Now when we compare octacore chip versus octacore chip the results get interesting.
M1: 1687 single-core and 7433 multi-core Intel Core i7: 1149 single-core and 7329 multi-core
Keep in mind: this is a 5nm chip versus a 14nm one. What is going to happen when Intel releases 10nm octacore chips? Or 7nm ones? 10nm Intel hexacore and octacore CPUs will arrive in 2021. So, right now Apple's advantages are primarily due to achieving an octacore low power low heat design. When Intel gets to 7nm - which they could do as early as 2022 by getting TSMC and Samsung to manufacture the chips - they will have the same.
Sigh... @cloudguy, again with this kind of crap - seems you’re trying to downplay Apple’s achievement here while successfully completely missing the point.
1. Comparing what Intel will deliver in two years vs what Apple delivered this month, to try to downplay what Apple has achieved... how is that remotely meaningful? “What is going to happen when a Intel releases 10m... 7nm...” etc...? Answer: Apple will have released 3nm or whatever else they already have in their labs that will eat the M1 for lunch.
2. The whole point of this article - and the whole point of Apple, frankly - is no one (who matters) cares how many cores it is or how many GHz it is or any other “specs”. Your attempt to compare the M1 against the i7 instead of the i3 it replaces misses the point completely. The reason the base model MBP has the dual core i3 in it is because cost, wattage, heat, etc are limiting factors there. The fact that Apple built a chip with 8 cores that compares in cost, energy, heat, etc, to a 2 generations old dual core i3 but delivers performance still better than the latest 8-core (16 threads) i7 is where this stuff is impressive.
3. Aside from all that, you want to argue core counts? First you ignore that only four of them are performance, but let’s skip that and ask: how do you explain that the M1 still trounces the i7 single core?
4. If you really want to get hyped about benchmarks and specs then how do you explain how the M1 MBP beats the maxed out 16” Intel MBP and even the Mac Pro and iMac at many tasks (See AI’s other article about that)?
Dude, sometimes you make some good points, but sometimes you just make a complete idiot of yourself.
Now when we compare octacore chip versus octacore chip the results get interesting.
M1: 1687 single-core and 7433 multi-core Intel Core i7: 1149 single-core and 7329 multi-core
Keep in mind: this is a 5nm chip versus a 14nm one. What is going to happen when Intel releases 10nm octacore chips? Or 7nm ones? 10nm Intel hexacore and octacore CPUs will arrive in 2021. So, right now Apple's advantages are primarily due to achieving an octacore low power low heat design. When Intel gets to 7nm - which they could do as early as 2022 by getting TSMC and Samsung to manufacture the chips - they will have the same.
You're ignoring that the M1 in those machines is the single most low-end processor Apple is ever going to put in a Mac. All M1 machines released so far replace the very bottom end of their respective lineups — and all of them are FASTER than the current crop of high-end CPUs.
They haven't even BEGUN replacing the mid-range and high-end laptops yet, let alone desktops.
Now when we compare octacore chip versus octacore chip the results get interesting.
M1: 1687 single-core and 7433 multi-core Intel Core i7: 1149 single-core and 7329 multi-core
Keep in mind: this is a 5nm chip versus a 14nm one. What is going to happen when Intel releases 10nm octacore chips? Or 7nm ones? 10nm Intel hexacore and octacore CPUs will arrive in 2021. So, right now Apple's advantages are primarily due to achieving an octacore low power low heat design. When Intel gets to 7nm - which they could do as early as 2022 by getting TSMC and Samsung to manufacture the chips - they will have the same.
You're ignoring that the M1 in those machines is the single most low-end processor Apple is ever going to put in a Mac. All M1 machines released so far replace the very bottom end of their respective lineups — and all of them are FASTER than the current crop of high-end CPUs.
They haven't even BEGUN replacing the mid-range and high-end laptops yet, let alone desktops.
"...single most low-end processor Apple is ever going to put in a [ASi] Mac." Obvious when I think about it but I hadn't thought of it quite in those terms -- that's a really good way of putting it.
The number of people on these forums talking about the limitations of the M1 as if it's the be-all end-all (like they're going to put that in the Mac Pro lol) is ridiculous.
Comments
Sigh... @cloudguy, again with this kind of crap - seems you’re trying to downplay Apple’s achievement here while successfully completely missing the point.
2. The whole point of this article - and the whole point of Apple, frankly - is no one (who matters) cares how many cores it is or how many GHz it is or any other “specs”. Your attempt to compare the M1 against the i7 instead of the i3 it replaces misses the point completely. The reason the base model MBP has the dual core i3 in it is because cost, wattage, heat, etc are limiting factors there. The fact that Apple built a chip with 8 cores that compares in cost, energy, heat, etc, to a 2 generations old dual core i3 but delivers performance still better than the latest 8-core (16 threads) i7 is where this stuff is impressive.
3. Aside from all that, you want to argue core counts? First you ignore that only four of them are performance, but let’s skip that and ask: how do you explain that the M1 still trounces the i7 single core?
4. If you really want to get hyped about benchmarks and specs then how do you explain how the M1 MBP beats the maxed out 16” Intel MBP and even the Mac Pro and iMac at many tasks (See AI’s other article about that)?
They haven't even BEGUN replacing the mid-range and high-end laptops yet, let alone desktops.
The number of people on these forums talking about the limitations of the M1 as if it's the be-all end-all (like they're going to put that in the Mac Pro lol) is ridiculous.