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

Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

asia.nikkei.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 661 posts

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#231

Post by Foxhuls »

bhouston wrote: post #180
masklinn wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would prefer just one 6K or 8K monitor personally Sure but the Air and MBP already support 6k external displays. They don’t support 2x4K.

I do agree. But what I am trying to say is that we should be pushing for 6K and 8K ultra wide monitors rather than the old hack of 2 monitors to one computer.

Out of curiosity, when did you last use a single monitor instead of your current dual monitor setup?

I’ve been using an ultrawide since 2015 but have almost always had a second side monitor with it. The period where I didn’t have a second monitor was short as having a separate monitor has always come in handy. All of the extra space on an ultrawide is great but when you’re doing something that takes the whole screen, it still leaves you in the same position you would be with a single 16:9 display.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#232

Post by oblio »

moooo99 wrote: post #123
oblio wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, here's hoping that both Linux and Windows work flawlessly on their hardware at some point.

Not even macOS works flawlessly on the hardware, why should Windows and Linux do. But as far as it goes for Windows, not having every other update completely break my system would be a welcome change.

> Not even macOS works flawlessly on the hardware, why should Windows and Linux do.

This is just pedantry and needless nitpicking. Replace "work flawlessly" with "work well" in my previous comment.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#233

Post by billylindeman »

chevill wrote: post #163
bhouston wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would prefer just one 6K or 8K monitor personally at a size of say 55" with a wide ratio. Simpler setup. No post in the middle. Something like this but bigger with higher resolution, and maybe a bit more height vertically (this one is a bit too wide for its height in my opinion): https://www.samsung.com/ca/monitors/gaming/super-ultra-wide-... I think that dual 4K is the old way, single 6K/8K ultra wides are the fut…

>I think that dual 4K is the old way, single 6K/8K ultra wides are the future. In the near future 16:9 8ks are going to be standard (too bad it won't be 16:10) but right now you can get a decent triple 4k monitor setup for half of what an 8k monitor costs. IMO ultra-wide is great for productivity in a situational sense but it sucks for gaming and media consumption. Also getting proper support for ultra-wide to be sta…

I rock a 38" dell ultrawide. It's not HiDPI but it works fantastic for me. It's just about big enough to make me not miss dual screens, and it's awesome for games.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#234

Post by jiveturkey »

bhouston wrote: post #180
masklinn wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would prefer just one 6K or 8K monitor personally Sure but the Air and MBP already support 6k external displays. They don’t support 2x4K.

I do agree. But what I am trying to say is that we should be pushing for 6K and 8K ultra wide monitors rather than the old hack of 2 monitors to one computer.

it's not a hack though. i prefer 2x4k. i hate the curve (no straight lines) and UW is too wide to be comfortable (eye and neck angle). 2x4k, one straight on and one angled is ideal. i spent 2 weeks and spent $8000 on monitors to test this out. 34UW at normal desk distance is perfect, however 2x4k is better overall. I actually use 3, as I use the macbook screen as the 3rd.

that said, i have no issue with your choice. for some applications (eg video editing is the default choice for ads of UW monitors) it is really better.

i do have issue with you denigrating 2 monitors. it is not at all "an old hack".

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#235

Post by nemo1618 »

flohofwoe wrote: post #216
kumarvvr wrote: post #156

Somewhere, the collective whos who of the silicon chip world is shitting their pants. Apple just showed to the world how powerful and efficient processors can be. All that with good design. Customers are going to demand more from Intel and the likes. Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. edit: a word.

Give Mac software a few years to "catch up" and everything will feel just as slow as usual (and I'm not even joking, so far, software was always excellent at undoing any advancements in hardware very quickly).

