Live data from Hacker News

Apple M5 chip

apple.com

801–810 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple M5 chip

#801
post #791

"When compared to Intel-based systems, it delivers up to 86x faster AI performance" I'm imagining the engineers responsible for running the tests finely tuning the test suite for days and days so they could get that number into the press release, lol. There's no way that's a coincidence and someone definitely advocated for that line being the way it is. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/10/apple-unveils-new-14-...

God bless them if so

Re: Apple M5 chip

#802
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.

Underwhelming? They are crushing any competition by a large margin.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#803

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do this. Here are some examples to add to your list, leaving out the 26.0 bugs that I've come to expect running a .0 release. 1. I won't focus on a bunch of Siri items, but one example that always bugs me: I cannot ask Siri to give me directions to my next meeting. The latest OS introduces an answer for the first time, though. It tells me to open the calendar app on my Apple watch, and tap on the meeting, and…

I had that complaint about Mail too. Then I realized you can begin dragging an email (from the list view), switch apps with your other hand, and drop it into, say, a todo. Of course, this is less discoverable, so I agree a Share button would not go amiss.

Wow. I didn’t even know it was possible to drag and drop between apps on iOS. TIL. Thanks!

Re: Apple M5 chip

#804

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.…

How does Asahi fare these days? For home use I am fine with my Fedora machine but as a former (Tiger-SL era) Mac user who's never used macOS, I am somewhat curious about this.

Remember Asahi works properly only on M1 and M2. More work is required to make it run well on later chips (its not just a faster ARM chip - it's new graphics card each time, motherboard chipset, every laptop peripheral changes from time to time, BIOS/UEFI, etc, and they all need reverse-engineered drivers for it work).

Re: Apple M5 chip

#805

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?

Running AI inference faster, of course!

Re: Apple M5 chip

#806
I find the Apple naming conventions / product updates confusing.

The MacBook Pro with the m5 is the low end model? an M2 Ultra is better than the m5?

I understand what they’re doing from a roadmap standpoint - but as a pure consumer is a bit confusing

Re: Apple M5 chip

#807

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the fastest M4 max was already fastest single and multicore CPU by a decent margin, while the fastest non-Apple CPU was only specialized for single or multi.

The single thread performance for modern high performance CPUs are all very close to each other. Apple's latest usually has a small advantage because they're the first to use TSMC's latest nodes, which is good for something like 15-20%. The fastest multicore CPUs are the ones with a lot of cores, e.g. 64+ core Threadrippers. These have approximately the same single-core performance as everything else from the same ge…

That article points out that GB5 and GB6 test multi-core differently. The author notes that GB6 is supposed to approach performance the way most consumer programs actually work. GB5 is better suited for testing things like servers where every core is running independent tasks.

The only “evidence” they give that GB6 is “trash” is that it doesn’t show increasing performance with more and more cores with certain tests. The obvious rejoinder is that GB6 is working perfectly well in testing that use case and those high core processors do not provide any benefit in that scenario.

If you’re going to use synthetic benchmarks it’s important to use the one that reflects your actual use case. Sounds like GB6 is a good general purpose benchmark for most people. It doesn’t make any sense for server use, maybe it also isn’t useful for other use cases but GB6 isn’t trash.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#809
post #137

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…

> Tahoe however makes my M1 Air feel sluggish doing the exact same tasks ive been last couple of years. I have a work provided M2 Pro with 32GB of RAM. After the Tahoe upgrade it feels like one of the sluggish PCs at the house. It is the only one that I can see the mouse teleporting sometimes when I move it fast. This is after disabling transparency in Accessibility settings mind you, it was even worse before.

> work provided

I too have a work-provided laptop and a personal one bought the same month, with identical specs (the only difference is the US vs UK keyboard layout). The work-provided one is at least an order of magnitude slower to do anything thanks to enterprise crapware.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#810

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) | +------+------------------+--------------+----------+----------------+------…

Looks brutal on mobile
Post reply on HN