Scalderlake!!! Intel is at it again!!

[Technerd108]

For the last few years, I have been using a 15" Dell Precision 7520 Workstation laptop, that was maxed out CPU, GPU, and RAM BTO options. It is provided by my work, and is a huge improvement over the crap I had previously.

That said, the fans are constantly ramping up, sometimes from the most basics of tasks, and the battery life is crap. It is also giant, much bigger than my Late 2011 17" MBP.



My son has a gaming laptop, not sure what one or the specs, but I can always tell when he starts to play a game as it sounds like he just started a vacuum cleaner in his room. He wears a headset, but not just for talking to people, I am pretty sure it is to drown out the fan noise.

I assume the MBP with the M1 Max chips also have some fan noise, but probably still lower than most Windows laptops with high performance chips.

MacBook and gaming are not quite a match just yet but you are very correct that you can push the cpu and gpu on the M1 Pro/Max as much as you want and it will warm up but it will never exceed a comfortable thermal envelope or throttle even if you were gaming though I imagine if you were there would still be significant fan noise on these new processors because it would be pushing the cpu/gpu and ram. Still not jet/vacuum level!😎

 

[pshufd]

I've seen the negative articles on the M1 PRO/MAX systems related to value (Luke Miani, Max Tech) but not the ones related to Alder Lake. I would agree that the M1 Macs have better value than the M1 PRO/MAX systems but I also think that the 2021 MacBook Pros give you a lot outside the specs.

I really like my 2015 MacBook Pro 15. The downsides were heat and battery life but the heat is a benefit in the cold winters here. Five hours of battery life isn't bad but I was using two of them to make sure that I always had enough juice. I simply do not have battery anxiety with the M1 PRO system.

Also, Apple hasn't filled out their product lines. I'm sure that there are plenty of people like me that want the 16 inch display, 32 or more GB of RAM but don't need the CPU and GPU performance of the M1 PRO. That is a MacBook Air with a 16 inch screen and 32 GB of RAM would be my ideal system. I am very happy with my 2021 MacBook Pro 16 but it is overkill for my needs. At least at this time.

I think that what Intel is doing is interesting but what I appreciate about Apple Silicon is the efficiency. I used to take my iPad mini for some tasks because it had 10 hours of battery life and now I get more than that on a laptop. Something like the LG Gram 17 would be nice - with macOS and the efficiency of Apple Silicon. I do not know who buys these really souped up laptops as I think that the performance is far more than what most people need. They gave us 2015 MacBook Pro 13s at my previous workplace and those weren't particularly powerful - but they got the job done.

 

[pshufd]

7th gen pentium watching YouTube 4k content must be an amazing experience with all that acceleration built in the web browser.

I think an A12 iPhone processor would run that content way better???

I'm wondering if there are APIs to custom silicon on Apple Silicon that are far more efficient than web browser JITs. JITs are a lot more efficient than interpreting Javascript but what if you could make use of the ProRes decoders for watching videos?

 

[staypuftforums]

7th gen pentium watching YouTube 4k content must be an amazing experience with all that acceleration built in the web browser.

I think an A12 iPhone processor would run that content way better???

A 7th gen Pentium can play 4K YouTube video flawlessly (no dropped frames). So you are mistaken regarding the A12.

At best, it could play the footage as well, but not better. Because you can’t get better than zero dropped frames (perfect frame-by-frame playback).

 

[Booji]

I absolutely have no links because what I said is my own conjecture and the experience of having Intel machines since Pentium days.

But sure it will run only at 115 watts at its highest performance while plugged in?

I am thinking the power supply is going to be one monster brick

 

[darinzook]

I think its pretty clear that Intel is really looking for the press that they can "beat" the performance of the M1. What's more concerning to me is that so many outlets pick this type of news up for the clickbait that it is, rather than digging into the facts and seeing the power & thermal issues.

While this type of competition is good overall, I personally don't see Intel beating Apple for at least 2-3 years for the desktop class (chips with integrated graphics, performance only, still will be power hungry), and likely more than that on the laptop architectures. At the end of the day, the biggest challenge Intel has to overcome is the fact that they don't have control over the power management, and are dependent on Microsoft and their OEM partners.

