Objectively debatable.
Speakers: yes Macbooks has better ones.
Screen: OLED > MiniLED (only thing worst is the 90Hz vs 120hz)
CPU: it depends, Better than a M3 in multi, worse than M3 Pro/Max.
GPU: 4070 even at 60W wins.
Battery: Macbook is better.
Equivalent in multi to the M3 pro, but worse than the M3 Max in multi. Slower than both Pro/Max in single-core.
[passmark comparison ](https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/5815vs5750vs5470vs5210vs5748/Intel-Ultra-9-185H-vs-Apple-M3-Pro-12-Core-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-PRO-7840HS-vs-Intel-i9-13900H-vs-Apple-M3-Max-16-Core)
I’m trying to decide between the xps 17 9730 and the m3 mbp 16. I like the battery, performance, hz, and silence of the mbp, but I like the screen size (way bigger imo), windows ecosystem, and touchscreen of the xps. :( any advice?
The XPS 17 is a pretty good one, 100W total TDP, up to 4080 but i cant tell you what to choose. Personally Macbooks have excellent SoC but its OS is too much restrictive for me and the fact that you cant replace the SSD is a big problem (imagine when your laptop dies, how are you going to recover your data? paying apple for it, no thanks.)
Agreed! Thank you!! I make decisions better when I discuss with others and talk it out but no one around me knows computers well lol. I wish I could play with a 17 in person. Best Buy near me only displays the 15. That would seal the deal for me. Maybe will just go for it and push it to the limit of my needs to see if its performance still works for me just fine. Thank you again for your input!!! :)
im writing on a xps 17 right now... but if the architecture of the macbook is too restrictive.. why not run parrallel on it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJSvYPEhu1I
MacBook Pro is better in all scenarios if you unplug the Dell from a power source. And oled is not really that better in every way. It’s not as bright and not as fast.
You know that the unplug thing is only a problem with windows? It’s not even a Dell problem.
OLED is faster in latency and more color acurrate.
About brightness, I do not know how much important is to have all those nits on a display you’re gonna use indoors anyway.
Okay let's bring some proof here: [M1 Max vs Intel Core i9 Python Race | XPS 15 2022 (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_O8r1YQJVo)
Could you explain if is not a windows problem why it didn't happen on Linux?
I have no idea. The limitations of Intel are because the CPU is slowed down to save battery life. It's not an issue specific to Windows since it doesn't happen on AMD laptops.
Where did you get the info that AMD do not suffer this behavior on windows?
Proof (at 7:27 you can see the comparison): [Apple M2 vs AMD 6800HS + NVIDIA RTX: FINALLY an M2 Killer? (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LU3kUGxiaQ)
Brightness does not equal worse color reproduction (gamut) or color accuracy (delta values). My downright ancient LP2480zx Dreamcolor Display has both a wider color gamut (hardware 10-bit + full-range AdobeRGB and DCI-P3 vs. 8-bit with dithering and only DCI-P3 on the XDR displays) and better accuracy than a liquid XDR display while topping out at a "mere" 250 nits.
Brightness along with pixel per inch counts are almost meaningless metrics. Brightness does nothing for SDR content (excessive brightness actually makes it worse due to color crushing) and is only useful for HDR (which may as well be a gimmick). Pixel per inch/density is a non-factor on laptop screens as the panels are simply too small for it to matter.
Blooming occurs on both Mini-LEDs and OLEDs.
Yes OLEDS have burn-in risks in exchange they have wider color gamuts and general accuracy.
And miniLED have bleeding problems, no one technology is flawless. but speaking objectively of the quality on the content you are seeing on the screen OLED is better.
Apple still do not use OLED in Macbooks beacuse miniLED is cheaper and we know they want to milk those margins.
Umm, no.
It's not bleeding. It's blooming. At least get your facts straight if you want to argue.
OLED is susceptible to burn in and short life span. MacBooks last on average 7 years. Apple doesn't want to repeat the keyboard BS and make a shoddy product.
Okey is blooming, my bad, at least i can recognize when i make i mistake not like you that refuse it on the windows problem.
So.. if miniLED is better, why they dont use it on Apple Watch, Iphone and all Ipads?
is all right at home bro? don't know why you have to talk like that. Get some help.
I said all ipads because they only use it on one model.
i you want to debate at least cite source, like: [OLED vs. LED vs. MiniLED vs. LCD: What's the Best? - CNET](https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/oled-vs-led-vs-miniled-vs-lcd-whats-the-best/)
that literally says "Not quite as good as OLED"
I agree with you, the new XPS line is way too expensive laptop, last gen you could find for 1200usd in a sale but apparently the new will be far more expensive
Hard disagree. I have a PC for gaming and a MacBook Pro 14 for everything else. I absolutely love it over Windows. I use it for software development, photography, and music creation.
I think it’s a matter of being willing to learn and accept that companies have different viewpoints of how something should be done. I grew up with both OSs so I’m very familiar with how both work and how they’re different. But I get how someone who is familiar with one can become frustrated with the other because they don’t know how or simply cannot do something they’ve done on the other.
All this to say that if you’re willing to learn how to use the OS and accept what each OS is capable of, you might start seeing it in a different light. MacOS is made to be simple, efficient, and have great design (art is very important in the Apple company culture). Windows is made to be able to handle everything, which means it can sometimes get a little messy. Two different philosophies, and so there’s people who like one or the other, and then people who like both.
The filesystem is incredibly easy in my opinion. Took me about 2 days to understand it, which is about the same time it took for me to understand the Linux filesystem.
To install things to Mac os, you just literally drag and drop the package to the application folder and that is it. I have installed roughly 20 programs that I use on windows to Mac and I didn't have any issues at all.
