Compared: Apple's 16-inch MacBook Pro versus MSI GE76 Raider

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited November 2021
Apple directly compared the graphical capabilities of the 16-inch MacBook Pro against the MSI GE76 Raider gaming notebook at its launch. Here's how it fares against the rest of the notebook's specifications.

16-inch MacBook Pro vs GE76 Raider
16-inch MacBook Pro vs GE76 Raider


Apple's launch of its M1 Pro and M1 Max chips, as used in the 14-inch MacBook Pro and 16-inch MacBook Pro, involved a lot of comparisons against other notebooks on the market. One such comparison was against the MSI GE76 Raider, model number 11UH-053, used to gather "High-end discrete PC laptop graphics performance data."



While Apple used the discrete GPU as a point of comparison against its latest notebook, MSI's notebook is not just defined by what GPU it uses. It's worth looking at the rest of the specifications list to see how MSI's gaming notebook stands up against Apple's latest creation.



Specifications

16-inch MacBook Pro (2021)MSI GE76 Raider
Display Size (inches)16.217.3
Max Resolution3,456 x 2,2341920 x 1080
Pixel Density254127
Brightness1000 nitsAround 300 nits
Display TechnologyMini LED-Backlit,
Wide Color (P3),
True Tone
ProMotion
IPS LCD-backlit,
360Hz 3ms
Processors10-core M1 Pro,
10-core M1 Max
Intel Core i9-11980HK
Memory16GB Unified Memory,
Configurable to 64GB
32GB 3200MHz DDR4,
Support for 64GB
GraphicsM1 Pro 16-core,
M1 Max 24-core
M1 Max 32-core
Intel UHD Graphics,
Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 16GB GDDR6
Storage512GB, 1TB, 2TB, 4TB, 8TB1TB, 2 x M.2 slots
BiometricsTouch IDNone
TrackpadForce TouchYes
KeyboardBacklit with ambient light sensorSteel Series per-key RGB
Anti-Ghost technology
Dimensions (inches)14.01 x 9.77 x 0.6615.63 x 10.57 x 1.08
Weight (pounds)4.7 (M1 Pro),
4.8 (M1 Max)
6.39
Battery100WHr99.9Whr
Ports3 Thunderbolt 4 ports,
HDMI,
SDXC card slot,
MagSafe 3,
Headphone jack
1 Thunderbolt 4 port,
1 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C,
1 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-A,
2 USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A,
HDMI,
mini DisplayPort 1.4,
SDXC card slot,
Gigabit Ethernet,
Headphone jack
Webcam1080p FaceTime HD1080p
SpeakersSix speakers with force-cancelling woofers, Dolby Atmos2x 2W with subwoofer
Microphones3 with directional beamforming1
NetworkingWi-Fi 6Wi-Fi 6E
Bluetooth5.05.2
Power Supply140W280W
Color OptionsSilver, Space GrayTitanium Blue
Pricefrom $2,499$3,399

16-inch MacBook Pro vs MSI GE76 Raider - Physical Dimensions

Housed in aluminum, the MacBook Pro is offered in Apple's standard color options of Silver and Space Gray. With rounded corners and straight lines, Apple has walked the line between minimalism and utility, complete with its well-trodden design language that's instantly recognizable to anyone else.

Gaming notebooks typically have a bombastic aesthetic to make it different from run-of-the-mill notebooks, and MSI has undoubtedly used the same playbook with the GE76 Raider. Made from plastic and aluminum in Titanium Blue, the notebook has large vents, various frills in the design, and a long RGB light bar below the keyboard.

Of the two, the Raider is physically larger, with a footprint of 15.63 by 10.57 inches versus 14.01 by 9.77 inches for the 16-inch MacBook Pro. This size difference could easily be explained by MSI's use of a larger display and other more minor design considerations.

It doesn't explain the difference in thickness, as while Apple opts for a slim 0.66 inches, MSI goes for 1.08 inches, almost double the size. The extra thickness, along with the significant use of vents, could help cool the unit down during periods of high load, but it's a little too thick.

