I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things. For years I worked* on an Ubuntu desktop machine I built myself. Early this year I switched to a brand new M1 mini and this this is slower and less reliable than the thing I built myself that runs Ubuntu. My Ubuntu machine had a few little issues every no and then. My Mini has weird bugs all the time. e.g. Green Screen Crashes when I have a thumbdrive plugged in. Won't wake from sleep. Loses bluetooth randomly. Not at all what I'd expect from something built by the company with unlimited funds. I would expect those issues from the Ubuntu box, but the problems were small on that thing.
*Work... Docker, Ansible, Rails apps, nothing that requires amazing super power. Everything just runs slower.
> I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things.
Two reasons:
1. M1 is a super fast laptop chip. It provides mid-range desktop performance in a laptop form factor with mostly fanless operation. No matter how you look at it, that's impressive.
2. Apple really dragged their feet on updating the old Intel Macs before the transition. People in the Mac world (excluding hackintosh) were stuck on relatively outdated x86-64 CPUs. Compared to those older CPUs, the M1 Max is a huge leap forward. Compared to modern AMD mobile parts, it's still faster but not by leaps and bounds.
But I agree that the M1 hype may be getting a little out of hand. It's fast and super power efficient, but it's mostly on par with mid-range 8-core AMD desktop CPUs from 2020. Even AMD's top mobile CPU isn't that far behind the M1 Max in Geekbench scores.
I'm very excited to get my M1 Max in a few weeks. But if these early Geekbench results are accurate, it's going to be about half as fast as my AMD desktop in code compilation (see Clang results in the detailed score breakdown). That's still mightily impressive from a low-power laptop! But I think some of the rhetoric about the M1 Max blowing away desktop CPUs is getting a little ahead of the reality.
That's Docker for Mac versus native Docker. Docker only runs on Linux, so Docker for Mac spins up a linux VM to run your containers. When you mount your Ruby or Python projects into your containers, Docker for Mac marshals tons of filesystem events over the host/guest boundary which absolutely devastates your CPU.
Docker for Mac is really just bad for your use case.
No idea what's going on with the thumb drive, bluetooth, etc.
Beyond that, it's a little silly to compare a desktop (presumably many times larger, ~500+W power supply, cooling system, etc) with a Mac mini (tiny, laptop chip, no fans, etc).
Disclaimer, I don't have an M1 Mac, but I do have a buggy ubuntu desktop and used Macs my whole technical life.
It seems that you're heavily in the minority with this. Even the weird bugs you mention are very unexpected. I've used a Mac for 15 years and never heard of an issue related to thumb drives. You may just have a lemon. See if you can just replace it (warranty, etc, not just spending more money).
Easy, it is likely docker that is making your Mac mini slower than your old linux box?
Docker on macOS is painfully slow, because it is implemented on macOS through what amounts to a sledgehammer to the problem. Docker depends on linux kernel features so on macOS it just starts a linux virtual machine and does other high overhead compatibility tricks to get it to work. Volumes are the biggest culprit.
If you are running docker through rosetta... (don't know the state of docker on apple silicon) then that is a double whammy of compatibility layers.
Regarding bugs, yeah probably teething issues because the M1 was/is such a large departure from the norm. They should really get those things fixed pronto.
Many folks are comparing it to previous Macs with macOS, not PCs nor other distros.
If you have an Intel Mac next to it, there's a clear noticeable difference assuming macOS is on it.
If you put W10 on the Intel Mac, it is much faster than macOS on it (from my own experience). If we could run W10 or Linux on M1, it will be much faster than Intel Mac.
Another example, Windows 10/11 on ARM in Parallels on my MBA m1 is much faster than Surface Pro X, a MS-tuned/customized device.
I have a three-year old hand-built 16-core ThreadRipper 1950X machine here with 64GB 4-channel RAM. I have a 14" MBP M1 Max on order. I just checked the Geekbench scores between these two machines:
I share the same feeling, and I'm glad to learn I'm not alone: earlier this year I worked for a (really) sort time with a company who gave me a Macbook M1, which I was pretty excited about.
Over the course of the two weeks I worked there, I faced:
- frequent glitches when unplugging the HDMI adaptor (an Apple one, which costed an arm and a leg).