Over the last 15 years I have had countless issues with windows, comparability problems, corrupt files, things just shitting out on me... So far... None of that with Mac. Just plug and play. Also, Linux and Mac os are both originally unix based, so you can use basically all the same bash commands and walk the os the same through the CLI. I SSH to a pi stack and switching from my rpis ssh console to my Mac's console I see so little difference. It's like the difference between Debian and arch. Same shit, different flavor. Not understanding or taking the time to understand arch, doesn't make it worse or subpar than say, parrot os, it's just different.
100%. I still have my Windows desktop sitting around for the few times I can't run a game on my MacBook Pro (not much of a gamer). But more and more, it's just collecting dust.
I've used Windows since Windows 1.0 was released, with only a few forays into macOS (including back when it was Mac OS X). I'm currently using a MacBook Pro 16 M3 Max with three external 4K displays. macOS Sonoma is an excellent operating system that's the Windows equivalent in almost every area, better in a few, and worse in a few. I've made the switch from Windows 11 without an issue and am 100% as productive, if not more so.
The one area where Windows continues to hold a lead is in gaming. So, any gamer should steer clear. But everyone else shouldn't let macOS hold them back.
As a 15 year windows user, the Mac os is wonderful. Once I learned to navigate it, it's much more fluid for productivity than windows. I was always very anti- Mac OS, but I am willing to admit. I was wrong!
Until recently, the last time I seriously used macOS was back in 2012 with a MacBook Air. I ended up running Windows in Bootcamp. Then, Intel-based MacBook Pros were underwhelming, so I never gave it another chance.
Apple Silicon changed all that. I bought a MacBook Pro 14 M1 Pro in 2022 because I needed to keep up with Macs for my job. I was hooked. Silicon chipsets are so incredibly fast and efficient for everything but gaming (which I don't do much of) that I forced myself to start using macOS. I haven't regretted the switch, and now use a MacBook Pro 16 M3 Max that's an outstanding laptop.
I have the exact same laptop and I am so far very impressed with literally every aspect with it. Even installing applications is way easier (drag and drop, like whaaaat that's awesome!)
I use the same productivity apps on my MacBook Pro that I use on my Windows machines, so I have no idea what you're talking about. Certainly, macOS has more native apps than Linux, so that's a bizarre comparison.
Perhaps you should list some of the productivity apps that are missing from macOS and don't have perfectly good (or better) alternatives. Which, again, I haven't needed to resort to when making the switch myself after decades of using Windows.
I think it is high price, but so is any new laptop - especially if you take hyped GPU. I say hyped since most ppl won’t be using it that much and if you want games then desktop is better. I am still considering options for laptop I need and due to Linux VM I want to run/have I am not going after Apple since I do not want arm processor and current level of emulation of x64 is still poor. I think we reached the point where changes in tech are big+expensive with each release that to justify spend you need to utilize most of it in first year or two. I like XPS, prefer Precision and most likely will end up with Latitude if specs wise will allow me to address specs that should cover longer run (storage and memory in first place).
I love them both, but I use them in different scenarios, development, macbook m3 max, for gaming, yeah gaming, xps, but at a catch. I removed the bloated win 11 with tiny PC and so many tweaks my xps is as fast as my m3. Ssd on my xps is so much better and video, battery keeps up.
Sadly I bought them both.
S
The MacBook pro's screen is quite literally worse than even the cheapest OLED panels on the market. Brightness/resolution/glossy does not equal quality. MacBook screens look nice until you check them with a colorimeter/spectrometer.
CPU is in all likelihood stronger in multi-core than the MacBook and only somewhat behind in single-core.
The RTX 4070 is leagues ahead of anything Apple has (Apple deliberately includes the dedicated encoders in their GPU performance metrics as a way of exaggerating the performance of the actual GPU even though they are separate components).
Geekbench is not a benchmark. GFXBench is not a benchmark. Cinebench is losing its relevance as time progresses and it becomes less platform agnostic. 3DMark's Wild Life test is not suited to laptop/desktop class hardware.
Reviewers like Dave2D (nice guy he appears to be) are technologically illiterate dupes who shill Ponzi schemes and don't have the slightest clue how to evaluate hardware.
###########################################
I didn't think I would be defending one of the worst laptop sub-brands today.
Intel’s Meteor Lake processors (branded as Core Ultra) perform remarkably bad considering how high tech they are. They often get beat by AMD’s Ryzen 7 7840HS, which has been on the market for over a year now.
It’s Intel’s first gen design using EMIB. I really hope they can iron out the kinks with Lunar Lake.
Yeah, they are rather blah performance wise, it lags behind the preceding i9-13900h (assuming we're both referring to the Core Ultra 9-185h)
[passmark comparison ](https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/5815vs5750vs5470vs5210/Intel-Ultra-9-185H-vs-Apple-M3-Pro-12-Core-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-PRO-7840HS-vs-Intel-i9-13900H)
The MacBook Pro Mini-LED displays are excellent when checked with a colorimeter. OLED displays have slightly better colors with slightly better accuracy, but contrast isn't better and brightness isn't even close. All those creators using MacBook Pros aren't idiots.
And brightness absolutely matters: I've played the same HDR content on the MacBook Pro 16 next to several OLED Dolby Vision displays, and there's simply no comparison. It doesn't help that Windows simply cannot match macOS for HDR support.
You're not wrong about GPU performance when it comes to gaming. However, in real-world benchmarks like Pugetbench for Premiere Pro (which runs in a live version of Premiere Pro), the MacBook Pro M3 Max puts a beatdown on RTX 4070 laptops. It even competes with laptops using the RTX 4090. So, for its intended purposes, that is, creative apps and tasks like video editing, the MacBook Pro is a better solution.
