Epic Laptop Battle! Razer Blade 16 vs MacBook Pro 16
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 05. 2024
- Gordon compares an Apple MacBook Pro 16 equipped with an M2 Pro to a Razer Blade 16 equipped with an Intel Core i9-13950HX CPU and Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU. Tests include everything from video editing to gaming to power consumption. There is a ton of information to dig into here, so grab some popcorn and kick back for this epic laptop battle!
Buy PCWorld merch: crowdmade.com/collections/pcw...
Follow PCWorld for all things PC!
--------------------------------
SUBSCRIBE: czcams.com/users/pcworld?sub_c...
TWITCH: / pcworldus
TWITTER: / pcworld
WEBSITE: www.pcworld.com
#macbookpro #razer #laptop
00:00 - Intro
01:17 - Cinebench R23 Multi-Core Results
02:20 - Cinebench R23 Single-Core Results
03:00 - Blender CPU Results
03:48 - Handbrake Results
07:14 - CrossMark Results
09:10 - Geekbench Results
10:05 - Google Chrome Results
12:08 - Lightroom Classic Results
15:23 - Premiere Pro Results
20:00 - Blender GPU Results
22:22 - Geekbench Compute Results
23:55 - Video AI Results
25:32 - Gaming Results
31:27 - Power Consumption Results
44:01 - Noise Results
48:24 - Battery Testing Results
56:16 - Conclusion - Věda a technologie
This is an excellent analysis. thank you!
Great tests, thanks for making this!
This is by far the best video to help me decide, thank you!
Great nuanced and detailed comparison! Thank you for the hard work and distilling the differences between these 2.
Although, maybe something to consider would be the 4080 variant benchmarks added for greater distinction as the price of a similar spec Razer 16 but with a 4080 is roughly $3600, with performance that could still outshine the macbook just as the 4090 has shown, could prove the more compelling option in terms of overall value.
This might be 'unfair' because it's the $3500 Mac instead of the $5200 Mac, except that I think Gordon is right, even if you doubled the GPU performance on a bunch of these tests, the Mac would not come anywhere close to what the 4090 laptop chip is doing at $4300.
Are you talking about Canadian dollars? The 16" MBP with M2 Max & 2TB SSD & 64GB RAM is USD$4300.
M2 Max would've absolutely made a difference in something like the Adobe Lightroom export test, even if it still wouldn't be able to catch up with the 4090 in Blender. Also keep in mind the M2 Max has double the video encoders (though it's unclear if a single stream of video is parallelized across the 2 encoders on the M2 Max, or if it just helps encode a 2nd stream in hardware while another stream is being encoded).
@@utubekullanicisiwhat’s MBP?
@@Gordonizon The abbreviation for the name of the device that has a processor called M2 Max in it.
Great analysis Gordon! With those prices, though, I don't think many people will be buying either, haha.
I've been watching MaxTech similar comparisons (he is quite Mac-biased), but this is a hack different level. You are a few levels above, actually. Never saw such detailed tests and such great analysis. Congrats and thank you.
MaxTech scores were clearly off.
@@Fordance100 He does not fake the tests, but the tests are mostly those who favor his workflow and the mac. Here we can see a lot more tests and they are put in context.
@@FlorinArjocu Max tech shows all fake tests. He always got less scores in Windows machines.
He is always doing shenanigans. You can watch live tests of Intel laptops in "Andrew Marc David" channel and still they are way better than all apple CZcamsrs( shenanigans).
You can watch ben g Kaiser review of Galaxy book 3 pro 360, m2 pro MacBook Pro.
Also check tech notice channel for m2 pro and hardware unboxed, jarrods tech for Intel 10nm 13 gen laptop chip performance.
Max tech is always showing fake scores of windows machines. He is always doing shenanigans so that apple could win.
They are hiding their defeat.
@@shivendraverma3731 You should back such claims with some evidence. I think Florin is closer to true. But that 200 W gorilla must be faster then battery designed chip. When came to unplugged performance, M2 Max would come as clear winner. That would be undesirable in sponsored review.
Sharing my experience as a mobile dev: my macbook pro 14 m1 pro can last 6 hours of developing tasks, a mix of web browsing, code editing, compiling and debugging.
In the same usage, my Asus Flow X16 with a 13900H lasts a maximum of 2h00. Gigantic difference...
They both have a miniLed display that I use most of the time at 90% brightness.
Unfortunately, it's pretty hard for someone to use one laptop, and then use one 'similarly' and declare much else since you can't do the exact same thing on both laptops simultaneously. I think you understand this limitation. However, I do think this would likely match the experience we've seen here if your mix is mostly lighter to medium loads versus and all heavy load. On a heavy load on both platforms, it's kind of a wash. When you get to the very light to medium mix of work--you're probably seeing the same advantage we saw here in that the M2 Pro really sips power. Also, keep in mind that "90% brightness" is also somewhat unreliable because we don't know what the laptops target for brightness at 90 percent.
Wow, I expected Apple to lose but they got absolutely demolished in performance across the board. Macbooks can still be great machines for some people depending on their use-case, but it's clear they come with significant limitations.
Btw Gordon did a great job highlighting all the nuances in all the comparisons.
