Live data from Hacker News

M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

daringfireball.net

861–870 of 882 posts

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#861

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a pretty accurate cost estimate from those tracking Ax series costs. A chip AMD sells for $300 doesn't cost AMD $300 to make, but being a public company their gross margins tell us it costs roughly $150.

But you were comparing this theoretical production cost to the retail cost of other chips, that doesn't make sense. Hardware companies don't charge cost + some reasonable markup, they charge whatever the market is willing to pay for it. I highly doubt Apple would release some hypothetical "threadripper killer" at a price any lower than they needed to to compete.

My point is that someone building a Threadripper PC has to pay $2,000 to $3,000 just for the CPU.

Lets assume that all the other parts, high speed RAM, SSD, power supplies, cooling, motherboard, etc cost another $500, and that operations, assembly, marketing etc average 20% and the manufacturer aims for a 5% margin. So they sell their low end Threadripper PC for $3300, and their high end Threadripper for $4,700.

Then Apple comes along and makes it's own high core count versions of the M1 (lets call them the M16 and M24) for $1,000 and $1,500 with similar performance to the Threadrippers. When Apple builds high end Mac Pros out of the, they also spend $500 for other parts, giving total parts cost of $1,500 and $2,000, it marks them up 50% for their typical margins, and sell them for $3,000 and $4,000 and have the same performance as the ThreadRippers from the lowest margin manufacturers at for 10-15% less.

And on top of that, the M16 and M24 use less power and generate quite a bit less heat than the Threadrippers. They don't need any fancy cooling systems. That can lead to smaller packaging and even more cost savings.

Obviously when Apples 16 and 24 Firestorm core Mx chips come out newer Threadrippers will have evolved to smaller process as well, and that will help increase their performance, while reducing cost and heat. But there is little doubt that Apple's Mac Pros will be much more competitive price and performance-wise at that time, and if they keep leveraging TSMC first there is a significant risk that they actually take some of their laptop cost/performance advantage up to Threadripper levels.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#862

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It matters because its not just adding electricity, its adding heat. Pretty clearly Apple can add a whole bunch of Firestorm cores to future M1 derivatives and still fit in smaller power/heat budgets that current generation Ryzen and Threadrippers operate in.

Maybe. I don't know enough about CPU design to argue with that. There are others elsewhere in this thread saying that a lot of the energy and heat goes on the communications systems and other resources you need more of when you ramp up the core count. I suspect we'll never know. Apple have shown little interest in anything other than prosumer workloads for a long time. I doubt they'll be making an M1 server platform…

I have to somewhat concede your last point. What percentage of AMD sales are Threadrippers in any year?

It's possible Apple just doesn't think the investment in a 30 core CPU is worthwhile and stops around 16 cores, which would still be higher than any i7 or any i9 ever made.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#863
post #829

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They cannot in fact be that easily trivialized. You'd welcome to try, though if you think you can demonstrate the point. If you really believe that non-x86 laptops are what makes for a revolution, then the credit here doesn't belong to Apple. For example: https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/6/21050758/lenovo-yoga-5g-sn... or: https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/09/cnn-underscored/galaxy-book-s... But personally, I'd say that tho…

The credit doesn't really belong to Apple for big screen primarily-touch based communication devices either, except that they popularized them.

I think that's incorrect. As a user of a pre-iPhone smartphone, I don't think Apple should get credit for inventing the smartphone, but I do think the iPhone was revolutionary. They didn't just popularize it; they created a true consumer-grade device via relentless user-focused polish. It's the same deal with the original Mac, which was also revolutionary.

But here, there's nothing radically different about M1 Macs that will open up vast new markets or notably change the daily lives of a purchaser.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#864
post #840

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea how much of Intel's profit can be attributed to Apple, but Apple definitely buys more higher end laptop CPUs from Intel than anyone else. That's going to hurt their bottom line. I also expect Apple will be picking up some market share. How much remains to be seen. If price/ performance was your primary reason for avoiding Apple, it's gotten a lot harder to resist switching.

