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

MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 1001 posts

Re: MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max

#201

Post by fooblaster »

kamranjon wrote: post #101
butILoveLife wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I'm not sure if you're just unaware or purposefully dense. It's absolutely possible to get those numbers for certain models in a m4 max and it's averaged over many tokens, I was just getting 127tok/s for 700 token response on a 24b MoE model yesterday. I tend to use Qwen 3 Coder Next the most which is closer to 65 or 70 tok/s, but absolutely usable for dev work. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle, many peop…

what inference runtime are you using? You mentioned mlx but I didn't think anyone was using that for local llms

Re: MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max

#202

Post by CrazyStat »

re-thc wrote: post #157
jsheard wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Look how many people bought Minis and ended up just paying for API calls anyway. (Saw it IRL 2x, see it on reddit openclaw daily) Aren't the OpenClaw enjoyers buying Mac Minis because it's the cheapest thing which runs macOS, the only platform which can programmatically interface with iMessage and other Apple ecosystem stuff? It has nothing to do with the hardware really. Still, buying a brand new Mac Mini for that…

> Aren't the OpenClaw enjoyers buying Mac Minis because it's the cheapest thing which runs macOS That's likely only part of the reason. Mac Mini is now "cheap" because everyone exploded in price. RAM and SSD etc have all gone up massively. Not the mention Mac mini is easy out of the box experience.

It's not cheap, though. Two weeks ago I bought a computer with a similar form factor (GMKtec G10). Worse CPU and GPU but same 16GB memory and a larger SSD for 40% the price of a base mac mini ($239 vs $599). It came with Windows preinstalled, but I immediately wiped that to install linux. Even a used (M-series) mac mini is substantially more expensive. It will cost me about an extra penny per day in electricity costs over a mac mini, but I won't be alive long enough for the mac mini to catch up on that metric.

I considered the mac mini at the time, but the mac mini only makes sense if you need the local processing power or the apple ecosystem integration. It's certainly not cheaper if you just need a small box to make API calls and do minimal local processing.

Re: MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max

#203

Post by whywhywhywhy »

$5000 laptop you have to pay to add a power adapter… gratuitous penny pinching from Tim Cook's Apple.

It's one of those things, yes if I'm spending that much on a laptop I can afford to spend $80 on the adapter too, but does it feel good as a customer to do that or are you souring the experience of buying from you just to earn a few more dollars.

Re: MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max

#204

Post by bsimpson »

jeanlucas wrote: post #171
manofmanysmiles wrote: post #114

I love the following section of their copy: > Even More Value for Upgraders > The new 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max mark a major leap for pro users. There’s never been a better time for customers to upgrade from a previous generation of MacBook Pro with Apple silicon or an Intel-based Mac. I read as "Whoops we made the M1 Macbook Pro too good, please upgrade!" I think I will get another 2-5 years…

Well, I just upgraded from Intel late last year. There are lots of users still on Intel :)

There was a magical window at Google where you could be issued an iMac Pro 5k. (To this day, the standard issue monitor is still 1440p.)

~9 years later, there are a lot of people still using it as their main machine, waiting until we get kicked off the corp network for lack of software support.

Re: MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max

#205

Post by satvikpendem »

nsbk wrote: post #188
satvikpendem wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The next macOS will be touch screen centric with elements getting bigger when you're close to touching them, rumors say. That being said, I run Tahoe and it works perfectly fine to me, I am not sure what issues people have with it. Sure, some corner radii aren't exactly the same but I honestly couldn't give less of a shit as long as it runs the programs I need.

Safari routinely using 20+ Gb of memory with a handful of tabs open. Safari tabs refusing to close. Unresponsive System Settings window. Random application freezes and crashes, Apple Music not playing music. This is on a 32Gb M1 Max. My M1 Air on Sequoia doesn't experience any of these issues, even if it has half the unified memory.

I never had any of those issues, but then again I don't use Safari or other Apple apps like music.

Re: MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max

#206

Post by vardump »

tristor wrote: post #198

I am very excited by this, but I am a bit dampened that the maximum memory available is 128GB. I was really hoping for 256GB, which would allow me to run frontier models locally. I think with 128GB it's still feasible to use this with something like Qwen3-Coder-Next and MiniMax-M2.5, but things like Kimi-K2.5 will require significant quantization to fit and model performance will really suffer. I'm really wanting to…

Tell me about it. I checked the page thinking whether I should go for 256 GB or 512 GB RAM model.

128 GB maximum.

Sigh.

Re: MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max

#207

Post by Hamuko »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #92
Hamuko wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried to use a local LLM on an M4 Pro machine and it's quite painful. Not surprised that people into LLMs would pay for tokens instead of trying to force their poor MacBooks to do it.

What are the other specs and how's your setup look? You need a minimum of 24GB of RAM for it to run 16GB or less models.

48 GB MacBook Pro. All of the models I've tried have been slow and also offered terrible results.

Re: MacBook Pro with M5 Pro and M5 Max

#208

Post by aurareturn »

klausa wrote: post #168
aurareturn wrote: post #4

Whoah, both the Pro and Max CPUs feature 18 cores. This hasn't happened since M1 Pro/Max. This is a surprise. Also, the mix of cores have changed drastically. - 6 "Super cores" - 12 "Performance cores" I'm guessing these are just renamed performance and efficiency cores from previous generations. This is a massive change from the M4 Max: - 12 performance cores - 4 efficiency cores This seems like a downgrade (in core…

I don't think the "new" Performance cores are just "renamed" "E" / "Efficiency" cores; Apple has retroactively renamed the baseline M5 nomenclature to say it has "10-core CPU with 4 super cores and 6 efficiency cores"; so they're clearly keeping the "efficiency cores" nomenclature around. I think this is a new design, with Apple having three tiers of cores now, similar to what Qualcomm has been doing for a while. I t…

Interesting. This is clearly a big CPU change if so. I wonder why no E cores. I’m sure E cores would be more efficient at OS tasks than the new performance cores.

For example, 6 super, 8 performance, and 4 efficiency.

Post reply on HN