691–700 of 782 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is downvoted, but my intel MacBook Pro (maxed out specs) from 2015 really was dying on zoom / MS teams calls. Probably says a lot about those two apps, but this was one of the main reasons I upgraded to an M1 Mac during corona.
Bizarre how my 2012 mpb15r (16GB RAM, SSD) is still usable and maybe preferable to models 3 or 4 years newer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a technical reason that the M1 only supports a single external monitor (optimized intended experience), or is just market segmentation?
Every GPU on the market supports a limited number of monitors. There are fixed-function (not programmable in a traditional sense) blocks of silicon that are used to support each monitor. M1’s GPU came equipped to only support the internal monitor and one external monitor… a very slim configuration, but that’s likely influenced by its smartphone processor ancestry. Smartphones don’t need to power a bunch of displays.…
I agree that they were pretty spot on with the market segmentation. I’m one of the folks who doesn’t need more than a single external monitor, and I consider myself a power user when it comes to resource consumption. I just wish the cost of ram would come down, holy moly.
"compared to the latest 12-core PC laptop chip [...] M2 provides nearly 90 percent of the peak performance"
That doesn't make sense. Twice the performance of a 10-core Intel CPU, but only 90% of the performance of a 12-core? This implies Intel more than doubles performance when going from 10 to 12 cores. Reading the footnotes, the 10- and 12-core Intel CPUs that Apple used for benchmarking are the i7-1255U and i7-1260P which have respectively 2P+8E and 4P+8E cores (performant and efficient cores). So the second Intel CPU actually has twice the number of performant cores than the first.
This means the benchmark mostly depends on performant cores and nearly doesn't use or doesn't depend on efficient cores. If so, that's a rather useless benchmark for evaluating the CPU as a whole (P and E cores.)
But what this also means is that Apple is being sneaky. The M2 has 4P + 4E cores (not revealed in the press release, but we can tell from the die shot). Thus comparing it to an Intel CPU with only 2P cores (i7-1255U) is guaranteed to make the M2 look better as the benchmark doesn't use E cores (see above.)
What I'd love to see is the M2 put up against a Zen 3 or 3+ mobile CPU like the Ryzen 7 6800U (15–28 W) which straight up has 8 regular ("performant") cores.
" Compared with the latest 10-core PC laptop chip, the CPU in M2 provides nearly twice the performance at the same power level " " compared to the latest 12-core PC laptop chip [...] M2 provides nearly 90 percent of the peak performance " That doesn't make sense. Twice the performance of a 10-core Intel CPU, but only 90% of the performance of a 12-core? This implies Intel more than doubles performance when going from…
It's 2x the perf if you compare the max power draw performance of the M2 vs the performance of the Intel CPU at the same power draw (so not maxed out)
It's 90% performance of the Intel CPU when they're both maxed out, while taking quarter of the power draw
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you maybe explain what you mean here? I can hardly understand your point about Intel, and don't seem to get what you are implying about "marketing-ese". The M1 is a spectacular chip. The M2 seems like a fine iteration.
They mean Apple's advantage is in good part due to their anti-competitive practice of buying TSMC's entire 5nm production. Leaving none for others like AMD which had to compete on 7nm for the longest time. Same will happen for 3nm if nothing changes. Whatever your opinion may be about Apple/AMD/Intel. Unfair competition is not good for consumers in the long run. edit: instantly downvoted. As per tradition in Apple re…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Software video code/decode is extremely expensive. It's actually a serious issue for sales these days, we have a compute expensive product that can't be demo'd effectively over zoom.
It does depend a lot on the software and I don't get why zoom is falling behind here. I'm dealing with this problem a lot on a recent Intel MBP and in my experience: Hot jet engine: Meet on Firefox, slack video, zoom. Works well: meet on Chrome, AWS chime, pop. Is totally on MBP for being an odd one, but also on the software since we have counterexamples of good performance.
Might it happen that more recent versions of macOS are extremely slower for Zoom? I’ve always thought they tune macOS for bigger L2 cache and it keeps paginating, but you’re telling me recent hardware is slower too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. The M1 drove me to become a Mac user/customer. I have been buying $600 used Dell professional laptops for ages...laughing at the stupid Mac people. The performance/effeciancy/quality/value of the M1 laptops exceeds any Intel laptop I'm aware of. Match the specs the best you can--Intel fan is going to howl all day and you better have a charger ready--the Mac is cheaper. Anyway, Windows sucks your dignity out a…
If you’re looking to avoid telemetry, Mac OS is not the alternative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is downvoted, but my intel MacBook Pro (maxed out specs) from 2015 really was dying on zoom / MS teams calls. Probably says a lot about those two apps, but this was one of the main reasons I upgraded to an M1 Mac during corona.
Bizarre how my 2012 mpb15r (16GB RAM, SSD) is still usable and maybe preferable to models 3 or 4 years newer.
" Compared with the latest 10-core PC laptop chip, the CPU in M2 provides nearly twice the performance at the same power level " " compared to the latest 12-core PC laptop chip [...] M2 provides nearly 90 percent of the peak performance " That doesn't make sense. Twice the performance of a 10-core Intel CPU, but only 90% of the performance of a 12-core? This implies Intel more than doubles performance when going from…
I would recommend looking at the graphs below the section you've quoted because they do explain away the incongruity that you're thinking is there. It's 2x the perf if you compare the max power draw performance of the M2 vs the performance of the Intel CPU at the same power draw (so not maxed out) It's 90% performance of the Intel CPU when they're both maxed out, while taking quarter of the power draw