Live data from Hacker News

The $1,799 MacBook Pro 13 vs. the $650 Acer Swift 3

pcworld.com

91–92 of 92 posts

Re: The $1,799 MacBook Pro 13 vs. the $650 Acer Swift 3

#91
Two things:

First, this is not about Apple, but rather about Intel. The 10th gen chips are very expensive, but they can't compete with AMD offer and this should be pretty clear to everyone right now. Anyway, this isn't just true for the MBP: we could make the same article for pretty much every premium laptop that uses Intel instead of AMD such as the Dell XPS, the X1 Carbon, the MS Surface Laptop/Book.

Secondly, what really matters in a laptop is the cooling system. Geekbench is nice to get a general idea of what a chip is capable of, but to understand how much the laptop can take advantage of it, you should run some stress tests. In this scenario, the base MBP can sustain ~25W while the higher end model goes up to ~30W. Most laptops in this category limit the chip to ~15W and sometimes they have to go even lower than that. I'm not saying that the Swift will be bad, but Geekbench doesn't really say much about that.

So sure, every occasion is good to scream "Apple bad", but this really isn't surprising

Re: The $1,799 MacBook Pro 13 vs. the $650 Acer Swift 3

#92
post #23

It's not just a case of dividing performance numbers by price - obviously the Apple machine is better built. The real question is: Is it built a $1000 dollars better and built well enough to overcome the fact it's slower (in these tests)? There are some pretty legitimate reasons to come away from Apple products now in my opinion, including some very competitive hardware at lower prices. I've been quite a happy Linux…

Not only are they better built, they also run macOS.

Better built is an objectively better. Having OSX is not. It's only better if you actually think OSX is the best OS.
Post reply on HN