Even today the M1 still feels slow occasionally -- hanging for a second or two, browser taking multiple seconds to launch, etc. Granted, that could be due to I/O or power management, but in any case it's clear that software is not making proper use of hardware.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#236

Post by DCKing »

hajile wrote: post #211
DCKing wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current RAM restrictions in the M1 are dumb restrictions resulting from the fact that you can't get LPDDR4X chips larger than 8GB in size (the M1 has two on SoC LPDDR4X chips). This year we should see a lot of CPU manufacturers change to (LP)DDR5 for memory - high end Samsung and Qualcomm SoCs are already using LPDDR5. It's a safe bet Apple is also switching to LPDDR5 which would put the upper limit on 64GB for t…

Samsung makes a very large 12GB module. I’m sure that offering would be taken advantage of by a lot of people if they’d just put it in the table. The real issue is not shipping the M1 with LPDDR5 support. We already have tons of Qualcomm phones and even Intel processors shipping with since last year. If Apple had done the same, we wouldn’t be talking about this today.

> The real issue is not shipping the M1 with LPDDR5 support.

I brought this up before but it was pointed out to me that the only manufacturer of LPDDR5 last year was Samsung, which was producing not-completely-standardized LPDDR5 at the time and probably didn't have enough spare volume for Apple anyway. Having 12GB LPDDR4X modules from one vendor (24GB total) probably is not enough reason for Apple to switch up their supply chain either, not for the M1 at least.

And, to be fair, I think Apple did get away with shipping low memory computers by targeting only their cheapest computers.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#237

Post by canuckintime »

I’m reading somewhat incompatible reactions in the top level comments e.g. [1] > Somewhere, the collective whos who of the silicon chip world is shitting their pants. Apple just showed to the world how powerful and efficient processors can be. All that with good design. Customers are going to demand more from Intel and the likes.

Another [2]: > I really want the next MacBook Pro to support driving two 4K monitors over thunderbolt and have an option to buy 32 gigs of ram.

Meanwhile the last Intel MacBook Pro supports driving four (4!) 4K displays [4]. Apple silicon is far ahead in benchmarks but how does speeds and feeds translate into what customers actually want?

Battery life is impressive but unfortunately not the usual differentiator during a worldwide pandemic. The M1 Macs are quite quiet (the first MacBook Air without a fan—in 2020!) meanwhile the Intel Surface Book was fanless in 2017. We shot the messenger of the recent Intel attack Apple ads [5] but message is still worth reading. I bought an M1 MBA and realized the speed didn’t make a difference as my consumer computer. For the first time in decades I’m not sure if Apple provides the most pleasurable experience.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26956336

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26955682

[4] https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT210754

[5] https://www.macrumors.com/2021/03/17/justin-long-get-a-mac-i...

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#238

Post by staticfloat »

clashmoore wrote: post #159
lizknope wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it support two 4K monitors now? I have an old Macbook from 2013 that runs Linux now with an Intel integrated GPU and it supports dual 4K monitors at 30Hz. I use the Thunderbolt ports as Mini DisplayPort outputs and connect to two 4K monitors with DisplayPort and it works fine.

M1 laptops can only support one external display at 6k and 60Hz. The other video goes to the laptop's own display. Even if you use the laptop closed in clamshell mode you can't connect or daisy chain to more than one external display. The mini can support two external displays. One via thunderbolt at that same 6k and 60Hz and the other a 4k at 60Hz through the HDMI port.

Note that the restriction on external monitors can be worked around by using a DisplayLink compatible dongle/dock, since it uses a custom driver (I assume it does something in software that would otherwise be limited in hardware).

I use the Dell D6000 and I run three (1080p) external monitors in addition to the built in monitor.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#239

Post by SSLy »

flohofwoe wrote: post #216
kumarvvr wrote: post #156

Somewhere, the collective whos who of the silicon chip world is shitting their pants. Apple just showed to the world how powerful and efficient processors can be. All that with good design. Customers are going to demand more from Intel and the likes. Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. edit: a word.

Give Mac software a few years to "catch up" and everything will feel just as slow as usual (and I'm not even joking, so far, software was always excellent at undoing any advancements in hardware very quickly).

This is called "What Andy giveth, Bill taketh away."

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#240

Post by NelsonMinar »

cainxinth wrote: post #29

All very impressive, but here's my question: what are they going to do about graphics cards? Will they find a way to connect existing graphics cards to their CPU? Will they make their own ARM-based graphics cards? Will AMD or Nvidia?

Why would Apple build fancy graphics cards? They have no meaningful gaming market and haven't cared about it for years. For machine learning?
Post reply on HN