Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

macworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 368 posts

Re: Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

#191

Post by dragontamer »

chias wrote: post #131
nielsbot wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

cryogenic cooling tho?

Wouldn't solve the problem. Basically you need the integrated components to have shorter transition times. These are an inherent property of the component: speeding up the transition time basically means "replace this component with a different component that has a shorter transition time"

Overvolting the component and sending more current to any transistor tends to speed it up, though at the cost of severely more watts used.

Overclocking is often a combination of overvolting (leading to more amps), allowing you to increase clock speeds.

Re: Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

#192

Post by fomine3 »

MBCook wrote: post #163
neogodless wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If any laptop was going to have a good screen I’d think it was this one. Well no... they put a very fast (high refresh) gaming screen in a gaming laptop. If you want QHD or 4K screens, they are out there. That's not... more than a Google away. So it's a really bad assumption to make. Here, first google result for "Intel 4K laptop", it's $1500. https://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-zenbook-flip-15-q538ei-15-... Your fau…

According to The Verge there is another configuration of this machine with double the RAM and a 4K 240Hz for the same price. Why in the world would you want a 1080p display just to get an extra 120 FPS? Even if you can perceive that difference (which I kind of doubt) you’re not going to get rates that high with your settings up high anyway. In The Verge’s tests only the old CS:GO got above 150 (it got over 400!). “ I…

Current GPU can't handle 4K120Hz on latest game with higher settings, and 4K on laptop for gaming isn't strongly needed. 1440p240Hz would be another sweet spot but 1080p360Hz is for who prefer the top refresh rate.

Re: Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

#193

Post by kingosticks »

zeusk wrote: post #166
nielsbot wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

cryogenic cooling tho?

Google propogation delay, your pipeline's length and delay of devices within that pipe determine the max frequency your circuit can run at (a very high level overview).

How is pipeline length related to max frequency?

Re: Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

#194

Post by c0nducktr »

Multiplayer wrote: post #87
Gatsky wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t find the same. Chrome seems to eat the battery a lot in my experience.

I deeply regret getting only 16gb ram in my air for exactly this reason.

Can you elaborate?

I don't have a MacBook (but have been considering getting one), but I can't imagine that you need more that 16 GB of RAM to run a browser, no matter how memory-hungry Chrome might be.

Is this really an issue? Maybe you're trolling?

I don't understand how adding more memory is going to fix your performance. It's not like you're spinning up a HDD to swap.

What do you regret?

Re: Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

#195

Post by barkingcat »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #59
Eric_WVGG wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think this is going to happen, but: It would be extremely funny if Apple strapped a heavy copper heatsink and a turbo fan to an M1 and just overclocked the ever-lasting crap out of it. The crazy thing about using a Macbook Pro (with an M1 Pro or M1 Max CPU) is that, in single-threaded performance, it's really no faster than a dippy little Macbook Air. And at the end of the day, single-thread performance is mo…

Apple (if they were willing to expose a more wild side) should make an "M1 Pro Max Unlocked" board (or something like that) and just sell it as a bare, microATX board. It could cost exactly the same as the Mac mini for all I care, but if PC builders could use it in crazy cases and with liquid (or even liquid nitrogen) cooling, that would be so cool.

I bet Woz would totally do it, and he has the clout to do it too - as a retro-mod calling back to the Apple I or II

Re: Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

#196

Post by mehrdada »

adam_arthur wrote: post #120
shawnz wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's merely equally as good as the previous market leader's flagship product in every way except litography, where it exceeds them? Are you implying that's not something to be impressed about just because lithography is not a property of the architecture?

Your comment is unclear. Apple's contribution to M1 was the design. TSMC built the next gen fabs, and gets credit for the manufacturing. You can't compare viability or success of the processor design when you compare cross fab generations. It's apples to oranges. You can state that M1 is better, which is true, but it doesn't follow at all that it's due to the design component. It could very well be that moving Intel'…

> It could very well be that moving Intel's design to TSMC's fab would lead to it running circles around M1

Or not. There is no reason to believe Apple design has not been a major contribution to the performance. Sure TSMC process is a major component but to quote yourself it does not follow that that explains all of it. It could very well be that a hypothetical Apple design to Intel fab would still run circles around current Intel chips (or not). What we do know is system architecture is sufficiently different, and that it is likely to have a material impact on performance.

Re: Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

#197

Post by vbezhenar »

BoorishBears wrote: post #71
addicted wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not true of the current Macs though. I still have a 2011 era MacBook that I can use, and was very pleasant to use until an OS update a couple of years ago. But that was because I was able to upgrade the RAM, the SSD, and replace the battery. None of those things are possible with macs from the last few years, so their longevity is much more likely to resemble phones than older macs.

The secondary market simply doesn't agree with the weird obsession with calling Apple's hardware future e-waste just because you can't change out an SSD. Mac hardware holds value because it's well built, supported for a long time, has specs that are enough for a wide range of users... - For every power user running through battery cycles every day, there's people who just need a solid well built machine and won't fee…

I bought Dell 3410 for $600 and upgraded it for another $200 to 16 GB/500 GB SSD. It's a perfect little beast. Air with those specs will be around $2000 in my country.

Re: Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

#198

Post by schleck8 »

johnklos wrote: post #62

Hold on - it's 2022, and an extremely high end $4000 laptop with the latest Intel CPU and an NVIDIA 3080Ti comes with a display that's... 1080 resolution? My 2008 17" MacBook Pro has a screen that's 1920 x 1200. My iPhone 6+ is 1920 x 1080. What am I missing? Is the non-Apple world really fine with stagnant resolutions?

For gaming refresh rate is generally preferred over resolution.

And this panel has 6 times more frames per second than any of the apple devices you listed.

Re: Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

#199

Post by watersb »

The Alder Lake monster review on AnandTech is fun. A desktop replacement laptop: ten pounds! 150 Watts! nVidia RTX! Whips and chains!

https://www.anandtech.com/show/17223/intel-alder-lake-h-core...

It's almost exactly three times as fast in CineBench as my MacBook Air, and cost about 3x as much, weight also about 3x. A useless comparison, but kind of funny to imagine rolling in there with three MacBook Airs, set up some distributed load network, and claiming victory.

The Alder Lake box has 100% more CUDA.

(I couldn't figure out the idle power draw from the review, AnandTech publishes their raw data, so maybe it's in there somewhere. https://www.anandtech.com/bench )

Re: Alder Lake Core i9 processor is faster than the M1 Max

#200

Post by burmanm »

MBCook wrote: post #109
neogodless wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is the non-Apple world really fine with stagnant resolutions? Exactly one specific version of one exact laptop has 1080p, and you jump to that conclusion? You are missing 99.999% of the picture here!

It’s one laptop. But it’s not a $350 laptop. It’s $4000. It has the top of the line Intel chip and (what I believe) is the top of the line GPU out now. If any laptop was going to have a good screen I’d think it was this one. Nope. $1100 Air has a better screen.

$1100 Air has 60Hz screen, which is equal to oldest LCDs found in laptops. That's not a good screen, that's horrible.

Resolution isn't everything.

Post reply on HN