Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M3 Max Review - M3 Max challenges HX-CPUs from AMD & Intel

[NikoB]

I just see how "A"'s a** is burning. I can just see how he emits rays of hatred (or diarrhea) from the way he shamefully flushed himself into the toilet. =)))

[NikoB]

Good night clown A. Tomorrow you will be more fun...

[A]

I just see how "A"'s a** is burning. I can just see how he emits rays of hatred (or diarrhea) from the way he shamefully flushed himself into the toilet. =)))

Smh

[Eugene]

The PROOF from China official site of Lenovo:
mitem.lenovo.com.cn/product/1030510.html
~1260$
And that config much faster(from PSU) then M3 Max Macbook 16 Pro 2023...=)

Who in their right mind would compare a premium laptop to a cheap gaming laptop? A person who chooses a business or workload premium laptop will never consider a cheap gaming series, because he have requirements that gaming series laptops in no way meet. And all laptops that meet them requirements, that on Windows that on MacOS cost comparable money.
Also, no one in their right mind does not buy the maximum configuration of laptops, only a couple percent of people do it, I'm talking about the configuration MBP 16 M3 Max/128Gb/8Tb for $7200.
More sensible people buy the base version, and expand the storage with DAS or NAS if necessary.

That's why the basic MacBook Pro 16" for $3500 and $4000 are expensive, but compared to the real competitors, MacBook cost are either equal or higher by 20% at most. Also even more people have enough basic MacBook 14" M3 Pro for much less money $2000-2400 or $2800 if more memory is required.

Yes I realize that there are many people who find the cheap gaming series of laptops more attractive, but it is extremely primitive of them to think that their requirements fit all people and those who have requirements do not fit for cheap gaming laptops are apparently fools.

The bottom line is that the main goal of all company is to make money, and all companies operate in a highly competitive market and do not take the price of their products from the ceiling. If you look at it, Chinese companies have also learned to make premium things, but suddenly it turns out that their cost is roughly equal to the cost of Apple products. Take a look at the Huawei MateBook X Pro, which is an analog of the MacBook Air
Lenovo with all due respect has no analogs MacBook Pro 16", only partially can compete with it Lenovo Slim Pro 9 cost start from $2200 or Lenovo Yoga Pro 9i 16 which costs $2900 for the configuration  i9-13905H/32Gb/1Tb/RTX4060.

Pluses in competing laptops on Windows are expandability of memory and storage and Nvidia cards with much better performance in games (but such laptops are not bought for gaming) and some GPU workloads, but not all.
But there are also some of disadvantages compared to MacBook: the autonomy of work under the usual average load is 2-3 times less, (AMD has a chance to change that, but so far laptop manufacturers haven't taken advantage of it), the performance in battery operation is significantly reduced, the weight of the laptop + power adapter is too much, the MacBook in most cases I take with me without power adapter and it lasts me a full day.

Here's a list of AMD Ryzen 7040-powered laptops:
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ap-mGyrNt723EO5v3B1nCW44R0XVMmOATpR-VZAXNgs/edit?pli=1#gid=0
In order to compete with MBP 16, the requirements for the laptop are as follows weight about 2 kg for 16" and 1.6 for 14", with quality Mini LED or OLED-display, battery life about 10 hours, with Thunderbolt 4 or USB-C 4 40Gbps port, high-quality, preferably not plastic unibody case, good sound system, keyboard and touchpad not worse than in MacBook Pro. 

In order to compete with MBP 16 M3 Max the laptop should have AMD 7945HX or 7845HX processors and meet the other requirements listed above. It doesn't have any real competitors to the Macbook Pro 16 on M3 Max yet. So far, the only one that can get on this list is the ROG Zephyrus Duo 16, but its weight, dimensions and battery life are of course much worse. Asus ProArt Studiobook Pro 16 OLED not released on 7945HX yet.

