4 ms·
If we’re comparing low-end apples to apples, the bottom-end Intel MacBook Pro (MacBookPro16,3) has an i5 part (Coffee Lake 8257U)[1] and would be a better compa
by roseway4 6y ago
If we’re comparing low-end apples to apples, the bottom-end Intel MacBook Pro (MacBookPro16,3) has an i5 part (Coffee Lake 8257U)[1] and would be a better comparison.
I don’t think I’ve seen any indication from Apple the current M1 13” is all we’re going to see in this form factor.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook_Pro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook_Pro
- rowanG077 6y agoThe price difference is only like 300 dollars so pretending that one is low end and the other high end is not really true here. They are both high end devices. I can't buy this hypothetical stronger arm Macbook so it means nothing. Apple's marketing material said the M1 would blow everything out of the water with a HUGE margin. Now it turns out it's actually slower then their own laptop would be with a refreshed intel chip. That's what dissapoints me.
- my123 6y agoIt does blow Tiger Lake out of the water. (and btw, barely gets ahead of it on single core perf with 11.0.1 as an update) On multicore, Tiger Lake blows well beyond its TDP range and throttles hard, ending with a 6070 score on MT for the 1165G7. (in CB R23)
- misterdabb 6y agoIt's not really slower. It's comparable, with some clear benefits. But yeah, reality is caching up. Apple is performance-wise matching their competitors (was clear from how they positioned m1 products that this would be the case). Now one can say that it's lower power and low end, but then we can also say that when especially AMD catches up to 5nm (within a year) and adds on-chip memory (within 2 years) they'd be ahead, with a chip with the same die size..