Hacker News
points by desolate_muffin 2 days ago | 0 comments
last time I checked, every Windows laptop had the absolutely massive caveat that it needed to throttle performance by a ton to have a low enough TDP to compete on battery life. You just cannot match the efficiency of ARM Apple chips with an x86 chip.
[–] Grombobulous 1 day ago
But the problem is “last you checked” is before Panther Lake came out.

It is not 2020 anymore. Look up reviews. Just Josh Tech’s ThinkPad X9 15p Aura Edition review, for example.

What you’re saying is just absolutely not true at all and is only backed by your gut feeling.

[–] desolate_muffin 1 day ago
As far as I can tell after just looking at the specs, what I said is still the same. For example, an Intel Core Ultra 5 Processor 338H has a TDP of 25-65W vs. the M5 TDP of 3-27W. These aren't even directly comparable, but it gets worse going higher in the Intel Stack.

Further, every Windows laptop seems to have a worse display. For example, an M5 Macbook Pro 14" has a 120Hz 254ppi mini-LED display with a peak brightness of 1600 nits vs. a Dell XPS 14" with a 120Hz 161ppi LCD display with a peak brightness of 500 nits.

So it seems like they have figured out that they can put bigger batteries, worse displays, and throttle TDP to get better battery life, but it is still not possible for them to beat Apple's efficiency just based on those TDP numbers alone—these chips are just drawing more than 2x the power at peak load.

I don't understand why there isn't more effort towards ARM in the Windows world.

[–] Grombobulous 22 hours ago
You are quoting an incorrect TDP number for the 338H (65W is not correct), and in addition to that you are misreading "maximum" as its minimum. It idles at far lower than 25W. And anyway, TDP is not a standardized number, it's not a real spec. Chip manufacturers are known for fudging those numbers.

I can see that you are depending on an outdated perception of Apple's competition, and I'm especially confused about what you're saying with displays. I would try comparing a more comparable laptop? I'm confused at why you're quoting a Dell without the display upgrade option, which only costs $150.

Lenovo X9 15p Aura Edition has a very nice OLED display. OLED displays consume more power than LCD, and yet it still beats MacBook Pro 14" M5 in battery life. See Just Josh Tech's video on this model for benchmarks and comparisons.

If it's not bright enough for you, great, there are other laptops with tandem OLED displays, like the ASUS ProArt P14.

I also think more generally it's easy to pick out a bad laptop that competes with Apple since there are so many models that compete against Apple instead of going through the effort to find which computers are the best-reviewed alternatives. Dell XPS 14 is not really at the top of Windows reviewers' rankings as an overall choice.

There is a lot of effort toward ARM in the Windows world, keep up with the times. The Qualcomm X2 Elite is another chip that's catching up with Apple's offerings, it's only lagging behind in graphics capability. It gets very similar performance and battery life otherwise, and Qualcomm laptops are frequently discounted.

Or maybe look at RTX Spark. Those computers definitely have nice displays as well, like the ASUS ProArt P14. That OLED panel has very similar specs to Apple's PROLED offering.