The size difference equates to a variance in weight, with the MacBook Pro at 4.7 pounds or 4.8 pounds, depending on if you configure it with the M1 Pro or M1 Max. The Raider tips the scales at a hefty 6.39 pounds.

Suffice to say, you could probably consider the Raider as a so-called desktop replacement, as the weight and dimensions don't point to it being a highly portable device.

MSI GE76 Raider
MSI GE76 Raider

16-inch MacBook Pro vs MSI GE76 Raider - Display

As said previously, Apple does have a smaller display using a 16.2-inch screen, while MSI goes for a 17.3-inch version.

While bigger, MSI's display in this particular specification is lower-resolution at 1080p, giving it a pixel density of 127ppi. This pales compared to the 16-inch MacBook Pro's 3,456 by 2,234 resolution and 254ppi pixel density.

16-inch MacBook Pro display
MacBook Pro display


The scale continues to tip in Apple's favor with its support for Wide Color P3, True Tone, and its use of mini LED backlighting. This gives it a high brightness of 1,000 nits of full-screen brightness, 1,600 at peak, and a 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio.

MSI's use of conventional LED results in a lower brightness display at around 300 nits for its IPS panel. Arguably, Apple could've chosen other models with a UHD-resolution screen, but as its interests lay in graphical performance, it wasn't a factor to the company.

The two do differ when it comes to the refresh rate. Apple uses ProMotion, allowing the MacBook Pro to refresh at up to 120Hz, adapting the rate depending on the content shown on the display.

MSI offers a maximum refresh rate of 360Hz, three times higher than the MacBook Pro's maximum, though it isn't adaptive to content. The refresh rate has to be set up, instead.

One other noteworthy element is that Apple has extremely thin bezels around its display, which necessitated the inclusion of the notch at the top of the screen to house the webcam. MSI doesn't use a notch, instead opting for a bezel thick enough to fit in the webcam.

16-inch MacBook Pro vs MSI GE76 Raider - CPU Performance

The 16-inch MacBook Pro has a choice of two CPU options, consisting of the M1 Pro and M1 Max. Both use identical 10-core setups with two efficiency cores and eight high-performance cores and are broadly similar in many respects.

The differences start with the M1 Max having a higher memory bandwidth of 400GB/s versus 200MB/s for the M1 Pro. Memory options for the M1 Pro start at 16GB with a 32GB upgrade available, while the M1 Max begins at 32GB and goes up to 64GB.

Both also have the Media Engine, which handles video encoding and decoding for H.264, HEVC, ProRes, and ProRes RAW content. The M1 Max increases the video encode engine count to two versus 1 in the Pro and doubles the ProRes encode and decode engines to two apiece.

There's also the 16-core Neural Engine, which will assist with tasks better suited to machine learning.

The Raider is configured with an Intel Core i9-11980HK processor, a Q2 2021 11th-generation chip made using 10nm lithography. The 8-core 16-thread chip has a base clock speed of 2.6Ghz, rising to 5Ghz under Turbo Boost.

On the memory side, it has 16GB of DDR4 3,200MHz RAM, though this could be upgraded to 64GB at maximum capacity.

In AppleInsider's testing of a 16-inch MacBook Pro with the M1 Max against the Raider's processor, we repeatedly found that there was a difference in performance for the Intel-based notebook, depending on whether it was running off the battery or if an outlet was powering it. This is likely to conserve battery life at the expense of performance.

Meanwhile, the MacBook Pro offered the same performance while on battery or under power, even under multiple tests. For the purposes of comparison, only one score is being reported for the MacBook Pro.

The single-core results in Geekbench put the M1 Max ahead.
The single-core results in Geekbench put the M1 Max ahead.


In Geekbench 5, the Raider manages single-core scores of 1,672 and 1,554 while being recharged and on battery respectively, meanwhile the M1 Max manages 1,769.

