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

181–190 of 328 posts

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#181

Post by microtonal »

Thaxll wrote: post #64
pier25 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The AMD Threadripper 3990X costs about $5,000 and I'm guessing that's cheap compared to the Xeons.

An AMD Ryzen 9 5950X cost $700 and is almost 2x faster than an m1 max in multi core.

Except in benchmarks outside GeekBench it isn't. See e.g. the last graph in

https://www.anandtech.com/show/17024/apple-m1-max-performanc...

The 5950X is only 55% faster than the M1 Max on multi-threaded integer benchmarks. The M1 Max is even 26% faster than the 5950X on multi-threaded FP benchmarks (maybe it has two AMX units?).

The M1 Max is really in 5900X/5950X territory... in a laptop.

I agree on the pricing (I also have a 5900X and a 5950X machine). But it is fantastic that we can have that kind of performance in a mobile device and still have many hours of battery life.

We should complement both AMD and Apple and be happy that we finally have serious competitors to Intel. AMD has managed to compete with and outrun Intel from the an initial position of an also-ran underdog. I think the M1 line is more impressive technically than Ryzen, given the very low TDPs. But Apple has vastly more budget and much more opportunity for vertical integration.

Both companies have done impressive work the last few years.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#182

Post by martin8412 »

bluecalm wrote: post #173
partiallypro wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel's Alder Lake benchmarks show that their new mobile processor is faster than the M1 Max. So, this domination doesn't seem to be a long term thing.

But did Intel use liquid nitrogen cooling to achieve this? I am joking but just a bit. Intel has long history of dirty tricks when it comes to benchmarks - using liquid nitrogen cooling and not mentioning it, manipulating the compiler to generate slower code on competing CPUs, terms of service forbidding publication of benchmarks, fuzzy use (or not mentioning it at all) of TWP/energy usage. What they say can only be…

Not to mention disabling mitigations against Spectre, Meltdown, MDS, etc

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#183

Post by MobiusHorizons »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #4
dnautics wrote: post #2

> There’s really no way to understate what a colossal achievement Apple’s M1 processor is; compared with almost every modern x86-64 processor in its class On the other hand I'm sure there's more than a few chipheads out there who are saying "it's about time", there was a longstanding prediction that the arm architecture would overtake x86.

I thought the observation was always that instruction set was not such a big difference in high performance CPUs next to manufacturing technology which was by far the first order effect. It would be expected for a high performance ARM CPU to reach roughly the same performance in that case (AMD is 1 generation behind here, I think Intel is 2). Is there really "chipheads" who are predicting ARM ISA to buck this trend a…

The two primary mechanisms I am aware of are drastically simpler instruction decoding and lack of backwards compatibility. Both of these save on power and area, allowing those budgets to be spent elsewhere. Often times on wider instruction decode, extra execution units, better branch prediction, etc.

These budgets are much tighter on a mobile chip, but are still relevant on desktop design.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#184

Post by Dylan16807 »

paulmd wrote: post #162
adfrhgeaq5hy wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think x86 can't go as wide as ARM? (I predict your answer will involve something about decoders and nothing about uop caches.) What goalpost have I moved? I have said one (true) thing: that you should judge by performance rather than by implementation details. You are falling victim to the Megahertz Myth, just the other way 'round.

OK, here’s the performance. Factor of 2.2X over its peers (other laptop SKUs) in multithreaded performance, going head to head with 5950X in some (floating-point) scenarios. https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph17024/117496.png Why do you think megahertz myth is relevant here? Core for core A15/M1 is plainly faster than any of its peers, ignoring clocks, and it is even farther on top when you do look at clocks (i…

> It’s amazing how much breath was wasted on “IPC is what really matters” when Ryzen came out and now it’s “the other side of the megahertz myth” when Apple is on top. Ryzen was never even remotely close to being in the lead on IPC compared to where Apple currently is.

IPC is what "really matters" when all the chips you're evaluating are capping out at pretty similar frequencies. When there's a 30% difference in frequency then you need to use instructions per second, and evaluate it with the context of different wattages and different benchmarks.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#185

Post by lowbloodsugar »

moron4hire wrote: post #114
floatingatoll wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ve correctly identified one reason Apple’s hardware is so effective: they have a hardware-accelerated standard library, something that requires cooperation between their software and silicon developers. The nearest comparison is if Dell released a line of servers that, when paired with Ubuntu LTS, provided a hardware-accelerated glibc. They could do this at any time, but it’s not easy; the capital cost is incredi…

A lot of good it does them. MacOS is an incredibly poor performing OS. For years, Windows and especially Linux have been more responsive and load faster than macOS on similar hardware, despite not being in a vertically-integrated hardware/software system. It's difficult to imagine how anyone can think that M1 is "competing" with Intel or AMD because of this. You won't be getting macOS on any new x86 processor, and yo…

I don't think you have a working definition of "competition". Here [1] is something from the 70s that might help.

  [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter%27s_five_forces_analysis

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#186

Post by pabs3 »

bullen wrote: post #170
pabs3 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once the Asahi Linux folks get their work into Linux/mesa mainline, you will be able to run any distro on Apple M1. https://asahilinux.org/

How is OpenGL on Metal progressing?

From the latest post, "We are passing about 75% of the OpenGL ES 2.0 tests".

https://rosenzweig.io/blog/asahi-gpu-part-4.html https://rosenzweig.io/blog/asahi-gpu-part-3.html https://rosenzweig.io/blog/asahi-gpu-part-2.html https://rosenzweig.io/blog/asahi-gpu-part-1.html

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#187

Post by bullen »

pabs3 wrote: post #186
bullen wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is OpenGL on Metal progressing?

From the latest post, "We are passing about 75% of the OpenGL ES 2.0 tests". https://rosenzweig.io/blog/asahi-gpu-part-4.html https://rosenzweig.io/blog/asahi-gpu-part-3.html https://rosenzweig.io/blog/asahi-gpu-part-2.html https://rosenzweig.io/blog/asahi-gpu-part-1.html

Neat, thx!

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#188

Post by panda88888 »

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.

Looking at the data in your second link, the performances differ by less than 3%. Looks like paulmd’s assertion that both are the same cpu core is fairly well supported by the data.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#189

Post by djxfade »

bullen wrote: post #170
pabs3 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once the Asahi Linux folks get their work into Linux/mesa mainline, you will be able to run any distro on Apple M1. https://asahilinux.org/

How is OpenGL on Metal progressing?

> With these drivers, M1 Macs are actually usable as desktop > Linux machines! While there is no GPU acceleration yet, the > M1’s CPUs are so powerful that a software-rendered desktop > is actually faster on them than on e.g. Rockchip ARM64 > > machines with hardware acceleration.

https://asahilinux.org/2021/10/progress-report-september-202...

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#190

Post by coldtea »

zbobet2012 wrote: post #146
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

>this is really interesting Sadly this is not really interesting, it's disingenuous. He benchmarked against a ten year old (03/06/2012) server CPU. My two year old intel laptop cpu (i7-9750H) also outperforms the xeon's he's comparing against by almost 40%. The M1 is a great chip, it's sad that this got published with a "server chip" comparison at all. A real server class CPU from the modern era, at a comparable pric…

This comment comes off as idingenuous itself. What about the 3245 or the Threadpiper, also mentioned?
Post reply on HN