Technology Android

[dilla]

It's not a good thing if you're gaming on your phone and care about battery life. GOS is actually neat in a way that it caps framerate and occasionally resolution.

Oh, I don't game on my phone. i went through a phase last year where I played COD Mobile before bed but I stopped.

I thought the GOS was found to be affecting other apps, too, though? That's why users were mad even though it was Samsung saving them from tanking their batteries while using non-gaming apps that didn't need full power?

Also, the Nest Hub was on sale for $50 at several stores. I had some Best Buy points that took it lower so I grabbed one and put the Home Mini I had in my room in my dad's office. This thing's pretty neat but this normally retails for $100. I still think $50 is on the high end of a "fair" price for it but I do like that I can quickly turn off lights using it. And my room needed a better clock and a weather forecast, too.

Have you dealt with strip lights? I was thinking of putting some on the back of my desk for ambient lighting but I'm not sure which companies make reasonably priced strips that aren't lacking in quality. Govee seems to be popular in that sense. So is Phillips Hue but those are pricey as hell and require getting the hub and buying in to their ecosystem. But they do make some high quality stuff.

So it's either a simple light strip or wait for a steep discount on some Nanoleaf fixtures, which is unlikely to ever happen,.

 

[Casey]

I have smart LED bulbs and strips from pretty much all the major companies: Philips Hue, Govee, LIFX, plus random chinese brands from Amazon. The good thing is, with Google Home there's no manufacturer lock-in and using all their proprietary apps isn't required post setup.

My only piece of advice for strips - get RGBIC instead of RGB and make sure they're Google Home and/or Alexa compatible

 

[dilla]

I have smart LED bulbs and strips from pretty much all the major companies: Philips Hue, Govee, LIFX, plus random chinese brands from Amazon. The good thing is, with Google Home there's no manufacturer lock-in and using all their proprietary apps isn't required post setup.

My only piece of advice for strips - get RGBIC instead of RGB and make sure they're Google Home and/or Alexa compatible

I'm starting to look at Kasa stuff since we just had a lot of light switches replaced with TP Link smart switches. I think I saw RGBIC stuff on their site and got an email saying they had a sale on light strips. Might be worth a look

 

[Pittsey]

I'm moving away from WiFi bulbs and sockets now. The cheap stuff I bought previously, although compatible with Google, isn't great. So I'm going to build a lightwave based system

 

[dilla]

I'm moving away from WiFi bulbs and sockets now. The cheap stuff I bought previously, although compatible with Google, isn't great. So I'm going to build a lightwave based system

Never heard of Lightwave so I looked it up and it looks to be a UK thing and a whole different type of infrastructure where they communicate with each other directly.

The smart switchs and bulbs and such we have in our house have been working well. There were a few hiccups with, both, the devices and user-error but those eventually got ironed out. Now everyone is used to turning rooms on and off with their voice and adjusting the brightness as they see fit.

One thing that became clear to me is the range of quality and degree of customization in smart home stuff. It can be brand specific and it can also be within a brand. I always shied away from Phillips Hue products because "it requires a hub" but looking at their products now, they seem to be of a higher quality and complexity than most other brands. I've carried that bias against Hue devices since 2015 or so when they first started popping up on deal sites and were just single light bulbs that were controlled by a hub. Now, their stuff is quite expansive from bulbs to fixtures to light strips and their offerings look nicer and are more customize-able that most other brands. Their gradient light strip looks so...premium and I don't think any of the other, big-name brands make something at that level.

Similarly, Lifx has given me some issues but it looks be to sorted again and should be good to go. They seem like just a step behind Hue products but still above TP Link and other brands and their color bulbs feel premium and the color and pattern and scene options seem to be much better than the others. I have Lifx and TP Link bulbs and while the TP Link/Kasa bulbs do exactly what they're expected to do, it's not quite at the same level as the Lifx bulbs that I have. The Kasa bulbs are not RGB, they're just "regular" LED bulbs that have 4 levels of brightness from 0-100%, so obviously I'm not comparing its colors to the Lifx but just the performance difference between the two. There's just so much more to do with the Lifx bulbs in the Lifx app or the Google Home app and I imagine Hue products to be more of the same.

