I have an X9-15p with the X7 CPU and an M4 Max 16” MBP. I love the X9, it’s so light and powerful enough for most of what I do. That being said, it’s nowhere near as powerful as the M4 Max, not even close, and here in the US, there’s no 64GB model available.

The cheapest M4 Max MacBook Pro on sale is $4500. That’s over $1000 more than a X9-15p isn’t it?

What you’re saying is true, but if your workflow involves graphics at all, Apple’s Max chips are subpar compared to getting a laptop with an Nvidia discrete GPU (e.g., 2026 ASUS Zephyrus G16).

Believe it or not the Max was less than $3K on a good sale, but that was before the price hike. You’re right though, the X9 only cost me $2100ish, and I love the damn thing. Wish I could get on the mobile GPU bandwagon but every time I try one (I bought and returned the 2025 G16 you mentioned) they’re loud as hell and cheap out on the trackpad. The 2026 G16 still doesn’t have a haptic one and they’re selling the 16GB model for over $3K!

Why are you citing reviews from random people and not benchmarks?

Because the benchmarks are meaningless piles of numbers that are irrelevant to day to day using of a laptop. I want to hear from a human not robot. Benchmarks have been and will be gamed. Hopefully human reviewers like Marques Brownlee and Just Josh Tech are less easily gamed.

Just Josh Tech does exactly that. They perform both synthetic benchmarks and real world benchmarks including an office productivity test involving realistic screen brightness (where the Framework 13 Pro beat any MacBook with an M5 or M4 chip).

Marques’ Framework 13 Pro review was much more of a layperson’s review with a focus on overall user experience.

Because the reviews from “random” people have benchmarks.

See, this is the problem, Mac enthusiasts refuse to do research, even when people point them in the right direction.