Intel's Flagship Alder Lake Chip Beats Apple's M1 Max, But There's a Catch

Alder Lake
Alder Lake (Image credit: Intel)

Intel's latest Core i9-12900HK processor may just have won the mobile x86 vs. Arm performance war, but it comes at a cost. The mobile 14-core Alder Lake chip has bested Apple's M1 Max in multiple workloads, including a 30% win in a multi-threaded test, but the former is far more power-hungry than the latter.

We've already seen what the M1 Max can do in the latest 16-inch MacBook Pro, and the Core i9-12900HK, which powers MSI's latest GE76 Raider gaming laptop, isn't a slacker, either. Both processors leverage different architectures, with the Arm-based M1 Max residing exclusively inside Apple's closed ecosystem, so an apples-to-apples comparison isn't always straightforward. However, some benchmarks do work on both types of hardware, including Geekbench 5, HandBrake, and Cinebench R23, so we charted out a few comparisons from the tests we ran in our lab.

Zhiye Liu
News Editor, RAM Reviewer & SSD Technician

Zhiye Liu is a news editor, memory reviewer, and SSD tester at Tom’s Hardware. Although he loves everything that’s hardware, he has a soft spot for CPUs, GPUs, and RAM.

  • peachpuff
    A great man once said... "It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning's winning."
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    peachpuff said:
    A great man once said... "It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning's winning."
    Except this isn't a drag race for Apple. They care about how you win. Do you think they want a thick as hell laptop for their Mac following? Apple must be laughing at this premise that Intel beat them by about 3% all around by using 3 times the energy. And the same will apply to whatever AMD can achieve with the Ry6H series; while better than Intel at power, I don't see them beating apple at power/performance. They'll be closer though.

    So, as stated in the article, when these CPUs arrive to the 25W-45W range, then it'll be an interesting comparison.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • watzupken
    It is not a clear win for Intel. Alder Lake is certainly a fast chip, but the jump in performance is to a large extend due to the much higher peak power draw. And when you are talking about a gaming laptop, the moment you unplug the laptop from the mains, the performance plunges big time. The Macbook Pro works and performs the same whether plugged in or on battery. As a desktop replacement, gaming laptops makes sense because not only is the laptop big and heavy, you need to lug along the 1 or sometimes 2 power adapter which are not small, not light to begin with. On the other hand, one can charge the MacBook Pro even with a 65W type C charger.
    Reply
  • King_V
    A couple of percentage points, at the cost of vastly greater power consumption?

    Or, at best, maybe that "up to" 30% gain in CinebenchR23 - relatively wide variance in multiple runs... The M1 has a variance of only 52 points, and the Intel a variance of 1641 points... suggests it's not able to keep the wick cranked all the way up that steadily to me.

    It doesn't say if the 94 watts from Intel is package power, or from the wall. If from the wall, than compared to the M1, it uses 136.8% more power.

    If it's package power, Intel is using 176.5% more power.


    Yeah, this is pretty laughable.
    Reply
  • peachpuff
    -Fran- said:
    Except this isn't a drag race for Apple. They care about how you win.
    A great man also once said... Second place isn't winning.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    peachpuff said:
    A great man also once said... Second place isn't winning.
    Then let me rephrase. Apple's race is power/performance ratio and not performance; think drifting vs drag, if you will. They care about slim and sleek designs and whether you and I agree to that philosophy or not, is moot. Even by "winning" in performance, as long as their power is off the roof for mobile, Apple will just laugh at them. So no, winning at performance alone won't sway Apple to get Intel into the Mac again.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • King_V
    peachpuff said:
    A great man once said... "It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning's winning."
    peachpuff said:
    A great man also once said... Second place isn't winning.

    I don't think that man/these men were really all that great. Sounds more like they were terribly misguided.

    It's the same conundrum that exists for hot-rodders:
    Cheap
    Fast
    ReliableYou can ONLY pick two.

    That Intel didn't win. With the power consumption, it lost. Badly. We are, after all, talking about LAPTOP processors.
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    -Fran- said:
    Except this isn't a drag race for Apple. They care about how you win.
    If you ain't first, you're last.
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    King_V said:
    That Intel didn't win. With the power consumption, it lost. Badly. We are, after all, talking about LAPTOP processors.
    Alder Lake destroys the M1 in most of the software I use, because it would have to run through some sort of emulation mode on the M1 if it worked at all. The saying is comparing apples to oranges. In this case, it's comparing Apples to PC's which for most people is useless. Mac hardware is basically becoming a custom designed and optimized console to run a few key applications on macOS. Intel and AMD have to support 30+ years of legacy software. One would hope the purpose built system would be more efficient.
    Reply
  • waltc3
    Interesting that you did not give AMD the same sort of comparison...;) Intel still is behind AMD in PPW. And in server chips, that's a huge win for AMD. I don't recall TH ever making that point, however...;) It's OK...I don't really care, but thought I would mention it...;)

    Do you guys at TH support links from the story pages to the forum topics anymore? They aren't showing up for me any longer at the end of your articles.
    Reply