They are acting like they are getting paid by Intel for advertising? Oh wait……
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.
The old Intel model is almost 300% of Max for gaming FPS
- Thread starter babyexercise
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A lot of mac are still Intel base, Apple can make Windows drivers for these or even come with Windows.
Ho really? Only few apps really M1 native, no need to be M1 native to run in M1, Apple just needs to make drivers for Windows, not M1 native still ok but just slower like using Rosetta 2.
@Black Magic
Intel needs this so much, but they have no money for us, so we are volunteers
.
Btw i have no Intel desktop system since 2019 (i had 11700K rocket lake in 2021, which i send back within 14 days, i tested it only to investigate frame time spikes on the Ryzen system), because this 14nm x + is horrible. I have not much favour for Intel because they used cheap tim instead of soldering from 2012 (Ivy Bridge) to 2017 (Coffee Lake S). Every time you got this Intels you had to delid them. This means 0 warranty and messing around with this awful gallium. You can imagine how much i like them. Alderlake has nice performance (especially single thread for games), but it's very expensive for the little boost over Zen 3 aka Ryzen 5XXX and it's using much more power and generating much more heat under full load.
@babyexercise
I saw a lot flickering in games used on Rosetta 2. Whol will seriously using Rosetta 2 for games?
Intel needs this so much, but they have no money for us, so we are volunteers
.Btw i have no Intel desktop system since 2019 (i had 11700K rocket lake in 2021, which i send back within 14 days, i tested it only to investigate frame time spikes on the Ryzen system), because this 14nm x + is horrible
. I have not much favour for Intel because they used cheap tim instead of soldering from 2012 (Ivy Bridge) to 2017 (Coffee Lake S). Every time you got this Intels you had to delid them. This means 0 warranty and messing around with this awful gallium. You can imagine how much i like them. Alderlake has nice performance (especially single thread for games), but it's very expensive for the little boost over Zen 3 aka Ryzen 5XXX and it's using much more power and generating much more heat under full load.@babyexercise
I saw a lot flickering in games used on Rosetta 2. Whol will seriously using Rosetta 2 for games?
So how do you explain Adobe Premiere working faster, or Photoshop, or Blender, or Unreal Engine 5… ?
Everything works much faster, spends less battery - and if that’s what it’s like being a lab white mice - I guess we should’ve all turned rodent earlier.
Look, you’re not convincing anyone. The entire thread is based on a wrong number, and you’re, for whatever reason, trying to convince yourself that a slower, warmer and more battery hungry cpus are better.
You don’t have to live with slowdowns with 16Gb RAM, stop spreading misinformation.
Says the man complaining about gaming performance on a new Mac.
It would not matter how fast the M1 Max is... there are no great games for macOS. It's hilarious that people are excited to play a 2004 game like WoW. These are just not gaming machines. They are elitist hardware for the 98% of user that consider themselves "pros" and the 2% that actually are. The new macbook pros are faster but do less with no boot camp.
I am happy with my i9 macbook pro and I run all the macOS productivity sofware and play all the windows games I want.
I am happy with my i9 macbook pro and I run all the macOS productivity sofware and play all the windows games I want.
Last edited:
No doubt for some use cases, equally they run hot, throttle, can be noisy and have far less runtime on battery in comparison to Apple Silicon which a major factor for many in a portable. The primary advantage of the Intel Mac's is BootCamp, even then I've always been of the opinion that if you have a significant need for Windows based applications a Windows PC will serve far better.
As for gaming; Mac's are just the wrong platform for obvious reasons. The new 2021 MBP may perform better, so for some a bonus, equally if one is looking to purchase a MBP for gaming then you rather deserve what you get.
Personally I own a base 13" M1 MBP and it's never missed a beat or been problematic, admittedly my expectations are balanced as in the notebook being a very competent 13" class Ultrabook with significant battery life & performance for it's day. I use macOS & Windows, both have their strengths & weakness...
Q-6
Last edited:
…and fastest PC laptops out there, like the excellent Razor Blade 15. The MBP is faster in real-world scenarios as well as benchmarks, as you can see all over the web. And that’s when plugged in - on battery it’s not even in the same ballpark.
