Using cherry-picked benchmarks, beleaguered Intel has resorted to claiming that its line of big, hot, slow, inefficient processors can best Apple’s first generation M1.
Malcolm Owen for AppleInsider:
In presentation slides published by Tom’s Hardware, the claims over comparable hardware are questionable in some cases.
The slides compare a 13-inch MacBook Pro with M1 and 16 gigabytes of memory against its own internal whitebox, packing the Core i7-1185G7 with four cores, eight threads, and a maximum clock speed of 4.8GHz, supported by 16GB of memory.
The slides generally appear to show Intel’s chip as being either comparable or superior to the M1 in various tasks, though with major caveats. For a start, the benchmarks use Intel’s “Real-world usage guideline” tests, a collection of trials that don’t seem to be actively followed by most other testers…
While a company aims to present itself and its products in the best light, and potentially in a way that brings competitors down in comparison, Intel’s presentation indicates it is doing so by jumping through hoops. Cherry-picking test results and using more obscure testing procedures than typical suggests Intel is straining to paint itself in the best light.
MacDailyNews Take: Unsurprisingly, Intel has no answers to their self-inflicted conundrum other than to jerry rig benchmarks in an attempt to fool the ignorant because they’ve been thoroughly embarrassed by Apple (and even by AMD) and hopelessly outclassed by Apple’e first generation entry-level M1. Much more embarrassment awaits the outmoded snail in months and years to come which no rigged benchmarks will be able to hide.
Again, beleaguered Intel should seriously consider becoming a maker of “lifestyle” hotplates. At that, they’d really excel.
(Our apologies to computer fan makers worldwide. We know you love Intel utterly and completely.)
Apple Silicon, the “silicon of choice” of all of today’s hip young communist apparatchiks.
Get help!
I don’t need help. I just censor you.
“…fan makers worldwide” OMG that was funny but actually true. I bet some of them are worried that Apples fanless designs will catch on.
Fans, and makers of HUGE box tower cases with monster power supply bricks.
Intel must be using testing methods taken right out of old Soviet propaganda playbook, for example, showing farm tractors operated optimistically by smiling maidens.
The proof the the pudding is in the tasting. Let’s see which company makes the most money from selling laptops six months from now. I just know I don’t want any Intel processor in a future Mac I’ll be purchasing. At this point, Intel is dead to me.
Dead is kind of extreme thinking but, yeah about the rest.
Many marketing rules were broken by Intel doing this. Chiefly, when the market leader, NEVER mention the competition. Ever.
Does Apple come out with a new iPhone and say “The iPhone that beats the Samsung Galaxy Note in battery and faster downloads!”
OR
Does Apple simply say “The new iPhone 12. The fastest iPhone ever.”
When the lead dog, you compare yourself to yourself.
What does Intel do? Apple comes out with a product that is truly a significant game-change in the processor industry, so Intel reacts. That’s done out of fear and panic – AKA emanation, vs rational marketing decisions. Intel should have never does this. Ever. It makes them look at lot worse than doing nothing at all. Rather, it pulls more attention to the M1 and Macs, not less.
Of course we know that these are entry-level processors for Apple and yet they absolutely smoke in speed and provide amazing battery efficiencies! Just amazing. What we would all liked to have seen is a Core-i3 or Core i5 competing head to head without all the multiple Intel boxes being used under some odd Intel test procedures, without pinning them against what might be some Rosetta apps???
It just all smells of fear indeed. And it just highlights what Intel knows is coming soon – the high-end M1x (or “z”). A few weeks after that product’s launch in the high-end MBP, more than a few heads are likely to roll at Intel.
What is Intel doing now? What will they do over the next 1-2 years? What they’ve always done. Rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic.
The bottom line in all of this is quite simple: AMD is defeating Intel at it’s own game, on the same platform structure, while Apple is coming at the computing solution in a disruption fashion and Intel has few options on the table in how to escape the pinch.