- non-compatible software (Docker, Sublimetext)
- and even a Kernel Panic while resuming from hibernation
It was like working with Linux in the 2000's, but at least with Linux I knew it was gonna be a bit rough on the edges. Given the hype found online, I wasn't at all prepared for such an experience.
I have had the opposite experience. Whenever a update to a kernel comes out for Ubuntu my machine apparently forgets which kernel to choose and boots up incorrectly. My M1 MacBook Air drives a Pro Display XDR without any hiccups. Its completely silent when I work with it. But, performance wise the M1 Pro and Max don't seem like they would be worth it for me to upgrade from the M1 at all. I just want a completely silent laptop and it makes a huge difference to me.
But, my workflows and workloads are slowly changing from local compilation of code to one where I will probably just SSH and or possibly figure out how to configure RDP into my Threadripper when I do actual builds and have my Macbook Air M1 with 16GB of Ram and the synergy with other Apple devices is a huge plus.
docker is a second-class citizen on anything but linux.
i'm especially amazed you bothered with the m1 mac mini if you wanted to use docker, considering how little memory it has. the memory overhead of having a VM running with only 8GB available is significant.
yes, i know the docker on mac has "native" support for the m1 cpu, that doesn't mean its not running a VM.
Has there been any research to OS response times between Macos, Windows and Linux?
Ive wanted to switch to Mac many times, most recently to M1 Mac Mini, but cant get over the frustrating slowness. Every action, like opening Finder, feels like it takes so long compared to Windows even with reduce animation on. I always end up returning the mac.
I went from a 2016 top-of-the-line MacBook Pro to an M1 Mac mini, and I can't believe how much faster things are–including Docker with Rails, PostgreSQL, etc. Out of curiosity, are you running native (arm64) containers? Aside from an issue now and then with my secondary HDMI display, my machine has continued to blow me away. My development environment is almost on par with our production environment, which is a nice change.
The Mac Mini isn't super impressive, because you're comparing it to desktops where TDP is far less of a concern.
The M1 is getting a lot of attention because it's Apple's first laptop chip, and it is the fastest chip in that category by a fairly significant margin. Chips from Intel and AMD only compete with it on performance when drawing considerably more power.
MacOS just seems to have a lot of stability problems related to peripherals. I don’t think it’s specific to M1. Even on my late-era Intel MBP, Bluetooth and USB often triggers a kernel panic.
My experience is the opposite. I love Linux, but my MacOS work laptop is just so much better.
For as long as I've used Linux it freezes randomly. This happens on all hardware configurations I've ever owned. If I don't regularly save my work, I will end up losing it.
These days I also can't leave my desktop PC suspended for too long. At some point the fans start spinning at max. No reason why.
As for my 13 inch M1 laptop, I don't even know if it has fans. I've never heard them even if I'm in a zoom meeting, sharing my screen, while compiling half the world.
Also in Linux I can't really use Zoom screen sharing. Seems to leek memory and after a while it crashes. Of course that's not Linux fault.
On my Linux machine it takes significant effort to use my AirPod's microphone.
And that's not even talking about battery life on Linux laptops.
It's always interesting how we all have such completely different experiences with our hardware and software.
People also overlook the fact that Geekbench has generally favored Apple A-series CPUs. When the original M1 came out they were faster than 4800u Ryzens on Geekbench, while being slower on Cinebench. 4800u consumes more power, but is also a node behind.
Other benchmarks too have their biases. You can find plenty of discussion on this topic.
I've never owned a mac and I've never used an M1 so take this with a heavy grain of salt. Everyone I've seen talk about how fast the M1 is were coming from 4-5+ year old macs not comparing them to intel/amd chips that came out last year in a similar price range.
Well switching hardware and OS makes it hard to tell what's responsible for the difference. I also suspect Docker and what's running in the containers might well be x86 code instead of native.
I can tell you that I have a high end mbp 16" intel-i9 with 32GB ram and it feels much slower than a new mac M1 mini. My intel-i9 runs the fan card during backups (crashplan), video conferencing, and sometimes just because even just outlook. The M1 mini on the other hand has been silent, fast, and generally a pleasure to use.
