Not really! The gulf between MacBook hardware and other laptops as well as Apple CPUs and the competitors is narrowing greatly.

Maybe we can say that they’re still the best, but it’s not 2x better like 2020, it’s more like 10-20% better.

For example, Panther Lake beats M5 battery life in real laptops available on the market, GPU performance, and multicore performance.

Just look at Marques Brownlee’s review of the Framework 13 Pro. Or the review of the ThinkPad X9 15p from Just Josh Tech.

I see this mistake all the time where there’s an assumption that MacBooks are still far and away the best without looking at more up-to-date information and evaluating current competition.

▲

YegoBear a day ago | parent | next [-]

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.

	▲	Grombobulous 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		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). For the Mac chips to make sense you have to specifically need very high CPU performance, be running local AI workflows (which you can do with cloud subscriptions for less money and better results, or you have alternatives like RTX Spark that cost roughly the same as MacBook Pro alternatives), and not want to play games (see gaming benchmarks on multi-platform native games like Cyberpunk 2077, high end Macs get walloped by mid-range discrete GPUs in laptops). In short, I imagine that 90%+ of MacBook Pro buyers are buying the base M chip or at most the Pro chip, and those SKUs have much more competition. A Mac is more of a good laptop for your employer than for you and me.

▲

what 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

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

▲

solyin 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

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.

	▲	Grombobulous 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		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.

▲

Grombobulous 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

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. They just want to believe their computers are the best and never shop competition.

I didn’t swap my M2 MacBook Pro because I didn’t like my Mac, I swapped it because it found a better solution for my needs.