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

251–260 of 882 posts

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#251

Post by scarface74 »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #247
zepto wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The numbers say otherwise.

When iPhone came out in 2007, Android was still an OS for BlackBerry like devices. It didn't take long for Android to discover touch screens once Apple made it clear that they were dramatically better. Similarly, it's not like other ARM chip manufacturers are going to have to go through all of the same R&D expense to figure out how to make chips that are comparably fast--they just need to copy what Apple did without…

If it were so easy, why are all of the other ARM manufacturers years behind?

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#252

Post by wmf »

mlyle wrote: post #210
colinmhayes wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably because there's basically no competition in the ARM space, especially in non-mobile. I'd like to see what amd and intel can do with ARM before saying apple will continue to be king.

Qualcomm, Samsung, Cavium/Marvell, and nVidia don't count? Not to mention ARM's own cores...

They don't count in the PC space. For desktop PCs there's just the Mac mini and various hacker boards. For laptops there's the new MacBooks and the mediocre Qualcomm 8cx/SQ2 and nothing else.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#253

Post by adkadskhj »

zepto wrote: post #177
simias wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple's ARM SoCs are definitely ahead, but it's not like the competition is hugely far behind. Top of the line Android phones and tablets perform well enough for most desktop tasks IMO. It's mostly the software and I/O that makes them unusable as such.

The numbers say otherwise.

Do they? Because i have yet to see any numbers that aren't clearly the result of a massively streamlined SoC. Yes the ARM chip is great, but the RAM is blazing, tiny, and more close to the ARM chip than anything out there for x86, right?

I'll be interested to see if Apple can keep this up with 128GiB of RAM and a beefy GPU.

So far to me M1 is great, ARM is great, but comparing a tiny amount of RAM soldered onto the CPU compared to flexible and huge RAM potential devices seems dishonest. Unless Apple manages to squeeze 128GiB of RAM on their chip, at least.

I want to see what my Blender workstation looks like on Apple's Architecture. Where i purpose built a huge CPU, GPU, and RAM for Blender rendering and large scenes. I suspect Apple will start seeing huge falloffs in the SoC design under larger workloads.

Apple is dominant in making phones though. And this Laptop is designed like a Phone. So yea, it's amazing for that.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#254

Post by ogre_codes »

ekianjo wrote: post #208
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…

> But I think the overarching point is true: now desktop and laptop makers can't just pretend that having a hot and/or slow, clunky, noisy x86-based architecture is just a fact of life. I hope and expect that it'll help create a new generation of ARM-based laptops and maybe even desktops that will run cool and smooth. Be careful what you wish for. X86 is the most open architecture right now. ARM, on the other hand, h…

> X86 is the most open architecture right now.

x86 is not "Open" in any fashion. You can't license x86 even for a fee, let alone free.

While ARM isn't open either, it is by comparison far more available to license at reasonable cost.

> ARM, on the other hand, has locked bootloaders

It also has open/ unlocked boot loaders. One of the advantages of licensable technology like this is you can have a lot of different architectures with the same underlying core. With x86, you get whatever the Intel/ AMD duopoly decide to ship you.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#255

Post by giorgioz »

The fact that reviewers of M1 chips are also saying things like "Safari is faster than Chrome" or "iOS is faster than Android" do make the other statements on M1 lose credibility.

"Safari is faster than Chrome" NOPE Now that IE is gone, Safari is the new IE by being the last not-ever-green browser always behind in features. So many benchmarks again and again proved Chrome and Firefox to be faster than Safari.

"iOS is faster than Android" NOPE It just depends on the device. Of course the latest iPhone is faster than a 300$ mid-low range Android device. Pick the top Android devices vs iPhones and you will see it's a tough race with no clear winner.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#257

Post by turtlebits »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #173
username3 wrote: post #105

There are no honest 8GB reviews. Gruber is selling 8GB Macs based on 16GB review units. This is the iPad 1 with 256MB all over again.

The justification that 16GB is "enough" from the Apple blogger clique like Gruber is ridiculous. Even if it is "enough" it's still what my MacBook Pro I bought 6 years ago shipped with for several hundred dollars less than this one. Why are we giving Apple a pass on RAM being stuck at 8GB and SSD being stuck at 128GB (only very recently bumping to 256) for almost a decade. Not to mention some of us get stuck on 8GB 1…

I've always gone cheap for personal use and the last 3 MacBooks Pros I've purchased were i3/i5 8GB models, and never have had perf/memory issues (even with 2 users logged in)

Work provides i7/i9 with maxed out RAM and honestly don't see a night and day difference in performance.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#258

Post by snazz »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #247
zepto wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The numbers say otherwise.

When iPhone came out in 2007, Android was still an OS for BlackBerry like devices. It didn't take long for Android to discover touch screens once Apple made it clear that they were dramatically better. Similarly, it's not like other ARM chip manufacturers are going to have to go through all of the same R&D expense to figure out how to make chips that are comparably fast--they just need to copy what Apple did without…

In my opinion, Apple "derisked" high-performance ARM chips with the A9-ish era five years ago. Other companies have had a long time to spend catching up to Apple mobile chips, and they haven't.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#259

Post by rsanheim »

CoolGuySteve wrote: post #147
marricks wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It very well may be over hyped but with the breakdown of Dennard scaling[1] the gains we've seen in CPUs has been pretty minor generation to generation. I think that could also be the reason it is getting so hyped, it is a tangible improvement over other CPUs. 50% more battery life, better performance in some case, what's the last CPU generation we saw such gains? Probably pretty far back to when Dennard sclaing was…

But AMD did just that with the Ryzen 4000 series. I'm on a 3 month wait list right now to get an 8 core/16 thread AMD Thinkpad. Nobody else currently produces a sub-15W part with that much computational power. The major difference vs the M1 is that AMD's micro-PCB design scales in core count rather than producing a single dense power-efficient die.

> I'm on a 3 month wait list right now to get an 8 core/16 thread AMD Thinkpad. Nobody else currently produces a sub-15W part with that much computational power.

This is a big part of the reason that the AMD mobile chip comparisons seem to be kinda besides the point for me. For a bunch of reasons, its almost impossible to get a high quality laptop today w/ the latest and greatest AMD chips that people love to compare to the M1 chips. I know AMD makes great chips, but what does that matter if you can't get buy them in a laptop today?

FWIW - I love AMD, I have a Ryzen desktop for gaming. Its fantastic the competition they are bringing in the desktop market. But I don't want to play the game of searching far and wide for high quality laptops that have the new Ryzen chips _and_ are actually in stock somewhere in a configuration I want _and_ are from a reputable manufacturer.

I was able to pickup a M1 Air on release date w/ the upgraded specs from my local Apple store. It's a glorious machine, and I knew the build quality and hardware is going to be top notch.

OEMs still largely prefer Intel for laptops for whatever reason, which sucks, and it seriously hampers the ability for AMD to compete in this market.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#260

Post by ogre_codes »

the_af wrote: post #120
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 want to believe. If we can end up with superfast, supercool ARM-based Linux laptops, that'd be a huge deal :)

Someone needs to spend the time/ money to design this M1 killer CPU. There is very little money in delivering powerful Linux laptops.

ARM based Linux server CPUs? Very likely. Low end/ Chromebook style laptop ARM CPUs, Already exist.

Performant ARM CPUs designed for laptops? I expect you just gotta hope Windows on ARM takes off or start porting Linux to M1 Macs.

Post reply on HN