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

Apple M1 Ultra

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 855 posts

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#171

Post by gjsman-1000 »

cehrlich wrote: post #158
willcipriano wrote: post #87

Is it actually more powerful than a top of the line threadripper[0] or is that not a "personal computer" CPU by this definition? I feel like 64 cores would beat 20 on some workloads even if the 20 were way faster in single core performance. [0] https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-threadripper-3...

Seems like for things that are: 1. Perfectly parallel 2. Not accelerated by some of the other stuff that's on the Apple Silicon SoC's ...it will be a toss-up. Threadripper 3990X get about 25k in Geekbench Multicore [1] M1 Max gets about 12.5k in Geekbench Multicore, so pretty much exactly half [2] Obviously different tasks will have _vastly_ different performance profiles. For example it's likely that the M1 Ultra wi…

Also of note is that half of the Mac Studio's case is dedicated to cooling. Up to this point, all M1 Max benchmarks are within laptops while all Threadripper benchmarks are in desktops. The M1 Max in the Mac Studio will probably perform better than expected.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#172

Post by marcan_42 »

kasperni wrote: post #72
cube2222 wrote: post #4

Looks like all the people saying "just start fusing those M1 CPU's into bigger ones" were right, that's basically what they did here (fused two M1 Max'es together). And since the presenter mentioned the Mac Pro would come on another day, I wonder if they'll just do 4x M1 Max for that.

> I wonder if they'll just do 4x M1 Max for that. Unlikely, M1 Ultra is the last chip in the M1 family according to Apple [1]. "M1 Ultra completes the M1 family as the world’s most powerful and capable chip for a personal computer.”" [1] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/03/apple-unveils-m1-ultr...

I've been saying 4x M1 Max is not a thing and never will be a thing ever since the week I got my M1 Max and saw that the IRQ controller was only instantiated to support 2 dies, but everyone kept parroting that nonsense the Bloomberg reporter said about a 4-die version regardless...

Turns out I was right.

The Mac Pro chip will be a different thing/die.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#173

Post by pjmlp »

brailsafe wrote: post #77
pjmlp wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

80% of the desktop market and 100% of cloud deployments won't care.

Would 80% of "the desktop market"—whatever that means—care about Ice Lake to begin with, or any high end chip at all?

What they definitely won't care is Apple hardware at Apple prices, specially outside first world countries.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#174

Post by squeaky-clean »

cassac wrote: post #142
Omniusaspirer wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on Anandtech benchmarks the M1 Max GPU is basically on par with a mobile 3080, which a quick search tells me is about 60% as fast as a desktop 3080. Not unreasonable to believe 2 of them combined will outperform a 3090- with nearly 128 GB of VRAM to boot. Even more incredible Anandtech reports the M1 max GPU block maxing at 43W in their testing. So a 90W GPU in the M1 Ultra is trading blows with a 350+ watt 309…

What on earth are you talking about. That link shows it’s not even half as fast as the 3060, let alone the 3080. In borderlands it got 24 FPS while the 3080 got 52 FPS. How is that on par?

If you buy a Mac for gaming, you're going to have a bad time. Look at the GFXBench 5.0 benchmark. The first graph on the page.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#175

Post by em500 »

arcticbull wrote: post #102
msoad wrote: post #76

At what point Apple will put those chips in their servers or sell server chips? It only makes sense for them to take this architecture to the cloud deployments

They likely won't re-visit the Xserve, IMO. No reason to. They can't sell them at a premium compared to peers and its outside their area of expertise.

> They can't sell them at a premium compared to peers

Intel is believed to have pretty good margins on their server CPUs

> and its outside their area of expertise.

That's what people used to say about Apple doing CPUs in-house.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#176

Post by BurningFrog »

iSnow wrote: post #35
cube2222 wrote: post #4

Looks like all the people saying "just start fusing those M1 CPU's into bigger ones" were right, that's basically what they did here (fused two M1 Max'es together). And since the presenter mentioned the Mac Pro would come on another day, I wonder if they'll just do 4x M1 Max for that.

>I wonder if they'll just do 4x M1 Max for that. They'll be running out of names for that thing. M1 Ultra II would be lame, so M1 Extreme? M1 Steve?

"M1 More", would show Apple is fun again!

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#177

Post by lambda_dn »

msoad wrote: post #76

At what point Apple will put those chips in their servers or sell server chips? It only makes sense for them to take this architecture to the cloud deployments

They could be secretly working on their own cloud platform, with their data centres having a choice between M1, Pro Max ultra instances. $$$$

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#178

Post by TylerE »

rpmisms wrote: post #149
iSnow wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I wonder if they'll just do 4x M1 Max for that. They'll be running out of names for that thing. M1 Ultra II would be lame, so M1 Extreme? M1 Steve?

Steve would be awesome, but a deal with Tesla to use "Plaid" would be perfection.

Never happen.

Elon is somewhat toxic these days...

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#179

Post by jra101 »

pphysch wrote: post #116

> This enables M1 Ultra to behave and be recognized by software as one chip, so developers don’t need to rewrite code to take advantage of its performance. There’s never been anything like it. Since when did the average developer care about how many sockets a mobo has...? Surely you still have to carefully pin processes and reason about memory access patterns if you want maximum performance.

They are referring to the GPU part of the chip. There are two separate GPU complexes on the die but from the software point of view, it is a single large GPU.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#180

Post by klelatti »

zamadatix wrote: post #133
dljsjr wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple's ARM chips can process a metric ton of ops per cycle due to the architecture of the chip: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25257932

But the answer to the question is still "no".

Only if the only thing you compare is CPU performance - adding a big GPU on die adds a certain amount of ‘power’ by any measure.
Post reply on HN