It's very unlikely given the difference in mobile performance, but it might mean that Samsung is going to seriously invest in ARM performance going forward.
The latest Samsung mobile processor (Exynos 2100) hits 956 single-core and 3,151 multi-core for Geekbench. That's basically the same as the Qualcomm Snapdragon processors or maybe a bit slower. Apple's A14 hits 1,585 single-core and 4,214 multi-core (66% and 34% faster respectively).
I would note that the Exynos still has good numbers. A 2020 MacBook Pro with i5-1038NG7 pulling 28W (not the cheaper 15W MacBook Pros) only hits 1,143 single-core and 4,227 multi-core. While the Exynos doesn't quite match an $1,800 laptop pulling 28W on single-core performance, the Intel is only 20% faster. Plus, on multi-core performance it is matching. If Samsung created a 10W or 15W part, it seems likely that they could beat that Intel processor.
And one can nitpick about Intel having released an 11th gen processor or looking at AMD performance or any number of things. However, it seems reasonable to believe that Samsung is definitely within striking distance of Intel's laptop performance without too much difficulty and certainly within what people want in terms of laptop performance.
If there were no worries about emulation of x86 instructions (since a lot of Windows software may never be ported to ARM), I think Samsung could easily satisfy people's performance needs.
Ultimately, Apple isn't really a competitor if they're not going to sell their M-series chips to Windows laptop makers. Maybe people will start buying Macs based on their performance, but generally people have bought Macs because they want the Apple hardware/software, not because they could get better performance (and even stuck with Apple when they would have to suffer through miserable performance circa 2004).
Samsung doesn't need to match Apple. They need to match Intel and it looks like they're there. If they can offer something at a lower cost with better thermal properties, that's a huge win. I think the bigger issue is going to be that so much Windows software won't get ported over. On the Mac side, everyone knows that they have to port everything over. On the Windows side, I'm guessing there are a lot of developers that doubt everyone's commitment to Windows-ARM. Plus, part of the Windows ecosystem is being able to run all sorts of stuff - something Mac users don't expect.
M1 and Rosetta shows that it is possible to emulate x86 and still run that faster than Intel for some workloads. Nothing prevents Samsung and Microsoft from doing that with Windows on Arm. And they do not need to match Apple efficiency, stuff like CPU 50% slowdown should be OK for most business and education oriented software as long as for native applications the performance will match roughly the latest Intel CPU.
The latest Samsung mobile processor (Exynos 2100) hits 956 single-core and 3,151 multi-core for Geekbench. That's basically the same as the Qualcomm Snapdragon processors or maybe a bit slower. Apple's A14 hits 1,585 single-core and 4,214 multi-core (66% and 34% faster respectively).
I would note that the Exynos still has good numbers. A 2020 MacBook Pro with i5-1038NG7 pulling 28W (not the cheaper 15W MacBook Pros) only hits 1,143 single-core and 4,227 multi-core. While the Exynos doesn't quite match an $1,800 laptop pulling 28W on single-core performance, the Intel is only 20% faster. Plus, on multi-core performance it is matching. If Samsung created a 10W or 15W part, it seems likely that they could beat that Intel processor.
And one can nitpick about Intel having released an 11th gen processor or looking at AMD performance or any number of things. However, it seems reasonable to believe that Samsung is definitely within striking distance of Intel's laptop performance without too much difficulty and certainly within what people want in terms of laptop performance.
If there were no worries about emulation of x86 instructions (since a lot of Windows software may never be ported to ARM), I think Samsung could easily satisfy people's performance needs.
Ultimately, Apple isn't really a competitor if they're not going to sell their M-series chips to Windows laptop makers. Maybe people will start buying Macs based on their performance, but generally people have bought Macs because they want the Apple hardware/software, not because they could get better performance (and even stuck with Apple when they would have to suffer through miserable performance circa 2004).
Samsung doesn't need to match Apple. They need to match Intel and it looks like they're there. If they can offer something at a lower cost with better thermal properties, that's a huge win. I think the bigger issue is going to be that so much Windows software won't get ported over. On the Mac side, everyone knows that they have to port everything over. On the Windows side, I'm guessing there are a lot of developers that doubt everyone's commitment to Windows-ARM. Plus, part of the Windows ecosystem is being able to run all sorts of stuff - something Mac users don't expect.