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

311–320 of 368 posts

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

#311

Post by dathinab »

olliej wrote: post #67
MBCook wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only that but the Apple GPU is around double the strength of the Intel integrated GPU. Obviously the 3080 smashes the Apple GPU but that comes at a huge power cost.

Seriously why can’t Intel make a decent igpu? My understanding is that the M1 GPU is just “ok” and isn’t competing with AMD or nvidia?

because for the target audience the intel iGPU is "good enough".

For now: And for the cases where it isn't, Intel wants you go for an dedicated graphics cards. (There is a cost to stuffing more onto the same CPU package, chiplets do reduce that cost by quite a bit, but are a new technology you have to integrate into your design flow, tooling etc.)

In the future: Similar, but due to some shifts in their approach Intel might reach for chiplets. Similar there are dedicated Intel Graphics cards they want to sell to you.

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

#312

Post by salamandersauce »

Gigachad wrote: post #248
sorry_outta_gas wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really the cost of capability and addons, I'm not sure about that MSI model but you're able to get a ton of storage and a good gpu for under what apple charges if you want one or two tb of storage and decent ram you're looking at $3,000+ after taxes

I think this still ties in to the point. People laugh at the apple user mentality of “I just know it’s going to work if I buy Apple”. But then you have windows OEMs where you have to do careful research because the product line is full of scams and traps.

As a user of a 15" 2018 MBP, Apple has had their fair share of scams and traps. They had no business stuffing the chips they did in that chassis. Especially the i9s. The cooling is woefully inadequate even for my base model i7 and I have no doubt that a $1000 gaming laptop with its "cheep" build with the same CPU would have better sustained performance.

Apple has also repeatedly sold several year old computers at brand new prices, in particular the 13" 2012 MBP that was only discontinued mid-2016, the 2015 MBA that they "updated" in 2017 and sold for another few years, the 2014 mini, the 2013 Mac Pro. What's worse is most of these were computers at the bottom of their price range. I had to steer so many people away from the attractive seeming base model MBP and convince them that yes, it worth spending $200 extra to get a machine that's 3 years newer. What other OEM literally sells several year old machines for new prices?

EDIT: Just remembered they still sell the 2018 i5 Mac Mini for the same price.

EDIT 2: Oh yeah and I just remembered they'd hide what generation Intel CPU you were getting and just say Dual Core 2.5Ghz i5.

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

#313

Post by dathinab »

baq wrote: post #279
dannyw wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

M-series GPUs feature a lot of ASIC and media encoder/decoders. My M1 Air absolutely DESTROYS my RTX 3090 in h265/422 video editing, which is what my camera (Sony A7S iii) shoots. My 3090 would shutter and play my 60fps footage at 11fps using 350W while my passively cooled M1 doesn't miss a frame.

this just means the M1 has a fixed function block for your codec or whatever else you're doing and the 3090 doesn't. or that your video software is crazy broken. it obviously doesn't matter for your workload, ultimately the M1 is faster and that's all that matters for you. just highlighting that this isn't magic, just hardware matched to use case.

It also means that your hardware has a tendency to "strangely become supper slow" when video codecs change over time.

But then they don't change that often.

Your probably change your apple laptop more often.

And given that codecs are pretty much the only "high performance" use-case apples target audience has to a high degree putting special hardware in to make it go fast is the right way to go.

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

#314

Post by dathinab »

marcan_42 wrote: post #203
dijit wrote: post #3

3.5%-5% increase in performance at more than double the wattage, for a chip that is not in consumers hands against a chip that basically hasn't changed and was released 14 months ago~ This is not the victory that the title implies. It's also a _little_ bit funny that the i9 laptop was double the price, given people usually rant loudly about how expensive Apple computers are.

Intel know Apple has the ability to strap two M1 Max dies together, right? Right? It's all over the architecture and drivers. It's designed for that. The damn interrupt controller has an unused second half. Rumors are it'll be used on the iMac Pro, but who knows, they can throw it into a 16" laptop if they really want to, it'd still be quieter and lower power than the old Intel MacBooks. Do that, same wattage, less t…

uhm, twice the chip twice the power usage if used for twice the performance...

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

#315

Post by johnklos »

neogodless wrote: post #101
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?

> 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!

The original PCWorld article linked in the Macworld article compares three different laptops (Asus AMD, MSi Intel 11th gen, MSi Intel 12th gen). All three have 1080p resolution displays.

How are three high end laptops from two vendors "exactly one specific version of one exact laptop"?

