I wonder how this is possible. I suspect that the i9 was designed for high-TDP usage, and thermal throttling just kills performance. That would mean that the MBP offering an i9 was mostly marketing.
16-inch MBP 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real-world Rust compile
191–200 of 529 posts
Re: 16-inch MBP 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real-world Rust compile
#192Is anyone else thinking, what the f*ck? Are we in a new era of computing? It certainly feels that way when looking at these desktop class ARM chips, where performance doubled every year or so, just like back in the 80s and 90s.
I think that for consumer products, which these are targeting, software responsiveness, usability, and battery lifetime are by far the most important metrics.
These chips help with battery, and can hell with software responsiveness if there's is developer focus on it.
But what will probably happen is that development teams will buy the fastest computers they can, and then develop software that is mostly, somewhat adequately performing on this beefy hardware, then ship it to customers that are on weaker hardware.
This effect is especially pronounced for web software, where it's easier to make unresponsive interactions due to so many layers of software, especially with developer network connections usually being 10x-100x less latency than users.
Re: 16-inch MBP 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real-world Rust compile
#193Is anyone else thinking, what the f*ck? Are we in a new era of computing? It certainly feels that way when looking at these desktop class ARM chips, where performance doubled every year or so, just like back in the 80s and 90s.
I suspect HP/Lenovo/Microsoft are squirming in their chairs right now.
Re: 16-inch MBP 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real-world Rust compile
#194I love everything about the move to Apple Silicon with the exception of the decision to put memory on-die or in-package (not sure how it is configured). They call it 'Unified Memory'. It makes a lot of sense but I don't know if they are going to be able to pack enough memory in there. A lot of folks are fixated on CPU performance lately (which is rad) but I think that there is a tendency to ignore memory. I have 32gb…
One, this is repeating the iPhone vs Android comparisons. iPhones with 4GB RAM feel faster and get more work done than Androids running Qualcomm ARM with double that amount of RAM. The faster IO becomes the cheaper paging becomes, and macOS and iOS have a lot of work done to handle paging well. Two, this is the entry level processor, made for the Air, which is what we get for students, non-technical family members an…
On the other hand it's quite funny that the title of this article is "16-inch MBP with i9 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real world Rust compile" and the comments are still saying "yeah but this is entry level not pro".
Apparently Pros are more concerned about slotting into the right market segment than getting their work done quickly :)
Re: 16-inch MBP 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real-world Rust compile
#195Is anyone else thinking, what the f*ck? Are we in a new era of computing? It certainly feels that way when looking at these desktop class ARM chips, where performance doubled every year or so, just like back in the 80s and 90s.
Re: 16-inch MBP 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real-world Rust compile
#196Re: 16-inch MBP 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real-world Rust compile
#197I love everything about the move to Apple Silicon with the exception of the decision to put memory on-die or in-package (not sure how it is configured). They call it 'Unified Memory'. It makes a lot of sense but I don't know if they are going to be able to pack enough memory in there. A lot of folks are fixated on CPU performance lately (which is rad) but I think that there is a tendency to ignore memory. I have 32gb…
Perhaps this will encourage programmers to write true native applications again instead of wrapping web scripting languages in a browser and calling it a day.
Re: 16-inch MBP 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real-world Rust compile
#198Is anyone else thinking, what the f*ck? Are we in a new era of computing? It certainly feels that way when looking at these desktop class ARM chips, where performance doubled every year or so, just like back in the 80s and 90s.
I suspect HP/Lenovo/Microsoft are squirming in their chairs right now.
I think the bigger question is what does this spell for x86-64?
Re: 16-inch MBP 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real-world Rust compile
#199I love everything about the move to Apple Silicon with the exception of the decision to put memory on-die or in-package (not sure how it is configured). They call it 'Unified Memory'. It makes a lot of sense but I don't know if they are going to be able to pack enough memory in there. A lot of folks are fixated on CPU performance lately (which is rad) but I think that there is a tendency to ignore memory. I have 32gb…
> You can't get an M1 configuration right now larger than 16GB which is a table-stakes baseline dev requirement today. Everyone on my team has been using 15" MacBook Pros with 16GB RAM for the past 3 years. I suspect most developers run with 16GB of RAM just fine. I'm not arguing "16GB is fine for all developers everywhere!", but it's absolutely not a hard requirement. I suspect for a lot of us, the difference in per…
Or to put it a different way: this is the slowest Apple Silicon system that will ever exist.
Re: 16-inch MBP 2x slower than M1 MacBook Air in a real-world Rust compile
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect HP/Lenovo/Microsoft are squirming in their chairs right now.
Satya Nadella just tweeted about their new Pluton processor. I have a feeling it won't get the same hype as the M1 but they are clearly already trying to defend.