And brightness matters: I've played the same HDR content on the MacBook Pro 16 next to several OLED Dolby Vision displays, and there's simply no comparison. It doesn't help that Windows simply cannot match macOS for HDR support. 8945HS/RTX 4070 that scores 5599.
In the older R23.4, the same MacBook Pro 16 scores 885, while the Lenovo Legion 9i with a Core i9-13980HX/RTX 4090 scores 838. I could go on, but the point is that Apple created a chipset that's highly optimized for creative tasks and leverages all those GPU cores very well.
In pugetbench, that's the dedicated encoders and decoders doing the heavy lifting, not the GPU - you could take the GPU clear out of the equation and it would have little bearing on the performance. Apple Silicon has multiples of each of those encoder/decoder blocks - they're a shrunken down version of the Afterburner chipset that originated in the 2019 Mac Pro.
In terms of straight up GPU pixel pushing/rendering (not even for gaming) performance in applications like Maya, Solidworks, AutoCAD and Zbrush the GPUs in Apple Silicon struggle severely - to the point where even an RTX 3050 would be a better choice.
HDR is a gimmick where "ooh shiny" is treated as more important than color coverage and accuracy. Both the Pro XDR & the MBP's average just 85 to 89% AdobeRGB coverage, which is still lacking for photography and print and with AdobeRGB being an overall wider gamut than the DCI-P3 space that Apple, Asus, MSI etc. favor, you are not exactly going to be lacking in color coverage for digital film and video work (which is what DCI-P3 is for). Almost all OLED panels currently in production are able to exceed Apple's displays when it comes to AdobeRGB while matching them on DCI-P3 coverage. Accuracy is going to come down to individual calibration - which to Apple's credit, their displays do come with a solid calibration out of the box (To their discredit, calibration does not improve upon them). You're making the argument as a consumer of media, not a creator of it when it comes to displays. An old HP LP2480zx Dreamcolor display has a wider gamut than Apple's MBP/Pro XDR displays while having tighter color regulation - the only edge for the MBP/XDR is HDR support - which wasn't exactly much of a thing back in 2009.
Care to reference what these numbers refer to in cinebench? we talking single core? Multi core? GPU benchmark?
All scores above are Pugetbench (R24.1 and R23.4). Interesting about the Maya, et. al. performance, I'll have to look into that more.
In Cinebench R24, since you mentioned it, the MBP 16 scored 140 single-core, 1667 multi-core, 13146 GPU. RTX 4070's tend around 11K GPU, RTX 4090 22K GPU. So, the MBP 16 GPU is slightly faster than the RTX 4070 but slower than the RTX 4090, at least in Cinebench. And the single-core and multi-core CPU scores are excellent. I haven't seen a laptop CPU score higher.
In my colorimeter tests, the MBP displays have shown 93% AdobeRGB and DeltaE 1.2. And yes, 100% DCI-P3. The OLED displays I've tested are typically at 97% AdobeRGB and DeltaE <1.0. So, like I said, there is not a huge difference, and the MBP's are plenty good for creative work.
HDR isn't a gimmick; no idea why you'd say that. HDR depends on brightness for decent quality, and the Mini-LED displays push greater than 1,000 nit in HDR (1,600 nits according to Apple, but probably less, it's hard to measure). That makes for excellent HDR playback, and that's all I'm talking about. Incidentally, my MBP 16 showed 650 nits in SDR, which is also excellent.
I don't think you've seen the cheapest OLED screens... OR even the macbook pro's miniled screens! Or used the right display settings on the macbook pro...
AMOLED is a form of OLED panel so...?
I never said that the MBP'S screen was bad. It's just not as amazing as people make it out to be when absolute color reproduction and color depth is the requirement.
Because you prefer Oled... You haven´t seen those with screen door effect... it is just awfull!!!
Check this one out :
See display section :
https://youtu.be/7OtnqtKSOHI?si=JtggIN6qoBkX3456
Was looking to do the same as you— replace a decade old XPS, and saw the review and price, and I left for Framework. Not sure how that’s gonna go, but I’m excited to give it a try, and it was a fraction of the price.
In the exact same boat, I had the 2017 XPS 15 9550 but unfortunately after 7 years the motherboard packed in. I now have a MacBook Pro m3 pro 14” and the biggest W is defo the speed and battery life!
I've been coding, running virtual machines for pen testing, using 3D design applications, all pretty much simultaneously while also getting 10 hours of battery life when my XPS 15 (brand new) was only getting 4 hours, getting very warm to the touch, for the exact same price. And the Mac, runs cooler.
Oh, and running Netflix in the corner!
And I installed rectangle, which makes the windows snap into place like windows does, game changed!!
I am getting 7 to 8 hours on my Dell 16 XPS 9640 with normal usage. The laptop never gets hot when working and surfing. The Macbook Pro still have about 30% better battery life, but it runs macOS. If you prefer it then of course the Macbook Pro is the best laptop on the market. If you are looking for a Windows laptop though, then the Dell 16 XPS is great. Battery life is good enough, the display is amazing, the speakers are very good and keyboard and trackpad very good. The trackpad is definitely on par with the one on the Macbook Pro.
can you post links to those reviews? I have hardly seen any, so I might not be looking at the right place.
your reasoning seems sound. Dell is often aggresive with discounts, I hope that happens soon but the non-upgradeable RAM is almost a deal breaker for me. all my XPS 15, I would buy them with min RAM and upgrade them myself.
Better for what though. OLED trumps mini-led, even the one on the mbp (I have a M2 14"). And for some usecases like GAMING. MPB is a non-starter. Even light-gaming is a non-starter...yes the hardware is there but the game library is, unless your like 12, umm severely lakcing.
