Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#481

Post by josephg » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:18 AM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #37

systemvoltage wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per core performance is the most interesting metric. Edit: for relative comparison between CPUs, per core metric is the most interesting unless you also account for heat, price and many other factors. Comparing a 56-core CPU with 10-core M1 is a meaningless comparison.

Not when building large software projects.

> Not when building large software projects.

While working in rust I am most limited by single core performance. Incremental builds at the moment are like, 300ms compiling and 2 seconds linking. In release mode linking takes 10+ seconds with LTO turned on. The linker is entirely single threaded.

Fast cold compiles are nice, but I do that far more rarely than incremental debug builds. And there’s faster linkers (like mold[1] or lld) but lld doesn’t support macos properly and mold doesn’t support macos at all.

I’m pretty sure tsc and most javascript bundlers are also single threaded.

I wish software people cared anywhere near as much about performance as hardware engineers do. Until then, single core performance numbers will continue to matter for me.

[1] https://github.com/rui314/mold

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#482

Post by ben-schaaf » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:23 AM UTC

spitfire wrote: post #397

What am I missing here? The marketing presentations spoke about 200GB/sec and 400GB/sec parts. Existing CPU's generally have 10s of GB/sec. But I see these parts beating out existing parts by small margins - 100% at best. Where is all that bandwidth going? Are none of these synthetic benchmarks stressing memory IO that much? Surely compression should benefit from 400GB/sec bandwidth? This also raises the question how…

As people stated in the announcement post, a high memory bandwidth doesn't really benefit CPUs much. That's also why AMD and Intel don't have high memory bandwidth on their cores, because it doesn't really help performance.

Where it is beneficial is the GPU; for comparison AMD and Nvidia cards often exceed 400GB/s. A desktop RTX 3090 has 900GB/s.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#483

Post by saila » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:23 AM UTC

throwaway894345 wrote: post #234

blakesterz wrote: post #100

I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things. For years I worked* on an Ubuntu desktop machine I built myself. Early this year I switched to a brand new M1 mini and this this is slower and less reliable than the thing I built myself that runs Ubuntu. My Ubuntu machine had a few little issues every no and then. My Mini has weird bugs all the time. e.g. Green Screen Crashes when I have…

That's Docker for Mac versus native Docker. Docker only runs on Linux, so Docker for Mac spins up a linux VM to run your containers. When you mount your Ruby or Python projects into your containers, Docker for Mac marshals tons of filesystem events over the host/guest boundary which absolutely devastates your CPU. Docker for Mac is really just bad for your use case. No idea what's going on with the thumb drive, bluet…

I used to run Docker on an older Intel Mini and it was fine--a little slow but usable. I've also used it on other Intel Macs without major issues, including running giant Java apps and SQL Server.

On my M1 Mini, I found it unstable and incredibly slow (for Postgres at least, using stock images from Docker Hub) and mostly quit using it. I upgraded to the latest version recently and it was still too slow.

For everything else, though, I find that the M1 Mini is significantly faster. E.g., compiling Python versions is way faster.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#484

Post by samcat116 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:23 AM UTC

Gigachad wrote: post #450

kstrauser wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My opinion: the jump from 16GB to 32GB probably won't make a huge difference today, especially if your workload is already running alright in 16GB. I think it'll greatly extend the useful life of the laptop, though. For example, I wouldn't want to be using an 8GB laptop today.

I have no idea why, but my 16gb M1 mac is working perfectly for me while my 16gb dell xps with linux was not cutting it. I have no idea why doing pretty much the same thing is using less memory but other people have said this too.

The M1 SSD is significantly faster than previous Macs. Could be that swapping is much less noticable now. I also have a 16GB M1 Mini and haven't noticed an issue either.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#485

Post by grishka » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:26 AM UTC

ksec wrote: post #167

I have seen far too many people making comments on MacPro "Pro" Chip. A hypothetical 32 Core CPU and 64 Core GPU is about the max Apple could make in terms of die size reticle limit without going chiplet and TDP limit without some exotic cooling solution. Which means you cant have some imaginary 64 Core CPU and 128 Core GPU. We can now finally have a Mac Cube, where the vast majority of the Cube will simply be a heat…

> about the max Apple could make in terms of die size reticle limit without going chiplet

I probably have no idea what I'm talking about as I'm a software guy. But — I remember that company that made that crazy ML accelerator where an entire silicon wafer is one chip. How'd they do that? Why can't Apple and others do the same/similar?

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#486

Post by mettamage » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:28 AM UTC

eulers_secret wrote: post #470

delfinom wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AMD is already planning not only 20% YoY performance improvements for x86 but now has 30x efficiency plan for 2025. I think x86 is in it for much longer than a decade. Intel otoh, depends on if they can gut all the MBAs infesting them.

Alder lake is looking really good in leaked benchmarks. I definitely think Intel is down, but not out. Have to see if they can not only catch up, but keep up.

Where can I find these benchmarks?

