51–60 of 122 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a diehard Firefox user, it has never been competitive with safari when it comes to performance. JavaScriptCore and WebKit are kind of ridiculously fast. If only they were put in a browser that was at all usable.
Firefox doesn't stutter on infinite scroll sites like Twitter. Safari noticeably does, even in Big Sur. So I am torn between the two.
incase you are wondering how native chrome support going (which is released today): https://twitter.com/oguzbilgic/status/1328805861834117120
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From what I've read the performance is very competitive even for Rosetta apps. Native support will just make things even more astounding.
It looks like you lose about 30% performance to Rosetta. That's quite a lot, and makes it slower than current x86-64 processors, e.g. Ryzen 5000 series, or even the Ryzen 3000 series. But compared to x86-64 Macs it's not that much slower, because the x86-64 Macs are using old slower Intel CPUs.
Depends on the app but some of them run faster in Rosetta than they do on comparable PC hardware.
Everyone keeps comparing a SoC designed for low-end (in the Apple lineup/ecosystem) to the Ryzen. As the AnandTech review noted, the M1 bests even the Ryzen on some benchmarks and Ryzen beats it in others.
The point everyone conveniently seems to miss is a new SoC for mobile devices running at 10-20 watts shouldn't be in the same universe when it comes to performance with any Ryzen desktop processor—but here we are.
It's disingenuous to state the only reason M1 seems fast is because all Macs are using old, slow processors.
The 16-inch MacBook Pro ($2,799.00) comes with a 2.3GHz 8‑core 9th‑generation Intel Core i9 processor, Turbo Boost up to 4.8GHz and for an additional $200, you can get it with a 2.4GHz 8‑core 9th‑generation Intel Core i9 processor, Turbo Boost up to 5.0GHz.
And yet the new 13-inch MacBook Pro with it's M1 processor blows them away when it comes to performance.
Here's a direct quote from their extensive review of the M1-based Mac mini (https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-teste...):
The M1 undisputedly outperforms the core performance of everything Intel has to offer, and battles it with AMD’s new Zen3, winning some, losing some. And in the mobile space in particular, there doesn’t seem to be an equivalent in either ST or MT performance – at least within the same power budgets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From what I've read the performance is very competitive even for Rosetta apps. Native support will just make things even more astounding.
It looks like you lose about 30% performance to Rosetta. That's quite a lot, and makes it slower than current x86-64 processors, e.g. Ryzen 5000 series, or even the Ryzen 3000 series. But compared to x86-64 Macs it's not that much slower, because the x86-64 Macs are using old slower Intel CPUs.
Regarding Rosetta, the AnandTech conclusion is (https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-teste...):
The software side of things already look good on day 1 due to Apple’s Rosetta2. Whilst the software doesn’t offer the best the hardware can offer, with time, as developers migrate their applications to native Apple Silicon support, the ecosystem will flourish. And in the meantime, the M1 is fast enough that it can absorb the performance hit from Rosetta2 and still deliver solid performance for all but the most CPU-critical x86 applications.
This is great news. Based on the early reviews coming in, native Apple apps perform amazingly well on the M1 chips. So it's going to be really important for third-party apps to support M1 natively to remain competitive.
As a diehard Firefox user, it has never been competitive with safari when it comes to performance. JavaScriptCore and WebKit are kind of ridiculously fast. If only they were put in a browser that was at all usable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a diehard Firefox user, it has never been competitive with safari when it comes to performance. JavaScriptCore and WebKit are kind of ridiculously fast. If only they were put in a browser that was at all usable.
Firefox doesn't stutter on infinite scroll sites like Twitter. Safari noticeably does, even in Big Sur. So I am torn between the two.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Docker has already addressed that, and a link was posted about it yesterday in HN.
Would you mind posting that here?
Here are the money paragraphs:
St Paer-Gotch says that Apple's changes mean the company needs to move its "plumbing" to Apple's new hypervisor framework. And it also relies on software from other companies which are similarly still working to adapt to Apple Silicon.
"We rely on things like Go for the backend of Docker Desktop and Electron for the Docker Dashboard to view your Desktop content," he continued. "We know these projects are hard at work getting ready for M1 chips, and we are watching them closely."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Docker has already addressed that, and a link was posted about it yesterday in HN.
They addressed it, but didn't give any indication when x86 containers will be ready (and how they'll do it). Expect at least next year.
If HN supported DLCs[1], I'd take the under on such a bet. The Apple Silicon DevKit which these guys have had access to since the summer didn't support virtualization (being based on the A12 SoC) but they knew that going in. I'd like to think they got some meaningful work done.
Apple showed Debian running on a prototype Apple Silicon Mac back in June at WWDC. I’d bet they’ll have something before the end of the year.
[1]: https://www.coindesk.com/dlc-private-smart-contracts-bitcoin
incase you are wondering how native chrome support going (which is released today): https://twitter.com/oguzbilgic/status/1328805861834117120
FYI: this build was pulled and fixed one will go live tomorrow. In the meantime one can use Intel version through Rosetta or manually give Bluetooth permission to native Chrome ( https://support.google.com/chrome/thread/83557143 ).