• kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    M4 reportedly outperforms Intel’s Core i9-14900KS by 16%. That CPU alone is over $600.

    • Jrockwar@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t think anything with the word “intel” can be taken seriously in value comparisons…

      When I got my last laptop I ended up with a MBP because there were no high end options for Linux laptops with AMD. Now the options are better, but back then, the only realistic alternative to a MacBook Pro would have had a third of the real-world battery life if not less, even if I decided to spend £3k. That didn’t seem like an acceptable compromise so there were virtually no laptops in existence that could compete with an M2 MBP.

      • kibiz0r@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        True. It was just the first comparison I saw when I searched for M4 benchmarks.

        Really, AMD isn’t even a fair comparison because we’re talking about an ARM SoC here. So maybe the Snapdragon dev kit that ultimately got cancelled?

        It was supposed to be $900, for a special Snapdragon X Elite, 32GB RAM, and 512GB SSD.

        cpubenchmark.net has comparisons to other X Elite chips, putting them pretty much on-par with the M4 or maybe just below it.

        With the same amount of RAM and storage in a Mac Mini, you’re talkin $1200. So, $300 premium for a device that’s maybe 2-8% better, has retail support instead of being a dev kit, and… well, actually exists. It’s not a slam dunk for the Mini, but it’s clearly not a rip-off either.