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

MacBook Pro M1X benchmarks have leaked

tomsguide.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 141 posts

Re: MacBook Pro M1X benchmarks have leaked

#51

Post by [deleted] »

sooheon wrote: post #46
byefruit wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any evidence for this claim? The actual concrete performance numbers for the M1 and Zen3 don't agree with you at all: M1: https://images.anandtech.com/doci/16252/latency-m1_575px.png Zen3: https://images.anandtech.com/doci/16214/lat-5950.png If anything the M1's ram has _higher_ latency than the Zen3. (Can't reply to the sibling comment but Intel's numbers are even better: https://images.anandtech.com/doc…

> like doing said editing smoother with fewer dropped frames than far more powerful Intel machines with a lot more RAM Just noting Zen3 is not Intel.

[deleted]

Re: MacBook Pro M1X benchmarks have leaked

#53

Post by ricardobayes »

jp555 wrote: post #29
imtringued wrote: post #14

Intel should be scared of its own failures. Apple is merely a competitor that didn't fall asleep.

Also Apple didn't have to do ~80% of what Intel has to do - you know, the actual building of chip fabs as well as chip design. "merely" LOL.

Who manufactures them for Apple?

Re: MacBook Pro M1X benchmarks have leaked

#55

Post by ksec »

Applejinx wrote: post #26
windexh8er wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other thing is RAM. Apple still has delusions of gimping it's buyers into 16/32GB for "Pro" level machines. I'd probably buy a 16" MBP with this chip if I could get it with socketed 64/128GB. But Apple's going to solder it to the board and charge a premium even if they did.

Rules change. I've got one of the 16GB RAM Macbook Pros. They've got it acting like it's L2 cache instead of RAM as we know it, so the place where you need more than 128G becomes, well, the SSD, your mass storage. These things already don't act as if it's RAM as we're used to considering it. They could probably have shipped the first ones with 4G RAM and had 'em act relatively normal… with heavy stuff like 4K video e…

>They've got it acting like it's L2 cache instead of RAM....... These things already don't act as if it's RAM as we're used to considering it.

Please stop this non-sense on HN. DRAM is DRAM. L2 Cache is L2 Cache. Doesn't matter how good its 8-Channel LPDDR4X Memory Architecture sitting next to the Die in the same package it is still just DRAM.

Re: MacBook Pro M1X benchmarks have leaked

#56

Post by alexellisuk »

I was surprised how well the 5800X holds up to the new M1 and M1X. Given the boost I felt with my MBA M1, I thought my NUC8i7HVK felt sluggish in comparison and was considering a new PC build - or moving off a "Linux Desktop" to M1X if it was dramatically better than incumbent desktop processors.

Seems like I can keep Linux and build a 5800X, and have > 32GB RAM to boot.

For those happy with MacOS as a daily drive, the Mac Mini is incredible value vs a full PC build.

Re: MacBook Pro M1X benchmarks have leaked

#57

Post by lou1306 »

martinald wrote: post #12
windexh8er wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other thing is RAM. Apple still has delusions of gimping it's buyers into 16/32GB for "Pro" level machines. I'd probably buy a 16" MBP with this chip if I could get it with socketed 64/128GB. But Apple's going to solder it to the board and charge a premium even if they did.

Yeah it's really annoying that 8/256 is the base still. It's been like that for years - I think that's been the same since around 2016. Would be much better if the base model was 16/512, but that's $500 of nearly pure profit apple would lose.

It's a textbook example of price discrimination on Apple's part. They know that the 8/256 model is not enough for several classes of Pro users, so they can sell the 16/512 model at a premium (while increasingly locking down their devices to prevent after-market upgrades).

Re: MacBook Pro M1X benchmarks have leaked

#58

Post by nixgeek »

bombcar wrote: post #28
friseurtermin wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlikely, the M1 page [0] says "2 displays" and I'm pretty sure the MBP supports internal display + Touchbar + external display. And even that is based on high-res displays, I think it could support more external displays at FHD [1]. [0]: https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-apple_m1-1804 [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqINozYxDK8

I wonder if their new GPU somehow is limited on display support (and they basically have to "add cores" to get more displays). My current 16" MBP has no problem driving a total of five displays and 16,041,600 pixels - and I'd be hard pressed to go back to just two external displays.

It’ll happily drive significant numbers of pixels although the resources used by Window Server do appear to scale somewhat proportionate to what you hook up:

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210754

I’ve found a Pro Display (6K) and two other Dell 4K works fine, additional to the internal display (it’s a MBP 16” and not running in clamshell mode).

MacBook 16”: 3072x1920

Pro Display: 6016x3384

Dell U2718Q: 3840x2160 (x2)

Total Pixels: 42,845,184

Modern hardware is frankly amazing. I remember the 22” Trinitron CRTs of years ago and owning and driving one of those was a feat, now we have multiple displays with PPI such that with average visual acuity everything is so incredibly crisp.

Re: MacBook Pro M1X benchmarks have leaked

#60

Post by ksec »

loceng wrote: post #54
MikusR wrote: post #38

Note that Tom's Guide is not the same thing as Tom's Hardware despite the same owner. It's where all the clickbait and low quality content of Future plc goes.

That's considerate that they realized they shouldn't compromise the quality of the one site?

Yes it is one of those thing Tomshardware and Anandtech had problems with in their early days. They dont report rumours, only Facts and in-depth reviews. But rumours gets the click and ads revenue.
Post reply on HN