So I understand the premium price of Hue products. They look like they're built better and have more cleaner and premium look to them. I don't think I'd switch over just like that but after looking at some of their products and comparing them to the other brands, they've got a few things that other brands just can't compete with. One was gradient light strip and the other was that TV camera thingy that monitors the colors on your TV and changes the lights around your room based on the colors shown on screen. I just looked it up and all I'm seeing is something called a "Sync Box" but I swear I saw one that used a light sensor that hung over your TV screen and did the same thing. Govee had something similar too, but didn't look as good. The Box looks like a cleaner set up so it might be a new product to replace the light sensor method Phillips used before. Either way, it's pretty neat. https://www.philips-hue.com/en-us/p/hue-play-hdmi-sync-box-/046677555221

 

[Pittsey]

Never heard of Lightwave so I looked it up and it looks to be a UK thing and a whole different type of infrastructure where they communicate with each other directly.

The smart switchs and bulbs and such we have in our house have been working well. There were a few hiccups with, both, the devices and user-error but those eventually got ironed out. Now everyone is used to turning rooms on and off with their voice and adjusting the brightness as they see fit.

One thing that became clear to me is the range of quality and degree of customization in smart home stuff. It can be brand specific and it can also be within a brand. I always shied away from Phillips Hue products because "it requires a hub" but looking at their products now, they seem to be of a higher quality and complexity than most other brands. I've carried that bias against Hue devices since 2015 or so when they first started popping up on deal sites and were just single light bulbs that were controlled by a hub. Now, their stuff is quite expansive from bulbs to fixtures to light strips and their offerings look nicer and are more customize-able that most other brands. Their gradient light strip looks so...premium and I don't think any of the other, big-name brands make something at that level.

Similarly, Lifx has given me some issues but it looks be to sorted again and should be good to go. They seem like just a step behind Hue products but still above TP Link and other brands and their color bulbs feel premium and the color and pattern and scene options seem to be much better than the others. I have Lifx and TP Link bulbs and while the TP Link/Kasa bulbs do exactly what they're expected to do, it's not quite at the same level as the Lifx bulbs that I have. The Kasa bulbs are not RGB, they're just "regular" LED bulbs that have 4 levels of brightness from 0-100%, so obviously I'm not comparing its colors to the Lifx but just the performance difference between the two. There's just so much more to do with the Lifx bulbs in the Lifx app or the Google Home app and I imagine Hue products to be more of the same.

So I understand the premium price of Hue products. They look like they're built better and have more cleaner and premium look to them. I don't think I'd switch over just like that but after looking at some of their products and comparing them to the other brands, they've got a few things that other brands just can't compete with. One was gradient light strip and the other was that TV camera thingy that monitors the colors on your TV and changes the lights around your room based on the colors shown on screen. I just looked it up and all I'm seeing is something called a "Sync Box" but I swear I saw one that used a light sensor that hung over your TV screen and did the same thing. Govee had something similar too, but didn't look as good. The Box looks like a cleaner set up so it might be a new product to replace the light sensor method Phillips used before. Either way, it's pretty neat. https://www.philips-hue.com/en-us/p/hue-play-hdmi-sync-box-/046677555221

My friend is fully bought into Hue. Has it all throughout his house

 

[dilla]

My friend is fully bought into Hue. Has it all throughout his house

Yeah, like I said, it's a bit pricey to enter the ecosystem and then stay within it but the Hue hardware is very nice looking and feels to be on another level. It just comes as a premium. I've just been buying smart home hardware to use with Google Home. And just like Android, Google Home is designed/licensed to work with even the shittiest of hardware and the companies that make them so you can get quality stuff like Kasa or Lifx for your Google Home needs, or you can buy cheap shitty Chinese hardware from Amazon which also works with Google Home. The range in quality is quite diverse. Hue works with Home too, but it's like an ecosystem with an ecosystem and that can get confusing for novice users and expensive for anyone trying to get in. Even the refurb prices for Hue products are measly discounts compared to new stuff. It really reminds me of Apple's model of business.

Still, it's good stuff. I don't know if it's smart for me to invest in entering their ecosystem since I really just like their light strips. I already have bulbs and switches from other brands so there's no need for me to enter the Hue world just for one device.

One brand I'm still trying to get a pulse on is Govee, which is everywhere on Amazon. Most "reviews" on YouTube of their products are by Amazon partners and those always make me skeptical of how honest their reviews are since they also have links to the product on Amazon in their descriptions. Affiliate links. I'm all for these guys making money but from the many reviews I've seen on different brands and their products, I don't think I've seen a scathing review of something that is just bad. They'll point out a few cons but they're they're mostly ticky-tack stuff so as to not put the viewer off from eventually buying the product. I might have to just buy a Govee product or two and see how it is for myself. One part of me is telling me it's sort of what Anker is/was to Amazon in its early days. It actually was quality stuff sold exclusively through Amazon. Now Anker products are sold in Apple Stores as certified Apple accessories. But they might be one of a few exceptions; most Amazon stuff is just cheap garbage where the company selling the stuff closes shop within a year or two and reappears under a different name to avoid dealing with customers complaints.