Competition is good for consumers.
problem with intel laptops is only great for desktop replacement.
they need to be plugged into the wall all the time to reach that performance
Only while plugged in. It basically falls apart while running on battery. As @corbi said, its more of a desktop machine than a laptop.
@@johnhio1843 it's actually a laptop that is portable. Keep in mind: pushed hard, both laptops are likely to give sub optimal battery life.
@@FakeGordonMahUng Its not about battery life but rather performance. The razer is basically a ghost of itself unless plugged into a power source, where as the mac is completely unaffected.
Just like Mortal Kombat "Lets Fight !" Don't forget, a lot of Mac users are running Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro, which runs fantastic on Apple Silicon. Gordon does mention this at the end.
Came here to say this. Razer or Intel notebooks generally could become powerful enough to calculate the path of every atom in the sun in real-time. Ain't care, because they can't run my video workflow of choice.
We we fl studio and much more music apps in Windows.
@@HDRPC Is it your assertion that I should learn a new DAW or NLE just because it exists on Windows?
55:45 - how many cycles did each laptop churn thru with their respective battery? It’s one thing to say which last longer but just how much real work were they able to accomplish with the power provided?
Can't really record that without a little more work but given the perf in the previous chart the MacBook likely rendered more frames. It's an interesting idea. One other might be to loop the photoshop puget bench until it dies too. The short story to me is neither do as well as we'd expect. 100 watt hour battery is the hard limit and the while the Mac does better, you're not getting some magical 4x difference or even 3x.
That is why benchmarks are not my preferred choice; if one device completes 15 cycles in an hour and the other only ten, then you already have a 50% better battery life on the 15-cycle machine as it will take less time to cycle 10 times. The same with gaming battery benchmarks; if you are rendering 60FPS and the other is 40FPS, then if you lowered the 60FPS to 40FPS then you would get a true gauge of battery life. It is easy to misinterpret benchmarks
Very well done.
I want to see a repeat of this test with a laptop that has AMD Dragon APU
Can't wait till Gordon gets back kicking ass like this! Thank you very much for YEARS of great work! I'm really debating between almost exactly those two products right now. I've been spoiled by the battery life, silent operation and speakers of my base model MacBook M1 Pro 16 and now I'm debating getting an used blade 16 in this exact config or a 64gb 32gpu M1 Max with 2tb. 512gb storage and 16 gb RAM on my Mac are a PITA. I don't need portability but I do web browsing a lot on battery (I think I can get great battery out of the razer with a refined profile on throttlestop). What really concerns me is an used Razer blade. Those Macs are tanks and they sold probably millions of units including M1, M2, M3 and the reliability is stelar in comparison.
If you doing mostly light loads and want to maximize battery life, it's going to be really had to beat the Mx Macs today. I'd say make a list of your top 3 needs (browsing, content creation, gaming, etc.) And then weigh the plusses and minuses of each ecosystem to decide. Each has distinct advantages over the other... good luck...
I would have loved to see the battery life test for both laptops running at idle on the battery as well. Most of us are not going to run our laptops at full speed on battery the entire time, so we could then work out how long the laptops would last for us, based on how much idle vs flat-chat time we would get, e.g. 20% full bore and 80% idle would favour the Mac, vs a work-flow that was 80% falt-out and only 20% would favour the Razer.
I would have too but battery testing is a major time suck with infinite variables to be tested. One test I want to do, but with normal laptops would be type on both simultaneously and browse the web organically for a day. Can't be reproduced but for that session, it will tell the truth.
You don't let the laptop idling if you're on battery right? You would likely close the lid and save energy. A better test would be cross application benchmark on loop
I think you mean low loading, not actually idle. On idle it makes sense to actually hibernate/stand by, not just let it open. But anyways, ARM will be much better on that low loading test, I don't think you can beat that with x86. On heavy loading we already saw, not much difference.
As a PC enthusiast, I really dislike this battle among the laptops. This battle is such an unfair comparison. The Macbook Pro that he's using is priced at $2699, while the Razer 16 (4090) costs $4299. The MBP 16 with the M2 Max CPU would've been a better comparison against the Razer 16 (4090) since it costs $3499 (starting). I don't know why reviewers fail to put pricing into equation; because there's really no reason to compare a $4300 laptop against a $2500. That's like saying a Corvette is faster than a Toyota Camry. Like no shit, of course the Corvette will be faster.
So that's mentioned at the end and on the CPU you are unlikely to see a difference. What we are inferring is that in many of the tests here the Max would still not unseat the 4090M--and I also point out the Max 38 is STILL lower in price than the Razer Balde 16.
This is mentioned many times in the clip and even with the maxed version of M2, there is no way ot gets closer to the 4090.
@@FakeGordonMahUngwhy don’t you prove it instead of inferring?
@@rods004_ because sometimes you have to run the benchmarks on the hardware you have, not the hardware you wish you had.
Of course, the latest Razer is 2023, and the M2 Pro (not even the best MB Max) is an overclocked M1 released in Q4-2020! Wait for the 2023 M3, 3nm MacBooks arriving later this year, and then use a similarly priced example for fairness.
I would like to see Gordon daily drive a gaming laptop
Even though you call Adobe Premiere the 800 lb gorilla, I would like to see the PugetBench for Davinci Resolve as well. Also, I just updated my Topaz Video AI to v3.1.8. You used v3.3.1?