The M1 Max's lead is solidified in Geekbench's multi-core test.
The M1 Max's lead is solidified in Geekbench's multi-core test.


In the multi-core test, the MacBook Pro managed 12,308 points. Meanwhile, the Raider reached 6,952 on battery and a better 10,140 when fully powered. This certainly shows that while on the move, the MacBook Pro will be the better performing model when there's no outlet around.

Things do change a bit when you look at the results for Cinebench R23. Again, the race is quite close in the single-core test, with the MacBook Pro managing 1,532, but the Raider takes a narrow lead with 1,553 on battery, 1,620 at an outlet.

In Cinebench's single-core test, the Raider takes the lead.
In Cinebench's single-core test, the Raider takes the lead.


With Cinebench's multi-core test, again, you see a drop in performance when using the battery with the Raider, with it managing 6,205 points. While powered by an outlet, the score rises to 12,631, slightly ahead of the MacBook Pro's 12,308.

The Raider narrowly wins in Cinebench's multi-core test, but falls far behind when using the battery.
The Raider narrowly wins in Cinebench's multi-core test, but falls far behind when using the battery.


Under Cinebench, the performance competition leans towards MSI, but only just, and certainly only when connected to a power source. On battery, Apple is still a clear winner.

16-inch MacBook Pro vs MSI GE76 Raider - Graphics Performance

Apple's reason for buying the Raider was for its graphics comparison, and for good reason. Inside the selected model is an Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 with 16GB of DDR6 VRAM. This is the same GPU used in the Razer Blade 15 Advanced that Apple also compared the Max against during launch.

Specifically, Apple said the M1 Max could offer "similar graphics performance" as the "high-end PC laptop graphics" in the Raider but consumes 100W less power in the process.

Along with the discrete GPU, the Raider has Intel UHD Graphics as a low-power integrated option.

The M1 Pro in the 16-inch MacBook Pro has a 16-core Apple-designed integrated GPU, with no discrete GPU. The M1 Max is available with a 24-core GPU or 32-core GPU, similarly as integrated graphics.

As Apple relies on a Unified Memory structure, where the various sections of the system-on-chip have access to the same memory pool to minimize duplication, the GPU has access to the same amount of memory as the CPU for its tasks.

In effect, the M1 Max GPU can have up to 64GB of memory at its disposal. While it's not private to the GPU, like in the Raider, the sheer amount available is advantageous to the MacBook Pro.

When AppleInsider benchmarked the 32-core M1 Max, it managed a Geekbench OpenCL score of 68,950, which is very respectable. Meanwhile, the Raider manages to get 93,617 on battery and 133,223 when powered, almost double Apple's score.

Geekbench 5's OpenCL test indicates the M1 Max 32-core GPU works well, but not quite enough to beat the Raider.
Geekbench 5's OpenCL test indicates the M1 Max 32-core GPU works well, but not quite enough to beat the Raider.


This isn't a good look for the M1 Max in this case, especially when put against Apple's "similar graphics performance" claim. However, bear in mind that this is just one benchmark, and as seen with the CPU testing, there can be variance between testing tools.

We ultimately don't know what tools Apple used to test graphical performance to develop its marketing message, but it found something that allowed it to confidently make such a claim.

This also doesn't take away the punch of the second half of Apple's claim relating to lower power usage. After all, what good is all of that performance if you can't use it for that long on a battery?

16-inch MacBook Pro vs MSI GE76 Raider - Storage, Connectivity, Power

The 16-inch MacBook Pro starts with 512GB of SSD storage at the lowest, rising to 1TB, 2TB, 4TB, and 8TB at the maximum. MSI includes 1TB of NVMe SSD storage in the Raider, however, its use of two M.2 slots means more could be added after purchase.

In terms of connectivity, Apple made the MacBook Pro easier for professionals to use immediately without dongles. In the latest iteration, there are three Thunderbolt 4 ports, HDMI, an SDXC card slot, and a headphone jack, along with MagSafe 3 for power.

