An simple arm processor has much lower production cost as a complex x86 based chip. Apple is also known for high prices and low effort. I would wonder if this Macbook Pro 32 gb ram, M1 Max, 1 tb ssd costs more than 500 Euros in production.
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
The only low effort here is your bait.
This statement just showed that you don't have a correct understanding on how chips are manufactured and what affects the cost of a chip. So please do some research?
You again. Why do you care so much about what other people decide to do? We get it, you think other computers are better. Awesome. You buy what you want, and we'll buy what we want. Hurray!
Says the guy who joined yesterday. I am entertained though!
Seeing how low Intel has gone in trying desperately to mock Apple since they no longer use Intel processors, it wouldn’t be much of a stretch for them to send shills and trolls onto these boards with ridiculous headlines and comments that defend their product against Apple Silicon.
Don’t fall for the bait. Intel is a $200B company. If they feel that their business model is threatened, which it is, I believe they will shamelessly do whatever it takes to defend it.
Don’t fall for the bait. Intel is a $200B company. If they feel that their business model is threatened, which it is, I believe they will shamelessly do whatever it takes to defend it.
I can. But I prefer macOS. There are a number of macOS elements that make my workflow more efficient.
It will also mean that I have a laptop with all-day battery life and that doesn't get hot for when I am mobile.
I do use Windows and Linux and any other operating system that I'm interested in playing around with. Buy my preference for making money is macOS. If you want to be efficient at your job, get tools that you are most comfortable with.
Last March I started seeing people on r/Mac come in stating that they had never used a Mac before and that they bought an M1 and couldn't believe how good it was. Of course that's the M1 hardware and Apple has done a lot since then but this is still only the beginning. I'm sure that we're going to see the same thing in a few months (if people can get them). I've already seen a few review videos on these things.
The MacBook Pros are pro machines and priced like it. If you want a cool and quiet machine with great battery life, a great screen and great compute, it's a very nice option. In fact it's the only option. There's nothing like M1. There's nothing like M1 PRO and M1 MAX. And this is only the beginning.
Most Apple fans dont know how technology works, so they think mac is state of the art. Pc hardware is much more advanced as this cheap arm cpu. I dont talk about cheap pc's. I mean pc's which are in the same price range. For 4000 Euros, you could build an Intel Alderlake DDR5 RTX 3090 system, which is repairable. Remember this before you buy a Macbook for your workstation. As i said if you have to use Apple software, you have no choice. In this case don't think about it.
There are a number of us that discuss chip design on the Apple Silicon forum. You are free to join us there to show us your Electrical Engineering prowess.
Ah, yes, cheap Arm, I see.Most Apple fans dont know how technology works, so they think mac is state of the art. Pc hardware is much more advanced as this cheap arm cpu. I dont talk about cheap pc's. I mean pc's which are in the same price range
How is it that this cheapo Arm CPU blows each and every Intel or AMD mobile chip out of the water, ridiculing the competition completely.
Speaking of no clue…
Last edited:
What system did they use before M1? Im no Intel desktop user since 2019, because of their old 14 nm process. So im not their fanboy. But Alderlake seems to be impressive.
Im coming from 11800H/5900X both with pciee gen 4 nvme ssds im really not impressed by M1 Pro in terms of desktop usage.
@Romain_H
Even my Intel Icelake laptop is in Cinebench R23 faster than this M1 Pro.
This is also a good example, the Gigabyte Aorus laptop is faster:
And the desktop work is much faster without any significant delay. I dont talk about apple apps. I talk about normal desktop work. When this M1 can't compete there with the both cpus above, it's not worth 3000 - 6000 euros. For this price none delay is acceptable.
I have seen this delay when starting apps also in videos about the previous m1.
Im coming from 11800H/5900X both with pciee gen 4 nvme ssds im really not impressed by M1 Pro in terms of desktop usage.
@Romain_H
Even my Intel Icelake laptop is in Cinebench R23 faster than this M1 Pro.
This is also a good example, the Gigabyte Aorus laptop is faster:
And the desktop work is much faster without any significant delay. I dont talk about apple apps. I talk about normal desktop work. When this M1 can't compete there with the both cpus above, it's not worth 3000 - 6000 euros. For this price none delay is acceptable.
I have seen this delay when starting apps also in videos about the previous m1.
Last edited:
Well, so you are going to buy 4000$ macbook to run emulated windows, with emulated games, and complain about performance?
Just buy console or PC for games.
Because maybe....just MAYBE I want my Laptop to last longer than 1 hour?! Its a LAPTOP. Power consumption is a major concern.
I do.
The world does.
China does.
Texas does.
If you are mobile, then power consumption matters a lot.
If you don't have air conditioning, then power consumption and heat matter a lot.
Intel's lost a few server farm deals because AMD is just better at performance per watt.
Well, so you are going to buy 4000$ macbook to run emulated windows, with emulated games, and complain about performance?
Just buy console or PC for games.
Yup. These MacBook Pros are very good for professional applications, particularly with native ports. But nothing can touch them in performance per watt. Nothing.
Cinebench has a (surprisingly) low core utilization of Apple's super-wide pipeline, and will result in a low performance for sure. The power consumption running Cinebench is almost 25% lower than the number when an M1 is usually maxed out.
Apple cares at least. Their SoCs are designed for power-efficiency first, then the performance. Intel is doing the opposite and both ways are OK. If you don't care about power-efficiency just return your MacBook Pro and have fun with Intel systems because it fits you better, there is nothing wrong to choose a platform. I won't jump into an Intel discussion forum and keep saying "Intel chips consumes so much power" to "be a smart guy."
Cloud providers care about power-efficiency and it's evident in the Intel has inked a deal with TSMC to make chips for them. If power really didn't matter, then they'd just hang out on 14 nm or 10 nm with their own process.
@Gnattu
The only reason why i bought really this m1 mac pro is the 16.2" hdr screen with 2596 dimming zones and 1000 nits sustained, 1600 nits peak.
But i thought it could handle basic applications as fast as the Intel notebook and desktop can. Thats my major complain about this laptop. If it would be snappier like you would expect from such an expensive latop, i would keep it.
And also pro motion is stuttering when scrolling. It's also a nogo for above 3000 Euros.
The only reason why i bought really this m1 mac pro is the 16.2" hdr screen with 2596 dimming zones and 1000 nits sustained, 1600 nits peak.
But i thought it could handle basic applications as fast as the Intel notebook and desktop can. Thats my major complain about this laptop. If it would be snappier like you would expect from such an expensive latop, i would keep it.
And also pro motion is stuttering when scrolling. It's also a nogo for above 3000 Euros.
One other aspect on performance and performance per watt is that Apple can make whatever custom silicon they want to. Intel and AMD can't really do this as they make general-purpose processors and so they have to optimize for a wide variety of workloads. Perhaps Apple will care about games some day but it certainly isn't a must. Their purpose is to maximize shareholder value and they are doing a good job at that.