The benchmark has been a little unreliable for me personally so haven't used it. Yes, Topaz Labs is crazy about the updates aren't they?
Ha, I just realized it was a typo. I used 3.1.1
Is there a battery life comparing word editing with several background programs like Dropbox, Slack, etc.? I’m surprised by the unplugged performance of 13950HX, but when unplugged, I’m not gonna push it hard😅. Most likely I will be sitting in a seminar hall and do something that’s not so performance-intensive.
No unfortunately. One way to do that is actually do "light use" on both simultaneously using one device to control both. Can't be reproduced by if you pretend both are subjected to the same light use, that can work. This is the situation where the MBP would very likely have a decent advantage over the RB16 but that is hard to know without actually going it. And perhaps it's not the advantage we all imagine it would be under light loads.
Great analysis & comparison. Fan noise in benchmarks is so often criminally overlooked, as someone who looks at machines to use in a music studio environment, fan noise is a HUGE dealbreaker.
The razer 16 & 18 offer 10-40% increases in some use cases with intel 13th gen mobile, but is an extra ~10dBa of noise under full load worth it? For those who don't know, an increase of ~10dB is perceiveably about twice as loud!
and i'm sure that people working in Music industry will use headphone, or noise cancelation headphone, or even normal headphone can block out the noise from the fan.
At least it's not like Georgia 65 TCI 7
In cinebench points that would be about
65,000 to 7,000 a total blowout win
For that last battery test I think you need to take the score into account and normalize as the higher performance of the Mac will effectively mean more battery.
For instance, if my code compilation takes less time, the all core load will be in effect for fewer hours over the course of the day, so I end up with more battery life.
I don't think assigning performance/runtime does anything because everyone does something different. The main point is run either of these platforms really hard and the 100 watt hour limitation is always going to be a serious bottleneck.
@@FakeGordonMahUng yeah, I think it's a good test, but factoring in what you can get done in that time makes a big difference. The case I mentioned would be my day to day workflow, for instance. If each cycle of compilation takes 80% of the time, or whatever, that means my laptop spends a lot more time in the non-full load case.
I think that's the kind of use case you'll find more often, not the running full tilt 100% of the time one. How many times can I build Firefox from scratch in each of those cases is something that makes a huge difference.
@@GustavoNoronha is exactly the same the other way around. If I run a Blender render on Nvidia, it consumes 5 times more, but I also have 9 times faster render (lower times).
@@FlorinArjocu yeah, and in that case you end up getting better battery life with the NVidia system. That's why you should consider the workload and how many times you can complete that workload when you are evaluating battery life, so your comment actually helps me make my point ;D
In the CPU case, which is the test that was run that my comment refers to, I am pretty sure the result would be M2 can do more runs of the workload (get better points) than the Intel chip, though.
@@GustavoNoronha Not sure you get better battery life on the intel+nvidia laptop in mostly any situation because the architecture itself is not that efficient and Windows does not do a very good job, either. ARM is better suited, but performance-wise, most of the time, intel+nvidia wins.
If you are like me, using a laptop as desktop replacement - go with the razer. If you use you laptop on the go with 1 hour + where it can not be plugged in, go with the mac. Since I use a lot of AI stuff and I'm mostly in an office or in my home, I can't really do without a nvidia card, so the sadly I don't have a choice. Hope Apple (and AMD) ups their game concerning AI - competition is so important.
pretty sure the neural engine in the macbook makes it decent at machine learning/ AI, but most people don't code for CoreML instead of Tensorflow or pytorch. pretty sure you can even do stable diffusion locally on a iphone.
Macbook Pro 16 M2 (2TB with 32GB RAM) is US$3899 & the Razer Blade 16 (2TB with 32GB RAM | RTX 4090) is US$4299.
Gosh, I think we mentioned the pricing disparity at the end of the video.
37:33 if we did a watt-hour analysis, the M2 pro is not consuming that less power.. Taking the time*power calculation..
For M2 pro, (337-4)*65=21645
For Intel, (97-4)*245=22785
What you've lost in power consumption, you save in precious time.. 👀
Were both laptops on battery power during tests? Or plugged in?
Plugged it, as anyone (99%) would use them while working heavy stuff.
@@FlorinArjocu as I understand current MacBooks don't loose power when working on battery as opposed to windows laptops. My Legion 5 cannot work in max power mode when on battery.
@@DrazenKlisuric That is true, but who actually works for long periods with the laptop in the lap? It is not an ergonomic and healthy position, so you end up on a table or on a desk and there is always a plug around. So you don't actually need to work unplugged very often.
Same thing dave 2d also shows macs don't have good battery in heavy tasks.
They are creator laptops aimed at a specific demographic. They have encoders and decoders for the targeted audience. They are not optimised for tasks like gaming and blender, though I suspect Apple is improving that with the M3. The delay of TSMC N3 meant that the M2 is an M1 in disguise, and the M3 will be the next-gen rather than a tick-tock upgrade like the M2.
@@andyH_England Intel 11 gen to 13 gen have igpu like uhd 770 and iris xe has 2 decoders of h.265(hevc) upto 12 bit 4.4.4 and also 2 decoders of av1 and h.264 and many more hardware accelerated media engines. Intel igpus also has one encoder of hevc, h 264.