Rear ports on the GE76 Raider
Rear ports on the GE76 Raider


The MSI GE76 Raider, like other gaming notebooks, tries to provide as many connection options as possible to users. The lengthy ports list includes one Thunderbolt 4, one USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C, one USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-A, two USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A, HDMI, mini DisplayPort 1.4, an SDXC card slot, Ethernet, and a headphone jack.

Left-hand ports on the GE76 Raider
Left ports on the GE76 Raider


On the networking side, the MacBook Pro relies on Wi-Fi 6, along with Bluetooth 5.0. As well as 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet, there's Wi-Fi 6E support and Bluetooth 5.2 in the Raider, giving it an edge, but only if you have a Wi-Fi network compatible with 6E.

It is a practically even match on the battery, with the MacBook Pro having a 100WHr battery against the Raider's 99.9WHr unit. Apple claims the battery life extends to 21 hours of Apple TV playback or 14 hours of wireless web surfing.

Gaming notebooks aren't known for having a long battery life, and it's telling that MSI doesn't offer a time estimate for the notebook. It appears that the consensus is that it runs to around 5 to 6 hours at best, 3 hours at worst, though there's a lot of variance in testing methodologies at play.

Getting power back into the notebook is another matter, with MSI using a 280W charger, while Apple uses a 140W version. You can use both MagSafe and Thunderbolt to recharge the MacBook, making it a great option for single-cable connections to a dock with sufficient power delivery.

You can't recharge the MSI using power delivery, as you must use the dedicated power connection. It does at least offer power delivery out to connected small devices.

16-inch MacBook Pro vs MSI GE76 Raider - Audio, Camera, keyboard and Other Details

Apple employs a "high-fidelity six-speaker sound system" with force-canceling woofers, supporting Spatial Audio with Dolby Atmos. The Raider uses a pair of Dynaudio 2-watt speakers, along with a couple of 1-watt woofers.

The MacBook Pro uses a "studio-quality three-mic array" with a high signal-to-noise ratio and directional beamforming. MSI uses a single mic located next to the webcam.

Both have 3.5mm headphone jacks, but Apple also includes advanced support for high-impedance headphones in its version.

Both also have a 1080p webcam, with the MacBook Pro's FaceTime HD camera taking advantage of the advanced image signal processor with computational video to process anything it captures.

Apple's versus MSI's keyboard
Apple's versus MSI's keyboard


The MacBook Pro uses a backlit 78-key Magic Keyboard with 12 full-height function keys and Touch ID in the top-right corner. MSI uses a 102-key with SteelSeries Engine 3, providing it with per-key RGB backlighting as well as anti-ghosting technology.

While the MacBook Pro offers Touch ID as biometric security, there's no such option for the Raider.

16-inch MacBook Pro vs MSI GE76 Raider - Upgradability

One thing that certainly lies in MSI's favor is that it is somewhat upgradable. A user can access the memory and the storage slots inside the GE76 Raider and add, remove, or replace what's there with something else.

While both memory slots are occupied with a pair of 16GB sticks, they could be switched out for two 32GB ones, bringing the total memory up to 64GB.

On the storage side, there are two M.2 ports, and one is occupied with a 1TB NVMe SSD. You could add another drive to the unoccupied slot, and equally, pull out the existing drive and insert a larger capacity option instead.

This is not an option at all for the 16-inch MacBook Pro. You're stuck with what you've got at the time of purchase, making selecting the initial configuration quite important.

If you did want to upgrade, you could feasibly take advantage of Thunderbolt 4 to have fast external storage, but that's a Band-Aid fix to the problem. Otherwise, you're looking at getting a whole new MacBook Pro with the specifications you want and selling or trading in your old one.

16-inch MacBook Pro vs MSI GE76 Raider - Configuration Pricing

The MSI GE76 Raider in Apple's selected configuration costs $3,399.

