Live data from Hacker News

Apple M5 chip

apple.com

631–640 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple M5 chip

#631
post #191
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Broadcom WiFi support 320Mhz while N1 is stuck with 160Mhz. There were report of N1 not supporting 4096 QAM as well but I didn't check.

I doubt the number of people in both "has no neighbors" and "owns Apple hardware" camps are significant at all.

Poe's law?

Re: Apple M5 chip

#632

It's surprising to me macs aren't a more popular target for games. They're extremely capable machines and they're console-like in that there isn't very much variation in hardware, as opposed to traditional PC gaming. I would think that it's easier to develop a game for a MacBook than a Windows machine where you never know what hardware setup the user will have.

It's kind of a myth though, Mac has many flagship games and everything in between If you identify as a "gamer" and are in those communities, then you'll see communities talking about things you can't natively play but if you leave niches you already have everything and with microtransactions, Apple ecosystem users are the whales. again, not something that people who identify as "gamers" wants to admit being actually…

> It's kind of a myth though

It's kinda not. Here's a rough list of the 10 most-played games currently on PC: https://steamdb.info/charts/

macOS is supported by one title (DOTA 2). Windows supports all 10, Linux (the free OS, just so we're clear) runs 7 of the games and has native ports of 5 of them. If you want to go argue to them about missed revenue opportunities then be my guest, but something tells me that DOTA 2 isn't being bankrolled by Mac owners.

If you have any hard figures that demonstrate "antiquated calculations" then now is the time to fetch them for us. I'm somewhat skeptical.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#633
post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You wrote: >Looking at my Macbook though, I can say with utmost certainty that it isn't 4000x faster than the Intel one I had 5 years ago. So, where is the disconnect here? They wrote: > Together, they deliver up to 15 percent faster multithreaded performance over M4 The problem is comprehension, not marketing.

Not quite. The announcement mentions that: “M5 delivers over 4x the peak GPU compute performance for AI” In this situation, at least, it’s just referring to AI compute power.

Much of this is probably down to optimized transformer kernels.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#634

Base models only: - M1 | 5 nm | 8 (4P+4E) | GPU 7–8 | 16-core Neural | Memory Bandwidth: 68.25 GB/s | Unified Memory: 16 GB | Geekbench6 ~2346 / 8346 - M2 | 5 nm (G2) | 8 (4P+4E) | GPU 8–10 | 16-core Neural | Memory Bandwidth: 100 GB/s | Unified Memory: 24 GB | Geekbench6 ~2586 / 9672 - M3 | 3 nm (first-gen) | 8 (4P+4E) | GPU 8–10 | 16-core Neural | Memory Bandwidth: 100 GB/s | Unified Memory: 24 GB | Geekbench6 ~296…

Amazing. My M3Max is going to look like a paper-weight very soon. And that's fine by me. When I get an M6 or M7Max to replace it it'll be amazing.

I was thinking similar thoughts about my M2 Max MBP. I look at the newer chips and wonder at what point will (or has it happened already) will the base M chip outperform my M2 Max? I'll probably hold onto it a while anyway -- I think it will be a while before I find 96GB limiting or the CPU slow enough for my purposes, but I'd still like to know how things are progressing.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#635
post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's the modern Apple, I think that's just Apple. I remember using iTunes when fixing the name of an album was a modal blocking function that had to write to each and every MP3, one by one, in the slowest write I have ever experienced in updating file metadata. Give me a magnetised needle and a steady hand and I could have done it faster. A long time ago they had some pretty cool design guides, and the…

Apple makes Logic Pro, Final Cut Pro, Notes, Calendar, Contacts, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Freeform, just from a "quality" standpoint, I'd rank any of those applications as competitive for the "highest quality" app in their category (an admittedly difficult thing to measure). In aggregate, those applications would make Apple the most effective company in the world at making high-quality GUI applications. Curious if I'…

Of those apps you've listed that I've used, none of them have been notable for being high quality to me, though as you say it's difficult to measure. For me I would rate them somewhere between unremarkable (notes, calendar, contacts!?) and awkward (pages, numbers, keynote). If you asked me to guess what desktop software Apple makes that people rate highly, I never would have guessed any of those, except _maybe_ Logic[1] and Final Cut, though ironically those are two of the three I've never used.

