21–30 of 419 posts
Feels like we’ve gone from “it’s just better, it’s obviously better you can see with your eyes and feel it as you use it” when M1/2 dropped. To trying to justify why the M3 is 20% faster than the M1 and the M2 was also 20% faster than the M1 and weirdly Apple is only comparing it to their older processor. Like people, maybe it’s just an underwhelming update… no need to pretend it’s not.
Feels like we’ve gone from “it’s just better, it’s obviously better you can see with your eyes and feel it as you use it” when M1/2 dropped. To trying to justify why the M3 is 20% faster than the M1 and the M2 was also 20% faster than the M1 and weirdly Apple is only comparing it to their older processor. Like people, maybe it’s just an underwhelming update… no need to pretend it’s not.
Slight tangent - even though the MBP has been struggling to handle my dev work (partly because the codebase I'm working on has grown significantly in the last two years) I won't be upgrading. Work bought me a MacStudio (M2 Max), which mainly runs headlessly on my desk (also running Homebridge and plugged into my big speakers for AirPlay). This means I'm keeping the MBP as my portable machine (using VSCode's remote extensions and/or CodeServer to do dev work from wherever). I also have a late-2015 27" iMac at the office (with OpenCore Legacy Patcher so it can run whatever the latest macOS is called nowadays). This also works perfectly well now all the hard stuff is done on the MacStudio - and the screen is still lovely. (My previous 27" iMac was in active service for 10 years, although it was almost unusable towards the end).
Another tangent - I bet that's why they're not doing the larger "pro" iMacs. If it weren't for VSCode Remote Extensions and OCLP, I would have ended up with a beautiful monitor that was essentially useless (as was my original 27" iMac). People who need that extra power should probably avoid all-in-ones and I won't be getting one again.
But for most people, who tend to have a single machine, a comparison to the 3 year old equivalent seems pretty fair to me.
It seems like the M3 favors efficiency and thermals over raw power. This makes sense for the devices they've put it in. I wonder if we're going to see different processors (M3X or M4) for the next release of the pro desktops, that favor power over thermals and efficiency? Maybe there will be a kind of tick-tock, with odd numbered processors favoring efficiency and even numbered processors for power? M3, M5, M7 for th…
It seems like the M3 favors efficiency and thermals over raw power. This makes sense for the devices they've put it in. I wonder if we're going to see different processors (M3X or M4) for the next release of the pro desktops, that favor power over thermals and efficiency? Maybe there will be a kind of tick-tock, with odd numbered processors favoring efficiency and even numbered processors for power? M3, M5, M7 for th…
Doesn't prioritizing efficiency and thermals make sense for any device? Even a desktop has moments when it's doing almost nothing but has tasks that can adequately be handled by an E core where powering up a P core is overkill. Doesn't being efficient mean that more of the thermal budget can be held in reserve for when it's actually needed? Don't desktop users desire for their powerful machine to also be quiet?
Apple is dictating how much power the CPU is allowed to draw and they don't let it scale up. They are also making a static choice about how much die area and power to spend on the GPU, which might not suit every user. I know I personally don't give a rip about the GPU in my M2 mac mini, beyond the fact that it can draw things on the screen.
This is good to know. I worry about the longevity of these new M-series processors from Apple since they're so (relatively) new. What is the usable lifespan of a base M1-MacBook Air for example? I guess I'll find out since I just bought one for my kid who is a junior in HS and I'm hoping this will last until they graduate college.
For context my M1 Air feels as good as the day I bought it and it's just about to hit 3 years old. I kept my previous 2014 MBP for 6 years and I can't see this one being any different.
This seems to be a lot of effort to rationalize the surprisingly small performance increase from M2 to M3. Initially the assumption was that M2 to M3 would be a bigger step than M1 to M2, not a smaller one. Perhaps TSMC 3nm is showing the limits of scaling?
It's a tick and some people... especially marketing departments want to sell it as a tock.
Feels like we’ve gone from “it’s just better, it’s obviously better you can see with your eyes and feel it as you use it” when M1/2 dropped. To trying to justify why the M3 is 20% faster than the M1 and the M2 was also 20% faster than the M1 and weirdly Apple is only comparing it to their older processor. Like people, maybe it’s just an underwhelming update… no need to pretend it’s not.
This is good to know. I worry about the longevity of these new M-series processors from Apple since they're so (relatively) new. What is the usable lifespan of a base M1-MacBook Air for example? I guess I'll find out since I just bought one for my kid who is a junior in HS and I'm hoping this will last until they graduate college.
For a while now, the lifespan of Apple devices has mostly been limited by Apple stopping to provide software updates. Most Macs from 20 years ago still work fine today. If some component died, it was usually the hard drive or the power supply in my experience. Apple Silicon will definitely be the architecture best supported by Apple for the foreseeable future. There is no downside to it in terms or reliability or lon…
Sure, macs from 20 years ago still work "fine", but the reason they aren't widely used anymore is not the lack of software updates.
This seems to be a lot of effort to rationalize the surprisingly small performance increase from M2 to M3. Initially the assumption was that M2 to M3 would be a bigger step than M1 to M2, not a smaller one. Perhaps TSMC 3nm is showing the limits of scaling?
Feels like we’ve gone from “it’s just better, it’s obviously better you can see with your eyes and feel it as you use it” when M1/2 dropped. To trying to justify why the M3 is 20% faster than the M1 and the M2 was also 20% faster than the M1 and weirdly Apple is only comparing it to their older processor. Like people, maybe it’s just an underwhelming update… no need to pretend it’s not.
1. I think you set your expectations too high. 2. I assume Apple compared the M3 to M1 because most of the customers they are targeting are still on the M1. M2 customers bought a computer less than a year ago and that pool of people is relatively small compared to the number on M1 today.
Well, they did announce it in an event called "scary fast". I mean there's always marketing exaggeration, but I did expect more than trying to understand if it's even faster at all. Otherwise I'm not entirely certain what the point was.