Doubling the number of fast cores, doubling (or quadrupling) the GPU and memory bandwidth should make the new MBP 14 and 16" even better.
The Docker situation on macOS for Apple Silicon is just really, really terrible. Docker on macOS was never particularly good (compared to Linux anyway), but on Apple Silicon it is just beyond bad. A combination of how Docker spins up a VM, the state of Linux on ARM (especially on the M1) and the complexities of when you need to compile stuff that doesn’t have native ARM versions is just a mess. If Apple cared about this segment, I'd think they would contribute some resources to either improving Docker or doing native macOS containers built with Unix, but I just don’t think they do.
This is one reason I'm keeping my 2020 iMac (10-core i9, 128GB of RAM, AMD Radeon Pro 5700XT) around for a long time, even though I just ordered a 64GB 32-core GPU 14” MacBook Pro . (I have an AMD Ryzen 5900X with an Nvidia 3080 as my gaming PC too.)
If your primary interface is containers, I don’t necessarily think the M1 series machines are the best. But for lots of other tasks, it’s really just astounding.
Actually there is nothing to figure out. If limitations of macos and arm cpu is not issue for you and you want a lightweight laptop then you buy a m1 macbook.
m1 macbook air first Apple product i bought and i also had latest gen ryzen laptop at that time (which was superior to intel). Simply there is nothing to compare. It is not an alternative to m1 cpu. At least 5 years behind it. Actually it looks like it will never possible for that architecture to catch up with arm for low tdp siutations.
If you ever used last gen windows laptop you will know there are always bugs. And installing ubuntu on a latest gen machine. LOL. That won't make you happy even if it is possible.
I also had an issue with bluetooth mouse being laggy. It seems like patched now. Bugs were really an issue with m1 cpu but i assume there shouldn't be much issues now.
>*Work... Docker, Ansible, Rails apps, nothing that requires amazing super power. Everything just runs slower.
Docker does require amazing super power on anything except Linux since only on Linux it doesn't have to rely on emulation. The overhead is 0-1% on Linux, and something way more on alternative platforms.
Besides Docker, what you're seeing is probably the fact that MacOS is way slower than Linux for almost all the things developers do in their daily lives. If the M1 port ever gets properly done, you're gonna see Linux fly on that.
M1 is fast for being a laptop CPU. This means that maybe it is not the fastest CPU in absolute terms, but if you consider performance per Watt, it is really a beast.
Although my main workstation is an Intel Ubuntu-based PC, I have also a M1 Macbook Air that I use when I travel, or when I am laying on the couch in the evening after work. That piece of hardware never gets hot, and the battery seems to last forever. Meanwhile it does whatever I throw at it; if else the limiting factor is the amount of RAM installed on the laptop.
> My Mini has weird bugs all the time. e.g. Green Screen Crashes when I have a thumbdrive plugged in. Won't wake from sleep. Loses bluetooth randomly.
Either the Mini is much buggier than the MacBook Air by design, or you need to get it replaced under warranty. My MBA is the first laptop I've used for months with absolutely no hardware interaction issue.
As someone who has an Intel NUC w. Ubuntu, a Thinkpad with Windows 10, and a Macbook Pro 2015, I have a totally different experience.
I spend like 5% of my total effort on OSX to make things working, the remaining 95% is spent to make things working on Windows and Ubuntu...
I'm surprised the MacBook holds its own against the Hetzner AX101's AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 16-core CPU! The multi-core SQLite performance surprises me, I would think the M1 Max's NVMe is faster than my server's SAMSUNG MZQL23T8HCLS-00A07.
Top intel mobile processor appears to be https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/10431820
M1 Max gives 9% boost for single-core and 34% for multicore, with similar or larger (?) TDP -- Intel is 35-45 W, M1 Max is 60W but I assume some of it (a lot?) goes to GPU. Impressive, but probably wouldn't be called revolution if came from Intel.
I have seen far too many people making comments on MacPro "Pro" Chip.
A hypothetical 32 Core CPU and 64 Core GPU is about the max Apple could make in terms of die size reticle limit without going chiplet and TDP limit without some exotic cooling solution. Which means you cant have some imaginary 64 Core CPU and 128 Core GPU.
