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

M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 882 posts

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#151

Post by bfgoodrich »

alwillis wrote: post #135
nix23 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Those machines are just standing around in their underwear now because the M1 stole all their pants. Not sure what shitty machine hes talking about, but my threadripper's are not impressed with some 4 core M1.

but my threadripper's are not impressed with some 4 core M1 The M1 has 8 CPU cores, 8 GPU cores and 16 Neural Engine cores. It also runs at 10 watts and maxes out at 24 watts. A Threadripper starts at over 100 watts…

To be fair, 4 of the cores on the M1 are efficiency cores and are very low performance (but sufficient performance, at incredible efficiency, for a lot of casual ongoing background things). An 8 performance core M1 would be a monster.

Not sure if it maxes out at 24 watts. Someone measured wall power of a Mac Mini hitting 21 watts at full load, but that's including power supply inefficiency, all of the supporting circuitry and IO, a fan, flash storage, etc.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#152

Post by ghaff »

aequitas wrote: post #137
ghaff wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultimately, it's all about Windows. I know it's hard for many of us who basically hardly see anything other than Mac or Linux laptops to really grok, but something like 90% of the laptops out there run Windows (if you exclude Chromebooks which AFAIK are mostly used in education).

Indeed, this is why Apple is able to take this leap and the PC platform hasn't so far. They don't have to wait for as many partners to get along for the ride.

And partners also means customers. A ton of those Windows systems (and I should have said systems--rather than laptops--as I don't know how things split out on laptops specifically) are going to non-technical users in big companies who absolutely do not want any changes that alter a menu or move an icon or introduce some incompatibility they have to deal with. They absolutely do not care whether there's some significant price/performance/watt boost if it otherwise introduces even mildly disruptive change.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#153

Post by macintux »

aequitas wrote: post #137
ghaff wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultimately, it's all about Windows. I know it's hard for many of us who basically hardly see anything other than Mac or Linux laptops to really grok, but something like 90% of the laptops out there run Windows (if you exclude Chromebooks which AFAIK are mostly used in education).

Indeed, this is why Apple is able to take this leap and the PC platform hasn't so far. They don't have to wait for as many partners to get along for the ride.

I think more accurately: Apple won't wait for partners to get along for the ride.

Backwards compatibility has long been a Microsoft obsession (out of necessity for the enterprise market) and an Apple allergy.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#154

Post by piokoch »

simias wrote: post #100

I've never owned a Mac and don't intend to own one but I'm very happy with this M1 move, mainly for the reasons highlighted in the introduction to the article: >M1 Macs embarrass all other PCs — all Intel-based Macs, including automobile-priced Mac Pros, and every single machine running Windows or Linux. Those machines are just standing around in their underwear now because the M1 stole all their pants. I think it's…

I am not sure if the derogatory tone is fair. This is just example how progress works. Not that long time ago Apple had to be saved by some pennies thrown by Microsoft. Not that long time ago Apple was moving from Motorola processors to Intel ones.

There is nothing bad that someone stayed behind. Someone has to stay behind if we want progress. No reason to insult predecessors.

Planc and Dirac weren't making fun of Newton. Minitel was used in France as some simple version of Internet years before Internet was created. Was Minitel bad? Should we make fun of it?

Was Minitel standing in its underwear in front of Internet? Has Dirac stolen Newton pants?

Intel made a lot of great stuff. Now Apple is making great stuff (or, to be precise, TSMC does). Next year someone else is going to make great stuff. Maybe Apple maybe not.

Intel and AMD chips are not that far behind, depending on what benchmark is used, even though they use older 14/10 or 7nm technology.

I also really hate the concept of not being able to upgrade RAM - If I use Mac and I need more RAM I need to throw away my old Apple laptop and buy a new one. So I have to spend way more money, not to mention impact on environment.

