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

781–790 of 855 posts

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#781

Post by hedgehog »

freemint wrote: post #688
fouc wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could be worth tracking what you did and make a new set of instructions, and trying to reproduce with a fresh install.

This is something Apple should pay people for.

Deep learning support for Mac is not going to happen at a level of quality you can rely on for research & dev work (like PyTorch + TensorFlow). The underlying problem is no big company cares about Mac platform and the work to maintain framework support for a specific piece of hardware is way beyond a hobby project. If you want your own on-prem hardware just buy Nvidia.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#782

Post by ralfd »

Geee wrote: post #605
needle0 wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, Varjo Aero is a clear outlier in terms of resolution and definitely does not represent the current typical VR headset experience (which in early 2022 would be around Quest 2 or Valve Index). If you went out of your way to get an expensive niche high-end headset, it struggling on a 3090 is your problem, not HL:A's.

I'd say that its just a couple of years ahead of the mainstream curve. My thinking is that Apple probably wants to make a very high resolution VR headset (similar or close to Varjo Aero), and it seems that with their new chips, they might be able to pull it off.

How is the foveated rendering? Is it noticeable?

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#783

Post by kayoone »

kllrnohj wrote: post #748
kayoone wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

prices in Europe right now are considerably higher than $0.30/kWh

It seems safe to say prices right now are not the norm due to, you know, that whole war thing going on that is impacting one of the EU's primary power supplies. The 2021 EU average was otherwise $0.22/kWh.

yeah but let's how fast we have those "normal" prices again, maybe this is the new normal, who knows.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#784

Post by willis936 »

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…

The relative graphics claims are particularly dubious. M1 Ultra has 10% less memory throughput than a 3090. I somehow doubt that nvidia has left performance on the table that Apple is picking up, even with the power savings of being on a smaller node. On the balance of things this just seems wrong. The intuitive range of relative performance for a 3090 in flat-out single precision vector workloads should top out at 90% but more likely 75% or less.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#785

Post by lostlogin »

flipgimble wrote: post #442
miohtama wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"every video game company" = Epic Games, and mostly because they don't like to pay overhead for their Fortnite loot boxes that most parents wish they could have some control over. I don't have allegiance to either company mostly because they don't care about me, just my money.

> I don't have allegiance to either company mostly because they don't care about me, just my money.

This criticism is something that is a positive to me. Opposing companies are often dependant on adverting money and the things this leads to are a whole lot worse in my view.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#786

Post by lostlogin »

nr2x wrote: post #414
miohtama wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Or was it last seasons wine in old bottles?

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#787

Post by lostlogin »

onethought wrote: post #504
outworlder wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Except when Bungie was going to release Halo on Mac[0] and Microsoft swooped in bought them and made it an Xbox thing. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tzrme9yWens

The Marathon days were really great. That jump was a huge loss to me, even if it wasn’t to Apple.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#788

Post by kingaillas »

the_af wrote: post #753
threeseed wrote: post #711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> GPU performance matters (Game performance, ML training perf) No one plays games on a Mac. And it has nothing to do with GPU performance but rather the fact that the audience simply isn't interested in gaming on it and so there is no economic incentive to target them. So the GPU performance that matters to Mac users and is relevant to Apple is not games but rather content creation, production etc.

> No one plays games on a Mac. My wife does (I play games on Linux). I have friends who own Macs who reluctantly dual boot to Windows just to play some games -- they would completely ditch Windows if they could just play every game on Mac. I see there are Mac games on Steam. All of this points to the situation being more nuanced than "no one plays games on Mac".

I interpret these sorts of statements to be short for "a statistically insignificant number of people play games on macos (or linux)" rather than the literal case where as long as a single person does, it is false.

According to the steam hardware survey, Windows is 95%, Macos is 4%, and Linux is 1%. And to dig deeper you'd need to see what games that 5% of the non-Windows is playing - are they simpler games that don't need graphics acceleration (e.g. puzzle games, roguelikes, etc) or ones that do?

My desktop is an Intel NUC running Ubuntu, and yeah I play games on it. Slay the Spire, Spacechem, even some older MMOs like DDO or LoTRO (which run but at 15-20 fps since that system just has Intel Iris). I'm unable to even start many others (e.g. Grim Dawn) due to not having dedicated graphics.

So yeah it's nuanced but lots of games that need a graphics card don't run or even display on that system.

That's why I have a windows gaming system too. I'm realistic, the market just isn't there. I used to have a Mac (dropped it in 2018) and if I still did I'd subscribe to Geforce Now or just do console gaming.

Re: Apple M1 Ultra

#790

Post by jbluepolarbear »

kingaillas wrote: post #788
the_af wrote: post #753

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one plays games on a Mac. My wife does (I play games on Linux). I have friends who own Macs who reluctantly dual boot to Windows just to play some games -- they would completely ditch Windows if they could just play every game on Mac. I see there are Mac games on Steam. All of this points to the situation being more nuanced than "no one plays games on Mac".

I interpret these sorts of statements to be short for "a statistically insignificant number of people play games on macos (or linux)" rather than the literal case where as long as a single person does, it is false. According to the steam hardware survey, Windows is 95%, Macos is 4%, and Linux is 1%. And to dig deeper you'd need to see what games that 5% of the non-Windows is playing - are they simpler games that don'…

Grim Dawn is just poorly implemented. I have a Ryzen 3700x with a 2070 super and Grim Dawn runs like crap.
Post reply on HN