Apple's 16-inch MacBook Pro starts at the base level with the M1 Pro, 16GB of memory, and 512GB of storage for $2,499. Bumping the memory up costs $400 on top.

The storage upgrade from 512GB to 1TB costs $200, while going to 2TB is $600, 4TB is $1,200, and 8TB at the highest is $2,400.

The lowest-priced M1 Max with a 24-core GPU, 32GB of memory, and 512GB of storage is $3,099. Upgrading the memory to 64GB is $400, while it's an extra $200 to get the 32-core GPU, and storage upgrade costs are the same as the M1 Pro.

For a comparative specification MacBook Pro, with the 32-core GPU M1 Max, 32GB of memory, and 1TB of storage, you would have to pay $3,499, $100 more than the MSI.

MacBook Pros continue to outclass gaming notebooks

Apple's decision to use the MSI GE76 Raider to compare high-performance graphics in notebooks is a good one. It chose one of the best GPUs on the block, and it happened to be inside the Raider in this instance.

However, going against a heavyweight GPU has its risks, and at least in our benchmark, it seemed that the MacBook Pro was a little too underperforming to be close. Don't count this as saying it's slow, as it's undoubtedly very good performance-wise, but in this particular test, it wasn't quite good enough.

Of course, graphical performance isn't everything, as in most other areas, the 16-inch MacBook Pro does far better. Everything from the design and the display to internal performance when on battery.

Where MSI does better is in much smaller stuff, such as the variety of ports available and the ability to change the memory and storage after purchasing. This lack of upgradability certainly harms Apple's image, but it's a long-term problem that we have lived with, and will probably continue to do so for quite a while.

The MSI GE76 Raider is a great gaming notebook in its own right. It's certainly more a desktop replacement than a portable workstation, and opting for a model with a 4K-resolution display may be a better choice, but it's still a decent effort from MSI.

The new 16-inch MacBook Pro
The new 16-inch MacBook Pro


For effectively $100 more for the 32-core GPU, same memory, and comparable storage, the 16-inch MacBook Pro is simply a better option. Especially for those who don't want to be tied to a power outlet.

Where to buy

Apple's 2021 16-inch MacBook Pro is on sale now, with exclusive coupon savings at your fingertips in the AppleInsider 2021 16-inch MacBook Pro Price Guide.

At press time, the best MacBook Pro deals offer triple-digit savings on both retail and configure-to-order (CTO) models at Apple Authorized Reseller Adorama with promo code APINSIDER and this activation link. Step-by-step instructions detailing how to redeem the coupon can be found here.

The MSI GE76 laptop, meanwhile, can be ordered at Amazon for $3,399.

Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 19
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    For me, I like that second storage slot:   It enables me to add a second drive for an "always on",continuous backup (theoretically, even RAID based system). 

    I also like that the drive can be removed -- not just for upgrades and replacements.  But, if you drown your machine with your Starbuck's, you can simply pull the drive, stick it in another machine and you're back up and running (just with a thinner wallet and no Starbuck's!)

    That is:  To me, the most valuable thing in any computer is the data.  Everything else can be replaced.  But not the data.  Without a backup, once it's gone, it's gone forever.

    While it's true that a backup in the same machine has disadvantages over cloud based backups (such as if the machine is stolen or burned up in a fire), it also has advantages.

    But, Apple could offset those advantages (except privacy) by fully opening up its outstanding iOS based cloud backup system to Mac users.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 2 of 19
    For me, I like that second storage slot:   It enables me to add a second drive for an "always on",continuous backup (theoretically, even RAID based system). 

    I also like that the drive can be removed -- not just for upgrades and replacements.  But, if you drown your machine with your Starbuck's, you can simply pull the drive, stick it in another machine and you're back up and running (just with a thinner wallet and no Starbuck's!)

    That is:  To me, the most valuable thing in any computer is the data.  Everything else can be replaced.  But not the data.  Without a backup, once it's gone, it's gone forever.

