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

Apple M5 chip

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple M5 chip

#721

Post by hooch »

alberth wrote: post #649
hereme888 wrote: post #563

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…

Did TSMC 2nm slip to next year, or was it always planned to be 2026?

Always been one more iteration of 3nm in the plan

Re: Apple M5 chip

#722

Post by hu3 »

pertymcpert wrote: post #712
anuraj wrote: post #709

Too underwhelming. Apple under Tim Cook has been running out of steam. What prevents Apple from having 100s of GPU cores and higher memory bandwidth? They need to catch the AI wave before they perish under it.

What are you talking about? People love Macs for running local LLMs.

For real work tho? My colleagues couldn't get past toy demos.

And it ruins battery life.

For coding it's on par with GPT3 at best which is amateur tier these days.

It's good for text to speech and speech to text but PCs can do that too.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#723

Post by jacobolus »

runjake wrote: post #663
hereme888 wrote: post #563

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…

Let's see if I can turn this into an ASCII table and have it survive HN's reformatting. +------+------------------+--------------+----------+----------------+-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ | Chip | Process | CPU Cores | GPU | Neural Engine | Memory Bandwidth | Unified Memory | Geekbench6 (Single/Multi) | +------+------------------+--------------+----------+----------------+------…

Or to fit in a narrower window:

  Chip | Process | CPU       | GPU  | Neural  | Memory      | Unified | Geekbench6
       |         | Cores     |      | Engine  | Bandwidth   | Memory  | Single / Multi 
  -----|---------|-----------|------|---------|-------------|---------|----------------------
  M1   | 5 nm G1 |  8: 4P+4E | 7–8  | 16-core |  68.25 GB/s |  16 GB  | 2346 / 8346          
  M2   | 5 nm G2 |  8: 4P+4E | 8–10 | 16-core | 100    GB/s |  24 GB  | 2586 / 9672          
  M3   | 3 nm G1 |  8: 4P+4E | 8–10 | 16-core | 100    GB/s |  24 GB  | 2965 / 11565         
  M4   | 3 nm G2 | 10: 4P+6E | 8–10 | 16-core | 120    GB/s |  32 GB  | 3822 / 15031         
  M5   | 3 nm G3 | 10: 4P+6E | 10   | 16-core | 153    GB/s | ≤32 GB  | 4133 / 15437 (9 core)

Re: Apple M5 chip

#725

Post by morshu9001 »

badc0ffee wrote: post #450
exabrial wrote: post #197

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've heard about rounded corners and low information density windows in Tahoe, but what "mobile features on desktop" are in Sequoia and earlier? The App Store? Launchpad? iCloud? Notifications? You don't need to use those.

They tried to make you use the App Store for Xcode and system updates, but thankfully there have been solid workarounds

Re: Apple M5 chip

#728

Post by TypesWillSaveUs »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #696
littlecranky67 wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A lot of Apple hardware is impressive on paper, but I will never buy a Mac that can't run Linux. They run Linux actually very well, have you ever tried Parallels or VMware Fusion? Especially Parallels ships with good softwaer drivers for 2d/3d/video acceleration, suspend, and integration into the host OS. If that is not your thing, the new native container solution in Tahoe can run container from dockerhub and co.…

Last I looked... extensive telemetry and a sealed boot volume that makes it impractical to turn off even if theoretically possible. There are other problems of course.

You can disable SIP and even disable immutable kernel text, load arbitrary drivers, enable/disable any feature, remove any system daemon, use any restricted entitlements. The entire security model of macOS can be toggled off (csrutil from recoveryOS).

Re: Apple M5 chip

#730

Post by varispeed »

bombcar wrote: post #585
gigatexal wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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’m trying to find any reason I can that my M1 Max needs replacement; it’s hard. How do you justify it?

I have M1 Max 32GB and I think I'll go with M5 Max simply because I need more RAM. I am constantly swapping about 16GB. I don't feel it that much, but it bothers me.
Post reply on HN