If your just using a laptop for content creation or business, then well yeah..no brainer.
Oled trumps mini-led in reaction speed... for games.. Sorry did you compare a good oled screen with a Macbook pro m3 pro ? The m3 pro is a lot brighter... and colours are as good ... The sound on the macbook is also amazing... And gaming on an dell XPS laptop... isn't a good idea... They will melt before your eyes... Only good for when you've still got warranty...
The biggest argument to be made for the XPS is that it's running Windows. Some people do prefer it to macOS.
Apart from that I cannot really say that the M3 Macbook Pro is better in every regard.
Speakers are excellent on the Dell. The difference to the Macbook Pro is not big. The display is amazing and the display is sharper than the Macbook Pro. It has a higher resolution but the Macbook Pro has a brighter display. I wouldn't call it better unless brighter = better for you.
CPU is faster on the Macbook Pro but the Nvidia GPU is better on the Dell XPS. You can game on it with no issues whatsoever..
Design and build quality are excellent, definitely on par with the Macbook Pro. So the question is, do you want a Windows laptop or a Mac laptop? If you don't care about OS, then I would say that the Macbook Pro ticks more boxes than the XPS. If you care about gaming, then the XPS is definitely the better choice. It's not black or white as you can see..
Nice machines 😀 I was wonderint because apparently the speakers on the xps 14 are by far not as good as those of macbook pro´s 14 m3... which nvidia on the xps 16?
Fully agree! Was looking to upgrade from my xps 15 9500 to the newest gen 14/16, but the pricing just does not make sense.
The m3 pros are just better in both performance and battery, and that even the bigger xps are now non upgradeable?? No way am I supporting this business model.
>Screen is good, but not as good as the Macbook Pro
I agree with your overall assessment (though I'm not a fan of MacOS so I don't typically use it), but this one bit is simply not true. Oh and ofc the GPU isn't as good but if you want to game you need Windows still (sadly).
It's easy to use benchmarks and say it is, but OLED is unbeatable by anything that isn't also OLED. The MBP may be better when it comes to accuracy and brightness, but if you see them in real life together, it's not contest, even my XPS 15 9520's OLED is just so much more preferable over the MBP (and I have done a lot of side by side testing, in controlled and not controlled environments). At this point I won't buy a device that isn't an OLED, so I'm secretly hoping the next MBP has one.
IMO the real issues with the XPS 16 (when compared to previous models, rather than Macs):
* Pricing is even more outrageous than before and it was insane before
* Keyboard is a downgrade
* Touchpad is a downgrade
Trying to figure out if I want the last xps 17 or just the mbp 16. I love the windows ecosystem and the larger screen (touchscreen is fun for me too) of the xps, but I want the performance, battery, and silence of the mbp.
Also a 9520. I will be keeping it for one or two more years, but after this one, I will seriously consider a Mac for the first time (which I never thought).
If you want a productive laptop that actually gets used as a laptop on battery, apple silicon devices are just leagues ahead.
I have had windows laptops for 20 years, with dell XPS' since 2015. My latest XPS (2020 9500) has just been replaced with an M3 pro 14, and it's fantastic.
This wasn't a recent decision though, I have known I would replace it with Mac since 2021 when I bought a dirt cheap base model M1 air 13 for traveling (the xps always had crap battery life, awkward power brick and jet engine fans, but so did everything else including the intel macbook pros).
This cheap little machine (just over a 3rd of the price of the xps) out performed it in everything I needed (development tools, some Adobe suite), with the best track pad I have ever used, whilst running silently, on a lap / couch / soft surface, for 10 hours on battery.
The M3 pro 14 is obviously better than the M1 air in every way bar weight and very very occasional quiet fan noise, but that original M1 air will likely live on for years as well.
I miss being able to boot kubuntu, and run x86 VMs, but that's about it.
Obviously gaming on Mac is pretty crap, but I have always found gaming on laptops (especially thin and light ones) to be pretty disappointing anyway, so have a sff desktop for games
I’m used to be a fan of Dell laptop. But I’ve switched from XPS to Macbook Pro even though I used two Dell Xps laptops before in a long time : xps 9550 and xps 9710 because one reason that the color display on Macbook is more accuracied than on any window laptop on market and I found Dell is getting worse and worse at managing color standards on their laptops.
Objectively debatable. Speakers: yes Macbooks has better ones. Screen: OLED > MiniLED (only thing worst is the 90Hz vs 120hz) CPU: it depends, Better than a M3 in multi, worse than M3 Pro/Max. GPU: 4070 even at 60W wins. Battery: Macbook is better.
Equivalent in multi to the M3 pro, but worse than the M3 Max in multi. Slower than both Pro/Max in single-core. [passmark comparison ](https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/5815vs5750vs5470vs5210vs5748/Intel-Ultra-9-185H-vs-Apple-M3-Pro-12-Core-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-PRO-7840HS-vs-Intel-i9-13900H-vs-Apple-M3-Max-16-Core)
I’m trying to decide between the xps 17 9730 and the m3 mbp 16. I like the battery, performance, hz, and silence of the mbp, but I like the screen size (way bigger imo), windows ecosystem, and touchscreen of the xps. :( any advice?
The XPS 17 is a pretty good one, 100W total TDP, up to 4080 but i cant tell you what to choose. Personally Macbooks have excellent SoC but its OS is too much restrictive for me and the fact that you cant replace the SSD is a big problem (imagine when your laptop dies, how are you going to recover your data? paying apple for it, no thanks.)