 

[dilla]

QC does make the good ones, I guess, but it sucks to see the continued lack of competition for modems.
https://www.macrumors.com/2022/06/28/apple-5g-modem-failed-qualcomm-remains-supplier/

 

[Jokerman]

New iPhone time of year. For me, at least. 14 slightly improved over 13. Still, getting.

 

[Pittsey]

It looks good. I just can't get on with iOS

 

[masta247]

The iPhone design is getting old again. You're basically getting nearly identical shell as with the 13, 12, 11 or X, but with the notch downsized to a still oversized camera cutout.

This is largely true about the internals as the only tangible difference between the 14 and anything since the 11 is the (finally) improved main camera. It's similar and in a number of ways better than Android's best, although Samsung still has the long optical zoom and high res recording to its advantage.

Can't blame Apple too much since Samsung, Google and the others are all stagnating. At this point it doesn't matter which brand you like. The differences are by far the smallest they've ever been, and you may as well stick with the ecosystem you already use and enjoy, since the days of major performance differences or when there were exciting features only one maker had versus another are largely over.

Perhaps the only exception today being foldables. The Fold 4 is imho the most interesting phone today, but I still find it too bulky and imperfect, and the price to be an early adopter is too high.

 

[dilla]

The iPhone design is getting old again. You're basically getting nearly identical shell as with the 13, 12, 11 or X, but with the notch downsized to a still oversized camera cutout.

This is largely true about the internals as the only tangible difference between the 14 and anything since the 11 is the (finally) improved main camera. It's similar and in a number of ways better than Android's best, although Samsung still has the long optical zoom and high res recording to its advantage.

Can't blame Apple too much since Samsung, Google and the others are all stagnating. At this point it doesn't matter which brand you like. The differences are by far the smallest they've ever been, and you may as well stick with the ecosystem you already use and enjoy, since the days of major performance differences or when there were exciting features only one maker had versus another are largely over.

Perhaps the only exception today being foldables. The Fold 4 is imho the most interesting phone today, but I still find it too bulky and imperfect, and the price to be an early adopter is too high.

Agreed. The S22 got criticized for not being too different from the 21. The 23 had leaks today and it looks the same as the 22. iPhone is guilty of the same. There's a rumor that it finally gets USB-C for the iPhone 15 but that's such an old feature to introduce at this point, especially since the Macs had USB-C charging since 2015 and the iPads since 2018.

I don't know what the new frontier is for phones now. They've beaten the camera to death and each "upgrade" feels so minimal but ends up being at the top of the list of improvements on the spec sheets with each new iteration.

Also, what site do you use for computer hardware reviews? I use NotebookCheck but it's still very Eurocentric and a lot of the suggested models are not available here or have poor US customer support (Gigabyte, MSI, etc.). My MBP is slowly breaking down with popped keys, a possible failing SSD, and a battery that is at 60% of its total capacity. Money spent replacing those parts would probably be better spent towards a new machine.

 

[masta247]

So Stadia is finally dead. Took longer than expected. What shocked me is that Google is giving refunds for software AND hardware. I feel like this was the worst possible outcome for Google. Keep pumping money into it for so much longer than expected while everyone knew it's going the way of the dodo, then spend insane money on refunds, that they never promised. Because If they had said they would do so right away, that would be the biggest boost for Stadia, as I'm sure there are Google fans who never invested in it because they suspected it'd fail, and they'd never get their investment back.

Also, what site do you use for computer hardware reviews? I use NotebookCheck but it's still very Eurocentric and a lot of the suggested models are not available here or have poor US customer support (Gigabyte, MSI, etc.). My MBP is slowly breaking down with popped keys, a possible failing SSD, and a battery that is at 60% of its total capacity. Money spent replacing those parts would probably be better spent towards a new machine.

NotebookCheck is alright. Check Rtings for reviews, they started doing laptops too:
https://www.rtings.com/laptop

Tom's Hardware (and Tom's Guide) have fallen off but I still sometimes check their reviews for the test results.

