Quote from: m0rbin on November 20, 2021, 05:42:43

Quote from: Importedbanana on November 19, 2021, 20:36:41
I have serious doubts. There is no way this will be anywhere near as efficient as M1 Max and more performance at the same time. There will be caveats.

Cope

LOL 12900k 8+8 @ 40 watts barely beats apple m1 8+2 @ 30 watts in the most favorable for intel (cinebench) and you actually think mobile 6+8 with the same cores will do better in a multicore throughput test?  good one.

Quote from: Khan on November 20, 2021, 11:58:47
I'm really doubtful whether these articles are written just to let down the recent performers in the market.

As previously mentioned by someone here, I too tried M1 on macbook air and it's 2x more of a breeze than my office's high end macbook pro on Intel (w. dedicated GPU). I'm already looking forward to get an M1 pro or max, without even bothering about these controlled tests which hardly have anything to do with real life usage of these machines.

Google app just keeps throwing such notifications, and I'll prefer just to silence it.

The various Apple M1 chips are brilliant, you are absolutely right to be enthusiastic about them! However, all the fun will go away the day you want to upgrade your SSD or need more RAM. That is the nature of the Apple beast, they get you through the door with really fantastic stuff, only to then bleed you dry with the very basics.

What about the power consumption when running Cinebench R23?

I'm really doubtful whether these articles are written just to let down the recent performers in the market.

As previously mentioned by someone here, I too tried M1 on macbook air and it's 2x more of a breeze than my office's high end macbook pro on Intel (w. dedicated GPU). I'm already looking forward to get an M1 pro or max, without even bothering about these controlled tests which hardly have anything to do with real life usage of these machines.

Google app just keeps throwing such notifications, and I'll prefer just to silence it.

Quote from: Importedbanana on November 19, 2021, 20:36:41
I have serious doubts. There is no way this will be anywhere near as efficient as M1 Max and more performance at the same time. There will be caveats.

Cope

I have serious doubts. There is no way this will be anywhere near as efficient as M1 Max and more performance at the same time. There will be caveats.

Never believe it

These articles always come out showing AMD and Intel faster than Apple. For years I built my own PC's and bought intel laptops thinking they were better. No matter how good the CPU and GPU are there are always other issues with Windows PCs. Finally bought my first MacBookPro M1 last January and I will never go back. It's just so solid, quiet, and runs cool. There is no comparison, nothing else is that good.

QuoteNever thought about Intel would have this kind of performance, especially in multi cores.

Bringing my conspiracy hat, that might hint they were managing the obsolescence of their products instead of being completely in back foot.
In a couple of months they released the 11000 series and now the the 12000 series soon.
Thank god for Ryzen or they would be still polishing the 10000.

If true it is a fantastic number.
But note that 11800 can go to 14088 and 5800H can go to 13214 when not constrained as noted in the list

This is only one data point.

More cores more performance so do include the respective processors' CPU core/Hardware-thread counts, and on the charts. And this is in fact CPU core rendering that's not the norm when one has GPU/Graphics for that. It's going to be hard without some normalized numbers that are related to performance per CPU core when running Multi-Threaded CPU rendering benchmarks so the fact here is that core counts help for CPU rendering workloads and some Processors do support SMT while other do not,  so rendering workloads like SMT capable processors/CPU cores somewhat.

One must remember with respect to Apple's M1 Pro/Max variants that Apple has chosen to target around 3.2 GHz as the sweet spot there and that the A14/Firestorm cores have 8 Instruction Decoders on the front end of each core  so that's clearly the widest order superscalar core design on the consumer market but the x86 cores are clocked 1.6GHz higher than Apple M1 variants. Apple went wide with the A14/Firestorm design at high IPC but a lower clock rate to get that leading battery power metric on the M1/M1 Pro and Max Based Macbooks.

The Tech Press has yet to really deep dive Intel's Golden Cove Core and that Core's 1 complex x86 Decoder and 5 x86 Simple decoders where x86 decoders are relatively much larger than any ARM ISA Decoder implementation. So Intel had to have reduced the decoding capabilities on Golden Cove's 5 Simple x86 Decoders in order to get 6 x86 decoders on Golden Cove's core design. Maybe Agner Fog's CPU optimization manuals for Golden Cove/Alder Lake Platform are not yet available but that will be one interesting read when available.

Quote from: lvjcor on November 18, 2021, 14:38:10
Never thought about Intel would have this kind of performance, especially in multi cores. Look forward to seeing this new GE76 in the market

Battery life is going to be very interesting as well. With performance cores disabled in light tasks like web browsing, it should yield to significantly higher battery life compared to AMD's offerings. Excited!

Never thought about Intel would have this kind of performance, especially in multi cores. Look forward to seeing this new GE76 in the market