Couple things that come to mind in response to that chart: Its impressive, but: Generally, take Intel's marketing material with a grain of salt. They're notor

Couple things that come to mind in response to that chart: Its impressive, but: Generally, take Intel's marketing material with a grain of salt. They're notorious for exaggerating, cherry-picking, and out-right lying in marketing materials. Related to that: While both the M1 Max & 12900HK have on-board iGPUs, the M1 Max has an especially powerful GPU for its class; one of the best iGPUs ever produced. That's going to contribute massively to package power draw, which is what they're measuring on the X-axis; if the Xe G7 can't compete, then these graphs are disingenuous to the overall experience some customers would be looking for (alternatively, other customers will be going dGPU anyway, so it doesn't matter). Related to that: Its unclear from the chart whether this is per-core relative perf or entire package and multithreaded perf. I'm guessing the latter, due to the size of that x-axis arc and because its roughly where we'd expect a 12th gen 14/20 configuration to land; that's an obscene amount of threads for mobile, far outpacing the 10/10 in M1 Max. In fact, I'd argue: if this is a multithread test, a 40% increase in cores w/ a 100% increase in SMT threads only arriving at a miniscule (~5%?) jump in perf at similar power draw is average, not good. The single-core perf, even on their high-draw cores under load, may be rather poor; so its end-of-day effectiveness may be very workload dependent. Overall, I'm hopeful the real-world performance matches the expectations they've set, and I'm bullish on Intel's strategy. Chip manufacturing is hard, but TSMC is becoming a bottleneck for both Apple & AMD. Hyper-optimizing large processes may work out for them; but the proof will be in the pudding.