Quote from: NikoB's Apprentice on Today at 17:10:44Probably something to do with single threaded performance which is still important for the vast majority of day to day apps. It's been 5 years and still nobody has caught up.

Also the fact that you can buy one today and try one in store. Versus the rest of x86 - "come back in another 6 months, when availability / supply / pricing gets better" joke.

Just being available in retail stores should give an extra 10-20 points on the score board by itself, imo.

Most of the stuff in my region on windows land that's available in physical local stores is like 8945hs. Like why am I looking at and being sold 3 year old tech? It's not even cheap after all that time, makes apple look like a bargain. Absolutely disgraceful.

You make a very valid point in terms of availability. I'll admit, I rarely think of global availability given I'm in the United States - same with access to the latest tech since it is so readily available where I live.

As for single core performance, what do you think about the latest Intel chips? I feel Intel is making some significant strides - enough so I opted for the intel variant of the P14s Gen 5 when I upgraded and I couldn't be happier.
[/quote]

Quote from: NikoB's Apprentice on Today at 17:10:44

Quote from: Bizarro_NikoB on Today at 16:03:54Hmm, I'm at a loss.

Probably something to do with single threaded performance which is still important for the vast majority of day to day apps. It's been 5 years and still nobody has caught up.

Also the fact that you can buy one today and try one in store. Versus the rest of x86 - "come back in another 6 months, when availability / supply / pricing gets better" joke.

Just being available in retail stores should give an extra 10-20 points on the score board by itself, imo.

Most of the stuff in my region on windows land that's available in physical local stores is like 8945hs. Like why am I looking at and being sold 3 year old tech? It's not even cheap after all that time, makes apple look like a bargain. Absolutely disgraceful.

You make a very valid point in terms of availability. I'll admit, I rarely think of global availability given I'm in the United States - same with access to the latest tech since it is so readily available where I live.

As for single core performance, what do you think about the latest Intel chips? I feel Intel is making some significant strides - enough so I opted for the intel variant of the P14s Gen 5 when I upgraded and I couldn't be happier.

Almost more downsides than upsides for 8600!!! euros and still 90%? Wooow

Quote from: Bizarro_NikoB on Today at 16:03:54Hmm, I'm at a loss.

Probably something to do with single threaded performance which is still important for the vast majority of day to day apps. It's been 5 years and still nobody has caught up.

Also the fact that you can buy one today and try one in store. Versus the rest of x86 - "come back in another 6 months, when availability / supply / pricing gets better" joke.

Just being available in retail stores should give an extra 10-20 points on the score board by itself, imo.

Most of the stuff in my region on windows land that's available in physical local stores is like 8945hs. Like why am I looking at and being sold 3 year old tech? It's not even cheap after all that time, makes apple look like a bargain. Absolutely disgraceful.

Quote from: juri on Today at 15:53:48if you are paid by apple, tag these as marketing!!

It's not that. Just how many laptops with the come with the absolute latest microarchitecture's just released and aren't a paper launch?

Like available *today*, in retail stores for people to try out themselves.

I can't think of anyone or anything else. Feel free to correct me though, if you know of any.

Quote from: nick23 on March 11, 2026, 13:17:49You really need to find a similar CPU endurance test for MacOS, especially since Geekbench is notorious for only testing peak performance during bursts.

I agree with that, Whan macbook air m1 was tested, NC performed Cinebench R15 loop (emulated via Rosetta 2) and Cinebench R23 loop (native), and readers were able to have own opinion.

We would see how it behaves under load. I see it as a overpriced machine with great peak performance but some points are missing to call it " objective test". Should be clearly marked as marketing

How does something with inconsistent performance and throttling issues score 90% and earn a Top-Rated Award?

Is it because it's highly repairable? ...Well that can't be it. Apple doesn't believe in a user's right to repair.

Is it because it's highly durable and rugged? ...Well that can't be it. Apple laptops are not known for their durability.

Is it because it's upgradeable? ...Maybe, Apple does allows for upgrades at time of purchase but only at time of purchase and for a considerable fee.

Must be the port selection!  Well, that can't be it. Apple pioneered the mindset of removing ports to drive peripheral sales, so it's dongle life for Apple users requiring legacy ports.

Then it has to be price! ...Well, not so fast. Macbook Pros are some of the most expensive laptops on the market.

Hmm, I'm at a loss.

how many f* notebooks from the same company will you test, and this every year, every model!?
if you are paid by apple, tag these as marketing!!

Helpful and informative content. MacBook users often struggle with performance and battery problems. Understanding the right repair and maintenance methods can save both time and money. Thanks for sharing this knowledge.

What's going on with your Blender benchmark?

Just use the Blender benchmark tool and give the results.

Nobody's using Blender 3.3...

It's good that you called Apple out on the throttling issue (after 1-2 *seconds*, seriously??), but this really highlights the lack of the Cinebench R15 multicore endurance test - the graph of CPU performance over time that you include in literally every single Windows laptop review and that visually emphasizes any throttling.

You really need to find a similar CPU endurance test for MacOS, especially since Geekbench is notorious for only testing peak performance during bursts.

Something just doesn't quite track. Compared to the 16" Pro, you measure lower average power commensurate with throttling during the CB 24 run, but then a higher score ... and they are in theory the same CPU. I'm not sure what is going on, but this is very strange - several oddities in these results which you noted as well, behavior seemingly needed to be fixed by Apple.