Part II, ran out of characters.

instead of a neural engine, Intel has opted to leverage its CPU and GPU by integrating what Intel calls DLBoost. As a result, in terms of tera-ops, Intel actually isn't much behind Apple in AI capabilities.

more csuite salad

Intel actually found some real-world AI applications where it completely trounced the M1.

cool we can have a carefully selected test from the manufacturer, just like the first article he linked that didnt match real world performance agian

The point I would emphasize about these benchmarks. Whether they are cherry-picked or not (which they obviously are since they come from Intel)

Funny how he doesnt say this until the 5h to last paragrah in his 35 minute long article.

the M1 hype has been far overblown: the chip may be fast, but it not in a league of its own. Else Intel wouldn't have been able to find benchmarks where it achieves such strong performance against the M1

his own link literally shows non intel processors destroying the m1, he is not a techie, only a stock person, and cant even interpret the data HE is sharing in this article. #mega fail LMAO O

there have been quite a few people who have argued that Apple's Mac sales are booming due to Apple Silicon.

lol. Their desktops have had this arm for less than a year, now?

Although Apple is doing a bit better than the strong PC environment overall, any additional demand due to Apple Silicon can't be isolated and simply does not seem to be the main phenomenon.

this guy is stupidly wordy for bo good purpose.

In any case, for a company that is fundamentally a consumer devices company, developing its chips in-house can be seen as a real advantage. On the competitive side, I argued that Apple has tailwinds from its partnership with TSMC (as first 5nm customer) and Intel's many delays. So looking forward, I would predict quite fierce competition to continue or to increase - for example as Intel boasts about returning to process and product leadership in a few years. Still, if one may remember one point about Apple's overhyped M1, is that it achieved far from the 2-3x lead which Intel actually had shortly before its delays begun.

so the first gen isnt 2-3x what intel has so its not longterm viable? I completely dont agree, its bad for different reasons than not being that fast in the first gen.

what a longass meandering post this was. really.

an engineering background

How do you know someone is an engineer????

and THERE IS IS

I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of INTC either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives.

Boom, i was right all along. shitty article, waste of time low iq market coomer.

You can. Just replace the “r” with Cyrillic “r”