The rivalry between Apple‘s latest M1 Ultra chip and Intel‘s 12th Gen Core i9 12900K is a clash of the silicon titans. With both processors packed with bleeding-edge technology and chart-topping performance, is there a clear winner between these two powerhouse chips? The answer depends on your specific needs.
The M1 Ultra‘s Arm-based architecture excels at power efficiency while providing excellent single-threaded speed. But the i9 12900K‘s brute force x86 cores dominate in parallel processing workloads thanks to Intel’s mature architecture and additional high-performance cores.
By evaluating key factors like performance, power, overclocking, platform support, and more, we can determine which processor claims the crown for different use cases. Let‘s dive in and compare the technical capabilities of the M1 Ultra vs i9 12900K to see which chip comes out on top depending on your needs.
Breaking Down The Architectural Differences
The M1 Ultra utilizes Apple‘s latest 5nm Arm-based architecture, packing up to 20 high-performance cores and four efficiency cores onto a single chunk of silicon. In comparison, Intel‘s i9 12900K is built on a 7nm process, but uses a more traditional x86 chip design split between eight high-performance P-cores and eight efficient E-cores.
Apple‘s unified SoC design allows ultra-fast data transfer speeds between the CPU, GPU, Neural Engine and more. However, moving to Arm also means giving up direct x86 compatibility without emulation.
On the other hand, Intel’s x86 architecture benefits from decades of optimization, plus advanced features like AVX-512 vector extensions. But its legacy foundations can result in lower power efficiency.
Performance Benchmarks – Who Comes Out On Top?
In single-threaded workloads, the M1 Ultra’s unified architecture gives it a real advantage. In the Geekbench 5 single-core test, the M1 Ultra achieves a score of 2151, around 25% faster than the i9 12900K’s 1701 score. This demonstrates the M1 Ultra’s superior per-core performance.
However, when we look at multi-threaded benchmarks that scale across many cores, the i9 12900K showcases its brute force. In the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, the i9 12900K achieves a score of 30823, while the M1 Ultra tops out at just 14810. For heavily parallel workloads, those extra x86 cores clearly make a difference.
The i9 12900K also pulls significantly ahead in 3D rendering and video editing tasks that leverage GPU acceleration. In the PugetSystems Premiere Pro benchmark, the i9 12900K achieves a score of 1183, versus 708 on the M1 Ultra config tested. If you need serious graphics performance, the i9 12900K‘s more powerful integrated graphics have a clear edge.
Power Efficiency – No Contest
One area where the M1 Ultra clearly wins out is power efficiency. With a 60W TDP, the M1 Ultra sips power compared to the i9 12900K’s 241W thermal design power under full load.
Laptops equipped with the M1 Ultra like the MacBook Pro can achieve astounding battery life up to 22 hours thanks to this efficiency. On the other hand, the power-hungry i9 12900K is best suited to desktops with advanced cooling solutions.
Overclocking – i9 12900K Enables Extreme Tuning
For overclocking enthusiasts, the i9 12900K is the clear choice. Its unlocked multiplier enables some serious tuning potential, with the ability to overclock all P-cores to 5.5 GHz or higher with adequate cooling.
Meanwhile, overclocking is completely disabled on the M1 Ultra, leaving tuning fanatics out of luck. If you want to push performance to the extreme, the i9 12900K is the overclocker‘s dream.
Platform Compatibility – A Limitation For M1 Ultra
One current disadvantage of the M1 Ultra is its limitation to Apple‘s walled garden. macOS is the only supported operating system. While Windows compatibility does exist through emulation in CrossOver or Parallels, emulation introduces overhead and compatibility issues with some games and applications.
Meanwhile, Intel‘s ubiquitous x86 architecture enables seamless Windows compatibility on the i9 12900K. For those needing native Windows app support, the i9 12900K’s cross-platform capabilities are a key factor.
Cache Configuration Compared
The M1 Ultra utilizes a unified 25MB L2 cache, shared between the CPU and GPU. This allows super-fast data transfer speeds between cores. But workloads confined to the CPU may see reduced cache availability.
In comparison, the i9 12900K splits cache responsibilities, with 30MB of L3 cache dedicated to the CPU cores, and 6MB of L2 cache per core pair. This cache partitioning can benefit certain applications that scale across many cores. But it lacks the unified design that enables the M1 Ultra’s ultra-low latency.
Summary – Who Wins Out?
For mobile and efficiency needs, the M1 Ultra clearly comes out on top. Its game-changing performance-per-watt makes it the best option for MacBook Pros and other portables where battery life matters. Graphic designers, photographers, and casual users will benefit the most from the M1 Ultra in Apple’s ecosystem.
But for raw multi-core performance, especially in Windows, the i9 12900K still holds the crown. For power users running intensive workloads like 3D rendering, video production, heavy multitasking, and graphics-accelerated tasks, the i9 12900K’s extra cores and tuning potential are hard to beat. Avid gamers who want maximum frame rates will also prefer the i9 12900K.
So in the end, there is no single "winner" between these two silicon heavyweights. The best processor ultimately depends on your individual needs and platform. Both the M1 Ultra and i9 12900K represent the pinnacle of performance, trading blows based on workload. But the future likely trends toward greater integration and power efficiency as seen in Apple’s M1 Ultra, which sets the bar for mobile SoC performance.