This is why Intel igpu is must for video editing with good speed ddr5 ram.
You can check Google and Intel website by searching "Intel media capabilities".
Nvidia 4080 and 4090 laptop GPUs has 2 encoders of hevc, h.264 and av1. Nvidia GPUs also have same decoders as last gen.
Everyone is upgrading themselves
Example:-
Amd has increased ipc about 13% and their single core increased from 1686 to 2072 in cinebench r23 and same 1750 to 2275 in geekbench 5.
Intel arrow lake coming in 1st half of 2024 (March 2024) with Intel 20A node(RibbonFET transistors and power via tech and has 45% ipc uplift over alderlake(P cores)🤩 You can imagine how much performance Intel is ready to deliver. Meteorlake(laptop only chips) is also coming later this year 2023 with 50% better performance per watt compared to 13 gen laptops and new Intel 4 node and 2 times faster igpu according to best twitter leaker "OneRaichu".
"Red gaming tech" is right that "CPU revolution is coming".
Next year in September, October 2024 RTX 50 series, Intel arc battlemage dGPU and amd rdna 4 GPUs are also coming
@@andyH_England you can watch ben g Kaiser review of Galaxy book 3 pro 360, m2 pro MacBook Pro.
Galaxy book 3 pro 360 is faster than m2 pro on battery also in video editing. Same with Legion 5i pro.
Also check tech notice channel for m2 pro and hardware unboxed, jarrods tech for Intel 10nm 13 gen laptop chip performance.
Would like to see this with AMD variants
Intel lobby and bribes say otherwise.
oh, you mean the macbook.
agreed.
M3 coming soon, are we going to see x3D mobile chips from AMD.. or just have to wait for next gen...
you can watch ben g Kaiser review of Galaxy book 3 pro 360, m2 pro MacBook Pro.
Also check tech notice channel for m2 pro and hardware unboxed, jarrods tech for Intel 10nm 13 gen laptop chip performance.
Bro Everyone is upgrading themselves
Example:-
Amd has increased ipc about 13% and their single core increased from 1686 to 2072 in cinebench r23 and same 1750 to 2275 in geekbench 5.
Intel arrow lake coming in 1st half of 2024 (March 2024) with Intel 20A node(RibbonFET transistors and power via tech and has 45% ipc uplift over alderlake(P cores)🤩 You can imagine how much performance Intel is ready to deliver. Meteorlake(laptop only chips) is also coming later this year 2023 with 50% better performance per watt compared to 13 gen laptops and new Intel 4 node and 2 times faster igpu according to best twitter leaker "OneRaichu".
"Red gaming tech" is right that "CPU revolution is coming".
Next year in September, October 2024 RTX 50 series, Intel arc battlemage dGPU and amd rdna 4 GPUs are also coming
Sir efficiency is coming very soon in Windows with Intel meteorlake chips later this year.
Meteorlake with Intel 4 node has 50% better performance per watt than 13 gen laptops and new 2 times faster igpu.
Then arrow lake will completely change the game using Intel 20A node, RibbonFET transistors, power via tech and much more. I don't have to say how much efficiency we can get from Intel 20A node against meteorlake.
Those advanced node will provide exceptional efficiency and solid state cooling laptops will be game changer in 2024 with those arrow lake laptop chips.
Competition is good for consumers.
@@FakeGordonMahUng yes what will happen when Intel 20A node will come out in 2024. Amd and apple will not able to catch up and next year RTX 50 series will come out in September 2024.
@@FakeGordonMahUng I have seem "ben g kaiser" video.
Galaxy book 3 pro 360 is faster than m2 pro MacBook Pro in video editing. Galaxy is way more faster than m2 pro chip even without nvidia GPU.
Video editors can easily pick galaxy book 3 pro 360 rather than m2 pro.
@@HDRPC You know, I think we'll have to wait until we get hardware in hand before anyone is going to start declaring victory. Up until then, it's just words.
@@HDRPC I'd probably disagree because "video editing" means different things to different people. You can surprisingly do video editing on an 8th gen U-class ultra portable laptop really easily using the optimized Windows video editor. Would I want to run Premiere Pro on an 8th gen U? Probably not. Davcinci? Probably not. And, of course, Final Cut is not available for PC and Apple also has an advantage dealing with ProRes because, well, it owns that.
I generally think the best advice is to examine every product for its strengths and weaknesses and match it to your needs rather than saying one is simply best as there are no perfect products.
Razer Blade 16 is hands down better, perfect performance and perfect gaming on the Blade 16 compared to subpar gaming on the MacBook Pro 16. I would even take a minimum configuration Blade 16 over a maxed out MacBook Pro 16. The Razer Blade 16 while may cost more at $4,300 it still has a better value for the money compared to a $3,500 MacBook 16 and that’s a fact. Though let’s be honest, I’m not going to spend $4,300 on a laptop that’s probably more than twice of what I’ll ideally pay for a decent gaming laptop.
Is mini led display quality and Mac book much different?