    While it's true that a backup in the same machine has disadvantages over cloud based backups (such as if the machine is stolen or burned up in a fire), it also has advantages.

    But, Apple could offset those advantages (except privacy) by fully opening up its outstanding iOS based cloud backup system to Mac users.
    Actually you can back up your Mac data to iCloud. There is an option in iCloud to back up your desktop and documents folder. I’m guessing more than 95% of user data is stored there. Of course you should still use Time Machine for complete backups. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 19
    Pretty devastating, the Max is almost half the GPU performance against the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 on the Geekbench 5 OpenCL test.  The whitewashed spin here by AppleInsider is inappropriate.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 4 of 19
    This Black Friday there were some 17" laptops with RTX 3070 GPUs on sale for around $1400 that could run rings around any MacBook Pro when it comes to ray tracing. In addition they can run vastly more and better games than the MacBook Pro. However the Mac Book Pro can run rings around any Windows laptop when it is running on battery and can do so for many hours.
    9secondkox2
  • Reply 5 of 19
    dewmedewme Posts: 4,250member
    The MSI seems like a decent enough gaming laptop for use in dimly lighted and darkened spaces. 300 nits of brightness and 1080p screen would be totally inappropriate for a lot of productivity applications. I could get by comfortably using the Mac without an external monitor in many scenarios, but the MSI would be a struggle. 

    Two widely different products targeting a widely disparate customer base. Interesting on paper, but not a very likely buying decision that many people will face in the real world.
    williamlondonchialmasantiwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 19
    Pretty devastating, the Max is almost half the GPU performance against the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 on the Geekbench 5 OpenCL test.  The whitewashed spin here by AppleInsider is inappropriate.
    Yes and for ray tracing the RTX 3080 will wipe the floor with the M1X Max GPU. That being said it does come down to how you intend to use the laptop. The MacBook Pro has the clear advantage in several areas such as performance and battery life when not plugged into a wall socket. No Mac is a gaming machine including the MacBook Pro. This is entirely Apple management's fault. Macs are fully capable of running the same games as Windows computers but Apple refuses to allow things like 32 bit support, OpenGL/Vulkan and third party graphics drivers along with operating system restrictions that make it impossible to run classic games. It is all about corporate power rather than empowering customers.
    edited November 2021 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 7 of 19
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,154member
    Pretty devastating, the Max is almost half the GPU performance against the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 on the Geekbench 5 OpenCL test.  The whitewashed spin here by AppleInsider is inappropriate.
    Whitewashed spin?
    However, going against a heavyweight GPU has its risks, and at least in our benchmark, it seemed that the MacBook Pro was a little too underperforming to be close. Don't count this as saying it's slow, as it's undoubtedly very good performance-wise, but in this particular test, it wasn't quite good enough.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 19
    I wonder if the screen resolution played a part? Would the MacBook Pro have been faster with the resolution set to roughly half at 1080 down from 3456? 

    Maybe that explains Apple’s marketing claim.
    waveparticlewatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 19
    hucom2000 said:
    I wonder if the screen resolution played a part? Would the MacBook Pro have been faster with the resolution set to roughly half at 1080 down from 3456? 

    Maybe that explains Apple’s marketing claim.
    Of course this has a profound effect on the benchmark numbers, especially the ray tracing / OpenCL. If the rastered image matrices weren’t matched, no true comparison can be made between the two machines.
    waveparticlewatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 19
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,755moderator
    Pretty devastating, the Max is almost half the GPU performance against the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 on the Geekbench 5 OpenCL test.  The whitewashed spin here by AppleInsider is inappropriate.
    Yes and for ray tracing the RTX 3080 will wipe the floor with the M1X Max GPU.
    It depends on which raytracing setup is used. A real-time raytracing setup here comparing a 2070 with DirectX raytracing vs M1 shows the 2070 over 30x faster. With M1 Max, it should be under 10x difference:

    https://www.willusher.io/graphics/2020/12/20/rt-dive-m1

    This is the difference Nvidia suggests when using RT cores:

    https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/geforce-gtx-ray-tracing-coming-soon/

    "when we examine just the ray tracing subset of the graphics workload, RTX 2080 is upwards of 10x faster."

