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

Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

#541

Post by jrk »

saijanai wrote: post #456
gamacodre wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, I guess that was as bad an idea as the 640K one.

How much per 8K x 10 bit color, video frame? Roughly 190GB per minute without sound. Trying to do special effects on more than a few seconds of 8K video would overwhelm a 64GB system, I suspect.

Video and VFX generally don't need to keep whole sequences in RAM persistently these days because:

1. The high-end SSDs in all Macs can keep up with that data rate (3GB/sec) 2. Real-time video work is virtually always performed on compressed (even losslessly compressed) streams, so the data rate to stream is less than that.

Re: Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

#542

Post by partiallypro »

CharlesW wrote: post #503
partiallypro wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention all the eWaste that comes with the AirPods.

Who's doing better to mitigate e-waste? > "AirPods are designed with numerous materials and features to reduce their environmental impact, including the 100 percent recycled rare earth elements used in all magnets. The case also uses 100 percent recycled tin in the solder of the main logic board, and 100 percent recycled aluminum in the hinge. AirPods are also free of potentially harmful substances such as mercury, B…

Weird that they leave out the parts about the battery and casing waste; and are design to only last on average of 18 months to force you to buy new ones.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/neaz3d/airpods-are-a-tragedy

Re: Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

#543

Post by cududa »

bla3 wrote: post #82

This is about the processors, not the laptops, so commenting on the chips instead. They look great, but they look like they're the M1 design, just more of it. Which is plenty for a laptop! But it'll be interesting to see what they'll do for their desktops. Most of the additional chip area went into more GPUs and special-purpose video codec hardware. It's "just" two more cores than the vanilla M1, and some of the effi…

Edit: I was wrong! Thanks for pointing it out

Not exactly. M1 CPU, GPU, and RAM were all capped in the same package. New ones appear to be more a single board soldered onto mainboard, with a discrete CPU, GPU, and RAM package each capped individually if their "internals" promo video is to be believed (and it usually is an exact representation of the shipping product) https://twitter.com/cullend/status/1450203779148783616?s=20

Suspect this is a great way for them to manage demand and various yields by having 2 CPU's (or one, if the difference between pro/ max is yield on memory bandwidth) and discrete RAM/ GPU components

Re: Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

#544

Post by morei »

Unklejoe wrote: post #126
PaulKeeble wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

400GB/s available to the CPU cores in a unified memory, that is going to really help certain workloads that are very memory dominant on modern architectures. Both Intel and AMD are solving this with ever increasing L3 cache sizes but just using attached memory in a SOC has vastly higher memory bandwidth potential and probably better latency too especially on work that doesn't fit in ~32MB of L3 cache.

The M1 still uses DDR memory at the end of the day, it's just physically closer to the core. This is in contrast to L3 which is actual SRAM on the core. The DDR being closer to the core may or may not allow the memory to run at higher speeds due to better signal integrity, but you can purchase DDR4-5333 today whereas the M1 uses 4266. The real advantage is the M1 Max uses 8 channels, which is impressive considering t…

L3 is almost never SRAM, it's usually eDRAM and clocked significantly lower than L1 or L2.

(SRAM is prohibitively expensive to do at scale due to die area required).

Edit: Nope, I'm wrong. It's pretty much only Power that has this.

Re: Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

#545

Post by Rapzid »

mohanmcgeek wrote: post #124

Disingenuous for Apple to compare these against 2017 Intel chips and call them 2x and 3.7x faster. I would love to see how they fare against 2021 Intel and amd chips.

When M1 first released they pulled some marketing voodoo and you always saw the actively cooled performance numbers listed with the passively cooled TDP :D Nearly every tech article/review was reporting those two numbers together.

Re: Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

#546

Post by coryfklein »

lisper wrote: post #105

"Apple’s Commitment to the Environment" > Today, Apple is carbon neutral for global corporate operations, and by 2030, plans to have net-zero climate impact across the entire business, which includes manufacturing supply chains and all product life cycles. This also means that every chip Apple creates, from design to manufacturing, will be 100 percent carbon neutral. But what they won't do is put the chip in an expan…

> it's the packaging that is massively unfriendly to the environment, stupid.

Of all the garbage my family produces over the course of time, my Apple products probably take less than 0.1% of my family's share of the landfill. Do you find this to be different for you? Or am I speaking past the point you're trying to make here?

Re: Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

#547

Post by eugeniub »

klelatti wrote: post #304
mohanmcgeek wrote: post #124

Disingenuous for Apple to compare these against 2017 Intel chips and call them 2x and 3.7x faster. I would love to see how they fare against 2021 Intel and amd chips.

How is it disingenuous - defined in my dictionary as not candid - when we know precisely which chips they are comparing against? They are giving Mac laptop users information to try to persuade them to upgrade from their 2017 MacBook Pros and this is probably the most relevant comparison.

I'm pretty sure they are comparing them with 2019/2020 MacBook Pros, which apparently have chips originally launched 2017.

Re: Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

#548

Post by lowbloodsugar »

spacedcowboy wrote: post #419
lowbloodsugar wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The slide where they say its faster than an 8-core PC laptop CPU is comparing it against the 11th gen i7 11800H [1]. So it's not as fast as the fastest laptop chip, and it's certainly not as fast as the monster laptops that people put desktop CPUs in. But it uses 40% of the power of a not-awful 11th gen 8-core i7 laptop. The M1 is nowhere near as fast as a full-blown 16 core desktop CPU. I am sure we will see reviews…

... and neither is the M1 (in any configuration) a "full blown 16 core desktop CPU". Those will be called M2 and come later next year, according to the rumor mill anyway.

Sorry, that is what I meant. I'll edit.

Re: Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

#549

Post by Andys »

yellowapple wrote: post #469

If Apple ever gets around to putting an M1 Max in a Mac Mini, that'd probably push me over the edge toward buying one.

Yeah, especially if it could run Linux. This would be a powerful little server.

I decked out my workstation with a 16 core Ryzen & 96GB RAM and it didn't cost anywhere near the price of this new 64GB M1 Max combo. (But it may very well be less powerful, which is astonishing. It would be great to at least have the choice.)

Re: Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

#550

Post by sam0x17 »

rudedogg wrote: post #163
sam0x17 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only that, but you're stuck with cards from 5 years ago with current macbooks. It's a shame too because the plug and play support is better than the very best e-gpu plug and play on linux or windows. I don't see Apple personally adding support any time soon, either. Clearly their play now is to make all hardware in house. The last thing they want is people connecting 3090s so they can have an M1 Max gaming rig. T…

You could use the new AMD cards at least though right? I don't think Nvidia support will ever happen again though (I got burned by that, bought a 1060 right before they dropped Nvidia). I'm on a RX 5700XT with my Hackintosh, and it works well. Edit: Thinking about this more.. I bet third party GPUs are a dead end for users and Apple is planning to phase them out.

Oh that's cool, last I checked the best AMD card you can use is a Vega 64.
Post reply on HN