Again showing your ignorance -
'If the reports I am hearing', just lol. I am talking about laptop intel chips. Ones that are already in released laptops.
Here -
I watched those videos. That's 30 minutes I would like back.
The laptop referenced in the video is the MSI GE76. I looked up the specs.
Laptop is not cheap, at $4k.
17.3" 1080p display, 32gb ram, an inch thick, 6.4 pounds.
Pretty heavy-duty cooling (some kind of liquid metal pad or something), because apparently this thing generates enough heat to keep your house warm in the winter.
330W charger
Battery life seems to be sub-par (quoted 4.5 hours of chrome usage with GPU turned off), and this is after making serious compromises to the display resolution
In contrast, that same money gets me a 16" M1 Max MBP variant, with the following:
Way better display, .66 inches thick, 4.8 pounds (so about 75% of the weight and thickness).
Fan noise is pretty negligible for users desiring a quieter working environment
Better battery life (especially if you are working away from a power source).
The observations are pretty much in line with what I made in the other thread about Alder Lake (I recall why I said what I did, I was specifically referring to the supposedly more energy-efficient chips slated for the March CES event). Intel basically finds itself in a lose-lose situation when trying to compete against the M1 Pro / Max chips.
In order to trade blows in CPU compute, Intel basically dedicated their entire die budget to CPU, resulting in 14 cores (compared to Apple's 10), allowing them to narrowly eke out a win in terms of performance, but at the expense of pretty much everything else. You have to throw in a pretty power-hungry GPU to fill that gap (which is where the 3080 comes in). But this also leaves the laptop with 2 extremely power-hungry chips in tow, effectively decimating battery life.
To summarise - it currently takes a hulking 17.3" laptop, with massive cooling, a dedicated GPU, a gimped display, being thicker and heavier, sporting way worse battery life, to just narrowly beat out the MBP in terms of performance, while losing in pretty much every other metric. Meanwhile, an M1 MBP offers the best of all worlds, offering great, sustained performance, long battery life and a cool and quiet working environment.
Intel wants so badly to have the performance crown again, but it simply doesn't have the tech right now to pull this off gracefully without completely compromising the overall laptop experience. Which was the point I have been trying to make all along - nobody can match the specific experience that Apple is offering with their Mac lineup right now, because of the control over hardware and software that Apple currently wields, and it's not something Intel can replicate (much less replicate overnight), because they are providing just one of several parts of what forms the final experience of a PC.