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

Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

blog.yiningkarlli.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 328 posts

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#151

Post by nathanielarmer »

paulmd wrote: post #95
nathanielarmer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're getting a bit confused. The 3990x is not designed for energy efficiency, on an older node, and on an older architecture... uses 3kWh vs Apples 2kWh (using a very flawed methodology). An yet you're claiming Apple has a 3-6x power efficiency advantage. I'm not sure how that makes any sense.

Hmm? Perf/watt isn’t the same thing as task energy, it sounds like you’re the one confused here. As I said, task energy (which is what’s measured in the OP) heavily favors “getting it done quicker” as well as this task being embarrassingly parallel such that the 3990WX can get all 128 threads into play. It’s basically a “race to sleep” benchmark not a perf/watt benchmark with processors that are that disparate. For a…

> Perf/watt isn’t the same thing as task energy, it sounds like you’re the one confused here.

How do you calculate Perf/watt if not Task/Task Energy?

> As I said, task energy (which is what’s measured in the OP) heavily favors “getting it done quicker”

Which x86 can do.

> It’s basically a “race to sleep”

Oh no, it gets the task done faster!

> I’m not the one claiming anything, if you disagree with Anandtech’s numbers go take it up with them.

I have no issue with Anandtech, since they made no such claim. I read the article, you're badly misquoting it.

> And again, that’s with it running at half the clock and half the threads of its laptop peers, so IPC is something like 8x higher in those scenarios.

None of which is ultimately important.

> That is not the kind of gap you close up with a node shrink or tightening pitches a bit. Hackernews experts know best though.

Look at the results again. For example for SPEC2017 ST the Apple M1 MAX is essentially tied with the 5950x.

Sure the M1 Max might be more energy efficent (though by how much you'd need to measure) - but remember it's a massively larger chip, a whole year newer, and on a newer node.

For MT we see the M1 max bearely beat a 5800X for int, and do significantly better for floating point - which shows different priorities of design.

Again, take a 5800X, shrink it down, add another FPU, and it beats a M1 max hands down.

> Next year Zen4 and A16 will be on the same node, and then it’ll be another excuse for why x86 is still getting dumpstered.

Except x86 isn't getting dumpstered.

You're just cherry picking specific comparisons that make M1 look great, and then ignoring all contrary information.

I mean, I could the the Borderlands 3 1080p benchmark, and say that the M1 got 21.1FPS to the GE76's 100, and therefore x86 is ~8 times faster.

It wouldn't be honest (I'm deliberately chosing the worst M1 chip, and picking a workload that really favors x86) - but I could do it.

But I don't, because it's not honest nor is it helpful.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#152

Post by Anhao »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #73
MangoCoffee wrote: post #9

>in order to give the M1 Max some real competition, one has to skip laptop chips entirely and reach for not just high end desktop chips, but for server-class workstation hardware to really beat the M1 Max this is really interesting

Not really, because the first Xeon CPU he compares against is ten years old . That kind of system isn't worth the cost of shipping it somewhere. A current generation desktop i3 is likely faster in almost any workload. It's not even interesting that the M1 is "slightly" beaten by a Mac Pro's Xeon, because nobody is doing raytracing on CPUs . A Pascal nvidia GPU will render scenes in Blender faster than a current mid-t…

> because nobody is doing raytracing on CPUs.

Nobody is doing realtime raytracing on CPUs. The author is talking about production ray tracing rendering working with scenes that won't fit in most workstation GPUs.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#153

Post by soylentnewsorg »

paulmd wrote: post #124
soylentnewsorg wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>enterprise features enabled Right. That's what a pro laptop is. 128G of ECC RAM so you don't get crashes and errors. 24MB of cache. Fast and solid. That's a workstation - we use those for work. But... Now you're saying the xeon I listed is the same as a 1 year old CPU, with half the cache of the Xeon, a lower clock, and half the core count. The mental gymnastics you have to perform are funny as hell to watch. Trump…

Just to humor you I looked it up - your Xeon W-11955M is the same chip as a consumer 11980HK, which is one of the processors in Anandtech’s benchmark. Same cores, same cache, same clocks, slightly lower TDP limit - the consumer one has a 65W boost configuration. It is the same TGL-H die with (very slight) variations in what feature fuses are blown. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Lake#List_of_Tiger_Lake_... So ba…

The m1 max TDP is projected to be 90W. The Xeon is 45W.

https://newsbeezer.com/franceeng/the-tdp-of-the-apple-m1-max...