I can't believe that you lose the oportunity of show to us that 2 incredible panels on hdr videos side by side, please pleeease if you have too, please show us side by side on hdr content
Personally my experience with razer laptops hasn’t been great (gaming and otherwise) but after I started gaming less I got a Mac book pro M1 16 inch and I finally had a laptop that felt like a laptop before building a gaming pc desktop with we better gaming performance than the razer laptop
I have this 4090 Blade and it is a monster with performance. They have a bigger chassis this year to get the full potential from the hardware inside.
This is the first time that pc laptop unplugged it’s as faster then my m1max 64 gigs of ram
At least you compare too the unpluged razer dude
And, we at least also compare plugged in performance too.
if you game, there's no contest. If you don't, Mac is the better portable machine
How were the thermals?
Bad in macbook as they are quiet and never ramp fans.
Best in Windows machines. Windows laptops will never throttle.
@@HDRPC Lmao you drunk?
Macbooks run much cooler and quiter than all that 10/14nm Intel shit.
@@m-stat9 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 you are mad or you don't have mind. Most Windows laptops runs cooler and quieter.
@@m-stat9 wait for September 2023, Intel Meteorlake will 100% provide better battery than m2 pro MacBook Pro 16 inch and performance will be way way faster in all worloads. Just wait and see.
Intel core ultra is coming.
@@m-stat9 14 inch m2 max MacBook pro cannot even handle light gaming which uses 70 to 80 watt of total CPU and GPU and throttle a lot.🤣🤣
Windows laptops never throttle.
It's just a bloodbath.
Yep, Windows sucks.
I have seem "ben g kaiser" video.
Galaxy book 3 pro 360 is faster than m2 pro MacBook Pro in video editing. Galaxy is way more faster than m2 pro chip even without nvidia GPU.
Video editors can easily pick galaxy book 3 pro 360 rather than m2 pro.
Ben used the worst optimised creative app for that video editing test, an app no Mac user would touch as it does not use the encoders or decoders. It was a biased test aimed for Windows fanboys that want to strut their stuff. Use Da Vinci, then the Mac would have demolished the Galaxy Book. See Max Tech to see that if you dare, but have your hankies ready.
@@andyH_England you can watch tech notice video of m2 pro vs Intel and nvidia PC for same price. He did excellent job in comparing.
M2 Doesn’t Have AV1 Hardware Encoder.
The bigger problem is it doesn't have AV1 decode either I believe.
@@FakeGordonMahUng Well, if this is the case, we will see significant battery life drop when AV1 becomes the majority of the online contents...But hopefully, since it took Apple so many years to finally replace the Adobe Flash Player with HTML5, this won't affect us in the following few years.
@@crearg8259 yup. the bad news is those using "older" hardware in 5 years. I'd guess most streaming services can just feed different codecs to older machines but that also means incurring higher bandwidth and or lower quality too.
@@FakeGordonMahUng Lol, those streaming services are extremely strict with the bandwidth. Once they confirm that certain percentage of the users have AV1 decoding capability, they will limit highest resolution exclusive to AV1.
@@crearg8259 possibly youtube is pretty good about different codecs but it does want to get away from paying too so who knows. It is odd to have a laptop introduced in 2023 without AV1 decode though.
This is like Goku vs Krillin.
I cant wait for the AMD dragon range, better performance than the intel 13th gen, for far less power consumption.
I also have high expectations.
Pugetbench for resolve hasn’t been ported to apple silicon yet. Otherwise Macs are nice little machines that are good for the noise sensitive. They play nice with iOS devices. They are a simple way to get middle “meh” equivalent PC performance. I like them for what they are. I don’t need to drag a workstation class laptop around with me on the regular.
Exports I don’t care about as much as timeline snappiness. If you are editing locally then a z690 desktop with lots of pcie 4.0 drives makes the assets issues a non issue. Macs have garbage external thunderbolt nvme speed, and cost of internal storage upgrades is laughable.
I wouldn’t do any AI work on primarily a laptop. Not enough vram unless you’re just playing with toy applications.
Bro you can watch ben g Kaiser review of Galaxy book 3 pro 360, m2 pro MacBook Pro.
Also check tech notice channel for m2 pro and hardware unboxed, jarrods tech for Intel 10nm 13 gen laptop chip performance.
If I needed to plug in my laptop all the time, why not just get a desktop PC?
Grab a base MacBook Pro for a reliable efficient mobile performance and get a good desktop PC setup for constant power work?
edited: for better wording
I'm confused...you're saying buy both a PC laptop and a Mac laptop?
@@FakeGordonMahUng I believe they are talking about Windows laptops having worse battery life than MacBooks. So instead of using windows laptop for productivity and needing to be plugged in all the time, get a desktop instead. Then use a Mac laptop for messing around on the go since their batteries last longer.
@@locuus I guess that part showing that the 100 watt hour battery being a big limitation on both doesn't matter.
@@locuus Not just that - the Mac will run with exactly the same performance whether on battery or plugged in, whereas the intel based laptops all run slower on battery because they draw too much power and/or drain the battery too much, so you don't get the full performance when not plugged in - hence the argument to just get a PC desktop if you need to be plugged in all the time to access the full performance of the expensive laptop you've bought.
I have to say with this Razer Blade 16 that even on battery it is still faster than the Mac (I would have loved to see the M2 Max to see a real equivalent comparison) - very impressive.
