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

Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

browser.geekbench.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 917 posts

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#691

Post by atirip »

adrianN wrote: post #596
dijit wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a really useless comparison. A 10 year old laptop will be extremely slow compared to any modern laptop and the battery will have degraded. The T460 has knock off battery replacements floating around but that’s not exactly reassuring. Granted: it works for you (and me, actually, I’m one of those people who likes to use an old thinkpad; x201s in my case though I mostly use a dell precision these days) but peopl…

Not everyone needs 15+ hours of battery life. I'd argue that most people don't. Laptops were extremely popular when the battery life was two hours. Now even older laptops get 5h+.

> Not everyone needs mobile internet. I'd argue that most people don't. Mobile phones were extremely popular when they didn't have any internet connectivity.

I am not mocking you, but here the case is that people do not know what true mobility for laptops is, that they literally can leave power brick behind, not to think about whether the battery lasts or not and use it freely during the day everywhere. This has been impossible until now, there has always been the constraint of do I really need to open my laptop, what if it dies, where is the power plug. As soon as masses realize that this is now no worry, everyone wants and needs 15+ hours battery life.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#692

Post by soylentnewsorg »

alwillis wrote: post #614
soylentnewsorg wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't be a surprise that a CPU that can't run most of the software out there (because that software is x86) and has ditched all compatibility and started a design from scratch, can beat last-gen CPUs from competitors. For specific apps and workloads, for which it has accelerators. But here I am, with a pretty thin and very durable laptop that has a 6 core Xeon in it. It gets hot, it has huge fans, and it comple…

But here I am, with a pretty thin and very durable laptop that has a 6 core Xeon in it. It gets hot, it has huge fans, and it completely obliterates any M1 laptop. I don't mean it's twice as fast. I mean things run at 5x or faster vs an M1. Probably not faster than an M1 Pro and definitely not faster than the M1 Max. Your machine doesn't have a 512-bit wide memory interface running at over 400GB/s. Does the Xeon proc…

well now, you've successfully argued that arm cpus are faster than server-grade processors for heavy workloads, using hand-picked misinformation. congratulations - you are now a trump voter. btw, that dell line had a 4k display 5 years ago, and it does refresh at 120hz. i know apple announced it's "almost 4k 120hz" display as new and groundbreaking.

i had a friend in the elevator show off his awesome new iphone x olde display to me. there i was, looking at my 3 year old nexus6. which had an oled display.

i do love how you use "billion pixels" instead of resolution, so you don't have to say they don't even have a 4k screen. any modern laptop can play 8k video btw. even a netbook with integrated graphics.

I'm not going to argue with you, just like i don't argue with the fox news watchers. no, your m1 is not faster than a xeon lol. what you did here is spew a bunch of half-truth marketing garbage. it's easy to tell, because you're comparing the new m1 to apple's own old intel cpu. which was over a year behind what the competition put in their laptops. as it's always been.

enjoy watching video for 20 hours on your fresh and crunchy green apple on your battery at your starbucks. the adults and our powerbricks have real work to do.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#693

Post by illiac786 »

knodi123 wrote: post #545
alexcnwy wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pro only supports 2 external displays which is why I ordered max

ha, man, some people have veeeery different workstation setups than me. I was offered a large external monitor by my employer, but I turned it down because I didn't want to get used to it, and working in different locations is too critical to my workflow. But I'd love to see how people with more than 2 external displays are actually using them enough to justify the space and cost (not being facetious, I really would)…

6+ hours of Web Conferencing a day.

1. Web Conferencing Content

2. Web Conferencing participants video

3. Screen where I multitask in parallel

4. VDI session to a customer's environment for tests

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#694

Post by nly »

caycep wrote: post #476
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't get me wrong: It's impressive and I have huge respect for it. I also bought one. However, it would be surprising if Apple's new 5nm chip didn't beat AMD's older 7nm chip at this point. Apple specifically bought out all of TSMC's 5nm capacity for themselves while AMD was stuck on 7nm (for now). It will be interesting to see how AMD's new 6000 series mobile chips perform. According to rumors they might be launche…

well....M1 Max single core also beating a 5950x But tbh, it doesn't seem the new hotness in chips is single core CPU, it's about how fancy you spend the die space in custom processors, in which case the M1 will always be tailored to Apple (and presumably Mac users') specific use-cases...

Geekbench score for a 5900x (12 core) against the M1 Max (10 core) score already linked:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/10517471?baseli...

They look to be on par to me. Things will be less murky if and when Apple finally scale this thing up to 100+ watt desktop class machines (Mac Pro) and AMD move to the next gen / latest TSMC process.

In my view Intel and AMD have more incentive to regain the performance crown than Apple do at maintaining it. At some point Apple will go back to focusing on others areas in their marketing.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#695

Post by n1000 »

walls wrote: post #146
IceWreck wrote: post #136

Why does Apple not open up their hardware to other operating systems like Linux. They will already get our money from the hardware purchases, what more do they want. I know Asahi Linux exists but without Apple's (driver) support it will never reach macOS on M1 level performance. (If someone disagrees, please compare Nouveau with proprietary Nvidia drivers.)

Nobody wants the Linux desktop experience associated with their brand.