    But that page also shows why it's highly dependent on how it's being used. The ray casting part is only a segment of the frame so only that part is faster, the rest is changed a lot less so the overall frame time is just under half.



    Post-production raytracing using Redshift here doesn't show the same difference and this is compared to a desktop 3080, which came out around 25% faster:



    Octane was a bit faster with a 2080ti desktop being around 2x faster and 3080ti 3x faster. M1 Max roughly matched a desktop 1080 ti:



    For interactive 3D, Apple Silicon runs smoother and quieter:



    The Apple engineers said they had to justify every piece of dedicated processing in the chip. For them to justify raytracing cores like Nvidia RT cores, there would have to be a use-case and due to lack of gaming, there isn't just now. There is way more widespread use of video codecs so adding special media processing hardware is much more easily justifiable and would be noticeable by most users.

    If people have the money to buy both PC and Mac, they can easily buy both for their strengths. The Mac is clearly the better option for most use cases - development, video editing, photography, pretty much any professional workflow, especially mobile. The PC is better for gaming, some compute tasks and some special use cases for Nvidia GPUs. Buying both gives the best of both, do most work on the Mac and offload raw compute for some tasks to the PC and do gaming on the PC.

    It would be nice to have a setup where you could just plug a PC into the Mac and control the PC like a virtual machine using the Mac mouse/keyboard to be able to use the XDR display for the PC side.
    muthuk_vanalingamdewmeGeorgeBMacchiaNaiyastenthousandthingswatto_cobrawilliamlondon
  • Reply 11 of 19
    Just for the sake of comparison, I like the ‘brute force’ pixel pushing math.
    I multiply the number of pixels in the monitor times the refresh rate.

    3,456 x 2,234 x 120 >> 926,484,480
    1920 x 1080 x 340 >>  705,024,000

    Of course, a 3x refresh rate is quite important in games.
    But that ‘brute force’ show that there is lots of power in the MacBook Pro
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 19
    "MacBook Pros continue to outclass gaming notebooks"

    This is an article that is supposed to compare the Macbook Pro to a gaming notebook, but there's not one single gaming benchmark.  Let that sink in.  If you want to see if it 'outclasses' gaming notebooks, then benchmark the top AAA games and then you can see which one comes out on top (I already know the answer after doing some research).  Although it might be hard to find many AAA games that will run on the MacBook Pro because of the paltry selection.
    muthuk_vanalingamwilliamlondon
  • Reply 13 of 19
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    "MacBook Pros continue to outclass gaming notebooks"

    This is an article that is supposed to compare the Macbook Pro to a gaming notebook, but there's not one single gaming benchmark.  Let that sink in.  If you want to see if it 'outclasses' gaming notebooks, then benchmark the top AAA games and then you can see which one comes out on top (I already know the answer after doing some research).  Although it might be hard to find many AAA games that will run on the MacBook Pro because of the paltry selection.

    Yes, true.
    But I think they knew that going in.  So, instead they  compared the MacBook to one of the most powerful competitors they could find.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 19
    "MacBook Pros continue to outclass gaming notebooks"

    This is an article that is supposed to compare the Macbook Pro to a gaming notebook, but there's not one single gaming benchmark.  Let that sink in.  If you want to see if it 'outclasses' gaming notebooks, then benchmark the top AAA games and then you can see which one comes out on top (I already know the answer after doing some research).  Although it might be hard to find many AAA games that will run on the MacBook Pro because of the paltry selection.
    As we all know, AAA games and any —decent— games ‘is optimised’ for the device in which it is running —PC, Xbox, PS, etc.—, so we should —homely— wait for those AAA games to be optimised in the M1s… which, also, have ‘a new architecture.’
    Maybe, what Apple is doing is ‘showing the games studios’ that the new machines are powerful enough to them to take the time/money to optimise them.
    (This would be a win for gamers and Apple.)
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 19
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 2,942member
    Pretty devastating, the Max is almost half the GPU performance against the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 on the Geekbench 5 OpenCL test.  The whitewashed spin here by AppleInsider is inappropriate.
    Read the title of the article. It wasn't a GPU comparison. It was a laptop comparison.