Now here's that Xeon beating that 11090HK. Hmm, same CPU according to you. Wonder why that is.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-W-11955M-vs-...

Sorry, I stopped reading after your first line.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#154

Post by soylentnewsorg »

DeRock wrote: post #125
soylentnewsorg wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my laptops is a Dell Precision 7760. Xeon W-11855M, NVIDIA RTX, 128GB ECC RAM. I don't need too much storage, but you can get it with 14TB if you want. Note mine is a 6-core. There is an 8-core available w/ the Xeon W-11955M, which is faster than mine. It's only a little thicker than the macbook pro. It's keyboard doesn't break, and the product line has had a 4k screen since 5 years ago. It's 120Hz refresh rat…

M1 max beats intels best CPU (which spoiler, is not their Xeon line) at both single threaded: https://www.anandtech.com/show/17024/apple-m1-max-performanc... And multithreaded: https://www.anandtech.com/show/17024/apple-m1-max-performanc... You go on a diatribe about how it doesn’t compete, but your only source is some proprietary workload that you claim is much faster on your laptop.

Which is much better than your source - false information.

> intels best CPU (which spoiler, is not their Xeon line)

this is simply false. https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-W-11955M-vs-...

wanna make up some more garbage to fit your feelings? you apple people, sitting there "working" at the starbucks with your cracked all-glass slippery phone and your "pro" laptops are funny.

You are also conveniently leaving out the main points of the pro laptop. 128GB of RAM. ECC RAM - because it's not a pro anything w/o ECC. If your work matters, you absolutely cannot risk errors and data corruption or wrong calculations. Which you get when you have a lot of RAM that's not ECC.

Hey, how about a 4k screen? Because the pro laptops have had them for 5 years. Apple doesn't make any that are 4k. Oh, I do wonder if that boosts their GPU ratings too, since they render under 4k, and the real pro laptops render at 4k.

It was funny when iphoneX came out and an apple fanboy showed off his "OLED" awesome screen to me in the elevator. My 3 year old Nexus had an OLED too. But proving to him that Apple's screen wasn't Revolutionary and ahead of everyone was impossible. So I just kept laughing at him. Like I am at you. There is no difference in your thinking, and the "covid is a hoax" thinking. You will twist the laws of physics themselves to fit your feelings.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#155

Post by paulmd »

soylentnewsorg wrote: post #153
paulmd wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to humor you I looked it up - your Xeon W-11955M is the same chip as a consumer 11980HK, which is one of the processors in Anandtech’s benchmark. Same cores, same cache, same clocks, slightly lower TDP limit - the consumer one has a 65W boost configuration. It is the same TGL-H die with (very slight) variations in what feature fuses are blown. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Lake#List_of_Tiger_Lake_... So ba…

The m1 max TDP is projected to be 90W. The Xeon is 45W. https://newsbeezer.com/franceeng/the-tdp-of-the-apple-m1-max... Now here's that Xeon beating that 11090HK. Hmm, same CPU according to you. Wonder why that is. https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-W-11955M-vs-... Sorry, I stopped reading after your first line.

> Sorry, I stopped reading after your first line.

I can tell, because you obviously didn’t read:

> the 11980HK is clearly allowed to go to much higher power levels than the M1 Max, reaching package power levels of 80W, for 105-110W at the wall

Meanwhile the M1 max:

> In multi-threaded scenarios, the package and wall power vary from 34-43W on package, and wall active power from 40 to 62W

So it’s over twice as fast (2.2X), at about 1/2 the power - hence Anandtech’s conclusion of “about 6x perf/watt”.

It’s ok, you can still complain that obviously a higher clocked processor should have lower efficiency, and Anandtech addressed that too, in the very next sentence!

> The performance levels of the M1 Max are significantly higher than the Intel chip here, due to the much better scalability of the cores. The perf/W differences here are 4-6x in favour of the M1 Max, all whilst posting significantly better performance, meaning the perf/W at ISO-perf would be even higher than this.

