ericthehalfbee

Musk is playing games to get a new trial date. Twitter isn’t falling for it. Musk would drag the “I’m still securing financing” schtick as long as he possibly could. Twitter is right I’m not trusting Musk and wanting to proceed with the trial WHILE Musk does his financing song & dance.

Your performance comparison is terrible.

The Dell is only capable of matching the M2 when plugged in. And even then the M2 is still faster at many tasks.

Run them on battery and the M2 obliterates the Dell. Most YouTube reviewers trying to paint the M2 in a bad light always test plugged in. The very few who have tested on battery expose Intel for what they are - power inefficient designs that only perform good when plugged in and throttle like crazy on battery.

These are laptops, not desktops. Their performance on battery is what counts. And the M2 crushes Intel.

Fred257 said:

Reviews that go in depth show a different story. If the new MacBook Air has only one Nand chip, like the newest 13’ MacBook Pro then it will be a downgrade in performance. Looks are one thing. But, like in any relationship it’s on the inside what matters most 😂

Another idiot posting this misinformation.

ALL devices that use smaller SSDs have lower scores than those that have larger SSDs. You can go back several years and see that the iPhone 7 or earlier MacBooks with base storage configurations were always slower. Nobody tried to make a scandal out of it. Why? Because it’s common knowledge that SSDs with fewer packages (chips) are slower. Anyone who builds their own gaming PCs would be well aware of this as repeated testing has shown higher capacity drives are faster.

The M2 is no different than previous Apple products that also had slower SSD speeds in base models. Except the M1. For some reason Apple used 2 x 128GB modules on the M1 MacBooks instead of their usual single modules. The M1 is the outlier having fast performance on the base model. If people want to accuse Apple of playing games or cheating, then they should look at the M1. Maybe Apple did this on purpose since this was the first Apple silicon Mac and they wanted ALL areas of performance to be top notch? Or maybe it was just a shortage of 256GB modules so they used the 128GN modules?

Whatever the reason, there’s no “scandal” with M2 SSD performance. It’s the same as previous generations of Apple devices. There’s just a group of Apple haters that are trying to manufacture a scandal out of something that’s been well-known and documented for years. That base model devices are slower. Whether it’s Apple or other companies.

Then we get to the throttling test. Another newly manufactured test to try and slight Apple (like the App Races YouTubers do to show Android phones are as fast as iPhones because they’re upset they lost in benchmarks). It’s downright hilarious (and pathetic) that Cinebench R23 is now the Apple haters favorite benchmark even though it has nothing to do with the type of work that 95% of users would never do. You’ll see these results everywhere while other benchmark tests are no longer used (funny how tests where Apple excels are invalid while tests that favor Intel suddenly are). It’s the age-old trick of changing test parameters when Apple gets ahead. Geekbench used to be considered a reliable test when Android phones scored higher than iPhones. When Apple took over suddenly it’s a useless benchmark.

Before the M2 I never saw laptop “reviewers” run Cinebench in extended loops to see how much the laptop throttles (and, boy, Intel doesn’t disappoint with significant throttling and power usage). Yet here we are. Another manufactured test that doesn’t equate with real-world performance and usage. Here’s an example:

One very well-known YouTuber tested the MBP M1 Pro against the new i9-12900. Never mind the MBP was $2,500 and the Intel was $4,200. Or that he should have used the M1 Max, which is closer in price.

The real scam is the Cinebench R23 tests. The Intel scored 17,000 to 12,000 for the M1 Pro. So clearly it’s faster. Then he unplugged the laptops and tested on battery. Intel dropped to 12,000 and M1 Pro STILL scored 12,000. That’s a whopping 5,000 point drop on battery. So what does this YouTubers do after discovering this massive drop on battery? Does he run his benchmarks twice (plugged in and on battery) to see how each laptop performs? No. He plugs them both in and does his full benchmark suite. This is the kind of testing that people consider valid? Worse yet, people always quote the 17,000 score of the Intel and conveniently forget it only gets 12,000 on battery. Or leave out that Intel consumes literally 3x the power to get that 36% boost. Oops, not a boost. On battery it gets the same score and still consumes 2X the power. And people use these numbers to conclude that Intel is better?


All this really proves is how good Apple Silicon really is. If it wasn’t it wouldn't be getting all the attacks from fake reviews doin obscure tests that nobody cares about before.

Another example that shows the EU is a joke.

Why no complaints about banks withholding their cards from iPhones? Why can they refuse to let customers add their bank card to the iPhone (and enjoy increased security/reduced fraud) yet complain that Apple won’t allow Apps access to NFC?

Want to know just how bad the new Exynos and Snapdragon are?

They're on the latest 4nm node. They’re using the latest & greatest ARM cores (X2, A710, A510). The stars have aligned letting them have all the best possible technology available together at the same time.

And they still get trounced by the A15. In fact, the A14 easily beats them both and the A13 offers about 95% of the performance.

Apple is literally 2 years ahead.