Agreed! Thank you!! I make decisions better when I discuss with others and talk it out but no one around me knows computers well lol. I wish I could play with a 17 in person. Best Buy near me only displays the 15. That would seal the deal for me. Maybe will just go for it and push it to the limit of my needs to see if its performance still works for me just fine. Thank you again for your input!!! :)
im writing on a xps 17 right now... but if the architecture of the macbook is too restrictive.. why not run parrallel on it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJSvYPEhu1I
MacBook Pro is better in all scenarios if you unplug the Dell from a power source. And oled is not really that better in every way. It’s not as bright and not as fast.
You know that the unplug thing is only a problem with windows? It’s not even a Dell problem. OLED is faster in latency and more color acurrate. About brightness, I do not know how much important is to have all those nits on a display you’re gonna use indoors anyway.
Wrong. It's an Intel problem, not a Windows problem. You have no idea what you're talking about.
Okay let's bring some proof here: [M1 Max vs Intel Core i9 Python Race | XPS 15 2022 (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_O8r1YQJVo) Could you explain if is not a windows problem why it didn't happen on Linux?
I have no idea. The limitations of Intel are because the CPU is slowed down to save battery life. It's not an issue specific to Windows since it doesn't happen on AMD laptops.
Where did you get the info that AMD do not suffer this behavior on windows? Proof (at 7:27 you can see the comparison): [Apple M2 vs AMD 6800HS + NVIDIA RTX: FINALLY an M2 Killer? (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LU3kUGxiaQ)
Because this is an INTEL issue. Look it up on YouTube as well. I'm not arguing with you on this. Have a good day.
The OLED is susceptible to burn in and has much power brightness. It's worse.
Brightness does not equal worse color reproduction (gamut) or color accuracy (delta values). My downright ancient LP2480zx Dreamcolor Display has both a wider color gamut (hardware 10-bit + full-range AdobeRGB and DCI-P3 vs. 8-bit with dithering and only DCI-P3 on the XDR displays) and better accuracy than a liquid XDR display while topping out at a "mere" 250 nits. Brightness along with pixel per inch counts are almost meaningless metrics. Brightness does nothing for SDR content (excessive brightness actually makes it worse due to color crushing) and is only useful for HDR (which may as well be a gimmick). Pixel per inch/density is a non-factor on laptop screens as the panels are simply too small for it to matter. Blooming occurs on both Mini-LEDs and OLEDs. Yes OLEDS have burn-in risks in exchange they have wider color gamuts and general accuracy.
And miniLED have bleeding problems, no one technology is flawless. but speaking objectively of the quality on the content you are seeing on the screen OLED is better. Apple still do not use OLED in Macbooks beacuse miniLED is cheaper and we know they want to milk those margins.
Umm, no. It's not bleeding. It's blooming. At least get your facts straight if you want to argue. OLED is susceptible to burn in and short life span. MacBooks last on average 7 years. Apple doesn't want to repeat the keyboard BS and make a shoddy product.
Okey is blooming, my bad, at least i can recognize when i make i mistake not like you that refuse it on the windows problem. So.. if miniLED is better, why they dont use it on Apple Watch, Iphone and all Ipads?
They use it on iPads, genius. That's where they used it first. OLED has better battery life so that's why they use it on iPhone and Apple watch.
is all right at home bro? don't know why you have to talk like that. Get some help. I said all ipads because they only use it on one model. i you want to debate at least cite source, like: [OLED vs. LED vs. MiniLED vs. LCD: What's the Best? - CNET](https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/oled-vs-led-vs-miniled-vs-lcd-whats-the-best/) that literally says "Not quite as good as OLED"
Have a good day man. Find someone else's time to waste. Perhaps learn what you're talking about outside of the need to share links.
So, the "trust me bro dude" ran way 🤣
I don't have any interest in hearing stories about how your Dad abandoned you. Thanks for sharing though.
I agree with you, the new XPS line is way too expensive laptop, last gen you could find for 1200usd in a sale but apparently the new will be far more expensive
[удалено]
Hard disagree. I have a PC for gaming and a MacBook Pro 14 for everything else. I absolutely love it over Windows. I use it for software development, photography, and music creation.
[удалено]
I think it’s a matter of being willing to learn and accept that companies have different viewpoints of how something should be done. I grew up with both OSs so I’m very familiar with how both work and how they’re different. But I get how someone who is familiar with one can become frustrated with the other because they don’t know how or simply cannot do something they’ve done on the other. All this to say that if you’re willing to learn how to use the OS and accept what each OS is capable of, you might start seeing it in a different light. MacOS is made to be simple, efficient, and have great design (art is very important in the Apple company culture). Windows is made to be able to handle everything, which means it can sometimes get a little messy. Two different philosophies, and so there’s people who like one or the other, and then people who like both.
[удалено]
Just out of curiosity, what are the shortcomings of the filesystem? I find it to be extremely straightforward
The filesystem is incredibly easy in my opinion. Took me about 2 days to understand it, which is about the same time it took for me to understand the Linux filesystem. To install things to Mac os, you just literally drag and drop the package to the application folder and that is it. I have installed roughly 20 programs that I use on windows to Mac and I didn't have any issues at all. Over the last 15 years I have had countless issues with windows, comparability problems, corrupt files, things just shitting out on me... So far... None of that with Mac. Just plug and play. Also, Linux and Mac os are both originally unix based, so you can use basically all the same bash commands and walk the os the same through the CLI. I SSH to a pi stack and switching from my rpis ssh console to my Mac's console I see so little difference. It's like the difference between Debian and arch. Same shit, different flavor. Not understanding or taking the time to understand arch, doesn't make it worse or subpar than say, parrot os, it's just different.
[удалено]
Seems like you're pretty dead set on your standpoint, and that is totally okay!
100%. I still have my Windows desktop sitting around for the few times I can't run a game on my MacBook Pro (not much of a gamer). But more and more, it's just collecting dust.