    And then read the first sentence of the article. The article is actually about "the rest of the specifications", which means NOT GRAPHICS.

    Your bias and your ability to miss the stated point is astounding.
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 16 of 19
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 2,942member
    Whenever I read a report like this, I copy and paste the chart into Apple's Numbers app then highlight each box if the box represents a clear win for my values (not everything gets a win because a different value does not always mean one is better.) I get something that looks like this.... This helps me decide. But since "better" is often subjective I can see why AI doesn't include this information.


    tht
  • Reply 17 of 19
    thttht Posts: 4,390member
    Whenever I read a report like this, I copy and paste the chart into Apple's Numbers app then highlight each box if the box represents a clear win for my values (not everything gets a win because a different value does not always mean one is better.) I get something that looks like this.... This helps me decide. But since "better" is often subjective I can see why AI doesn't include this information.
    Ooh, nice work, but are you really cross shopping these two laptops?

    These comparison articles have high "taps per work hour" or "clicks per work hour" ratios - ie, they are easy for the authors to do while having a lot of readers - but I always view them as a kind of fantasy comparison in the vein of determining the winner between Batman vs Superman or Megalodon vs Mechashark or WoT vs ASOIAF. Fun to read, but when it comes down to buying decisions, potential buyers definitely know what they need. The spec table comparison probably have some parameter that says why a buyer chooses this or that, but I find it pretty vague most of the time or just plain improperly filled (the low work part of this type of article), and buyers definitely know what they want and these comparison articles really don't help.

    I have a MBP15. For what I do, it would be literal insanity for me to choose the MSI Raider. The Raider is a machine designed for gamers, who at most will transport it from where it lives on a home desk 99% of the time to same gaming event. And you need to be mindful that a Raider user will typically have a headset on, and is likely in a well air conditioned room. I'm not going to be lugging around 10+ lbs of laptop stuff (laptop, charging brick, wires) to and from work every day, let alone use it in an airplane or while traveling.

    It goes the other way, it would be insanity for a gamer to buy a MBP. macOS doesn't have any games. These gaming laptops are interesting in that they haven't been optimized all the way yet. Make it a pure gaming transportable. Why bother with having a 100 WHr battery in it? Just use a 20 WHr battery. It's not going to be used on battery, so save some weight and use a smaller battery? Have no battery? Speakers? Are the speakers really used or do gamers use headsets when playing all the time? Then, I'm curious why would the Raider's target audience want that keyboard arrangement? The numpad keys aren't standard width, unless my eyes are deceiving me. I thought gamers don't use num pads.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 18 of 19
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    Whenever I read a report like this, I copy and paste the chart into Apple's Numbers app then highlight each box if the box represents a clear win for my values (not everything gets a win because a different value does not always mean one is better.) I get something that looks like this.... This helps me decide. But since "better" is often subjective I can see why AI doesn't include this information.



    Well done!  That's a time saver!
    It would be nice if somebody at ai stole your idea for future comparisons!  (Hint, wink)
  • Reply 19 of 19
    Pretty devastating, the Max is almost half the GPU performance against the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 on the Geekbench 5 OpenCL test.  The whitewashed spin here by AppleInsider is inappropriate.
    You do know that OpenCL has been deprecated on the Mac for years now, right?  Optimized Mac software will use Metal.  Early builds of Metal optimized Blender show ray tracing is very close to RTX 3080 speeds.  Definitely in the same class of performance. 
    williamlondon
Sign In or Register to comment.