Dell does

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#696

Post by nly »

kbenson wrote: post #513
caycep wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well....M1 Max single core also beating a 5950x But tbh, it doesn't seem the new hotness in chips is single core CPU, it's about how fancy you spend the die space in custom processors, in which case the M1 will always be tailored to Apple (and presumably Mac users') specific use-cases...

You actually get better single core performance out of a 5900x than a 5950x. The more cores the AMD CPU has, generally the more they constrain the speed it can perform at on the top end. In this case, the 5950x is 3.5GHz and the 5900x is 3.7GHz. The 5800x is even slightly faster than that, and there's some Geekbench results that show single core performance faster than the score listed here, but at that point the mul…

That's obviously a Hackintosh or a VM result.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#697

Post by iSnow »

soylentnewsorg wrote: post #567
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't get me wrong: It's impressive and I have huge respect for it. I also bought one. However, it would be surprising if Apple's new 5nm chip didn't beat AMD's older 7nm chip at this point. Apple specifically bought out all of TSMC's 5nm capacity for themselves while AMD was stuck on 7nm (for now). It will be interesting to see how AMD's new 6000 series mobile chips perform. According to rumors they might be launche…

It wouldn't be a surprise that a CPU that can't run most of the software out there (because that software is x86) and has ditched all compatibility and started a design from scratch, can beat last-gen CPUs from competitors. For specific apps and workloads, for which it has accelerators. But here I am, with a pretty thin and very durable laptop that has a 6 core Xeon in it. It gets hot, it has huge fans, and it comple…

>Because when you want a super fast chip, you don't design up from a freaking cell phone CPU. You design down from a server CPU.

Is that really true? I don't have any intricate chip knowledge, but it rings false. Whether ARM is coming from a phone background or the Xeon from a server background, what matters in the end is the actual chip used. Maybe phone-derived chips even have an advantage because they are designed to conserve power whereas server chips are designed to harvest every little ounce of performance. IDK a lot about power states in server chips, but it would make sense if they aren't as adapted to rapidly step down power use as a phone chip.

Now, you might be happy with a hot leaf-blower and that's fine. But I would say the market is elsewhere: silent, long-running, light notebooks that can throw around performance if need be, you strike me as an outlier.

Pro laptops should have a beefy CPU, great screen, really fast SSD, long battery life, lots of RAM which (presumably) your notebook features, but the new M somethings seemingly as well. But in the end, people buy laptops so they can use them on their lap occasionally. And I know my HP is getting uncomfy hot, the same was said about the intel laptops from Apple I think.

Apple doesn't need to have the one fastest laptop out there, they need a credible claim to punching in the upper performance echelon - and I think with their M* family, they are there.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#698

Post by jeswin »

localhost wrote: post #396
blakesterz wrote: post #100

I 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 have a three-year old hand-built 16-core ThreadRipper 1950X machine here with 64GB 4-channel RAM. I have a 14" MBP M1 Max on order. I just checked the Geekbench scores between these two machines: M1 Max: 1783 single-core | 12693 multi-core 1950X: 901 single-core | 7409 multi-core That's a big difference that I'm looking forward to. Also, just checked memory bandwidth. I have 80GB/s memory bandwidth [1] on my 1950X.…

1. M1 Max has 50+ billion transistors (only a part of that count is CPU, so adjust the number downwards), 1950X (first gen 14-nm Ryzen) has 10 billion.

2. Multicore Cinebench R23 for M1 Max: 14970; Ryzen 1950X: 18780

Geekbench tests in short bursts, not taxing the CPU thermals. Cinebench is the opposite. In short, CPUs do well on some benchmarks and not so well on others.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#699

Post by nly »

b9a2cab5 wrote: post #581
shaklee3 wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are vastly, vastly overestimating how many people like apple laptops. They're expensive, the OS is worse, and there's no speed difference outside of benchmarks. That combined with the fact that most apps are windows-based, and the games are poorly emulated or nonexistent, there's really no reason to buy an apple laptop short of bragging.

Is that why every tech company uses Macbooks? People who can't afford Apple laptops (and gamers and certain other use cases) buy cheaper laptops. The brand appeal draws all the wealthy people towards Apple devices.

A lot of tech companies let their engineers choose between something like an X1 Carbon or a Macbook.

Lots of tech workers, in my experience, actually choose a Macbook for work because they really want to use a slick, luxury device and can't justify the cost for personal use... particularly given how many of them actually use their work laptops for personal tasks in off hours.

I think HN underestimates how many SWE's actually don't do much programming or use their personal computers for much at all. Particularly those with families.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#700

Post by nly »

baybal2 wrote: post #355
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 stu…

> were stuck on relatively outdated x86-64 CPUs. We came to a point when X86 is faster to emulate, than to run on a more modern microarchitecture. One point is clear: per-transistor performance of X86 is dimishing with each new core generation, and it is already losing to M1. X86 makers will not be able to keep up for long. They will have to keep releasing bigger, and hotter chips to keep parity, until they cannot.

I think in 10-15 years the majority of the market, laptop or otherwise, will still be x86.

For me what the M1 shows is not that x86 is dead and ARM is the future, or even that Intel or AMD are toast, it's that the days of the traditional socketed CPU and modular RAM are numbered.

10 years from now we'll all be using gigantic 32 core x86 SoC's with onboard RAM and GPU, and perhaps people on HN cheering on Apple now won't be when hobbiest PC building is a thing of the past.

Post reply on HN