Which still come out behind other than multi core, while using substantially more power.

Those panther lake comparisons are from the top end PTL to the base M series. If they were compared to their comparative SKUs they’d be even further behind.

▲

cubefox 6 hours ago | parent [-]

The article said the M5 has significantly higher single core CPU performance, Panther Lake has significantly higher GPU performance. The Panther Lake devices had OLED screens, which consume significantly more power than LCDs, so they were at a disadvantage.

This was all mentioned in the article.

	▲	dagmx 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Again, the Panther Lake devices here are the top end of Panther lake comparing against the base level M5. See the chart here for what the intel SKUs are: https://www.pcworld.com/article/3023938/intels-core-ultra-se... They consume more power at the chip level. You can see this in Intels spec sheets. The base recommended power envelope of the PTL is the maximum power envelope of the M5. They’re completely different tiers. You’re comparing a 25-85W tier chip to a 5W-25W chip. They also only win when it comes to multi core whether that’s CPU or GPU. If they were fairly compared to the correct SoC (an M4 Pro) they’d come out behind on both multicore CPU and GPU. This was all mentioned in my comment addressing the article. This is the trick that apples competitors are using, by comparing across SKU ranges to grab the headlines. PTL is a strong chip, no doubt, but it’s still behind Apple across all the metrics in a like for like comparison.
	▲	PunchyHamster 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		So useless for what most laptops are used - working