So, today, I am still choosing Intel/AMD computer, I can install whatever operating system I wish and upgrade my system to whatever configuration I dream about and I can afford now or in future.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#155

Post by Jonnax »

feelix wrote: post #99

It turns out that the benchmarks for M1 vs latest generation Intel & AMD CPU's are indeed overblown, and it is an incremental improvement more than a great leap forward. The source of the confusion has been the benchmarking software. To saturate one core on an Intel processor you need to run two threads, because that's the way they are designed. So the single thread benchmarks that have been used so far have been usi…

That article makes no sense whatsoever. And whoever wrote it doesn't not understand what they're talking about.

SMT is designed to boost performance in multitreaded workloads.

It can be thought as multitasking for a CPU core.

Using two threads for one benchmark and use one thread for another, it is not comparing single core performance.

Because why wouldn't that CPU schedule the load on other cores?

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#156

Post by soneil »

zionic wrote: post #126
nix23 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Those machines are just standing around in their underwear now because the M1 stole all their pants. Not sure what shitty machine hes talking about, but my threadripper's are not impressed with some 4 core M1.

Wait for an 8-core (or the rumored 12 core) variants. Those will embarrass your threadripper.

I really can't wait to see what they'll do in the desktop space. For all the gushing reviews the M1 is receiving, it's worth remembering this is their entry-level machines.

As it stands right now, I have an 18 month old 27" iMac with 64GB ram and an AMD gpu - and an 8GB M1. And I'm preferring the M1 for almost any task that doesn't demand the real estate.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#157

Post by spideymans »

tootie wrote: post #78
croes wrote: post #31

Fast and hot and slow and cool is still valid. The M1 is as fast or faster as other CPU but could surely run faster. But then it's getting hot.

IDK how it actually went down at Apple HQ but I can imagine. They are so, so keen on sleek, quiet machines that it tops all other concerns. When the hardware engineers said "more performance is going to require a fan or two" the leadership said "nah, let's design and fab our own CPUs".

More likely that they realized their iPad chips were faster than their Intel notebooks, and really had no choice but to move to their own chips on the Mac.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#158

Post by ghaff »

macintux wrote: post #153
aequitas wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, this is why Apple is able to take this leap and the PC platform hasn't so far. They don't have to wait for as many partners to get along for the ride.

I think more accurately: Apple won't wait for partners to get along for the ride. Backwards compatibility has long been a Microsoft obsession (out of necessity for the enterprise market) and an Apple allergy.

I'm not sure there's another company of Apple's size and influence which has consistently been so ready to dump legacy at least a beat before its customers were prepared for it. Headphone jack, 5 1/4" floppy, I'm sure a bunch of other things I'm forgetting.

"I'm going to dump Apple over this!"

"See ya. Don't let the door hit you on the way out!."

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#159

Post by nix23 »

zionic wrote: post #126
nix23 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Those machines are just standing around in their underwear now because the M1 stole all their pants. Not sure what shitty machine hes talking about, but my threadripper's are not impressed with some 4 core M1.

Wait for an 8-core (or the rumored 12 core) variants. Those will embarrass your threadripper.

>Wait for an 8-core (or the rumored 12 core) variants. Those will embarrass your threadripper.

It will not, my TR has 64 cores 128 Thread and you know whats the best thing? 128GB Ram...and imagine that..they aren't even soldered...and i even can exchange my GPU..or slap in 2 others.

And if apple ever brings out a M1 Workstation, i can probably buy 3 other Server/Workstations with that money.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#160

Post by dingaling »

bni wrote: post #27
perryizgr8 wrote: post #2

I don't understand the comparison to the iphone and android situation. As far as I can see, android phones are highly competitive with iphone on everything. The longest battery isn't on an iphone, the best camera isn't on an iphone, the latest screen tech isn't on an iphone, etc. etc. Coming to the M1 laptops, they beat comparable Windows laptops in every single metric. It's literally just a matter of looking at the…

Flagship iPhone absolutely crushes any flagship Android phone in benchmarks its not even close. Has been like this for many years. It is also very common that people that like Android are not aware of this for some reason.

AnTuTu Benchmark smartphones ranking:

Vivo Iqoo 5 Pro 671,218

OnePlus 8 Pro 590,112

iPhone 12 Pro 579,778

As ever, it depends what you're measuring

Post reply on HN