131–140 of 1001 posts
Strange that they mostly compare performance to M1, not M2. Probably means it's not as much faster than M2 as they would like.
One thing that left me a bit confused was the comparison against Intel Macs. Although I am still using an Intel 16-inch MacBook, I really wanted to see how the M3 fared against the M2, not Intel and M1. I think it's no surprise the M3 exceeds the Intel Core i7-9750H in basically all of Apple's own benchmarking. My real question, which will probably be answered next week, is how it compares to the generation right bef…
I don't understand why they don't update the entire lineup whenever a new chip comes out, especially if really only swapping the chip in the macbook pro and imac here. On a separate note does anyone have any insight on how unified memory compares to vram in the context of machine learning performance? Considering an H100 with 80GB costs like $30k a maxed out macbook pro with 128gb unified memory for $5k is interestin…
I expect it's a combination: 1. Engineering bandwidth (it's work to upgrade a lineup! They probably need at least a year) 2. Manufacturing bandwidth - they probably spent the first half of the year manufacturing the 3nm iphone processor while researching the mbp processor. I expect it's difficult to ramp manufacturing on many chips simultaneously 3. Sure, consider the demand side. If my parents are going to buy a new…
Sort of. It's that the whole concept of a "ramp" implies that manufacturing things (not just chips!) starts expensive and risky and get cheaper and reliable over time as people work out the kinks in the various processes.
The M2 is mature. TSMC can make them reliably and in high quantity at low marginal price. Why would you *not* sell a product like that if there's a market for it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calling it evil is a bit of a stretch.
Is it? Its pretty evil to overcharge and prey on a customer base who doesn't know any better, but would benefit from a more usable starting point, oh say 16... Tims a finance guy, they are kinda evil by default.
So they remove MacBook 13 inch and replace with MacBook 14 inch as base. Many people will see the $500 off. Good selling strategy. Btw, I didn't see the comparison with M2 chip. Could anyone give me the reference for that? Thank you.
How did Apple become so successful making high-end CPU chips on their own so quickly?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P.A._Semi
Am I the only one shaking my head that they kept comparing the M3 chips against M1 chips skipping M2? Just like the last product release spent more time on huffing their own farts (the Apple Watch is the first of its kind carbon negative product), there is no real innovation or something to garner interest for me here.
But also, I bought a 16" MacBook Pro M1 Max when it was announced. The M2 Max replacement was announced only 15 months later and didn't seem like a big enough improvement to justify buying. Maybe they know there are a lot of M1 owners with my mindset, and we're who they're pitching.
Something at Apple broke when they switched to their own silicon outside iPad and iPhone. They turned around the slow march toward parity on price:performance/RAM/storage and went screaming in the other direction. I really wanted to switch to mac when I was shopping for a new system earlier this year, but the prices were and remain ridiculous.
Am I the only one shaking my head that they kept comparing the M3 chips against M1 chips skipping M2? Just like the last product release spent more time on huffing their own farts (the Apple Watch is the first of its kind carbon negative product), there is no real innovation or something to garner interest for me here.
Are they not supposed to make comparisons? I don't understand what alternative you would like.