It seems that the 13” macbook pro (m1, non air) is gone for good?
And with it the touchbar I guess?
Good riddance. No matter how much they pushed it was an utter failure that should have never left their research lab.
Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max
771–780 of 1001 posts
Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max
#772Really love the pace of Apple innovations. Nowadays, I am biased towards battery and weight (MacBook Air) if it is for portability and the other line of notebooks are converted into desktops via TB exactly because of weight and battery life. I feel the difference in battery use from one to the other. The Air seems like it has "infinite battery" evn when the others use Mx processors. Also waiting for a great Linux por…
i’ve had the 16gb ram macbook air for 3 years now and it’s still an incredible machine considering lightness, battery, and passive cooling.
Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max
#773Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think your last paragraph sounds about right. The Max is a compromise on battery life for those who want the absolute most possible performance, but I think Apple is seeing a much wider audience get the Pro chip. Anecdotally, whenever I see a tech person mention their Apple silicon device, it's almost always a Pro chip. I'm sure only a small fraction of that user base is hitting all cores with a full load on a regu…
I chose the M1 Max over the M1 Pro only to get 32GB RAM. I couldn’t care less about the GPU (which makes it annoying to have to pay for it).
I have an M1 Pro with 32GB
Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max
#774What's the deal with "dynamic caching"? I wish they would have talked about it more. It sounds like they're reducing memory allocations by only allocating what is actually needed.
From what I understand this is about assigning GPU resources (such as register files and other on-core memory) to shaders. Imagine you have a complex shader that has two paths, a frequently taken fast one that needs X bytes of on-chip memory to function and a rarely taken slow path that needs Y bytes (Y > X). Usually this stuff is statically partitioned, so you have to provision Y bytes for the slow path to run this…
in tinygrad, the llama2 model with Metal runtime produces 1k kernels. this means we have to compile them all, leading to both startup and runtime costs from repeated compilations and buffer bindings. someone suggested using one megakernel to call the rest. could dynamic partitioning help here?
Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max
#775Tldr; Much better than M1, we don't want to compare it to M2 because that highlights it's only an incremental upgrade.
Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max
#776I have found some deals on M1 Max Macbook Pros with 10-core CPU, 32-core GPU, 64GB RAM and 2TB storage. Does it make sense to go with those or with base M3 Pro with 11-core CPU, 14-core GPU, 18GB RAM 512GB storage which is the same price?
No, keep the M1 Max. M1 Max has bigger RAM & better GPU compared to M3 Pro.
Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max
#777Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine the amount of people upgrading from an M2 Mac will be close to 0, while there's a lot of Intel stragglers out there.
I’m an Intel strangler because it’s the only way I can have Mac and Windows on the same machine. Am I the only person that really needs this? Parallels has trash performance.
I'm still running Windows on my Mac mini. I used to use Bootcamp but don't do so much Windows stuff now so can get away with VMWare. After June next year I can drop Windows completely so will likely upgrade then.
I'm not sure how VMWare compares to Parallels but performance isn't as good as Bootcamp. I wouldn't want to use it all day long.
Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max
#778A few things I noticed, as I'm seeing the variety of SKUs becoming more complex. - Note that memory bandwidth is down. M2 Pro had 200GB/s, M3 Pro only has 150GB/s. M3 Max only has 400GB/s on the higher binned part. - Just like the low-spec M3 14" has one fewer Thunderbolt port, it also doesn't officially support Thunderbolt 4 (like M1/M2 before it) - The M3 Pro loses the option for an 8TB SSD. Likely because it was a…
The max is probably only going to be in desktops, so better to use the die area for other things than E cores
Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max
#779A few things I noticed, as I'm seeing the variety of SKUs becoming more complex. - Note that memory bandwidth is down. M2 Pro had 200GB/s, M3 Pro only has 150GB/s. M3 Max only has 400GB/s on the higher binned part. - Just like the low-spec M3 14" has one fewer Thunderbolt port, it also doesn't officially support Thunderbolt 4 (like M1/M2 before it) - The M3 Pro loses the option for an 8TB SSD. Likely because it was a…
I think what Apple is pushing for is computing efficiency. It still gets faster but with much less power. Focusing on performance solely would be the wrong way to evaluate these chips. https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-m3-chip
This drives me crazy. Apple plays the market like Nintendo. Pick something that no one cares about, do it better than anyone else, and make a big deal about it.
I dream of a world where instead of a marketing company becoming a top 3 tech company, a tech company would have. Wonder what they would have done for their laptop...
Or maybe this is just an inevitable outcome of capitalism/human biology where a veblen goods company will become a top player in a market.
(I have my own Google and M$ complaints too)
Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max
#780Earlier quoted context omitted.
For years now, Apple's biggest competitor is Apple from five years ago. One of their biggest threats is that sales flatline because people are still using their perfectly good laptops and phones from several years ago. And that's a hard problem to deal with when you advertise your products as high-end goods that will last a long time.
This shouldn't be a problem, and the answer is to refresh devices less frequently.
Why would they do that? It wouldn't solve the problem @rueeeeru stated. They need to remain competitive and you can't do that by sitting on your backside for four or five years between products.