Live data from Hacker News

M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

eclecticlight.co

221–230 of 419 posts

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#221
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GPU is increasing a lot though. Another point is the CPU improvements are constant. In about two years the base M3 is now on par with the M1 Max.

It’s true but the problem with the GPU is Apple’s addiction to RAM money. Yes the GPU is improving in performance but it does you no good if it has to share a tiny amount of system RAM with the CPU.

Tiny? My M2 Air has 24g, which is more ram than any other laptop video card I've had.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you name or link any specific hardware or software you're using? Last time I looked into how to run 2 monitors on my M1 Air I gave up after seeing $400 docks that seemed to have performance issues for some people.

I have this for my m1 pro: https://a.co/d/gD5q8G3 It uses the 6950 DisplayLink chip, which can do 4K@60Hz. It's 90 dollars and drives 2 screens. Software is less good. I had to enable Rosetta2 to get the pkg to install. Then you have to boot to recovery mode to allow signed 3rd party drivers. And you get a creepy notice that someone is watching your screen, which is how the display driver works. Performance is pretty…

Is that because the screen generation is software based? I noticed that when using display link and couldn’t bare the input lag or worse the compression from moving a window too rapidly. Switched to a monitor with thunderbolt output and my coworkers thought I was being a diva.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#223
post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are making themselves more different from the rest of the market instead of "the same but better" which brought people back to the mac in the first place. It used to be as a normal person you bought the latest Mac and it came with the latest i7 and you didn't even think about it and none of your friends on PC could say anything bad about it because it was the same chip they had. Now it's like woo M chip is so di…

>It used to be as a normal person you bought the latest Mac and it came with the latest i7 and you didn't even think about it and none of your friends on PC could say anything bad about it because it was the same chip they had. Only a tiny, tiny fraction of people who buy computers have conversations like this with their friends. I am a software engineer and could not care less which chips my friends have in their la…

Then why is their marketing right now all about the chip not the product

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm using an M2 Air with 16GB and M1 Mini with 8GB. On the 8GB machine I have to restart Firefox every few days because otherwise it completely fills up RAM + Swap and the entire system starts getting sluggish. It's a very noticeable bottleneck while on the 16GB Macbook I don't really think about memory usage. I would not recommend the 8GB variant to anyone who plans on using it for more than a couple browser tabs an…

> I would not recommend the 8GB variant to anyone who plans on using it for more than a couple browser tabs and some light tasks. Which is basically all my kids do. Less than 10 tabs, nothing else.

I’m a heavy user often do 50 tabs and lots of apps in the background. 8gb M1 air is really fast for me.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#225

For context, a desktop intel 13900 to 1400 combined with at least a NVIDIA 4060 beats it...System76 Thelio Mira for example. Both in Single and Multicores and GPU memory bandwidth

Yes but only just and it used 5-10x more power.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#226
post #197

I don't see apple silicon in macs having been the right decision a decade from now because competing toe to toe with the entire semis industry on architecture has never worked before except in iphone where they had a huge first mover advantage.

I certainly thought this back in 2012 when Apple started designing their own mobile CPU cores. How could Apple compete with ARM's designs which would have much greater economies of scale or with Qualcomm who would be shipping way more units than Apple? More than a decade later and it's proven to be a durable competitive advantage. I would point out that Apple had no first mover advantage with the iPhone. Apple was us…

[deleted]

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#227
post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately this will never be fixed. It's not a technical problem. They refuse to ship software licensed under GPL v3, and bash 3.2 is the final GPL v2 version. I hate it.

I wonder why they haven’t fixed it yet by removing bash and the other GPL-licensed tools. Even if they currently need one to boot the system, they have the resources to change that.

I refuse to drop Samba and go back to AFP

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#228
post #22

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.

I bought my M1 MacBook Pro not long after they were released. It's approaching 3 years old which is a pretty standard age for people to start looking at a replacement - I guess that's why they're comparing it to the M1. 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 bou…

> It's approaching 3 years old which is a pretty standard age for people to start looking at a replacement

Is this really true? Three years sounds very new to me, and no one in their right minds would replace it.

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#229

And yet the air can’t support more than one monitor. I know Apple is a small company with only a few engineers so it must have been too hard. Sarcasm obviously. As an Apple enthusiast it’s so annoying how they sniff farts.

Only 1-monitor support seems like a market segmentation decision, not a lack of capability.

(Much like how the iPhone Pro has faster USB-C data transfer speeds vs base iPhone)

Re: M3 Macs: there's more to performance than counting cores

#230
post #208
post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple provided CLI tools should only be used to download the tools and versions of tools that you actually want. Why? Why do I need to use 3rd party package managers, or manual installations from 3rd party sources to install common tools that aren't a decade+ outdated? > When the OS version is tied to the version of so many other tools, it's a nightmare. It doesn't need to be tied to anything. If the OS needs speci…

> Why? Why do I need to use 3rd party package managers, or manual installations from 3rd party sources to install common tools that aren't a decade+ outdated? Because you want to control the version of 3rd party software. > It doesn't need to be tied to anything. If the OS needs specific libraries/tools then they can be installed in a separate location The OS installs tools in /usr/bin and you should install tools in…

We're not talking about keeping up to date with the latest revision of python / java here, it's a shell that's woefully out of date. Apple is not RHEL backporting fixes so binaries continue to run for 10 years - in fact they seem quite cavalier about backwards compatibility.
Post reply on HN