Have to point this out, you're not the only one, everyone is doing this, and it's annoying.
The M1's are essentially 6 core machines, 4 Performance an 4 "efficiency" cores. They replace the bottom of the line i5 and i7 four core machines in the line up. With that in mind they perform really well, as good as the 6 core i7 15" Apple put out. Comparing the price of the i9 8 core to the i7 six core is just bad logic. Comparable i9 8 core laptops with great specs like the Zenbook Duo come in at the same price.
Come back at this when the next generation comes out, likely 8 performance cores and 4 efficiency. No one of any logic has claimed in any way that the M1's are bad chips or that they're the best that can be done, it's flatly obvious it's going to be the slowest least powerful chip in a Mac. With that in mind they're dammed impressive. Fanboys have made them seem like they could take on a 32 core AMD, but everyone else is being logical about it.
But for fun put your computer through Cinebench and compare, your 17" desktop CPU is probably at the same level as the M1, but slower in single core tests.
Yeah, you don't understand why people do that, that's all. I saw Kraftwerk with 4 PC's so obviously Macs are better...Imagine how much more you could have saved if you'd spent less than 1000 Euros on a gaming PC laptop like mine! I've seen several bands who needed two MB Pros to do what we've always done with one PC laptop. KMFDM and VNV Nation being two that come to mind.
Mike Mcnight uses two Mac minis for Rodger Waters, one is playing exactly the same things in sync. Hundreds of tracks, submixes, they control the lighting etc.
We need the beating a dead horse emoji on this forum like nothing else.