Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by MBCook | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

MBCook·

That was always the biggest issue.

It’s not hard to outperform an M1 Max. Just use a ton of cores and high frequencies.

But that uses a ton of battery and puts off a ton of heat.

That’s my favorite thing about my M1 Mac. It has no fan, doesn’t get hot, has TONS of battery, and still performs well.

If Intel can match/beat Apple at similar power/thermal levels THATS an achievement.

View on HN

Right - show me an ambiently-cooled Intel laptop with the same performance as a MacBook Air M1, available for purchase in the market, metric-for-metric. It doesn’t exist.

Based on Intel’s graph it looks like they be able to beat the M1 Max in performance at 35 watts. And that would be great.

But laptops shouldn’t need to draw 35 watts minimum. If it can’t scale down when idle I think I’d pass.

I have an i9-12900K (same gen desktop chip) that is self-reporting ~15W idle. I would be pretty surprised if their mobile chip didn't scale lower than that.

I was going off the slide shown on this tweet:

https://twitter.com/tomwarren/status/1478514671980269574

It doesn’t show the new Intel processors going below about 30 watts.

Then again I kind of doubt the M1 Max chips can’t get below 20 W.

It's impossible to overstate the quality of life difference this makes. I've had an M1 Pro MBP since launch and I'm still yet to hear the fans come on. I stress tested it by generating a 5 minute music video (fairly complex Magic project) while also building a multi-arch docker image - laptop remained totally cool and silent, and the video rendered in 6 minutes. The same video on my top of the range, maxed out Intel MBP took over 20 minutes to render, got so hot I couldn't touch the bottom of the laptop and sounded like a 747 taking off. And I wasn't simultaneously building a docker image.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com