We can now finally have a Mac Cube, where the vast majority of the Cube will simply be a heat sink and it will still be faster than current Intel Mac Pro. I think this chip makes most sense with the A16 design on 4nm next year [1].
Interesting question would be memory, current Mac Pro support 1.5TB. A 16 Channel DDR5 would be required to feed the GPU, but that also means minimum memory on Mac Pro would be 128GB at 8GB per DIMM. One could use HBM on package, but that doesn't provide ECC Memory protection.
[1] TSMC 3nm has been postponed in case anyone not paying attention, so the whole roadmap has been shifted by a year. If this still doesn't keep those repeating Moore's law has not died yet I dont know what will.
What am I missing here? The marketing presentations spoke about 200GB/sec and 400GB/sec parts. Existing CPU's generally have 10s of GB/sec. But I see these parts beating out existing parts by small margins - 100% at best.
Where is all that bandwidth going? Are none of these synthetic benchmarks stressing memory IO that much? Surely compression should benefit from 400GB/sec bandwidth?
This also raises the question how are those multiple memory channels laid out? Sequentually? Stripped? Bitwise, byte wise or word stripped?
IMHO, ditching Intel is a smart move for apple but a bad one for hackers. I’m sticking with older intel mbps until decent emulation scores are achieved with qemu, and probably further down the line. Hypervisors (say VBox proxmox combo) are so useful when you have to experiment/test with other platforms. Happy to see HDMI and escape key back tho, and it looks like we’ll even get a Target Display Mode equivalent! We’ll be back to my 2015 setup.:-)
My ideal M1 mbp would be this new one with 64gb ram but with a second cheap mid tier i5 with 16gb dedicated, and a rtx2070(cmon NVdia has Cuda —we need that) with 8gb, connected via internal tb3. I don’t care that it would be 700g heavier and a bit bigger or have less battery life when used to the max (idled chips should not eat a lot). It terms of bare costs thats maybe 1000$ more silicon, but it’s a world more of possibilities. What’s wrong with dedicated gpu offering— not for everyone but hackers love it and help the aura.
And —-please—- bring back a modular slot (m2?) for (additional?) storage! (Also good for hackers but not for Apple)
One big thing to consider is that this is just the first m1 Max Geekbench score, compared against the world's greatest 11900Ks. Most 11900K's are nowhere near the levels of the top preforming one.
Once Apple starts shipping M1 Max in volume, and as TSMC yields get better, you will see "golden chips" slowly start to score even higher than this one.
Do we know of the M1 Max in the MacBook can sustain this level of performance without thermal throttling?
Mobile phones often have this issue where the benchmark looks gear until you run it for 15 minutes and the thermal throttling kicks in and kills the performance.
Thermal throttling is something I'd like to understand when comparing these against a desktop CPU.
For example, I just bought a 5900X and the Geekbench scores are very similar. My assumption is that the 5900X will be able to sustain full boost speeds indefinitely because of the additional cooling. I don't know if the MacBook can do the same.
If it can sustain mac performance without overheating inside the laptop form factor that'll definitely be a big win for Apple.
I’m not sure how Geekbench browser tests hold up to real world usage, but note that Apples ecosystem is WAY different compared to x86.
For starters, the chip isn’t general purpose compute, it’s more of an ASIC that is optimized to run the OS abstractions available through the official APIs (Think on screen animation such as rendering an image or detecting things in it. On x86, you implement the code and in some cases, proprietary libraries such as Intels MKL make it seemingly faster to run. On Apple Silicon, for such common use cases there are DEDICATED chip areas. Thus, an ASIC)
[+] [-] blakesterz|4 years ago|reply
*Work... Docker, Ansible, Rails apps, nothing that requires amazing super power. Everything just runs slower.
[+] [-] PragmaticPulp|4 years ago|reply
Two reasons:
1. M1 is a super fast laptop chip. It provides mid-range desktop performance in a laptop form factor with mostly fanless operation. No matter how you look at it, that's impressive.
2. Apple really dragged their feet on updating the old Intel Macs before the transition. People in the Mac world (excluding hackintosh) were stuck on relatively outdated x86-64 CPUs. Compared to those older CPUs, the M1 Max is a huge leap forward. Compared to modern AMD mobile parts, it's still faster but not by leaps and bounds.