@@FakeGordonMahUng No, I want to clarify. I meant a desktop Windows PC and a MacBook Laptop.
For me, I hate the Throttling they do with some Windows Laptop and this razer laptop shows the worst of it. More than 50% of the performance lost during mobile battery work, I can tolerate if the lost is around 20%, but more than 50%? What's the point of buying and putting an i9 with RTX4090 in a thin and light laptop, when you couldn't utilize all the power on battery. I might as well buy an i5 with 4060 Laptop where u can use all the power and use the rest of the money to buy a desktop i7 with desktop RTX4080.
But look, i have a use case that i could use a laptop for showcase and moderate modelling and a desktop to run the constant render. And I like the idea of not worrying about searching for a plug socket every time i need to work. Your work case might be different than mine.
Nah, the battery life testing ain't relevant mah dude.
I'd love for there to be a standardized test which uses a mixed workflow which better reflects actual usage.
What you tested for was sustained efficiency if anything. May be insightful from a technical standpoint, but not from a practical usage one.
Also would've liked to see better acoustic testing conditions.
I agree mixed workflow would be a useful *additional* metric. However, I do think we can agree that a fixed maximum battery capacity, and a fixed workload of X watts tells us that if you push the Macbook's GPU or CPU really hard, the battery life will be diminished and the difference between the two isn't as pronounced as some might have you believe. And although *you* may not see a 100% render load in your workloads, others do and will find it relevant. If you look at the other metrics presented, you can also see the Macbook's power consumption under light loads is extremely impressive which means a mixed workflow would favor the Macbook.
An anechoic chamber would be nice, but the main take away is the Macbook makes virtually *no noise* while the Razer is loud AF. I'm not sure we need much more data than that but I agree, an anechoic chamber would make it cleaner.
@@FakeGordonMahUng Hi Gordon, appreciate your reply. If it really doesn't make that big of a difference b/w mixed workload and these testing conditions in terms of the conclusions it provides then I guess that works. But I had Geekerwan in mind when typing that out as they're pretty much the only ones I know that have developed a standardized real world testing suite and would've liked to compare that with others'.
As for the sound, yeah ig here the difference was big enough for the noise floor to be less relevant.
Keep posting the kind of content that you guys do, I like the coverage here on PCWorld!
@anmolagrawal5358 thx. "real world" mixed workloads is something I've favored for a long time but it definitely is hard to accomplish while being repeatable. Even then it's rare for a person to run a single app so you need mixed, plus multi-tasking too.
There are some methods that can do that but such as UL's procyon or Bapco's sysmark, but those are windows only tools too so tough for Mac vs PC.
Of course, mixed, multi-tasking workloads mean nothing if you don't use those apps or use those apps the same way. So yeah, not easy to pull off. ):
HELLO!
Why don't you talk about how APPLE's BIGGER Hard Drive allows better reads, its CPU RAID, or something like that, and I heard if you get a 4tb or 8tb version, pref the 8tb, files even running on a slower m1 are more responsive, this was the claim in 8K Movie Files and how many can be ran at the same time (streams)...
-
So it wasn't the APPLE SILICON only that did the heavy lifting, its better than raid in its traditional way done on PCS, in apple its all included, so well, that many fail to even talk about the performance gain of the 8TB vs the other sizes...
I know it costs a lot, but get a 8TB unit and test those, that's what I want to see, and you guys are PCWORLD, I know you can do it.
-
THANKS SO MUCH FOR ALL THE WORK! I would even buy the mac from you after you would be done with your testing. I really want to see if apple's 8tb hard drives really perform GREAT ALONG with the apple silicon processor. As a content creator needing to buy a new PC or APPLE, I need to know. I love PCs, don't get me wrong, running one now, but having an apple quiet as a mouse with serious performance would help me not hear the hum of my pc fans, yes even NOCTUA fans, water cooled AIO, and a giant video card... just wondering if such a huge tower is worth it for what I can get in such a small and quiet package.
-
I heard that the performance of the 8TB beats the price of any external to the mac... as to making it expensive but well worth it for huge content creators, where they film in 8K RAW and need to hold onto Raw_Sequences that are HUGE in file size.
Let me know if this is possible ... Also test a MAC with MAXXED out Ram... I think the Apple STUDIO will come out with an M2ULTRA, and 128GB of Ram, with the 8TB or even soon 16TB of this MYSTERY SUPER FAST SERVER GRADE NEXT GEN CPU RAIDED -SUPER EXPENSIVE- monster hard drive system (that many do not talk about).
-
With PCs, I figured a i913900K CPU with 128GB RAM (Corsair) with a 24gb 4090 Video card with an ASUS ROG Motherboard or TUF, and 2 Samsung 980 pro nvme hard drives, that's what I can get to EDIT 8K VIDEO. But if I got a MAC, the uniform memory of 64GB is more for the GPU, so that is what I want to know, given these PC specs, what would I need to buy APPLE to gain similar performance.
AND ALSO, mention how each OS is written, how one's code is AMAZING, and how WINDOW code is just copied in another language made with a BAND-AID after BAND-AID of "improvements" - while knowing how much they stole from apple, just like Samsung stole from apple, and ANDROID and all that good stuff... don't we have a performance just by OS itself too? I am curious and I know it exists. I just want to see more videos tackling those issues.
