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

Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

asia.nikkei.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 661 posts

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#651

Post by thruhiker »

atonse wrote: post #636
thruhiker wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a 2018 Mac Mini driving two 4K displays with Display Port over USB-C cables. I previously was driving 2 x 24" 2K displays (same cables) and had no performance problems. Once I upgraded to the 4K displays I've observed very noticeable display draw performance issues. It's not enough for me to give up the 4K displays but I'm wondering if this is improved on the current M1 Mac mini?

I haven’t noticed any display lag on my end. But I don’t do latency sensitive things like gaming. 1 monitor (Dell P2715Q) is hooked up using DisplayPort. The other (LG 27” IPS 4K) is using HDMI 2.0. Both are running 4K retina at 60Hz without any issues. I had so much trouble finding this out before I bought it which is why I am vocal about the fact that it works.

Thanks for the information! I am tempted to upgrade my 2018 when the next revision (M1X or M2?) Mac mini comes out to improve the display refresh rate issues.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#652

Post by rmorey »

saagarjha wrote: post #608
rmorey wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There basically already is in the M1: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16226/apple-silicon-m1-a14-de... tl;dr it has really sick floating point double performance which directly translates to JS performance

Most JavaScript JITs do math on integers.

Only if using the BigInt type: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...

all other numbers are floats

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#653

Post by saagarjha »

rmorey wrote: post #652
saagarjha wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most JavaScript JITs do math on integers.

Only if using the BigInt type: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe... all other numbers are floats

No, this is independent of BigInt. JITs speculate that numbers are integers for performance.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#654

Post by jfb »

_ph_ wrote: post #395
jfb wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's in it for Apple? I'm not trying to be glib, here, but unless there were some Mac only server functionality, nobody would buy an Apple ARM powered datacentre machine.

First of all, Apple could save a huge amount of money replacing Intel based servers with their own chips. Both on the CPU price, expecially the Xeons are really expensive as well as on electricity consumption, probably the largest running cost of data centers. Then the gains of scale, making a CPU just of the Mac Pro would mean too low production numbers, but with data center usage would drive those up - especially i…

The amount of money that Apple would save to put a bunch of 2U ARM servers into racks is dwarfed by the costs of building such systems. Seriously, nobody (to the first approximation) is going to buy a macOS server, and so there's no reason for Apple to do this.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#655

Post by SergeAx »

kumarvvr wrote: post #156

Somewhere, the collective whos who of the silicon chip world is shitting their pants. Apple just showed to the world how powerful and efficient processors can be. All that with good design. Customers are going to demand more from Intel and the likes. Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. edit: a word.

Apple will never sell it's chips standalone. Phone, desktop or server, whatever. I can see them building Mx cloud servers and trying to peddle it for CI pipelines, but not selling actual iron.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#656

Post by enos_feedler »

9935c101ab17a66 wrote: post #649
enos_feedler wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the consumer space there are only 2 paths for a viable competitor to emerge. 1) a coordinated ecosystem attack or 2) an individual company doubles down. There are things that lead me to believe 1) can't happen. Google ultimately acquiring Fitbit instead of ecosystem compatibility and integration. It seems like the giants are needing to acquire the pieces to build their own Apple, rather than partner with them. Als…

What do you mean by “doubling down”?

Invest in more Apple like things: vertical integration, cross-device compatibility, app quality, more device types, more accessories, more spinoff platforms (similar to MagSafe, AirTag, etc)

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#657

Post by ngcc_hk »

amelius wrote: post #377
kumarvvr wrote: post #156

Somewhere, the collective whos who of the silicon chip world is shitting their pants. Apple just showed to the world how powerful and efficient processors can be. All that with good design. Customers are going to demand more from Intel and the likes. Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. edit: a word.

> Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. As a developer, I'm sweating bullets. Imagine a future where Apple is the only serious platform left on mobile, server and desktop, then developers can forget about starting that next disruptive startup and instead they will become just second-class Apple "employees" with contracts similar to Uber drivers.

If they release m1 in blade format ... as m1 MACmini is already with mdm ... that might be enough for some mac clouds services.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#658

Post by ngcc_hk »

reddog wrote: post #454
spockz wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would need to think quite far out of the box and hit it to be able to beat a vertically integrated, extremely well-funded, and successful company.

Like IBM circa 1968?

Vertical integration for our Mgt guru generation could not last. In fact the problem of intel not farming out its fab business (and recognise its asset is x86 etc) is the problem. What apple smart at is cut the line to fab.

Still ibm then have no consumer whilst apple now has no business and cloud business domination ... still lots of space to play.

But if windows moved to arm with the same result I cannot say intel can survive though.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#659

Post by ngcc_hk »

floatboth wrote: post #556
hugi wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. It's interesting to see how people like to label Apple a monopoly - a company with a 19% market share in smartphones and an 8% share on the desktop.

When people use the words "Apple" and "monopoly" it's more often about the iOS walled garden: because there's no (good) sideloading, Apple has a monopoly over app distribution on their mobile devices.

Android did not have that and we pay less. But so. Like walled garden in a world where nobody know that you are a dog. And you have alternatives on both desktop and mobile.

Success is not a crime.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#660

Post by rmorey »

saagarjha wrote: post #653
rmorey wrote: post #652

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if using the BigInt type: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe... all other numbers are floats

No, this is independent of BigInt. JITs speculate that numbers are integers for performance.

Hmmmm okay! I see what you're saying now.
Post reply on HN