For Intel, this story has always been about raw performance. I honestly don't they prioritize the power/thermals.

 

[pshufd]

I think its pretty clear that Intel is really looking for the press that they can "beat" the performance of the M1. What's more concerning to me is that so many outlets pick this type of news up for the clickbait that it is, rather than digging into the facts and seeing the power & thermal issues.

While this type of competition is good overall, I personally don't see Intel beating Apple for at least 2-3 years for the desktop class (chips with integrated graphics, performance only, still will be power hungry), and likely more than that on the laptop architectures. At the end of the day, the biggest challenge Intel has to overcome is the fact that they don't have control over the power management, and are dependent on Microsoft and their OEM partners.

For Intel, this story has always been about raw performance. I honestly don't they prioritize the power/thermals.

Intel worked really hard on single-core performance a few years ago when it was clear that they couldn't catch AMD on multicore performance. They made quite a bit of noise about it and I suppose that they sold systems to gamers but AMD won a lot of mindshare in the gaming community as the underdog.

My i7-10700 desktop is designed to run cool and quiet (notice it's not the 10700K), and that's how I want to keep it. It has all of the performance that I need and I need it for one program right now. I could run that program on Wine/Rosetta 2 but Rosetta 2 will go away at some point and the software vendor has given no indication that they will do a port to Apple Silicon.

In retrospect I would have been better off with an AMD system but I've just been used to Intel builds and I wanted to leave my options open to doing a Hackintosh and the 10700(K) is used in the 2020 iMac 27" so would have simpler compatibility.

 

[darinzook]

Intel worked really hard on single-core performance a few years ago when it was clear that they couldn't catch AMD on multicore performance. They made quite a bit of noise about it and I suppose that they sold systems to gamers but AMD won a lot of mindshare in the gaming community as the underdog.

My i7-10700 desktop is designed to run cool and quiet (notice it's not the 10700K), and that's how I want to keep it. It has all of the performance that I need and I need it for one program right now. I could run that program on Wine/Rosetta 2 but Rosetta 2 will go away at some point and the software vendor has given no indication that they will do a port to Apple Silicon.

In retrospect I would have been better off with an AMD system but I've just been used to Intel builds and I wanted to leave my options open to doing a Hackintosh and the 10700(K) is used in the 2020 iMac 27" so would have simpler compatibility.

Just curious, are you using a graphics card or the integrated Intel UHD Graphics 630? I don't ask necessarily because it matters - its just again, as with any benchmark - what's the real world use case? If I'm using something for business workloads, integrated graphics may be just fine. Is it going to give me the performance and power efficiency of Apple's integrated graphics on the M1? No. But is it OK for an average workload with minimal GPU compute needs, absolutely.

If I'm a gamer, I'm not buying a Mac period. Its not going to be an M1 or Intel Mac because it's not the right machine for the use case. I always get a good chuckle out of folks who complain about gaming on the Mac. Its not the use-case. It's never been the target market. Thats why so many folks have gaming PCs in addition to their Macs.

I just think that Intel is going after Apple for the wrong reasons. Its not about performance. Its about PPW, its about integration into the platform, its about control over your own go-to-market, without having to wait on Intel's forever extending timelines.

 

[M.PaulCezanne]

If Apple would just once, if only for proof of concept, show its silicon in AAA gaming action it would slam the door on this discussion. Apple’s efficiency could definitely push fps higher than the best Intel/nVidia/AMD combos and frames are all these idiots understand.

 

[MauiPa]

Temperature and thermal output are two different things. Alder Lake has far higher thermal output per unit performance than the M1 Max.

Or said another way, after being cooled to operating temperatures, doh!

 

[pshufd]

Just curious, are you using a graphics card or the integrated Intel UHD Graphics 630? I don't ask necessarily because it matters - its just again, as with any benchmark - what's the real world use case? If I'm using something for business workloads, integrated graphics may be just fine. Is it going to give me the performance and power efficiency of Apple's integrated graphics on the M1? No. But is it OK for an average workload with minimal GPU compute needs, absolutely.