I also think you're confusing what I wrote. It's not a competition.

I have just found that Apple's hardware on desktop has been stronger than their software, in my experience (periodic sporadic use, ~2006->now).

[1] and now from a sibling comment I hear that perhaps people regard that tool as bad, so there you go, they jury is clearly out

Re: Apple M5 chip

#636

The M5 MacBook Pro still gets the Broadcom WiFi chip but the M5 iPad Pros get the N1 and C1X (Sweet). All in all, apple is doing some incredible things with hardware. Software teams at apple really need to get their act together. The M1 itself is so powerful that nobody really needs to upgrade that for most things most people do on their computers. Tahoe however makes my M1 Air feel sluggish doing the exact same task…

Seems like the software teams are there to simply squander the extra processing power that the hardware teams provide, thus ensuring recurring revenue. I see no good reason to upgrade to Tahoe. I’d have to buy a new computer just so I could power transparencies that I don’t want.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#637

Apple's software division has lost their way. They've done nothing but add flashy features and move buttons around, deprecating things and breaking backwards compatibility (yeah, 32bit has been awhile now, but alas), meanwhile retreating on stability. Snow Leopard still remains the company's crown achievement. 0 bloatware, 0 "mobile features on desktop" (wtf is this even a thing?), tuned for absolute speed and stabil…

I liked Snow Leopard too, it was indeed the last focused Mac OS, but there was some memory-related bug that made me update past it. The new OSes aren't so bad, but yeah I don't touch any of the new features.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#638
post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is the ecosystem. The ARM CPUs not from Apple are just too slow.

X Elite and N1X are fine; the problem is with Windows.

As someone who admins Linux and Windows ARM machines, rest assured the issue is not just with Windows. ARM support is best-effort on most distros, and still fairly incomplete even on nixpkgs and Debian unstable.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#639

Apple's software division has lost their way. They've done nothing but add flashy features and move buttons around, deprecating things and breaking backwards compatibility (yeah, 32bit has been awhile now, but alas), meanwhile retreating on stability. Snow Leopard still remains the company's crown achievement. 0 bloatware, 0 "mobile features on desktop" (wtf is this even a thing?), tuned for absolute speed and stabil…

They completely removed hardware support for 32 bit software.

This was in the Intel generation of Macs. If Windows can support 32-bit software then so should Mac, along with all that 64-bit software that got broken in random Mac updates.

Ironically I can still run old 32-bit Windows software in Wine on my M1 Mac. Windows software is more stable on a Mac than Mac software.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#640

It's surprising to me macs aren't a more popular target for games. They're extremely capable machines and they're console-like in that there isn't very much variation in hardware, as opposed to traditional PC gaming. I would think that it's easier to develop a game for a MacBook than a Windows machine where you never know what hardware setup the user will have.

Multiple solid reasons have been mentioned from ones created by Apple to ones enforced in software by Apple. One that hasn't been mentioned is the lack of marketshare. Macos market is just tiny and very limited. It's also not a growing market. PC gaming isn't blowing up either but the amount of players is just simply higher.

Ports to macos have not done well from what I've heard. However you can see ports on PC do really well and have encouraged studios like Sony and SquareEnix to invest more in PC ports. Even much later after the console versions sell well. Just not a lot of reasons to add the tech debt and complexity of supporting mac as well.

Even big publishers like Blizzard who have been mac devs for a long time axed the dedicate mac team and client and moved to a unified client. This has downfalls like mac specific issues. If those are not critical then they get put in the pile with the rest of the bugs.

Post reply on HN