There are very tentative competitors to the MacBook Pro 16 with M3 Pro processors, as the performance of the Ryzen 9 7940HS is on par with the M3, not the Pro version. The MBP 16 with M3 Pro 18Gb/1Tb costs $2700, 36Gb/1Tb costs $3100. An MBP 16 M3 laptop if they released one would be $400 cheaper, meaning the MBP 16 M3/16Gb/1Tb should cost $2300 and the 16 M3/32Gb/1Tb should cost $2700
So these are laptops like:
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 OLED 7940HS - no such thing yet, on Intel CPU it cost for version 16Gb/1Tb around $2000
Lenovo ThinkPad Z16 Gen 2 OLED 7940HS 64Gb/1Tb - $2939
HP EliteBook 865 G10 7840HS (but only have 1080p IPS display) 32Gb/1Tb - $3360
Acer Swift X 16 OLED 7940HS 16Gb/1Tb - $1600 (Bingo, we finally found a laptop much cheaper, but wait, it have only 16Gb memory soldered on board. With Windows in 2023 it's not enought, 76 Wh battery will give a maximum of 50 % working time compared to MBP. From review: Not gaming I get 3-4 hrs of doing normal web surfing.)

The competitor of MacBook Pro 14 with M3 Pro processor should have 7845HX processor and meet the other requirements listed above. There are no such notebooks yet either.

But there are competitors to the MacBook Pro 14 with the M3 processor. These are ultrabooks on AMD 7940HS or 7840HS processors, their list and cost can be calculated by yourself.
Total it turns out that the real competitors do not cost much cheaper.

[RobertJasiek]

All this does not justify any storage upselling.

(It is your preference to disregard IPS.)

[NikoB]

There are very tentative competitors to the MacBook Pro 16 with M3 Pro processors, as the performance of the Ryzen 9 7940HS is on par with the M3, not the Pro version.

notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-16-2023-M3-Pro-review-Efficiency-before-performance.772025.0.html
vs
www.notebookcheck.net/Asus-ROG-Flow-X13-GV302XV-2023-Review-Svelte-gaming-convertible-that-packs-a-punch-with-AMD-Zen-4-Ryzen-9-7940HS-and-60-W-Nvidia-RTX-4060.742259.0.html

Again a pure lie. The 7940HS is significantly faster M3 Pro.

The rest of the speech is meaningless in the context of what was previously written - the 7945HX is more than 1.5 times faster than the top version of the M3 Max in a cheap laptop for $1200-1300. Fully packaged as I described it still costs around $2000. It was about pure performance, in which Apple loses outright.

[NikoB]

Apple wins only in autonomy time and balanced battery performance. That not only has never been disputed by me, but this is precisely what I emphasized. Nevertheless, at the prices that they sell and the upgrade opportunities, most people are not interested in Apple laptops and do not buy them. This is why x86 has reigned supreme on the market for over 30 years. Just like Windows, despite all the efforts of red-eyed figures in Linux.

The market really decided everything. It's Apple's destiny to coopt up wealthy pinocchios and kleptocratic circles in most countries outside the US/EU, and even there, more than half of the population does not buy Apple. What any expert familiar with the local laptop markets knows.

[Eugene]

Again a pure lie. The 7940HS is significantly faster M3 Pro.

Productivity in what, in games or in work tasks? Do you have a Macbook or are you just looking at benchmarks?
When choosing a device, pure performance doesn't make much sense without other parameters.

Apple has never announced or released products in the segment of cheap gaming laptops, it is a completely different product category where other rules apply. If you don't understand how the market works and why devices as rules are segmented into different categories, then there is nothing to talk to you about.
As for the fact that most people buy cheap windows laptops, I think it is quite obvious, but not because they are better, but because they don't have money for more expensive and better devices.

I just gave you an example that devices from one premium segment are quite expensive regardless of the manufacturer, be it HP, Dell, Lenovo, Asus or Apple, everyone prices their products quite expensive. But other manufacturers also have a line of cheap laptops and Apple does not, they are not interested in that market. But whining that Apple doesn't make laptops in the cheap segment is unhealthy.

[Neenyah]

Lenovo with all due respect has no analogs MacBook Pro 16",

ThinkPad P1, literal direct competitor (better in some ways, worse in some other ways, they are very equal overall). Same as the X1 Carbon is there to compete with all variants of the MacBook Air and some MB Pros 14.