But I agree that the M1 hype may be getting a little out of hand. It's fast and super power efficient, but it's mostly on par with mid-range 8-core AMD desktop CPUs from 2020. Even AMD's top mobile CPU isn't that far behind the M1 Max in Geekbench scores.
I'm very excited to get my M1 Max in a few weeks. But if these early Geekbench results are accurate, it's going to be about half as fast as my AMD desktop in code compilation (see Clang results in the detailed score breakdown). That's still mightily impressive from a low-power laptop! But I think some of the rhetoric about the M1 Max blowing away desktop CPUs is getting a little ahead of the reality.
[+] [-] throwaway894345|4 years ago|reply
Docker for Mac is really just bad for your use case.
No idea what's going on with the thumb drive, bluetooth, etc.
Beyond that, it's a little silly to compare a desktop (presumably many times larger, ~500+W power supply, cooling system, etc) with a Mac mini (tiny, laptop chip, no fans, etc).
[+] [-] vineyardmike|4 years ago|reply
It seems that you're heavily in the minority with this. Even the weird bugs you mention are very unexpected. I've used a Mac for 15 years and never heard of an issue related to thumb drives. You may just have a lemon. See if you can just replace it (warranty, etc, not just spending more money).
[+] [-] lambdapsyc|4 years ago|reply
Docker on macOS is painfully slow, because it is implemented on macOS through what amounts to a sledgehammer to the problem. Docker depends on linux kernel features so on macOS it just starts a linux virtual machine and does other high overhead compatibility tricks to get it to work. Volumes are the biggest culprit.
If you are running docker through rosetta... (don't know the state of docker on apple silicon) then that is a double whammy of compatibility layers.
Regarding bugs, yeah probably teething issues because the M1 was/is such a large departure from the norm. They should really get those things fixed pronto.
[+] [-] mikhailt|4 years ago|reply
If you have an Intel Mac next to it, there's a clear noticeable difference assuming macOS is on it.
If you put W10 on the Intel Mac, it is much faster than macOS on it (from my own experience). If we could run W10 or Linux on M1, it will be much faster than Intel Mac.
Another example, Windows 10/11 on ARM in Parallels on my MBA m1 is much faster than Surface Pro X, a MS-tuned/customized device.
[+] [-] localhost|4 years ago|reply
Also, just checked memory bandwidth. I have 80GB/s memory bandwidth [1] on my 1950X. The MBP has 400GB/s memory bandwidth. 5x(!)
[1] https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/ryzen_threadripper/1950x
*EDIT adding memory bandwidth.
[+] [-] littlestymaar|4 years ago|reply
Over the course of the two weeks I worked there, I faced:
- frequent glitches when unplugging the HDMI adaptor (an Apple one, which costed an arm and a leg).
- non-compatible software (Docker, Sublimetext)
- and even a Kernel Panic while resuming from hibernation
It was like working with Linux in the 2000's, but at least with Linux I knew it was gonna be a bit rough on the edges. Given the hype found online, I wasn't at all prepared for such an experience.
[+] [-] zitterbewegung|4 years ago|reply
But, my workflows and workloads are slowly changing from local compilation of code to one where I will probably just SSH and or possibly figure out how to configure RDP into my Threadripper when I do actual builds and have my Macbook Air M1 with 16GB of Ram and the synergy with other Apple devices is a huge plus.
Have you talked with Apple to get a replacement?
[+] [-] y4mi|4 years ago|reply
yes, i know the docker on mac has "native" support for the m1 cpu, that doesn't mean its not running a VM.
[+] [-] dubcanada|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lewantmontreal|4 years ago|reply
Ive wanted to switch to Mac many times, most recently to M1 Mac Mini, but cant get over the frustrating slowness. Every action, like opening Finder, feels like it takes so long compared to Windows even with reduce animation on. I always end up returning the mac.
[+] [-] 2OEH8eoCRo0|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pgib|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] babypuncher|4 years ago|reply
The M1 is getting a lot of attention because it's Apple's first laptop chip, and it is the fastest chip in that category by a fairly significant margin. Chips from Intel and AMD only compete with it on performance when drawing considerably more power.
