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

How M1 Macs feel faster than Intel models: it’s about QoS

eclecticlight.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 427 posts

Re: How M1 Macs feel faster than Intel models: it’s about QoS

#361

Post by hiq »

usefulcat wrote: post #264
zepto wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But, then why not just VNC into a beastmode machine on a netbook and compile remotely? After all, that’s what CI/CD pipeline is for. Is this how you work?

I've worked that way for 10 years. My current desktop is a 5 year old Intel i3 NUC with a paltry 8G of memory. Granted, it uses all that memory (and a bit more) for a browser and slack, and the fan spins up any time a video plays. But usually it's silent, can drive a 4k monitor, and most of the time I'm just using mosh and a terminal, which require nearly nothing. OTOH, the machine that I'm connecting to has 32c/64t,…

> the machine that I'm connecting to has 32c/64t, half a terabyte of RAM

Ok I'll bite, what do you do? Do you think halving the number of cores / RAM would impact your productivity?

Re: How M1 Macs feel faster than Intel models: it’s about QoS

#362

Post by Fergusonb »

vetinari wrote: post #274
kryps wrote: post #75

It does not just feel faster, in many cases it is faster. E.g. compiling Rust code is so much faster that it is not even funny. cargo install -f ripgrep takes 22 seconds on a Mac Book Air with M1, same on a hexacore 2020 Dell XPS 17 with 64GB RAM takes 34 seconds.

For me, it takes 34 seconds on M1 (MBP13): Finished release [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 34.50s ... cargo install -f ripgrep 137,66s user 13,00s system 435% cpu 34,632 total For comparison TR1900x (yeah, desktop, power-guzzler, but also several years old), Fedora 34: Finished release [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 25.15s ... real 0m25,271s user 4m41,553s sys 0m7,216s

Thank you for the perspective.

Here's r7 4800HS (35w) on linux:

Finished release [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 24.98s

real 0m25.151s

user 4m54.987s

sys 0m6.764s

Re: How M1 Macs feel faster than Intel models: it’s about QoS

#363

Post by JudasGoat »

josephg wrote: post #106
kryps wrote: post #75

It does not just feel faster, in many cases it is faster. E.g. compiling Rust code is so much faster that it is not even funny. cargo install -f ripgrep takes 22 seconds on a Mac Book Air with M1, same on a hexacore 2020 Dell XPS 17 with 64GB RAM takes 34 seconds.

I did a side-by-side comparing with my friends' M1 macbook and my (more expensive, nearly brand new) ryzen 5800x workstation compiling rust. The ryzen was faster - but it was really close. And the macbook beats my ryzen chip in single threaded performance. For reference, the ryzen compiles ripgrep in 19.7 seconds. The comparison is way too close given the ryzen workstation guzzles power, and the macbook is cheaper, p…

I have a Ryzen 7 4700g. I wanted to compare this to the GPU side of the M1. On Geekbench OpenGL test, it was slightly faster than the M1. I would like to find a better test.

Re: How M1 Macs feel faster than Intel models: it’s about QoS

#364

Post by smoldesu »

GeekyBear wrote: post #350
smoldesu wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this surprise anyone at all? You're comparing a 5nm-based core to a 7nm-based core, of course there will be a direct disparity in performance. If anything, I'm surprised they weren't able to eke more performance out of it. The GPU is frankly pathetic, and the memory controller and IO subsystems are both obviously gimped too. As a matter of fact, the current M1 Mac Mini quite literally could not connect to al…

> How does this surprise anyone at all? You're comparing a 5nm-based core to a 7nm-based core, of course there will be a direct disparity in performance Given that Apple took the power/heat drop with the transition from 7nm to 5nm instead of a performance increase, that's just not as relevant as it could have been if they had gone the other way. However, that M1 is still running with a significant frequency and power…

> Given that Apple took the power/heat drop with the transition from 7nm to 5nm instead of a performance increase, that's just not as relevant as it could have been if they had gone the other way.

I still don't understand your argument here though. It's impressive because Apple was able to get first dibs on next generation technology? Should I be applauding their engineers or fearing their supply chain managers?

> However, you compete with the performance you have today, not some theoretical performance you might have if your chip was made differently.

