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

411–420 of 855 posts

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#411

Post by alasdair_ »

polyrand wrote: post #258

I think the GPU claims are interesting. According to the graph's footer, the M1 Ultra was compared to an RTX 3090. If the performance/wattage claims are correct, I'm wondering if the Mac Studio could become an "affordable" personal machine learning workstation (which also won't make the electricity bill skyrocket). If Pytorch becomes stable and easy to use on Apple Silicon [0][1], it could be an appealing choice. [0]…

Note the label on the y-axis. "relative performance" from "0-200" seems like marketing bullshit to me.

"M1 Ultra has a 64-core GPU, delivering faster performance than the highest-end PC GPU available, while using 200 fewer watts of power."

Note that they say "faster performance" not "more performance". What does "faster" mean? Who knows!

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#412

Post by snowwrestler »

marcan_42 wrote: post #172
kasperni wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Plus they are running out of M1 superlatives. They’ll have to go to M2 to avoid launching M1 Plaid.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#413

Post by TheKarateKid »

Geee wrote: post #307

This is insane. They claim that its GPU performance tops the RTX 3090, while using 200W less power. I happen to have this GPU on my PC and not only it costs over $3000, but its also very power-hungry and loud. Currently, you need this kind of GPU performance for high resolution VR gaming at 90 fps, but its just barely enough. This means that the GPU will run very loudly and heat up the room, and running games like HL…

What we're seeing right now with Apple's M1 chips for desktop computing is on the same level of revolutionary as what the original iPhone did for mobile phones.

The advancements in such a short period of time in the amount of computing power, low power usage, size, and heat usage of these chips is unbelievable and game-changing.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#414

Post by nr2x »

miohtama wrote: post #407
outworlder wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too bad that historically Apple has not given any attention to Mac gaming.

Apple has now too much money and is running out of core business areas. Expect more investing in non-Apple areas like gaming, cars, etc. Though every video game company on the planet hates them because of App Store terms.

The first half of the event was old wine in new bottles - I reckon that’s the main growth area they are squeezing.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#415

Post by Dylan16807 »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #276

In some ways I wish this processor was available from a CPU chip seller. As a compute engine it gets a lot "right" (in my opinion) and would be fun to hack on. That said, the idea that USB C/Thunderbolt is the new PCIe bus has some merit. I have yet to find someone who makes a peripheral card cage that is fed by USBC/TB but there are of course standalone GPUs.

> That said, the idea that USB C/Thunderbolt is the new PCIe bus has some merit. I have yet to find someone who makes a peripheral card cage that is fed by USBC/TB but there are of course standalone GPUs.

I hope we get closer to that long-standing dream over the next few years.

But right now you can see laptop manufacturers so desperate to avoid thunderbolt bottlenecks that they make their own custom PCIe ports.

For the longest time, thunderbolt ports were artificially limited to less than 3 lanes of PCIe 3.0 bandwidth, and even now the max is 4 lanes.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#416

Post by neogodless »

j_d_b wrote: post #333

M1 has the most powerful chip ever yet it still can't handle two monitors.

This is not relevant to the Apple M1 Ultra.

From the Mac Studio technical specifications

> Simultaneously supports up to five displays:

> Support for up to four Pro Display XDRs (6K resolution at 60Hz and over a billion colors) over USB-C and one 4K display (4K resolution at 60Hz and over a billion colors) over HDMI

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#417

Post by ricardobeat »

unicornfinder wrote: post #363
airstrike wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean I get to save AND have fun building my own PC?

Not to mention if you build your own PC you can upgrade the parts as and when, unlike with the new Mac where you'll eventually just be replacing the whole thing.

Since the context here is using these machines for work, a mid-level engineer will easily cost an extra $1000* in his own time to put that together :)

EDIT: I’m quite confident this is not at all an exaggeration. Unless you have put together PCs for a living. $100/h (total employment cost, not just salary), 1-2 hours of actual build & setup, 8 more hours of speccing out parts, buying, taking delivery, installing stuff and messing around with windows/Linux (I’ve probably spent 40 hours+ in the past couple years just fixing stuff in my windows gaming pc. At least 1 of those looking for a cabled keyboard so I could boot it up the first time, ended up having a friend drive over with his :D)

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#419

Post by joshspankit »

kllrnohj wrote: post #360
polyrand wrote: post #258

I think the GPU claims are interesting. According to the graph's footer, the M1 Ultra was compared to an RTX 3090. If the performance/wattage claims are correct, I'm wondering if the Mac Studio could become an "affordable" personal machine learning workstation (which also won't make the electricity bill skyrocket). If Pytorch becomes stable and easy to use on Apple Silicon [0][1], it could be an appealing choice. [0]…

The GPU claims on the M1 Pro & Max were, let's say, cherry picked to put it nicely. The M1 Ultra claims already look suspicious since the GPU graph tops out at ~120W & the CPU graph tops out at ~60W yet the M1 Studio is rated for 370W continuous power draw. Since you mention ML specifically, looking at some benchmarks out there (like https://tlkh.dev/benchmarking-the-apple-m1-max#heading-gpu & https://wandb.ai/tcapel…

Watching the keynote I was almost thinking that Nvidia missed the boat when they chose not to sign whatever they had to to make OSX drivers.

Thank you for recalibrating me to actual reality and not Apple Reality (tm)

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#420

Post by restlake »

pathartl wrote: post #358
bee_rider wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could they do a multi-socket board for the Mac Pro?

They would never do that

They have done this previously for dual socket Xeons. Historical precedence doesn’t necessarily hold here, but in fact, it’s been done on the “cheese graters” previously
Post reply on HN