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

Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#291

Post by soulofmischief »

hk1337 wrote: post #248
soulofmischief wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just that, but if you're not running ARM images then it's running a VM for your docker images to boot. It's just mind-blowing how many containers I have running and my laptop is cool to the touch, and at full battery.

You’re running a VM either way on a Mac. Docker without a VM is only available on Linux. EDIT I get your intent though because it runs better when the images match the host.

Yep! But at least it can leverage hyperkit and vastly reduce overhead when running images of matching architecture.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#292

Post by SparkyMcUnicorn »

hk1337 wrote: post #248
soulofmischief wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just that, but if you're not running ARM images then it's running a VM for your docker images to boot. It's just mind-blowing how many containers I have running and my laptop is cool to the touch, and at full battery.

You’re running a VM either way on a Mac. Docker without a VM is only available on Linux. EDIT I get your intent though because it runs better when the images match the host.

MacOS can run MacOS containers natively, but I understand that's not much help for most people.

https://macoscontainers.org/

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#293

Post by bee_rider »

Jensson wrote: post #202
nblgbg wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The M3 chips are 30% faster than the M2 chips for efficiency cores and 15% faster for performance cores. The overall performance is still impressive and there is no alternative to M*s when compared with performance per watt. But others have caught up, for example https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-ryzen-9-7940hs is very good.

> But others have caught up You mean others now got to use TSMC's 4nm process? These new M3 chips are probably on the 3nm process, Apple is still a generation ahead here. It looks like Apples aim is to always stay a generation ahead of its competition, I wonder how long they can keep that up since they aren't running their own fabs.

Not running their own fabs makes it easier, right? They presumably pay a premium for being the first to use a generation, but not anywhere near as much as the full cost of developing it, since TSMC can sell that capacity to everybody else when they are done with it.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#295

Post by mschuster91 »

internet2000 wrote: post #158
koito17 wrote: post #102

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 imagine the amount of people upgrading from an M2 Mac will be close to 0, while there's a lot of Intel stragglers out there.

I'm one of them. For work, come and grab my 2019 16in from my cold dead hands - it may not have the battery lifetime of my private 2022 M2 MBA, but at least I don't have to fight weird issues with x86 Docker images (especially anything involving a JDK runtime, i.e. Tomcat, tends to act up). And no, converting these images to ARM isn't an option, the source image doesn't come from us, and we need to reproduce the exact software environment to reproduce bugs.

And for me as a Samsung phone user, I'm pretty annoyed that I have to drag out a win10 machine every time I want to update the firmware of my phone because Odin is only available on Windows and UTM can't use Rosetta to emulate a Windows VM at any acceptable speed or stability.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#296

Post by iAMkenough »

sosodev wrote: post #85

What's the deal with "dynamic caching"? I wish they would have talked about it more. It sounds like they're reducing memory allocations by only allocating what is actually needed.

You got it. Instead of letting software developers allocate a static cache with overhead that eats a little into the unified memory, the Mac gets to decide how to dynamically allocate and release cache for graphics. They said it would be "transparent to developers," but not really sure what that means exactly.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#297

Post by bufo »

kivlad wrote: post #160

A few things I noticed, as I'm seeing the variety of SKUs becoming more complex. - Note that memory bandwidth is down. M2 Pro had 200GB/s, M3 Pro only has 150GB/s. M3 Max only has 400GB/s on the higher binned part. - Just like the low-spec M3 14" has one fewer Thunderbolt port, it also doesn't officially support Thunderbolt 4 (like M1/M2 before it) - The M3 Pro loses the option for an 8TB SSD. Likely because it was a…

It was pretty hard to saturate the memory bandwidth on the M2 on the CPU side (not sure about the GPU).

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#298

Post by WillPostForFood »

Love the improvement on the CPUs, but I was hoping for bigger iMacs and smaller Macbooks. I work at home on a 27" iMac, and on the road on a 12", 2 pound Macbook. We are years into the M generation of chips, and iMacs are still stuck at 24", and laptops are minimum 3 pounds and 13".

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#299

Post by rewmie »

latchkey wrote: post #255
andrewprock wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still using a 2015 macbook for my personal daily driver. I have to plug it in regularly, but otherwise it works just fine for everything except video editing.

Any reason for not upgrading?

> Any reason for not upgrading?

Why is this sort of question always framed as if people have to provide a justification for not buying a new model, as if spending money on the new shiny without any reason is normal or desirable?

We live in a day and age where hardware bought a decade ago still packs enough punch to run most of today's software without any hiccup. Why would anyone waste their cash to replace something that works without having any compelling reason?

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#300

Post by saagarjha »

photonerd wrote: post #204
polishTar wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition to the reduced memory bandwidth, the M3 pro also loses 2 performance cores for only 2 more efficiency cores. M2 pro: 8 performance cores + 4 efficiency cores. M3 pro: 6 performance cores + 6 efficiency cores. Not a great trade... I'm not sure the M3 pro can be considered an upgrade

Depends. Is it faster? Then it's an upgrade. Has the CPU industry really managed to pull off it's attempt at a bs coup that more cores always === better? I thought we'd learned our lesson with the silly Mhz Myth already?

Faster than what? M1 Pro? Just barely.
Post reply on HN