I’ve never known anyone that games on a laptop.
Me
Thanks for review. Razer the best)
You can watch ben g Kaiser review of Galaxy book 3 pro 360, m2 pro MacBook Pro.
Also check tech notice channel for m2 pro and hardware unboxed, jarrods tech for Intel 10nm 13 gen laptop chip performance.
Macbook the best)
You can carry Macbook outside without plugin power supply and better battery. Why buying Razer 16 when you have to plug in with power supply and battery is worst? Just buy a PC instead Razer 16.
4090 top of the line vs m2 pro with 19 gpu not 38??? maybe run it on battery see how well 4090 can do
Never change Internet, never change.
@@FakeGordonMahUng 😂
even with the 38 core GPU, Apple would still get crushed, but that's not a surprise to anyone.
@@bl4ckst0ne the point is that you can't compare oranges to apples
@@user-ox6gs9kl3f they're both ridiculously expensive laptops...fair comparison
The Macbookpros are nice, screens are exceptional. Bit expensive to repair if you tip water on them. Good keyboard. There's a lot of software that doesn't work properly on Arm. Wouldn't touch a Razer with a bargepole, if it breaks and it will, good luck getting any support with that;
The macboom screens are actually a weird combination. Amazing colors and brightness, absolutely terrible ghosting and inputlag.
On paper they do 120Hz but really it looks worse than your average 60Hz panel
Crazy how the new MacBook was the holy grail not long ago and now it gets absolutely stumped on, gotta love competition
Comparing old with new, you can only expect that in tech. The Mac chip design went into production in mid-2020 (M1). The M2 is the overclocked version of a near-three-year-old chip! The M1 next-gen is the M3, coming later this year.
@@andyH_England Yes, and you also compare new product with new product. Both of these laptop launches were separated by less than two months. Flip this in reverse and that would be like some PC fan crying that (if it happens, and we don't know, M3 kicks the hell out of 13th gen and 4000. "But this is comparing old with new. Intel / Nvidia will soon have new products!" Sorry, for a buyer making an active choice based on available and newly launched products, that doesn't help them.
Macbook is still the "holy grail". GPU performance ain't all. You have to look at the whole package and there Macbooks still dominate.
@M-Stat9 also, when you win, you get to brag. When you lose, you talk about the next season and to ignore this season. SOP in technology fans and sports fans.
👍 Thanks but I'll just buy a new car.
96 megz 😂😂😂 great review btw was looking for this. I can see apple won the war already. One more generation and apple will be ahead in single core and multi core, its like Actual laptop vs portable desktop.
I guess you realize that most people using them are actually close to a socket anyways, so they don't actually care. They can take the good performance for those 10 minutes a year running it heavy on battery. But when plugged, the 9x performance in some cases might compensate well enough. Ah, and Intel is also going to a much better node, so a lot of efficiency will come from that, too.
@@FlorinArjocu come on its not an year and 10 minutes difference you know deep down. Plus dude we cant use windows LAPTOP on a "Lap". Its portable desktop you can say. You need socket + Desk table also. Otherwise you gonna burn your lap. Wait and watch its apple silicon will be ahead in 3rd gen or 4th gen. Its just the beginnings.
@@alisheikh1582 You can use it alright, but not during heavy work. And it is not a confortable way to use it for long periods anyways, so cannot really work with it on the lap. For our sake, I hope Intel and AMD will have compelling products. There is someone somewhere here that swears that Intel will be on 4nm next year, 20 an in 2 years etc. and will bring huge performance and efficiency gains (although I have my doubts there will not be delays). For all our sake, you should hope we have competition, because otherwise we'll all pay for Apple's monopoly.
@@FlorinArjocu i am telling you mate, apple already won the war in cpu. Just wait and watch for 3nm apple chips there. You gonna see Single core king soon. Im not apple fan boy. I am having i9 13900k and i9 12900h. It hurts when sleek machine performs better in creative workflows without plug, noise, insane amount of wattages. Facts my friend just like android is following apple. Windows is also. Look at windows UX now you can clearly see an hint of Mac OS in it. Project voltera failed badly. Arm RiscV is the future my friend. Few more time for x86. No more performance gains or huge leaps with those crazy amount of wattages.
You can watch ben g Kaiser review of Galaxy book 3 pro 360, m2 pro MacBook Pro.
Also check tech notice channel for m2 pro and hardware unboxed, jarrods tech for Intel 10nm 13 gen laptop chip performance.
I don't get why the M2 Pro instead of the M2 Max MacBook Pro is being compared with the Razer Blade with the 4090 here, the M2 Max model is the one that's about the same price as the Blade 4090 and is targeted for the same market segment. Also the M2 Max is not just about the GPU, it has 2x the encoders and 2x the ProRes encoders and decoders compared to M2 Pro as well (though it's unclear if a single stream of video is parallelized across the 2 encoders on the M2 Max, or if it just helps encode a 2nd stream in hardware while another stream is being encoded. But I think I've seen the M2 Max still export videos faster than the Pro even when the export isn't GPU dependent, so it's at least worth being tested).