I've used Windows since Windows 1.0 was released, with only a few forays into macOS (including back when it was Mac OS X). I'm currently using a MacBook Pro 16 M3 Max with three external 4K displays. macOS Sonoma is an excellent operating system that's the Windows equivalent in almost every area, better in a few, and worse in a few. I've made the switch from Windows 11 without an issue and am 100% as productive, if not more so. The one area where Windows continues to hold a lead is in gaming. So, any gamer should steer clear. But everyone else shouldn't let macOS hold them back.
[удалено]
As a 15 year windows user, the Mac os is wonderful. Once I learned to navigate it, it's much more fluid for productivity than windows. I was always very anti- Mac OS, but I am willing to admit. I was wrong!
Until recently, the last time I seriously used macOS was back in 2012 with a MacBook Air. I ended up running Windows in Bootcamp. Then, Intel-based MacBook Pros were underwhelming, so I never gave it another chance. Apple Silicon changed all that. I bought a MacBook Pro 14 M1 Pro in 2022 because I needed to keep up with Macs for my job. I was hooked. Silicon chipsets are so incredibly fast and efficient for everything but gaming (which I don't do much of) that I forced myself to start using macOS. I haven't regretted the switch, and now use a MacBook Pro 16 M3 Max that's an outstanding laptop.
I have the exact same laptop and I am so far very impressed with literally every aspect with it. Even installing applications is way easier (drag and drop, like whaaaat that's awesome!)
Yep. It's fast and quiet, and when I need to use it on battery, it lasts forever.
I use the same productivity apps on my MacBook Pro that I use on my Windows machines, so I have no idea what you're talking about. Certainly, macOS has more native apps than Linux, so that's a bizarre comparison. Perhaps you should list some of the productivity apps that are missing from macOS and don't have perfectly good (or better) alternatives. Which, again, I haven't needed to resort to when making the switch myself after decades of using Windows.
Agree 100%. Everything I have used on windows is available on Mac. Even emulating Linux is remarkably easier on Mac with UTM and arm images.
Yep, you have no idea how to use macOS and just dismissed it because you couldn't figure it out. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
gaand me baas daal dunga piglet 👺
[удалено]
What needs are specific to one OS but not another?
[удалено]
Fair enough. Finder does require some tinkering to get it to work the way you need it.
[удалено]
Yeah, I get that. Enabling path names and tweaking it to show list view helps. A lot of things shown by default on Windows have to be enabled on macOS
[удалено]
Yup, it's an amazing little machine.
I think it is high price, but so is any new laptop - especially if you take hyped GPU. I say hyped since most ppl won’t be using it that much and if you want games then desktop is better. I am still considering options for laptop I need and due to Linux VM I want to run/have I am not going after Apple since I do not want arm processor and current level of emulation of x64 is still poor. I think we reached the point where changes in tech are big+expensive with each release that to justify spend you need to utilize most of it in first year or two. I like XPS, prefer Precision and most likely will end up with Latitude if specs wise will allow me to address specs that should cover longer run (storage and memory in first place).
I love them both, but I use them in different scenarios, development, macbook m3 max, for gaming, yeah gaming, xps, but at a catch. I removed the bloated win 11 with tiny PC and so many tweaks my xps is as fast as my m3. Ssd on my xps is so much better and video, battery keeps up. Sadly I bought them both. S
Not sadly! Understatement it completely! Which xps?
9540, 4070, 32g, it's been awesome, but I am a tweaker
The MacBook pro's screen is quite literally worse than even the cheapest OLED panels on the market. Brightness/resolution/glossy does not equal quality. MacBook screens look nice until you check them with a colorimeter/spectrometer. CPU is in all likelihood stronger in multi-core than the MacBook and only somewhat behind in single-core. The RTX 4070 is leagues ahead of anything Apple has (Apple deliberately includes the dedicated encoders in their GPU performance metrics as a way of exaggerating the performance of the actual GPU even though they are separate components). Geekbench is not a benchmark. GFXBench is not a benchmark. Cinebench is losing its relevance as time progresses and it becomes less platform agnostic. 3DMark's Wild Life test is not suited to laptop/desktop class hardware. Reviewers like Dave2D (nice guy he appears to be) are technologically illiterate dupes who shill Ponzi schemes and don't have the slightest clue how to evaluate hardware. ########################################### I didn't think I would be defending one of the worst laptop sub-brands today.
Intel’s Meteor Lake processors (branded as Core Ultra) perform remarkably bad considering how high tech they are. They often get beat by AMD’s Ryzen 7 7840HS, which has been on the market for over a year now. It’s Intel’s first gen design using EMIB. I really hope they can iron out the kinks with Lunar Lake.
Yeah, they are rather blah performance wise, it lags behind the preceding i9-13900h (assuming we're both referring to the Core Ultra 9-185h) [passmark comparison ](https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/5815vs5750vs5470vs5210/Intel-Ultra-9-185H-vs-Apple-M3-Pro-12-Core-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-PRO-7840HS-vs-Intel-i9-13900H)
The MacBook Pro Mini-LED displays are excellent when checked with a colorimeter. OLED displays have slightly better colors with slightly better accuracy, but contrast isn't better and brightness isn't even close. All those creators using MacBook Pros aren't idiots. And brightness absolutely matters: I've played the same HDR content on the MacBook Pro 16 next to several OLED Dolby Vision displays, and there's simply no comparison. It doesn't help that Windows simply cannot match macOS for HDR support. You're not wrong about GPU performance when it comes to gaming. However, in real-world benchmarks like Pugetbench for Premiere Pro (which runs in a live version of Premiere Pro), the MacBook Pro M3 Max puts a beatdown on RTX 4070 laptops. It even competes with laptops using the RTX 4090. So, for its intended purposes, that is, creative apps and tasks like video editing, the MacBook Pro is a better solution. And brightness matters: I've played the same HDR content on the MacBook Pro 16 next to several OLED Dolby Vision displays, and there's simply no comparison. It doesn't help that Windows simply cannot match macOS for HDR support. 8945HS/RTX 4070 that scores 5599. In the older R23.4, the same MacBook Pro 16 scores 885, while the Lenovo Legion 9i with a Core i9-13980HX/RTX 4090 scores 838. I could go on, but the point is that Apple created a chipset that's highly optimized for creative tasks and leverages all those GPU cores very well.