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#487

Post by qudat » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:28 AM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #245

blakesterz wrote: post #100

I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things. For years I worked* on an Ubuntu desktop machine I built myself. Early this year I switched to a brand new M1 mini and this this is slower and less reliable than the thing I built myself that runs Ubuntu. My Ubuntu machine had a few little issues every no and then. My Mini has weird bugs all the time. e.g. Green Screen Crashes when I have…

> I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things. Two reasons: 1. M1 is a super fast laptop chip. It provides mid-range desktop performance in a laptop form factor with mostly fanless operation. No matter how you look at it, that's impressive. 2. Apple really dragged their feet on updating the old Intel Macs before the transition. People in the Mac world (excluding hackintosh) were stu…

For reference, I’m looking to purchase a framework laptop. If I’m lucky I’m going to get 8 hours of battery life. Real number for M1 mbp reach 16+ hours, doubling the laptop of my choice.

That is crazy impressive and something that I wish I could get in the ultrabook form factor.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#488

Post by grishka » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:30 AM UTC

metahost wrote: post #64

This is the comparison to a mid 2015 15" MacBook Pro for anyone who is curios: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/10513492?baseli... Summary: single core performance gain is 2x whereas multi-core performance gain is 4x.

Comparison with the 2012 macbook I'm typing this on: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/10496766?baseli...

I waited for these to come out for a long time, and now "should I upgrade" isn't even a question. It's a "shut up and take my money" situation at this point, but they aren't even taking preorders over here yet. I mean, it could probably run a browser, several electron apps, AND android studio at the same time, how cool is that?!

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#489

Post by genewitch » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:32 AM UTC

caycep wrote: post #476

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't get me wrong: It's impressive and I have huge respect for it. I also bought one. However, it would be surprising if Apple's new 5nm chip didn't beat AMD's older 7nm chip at this point. Apple specifically bought out all of TSMC's 5nm capacity for themselves while AMD was stuck on 7nm (for now). It will be interesting to see how AMD's new 6000 series mobile chips perform. According to rumors they might be launche…

well....M1 Max single core also beating a 5950x But tbh, it doesn't seem the new hotness in chips is single core CPU, it's about how fancy you spend the die space in custom processors, in which case the M1 will always be tailored to Apple (and presumably Mac users') specific use-cases...

My 5950x compiles the Linux kernel 10 seconds faster than a 40 core xeon box, in like 1/10th the power envelope.

The chances of actually getting a only a single core working on something are slim with multitasking, I had to purpose build stuff - hardware and kernel/etc for CPU mining a half decade ago to eliminate thermal and pre-emption on single threaded miners.

Single thread performance has been stagnant forever because with Firefox/chrome and whatever the new "browser app" hotness is this month your going to be using more than 1 core virtually 100% of the time, so why target that. Smaller die features means less tdp which means less throttling which means faster overall user experience.

I'm glad someone is calling out the M1 performance finally.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#490

Post by scoopertrooper » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:33 AM UTC

smoldesu wrote: post #431

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't get me wrong: It's impressive and I have huge respect for it. I also bought one. However, it would be surprising if Apple's new 5nm chip didn't beat AMD's older 7nm chip at this point. Apple specifically bought out all of TSMC's 5nm capacity for themselves while AMD was stuck on 7nm (for now). It will be interesting to see how AMD's new 6000 series mobile chips perform. According to rumors they might be launche…

This definitely is a factor. Another thing that people frequently overlook is how competitive Zen 2 is with M1: the 4800u stands toe-to-toe with the M1 in a lot of benchmarks, and consistently beats it in multicore performance. Make no mistake, the M1 is a truly solid processor. It has seriously stiff competition though, and I get the feeling x86 won't be dead for another half decade or so. By then, Apple will be com…

> This definitely is a factor. Another thing that people frequently overlook is how competitive Zen 2 is with M1: the 4800u stands toe-to-toe with the M1 in a lot of benchmarks, and consistently beats it in multicore performance.

It's a bit unfair to compare multicore performance of a chip with 8 cores firing full blast against another 8 core chip with half of them being efficiency cores.

The M1 Max (with 8 performance cores) multicore performance score posted on Geekbench is nearly double the top posted multicore performance scores of the 5800U and 4800U (let alone single core, which the original M1 already managed to dominate).

It'll be interesting to see how it goes in terms of performance-per-a-watt. Which is what really matters in this product segment. The graphs Apple presented indicated that this new line up will be less efficient than the original M1 at lower power levels, but they'll be able to hit it out of the park at higher power levels. We'll have to wait to see the results from the likes of Anandtech to get the full story though.

Personally, I'd love to see a MacBook 14 SE with an O.G. M1, 32 GB memory, a crappy 720p webcam, and no notch. I'd buy as many of those as they'd sell me.

I'm curious to see how the M1 Pro compares to the M1 Max. They are both very similar processors with the main differences being the size of the integrated GPU and the memory bandwidth available.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q...