101–110 of 551 posts
So what is the role of the Mac Studio now? It only has: - faster memory and up to 192 GB. - 1 ekstra Thunderbolt port. That is not much for such a large price difference: Mac Mini (fastest CPU, 64 GB ram, 1 TB SSD, 10 GbE): $2500 Mac Studio (fastest CPU, 64 GB ram, 1 TB SSD, 10 GbE): $5000
I'm confused. They're claiming "Apple’s M4 Max is the first production CPU to pass 4000 Single-Core score in Geekbench 6." yet I can see hundreds of other test results for single core performance above 4000 in the last 2 years?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AMD's latest Strix Point mobile chips are on par with M3 silicon: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Z8WKR0VHfJw
I was looking into this recently as my M1 Max screen suddenly died out of the blue within warranty and Apple are complete crooks wrt honouring warranties. The AMD mobile chips are right there with M3 for battery life and have excellent performance only I couldn't find a complete system which shipped with the same size battery as the MBP16. They're either half or 66% of the capacity.
Huh? I've used AC for both MBP and iPhones a number of times over the years, and never had an issue. They are known for some of the highest customer ratings in the industry.
What's crazy is that the M4 Pro is in the Mac mini, something so tiny can handle that chip. The Mac Studio with the M4 Max will be awesome but the Mini is remarkable.
I am still astounded the huge change moving from an Intel Mac to an Apple Silicon Mac (M1) has had in terms of battery performance and heat. I don't think i've heard the fans a single time I've had this machine and it's been several years. Nor have I had any desire to upgrade.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They’ve always been good enough for gaming. The problem has just been whether or not publishers would bother releasing the games. It’s unfortunate that Apple can’t seem to really build enough momentum here to become a gaming destination.
It has always baffled me why Apple doesn't take gaming seriously. It's another revenue stream, it would sell more Macs. It's profit. Is it just some weird cultural thing? Or is there some kind of genuine technical reason for it, like it would involve some kind of tradeoffs around security or limiting architecture changes or something? Especially with the M-series chips, it feels like they had the opportunity to make…
Mac gaming is a nice-to-have; it's possible, there's tools, there's Steam for Mac there's toolkits to port PC games to Mac, there's a games category in the Mac app store, but it isn't a major point in their marketing / development.
But don't claim that Apple doesn't take gaming seriously, gaming for them it's a market worth tens of billions, they're embroiled in a huge lawsuit with Epic about it, etc. Finally, AAA games get ported to mobile as well and once again earn hundreds of millions in revenue (e.g. CoD mobile).
For how long? There are a lot of superlatives ("simply incredible" etc) - when some new AMD or Intel CPU beats this score, will that be "simply incredible" too? New chips are slightly faster than previous ones. I am not incredulous about this. Were it a 2x or 3x or 4x improvement or something, sure. But it ain't - it's incremental. I note how even in the Apple marketing they compare it to generations 3 or 4 chips ago…
They want the people who are still clinging to intel mac to convert finally. And as for m1 comparisons, people are not changing laptops every year and that is the cohort of m users that is the most likely to upgrade. It's smart to do what apple did.
This confuses me because I thought all of the Mx series chips in the same generation ran at the same speed and has the same single-core capabilities? The main thing that caused differential single-core CPU performance was just throttling under load for the devices that didn't have active cooling, such as the MacBook Air and iPad Pros. Based on this reasoning, the M4, M4 Pro and M4 Max in active cooled devices, the Ma…
It might be down to the memory latency, the base M4 uses LPDDR5X-7500 while the bigger models use LPDDR5X-8533. I think that split is new this generation, and the past gens used the same memory across the whole stack.
How many people does this actually affect? Gamers are better off with AMD X3D chips, and most productivity workloads need good multicore performance. Obviously MR is great silicon and I don't want to downplay that, but I'm not sure that best singlecore performance is an overly useful metric for the people who need performance.
> Gamers are better off with AMD X3D chips Yeah but then you'd have to use Windows. I'd rather just play whatever games can be emulated and take the performance penalty. It helps that most AAAs put me to sleep...
I mean no Infiniband of course, but how bad would a cluster of these guys using Thunderbolt 5 for networking be? 80Gbps is not terrible…