I find it hilarious that people are still seriously claiming that Apple's decision to switch to ARM was a bad idea. Especially based on some strange belief system that claims with no evidence beyond some sort of gut feeling or wishful thinking that they will be unable to scale their hardware to larger machines.
I guess that belief system holds that Apple decided to switch to ARM because they could save a few bucks, without doing any internal development and proof of concept to know how it compared to x86 performance both natively and under emulation - and THEN announced they'd be converting the entire line without knowing whether they'd be able to produce anything that covers their high end.
Apple further made it clear they'd be using their own GPU and not third party GPUs, and that was all on a wing and a prayer too without any internal development and testing. I'm sure when they said that they had NO idea if they could scale their GPU up to workstation GPU levels of performance - after all, they are severely limited by having only 12 digits of cash on hand so clearly they couldn't afford to find out ahead of time!
This reminds me of the skepticism from some when rumors of Apple switching Macs to ARM were discussed on and off for years. People who had a clue saw how quickly they were increasing performance of their ARM SoCs and could see if that continued they'd be able to match x86 performance levels. People without a clue came up with all sorts of spurious reasons why such an attempt would fail, everything from claims that ARM is somehow only suitable for "phone workloads" (whatever those are) to claims that developers would be unwilling to port and Apple would be stuck running x86 emulation forever.
I see the spurious reasons are still coming hot and fast for a few holdouts, now including the even more ridiculous claim that because AMD makes systems that beat M1 on multicore that Apple can't ever meet or exceed it. Complete with made up ideas that "Apple would have switched to AMD but they had a secret contract clause with Intel that prevented it". Plus throw in a few ready made excuses in case Apple does beat AMD by talking about how Apple is ahead on process and only has to design for Metal and not DirectX, so when it happens claims can be made that "technically Apple isn't faster, it is only because of the process and cheating by using Metal".
I would have thought living in such a contrived fantasy world could only happen in the realm of partisan politics. But maybe Apple v Linux/Microsoft, AMD v Intel or x86 v ARM is "partisan politics" for some.