I'm sure this is easier said than done but... why is Intel (or AMD for that matter) not making their own laptops? Not laptop CPUs, the full package like Apple does. Apparently no one asked for this before, as putting the title in different search engines gives irrelevant results about laptop CPUs.
Intel & AMD make CPUs with a certain performance & power efficiency level. When looking at laptops I'd expect laptops with same CPUs to have similar performance & power efficiency, like how laptops with same Nvidia GPUs don't differ in video game or render performance. However laptops with same CPU seem to wildly differ in battery life. The difference is apparent on Just Josh's battery life test on low load. (timestamp attached, you don't need to watch the whole thing) The best laptop and the 3rd best have the same Intel CPU (Ultra 7 258V). The 1st spends less than 3W per hour (57W/21.5h=2.65W) beating the best of Apple while the 3rd one works out closer to 4W (70W/18.17h=3.85W). And there are many laptops with the same exact CPU, nowhere to be seen.
Another common complaint I hear with non Apple laptops is battery life on suspend, although I'll admit I don't know how common this problem is now. I have a MacBook Air, no not with Apple silicon, a 13-inch Early 2015 with i5-5250U. If I turn on airplane mode, close the lid at night and open it in the morning, I have %0 drop in battery capacity and I am back to business in 3 seconds. That is not even with macOS, but with Linux! macOS is same if not better.
My point is OEMs seem to be unable to reach the maximum potential of the CPUs especially on battery life on some of their laptops. The CPU manufacturers themselves can attempt to create a better software / hardware cooperation and basically "show how it is done" to other OEMs in order to push them for creating better laptops. They don't even need to take on Apple, they can attempt to break through in other markets such as lower cost convertibles (think Framework 12 or Chromebooks, the 1st laptop in the video is a convertible but it costs a fortune) or high end devices intended for gaming or whatever Apple Silicon is incompatible with.
Probs the same reason tire companies don’t make their own cars. It’s a lot of work. Plus there’s plenty of competition
What you’re missing is companies like intel have initiatives such as the ultrabook initiative to help manufacturers make better laptops.
Besides it’s way more profitable for them to just make the cpu and not deal directly with consumers as much as possible.
> It’s a lot of work.
Smaller companies like Framework are able to come up with new designs from scratch, though. Slimbook too I think?
> Besides it’s way more profitable for them to just make the cpu
That pretty much sums it up & answers my question.
This is still a problem, and it's because of windows. Microsoft claim to have fixed it ONLY for snapdragon laptops, but I have heard some still having the issue. Ever since apple made the M chips the blame has shifted to X86 processors being the problem when it was and still is windows the whole time. This whole thing makes x86 seem worse than it actually is.
It's both.
It's not cause SDXE also suffers from this issue Intel CPU Didn't have the issue with MacOS
There are issues, but SDXE still did better on battery life than comparable Intel chips, and that's with a number of its own issues. Only with LNL/PTL has Intel meaningfully started to close that gap, the first such push since HSW-ULT.
Some software on windows will break it you are one update away from Things breaking in windows be it WoA or X86_64
They did. Intel produced NUC desktop and laptops for quite a while, then they sold the business to Asus. The desktops are absolutely excellent.
I have an Intel NUC 9 Extreme LAPQC71A. It’s built like a tank (magnesium alloy chassis) and I’ve always been very happy with it. It’s still my main laptop.
Because then theyre essentially competing against their own customers. In a market that would require a lot of effort for small margins.
Their effort is better spent horizontally expanding rather than vertically at this point.
As someone who owns the Intel nuc 12 enthusiast, the engineering on them is phenomenal, Intel would do an extremely good job resulting in low margins and financially it doesn’t make sense to make laptops stick and perfect the chips is probably the best financial decision seeing as neither Qualcomm, amd, nvidia make laptops themselves. Even reference designed are outsourced. I worked on intels Arc program those Intel branded cards are expensive AF as they don’t have the bargaining power of getting low cost components like Asus or Lenovo would.
They used to, NUC was acquired by Asus.
Making and selling CPUs is more profitable. Apple has a different business model.
I really like Intel NUC. Too bad they sold it to Asus
Why don't tire companies make their own cars? Why don't window companies build their own houses or office buildings? Why don't the semiconductor tooling companies like ASML, LAM, Applied Materials just build their own fabs and make their own chips? Hell why can't they just build their own laptops too??
Do you really think that Apple manufactures their own M series chips? Or really any of the components in their products? Because the truth might shock you.
I recommend you look up supply chains and maybe learn a lil something :)
You are not Intel’s or AMD’s customer
Dell, Asus, Lenovo, MSI, etc are all customers of Intel and AMD in that they are the ones who actually buy chips
If Intel or AMD go into the laptop business then they are competing with their customers which tends to make their customers upset
The same problem exists with Microsoft and their Surface line which is one of the reasons the Surface line often seems to struggle - Microsoft has to be careful walking the line between demonstrating what they would like the hardware companies to do vs actually competing with them
As for differences in performance that can often come down to what price point the manufacturer is aiming for with the laptop. Higher price can often mean better quality components (which in a laptop can mean lower power consumption)
A mid ground solution would be to make a reference laptop and mandate manufacturers to meet or exceed the criteria like battery life and thermals.
Intel did have an initiative called Ultrabook serving a similar purpose before.
They did, but got out of it
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/196845/intel-nuc-laptop-kits.html
They used to make mobos too, but got out of that
Please, don't.
Once, a long time ago, when dial-up was a thing and used by business, I've purchased an Intel modem. 9600 bps connection speed. It was the worst modem I've ever witnessed [despite the fact that it was expensive], because the firmware was expected to be run in sterile laboratory conditions. The real world with unperfect landlines drove this child into confusion and madness, it was repeatedly entering renegotiation on every disturbance, often ending in just dropped connection.
I assume that Intel entrusted the design to talented engineers who had no idea about real-world operating conditions and did not bother to study them. Even in the US at that time, analog telephone lines did not always have negligible levels of interference.
* 9600bps was the bleeding edge at the time; the old modem at the company where I worked had a speed of 2400 bps.