Yeah the 12900HK beats the Max by 3%, even though the M1 Max is way more power efficient and likely utterly smoked it on GPU. After all it’s 8% faster than a mobile 3060.

The 3060 alone is a 60W TGP.

The M1 Max running Cinebench consumes 9W while the 11980HK (previous gen) consumes 45W. Perf/W Is about 3X higher for the M1 Max on CPU alone and I suspect factoring in graphics we’ve got a breakaway here.

Intel will catch up but not today.

Just FYI because I've seent that a few times already: A 60W/70W 3060 is -very slow-. There are many laptops that supply much more power and conversely also get better results.

That's a very good point. Do you thing running a 3060 at a higher TGP gets you the same perf/W? I'm genuinely curious where they have them set along the curve.

I mean 60W is very low, probably 90-100W is the sweetspot? I have a Legion 5 Pro which supplies 130W and that's pretty much the highest you will get.

I am pretty sure perf/W for the M1 Max chips is excellent, better than the 3060. But saying it performs "on par" with a 3060 isn't really correct.

Except it ignores the fact that it requires 5 times the power to barley edge out the M1 Max. It certainly isn't going to end the M1 love fest.

So 200W for mobile processor? Are you sure? I'd say 65W tops

M1 lovefest won't end just like MacBook lovefest haven't ended all this years when Apple made stuff everyone criticizes now.

And it will probably devour a ridiculous amount of power and generate a thermos of heat to be marginally overall faster. It also won’t have a comparable GPU.

M1 Max still is the better experience and innovation.

If you don't require a laptop then an alder lake chip doesn't take anything close to a ridiculous amount of power, nor is it hard to cool.

Edit: I know this discussion is partly focused on laptops, but the overall comparison is including server chips so it's clearly not just about laptops. And 60 or 100 watts is child's play in even a tiny desktop.