 

[dilla]

So Stadia is finally dead. Took longer than expected. What shocked me is that Google is giving refunds for software AND hardware. I feel like this was the worst possible outcome for Google. Keep pumping money into it for so much longer than expected while everyone knew it's going the way of the dodo, then spend insane money on refunds, that they never promised. Because If they had said they would do so right away, that would be the biggest boost for Stadia, as I'm sure there are Google fans who never invested in it because they suspected it'd fail, and they'd never get their investment back.



NotebookCheck is alright. Check Rtings for reviews, they started doing laptops too:
https://www.rtings.com/laptop

Tom's Hardware (and Tom's Guide) have fallen off but I still sometimes check their reviews for the test results.

I saw the news about Stadia too and I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did. And, like you said, I figured it would be another service eventually added to the Google Cemetery.

I didn't know RTings expanded to laptops. I know they had TV reviews open to everyone but then they added more products and started charging a premium membership for it. I don't know if that has changed, but I'll check them out.

Sad that there's so few review sites left. I heard the same thing you said about Tom's and its drop in quality. About a decade ago, it was Anandtech and Tom's that everyone went to for news and now Anandtech is a graveyard and Tom's is just trying to push affiliate linked products. Which reminds me, I haven't been to Engadget or Gizmodo in about a decade either.

I thought NoteBookCheck was highly regarded but you said it's just "alright."

I don't even know what I want from a laptop anymore. I'll say I don't want to game on it but then have buyer's remorse a year later when I start gaming on PC again. On the flip side, I'd look to get something like a 3060 or something and then never use it. I definitely do not want a dedicated gaming laptop with RGB and a $3K price tag. But if I do get one with a dedicated GPU, I'd rather get a 3000 series unit and not save a few bucks and get an RTX one.

I'm thinking an ASUS ROG or something from Lenovo. SlickDeals doesn't speak highly of Dell and HP units with dedicated GPUs and their reliability.

 

[masta247]

I thought NoteBookCheck was highly regarded but you said it's just "alright."

I guess I meant alright as in that they're good, and even great considering the alternatives. I'm mostly pained by the absence of literally great reviewers.
I trust Notebookcheck reviews. They check for all the key things that matter to me. I'd base my decisions on their and Rtings reviews the most.
It's just that when I think of "great" I think of the way Anand or Tom would write 10+ page reviews and run extremely detailed tests, often pissing off manufacturers by pointing faults that designers had hoped would go unnoticed because they didn't expect anyone to test for them.

And yeah most other sites these days are just pushing pseudo-reviews. Where they get their review units, and have a newbie play with a device and share their thoughts, biased by deep inexperience and preferences. Calling Gizmodo and Engaget "review sites" would be like calling Star Wars a show about astronomy. Watching a MKBHD video may have more value than those because even though he has no idea how to test a thing, he's at least seen more tech over the years to have more reasonable high-level thoughts.

 

[dilla]

Yeah and now most reviewers write up reviews with assumption that people will upgrade within 2-3 years to a new machine and don't make comments on predicted reliability. I can't even find reliability scores for OEMs and their various lines since not all Dells or HPs are made the same. There's a difference between an XPS and Latitude machine as far as parts go.

I'm thinking about just going back to Apple lol. No lie, let this rumored October event happen and if they update the MBPs to the M2 chip, I'll go right back to Apple. I didn't realize that MBPs came with a 120hz screen now. I know PC OEMs do 144 and higher but I still expected Apple to keep us at 60hz and force "Pro" users to shell out for their external monitor.

 

[masta247]

Apple definitely make excellent hardware. I suspect at this point they are on par with the Dell XPS line or the Thinkpads, with an understanding that none of these is perfect and each model in each line has its own quirks.
Personally, as far as Macbooks are concerned, I only have a problem with their software. While acknowledging that it works well with the hardware, Mac OS just isn't something I could use. Otherwise, I'd be on the Macbook Air.

Microsoft's trying to recreate the experience with their Surface series. I had the Surface Pro. I hope they get there one day, but they aren't improving as fast as I had expected, and it feels like over the years they haven't been able to narrow the gap. What's surprising to me and actually pissing me off is that they refresh their products with only minor improvements, while what they need are significant quality improvements. The experience just isn't very polished, and despite making the software and the hardware, those two just aren't working as well together as it would with Apple. And there are always bugs and unexpected quality of life issues.