Yep, that’s the picture. Lose by a factor of 2.2X in performance and by a factor of 2-3x in power consumption, or lose by a factor of 4 in performance (made up number but probably about right) at equal power.

Apple is way out ahead here, far more than can be explained by “being a node ahead” or “using tighter pitches”. Their design is ahead.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#156

Post by wincy »

rewtraw wrote: post #91
howinteresting wrote: post #76

The problem with Apple is, and remains, the software, which I find utterly hostile and inflexible for my workflows, and getting worse by the year. Personally, I only consider getting one of these after it is able to a decent Linux distribution well.

A decent desktop Linux distro needs to be created first though.

Mint is okay. Except the time that grub randomly failed for me and I had to manually fix my boot config. But at least my webcam and brightness buttons worked on my ten year old laptop, which they didn’t when I booted into windows even after spending a few hours trying to find the correct drivers.

My wife (who while smart doesn’t like tinkering with computers) has been using Ubuntu for two years now and her only complaint is “my hard drive is full and how the heck do I uninstall applications?” Even things like Microsoft Teams and all the virtual doctors meetings apps work for Ubuntu, which surprised me.

I mean Linux distros kinda suck when something goes wrong but I’m honestly impressed how long my wife’s Ubuntu laptop has been working without major issues.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#157

Post by soylentnewsorg »

paulmd wrote: post #155
soylentnewsorg wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The m1 max TDP is projected to be 90W. The Xeon is 45W. https://newsbeezer.com/franceeng/the-tdp-of-the-apple-m1-max... Now here's that Xeon beating that 11090HK. Hmm, same CPU according to you. Wonder why that is. https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-W-11955M-vs-... Sorry, I stopped reading after your first line.

> Sorry, I stopped reading after your first line. I can tell, because you obviously didn’t read: > the 11980HK is clearly allowed to go to much higher power levels than the M1 Max, reaching package power levels of 80W, for 105-110W at the wall Meanwhile the M1 max: > In multi-threaded scenarios, the package and wall power vary from 34-43W on package, and wall active power from 40 to 62W So it’s over twice as fast (2.…

Again, the Xeon is not the same CPU, is faster than the 11980HK, and has a lower TDP. What is it that you are not understanding here? Let me explain: the same CPU would have the same metrics. These two have different metrics. So they are not the same, because they are different. Does ya got it now?

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#158

Post by Uehreka »

TYPE_FASTER wrote: post #123
speed_spread wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're plugged in all the time, lower TDP is nice but not critical. And if you live in a cold country, you have to heat up the house six months per year, TDP is just heating with a computing side effect.

This winter I'm going to experiment with having a Raspberry Pi act as a thermostat that starts/stops containers running on a server in our basement. That, combined with the laptop we just got for gaming that has a 3070 in it, should do nicely to supplement our heating system.

Watts go in, Watts come out. So basically, find a space heater with the TDP of your server, and that’s the upper bound on what you can expect heating-wise.

I know that’s a bummer for people who want to heat their house with their computer, but Thermodynamics is always a bummer, I don’t make the Laws.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#159

Post by girvo »

zeusk wrote: post #94
mlyle wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes-- they show a few percent victory in absolute performance while using nearly 5x the power, for a chip that's several months away.

it's launching this week fwiw

And there are samples out in the wild being bought and sold right now, too.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#160

Post by paulmd »

soylentnewsorg wrote: post #157
paulmd wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sorry, I stopped reading after your first line. I can tell, because you obviously didn’t read: > the 11980HK is clearly allowed to go to much higher power levels than the M1 Max, reaching package power levels of 80W, for 105-110W at the wall Meanwhile the M1 max: > In multi-threaded scenarios, the package and wall power vary from 34-43W on package, and wall active power from 40 to 62W So it’s over twice as fast (2.…

Again, the Xeon is not the same CPU, is faster than the 11980HK, and has a lower TDP. What is it that you are not understanding here? Let me explain: the same CPU would have the same metrics. These two have different metrics. So they are not the same, because they are different. Does ya got it now?

Yes, it is the same cpu die with a few enterprise feature flags turned on, it’s no faster, it’s actually slower due to the lower TDP you note.

You don’t understand what you’re talking about and you’re openly hostile to the person who tried to explain it to you lol.

Post reply on HN