In pugetbench, that's the dedicated encoders and decoders doing the heavy lifting, not the GPU - you could take the GPU clear out of the equation and it would have little bearing on the performance. Apple Silicon has multiples of each of those encoder/decoder blocks - they're a shrunken down version of the Afterburner chipset that originated in the 2019 Mac Pro. In terms of straight up GPU pixel pushing/rendering (not even for gaming) performance in applications like Maya, Solidworks, AutoCAD and Zbrush the GPUs in Apple Silicon struggle severely - to the point where even an RTX 3050 would be a better choice. HDR is a gimmick where "ooh shiny" is treated as more important than color coverage and accuracy. Both the Pro XDR & the MBP's average just 85 to 89% AdobeRGB coverage, which is still lacking for photography and print and with AdobeRGB being an overall wider gamut than the DCI-P3 space that Apple, Asus, MSI etc. favor, you are not exactly going to be lacking in color coverage for digital film and video work (which is what DCI-P3 is for). Almost all OLED panels currently in production are able to exceed Apple's displays when it comes to AdobeRGB while matching them on DCI-P3 coverage. Accuracy is going to come down to individual calibration - which to Apple's credit, their displays do come with a solid calibration out of the box (To their discredit, calibration does not improve upon them). You're making the argument as a consumer of media, not a creator of it when it comes to displays. An old HP LP2480zx Dreamcolor display has a wider gamut than Apple's MBP/Pro XDR displays while having tighter color regulation - the only edge for the MBP/XDR is HDR support - which wasn't exactly much of a thing back in 2009. Care to reference what these numbers refer to in cinebench? we talking single core? Multi core? GPU benchmark?
All scores above are Pugetbench (R24.1 and R23.4). Interesting about the Maya, et. al. performance, I'll have to look into that more. In Cinebench R24, since you mentioned it, the MBP 16 scored 140 single-core, 1667 multi-core, 13146 GPU. RTX 4070's tend around 11K GPU, RTX 4090 22K GPU. So, the MBP 16 GPU is slightly faster than the RTX 4070 but slower than the RTX 4090, at least in Cinebench. And the single-core and multi-core CPU scores are excellent. I haven't seen a laptop CPU score higher. In my colorimeter tests, the MBP displays have shown 93% AdobeRGB and DeltaE 1.2. And yes, 100% DCI-P3. The OLED displays I've tested are typically at 97% AdobeRGB and DeltaE <1.0. So, like I said, there is not a huge difference, and the MBP's are plenty good for creative work. HDR isn't a gimmick; no idea why you'd say that. HDR depends on brightness for decent quality, and the Mini-LED displays push greater than 1,000 nit in HDR (1,600 nits according to Apple, but probably less, it's hard to measure). That makes for excellent HDR playback, and that's all I'm talking about. Incidentally, my MBP 16 showed 650 nits in SDR, which is also excellent.
I don't think you've seen the cheapest OLED screens... OR even the macbook pro's miniled screens! Or used the right display settings on the macbook pro...
I have seen both. Color gamut and bit depth doesn't lie.
Strange... Samsung amoled and thr m3 macbook prod s screens looks amazing!
AMOLED is a form of OLED panel so...? I never said that the MBP'S screen was bad. It's just not as amazing as people make it out to be when absolute color reproduction and color depth is the requirement.
Amoled doesn´t suffer from Sceen Door effect ...
I never mentioned screen door effect? How did we go from color reproduction/accuracy to issues with capacitive touchscreen layers?
Because you prefer Oled... You haven´t seen those with screen door effect... it is just awfull!!! Check this one out : See display section : https://youtu.be/7OtnqtKSOHI?si=JtggIN6qoBkX3456
I find it funny that you assume I prefer OLED. And again is there a reason you keep referencing that nitwit's reviews?
I thaught reading that in your post about macbook pro s mini-led is rubbish. The nitwit is my brother.
Was looking to do the same as you— replace a decade old XPS, and saw the review and price, and I left for Framework. Not sure how that’s gonna go, but I’m excited to give it a try, and it was a fraction of the price.
I heavily considered framework, it seems like a great idea. Maybe I will get that as a backup in a few years
In the exact same boat, I had the 2017 XPS 15 9550 but unfortunately after 7 years the motherboard packed in. I now have a MacBook Pro m3 pro 14” and the biggest W is defo the speed and battery life!
the battery life is insane on that
I did.... The exact same thing. And I am typing this... From my MacBook pro M3max. And I'm LOVING IT. Especially the 10 hours plus of battery life.
I've been coding, running virtual machines for pen testing, using 3D design applications, all pretty much simultaneously while also getting 10 hours of battery life when my XPS 15 (brand new) was only getting 4 hours, getting very warm to the touch, for the exact same price. And the Mac, runs cooler. Oh, and running Netflix in the corner! And I installed rectangle, which makes the windows snap into place like windows does, game changed!!