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

#316

Post by gnufied »

sid-ant wrote: post #252
gnufied wrote: post #34

I know everyone is going to jump the gun and declare how mediocre Intel's offerings are in terms of power efficiency but lets not forget that this Laptop is also running RTX 3080Ti and historically more 5% performance on Alder Lake CPUs requires somehow way more power. Same thing happened during 12900K reviews. IMO - it would be interesting to see benchmark of P and U series Laptops. Honestly I do not think they are…

There is no Intel 14core laptop with i9-12900HK consumes 115W of Turbo Power (PL2) [1] At 45W it can only do 2.5Ghz ( literally half ) on P cores and 1.8Ghz on E cores. It would be really interesting to see how this processor works with TB disabled which is really easy thing to do. [1] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/proces...

> There is no Intel 14core laptop with I didn't say anything about frequencies. :-)

But there is https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i7-1280P-Processor-... which is 14core P series model with power envelop of 28w. I would personally take 5-10% lower performance if it results in decent efficiency.

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

#317

Post by ddingus »

philistine wrote: post #234
ddingus wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am very likely to use this phone another three years. Just saying. Otherwise, yeah! My wife has an older iPhone still nicely supported, and older than my Note. My last Mac was a 2012 i7. I used it 6, 7 years? It is still useful, but got coke on keyboard! I fixed it myself last time. Not doing it again.

What if there is a debilitating security problem with Android within those three years? I wouldn't choose that kind of uncertainty.

Depends on how one uses the phone for starters. I may ditch it, I may not.

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

#318

Post by marcan_42 »

WatchDog wrote: post #300
marcan_42 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not guessing. They are different dies. There is no need to write a hypothetical wall of text and get it wrong; you can just look up die shots or chip package shots or device trees and know they're different dies. This information is well known. There's a massive difference in size and aspect ratio between all 3 dies. It would not be cost efficient to fab M1 Max dies and sell them as M1 Pro. The M1 Max is explicit…

I tried finding die shots of the M1. Techinsights have a die shot of the original M1[0]. But for the pro and max, I could only find the die shots from the apple press release. The pro just looks like a cropped max, I wasn't sure if it was just cropped for illustration purposes or actually a different die. Are there any publicly available die shots of pro/max from a third party source? [0]: https://www.techinsights.co…

The Pro isn't a flat out cropped Max; you can tell because the bottom edge looks like a proper die edge, and there are subtle places where the break line wouldn't be straight (compare the DDR channels with the rest of the blocks, they don't line up slightly). The Max is a cropped real Max because they tried to hide the die-to-die interconnect (meant for a 2-die Max machine) at the bottom. You can tell because the die abruptly stops at that edge hard, without the expected features of an IC edge. Clearly if they'd gone as far as photoshopping that on for the Pro, they wouldn't have screwed it up on the Max ;-)

I'm not aware of any other public die shots of the Pro, but there is one of the Max that went around on Twitter and it matches the marketing shot, plus an extra strip on the bottom edge as we'd suspected. We do know the M1 Pro has a completely different and smaller package, however, and the M1 Max die would not fit on it. That one was leaked months before the announcement as part of the board layout and schematics for that machine. So the Max die simply wouldn't fit on Pro machines, and this is from engineering drawings.

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

#319

Post by [deleted] »

u320 wrote: post #305
kingosticks wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, yes there's often correlation but that's it. A longer pipeline doesn't affect max circuit frequency. The other sibling comment regarding distance isn't true. regardless of how insane your feedbacks are. Physical placement tools have always handled this in my experience (as a chip designer for 10+ years).

There is no point of lengthening the pipeline if you don't get higher frequency from it. It would just add complexity and and a higher branch mispredict penalty.

[deleted]

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

#320

Post by zht »

bayindirh wrote: post #304
omegalulw wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> have certain amounts of time which they need to take in order to tie voltages high or low, to either read or output a bit. When you overclock you add voltage which helps with this which goes a long way. You would often hit thermal limits first, so heat dissipation is a major factor.

This is not my experience in the olden Athlon XP days. Even though you give the extra voltage and give enough cooling, the CPU starts to encounter many internal errors and needs to re-run a lot of instruction trains to get sane results. This causes heat and load spikes, and while you get no errors, the increased frequency doesn't give you any real world performance gains. Returning a to a slower configuration actuall…

Athlon was 20 years ago.

It feels unfair to generalize across time and architectures

Post reply on HN