I doubt much of the market cares particularly much about price/perf. But the $700 impact does seem like an impressive value that can do a wide range of things not normally considered for this price point. Things like editing 4k video.

You basically described price for performance: it can do more at a lower price.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#865
post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Local compensation practices where you live must really suck if you can't afford a $1000 laptop. :(

I don't live in the US and I must politely ask you to see how the rest of the world lives. The macbook I was given costs, after customs, taxes and everything, $4000. Not $1000. Are there cheaper macbooks? Sure. Why would I want them, though?

I'm sorry if my post seemed rude in any way.

First, this discussion is about the new MacBook Air that costs $1000 US which is why I mentioned that price point. I suppose tariffs and such would increase that substantially, so that's a fair point. My bad. That said, I believe there was discussion about the hypothetical situation where you did want a Mac.

More to the point, I checked your post history before I commented, and I gathered you are a developer, somewhere in South America (?). I suspect that the code I write is probably no better than the code you write. But your pay is presumably quite a bit less than mine. My point was that it's unfortunate that like work doesn't yield like rewards.

Now here I am going to make some assumptions... In all likelihood, people are amassing wealth off of your work in the same way they profit from mine. But due to local wage norms, they can pay you less and reap higher margins. They get to upgrade the yacht, but you might not even have enough free time time to use a boat even if you could afford one.

It's possible that I extrapolated too much and that your situation is nothing like what I have inferred. Sorry in advance if that is the case.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#866
post #747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Complaining about incompatibilities in software used by less than 5% of Mac users and ignoring the strong compatibility of software used by 95% of Mac users seems misleading.

Equally, talking only about the stuff that works great and completely ignoring the incompatibilities that do exist is also misleading. Every other review out there covered the strong compatibility and how amazing the M1 is. I for one am glad that there exist a least a couple of reviews that focus on everything that doesn't work. Let's be honest, no one these days makes a purchasing decision based off of just reading…

I agree but these reviewers should weight and categorize the problems they find. For example reviews have been pretty consistent that

1) Graphic Design software: Works well out of box. Key Adobe apps not yet native and have some minor issues under Rosetta, but still work, are still fast and should be much faster when native.

2) Video Production: Unbelievably fast, on par with high end iMacs and Mac Pros and should get faster as all tools go native.

3) Software Developers: Super fast builds and tools. Homebrew not native yet but can still use with Rosetta version of terminal. If you need Docker it’s months away.

4) niche Users of esoteric apps ported from windows: this is the group Patrick reported in. Yea, some of these apps are months away from being usable but all have perfectly cromulent native replacements.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#867
post #830

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I don't really see how this will affect Intel financially in any meaningful way in the short term. They won't provide chips for Apple anymore, but that must have been a relatively small number of units, so no great financial loss to them. And Apple are never going to sell these chips generally, so there's no competition there. In the long term though it may actually benefit Intel (and AMD/NVidia) who might work o…

That assumes Apple won't be growing its PC market share. Given the M1's benefits, the ability of Big Sur to run iOS apps, and Apple's marketing prowess, I'd be surprised if they don't double their market share in the next 3 to 4 years. Then there's the (highly lucrative) server market.

I could see Apple potentially licensing the design (minus IP critical to their MacOS workstation offering like the GPU or neural engine), to a big cloud provider, if the cloud provider does the heavy lifting on the Linux port (something Apple isn’t publicly talking about) you could see this become a big deal overnight.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#868
post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What lockdown is grating to you? I grew up on BSD multi-user systems and Apple things still look the same to me: crusty BSD with ancient coreutils in the terminal, nice rounded corners in the GUI. What is the iPad-ification? Just the code signing stuff? I guess you can't write to /System anymore these days? And there's something about app notarization, but it doesn't really affect any of my uses.