Sure, but there's not much fun in bragging about how your V8 demolished a 4-stoke. Plus, as the market for silicon fabs continues to heat up, Apple's lead on logistics isn't going to be so noticeable. They've also painted themselves into a bit of a scalar issue, too: the M1 occupies a bit of an ARM sweet spot right now. As far as I can tell, Apple's only choice for making a more powerful machine is to use better silicon: which won't be available until 4nm/3nm starts to hit production in Q32022, at the earliest.

Re: How M1 Macs feel faster than Intel models: it’s about QoS

#365

Post by postalrat »

agloeregrets wrote: post #222
postalrat wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What environment you compiling your large typescript app in? Windows with WSL on a 7400 rpm disk drive? I think you have other things going on that's slowing down the compilation on the i9. Maybe if run linux and install a fast SSD your i9 will be faster than your m1. Then by your logic you should ditch the m1.

Ironically it was a Samsung Pci-E drive in non-WSL Windows. A 16 inch Macbook Pro i9 also put out roughly alike times in MacOS. Node compile is a single-core workload with a very strong focus on small fast translated instructions, the M1 is actually that fast at that specific task.

https://doesitarm.com/tv/m1-macbook-vs-intel-i9-in-continuou...

That dude says both his intels are faster.

Re: How M1 Macs feel faster than Intel models: it’s about QoS

#367

Post by cbsmith »

kemayo wrote: post #236
cbsmith wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Starting applications on the M1 seems to have significant delays too, but I'm not sure if that's a Mac OSX thing. That's a Mac OSX thing. It's verifying the apps. https://appletoolbox.com/why-is-macos-catalina-verifying-app...

If it's Intel-compiled apps, it's also that Rosetta is translating them to run on M1 when they're first run, as I understand it. Both of these are first-time launch issues, so comparing launch times on the second launch is probably more reasonable.

Good point. I'm really surprised they don't translate during installation (ahead of time).

Re: How M1 Macs feel faster than Intel models: it’s about QoS

#368

Post by cbsmith »

josephg wrote: post #352
cbsmith wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunnoh... the Ryzen 5800x laptops seem to be able to stay ahead of the M1's for most tasks.

Huh? 5800x laptop? The 5800x is a desktop chip.

The 'X' was meant to be "various letter extensions on the 5800 series", such as 5800U, 5800H, 5800HS. I probably should have used different terminology from the model number, as there are other Zen 3 mobile processors like the 5900HX, 5980HS and 5980HX that if anything make the point stronger.

Re: How M1 Macs feel faster than Intel models: it’s about QoS

#369

Post by GeekyBear »

smoldesu wrote: post #364
GeekyBear wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How does this surprise anyone at all? You're comparing a 5nm-based core to a 7nm-based core, of course there will be a direct disparity in performance Given that Apple took the power/heat drop with the transition from 7nm to 5nm instead of a performance increase, that's just not as relevant as it could have been if they had gone the other way. However, that M1 is still running with a significant frequency and power…

> Given that Apple took the power/heat drop with the transition from 7nm to 5nm instead of a performance increase, that's just not as relevant as it could have been if they had gone the other way. I still don't understand your argument here though. It's impressive because Apple was able to get first dibs on next generation technology? Should I be applauding their engineers or fearing their supply chain managers? > Ho…

>I still don't understand your argument here though. It's impressive because Apple was able to get first dibs on next generation technology?

The M1's performance lead wasn't created by a move from TSMC 7nm to TSMC 5nm.

See, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27184236

The Firestorm cores in the M1 in the M1 get their performance from (among other things) having a very wide core that performs more instructions in a single clock cycle, despite running the cores much more slowly than AMD does.

There's a good break down of that and other design advantages here:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/16226/apple-silicon-m1-a14-de...

Re: How M1 Macs feel faster than Intel models: it’s about QoS

#370

Post by emteycz »

davrosthedalek wrote: post #357
emteycz wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lenovo or Dell displays are much worse than Apple displays even though the machine costs the same.

Sure, but my macbook pro has cooked it's display /twice/ now. Didn't go to sleep properly, and it overheated in my laptop bag. No good way to check for it, because no LEDs on the outside. Only way to check is to see if the fans switched on after five minutes in the bag.

You don't want to know what the Dells are capable of doing. My XPS 15 2020 literally got on fire somewhere on the motherboard - not even a battery thing. Then I decided to go Apple only.
Post reply on HN