Why? some people are so ingrained in windows that a faster mac has no meaning to them, if it can't run xyz it doesn't matter how fast it is. We just had this conversation where I work, Engineering/Consulting firm, and as far as they are concerned it means nothing because a vast majority of the tools we use have never been available on mac's, unless you run bootcamp, and apple has pretty much killed that. Don't get me wrong I'm very excited, and have one on order but lets not fool ourselves into thing it's going to suddenly make a huge difference to the windows crowd.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
M1 Comparison reviews....
- Thread starter AdamNC
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple also don't label their MacBooks as laptops, but as notebooks. You shouldn't pay attention to Apple's nomenclature for their products when categorising them and comparing them to other products.
Just because Apple calls them notebooks, doesn't mean they're also laptops.
Just because Apple calls them Pro, doesn't mean you have to accept them as pro machines, whatever that means.
Consider paying attention to what I replied to and the conversation preceding. ?
It has nothing to do with what they'd want to use (I'd much prefer if PCMR types never became Mac users) but more to do with the fact that their comparisons with the M1 and much hotter, bigger CPUs are going to look a bit silly once the next round of ASi Macs show up.
Sorry I missed interpreted what you said. But yes I agree, that when the next round gets released it should be very interesting.
Not really the point....
The point is that if Apple labels something a MacBook Pro, it is perfectly fine to compare it as such.
The argument of saying that you cannot compare the M1 MBP to mid-range Intel chips because it is not really a Pro machine just doesn't hold up.
As I previously mentioned, Apple actually defines the 13" MBP as a "Compact pro notebook" and describes it as a notebook with "high-performance graphics".
To me, this means that comparing it to other similar machines is more than fair.
The M1 is Apple's base chip as far as SoCs are concerned. If you're thinking of it in terms of A-series SoCs from 2018, think of it like the base A12 Bionic. A12 Bionic, certainly for 2018, was no slouch, but that's not to say that there wasn't eventually an A12X and A12Z that weren't beefier and more powerful for the iPad Pros. Similarly, that's not to say that there wasn't eventually an A13 (and then eventually A14) to replace it.
Incidentally, if you take the pre-M1 Intel lineup, you'll see that the M1 has replaced only Apple's lowest end Intel Macs (the Air, the 2-port 13" MacBook Pro, and the 8th Gen Quad-Core Intel Core i3 model of 2018 Mac mini).
That all being said, Intel Core i3/i5/i7/i9 and AMD Ryzen 3/5/7/9 aren't really marketed like that. You have Core i5 and Core i7 at completely different form factors, TDP, and, well, performance segments within a given generation (which is why a 2020 Intel MacBook Air and a 2020 Intel 4-port 13" MacBook Pro both have 10th Gen Quad-Core Core i5 and Core i7 that aren't even in the same league of performance as each other).
M1 is M1. You have varying degrees of thermal/performance throttling happening (most on the Air due to passive fanless cooling, less on the 2-port 13" Pro, and then the least on the Mac mini given the fan and open [empty] area of the chassis). But, it's still, for the most part, the same SoC (give or take one less GPU core on the entry-level version of the Air). We might see an M1X on the beefier Macs. Then again, an M2 might also allow for some of the features that are clearly missing on M1 (support for more than one external display on the laptops and more than two on the Mac mini, more than 2 Thunderbolt ports, more that 16GB of RAM, more than 2TB of SSD, etc.) or it could be that there is an M1X variant and then an M2. Or maybe we don't see the X variant to an M-series SoC until M2. It's hard to say.
I would say that the better comparison to make when it comes to Intel to Apple Silicon is in comparing the various series of Intel CPUs. For instance, the M1 seems primarily geared to be compared to Intel's ULV U-series and Y-series variants (not in terms of performance, but rather in terms of the type of computer it is intended for). One would imagine that as Apple scales their SoCs for the iMacs and the higher-end MacBook Pros (and ESPECIALLY the Mac Pros), we'll see beefier classes of SoCs. But for now, I think the better comparison to make isn't M1 to Core i3 or M1 to Core i5, but rather M1 to Intel U-series or very low-end Intel H-series (so, low-mid range mobile computers [the Mac mini, while on Intel, has always been a laptop without an integrated battery, keyboard, trackpad and display]).
OP,
Why are you spending time arguing with strangers about which computer can beat up the other computer? What really matters is whether or not you are happy with your Mac. Specs are specs. Day to day individual real world usage is what counts, in my opinion.
Why are you spending time arguing with strangers about which computer can beat up the other computer? What really matters is whether or not you are happy with your Mac. Specs are specs. Day to day individual real world usage is what counts, in my opinion.
I watched the XPS 13 and high-end AMD with dedicated GPU videos yesterday, and the M1 MBP is very impressive in those tests.
The video with with the Dell XPS was surprising. The M1 made that XPS look like a kids toy.
The video with the high-end AMD chip was also surprising. While the M1 didn't perform as well as the AMD in most tests, it showed that the Apple M-chips could be out performing all X86 chips one day.
It also showed that the benefits of having a dedicated GPU, and that while it is impressive, the M1 just won't be a replacement for everyone.
About fairness and what the OP's concern, I think the tests done in the videos were fair, with the exception of placing the two devices so close together, and having the gaming laptop blowing all the hot air on the MBP. The narrator mentioned the MBP wasn't performing quite as well as before, and alluded to the fact that all the hot exhaust air from the PC was blowing on it, but didn't do anything about it.
I have a mid-range GPU in my desktop (GTX 1050 ti) which is often used as a reference point for the M1 GPU. It's not recommended for gaming; it gets the job done for me but I don't do intensive graphics. I bought it as it supports 3x4k. An M1X with double the graphics cores would be quite good; still not gaming dominance though. The top gaming cards have about 4.5 times the punch of the M1 graphics.