Among other problems, Safari keychain backups don’t work unless you store them in iCloud (and there’s no warning about this): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24626562

This does appear to be sorta documented:

Note: You can’t copy passwords stored in your Local Items or iCloud Keychain. To transfer these keychain items to another computer, set up iCloud Keychain on the other computer using your iCloud user name (normally your Apple ID) and password. You can manually copy keychains other than Local Items or iCloud Keychains to another Mac using the steps below.

https://support.apple.com/guide/keychain-access/copy-keychai...

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#869

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel went through a phase where they managed to break their graphics and network drivers at the same time . I thought whether my hardware was failing but, when they broke three different NICs with the same update, I understood what happened. Hope they don't do it again. I'm not going to use their processors in my next build but, I tend to like their NICs.

> I thought whether my hardware was failing but You're now making me question whether this is a problem with the wifi card or the driver. I admit I'm still convinced it's probably the card (I have an earlier revision in a ThinkPad that works fine), but now I'm not so sure! Curious: Are you talking about that "little" issue where the i915 module was randomly causing a panic? I ran into someone who had some really perp…

Actually it can be anything. My mother owns a HP Spectre X2 convertible with an Intel WiFi card. Only the driver bundled with the Windows works. Any newer version via Windows Update or Intel breaks the card after a standby-wake cycle. Both updated drivers support the card on paper but, either the driver has a problem or the way the hardware designed on that particular computer messes some stuff up. BIOS upgrade didn't fix anything too.

> Are you talking about that "little" issue where the i915 module was randomly causing a panic?

No, I started to see some lines in the display like a faulty GPU draws. Sometimes a line, sometimes small corruptions were visible but, it was always fixed itself after a minute or two. The laptop in question is extremely low power so, nothing gets hot.

Newer kernel updates fixed these issues too.

Intel's mid-range and higher-end NICs have proper offloading and processors so, they neither tax the system much or fail to reach their advertised speeds. They're real cards for real loads, so they're more reliable AFAICS. A Realtek card works reasonably well for most of the light loads but, load it up with sustained high load, it cannot saturate the interface as it should.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#870

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I thought whether my hardware was failing but You're now making me question whether this is a problem with the wifi card or the driver. I admit I'm still convinced it's probably the card (I have an earlier revision in a ThinkPad that works fine), but now I'm not so sure! Curious: Are you talking about that "little" issue where the i915 module was randomly causing a panic? I ran into someone who had some really perp…

Actually it can be anything. My mother owns a HP Spectre X2 convertible with an Intel WiFi card. Only the driver bundled with the Windows works. Any newer version via Windows Update or Intel breaks the card after a standby-wake cycle. Both updated drivers support the card on paper but, either the driver has a problem or the way the hardware designed on that particular computer messes some stuff up. BIOS upgrade didn'…

> Any newer version via Windows Update or Intel breaks the card after a standby-wake cycle.

hahaha that's insane.

I've seen some weird things come out of HP machines in the past, so somehow none of the above would surprise me.

> No, I started to see some lines in the display like a faulty GPU draws.

Ah, interesting. There was a drive bug in the i915 module that could potentially cause a panic on certain hardware. I never experienced it myself, but I ran into someone who had a similar issue. I don't think their problem was tied to the i915, but it was also resolved by a kernel update.

> A Realtek card works reasonably well for most of the light loads but

Yeah, and the Realtek chipsets are much more cheaply designed. Although, what puzzles me is that most of the Intel chipsets aren't that much more expensive (depends on vendor, of course, but you can easily find off-brand dual-port cards for ~$40USD with an Intel chip). It really makes it pointless to invest in Realtek cards that are both cheap and may or may not work at all.

I remember having an issue with the onboard one in my desktop where it would randomly disconnect after negotiating 1Gbps. If I forced it into 100Mbps it would be fine. But, as with the earlier discussion(s), that was also resolved with a kernel update. I used an Intel card for a few years because of that reason, so I have no idea when it was eventually fixed.

Post reply on HN