If I'm a gamer, I'm not buying a Mac period. Its not going to be an M1 or Intel Mac because it's not the right machine for the use case. I always get a good chuckle out of folks who complain about gaming on the Mac. Its not the use-case. It's never been the target market. Thats why so many folks have gaming PCs in addition to their Macs.

I just think that Intel is going after Apple for the wrong reasons. Its not about performance. Its about PPW, its about integration into the platform, its about control over your own go-to-market, without having to wait on Intel's forever extending timelines.

My use case was three 4k monitors so I have a GTX 1050 Ti in it. I did run it with four monitors at one point and added a GT 1030 for that but have since removed it.

My kids game and they have both Windows PCs and MacBooks.

The Windows laptop market has been chasing Apple since 2006 I think and they're going to be doing so with the 2020 Air and 2021 MacBook Pros and when the 2022 Air comes out. I don't think that these models would be possible with current Intel chips.

 

[Madhatter32]

If I'm a gamer, I'm not buying a Mac period. Its not going to be an M1 or Intel Mac because it's not the right machine for the use case. I always get a good chuckle out of folks who complain about gaming on the Mac. Its not the use-case. It's never been the target market. Thats why so many folks have gaming PCs in addition to their Macs.

I agree that if you are a gamer you need a windows based machine. But, I also think that it should not be the case. Games run on computers. A good computer should give you the option to do whatever you want with it. Nobody wants to buy separate devices for different "use cases." You do not see this "use case" business plan anywhere else in the personal computer industry. Of course, I understand that Apple does not control the game development industry. However, it really should get serious about it by backing some real games to enhance the user experience. It is in the computer business after all.

 

[827538]

I’ve been saying it for ages. It’s a failure from Intel, a bad chip on a bad node.

They can’t compete with Apple Silicon or AMD, absolute performance is important, but absolute performance at the expense of extreme heat and power consumption is not acceptable.

No wonder they are trying to get TSMC to fab future chips for them. Zen 4 is just around the corner and it’s going to steamroll Intel.

 

[827538]

I agree. I have a 14" M1 Max 64g mbp. It pretty much runs stone cold (too cold for the winter) except when I am rendering using blender (after 20 min of rendering it gets quite hot). Playing league, editing large photos, compiling java code, watching YouTube 4k 60 HDR, etc cannot even get the fan up.

My M1 Pro 14” has never had the fans spin up since I bought it at launch and stays cool at all times. Whilst my old Intel MacBook you could feel it get hot where the CPU was.

TSMC’s N5P obviously contributes but ARM64 is just an incredible efficient architecture compared to the half century of baggage x86 is carrying.

 

[darinzook]

I agree that if you are a gamer you need a windows based machine. But, I also think that it should not be the case. Games run on computers. A good computer should give you the option to do whatever you want with it. Nobody wants to buy separate devices for different "use cases." You do not see this "use case" business plan anywhere else in the personal computer industry. Of course, I understand that Apple does not control the game development industry. However, it really should get serious about it by backing some real games to enhance the user experience. It is in the computer business after all.

Like it or not, Apple is a business that focuses on use-cases. While its personal devices may be highly flexible and support a number of use-cases, you'll never see a company with a single device that meets every use case. Enter iPhone, iPad & Mac, AppleTV, AirPods/Pro/Max, etc. You can meet a lot of use cases with a single product, but you'll never hit them all. If you own more than one Apple device, you already own separate devices for different use-cases.

Even the PC industry, this holds true. You've got the run of the mill models, up to the high-end and highly customizable models. You've got Google & Android that acts largely as a companion to the PC industry as well.

I have no issue with how Apple focuses it's time & money. The gaming industry is largely focused on highly customizable and purpose built machines. Apple doesn't play there. Historically it never has. Apple wants to get hardware out of the way, and give you the ability to focus on the use-cases it excels. Just because its building its own silicon that now rivals that of the traditional personal computing industry players (Intel/AMD), doesn't mean it should just change gears. I think one of the reasons that Apple has excelled in the areas it has - is because it's not trying to do everything for everyone, and has instead been built around doing less things really well.