True. Of course there are scenarios where one configuration may be better. Even in the same family of products - for example, if your primary metric is battery life, the M1 Pro is better than M1 Max. It doesn’t mean M1 Max buyers are being ripped off or anything.
Same with Windows and macOS, Apple Silicon and Intel, AMD and Intel, etc.
But there are undeniable benefits to Apple Silicon on Macs for a loto of people, and new MBPs are amazing computers. And, as you said - honestly, at this point - if you want to game on your computer or need Windows - why not get a PC laptop or desktop? There are some really nice ones out there.
Overall I think going forward that Apple Silicon is the better path and as more adopt the SW will naturally follow, however it will take time. To date if the app ran on one of my Intel Mac's it's run on my M1 MBP. The exception being Windows apps setup in wrapper such as Wine, which in time may also be resolved as can be seen with Crossover.
For my use the benefits of Apple Silicon far outweigh the Intel Macs and for those Windows apps I need, I also have the appropriate HW.
Q-6
that's what I said. why give up half of a computer? my omnifocus, fantastical, fiery feeds, drafts, and devonthink all run just as fast as an M1 Max and I can play Sea of Thieves wherever I happen to be.
If I churned out video for a living, I would definitely add an M1 Max to my fleet, but short of that, I can wait a while..
Look how much beyond Alderlake is over M1 Max with around 11800 points is, nearly 3 times the performance:
M1 with all it's compromises feels like very much overpriced very green banana in comparison. Of course it's desktop cpu, but this laptop is meaned for workstation work loads. So this comparison is very reasonable.
M1 with all it's compromises feels like very much overpriced very green banana in comparison. Of course it's desktop cpu, but this laptop is meaned for workstation work loads. So this comparison is very reasonable.
Last edited:
Of course, it’s a completely different class of CPU, but since I need a win here, I will pretend laptops are somehow desktops if they are workstations.
And if the Apple desktop CPU outperforms Intel, I will just compare it to two, three PCs at once, because why not.
I ask me the same questions:
This OS is so weird. Windows is so much better in case of useability.
This OS is so weird. Windows is so much better in case of useability.
If you prefer Windows, by all means, enjoy a PC. I prefer macOS, so much so - that I was willing to get lower performance just to use macOS. This time, those who want Windows will get lower performance to use the OS of their choice.
I'm happy that currently macOS goes with devices that have industry leading performance per watt, but I would be working on a Mac even if it was not the case.
Since there are some nice PC laptops, if you prefer Windows, you have good, powerful options there - with many more different configurations and form factors. Those Surface Pros, for example, look excellent. And who knows, maybe Intel or AMD catch up with Apple at some point, so the pendulum shifts again.
Last edited:
Yes, if I am going to run Windows alongside the macOS. My 2011 mini is making its last stand in Windows 10 and almost never boots into the macOS anymore. I expect this for about three more years before Win 10 becomes "unsupported."
But that's the issue with EVERY SINGLE INTEL MAC since they cannot run Win 11 legit. Your last stand in Windows 10 will be severely limited by Microsoft itself, planning obsolescence within five years. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is and Apple will dump Intel support from the macOS way before MS will. This is evidenced by the 68k to PowerPC transition AND the PowerPC to Intel transition. Official Apple support just sucks when you aren't running the newest processor family from them.
To be fair, Blizzard (due to Apple's screwjob of anything non-Metal) screwed the pooch when it came to that 2004 game. You seriously have to have a METAL CAPABLE GPU to play WoW Classic...from 2004...which ran on my old 733 MHz Digital Audio G4 tower in my signature through WoW Wrath. And this is nowhere Blizzard's fault, as it wasn't them who put the screwjob to lower end INTEL Macs. Let's just leave the PPC ones out of this, Apple put the screwjob on everyone that wanted to keep their 2011 Radeon minis.
Thank goodness those same Intel/Radeon minis can run WoW and any other somewhat graphical adventure from 2004 in WINDOWS.