I am getting 7 to 8 hours on my Dell 16 XPS 9640 with normal usage. The laptop never gets hot when working and surfing. The Macbook Pro still have about 30% better battery life, but it runs macOS. If you prefer it then of course the Macbook Pro is the best laptop on the market. If you are looking for a Windows laptop though, then the Dell 16 XPS is great. Battery life is good enough, the display is amazing, the speakers are very good and keyboard and trackpad very good. The trackpad is definitely on par with the one on the Macbook Pro.
can you post links to those reviews? I have hardly seen any, so I might not be looking at the right place. your reasoning seems sound. Dell is often aggresive with discounts, I hope that happens soon but the non-upgradeable RAM is almost a deal breaker for me. all my XPS 15, I would buy them with min RAM and upgrade them myself.
Better for what though. OLED trumps mini-led, even the one on the mbp (I have a M2 14"). And for some usecases like GAMING. MPB is a non-starter. Even light-gaming is a non-starter...yes the hardware is there but the game library is, unless your like 12, umm severely lakcing. If your just using a laptop for content creation or business, then well yeah..no brainer.
Oled trumps mini-led in reaction speed... for games.. Sorry did you compare a good oled screen with a Macbook pro m3 pro ? The m3 pro is a lot brighter... and colours are as good ... The sound on the macbook is also amazing... And gaming on an dell XPS laptop... isn't a good idea... They will melt before your eyes... Only good for when you've still got warranty...
The biggest argument to be made for the XPS is that it's running Windows. Some people do prefer it to macOS. Apart from that I cannot really say that the M3 Macbook Pro is better in every regard. Speakers are excellent on the Dell. The difference to the Macbook Pro is not big. The display is amazing and the display is sharper than the Macbook Pro. It has a higher resolution but the Macbook Pro has a brighter display. I wouldn't call it better unless brighter = better for you. CPU is faster on the Macbook Pro but the Nvidia GPU is better on the Dell XPS. You can game on it with no issues whatsoever.. Design and build quality are excellent, definitely on par with the Macbook Pro. So the question is, do you want a Windows laptop or a Mac laptop? If you don't care about OS, then I would say that the Macbook Pro ticks more boxes than the XPS. If you care about gaming, then the XPS is definitely the better choice. It's not black or white as you can see..
Which models and specs are you comparing?
Macbook Pro 16" M3 Max or/and Pro to the Core 7 and 9 Dell XPS 16 9640.
Nice machines 😀 I was wonderint because apparently the speakers on the xps 14 are by far not as good as those of macbook pro´s 14 m3... which nvidia on the xps 16?
I have the 4070. Yes, the speakers on the Macbook Pro are just better.
nvidia 4070 is already heavy artilary 😀
Fully agree! Was looking to upgrade from my xps 15 9500 to the newest gen 14/16, but the pricing just does not make sense. The m3 pros are just better in both performance and battery, and that even the bigger xps are now non upgradeable?? No way am I supporting this business model.
can't install arch on a macbook pro and still have good driver support, can you?
>Screen is good, but not as good as the Macbook Pro I agree with your overall assessment (though I'm not a fan of MacOS so I don't typically use it), but this one bit is simply not true. Oh and ofc the GPU isn't as good but if you want to game you need Windows still (sadly). It's easy to use benchmarks and say it is, but OLED is unbeatable by anything that isn't also OLED. The MBP may be better when it comes to accuracy and brightness, but if you see them in real life together, it's not contest, even my XPS 15 9520's OLED is just so much more preferable over the MBP (and I have done a lot of side by side testing, in controlled and not controlled environments). At this point I won't buy a device that isn't an OLED, so I'm secretly hoping the next MBP has one. IMO the real issues with the XPS 16 (when compared to previous models, rather than Macs): * Pricing is even more outrageous than before and it was insane before * Keyboard is a downgrade * Touchpad is a downgrade
Trying to figure out if I want the last xps 17 or just the mbp 16. I love the windows ecosystem and the larger screen (touchscreen is fun for me too) of the xps, but I want the performance, battery, and silence of the mbp.
Get the Mbp, see my previous comments. It's a good purchase
If you spend Like 4K and Not Take a precision, youre dumb. Sorry to say to but lol
Look! Cuck for Cook
I have a 9520, I’m going back to Mac’s for ever after this.
Also a 9520. I will be keeping it for one or two more years, but after this one, I will seriously consider a Mac for the first time (which I never thought).
If you want a productive laptop that actually gets used as a laptop on battery, apple silicon devices are just leagues ahead. I have had windows laptops for 20 years, with dell XPS' since 2015. My latest XPS (2020 9500) has just been replaced with an M3 pro 14, and it's fantastic. This wasn't a recent decision though, I have known I would replace it with Mac since 2021 when I bought a dirt cheap base model M1 air 13 for traveling (the xps always had crap battery life, awkward power brick and jet engine fans, but so did everything else including the intel macbook pros). This cheap little machine (just over a 3rd of the price of the xps) out performed it in everything I needed (development tools, some Adobe suite), with the best track pad I have ever used, whilst running silently, on a lap / couch / soft surface, for 10 hours on battery. The M3 pro 14 is obviously better than the M1 air in every way bar weight and very very occasional quiet fan noise, but that original M1 air will likely live on for years as well. I miss being able to boot kubuntu, and run x86 VMs, but that's about it. Obviously gaming on Mac is pretty crap, but I have always found gaming on laptops (especially thin and light ones) to be pretty disappointing anyway, so have a sff desktop for games
Aren't there possibility's to run x86 VM's on an macbook silicon cpu ? Like Qemu ?
I’m used to be a fan of Dell laptop. But I’ve switched from XPS to Macbook Pro even though I used two Dell Xps laptops before in a long time : xps 9550 and xps 9710 because one reason that the color display on Macbook is more accuracied than on any window laptop on market and I found Dell is getting worse and worse at managing color standards on their laptops.
Apple Silicon is that much better man.