 

[pshufd]

I agree that if you are a gamer you need a windows based machine. But, I also think that it should not be the case. Games run on computers. A good computer should give you the option to do whatever you want with it. Nobody wants to buy separate devices for different "use cases." You do not see this "use case" business plan anywhere else in the personal computer industry. Of course, I understand that Apple does not control the game development industry. However, it really should get serious about it by backing some real games to enhance the user experience. It is in the computer business after all.

It would be nice to do everything on one system but that's not truly how things work. Companies have been moving to laptops for a long time but this model is only possible with a lot of applications on the cloud which is run on servers. So employees are already running on multiple types of computers; just with one client.

We have tablets, phones and watches now which are also computers

 

[pshufd]

I’ve been saying it for ages. It’s a failure from Intel, a bad chip on a bad node.

They can’t compete with Apple Silicon or AMD, absolute performance is important, but absolute performance at the expense of extreme heat and power consumption is not acceptable.

No wonder they are trying to get TSMC to fab future chips for them. Zen 4 is just around the corner and it’s going to steamroll Intel.

They are getting TSMC to fab server chips for them. PPW is really important in the server market.

 

[pshufd]

Like it or not, Apple is a business that focuses on use-cases. While its personal devices may be highly flexible and support a number of use-cases, you'll never see a company with a single device that meets every use case. Enter iPhone, iPad & Mac, AppleTV, AirPods/Pro/Max, etc. You can meet a lot of use cases with a single product, but you'll never hit them all. If you own more than one Apple device, you already own separate devices for different use-cases.

I bought the Beats Fit Pro a few months ago and they are very nice. In chatting with people in the AirPods forum, I found out that there are customers that have AirPods and BFP. The BFP's are the best for fit when working out but the AirPods are better for making phone calls because of the stem. So people buy both. That's a lot of money for headsets but I can see it.

 

[darinzook]

They are getting TSMC to fab server chips for them. PPW is really important in the server market.

Working in Enterprise software, I can confirm this. Data Centers everywhere are working to shave down power usage. PPW matters. I would routinely put together server BOMs for customers in the past - and many (if not most) of them would gladly shave off clock speed for more cores and lower wattage per socket. Again, everything depends on the use-case, but PPW matters across the board (except gaming and HPC, mostly). 😉

 

[pshufd]

Working in Enterprise software, I can confirm this. Data Centers everywhere are working to shave down power usage. PPW matters. I would routinely put together server BOMs for customers in the past - and many (if not most) of them would gladly shave off clock speed for more cores and lower wattage per socket. Again, everything depends on the use-case, but PPW matters across the board (except gaming and HPC, mostly). 😉

This is the main reason I went with the i7 over the i5 - spreading the load on more cores means more efficiency. The downside is that you need bigger chips which cost more. But cool and quiet is nice.

 

[Technerd108]

I like roasting marshmallows near the Scalderlake cpu as it brings out the tasty goodness much better than a 🔥 flame!

Who needs to shave down power usage or heat when you have performance!

I like it toasty my friends!

 

[Technerd108]

Servers love heat and high wattage!! Makes the AC run better!

Hell we are running everything on Solar power and the heat generated by our server room heats the entire building!

 

[827538]

They are getting TSMC to fab server chips for them. PPW is really important in the server market.

Oh I know, it’s why AWS etc are all starting to build their own custom ARM silicon.

 

[Technerd108]

Yes adding more cores spreads the heat out better which is why an i5 would be better than an i7 at least since ice lake.

Adding more hotter higher frequency cores may get things done faster and may be slightly more efficient but if the job takes any time those extra toasty cores will throttle and the i7 will be slower than the i5 with less cores but doesn’t throttle as much.

Man, Intel just can’t win!

 

[Technerd108]

Oh I know, it’s why AWS etc are all starting to build their own custom ARM silicon.

PPW is not needed in server market!

Just Geekbench 5 results!

Besides Intel provides heat for our building in the winter!