The latest Surface Laptop still discharged when asleep, and still tazed me with static electricity when plugged in like the Surface Pro of 6 years ago that I previously used. And the battery still doesn't last even half as long as on a similarly priced Macbook, and it doesn't even have a performance advantage anymore. Not to mention that even in the Windows world the Surface series always launches with outdated and underperforming hardware.
Intel just released the 13th gen chips, and the upcoming Surface devices are launching later this year with the 12th gen chips. Seriously, it's like they don't even care.

The Surface series has got such potential, but Microsoft just fails at execution. It's a bit like where the Pixel series is vs the iPhone. They ask for a similar $$$, but just don't execute anywhere as well to actually earn it, and aren't doing enough to improve their product quality to make their actually cool visions materialize. With Macbooks, you buy these and know you have a really cool product that works great. They're a joy to have. With the Surface series and Pixels it's always the "It's cool and would be great if it wasn't for X, Y and Z", and sometimes it's surprising how unpolished parts of the experience feel compared to something like a Macbook.

 

[dilla]

Apple definitely make excellent hardware. I suspect at this point they are on par with the Dell XPS line or the Thinkpads, with an understanding that none of these is perfect and each model in each line has its own quirks.
Personally, as far as Macbooks are concerned, I only have a problem with their software. While acknowledging that it works well with the hardware, Mac OS just isn't something I could use. Otherwise, I'd be on the Macbook Air.

Microsoft's trying to recreate the experience with their Surface series. I had the Surface Pro. I hope they get there one day, but they aren't improving as fast as I had expected, and it feels like over the years they haven't been able to narrow the gap. What's surprising to me and actually pissing me off is that they refresh their products with only minor improvements, while what they need are significant quality improvements. The experience just isn't very polished, and despite making the software and the hardware, those two just aren't working as well together as it would with Apple. And there are always bugs and unexpected quality of life issues.

The latest Surface Laptop still discharged when asleep, and still tazed me with static electricity when plugged in like the Surface Pro of 6 years ago that I previously used. And the battery still doesn't last even half as long as on a similarly priced Macbook, and it doesn't even have a performance advantage anymore. Not to mention that even in the Windows world the Surface series always launches with outdated and underperforming hardware.
Intel just released the 13th gen chips, and the upcoming Surface devices are launching later this year with the 12th gen chips. Seriously, it's like they don't even care.

The Surface series has got such potential, but Microsoft just fails at execution. It's a bit like where the Pixel series is vs the iPhone. They ask for a similar $$$, but just don't execute anywhere as well to actually earn it, and aren't doing enough to improve their product quality to make their actually cool visions materialize. With Macbooks, you buy these and know you have a really cool product that works great. They're a joy to have. With the Surface series and Pixels it's always the "It's cool and would be great if it wasn't for X, Y and Z", and sometimes it's surprising how unpolished parts of the experience feel compared to something like a Macbook.

I looked at a Surfacebook back in 2017 before getting another Mac. I thought the inclusion of the stylus was really neat and Apple had just brought out the Pencil but for the iPad Pros. I thought it would work just as well as Apple's but on a desktop OS instead of a mobile OS but was ultimately disappointed with it.

As far as macOS' criticisms go, I hear a lot of people say the same as you but I think you guys are more power users and perhaps your work (or hobbies) require certain programs that are Windows-only. I know Apple has locked down the OS as well so power users can't get as "deep" in to the OS to make changes that normal people wouldn't care to do. But much as I use my MBP daily, I still am nowhere near a power user. Apple's walled-garden still doesn't feel small to me and I only start to see the boundaries when looking at games that end up being mostly only for PC. At least with Intel Macs, Boot Camp was a fine alternative. Apple Silicon closed the door on Boot Camp and I doubt it comes back. My rudimentary knowledge of the situation is that MS has to make Windows run-able on AS specifically and not just ARM in general? I don't know but I haven't read anyone being optimistic that that will change any time soon.

My issue with look at M1/M2 Macs right now is looking at the "Cores" on the spec sheet how and arbitrary it can look to the average person. I don't think most people know whether to buy an 8 core or a 10 core CPU/GPU AS machine. You can look at benchmarks but that's still not too helpful. I think the vast majority of people are stuck in the "old" ways of looking at Ghz and even that didn't tell the whole truth as it didn't always translate well between generations of Intel chips.

The thought of a desktop Mac has crossed my mind. The iMacs look nice and the Mac Studio is overkill, much like the MBPs are, for most people. I'm trying to re-assess how much I use my MBP away from a desk and whether I should go for a desktop for the times I need the screen real estate. For everything else, I use my iPad Pro which is still going on strong since 2018.

