You can probably install Asahi Linux on that M1 pro and do comparative benchmarks. Does it still feel different? (serious question)
Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
181–190 of 640 posts
Re: Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is sold cheap as they make money on volume and an optimized supply chain. What about all the money that they make from abusive practices like refusing to integrate with competitors' products thus forcing you to buy their ecosystem, phoning home to run any app, high app store fees even on Mac OS, and their massive anti repair shenanigans?
Macs today are not designed to be easily repairably but instead to be lighter and otherwise better integrated - I believe that is consequence of consumer preferences and not shady business practices. As for the services - it is a bit off topic as I believe Apple makes a profit on their macs alone ignoring their services business. But in general I have less of a problem with a subscription / fee-driven services busine…
I am pretty sure it is a consequence of consumer preference. I can see it from my own behaviour - I am a power user of all things computing and it has been decades since I upgraded a harddisk.
Re: Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
>How many iterations to match Apple? Until AMD can built a tailor made OS for their chips and build their own laptops.
Here's an M4 Max running macOS running Parallels running Windows compared to AMD's very best laptop chip: https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/13494385?baseli... M4 Max is still faster. Note that the M4 Max is only given 14 out of 16 cores, likely reserving 2 of them for macOS. How do you explain this when Windows has zero Apple Silicon optimizations?
Maybe Geek bench is not a good benchmark?
Re: Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
The macbook air doesn't even have a fan. I don't think you could built a fan-less x86 laptop.
Sure you can. There are a bunch listed in this article: https://www.ultrabookreview.com/6520-fanless-ultrabooks/ Fanless x86 desktops are a thing too, in the form of thin clients and small PCs intended for business use. I have a few HP T630s I use as servers (I have used them as desktop PCs too, but my tab-hoarding habit makes them throttle a bit too much for my use - they'd be fine for a lot of people).
Do you have a version of that web page for people who want to run Linux? That'd be particularly helpful.
Re: Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
#185Battery efficiency comes from a million little optimizations in the technology stack, most of which comes down to using the CPU as little as possible. As such the instruction set architecture and process node aren't usually that important when it comes to your battery life. If you fully load the CPU and calculate how much energy a AI340 needs to perform a fixed workload and compare that to a M1 you'll probably find s…
A huge reason for the low power usage is the iPhone.
Apple spent years incrementally improving efficiency and performance of their chips for phones. Intel and AMD were more desktop based so power efficiency wasnt the goal. When Apple's chips got so good they could transition into laptops, x86 wasn't in the same ballpark.
Also the iPhone is the most lucrative product of all time (I think) and Apple poured a tonne of that money into R&D and taking the top engineers from Intel, AMD, and ARM, building one of the best silicon teams.
Re: Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
#186Battery efficiency comes from a million little optimizations in the technology stack, most of which comes down to using the CPU as little as possible. As such the instruction set architecture and process node aren't usually that important when it comes to your battery life. If you fully load the CPU and calculate how much energy a AI340 needs to perform a fixed workload and compare that to a M1 you'll probably find s…
Hell, Apple CPU's are even optimized for Apple software GC calls like Retain/Release objects. It seems if you want optimal performance and power efficiency, you need to own both hardware and software.
Looks like general purpose CPUs are on the losing train.
Maybe Intel should invent desktop+mobile OS and design bespoke chips for those.
Re: Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
#187That's a Chrome problem, especially on extra powerful processors like Strix Halo. Apple is very strict about power consumption in the development of Safari, but Chrome is designed to make use of all unallocated resources. This works great on a desktop computer, making it faster than Safari, but the difference isn't that significant and it results in a lot of power draw on mobile platforms. Many simple web sites will…
AFAICT the comparisons to safari are no longer true https://birchtree.me/blog/everyone-says-chrome-devastates-ma... That might be different on other platforms
I think the GP is talking about linux specifically. On a Mac I can see that Chrome disables unused tabs (mouse over says "Inactive tab, xxx MB freed up")
Re: Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's an M4 Max running macOS running Parallels running Windows compared to AMD's very best laptop chip: https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/13494385?baseli... M4 Max is still faster. Note that the M4 Max is only given 14 out of 16 cores, likely reserving 2 of them for macOS. How do you explain this when Windows has zero Apple Silicon optimizations?
Maybe Geek bench is not a good benchmark?
Maybe it is? Cinebench favors Apple even more.
GB correlates highly with SPEC. AMD also uses GB in their official marketing slides.
Re: Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
#189> using the Framework feels like using an older Intel based Mac
Your memory served you wrong. Experience eith Intel based Macs was much worse than recent AMD chips.
Re: Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?
#190Battery efficiency comes from a million little optimizations in the technology stack, most of which comes down to using the CPU as little as possible. As such the instruction set architecture and process node aren't usually that important when it comes to your battery life. If you fully load the CPU and calculate how much energy a AI340 needs to perform a fixed workload and compare that to a M1 you'll probably find s…
Turning down the settings will get you worse experiece, especially if you turn down that they are "mostly idle". Not comparable.