Apple has a clear performance advantage over Intel when it comes to laptop processors and the move to M1 silicon has brought rich dividends to it. Even Intel itself agrees that it is superior. Former Mac boss Jean-Louis Gassée and former Windows president Steven Sinofsky have stifled any remaining suspicion.
Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger reluctantly admitted that Apple’s silicon is “pretty good” and better than any Intel chip. However, voices have been heard downplaying Apple’s leadership stance, saying, “even based on Apple’s own performance estimates, the chip will be slower than Intel’s upcoming Alder Lake CPU.” In independently published blog posts, former Apple CEO Jean-Louis Gassée dismissed the comparison of Alder Lake, noting that speculation compares the current production chip for the laptop with the upcoming chip for desktop computers. Gassée said Apple is working on a faster desktop chip for the upcoming Mac Pro and that would be a fair comparison.
For context, Jean-Louis Gassée was once at the forefront of Macintosh development, a role taken over by Steve Jobs. At one time, he was emphasized to be the general director of the company. In his blog post, he rightly said that Intel has not successfully implemented the key to Apple’s silicon success – the integration of everything needed on a single chip.
“In the case of x86 devices, Intel’s SIP (System In a Package) is an acknowledgment of their inability to integrate all CPU bodies into a single SoC (System on a Chip). As a result, SIP performance suffers due to lower interconnection speeds, especially compared to fully integrated SoC. For example, the memory transfer offered by the M1 Pro and Max reaches 200 and 400 gigabits per second, speeds that are unattainable in a SIP CPU implementation. ”
Separately, Steven Sinofsky called the M1-based MacBook Pro a “stunning innovation.” To get you up to speed, Sinofsky resigned as president of Windows after 20 years at Microsoft. His role meant that he was acutely aware of the internal workings of Intel’s x86 microarchitecture and the challenges for operating systems to support it. This gives it an important and unique perspective on the success of Apple’s M1 line.
In his blog post, Sinofsky told the history of Apple chips from PowerPC, leading to M1. He compared Apple’s decision to reject Motorola for PowerPC processors to the decision to leave Intel now.
“Apple essentially left a partner for the chips, while their core delivered to customers was a computer. That seemed like an impossible situation…
The M1 chip was the realization of all iPad and iPhone jobs (sensors, OS port, security, power management, graphics and more).
The M1 not only aimed to fix what had corrupted Intel, but also PPC. It has been learned from the past decade. ”
Sinofsky reiterated that the M1 Pro and M1 Max chips in the new MacBook Pro can beat Intel and almost anything, not just performance.
Kada When you look at the M1 Pro / Max today, it’s tempting to think of this in terms of performance, but performance per watt and integrated graphics and integrated memory and integrated application processors are an innovation in a completely different direction…
M1x shared memory capabilities, SoC that is not only smaller but has so many auxiliary functions, ProRes, super-fast SSD, even more TB ports – all these things require deeply integrated software (from chipset to experience).
We tend to agree with both Sinofsky and Gassée because even if Apple’s claims about the performance of the M1 Max and M1 Pro are a little less, the processors are simply leagues ahead of their counterparts from Intel and AMD. In addition, if you have the time, we warmly recommend that you read the interesting blog posts of both of these eminent veterans of the industry.
Friendly communicator. Music maven. Explorer. Pop culture trailblazer. Social media practitioner.