Windows is a garbage OS. That alone is reason enough to use a Mac.
apple cant compete with high end windows laptops
🧂
It does
@@lukabosnjak3829 nahhh Apple can’t 😂
Where Apple shines is their performance and efficiency when not plugged in. It beats the blade and any other Windows laptop in that regard
@@Qwajman97 i prefer performance and a laptop that can run games, even if battery was 4 hrs its ok, but it is more than 4 hrs
I will go with the Mac since I am paying 5k anyways. At least with the mac, I can get a top configuration with an extended warranty 🤷🏻♂️ Razer doesn’t have any warranty!
Pick the hardware best suited for your personal needs and ignore the arguing.
YOU ARE HACKING MANY CZcams CHANNELS?
Hang on. Why compare a mid-range MacBook Pro 16 to a top of the range Razer Blade 16? A fairer comparison would have been with the MacBook Pro M2 Max, right?
So, that's mentioned here. Both Pro and Max 30/38 use the same CPU core count. And while the Pro is half the Max 38 in GPU cores, in many of the tests its hard to see it actually outperforming the 4090 Laptop GPU when plugged in.
@@FakeGordonMahUng Still, better to match them in pricing and then we can see the truth. Now it leaves a sour taste as if this was a video sponsored by Windows/Intel.
@@andyH_England Sure Internet, always go there. Go look up the scores for an M2 Max 38 in Geekbench and Cinebench R23 and compare them. You can see the CPU performance is the same.
The macbook pro has 27% better battery life, not 13.6% better as stated in the review. You have to also include the performance you get from the battery. The macbook pro is 17.2% more performance in cinebench, and lasted 13.6% longer, but has 5.2% more battery, so you can just multiply that all out: 1.172 * 1.136 / 1.052 = 1.266, so the macbook is around 27% more performance per watt. Please reviewers also measure performance per watt, unless you're doing something like watching a video, which completes in a fixed time.
Great job on the video, I switched over to a Mac 13 years ago and the operating system is the only reason I would never ever go back, I cannot believe that PC still exist, if you take in the amount of wasted time you could have learned a new language and started five businesses❤
You don't have to look any other os if you are using Windows machines or windows os.
Windows is that good and will be good always.
I have seem "ben g kaiser" video.
Galaxy book 3 pro 360 is faster than m2 pro MacBook Pro in video editing. Galaxy is way more faster than m2 pro chip even without nvidia GPU.
Video editors can easily pick galaxy book 3 pro 360 rather than m2 pro.
@@HDRPC Can the Galaxy Book Pro run Final Cut and Compressor?
@@POVwithRC no galaxy book cannot rum final cut😅
You can watch ben g Kaiser review of Galaxy book 3 pro 360, m2 pro MacBook Pro.
Also check tech notice channel for m2 pro and hardware unboxed, jarrods tech for Intel 10nm 13 gen laptop chip performance.
Not a fair comparison, you should've used the M2 Max macbook pro with the 38 core gpu
Lhavxjz
Hello? What about the screens? This is amateur hour
Razer quality control is fucking terrible. I wouldn't even trust them with a $1000 laptop.
This time they really nailed.
You can buy it.
@@HDRPC still bloatware installed
First
Home-field advantage 😉
Let's face a computer with a processor that its throttled to less than half the performance and match it up with a Macbook... WTF you doing? Do the same testing with a full-on i9-13900K and a proper Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 GPU
The idea is to compare power in the same form factor, not individual hardware parts.
I'm not sure how that applies here since both are laptops. Those would be desktop parts. We already know where desktop PCs perform and it's quite a bit higher. And the truth is that under power-limited situations, some of these parts are going to suffer. I'm not sure what we want here. Even though some people would to tilt the scales to favor their favorite platform, I think we should all strive for information a regular person--not a super fan--can use.
@@FakeGordonMahUng Dear "Super Fan", I don't think "Regular People" would put out the budget for high-end laptop hardware that you feature here. I would start asking anyone what their budget is if they were to buy a laptop. And I'm not talking about payment plans. A laptop with an Intel Core i5 12th Gen 12500H with an NVidia 4060 would probably make more sense for those "Normal People" that are budget friendly for 1/4 of the cost. Sorry for the rant but that would be my personal opinion and not trying to label others. It's like trying to compare apples to ... you can't make everyone happy
Windows laptops never throttle
MacBooks have crap thermal design. I haven't checked if they've improved since 2017 though. Mac OS is reason enough not use a MacBook. I assume people who buy them use apps that are exclusive to Mac OS.
So much bs talk. Windows 11 + Intel is reason enough not to use any laptop crap. Thermals are fine. If you haven't checked it since 2017 then don't post idiotic comments. 2017 was WAY DIFFERENT.
@@m-stat9 thermals may be fine now (I havent checked as have no interest or need for Apple machines) but my point still stands that Mac OS is horrible and you would only buy a Mac if you needed apps exclusive to Mac.
Then why do people buy MacBooks
Because they want to buy them?
Because you can carry it outside without plugin power supply. Why buying Razer 16 when you have to plug in with power supply and battery is worst? Just buy a PC instead Razer 16.
Dumb and unfair comparison, lol. But what to expect from a channel called "PCWorld" hahaha
I stick with my lighter and superior 16" Macbook Pro, thank you ;-) Gaming? I have my PS5 for that.
Never change Internet. Never change.