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

191–200 of 328 posts

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#191

Post by buildbot »

Uehreka wrote: post #158
TYPE_FASTER wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's why I heat my house with a dell C4140! The _lowest_ power throttle it has is 1.4KW.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#192

Post by zozbot234 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #5
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.

> there was a longstanding prediction that the arm architecture would overtake x86. So now the wheel turns and someone will have to predict how long it takes before RISC-V overtakes ARM.

RISC-V has a few ISA advantages over ARM64 (mainly the variable length instructions, which provide instruction density that's comparable with x86 while still being very easy to decode) but meaningful competition would have to come from something more like the upcoming Mill architecture - VLIW-like power efficiency with the same flexibility and IPC as current OOO designs.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#193

Post by mmgutz »

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.

I'm an AMD fan.

The comparison should not even be close TBH. We're talking about a laptop chip that can run on battery for an extended period of time that performs as well and sometimes better than the high end consumer AMD desktop chip. Kudos to Apple.

I'm not suprised. Apple has the lead in the fabrication process, 5nm vs 7nm. I eagerly await a true apples to apples comparison when AMD uses the same 5nm process.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#194

Post by soylentnewsorg »

paulmd wrote: post #160
soylentnewsorg wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And a Porshe is the same as a Kia, just with a few racing features.

>You don’t understand what you’re talking about

So you look at the graph I linked that shows the Xeon model is faster than the consumer I9 chip. And your brain says "the Xeon is slower." Then tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.

Tell me, do you ever stand in a lake and tell people you're dry? Are you in the lake to hide the pee? Do you tell people about the wonders of horse dewormer?

See, the only way your argument works is to compare the M1 to the I9. And despite the Xeon being faster than the I9, as literally and plainly shown in the tests I linked, you keep saying it's slower. ... But then you keep saying they're the same. Reality: it's faster, literally look at the numbers. Your mental gymnastics are amazing. I am not hostile. I have been getting great laughs and relaxation out of you. Yes, that comes at your expense.

> person who tried to explain it to you

By saying wet is dry. I get your explanation. I just see what my eyes tell me. You see blue, your brain says "nah, it's orange."

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#195

Post by coldtea »

speed_spread wrote: post #104
glasshead969 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has to be 3x faster to match M1's efficiency given the TDP is 30 vs 105.

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.

>If you're plugged in all the time, lower TDP is nice but not critical.

"If you're plugged in all the time" then try the Mac Pro version when it comes out.

This is about performance in laptop models, where it IS critical.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#196

Post by soylentnewsorg »

panda88888 wrote: post #188
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.

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.

His assertion is that the faster chip is slower, not 3% faster. Please do read what he says before claiming what he asserts. I do also love how everyone completely ignores that the M1 doesn't have ECC memory, and only has half the memory. While having much, less display resolution. Have I mentioned the Dell pro line can go up to 14TB of storage? And no, it's not a brick. Quite thin and about 7lb. only 2lb heavier than the m1 max.

one of these is a pro laptop. the other is a mid-tier laptop claiming to be a pro.

This is my favorite from the trump voters - I mean apple fanbois. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Mac_G4_Cube

That underpowered little acrylic piece of crap was marketed by apple as a "personal supercomputer." Slower than a gateway from radioshack, but the apples ate it up blindly.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#197

Post by NathanielK »

chris37879 wrote: post #163
bparrish0 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern heat pumps provide a lot more than 100% efficiency. I'd stick to the heating system unless those containers are doing something profitable (mining?)

Literally nothing provides 100% efficiency. You're conflating coefficient of performance with efficiency. They're not even close to the same thing, modern heat pumps reach their CoP because they don't actually generate heat, they simply move it around, which provides more heat indoors than if you had converted an equivalent amount of electricity directly into 100% heat. Thermodynamics would not take kindly to you hav…

> because they don't actually generate heat Heatpumps still do use electricity(or other power), and all that electricity also ends up as heat. It's why heatpumps have higher CoP than the same system as a refrigeration cycle.

> Thermodynamics would not take kindly to you having a >99.999...% efficient anything

Well the cogen gas powerplants here can produce 50kWh of electricity from burning 100kWh of natural gas. I can use 50kWh of electricity to put 200kWh of heat into my house with a heatpump.

Seems like a good deal to me, and I think carnot would be fine with that.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#198

Post by threeseed »

partiallypro wrote: post #55
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

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.

Do you have a link to these benchmarks ?

Well be very interesting to see given Alder Lake is dumping AVX-512 which was one of their core performance strengths against AMD. Albeit at staggering cost in thermals and power.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#199

Post by glenneroo »

Osiris wrote: post #167
paulmd wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

task energy comparisons are usually won by the processor that gets it done fastest in absolute terms: because of the overhead of the rest of the system, it takes a really big perf/watt win to come out ahead of the system that maybe isn't as efficient in actual watts but gets it done in half the time, because you pay the system overhead for a shorter period of time. it's also a 128-thread processor being put against a…

I have an AMD Ryzen 5900X and it is nearly the same in single core and much faster multi-core (12 core). So I don't think it's accurate to say that x86 needs 4x the silicon just it match the M1.

So why don't you write up an article and provide some benchmarks? You'll win lots of internet points, at least on Hacker News, as a lot of people seem pretty upset that Apple's new silicon is killing it.

Re: Rendering on the Apple M1 Max Chip

#200

Post by saagarjha »

bredren wrote: post #142
grp000 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would be cool if they try to decouple the GPU and CPU for server units somehow.

I think they will with a new release of the “Afterburner” card, this time powered by Apple Silicon instead of FPGAs. https://www.gettingtechnologyright.com/apples-mac-pro-wheels... >The second bit of design is in the optional “Afterburner” video editing card. The discussion of it starts at around the 1hr. 26 min. point in the Keynote. It is described as a custom FPGA-based HW accelerator. It is claimed to be capable…

Isn't the point of a FPGA that you can reconfigure it? It seems like a waste to expend it on another CPU.
Post reply on HN