And then after I asked a random person about the 3000 series GPUs vs AMD's...6000? series GPUs and why there was a circle jerk over Nvidia, and it turns out it's for ray tracing. And RT isn't really possible unless you get a 3080 or higher. And that RT was developer-dependent. And that RT still comes down to a personal preference and might not even be a focus/priority during this generation of gaming. Not that I was looking at anything above a 3070 but I was curious why I see AMD and Nvidia setups on Dell, Lenovo, etc., but the hype still surrounds the Nvidia units more.

 

[masta247]

Indeed, from where I'm sitting Mac OS is just one big limitation. I liked the Macbook Air a lot, but Mac OS was a huge pain to try to use and realize it can do almost nothing I need my computer to do. I don't even consider myself a hardcore power user. But anything I do for work OR fun (games) are literally impossible on a Mac. So, to me it is pretty unusable. It feels like there's almost nothing it can do except for browsing, and some select use cases using the absolutely most mainstream tools.

MacOS is also way too clunky for lots of the things it can kind-of do. I mean, there isn't even a 7zip, which is a bit crazy as the alternatives absolutely suck. My backups alone took multiple hours longer every week and I had no control over compression settings, so the file sizes were also much bigger. And that's the second most basic thing I do on my laptop, first being the browser.


As for Nvidia, they've got a rep for a more polished experience. As in if you're running Windows, you'll likely never experience any issues with an Nvidia GPU. You'd launch any game and it'd just work well. AMD used to require some love, and their drivers historically weren't as stable.

As for CPU performance, benchmarks are the best thing to refer to. Especially performance in the programs you use. It's pretty impossible to tell performance from Ghz. Pentium 4 was running at close to 4ghz, while it wasn't even a quarter as fast as a single Ryzen 5000 core running at 4ghz. Then more cores help in software that's well threaded, but in most programs the returns for each additional core are smaller the more of them you add. While architectural improvements would always scale linearly.

Think of it like having 6 fast workers (newer architecture) vs 10 slow workers (older architecture). Any of the 6 fast workers will do a 1-person task much faster than any of the 10 slow workers. 6 fast workers can also do a 10-person task faster than 10 slow workers if they are sufficiently faster. With that example in mind, because of those architectural improvements a Ryzen 7000 CPU with 6 cores would be faster than a 2020 Intel 10th gen chip with 10 cores. Even running software that scales well with cores. And would be twice as fast in programs that don't scale as well with more cores.

The M1/M2 have 4 fast and 4 slow cores. MacOS doesn't see many use cases that require more cores. Some exist, but you'd know if you needed to use one of those. Things like the browser, photoshop, general UI, all are very lightly threaded. As in they would almost never take advantage of more cores.

 

[dilla]

MacOS is also way too clunky for lots of the things it can kind-of do. I mean, there isn't even a 7zip, which is a bit crazy as the alternatives absolutely suck. My backups alone took multiple hours longer every week and I had no control over compression settings, so the file sizes were also much bigger. And that's the second most basic thing I do on my laptop, first being the browser.

Did The Unarchiver not handle everything you needed? That's what I use but I don't think I've seen a zipped file other than a .zip file in quite some time. But it handled .rar files too. Not sure about the other formats.

Think of it like having 6 fast workers (newer architecture) vs 10 slow workers (older architecture). Any of the 6 fast workers will do a 1-person task much faster than any of the 10 slow workers. 6 fast workers can also do a 10-person task faster than 10 slow workers if they are sufficiently faster. With that example in mind, because of those architectural improvements a Ryzen 7000 CPU with 6 cores would be faster than a 2020 Intel 10th gen chip with 10 cores. Even running software that scales well with cores. And would be twice as fast in programs that don't scale as well with more cores.

This makes sense. But what about comparing the newest Ryzens and Intel chips from the same generation? Would benchmarks tell the full story in that case? Would the differentiating factor just be cost since AMD still is a bit cheaper than Intel? Same for GPUs with AMD and Nvidia?

The M1/M2 have 4 fast and 4 slow cores. MacOS doesn't see many use cases that require more cores. Some exist, but you'd know if you needed to use one of those. Things like the browser, photoshop, general UI, all are very lightly threaded. As in they would almost never take advantage of more cores.

I see 10 core CPUs for the 16" but the GPUs vary from 16 to 24 to 32. I guess it would be wrong to try to compare them to proper GPUs from AMD and Nvidia?