Single core regular M1 Macbook about the same. Multicore the Max is a lot higher.
It should be about the same. It is the same micro-architecture which is why they are still called M1. There are just more of the same cores.
Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score
241–250 of 917 posts
Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this kinda makes sense to me — the M1 Max has the same cores as the M1, just more of them and more of the performant ones, if I understand it right. The fastest work on the fastest core, when only working on a single core, is probably very similar.
Maybe a little surprised - presumably the thermal limitations on a 16 inch laptop are potentially less limiting than on a 13 inch one so that single core could be pushed to a higher frequency?
Does the core speed of an M1 core change at all? I thought they used the low/high power cores at fixed-limit clock speeds.
It sounds crazy to consider, but maybe they’d rather not try to speed up the individual cores in M1 Max, so that they can keep their overhead competitively low. That certainly would simplify manufacturing and QA; removing an entire vector (clock speed) from the binning process makes pipelines and platforms easier to maintain.
Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score
#243I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things. For years I worked* on an Ubuntu desktop machine I built myself. Early this year I switched to a brand new M1 mini and this this is slower and less reliable than the thing I built myself that runs Ubuntu. My Ubuntu machine had a few little issues every no and then. My Mini has weird bugs all the time. e.g. Green Screen Crashes when I have…
Disclaimer, I don't have an M1 Mac, but I do have a buggy ubuntu desktop and used Macs my whole technical life. It seems that you're heavily in the minority with this. Even the weird bugs you mention are very unexpected. I've used a Mac for 15 years and never heard of an issue related to thumb drives. You may just have a lemon. See if you can just replace it (warranty, etc, not just spending more money).
yep. if things don't work contact apple support they are actually pretty decent. i had a lemon mini, randomly would go into a bootloop after os updates - had a bad mainboard so apple replaced it and it's been fine since.
Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many folks are comparing it to previous Macs with macOS, not PCs nor other distros. If you have an Intel Mac next to it, there's a clear noticeable difference assuming macOS is on it. If you put W10 on the Intel Mac, it is much faster than macOS on it (from my own experience). If we could run W10 or Linux on M1, it will be much faster than Intel Mac. Another example, Windows 10/11 on ARM in Parallels on my MBA m1 is…
I’m comparing Windows PC (i7-6700k, nvme) with MBA m1 and MBA is noticeable faster in just everything. Compilation time of JS and Java code is literally 2 times faster on MBA M1 than on desktop i7 CPU.
That hardware is from 2015, though. A fairer comparison would be to current gen Intel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_processo...
Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score
#245I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things. For years I worked* on an Ubuntu desktop machine I built myself. Early this year I switched to a brand new M1 mini and this this is slower and less reliable than the thing I built myself that runs Ubuntu. My Ubuntu machine had a few little issues every no and then. My Mini has weird bugs all the time. e.g. Green Screen Crashes when I have…
> I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things.
Two reasons:
1. M1 is a super fast laptop chip. It provides mid-range desktop performance in a laptop form factor with mostly fanless operation. No matter how you look at it, that's impressive.
2. Apple really dragged their feet on updating the old Intel Macs before the transition. People in the Mac world (excluding hackintosh) were stuck on relatively outdated x86-64 CPUs. Compared to those older CPUs, the M1 Max is a huge leap forward. Compared to modern AMD mobile parts, it's still faster but not by leaps and bounds.
But I agree that the M1 hype may be getting a little out of hand. It's fast and super power efficient, but it's mostly on par with mid-range 8-core AMD desktop CPUs from 2020. Even AMD's top mobile CPU isn't that far behind the M1 Max in Geekbench scores.
I'm very excited to get my M1 Max in a few weeks. But if these early Geekbench results are accurate, it's going to be about half as fast as my AMD desktop in code compilation (see Clang results in the detailed score breakdown). That's still mightily impressive from a low-power laptop! But I think some of the rhetoric about the M1 Max blowing away desktop CPUs is getting a little ahead of the reality.
Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m comparing Windows PC (i7-6700k, nvme) with MBA m1 and MBA is noticeable faster in just everything. Compilation time of JS and Java code is literally 2 times faster on MBA M1 than on desktop i7 CPU.
i7-6700k is 6 years old. The current equivalent i7 (i7-11700k) is almost 2x as fast when using all cores.
If the latest gen, top cpu is “almost 2x as fast” it will still lose to the parent’s “literally 2 times faster” M1. While using 4x more power.
Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this kinda makes sense to me — the M1 Max has the same cores as the M1, just more of them and more of the performant ones, if I understand it right. The fastest work on the fastest core, when only working on a single core, is probably very similar.
Maybe a little surprised - presumably the thermal limitations on a 16 inch laptop are potentially less limiting than on a 13 inch one so that single core could be pushed to a higher frequency?
For how long? Longer than it takes to run the benchmark?
Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interestingly, the M1 Max is only a 10 core (of which only 8 are high performance). I wonder what it will look like when it’s a 20-core, or even a 64-core like the Threadripper. Imagine a 64-core M1 on an iMac or Mac Pro. We’re in for some fun times.
John Siracusa - no the chart isn't real, but maybe qualify that with "yet"... https://twitter.com/siracusa/status/1450202454067400711
Hm, related to that reply https://twitter.com/lukeburrage/status/1450216654202343425
Is this a yield trick, that one is the "chopped" part of another? So they'll bin failed M1Max ones as M1Pro, if possible?
Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score
#249I'm not exactly proficient with GeekBenchery, but what I see here is that the M1 Max per core barely outperforms the M1? https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/10496766?baseli...
Tick - New cores;
Tock - Scaling up the number of those same cores
I think most of the work went into the uncore portions of the SOC this time.
Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score
#250This is the comparison to a mid 2015 15" MacBook Pro for anyone who is curios: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/10513492?baseli... Summary: single core performance gain is 2x whereas multi-core performance gain is 4x.
Ha I couldn't stand the order that was, so here's the reverse:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/10496766?baseli...
3.1% increase in single core, and 69.4% increase in multi-core.