471–480 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a professional programmer... hardware constraints aren't exactly the limiting factor when i use vim all day.
I've been around software development for over 20 years. Never met a single engineer who didn't want faster build/test cycles.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What in the world is an actual professional? I would say that generally , a "professional" user of pretty much any tool, is someone for whom the tool's quality is a constraint on their professional productivity. A professional paint user is an artist. A professional telescope user is an astronomer—or a sniper. A professional typewriter user is a stenographer. A professional shoe user is an athlete. In all these cas…
I'm a professional programmer... hardware constraints aren't exactly the limiting factor when i use vim all day.
Looking at Geekbench charts, I see that my Samsung phone has a faster processor than my $3000 gaming rig, and it sure as hell draws less power ... so why aren't datacenters just use phones instead of Xeon and Epyc servers, what am I missing?
Looking at Geekbench charts, I see that my Samsung phone has a faster processor than my $3000 gaming rig, and it sure as hell draws less power ... so why aren't datacenters just use phones instead of Xeon and Epyc servers, what am I missing?
You need to be competitive on single thread performance to have a chance at datacenter. Amdahl's law is still very relevant. Up until very very recently, the CPUs were not up to par.
This really flips the argument that Mac hardware is overpriced and underpowered on its head. Now Apple computers are a premium product from a performance perspective, as well.
Shouldn't we wait for non synthetic benchmarks to be performed by third parties running real applications? We could even compare some cross platform apps across both OS and cpu and see how the total package performs.
Looking at Geekbench charts, I see that my Samsung phone has a faster processor than my $3000 gaming rig, and it sure as hell draws less power ... so why aren't datacenters just use phones instead of Xeon and Epyc servers, what am I missing?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s very impressive. It seems like the open computing platforms where you have control of your hardware/ os are in real trouble. I use Mac at work, but Linux at home, if the hardware isn’t competitive....
- Mac has ~10% of the global market for end user machines. It doesn't now, never has, and never will own the market nor does it desire to sell cheap enough machines to do so. - Given that you can't add ram after the fact and 256GB is anemic the cheapest laptop that is a reasonable choice is $1400. - The cheapest desktop option is $6000 with an 8 core cpu or 8000 with a 16 core. - The average end user spends $700 on a…
No, it is $600 with an 8 core M1 chip, the new mac mini. Also the iMac is arguably a desktop option, even if not really upgradeable.
Looking at Geekbench charts, I see that my Samsung phone has a faster processor than my $3000 gaming rig, and it sure as hell draws less power ... so why aren't datacenters just use phones instead of Xeon and Epyc servers, what am I missing?
> The Mac mini with M1 chip that was benchmarked earned a single-core score of 1682 and a multi-core score of 7067.
> Update: There's also a benchmark for the 13-inch MacBook Pro with M1 chip and 16GB RAM that has a single-core score of 1714 and a multi-core score of 6802. Like the MacBook Air , it has a 3.2GHz base frequency.
So single core we have: Air 1687, Mini 1682, Pro 1714
And multi core we have: Air 7433, Mini 7067, Pro 6802
I’m not sure what to make of these scores, but it seems wrong that the Mini and Pro significantly underperform the Air in multi core. I find it hard to imagine this benchmark is going to be representative of actual usage given the way the products are positioned, which makes it hard to know how seriously to take the comparisons to other products too.
> When compared to existing devices, the M1 chip in the MacBook Air outperforms all iOS devices. For comparison's sake, the iPhone 12 Pro earned a single-core score of 1584 and a multi-core score of 3898, while the highest ranked iOS device on Geekbench's charts, the A14 iPad Air, earned a single-core score of 1585 and a multi-core score of 4647.
This seems a bit odd too - the A14 iPad Air outperforms all iPad Pro devices?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see these being very useful for video editing with RAM maxing out at 16gb. Maybe 1080p, but not 4k. (And the small storage, but that can be remedied with a NAS or other external storage, and then fast local scratch space only needs to be big enough for a couple of projects at a time)
They have shown impressive performance with 6k and 8k ProRes footage, even ipad pros and latest iphones are pretty incredible when it comes to editing 4K video and exporting it faster than latest macbooks. With Thunderbolt it's also pretty easy to extend high performance storage.
I was going off normal recommendations for video editing on x86 desktops/laptops. But it makes sense they'd go the extra mile on the software end to make it work on phones.