[+] [-] dcolkitt|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] YuukiRey|4 years ago|reply
For as long as I've used Linux it freezes randomly. This happens on all hardware configurations I've ever owned. If I don't regularly save my work, I will end up losing it.
These days I also can't leave my desktop PC suspended for too long. At some point the fans start spinning at max. No reason why.
As for my 13 inch M1 laptop, I don't even know if it has fans. I've never heard them even if I'm in a zoom meeting, sharing my screen, while compiling half the world.
Also in Linux I can't really use Zoom screen sharing. Seems to leek memory and after a while it crashes. Of course that's not Linux fault.
On my Linux machine it takes significant effort to use my AirPod's microphone.
And that's not even talking about battery life on Linux laptops.
It's always interesting how we all have such completely different experiences with our hardware and software.
[+] [-] jeswin|4 years ago|reply
Other benchmarks too have their biases. You can find plenty of discussion on this topic.
[+] [-] jccalhoun|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sliken|4 years ago|reply
I can tell you that I have a high end mbp 16" intel-i9 with 32GB ram and it feels much slower than a new mac M1 mini. My intel-i9 runs the fan card during backups (crashplan), video conferencing, and sometimes just because even just outlook. The M1 mini on the other hand has been silent, fast, and generally a pleasure to use.
Doubling the number of fast cores, doubling (or quadrupling) the GPU and memory bandwidth should make the new MBP 14 and 16" even better.
[+] [-] ChrisMarshallNY|4 years ago|reply
Even if it’s out there, I suspect it’s not optimized.
I think standard distros are running on Rosetta2, which is an (excellent, from all reports) X86 emulator.
[+] [-] merrvk|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] filmgirlcw|4 years ago|reply
This is one reason I'm keeping my 2020 iMac (10-core i9, 128GB of RAM, AMD Radeon Pro 5700XT) around for a long time, even though I just ordered a 64GB 32-core GPU 14” MacBook Pro . (I have an AMD Ryzen 5900X with an Nvidia 3080 as my gaming PC too.)
If your primary interface is containers, I don’t necessarily think the M1 series machines are the best. But for lots of other tasks, it’s really just astounding.
[+] [-] alienalp|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vegai_|4 years ago|reply
Docker does require amazing super power on anything except Linux since only on Linux it doesn't have to rely on emulation. The overhead is 0-1% on Linux, and something way more on alternative platforms.
Besides Docker, what you're seeing is probably the fact that MacOS is way slower than Linux for almost all the things developers do in their daily lives. If the M1 port ever gets properly done, you're gonna see Linux fly on that.
[+] [-] mrighele|4 years ago|reply
Although my main workstation is an Intel Ubuntu-based PC, I have also a M1 Macbook Air that I use when I travel, or when I am laying on the couch in the evening after work. That piece of hardware never gets hot, and the battery seems to last forever. Meanwhile it does whatever I throw at it; if else the limiting factor is the amount of RAM installed on the laptop.
[+] [-] Phylter|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] factorialboy|4 years ago|reply
My two year old Linux desktop is a beast compared to my M1 Macmini. But I love the Macmini compared to my 2019 MBP.
[+] [-] majormajor|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] joconde|4 years ago|reply
Either the Mini is much buggier than the MacBook Air by design, or you need to get it replaced under warranty. My MBA is the first laptop I've used for months with absolutely no hardware interaction issue.
[+] [-] ody4242|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] munro|4 years ago|reply
* M1 Max OpenCL https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/3551790 [60,167 OpenCL Score]
Comparing to my current MacBook Pro (16-inch Late 2019) & my Hetzner AX101 server:
* MacBook Pro (16-inch Late 2019) vs M1 Max - CPU https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/10496766?baseli... [single 163.6%, multi 188.8%]
* MacBook Pro (16-inch Late 2019) vs M1 Max - OpenCL https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/compare/3551790?bas... [180.8%]
* Hetzner AX101 vs M1 Max - CPU https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/10496766?baseli... [single 105.0%, multi 86.4%]
* NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 vs M1 Max - OpenCL https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/compare/3551790?bas... [80.7%]
* NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 vs M1 Max - OpenCL https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/compare/3551790?bas... [29.0%, boo]
I'm surprised the MacBook holds its own against the Hetzner AX101's AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 16-core CPU! The multi-core SQLite performance surprises me, I would think the M1 Max's NVMe is faster than my server's SAMSUNG MZQL23T8HCLS-00A07.
