I'm happy to get into the subjective stuff you've outlined, although you're not ...

smoldesu · on July 10, 2023

> It looks like the M1 which shipped in the 13" MacBook Air massively outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 3500U[^1] on Geekbench 5 single core: 1710 vs. 707.

> Am I missing something?

Yes, a fair fight. Pick a laptop with the same core count as M1 and preferably another 5nm laptop chip for a truly "fair" comparison. Like the 5800u, if you fancy. Or ignore that and continue to insist faster and cheaper laptops don't exist.

> The M1 MacBook Air scored >29hrs on the battery rundown test

> Am I missing something?

Presumably the part in any of my previous comment where I mentioned battery life.

> The same reviews refer to the Ideapad having a "mediocre" screen.

> Am I missing something?

It's a $400 laptop and your only critera was that it had to be faster and cheaper. If you actually wanted to talk about displays then yes, your original comment was missing some key details. I wouldn't be surprised if your next reach was to claim MacOS is an "infinite value add" and end our comparison on that basis alone.

georgespencer · on July 10, 2023

I think one of us is confused!

My original ask of OP was this:

> 2) look at the single core performance, battery life, and screen quality of the original 13" M1 MacBook Air. Now find me a laptop with commensurate performance at the same price point from that time.

My point is not that there are NO faster or cheaper laptops than MacBook Air, but that at this price point, it's very difficult (impossible?) to find comparable processor performance, battery life, and screen quality.

You offered a laptop which doesn't seem to be commensurate on any of those aspects. I think it's possibly because you didn't read the full comment?

> Or ignore that and continue to insist faster and cheaper laptops don't exist.

Hopefully the above clears up what I'm driving at. Faster laptops definitely exist. Cheaper laptops definitely exist.

> It's a $400 laptop and your only critera was that it had to be faster and cheaper.

No, that is not what I said. I referred to the MacBook Air "test" twice:

> > 2) look at the single core performance, battery life, and screen quality of the original 13" M1 MacBook Air. Now find me a laptop with commensurate performance at the same price point from that time.

This might be unclear to you. I am saying: look at [processor performance, battery performance, screen performance] of the original 13" M1 MacBook Air. Now find me a laptop with commensurate performance [to those aspects][ at the same price point.

I went on to refer back to this later on:

> 4. Can you find me that mythical laptop computer to compete with MacBook Air?

I did not set the condition that it be cheaper. I did not constrain performance to JUST the processor speed.

> If you actually wanted to talk about displays then yes, your original comment was missing some key details.

Is there something beyond me specifically referring to the "screen quality" that would have been helpful to your understanding?

> I wouldn't be surprised if your next reach was to claim MacOS is an "infinite value add" and end our comparison on that basis alone.

You're engaging in a lot of quite pointed speculation about my integrity in this discussion. Did you read what I said to OP? If so, can you help everyone understand why you think I don't care about the list of parameters I enumerated and am somehow moving the goalposts by assessing your example by the criteria I feel like I originally expressed?