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

Leaked Apple M5 9 core Geekbench scores

browser.geekbench.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 565 posts

Re: Leaked Apple M5 9 core Geekbench scores

#151

Post by remix2000 »

criddell wrote: post #130
remix2000 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends how you frame it; in my eyes, I'd be paying $1.4k USD after sales tax (at least here in the EU) for a laptop with measly 16 gigs of RAM… I could buy two normal laptops to outperform that for a price of one!

If you use the $1.4k USD laptop for 2 years, that works out to around $2 / day. If it’s a Mac, it probably has some resale value at the end of the time bringing the cost down closer to $1 / day. For a work machine, that’s pretty easy to justify.

I wouldn't expect an Apple product to last that long… This is from my personal experience and also family members who tried Apple, so your mileage may vary, I just wouldn't trust it.

Ignoring that though, if work machine means an Excel machine, then it's probably overspending IMO. If work machine means workstation, then you'd probably rather want one of the >1.6k models with more working memory… or just don't go Apple.

Re: Leaked Apple M5 9 core Geekbench scores

#152

Post by remix2000 »

bayindirh wrote: post #106
remix2000 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends how you frame it; in my eyes, I'd be paying $1.4k USD after sales tax (at least here in the EU) for a laptop with measly 16 gigs of RAM… I could buy two normal laptops to outperform that for a price of one!

Honestly asking, can you use either of them for a decade? From replacement parts and physical endurance perspective, I mean.

I don't think it's realistic to expect any tech made in the twenties last a decade…

Re: Leaked Apple M5 9 core Geekbench scores

#153

Post by spwa4 »

pico303 wrote: post #94
traceroute66 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but I mean, 20% is not that much for 99% of the population. As long as you're ok being tethered to the wall, and even then, guzzling power. The whole point of Apple Silicon is that its performance is exactly the same on battery as tethered to the wall AND it delivers that performance with unmatched power efficiency. Its the same on pure desktop. Look at the performance per watt of the Mac Mini. Its just nuts how po…

My “fancy” Windows work laptop has 45 minutes of battery life, while my M3 MacBook Pro will go 14 hours compiling C++ or running JavaScript and Docker images, and do so twice as fast as my work laptop could. I’d say you get what you pay for, but my work laptop was around the same price as my M3. I wouldn’t be opposed to going back to Linux. But once you stop looking for power sockets all the time and start treating y…

That's because your company's security department has virus scanners scanning every bit of code (including 99% of the virus scanner itself).

Re: Leaked Apple M5 9 core Geekbench scores

#154

Post by kwanbix »

Zak wrote: post #140
kwanbix wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are OK with the closed apple ecosystem, sure, but I mean, 20% is not that much for 99% of the population. Don't get me wrong, I really admire what apple has done with the M CPUs, but I personally prefer the freedom of being able to install linux, bsd, windows, and even weirder OSes like Haiku.

It does not appear to me that Macs are closed in the sense that iOS is. It is possible, at least to install Linux on Apple silicon Macs. There are certainly many more options on the PC side, but it's not because Apple actively blocks users from running another OS.

As far as I understand, the only Linux you can install on an M CPU is Asahi linux. Apple is not doing anything actively, but is also doing nothing to help linux be ported.

Re: Leaked Apple M5 9 core Geekbench scores

#155

Post by sys_64738 »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #117
zf00002 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading on my 8gb M2 Air that I have not once ever felt is lacking.

Glad you’ve had a good experience, maybe we just got a bad computer. But I know what I saw ultimately and what it was was a brand new M3 machine running like crap.

Try installing Vitals.app open source app to see what's going on:

https://github.com/hmarr/vitals

Stats is another good one too:

https://github.com/exelban/stats

Re: Leaked Apple M5 9 core Geekbench scores

#156

Post by bayindirh »

remix2000 wrote: post #152
bayindirh wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly asking, can you use either of them for a decade? From replacement parts and physical endurance perspective, I mean.

I don't think it's realistic to expect any tech made in the twenties last a decade…

I still expect Mac and Thinkpad hardware to last a decade, sans their batteries. A good desktop PC made from better parts will also endure without much effort.

Re: Leaked Apple M5 9 core Geekbench scores

#157

Post by CharlesW »

latexr wrote: post #149
CharlesW wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strategies change. That was 7 years ago, pre-Apple Silicon. It turns out that people want windowing options on their large and expensive tablet, to do long-running tasks in the background, etc.

> That was 7 years ago, pre-Apple Silicon. There have been rumours of Apple wanting to shift Macs to ARM chips for 14 years. When they made that announcement, they already knew. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_transition_to_Apple_silico... It was obvious it was going to happen. I remember seeing Apple announcing iPads doing tasks my Mac at the time could only dream of and thinking they would surely do the switch. >…

> When they made that announcement, they already knew.

Yep, the ongoing convergence made that pretty clear. The emphatic "No" was to reassure 2018's macOS developers that they wouldn't need to rewrite their apps as xOS apps anytime soon, which was (and is) true 7 years later.

This is the same session where Craig said, "There are millions of iOS apps out there. We think some of them would look great on the Mac." and announced that Mohave would include xOS apps. Every developer there understood that, as time went on, they would be using more and more shared APIs and frameworks.

> The problem isn’t them making iOS (or iPadOS) more like macOS, it’s them doing the reverse.

That ship has sailed, but it's also completely overblown.

Re: Leaked Apple M5 9 core Geekbench scores

#159

Post by red369 »

pier25 wrote: post #105
alberth wrote: post #98

Looks like an improvement over the M4 iPad of: Single Core: ~12% (3679 vs 4133) Multi Core: ~15% (13420 vs 15437) Which is in alignment historically with improvements from a new node improvement. https://browser.geekbench.com/ios_devices/ipad-pro-13-inch-m...

> since M5 will be on the new (smaller) 2nm node AFAIK the M5 is still 3nm being produced at the TSMC N3P node.

I frequently forget that the 2 nm naming has nothing to do with the physical size anymore. I hate that naming system.

From Wikipedia: Node name Gate pitch Metal pitch Year 5 nm 51 nm 30 nm 2020 3 nm 48 nm 24 nm 2022 2 nm 45 nm 20 nm 2025 1 nm 40 nm 16 nm 2027

Re: Leaked Apple M5 9 core Geekbench scores

#160

Post by thenaturalist »

stego-tech wrote: post #72

Damn impressive if true, but I’ll be honest, I still don’t feel the need to replace my M1 iPad Pro or my M1 Pro Macbook Pro. They’re both more than amazing for my use cases - though if Apple suddenly took gaming seriously, like extending Rosetta to act as a translation layer for Windows games a la Proton, I’d gladly throw down for an M5 Ultra when it’s released.

Local LLMs will be one of those things where you'll feel a difference.

Not much else I can think of as well.

M1 is still insane. Apps, OS emulation... just chuggs along.

Post reply on HN