[+] [-] icosahedron|4 years ago|reply
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/10496766?baseli...
[+] [-] EvgeniyZh|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ksec|4 years ago|reply
A hypothetical 32 Core CPU and 64 Core GPU is about the max Apple could make in terms of die size reticle limit without going chiplet and TDP limit without some exotic cooling solution. Which means you cant have some imaginary 64 Core CPU and 128 Core GPU.
We can now finally have a Mac Cube, where the vast majority of the Cube will simply be a heat sink and it will still be faster than current Intel Mac Pro. I think this chip makes most sense with the A16 design on 4nm next year [1].
Interesting question would be memory, current Mac Pro support 1.5TB. A 16 Channel DDR5 would be required to feed the GPU, but that also means minimum memory on Mac Pro would be 128GB at 8GB per DIMM. One could use HBM on package, but that doesn't provide ECC Memory protection.
[1] TSMC 3nm has been postponed in case anyone not paying attention, so the whole roadmap has been shifted by a year. If this still doesn't keep those repeating Moore's law has not died yet I dont know what will.
[+] [-] e0m|4 years ago|reply
10,997 for Intel i9
vs
12,693 for M1 Max
[+] [-] metahost|4 years ago|reply
Summary: single core performance gain is 2x whereas multi-core performance gain is 4x.
[+] [-] spitfire|4 years ago|reply
Where is all that bandwidth going? Are none of these synthetic benchmarks stressing memory IO that much? Surely compression should benefit from 400GB/sec bandwidth?
This also raises the question how are those multiple memory channels laid out? Sequentually? Stripped? Bitwise, byte wise or word stripped?
[+] [-] petersellers|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] headgasket|4 years ago|reply
My ideal M1 mbp would be this new one with 64gb ram but with a second cheap mid tier i5 with 16gb dedicated, and a rtx2070(cmon NVdia has Cuda —we need that) with 8gb, connected via internal tb3. I don’t care that it would be 700g heavier and a bit bigger or have less battery life when used to the max (idled chips should not eat a lot). It terms of bare costs thats maybe 1000$ more silicon, but it’s a world more of possibilities. What’s wrong with dedicated gpu offering— not for everyone but hackers love it and help the aura.
And —-please—- bring back a modular slot (m2?) for (additional?) storage! (Also good for hackers but not for Apple)
[+] [-] jkeddo|4 years ago|reply
Once Apple starts shipping M1 Max in volume, and as TSMC yields get better, you will see "golden chips" slowly start to score even higher than this one.
[+] [-] biosed|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] diebeforei485|4 years ago|reply
Would upgrading to 32GB RAM make Xcode faster? Or would it be a waste of $400?
[+] [-] tambourine_man|4 years ago|reply
1783 Single-Core Score
12693 Multi-Core Score
[+] [-] parhamn|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Osiris|4 years ago|reply
Mobile phones often have this issue where the benchmark looks gear until you run it for 15 minutes and the thermal throttling kicks in and kills the performance.
Thermal throttling is something I'd like to understand when comparing these against a desktop CPU.
For example, I just bought a 5900X and the Geekbench scores are very similar. My assumption is that the 5900X will be able to sustain full boost speeds indefinitely because of the additional cooling. I don't know if the MacBook can do the same.
If it can sustain mac performance without overheating inside the laptop form factor that'll definitely be a big win for Apple.
[+] [-] bhouston|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] runeks|4 years ago|reply
This is what's holding me off buying one since I don't know whether to get 16 GB RAM (if it doesn't work) or 32 GB RAM (if it does work).
[+] [-] hammock|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DisjointedHunt|4 years ago|reply
For starters, the chip isn’t general purpose compute, it’s more of an ASIC that is optimized to run the OS abstractions available through the official APIs (Think on screen animation such as rendering an image or detecting things in it. On x86, you implement the code and in some cases, proprietary libraries such as Intels MKL make it seemingly faster to run. On Apple Silicon, for such common use cases there are DEDICATED chip areas. Thus, an ASIC)