In 2020, Apple officially ended its long-standing partnership with Intel in computer processor manufacturing, announcing the transition to its own in-house M-series chips—similar in philosophy to those used in iPhones. Since then, Apple has released several generations of M-series processors and is expected to unveil the sixth generation by the end of this year.
Apple did not stop at desktop and laptop computers; it expanded the use of these chips to include tablets and even high-performance machines designed for demanding professional workloads. This major shift raised an important question: why did Apple make such a radical move, and did it succeed in creating processors that rival or surpass Intel’s offerings?
The Transition Journey
Apple’s collaboration with Intel began in 2006, following the end of its partnership with PowerPC, which was once a leading force in computer processor manufacturing. However, Apple’s complete transition to its own chips only materialized in recent years, with a gradual rollout of Mac computers powered by M-series processors.
According to a report by Tom’s Guide, Apple’s extensive experience in designing processors for iPhones and iPads played a crucial role in this transition. Tim Millet, Apple’s Vice President of Platform Architecture, stated that the success of the first generation stemmed from the company’s deep understanding of Mac users’ needs—describing this insight as the “secret weapon” behind the leap in performance.
Meanwhile, Tom Boger, Vice President of Product Marketing for Mac and iPad, likened the experience of testing the M1 prototype to rediscovering Apple computers all over again.
Power Efficiency and Performance
Tom’s Guide highlights that Apple focused heavily on battery life and CPU performance when developing its new processors—expertise the company refined over years of designing iPhone chips. Beyond improving battery longevity, Apple significantly increased performance per watt, thanks to lower power consumption and reduced heat output.
These improvements enabled Apple to deliver processors that outperform Intel counterparts in many Mac systems, while also being more cost-effective.
Performance That Defies Expectations
Apple frequently showcases performance gains compared to older processors and competitors, but such figures alone do not fully capture real-world differences. Independent benchmarking tools like Cinebench and Geekbench provide a more objective view, though they still cannot reflect every usage scenario due to varied user behavior.
Apple’s vertically integrated approach further amplifies performance advantages. Its processors are exclusive to Apple devices, and the company controls both hardware and software development, allowing for deep optimization across the entire system.
Apple vs. Intel: Benchmark Comparisons
Independent benchmarks remain a key reference point. A comparison between Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285H (16 cores at 2.9 GHz) and Apple’s M5 (10 cores at 4.61 GHz) illustrates notable differences.
According to Notebookcheck, Apple’s processor shows a clear lead in single-core performance. In Cinebench, Apple scores 200 points versus Intel’s 145. Geekbench results show 4,326 points for Apple compared to 3,109 for Intel.
NanoReview reports similar single-core performance but varying multi-core results, with Intel leading by 22% in Cinebench multi-core tests, while Apple leads Geekbench multi-core scores by 5%. In PassMark tests, Apple outperforms Intel by 32% in single-core tasks, whereas Intel leads multi-core performance by 22%.
Blender benchmarks reveal relatively close results, with Intel scoring 205.02 points compared to Apple’s 276.45.
Why Does This Performance Gap Exist?
The core reason lies in processor architecture. Apple relies on ARM architecture—the same foundation used in smartphone processors—while Intel uses the traditional x86 architecture.
Apple’s ARM-based chips integrate multiple components into a single system-on-a-chip design, including CPU, GPU, image processors, neural engines for AI, and unified memory. This integration enables faster data transfer, higher efficiency, and significantly lower power consumption.
While ARM architecture traditionally suffered from limited software support, Apple overcame this challenge by developing and optimizing its own operating systems and applications specifically for its hardware.
Impact on the Competition
Apple was not the first company to experiment with ARM-based laptops, but it was the first to deliver commercially successful, high-performance systems capable of competing with traditional computers. This success prompted other companies to explore ARM processors for Windows devices, most notably Microsoft’s Surface lineup.
The rise of Windows-based handheld gaming devices further demonstrates the growing interest in ARM architecture. It is also possible that Intel itself may adopt similar approaches in the future, much like AMD has done with certain processors used in home gaming consoles.
