> The 2019 MBP 13 supposedly uses an 8th gen, 14nm Intel part (14nm is 6 year-old technology). A more fair comparison would be Tiger Lake (20% IPC improvement) on Intel's terrible 10nm process. The most fair comparison would be zen 3 on 7nm, but even that is still a whole node behind.

I'm not sure exactly what your point is. The fact it is IT IS on a better node. That's probably a big part of the performance picture. But, as a user I don't care if the improvement in performance is architectural or node. I just care that it's better than the competition.

I agree, but the real question becomes whether users would prefer 11th gen Intel processors or zen 2/3 over what they're shipping now. Would you take AMD seriously if they started talking about how their 5950 beat an ancient 8th gen Intel processor? I expect a higher standard from hardware makers and don't give a free pass to anyone over that kind of shenanigan.

We'll see third party benchmarks in less than a week and then this discussion is moot.

Do you really? It’s nice if it’s faster (and a hard sell if it’s slower) but really most people aren’t going to do the same things on a Mac they are going to do on a Windows laptop. You can’t run Windows or Windows software on these Macs. And it’s really no use to compare for instance Office for Windows to Office for Mac.

It depends on how you define fair. The base level M1 MBP is the same price as the previous generation Intel MBP and has the same amount of ram and storage. So in terms of a generation-on-generation comparison, it's absolutely fair for Apple to position the benchmarks that way.

Yes, Wikipedia says it's i7-8557U which has 8 MB cache.

So comparing a

4-Core, 5nm, 16 MB cache, 10 watts TDP vs

4-Core, 14nm, 8 MB cache, 15 watts TDP.

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/192996/...