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

741–750 of 917 posts

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#741

Post by hnaccount_rng »

jandrese wrote: post #324
vineyardmike wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

It's hardly unheard of for a Mac to pick up weird issues. My wife's Macbook has a thing where the mouse cursor will just disappear when she wakes the thing up from sleep. Poking around on the internet finds other people with the same problem and no good solution (zapping PRAM doesn't help, neither did a full OS reinstall). It's just a live with it affair. The only fix is to close the lid and open it again, which isn'…

Doing a three finger swipe up and back down should fix it. But yeah that bug is annoying as hell

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#742

Post by sokoloff »

dijit wrote: post #655
true_religion wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trade in value for my 6 year old MacBook Air is 150 dollars. Old computers depreciate so fast, that you can afford to buy ten of them for the price of one new computer.

Looks like they’re selling for more than twice that on ebay.co.uk though. And considering MacBook airs are $1000~ devices that’s really high. 6 years is also beyond the service life of a(ny) machine. If I look at 3 year old MacBook airs they’re selling for £600 on eBay, which is, what, half of the full cost. Not great for an already old machine with only a few good years left. I guess you might save a bit of money us…

> 6 years is also beyond the service life of a(ny) machine.

That was the case for many decades. I think it’s no longer nearly the case. I’ve got a USB/DP KVM switch on my desk and regularly switch between my work laptop (2019 i9 MBPro) and my personal computer (2014 Dell i7-4790, added SSD and 32GB).

Same 4K screens, peripherals, everything else. I find the Dell every bit as usable and expect to be using it 3 years from now. I wouldn’t be surprised if I retire the MacBook before the Dell.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i9-9980HK-vs-Inte... shows the Mac to have only a slight edge and that’s a 2 year old literal top of line Mac laptop vs a mid-range commodity office desktop from 6 years ago bought with < $200 in added parts. (Much of what users do is waiting on the network or the human; when waiting on the CPU, you’re often waiting on something single-threaded. Mac is < 20% faster single-threaded.)

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#743

Post by vbezhenar »

keymone wrote: post #651
qayxc wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These cards can run idle (e.g. desktop 2D mode) at about 15W, so it might run just fine. Actual power draw depends on monitor resolution, number of attached displays, and refresh rate, though.

These cards idle at 15w while m1 max is yielding like half the performance at that wattage. Sorry, Apple is clearly lightyears ahead. All they need to do is put out a chip with 48 of their gpu cores and they will beat the most expensive top of the line best ever performance gpu on the market… with a laptop-grade SoC .

The moment of truth will be Mac Pro. There they'll have all the freedom to spend as much electricity as possible and push computing to the bounds.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#744

Post by vbezhenar »

sunflowerdeath wrote: post #526
keymone wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 vs M1 Max - OpenCL https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/compare/3551790?bas ... [29.0%] 30% performance for ~15% of power use in laptop form factor? that's not boo, that seems like a clear win for apple.

Also, the 3090 costs almost like the whole macbook

Just wait until miners will start buying macbooks.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#745

Post by vondro »

paulmd wrote: post #564
icosahedron wrote: post #195

I'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...

they're the same cores as the original M1 architecturally, you just get an 8+2 on a Max instead of 4+4... and also an absolutely titanic iGPU, total transistor count is about twice that of a 3090 and almost all of it lives in the iGPU. the only architectural difference between M1 and M1 Max in the CPU cores, besides the different combination of big/little cores, is that the M1 Max goes from quad channel to hexadecima…

I believe it's LPDDR5, basically a memory chip for smartphones, not DDR5.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#746

Post by runeks »

eMSF wrote: post #508
runeks wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Intel CPU is pretty underwhelming. It has twice the number of high performance cores (16 vs 8) but is only 37% faster for multi-core tasks.

That Intel CPU (12900K) has 8 performance cores, i.e. as many as M1 Max.

Not as far as I can see.

> The Intel Core i9-12900K operates with 16 cores and 24 CPU threads. It run at 5.30 GHz base 5.00 GHz all cores while the TDP is set at 125 W.

https://cpu-comparison.com/intel-core-i9-12900k/

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#747

Post by microtonal »

aenis wrote: post #681
microtonal wrote: post #627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dell Precision. 6 core xeon, 128GB RAM, 9 hour battery life. [...] My laptop is like 5x or more faster that the Air. Very unlikely. You seem to go out of your way not to mention the Xeon's part number. So what Xeon is it?

Yup. I, too, call BS on that. I do own a precision laptop with a 8 core xeon and this thing is heavy, noisy and can't work on battery for more than 2hrs under normal workload.

Just for fun, I looked up the most expensive Dell Precision Xeon laptop, which seems to be the Precision 7760 with a Xeon W-11955M.

With a GeekBench score of 1647 ST/9650 MT, this $5377.88 machine is just a bit faster than the passively cooled $999 MacBook Air with 1744 ST/7600 MT. The MacBook Pro 14" 10 core is better than the Dell Xeon in about every way, performance, price, performance per watt, etc.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#749

Post by vbezhenar »

ksec wrote: post #167

I have seen far too many people making comments on MacPro "Pro" Chip. A hypothetical 32 Core CPU and 64 Core GPU is about the max Apple could make in terms of die size reticle limit without going chiplet and TDP limit without some exotic cooling solution. Which means you cant have some imaginary 64 Core CPU and 128 Core GPU. We can now finally have a Mac Cube, where the vast majority of the Cube will simply be a heat…

Mac Pro is supposed to be expandable.

The most elegant solution would be to have a motherboard with cartridges. You're buying as many CPU/GPU/AI/RAM/SSD modules as you like and getting anything you want. Wanna crazy build farm? Put plenty of CPUs and some RAM. Wanna GPU farm? You've got it. Want terabytes of RAM? No problem.

Not sure if it's possible to implement. But I'd love to see it done this way.

Post reply on HN