Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

tech.ssut.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 467 posts

Re: Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

#201

Post by [deleted] »

kofejnik wrote: post #160
fredsted wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Apple's current lineup is a little confusing. The 13" Pro and 13" Air are so similar, and almost the same weight. I still use a 12" MacBook, and it's just amazingly small and light. If Apple makes a 12" MacBook with a M1, it would be awesome. A dream machine for me.

I am typing this on M1 Air, and it's noticeably smaller and lighter than our 2013 MB Air. I'd say that in terms of size it's quite close to 12" Mb which we owned previously, and maybe just a tiny bit heavier.

[deleted]

Re: Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

#202

Post by mackal »

x87678r wrote: post #94
bb123 wrote: post #11

The fact that we are even able to realistically compare a CPU in an ultralight laptop with no fan to an i9 is absolutely amazing. To me that would be an upgrade even if performance is a complete wash.

You're not wrong but the article is still a 9th gen laptop i9. A desktop i9 is quicker - https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-9880H-vs... .

I still don't understand why people can't get that not all i9s are the same. That's literally what this title is implying ... Which isn't even the article's title ... Maybe someone will edit it so people stop assuming they mean the i9-10900k ...

Re: Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

#203

Post by africanboy »

gzer0 wrote: post #92
sdflhasjd wrote: post #71

I'm still extremely suspicious of all these benchmarks, because they don't seem to correlate with my real-world experience. All these benchmarks claim to be comparing real-world applications, but I don't trust them because of what they always show with regards to mobile i9 and desktop Ryzen. I've got a Intel Macbook Pro, and a Ryzen desktop. When I'm using them for development, my Ryzen is absolutely wiping the floor…

Would you also be able to run some of these? They're publicly available; the more datasets we have the better picture we get.

I've tried

But the instructions are not clear.

Take for example the als benchmark for java renaissance.

It has a lot of options, one of them used to not force GC.

Was it set?

What version of Java?

I'm running openjdk 11.

When I launched it it gave me this warning

    20/12/14 18:55:20 WARN NativeCodeLoader: Unable to load native-hadoop library for your platform... using builtin-java classes where applicable
Would a native hadoop library make a difference?

And how much?

There are other warnings complaining about lacking some additional library and switching to default, but what really surprised me is that on this particular laptop that mounts an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6820HQ CPU @ 2.70GHz with 8 cores, a CPU at least 5 years old, I could beat the i9 benchmark.

The als benchmark for the i9 completed in 3581.838 ms, on my (very old) laptop the running time was 3533.964 ms.

Raw data from here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1g4U7LAImfEcXRihJbySZ...)

Tab "Java Renaissance (Chart)"

Col O, Row 4

Re: Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

#204

Post by klelatti »

nitrogen wrote: post #183
klelatti wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by somewhat compatible? Why fragmentation when Arm sets the ISA standard?

The base ISA is set by ARM, but every vendor has their own set of features turned on or off, and their own extensions, and potentially their own way of laying out memory mapped IO and identifying peripherals.

Every vendor does not have their own set of extensions. Different x86 chips have different extensions (from a pre-defined set) - I don't see panic about x86 fragmentation.

Re: Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

#205

Post by hugi »

pmontra wrote: post #159

Considering that Apple won't sell their chips to anybody else, and the M2, M3, Mn could be increasingly faster than the x86 chips, how long before we start moving along this path? 1. Amazon, Google, Microsoft start building their own chips for their own clouds. The most efficient chip could translate into the cheapest cloud, or the fastest one at the same price. Their choice. 2. There will be N somewhat compatible AR…

What utter nonsense. Different ARM chips aren't "somewhat compatible" anymore than Intel/AMD x86 chips. It's a standard instruction set. And even if we'd get different instruction sets, we have much better toolchains/compilers to work with multiple architectures now than we did in "the home computing landscape of the 80s / early 90s" (GCC and LLVM aren't really comparable to Sinclair Basic).

The M1 has been out for a month and we already have hundreds/thousands of natively compiled binaries—and Windows and Linux are up and running.

Choice is not a problem and competition is good.

Re: Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

#206

Post by mirekrusin »

pmontra wrote: post #159

Considering that Apple won't sell their chips to anybody else, and the M2, M3, Mn could be increasingly faster than the x86 chips, how long before we start moving along this path? 1. Amazon, Google, Microsoft start building their own chips for their own clouds. The most efficient chip could translate into the cheapest cloud, or the fastest one at the same price. Their choice. 2. There will be N somewhat compatible AR…

x86 line of processors is fragmented with tons of extensions.

Re: Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

#207

Post by acqq »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #124
bb123 wrote: post #11

The fact that we are even able to realistically compare a CPU in an ultralight laptop with no fan to an i9 is absolutely amazing. To me that would be an upgrade even if performance is a complete wash.

I think they're more light than ultralight. Otherwise the performance stands. LG Gram 2020: 2.07 lbs MacBook 2017: 2.03 lbs MacBook Air 2020: 2.8 lbs MacBook Pro 2020: 3.0 lbs

MacBook Air 2019 (Intel): 2.75

MacBook Pro 2019 (Intel): 3.02

As far as I see the M1 models aren't heavier than the Intel ones? But run much longer before they have to be recharged, spending much less power.

Re: Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

#208

Post by adamcstephens »

tambourine_man wrote: post #13

Can't wait to see the Mac Pro. The argument is over for best laptop processor. I want to see if Apple is as eager to beat the competition in the Workstation/HPC space as they were in the mobile/laptop. I think they are, Srouji looks like he's got a knife in his teeth and can't wait to claim fastest personal computer ever period. But we'll have to see, it's a tiny, tiny market to justify the effort.

The probability that Apple will target HPC is practically zero. They don’t care about low margin offerings, and HPC runs Linux which they don’t support.

Re: Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

#209

Post by geogra4 »

pmontra wrote: post #159

Considering that Apple won't sell their chips to anybody else, and the M2, M3, Mn could be increasingly faster than the x86 chips, how long before we start moving along this path? 1. Amazon, Google, Microsoft start building their own chips for their own clouds. The most efficient chip could translate into the cheapest cloud, or the fastest one at the same price. Their choice. 2. There will be N somewhat compatible AR…

I don't think any of the major cloud providers would be interested in #5. Better to have a wide open list of hardware that can develop for your platform. You can still run Windows VMs in AWS, Oracle DBs in Azure, etc.

Re: Apple M1 vs. Ryzen 3900X vs. Intel I9 in Software Development

#210

Post by nickjj »

I'm not a hardware review expert but I think one of the biggest advantages of the Ryzen 5000 series vs the 3900x is the CPU performance for apps that don't take advantage of parallelism across many cores. The 5000 series has a completely new architecture and is supposedly WAY faster than the 3000 series for single core tasks. That's partly why gaming performance is so much better with the 5000 series since it often comes down to execution speed on 1 core, but that would also apply to many programming benchmarks too.

It would be interesting to see the same benchmarks with the 5000 series. I know the author said he didn't have that CPU to test it against, but IMO it would be a more fair comparison considering the 3900x is using an older CPU architecture that has been drastically improved upon with hardware that's available today (ie. the 5000 series isn't the next gen, it's the current gen).

Post reply on HN