None of those laptops has a modern Ryzen CPU in them though? For a more fair comparison?
Also your post is a bit misleading: GPU performance is comparable to Intels, not nVidias which is explicitly called out.
Also your post is a bit misleading: GPU performance is comparable to Intels, not nVidias which is explicitly called out.
AMD just caught up (to Intel) in 2020 in laptop efficiency, and the OEMs are starting to catch up in offerings in 2021. However, availability is a mess in general lately. Might be 2022 before really high-end laptops offer Ryzen regularly.
https://www.amd.com/en/shop/us/Laptops should get you started on where to look.
5xxx models are just appearing, look up the Zephyrus G15.
> Only compare high-end laptops
Wait...
Depending on what you're doing, compare Best (most powerful), Value, Efficiency, etc...
M1 wins in Efficiency. Ryzen wins on high-end power. Value varies by laptop but currently Ryzen wins on any sub-$1200 laptop comparison for value.
The current MacBook Air is a phenomenal value with almost no compromises.
That's a massive compromise, and I'll be returning this version
(The Air and mine have different compromises. High-end gaming, wider selection of games, bigger screen vs minimal/no heat output, amazing battery, better portability. But I do think some of your assumptions about what is possible in the value segment aren't current.)
Not sure what that has to do with marketing - I mean you can buy based on marketing, but the original discussion was about comparing entry-level laptops and high-end laptops to the Macbook Air, and excluding Ryzen because they aren't in high-end laptops.
You are off in the sticks. By your definition, nothing is "Well rounded". Every product is designed for a purpose. Value is about how well a product suits its that purpose. When I buy a hammer, I don't complain because it doesn't work as a screwdriver.
Your continued assumption here is that every computer needs to be suitable for gaming and that assumption is nonsense.
> original discussion was about comparing entry-level laptops and high-end laptops to the Macbook Air, and excluding Ryzen because they aren't in high-end laptops.
Your original comment which I replied to was talking about how Ryzen wins on value. Which is only the case if you are willing to accept lower end components, less battery life, and fan noise.
But this is only the case if you compare $1200 versions of the Macbook Air to $400-500 laptops...
My previous comment already discussed the existence of $1000-1200 laptops with Ryzen that don't have "lower end components" or "fan noise" (outside of gaming, which we can't compare on because we're excluding that as a possible compromise.)
Sure we're getting a bit into terminology. Long battery life is a feature, just like a full selection of games - it is a compromise to have less of either. It's not a critical compromise depending on what you buy the machine for.
Critical compromises (again mostly in the eye of the buyer) could arguable be bad quality or unusable screens, like those with poor color representation that prevent professional work.