No iCrap gets the hate well deserved. They torpedo their own products.

The benchmark itself measures burst compute.

For any sort of sustained workload it's nowhere near laptops, let alone near desktops.

The whole post, and especially the title and image, are misleading.

Sometimes companies build product to get high scores, rather than to work well in real settings.

Apple has done a remarkable job with their silicon though.

I got an used M1 2020 MacBook Air (base model, no upgrades) back in 2023 and that thing is still going strong. Doesn’t feel slow at all. Not even slightly.

I'm not familiar with GeekBench, but I assume that, as with benchmarking software that I've used in the past, its benchmark runs for more than two seconds to help make numbers reproducible.

Yes this right here the context the people are actually missing is that these trips are going to be proprietary to Apple products.

The last Apple product that I purchased was a iPod mini in 2008.

On the iPhone, sure, but it would be equally wasted on Android phones because who needs this much performance in a phone anyway. However, I expect them to also use it in next year's Macbook Neo, which is a surprisingly capable laptop for its price with even the A18 Pro chip. It also bodes well for the next generation of their M series chips if the A20 Pro is this fast... and there are TONS of people using Macs for real work. Code compilation in particular got super fast with the M1 Pro and I believe it's great for creative applications too, though I haven't really used those much myself. Creatives types gravitated towards MacOS even before Apple Silicon, especially video editors because of Final Cut Pro.

More cats in my dwarf fortress are never wasted.

Honestly, DF was the last time i thought about single core performance.

Okay, but that Intel CPU was part of the first family of CPUs on Intel's equivalent node (18A) too. If nothing else, it serves as an interesting Intel vs TSMC lithography comparison. Which one would expect TSMC to win anyway, but at least now we have numbers.

They’re the first to get the fastest chips, so saying their chips are the fastest is… misleading? But also “of course” it’s true?

I’m confused.

I don’t think anybody was misled into thinking it meant this chip would always be the fastest on the market.