[Eugene]

ThinkPad P1, literal direct competitor

Yes, good variant:
ThinkPad P1 Gen 6 CPU i7-13800H (performance roughly equal to M3 Pro), GPU NVIDIA® RTX™ 3500 (performance between RTX 4070 and 4080 laptop, yes it faster then M3 Max GPU), 32Gb RAM, 1Tb SSD, 4k OLED (but only 400 nits and 60Hz) - $3249

How greedy is Lenovo, why didn't they make it price the same as a cheap $1200-$1500 gaming laptop?

[Neenyah]

How greedy is Lenovo, why didn't they make it the same as a cheap $1200-$1500 gaming laptop?

P1 G6 has also a 165 Hz screen option but mate, come on, why are you saying that to me? If you check the previous convo (not sure if it was here or in another M3 MBP thread) you will see that I was also genuinely amused by that nonexisting $1200 gaming laptop ($2000 is closer to its current offer but NikoB is conveniently forgetting import taxes, VAT and stuff like that, just to push his narrative).

Edit: Here it is.

Right now I can order L5Pro 7945HX+4060 from many sellers from China for $1200-1300, with free delivery within 2 weeks maximum.

Prices in China for Chinese Lenovo models can be easily checked even by a child.

Mmm, "prices in China for Chinese Lenovo models" are being listed in USD. In China. Sure.
Btw, you live in Somalia or something similar where import taxes are not a thing? I mean you can literally be in China and order something from the US or the EU - and you will pay hefty imports. So...

-

Edit:

I went to check your claims, NikoB, and, surprise, surprise, you are lying again.

The mentioned model is ¥10148 and that is $1,427.06, not $1,200 as you claim and that's the cheapest Lenovo with 7945HX altogether. Screenshot 😀😀

[Eugene]

P1 G6 has also a 165 Hz screen option but mate, come on, why are you saying that to me?

It's not for you, it for NikoB, also it not my question, for me it good price for good product

[NikoB]

As for the fact that most people buy cheap windows laptops, I think it is quite obvious, but not because they are better, but because they don't have money for more expensive and better devices.

Once again, it was not about balancing the parameters of a certain universal laptop, to which Apple is technically closest, but about pure performance - here the x86 wins by a huge margin, including in price.

n terms of absolute performance from the outlet, x86 laptops from AMD are in the lead by a huge margin. This is what I proved earlier, and the difference in price is simply huge - a fully packaged L5Pro with 7945HX+4060 64GB/8TB(4+4) costs around $2000 (I can right now order exactly this configuration from China and adding memory and SSD as Since I'll spend about $2,000 in my country, the problems of customs duties in other countries don't bother me at all), as I wrote. And it will definitely be 1.5 times faster than the top-end Mac 2023 in most scenarios for both work and entertainment, with a difference of more than 3 times in price, at least.

[RobertJasiek]

the problems of customs duties in other countries don't bother me at all

Delaware? Caimen Islands? Hm.

[Alexander_]

Pluses in competing laptops on Windows

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 (2023) [GU604VY and next]

• The dimensions (and design) are very similar.
• The battery is the same.
• Asus will have a significant advantage in graphics performance thanks to the 4090.
• Conversely, due to the gluttonous Intel package, the autonomy will be significantly worse than the M3 (especially with light loads).
• The power supply (as well as the consumption itself) is larger on the Asus, although it can also be powered by USB-C 100W.
• The speaker system is as good as in the MacBook Pro.
• An additional touch is a separate "AniMe Matrix" screen.
• Yes, it will cost, most likely, about $1k more than a MacBook (there are also different configurations).
• And somewhat louder in terms of emissions.
• However, it can be serviced, components can be changed, and it has a better screen (it already has a matte MiniLED with good speed).

So there is actually an alternative.
The question is what is more critical for the consumer: autonomy, whether the OS is full-fledged (Windows), omnivorous games and video content (hardware and without dancing with a tambourine), or portability.

Savings in neither of them will be significant.
In one, the price is better at first, but the service is worse. Otherwise, there is native support for the OS, where there is a variety of programs that may be more profitable than for apple counterparts.
One will be more suitable for specialists of narrow use of laptops. The other laptop is fine for anything, but it's louder.