4 ms·

The GPU in a ps5 is equivalent to an RTX 2060. The onboard graphics in the m1 is (almost) equivalent to a GTX1060. That is only one generation behind.

sudosysgen 6y ago
No, it really isn't. It's equivalent to a 1060 running outdated graphics APIs on barely supported drivers. I assure you it's not comparable to a 1060, and when people start benchmarking them on Vulkan or DirectX instead of decade old OpenGL this is will be apparent.
- supermatt 6y ago
  The benchmarks don't take advantage of Metal either! Obviously we will have to wait for more sophisticated benchmarks that can take advantage of otherwise unsupported features - but based on raw performance, they ARE comparable. That is not even up for debate. As should be clear - these aren't consoles. But apple certainly have the knowledge to create one. Markup on apple products is typically 50%. That gives a LOT of wiggle room for them to meet the pricing of your famed loss leaders (that are ALREADY a generation behind at release!).
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    The benchmarks might not take advantage of Metal, but they take advantage of modern drivers. If you want to know just how much of a disaster NVidia GPUs are on Mac OS, you can test them on Windows vs Mac OS and you will notice a huge difference. It's so bad that people were working on OpenGL to Metal translation layers. The 1050Ti is indeed much more powerful than the GPU in the M1, as even on OpenGL, where it is generally 30% slower than the competition vs on DirectX, and even though it has to deal with horribly bad drivers, and even though it's extensions are not fully supported on Mac OS, it stays competitive. And Apple does not have the knowledge to be competitive with AMD in GPUs, not even remotely close. If you want to look at raw performance, we can. The M1 GPU does 2.6 teraflops. The GPU in the PS5 does 10.28 teraflops. The PS5 is, in raw performance, 4 times faster than the M1 chip.
    - supermatt 6y ago
      > The 1050Ti is indeed much more powerful than the GPU in the M1 The 1050ti is 2.1 teraflops, vs the 2.6 for the M1! Also, M1 GPU has "extensions" that aren't being benchmarked... > The PS5 is, in raw performance, 4 times faster than the M1 chip. I already said that the ps5 GPU is a generation ahead of M1, so it is no wonder it is more performant. Anyway, like I said, we will have to wait for some comparable benchmarks. Not sure how that will ever happen though.
      - sudosysgen 6y ago
        The PS5 isn't just a generation ahead, 4 times more compute power is 2-3 generations. As for the 1050Ti, while it has a bit less raw compute power, it uses many tricks like variable rate shading, streaming memory compression, and vastly faster memory, that the M1 doesn't have. The difference between those features, exposed via extensions but not used on macOS, is that they actually significantly speed up the rendering of video games. If there were in the M1 chip, I don't know why Apple wouldn't expose them. NVidia does, on every platform except macOS because Apple doesn't want them to. As for benchmarks, the best you're going to get is a Vulkan benchmark running on the Nvidia card via the native driver and on M1 via MoltenVK.
        supermatt 6y ago
        Nope - ps5 is same as last generation GPU in terms of both performance and features (e.g. Nvidia Turing). The 1050ti is the generation before that (Pascal). M1 has "variable rate shading", and "streaming memory compression" (since, at least, A12) - in addition to many, many more features both before and since. I don't understand why you would think otherwise. Go read the docs. We can't just talk about "faster memory", as the architecture is so completely different. But lets just start by saying that it is DDR4 in the M1 vs DDR3 (GDDR5) in the 1050ti. i.e. its MUCH lower latency, and has a higher bandwidth per module. It is also utilises a unified memory pool. i.e. the CPU can GPU access the same memory - so there is no "transfer" involved. This isn't your "shared memory integrated GPU" of old. As I said, there is no fair benchmark to compare theses two. Based on openGL, the m1 wins. You think the 1050ti features would make it more performant - I'm saying the m1 has those same features (and more), that also wouldn't be utilised up by a simple openGL benchmark. By all means enjoy your ps5. It is a great console (I want one myself), and it isn't being threatened by the m1. But don't deceive yourself into thinking it is something magical, or cutting edge - or that a trillion-dollar computer hardware designer and manufacturer doesn't have the know-how to create something as performant.

sudosysgen 6y ago

No, it really isn't. It's equivalent to a 1060 running outdated graphics APIs on barely supported drivers. I assure you it's not comparable to a 1060, and when people start benchmarking them on Vulkan or DirectX instead of decade old OpenGL this is will be apparent.

supermatt 6y ago
The benchmarks don't take advantage of Metal either! Obviously we will have to wait for more sophisticated benchmarks that can take advantage of otherwise unsupported features - but based on raw performance, they ARE comparable. That is not even up for debate. As should be clear - these aren't consoles. But apple certainly have the knowledge to create one. Markup on apple products is typically 50%. That gives a LOT of wiggle room for them to meet the pricing of your famed loss leaders (that are ALREADY a generation behind at release!).
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  The benchmarks might not take advantage of Metal, but they take advantage of modern drivers. If you want to know just how much of a disaster NVidia GPUs are on Mac OS, you can test them on Windows vs Mac OS and you will notice a huge difference. It's so bad that people were working on OpenGL to Metal translation layers. The 1050Ti is indeed much more powerful than the GPU in the M1, as even on OpenGL, where it is generally 30% slower than the competition vs on DirectX, and even though it has to deal with horribly bad drivers, and even though it's extensions are not fully supported on Mac OS, it stays competitive. And Apple does not have the knowledge to be competitive with AMD in GPUs, not even remotely close. If you want to look at raw performance, we can. The M1 GPU does 2.6 teraflops. The GPU in the PS5 does 10.28 teraflops. The PS5 is, in raw performance, 4 times faster than the M1 chip.
  - supermatt 6y ago
    > The 1050Ti is indeed much more powerful than the GPU in the M1 The 1050ti is 2.1 teraflops, vs the 2.6 for the M1! Also, M1 GPU has "extensions" that aren't being benchmarked... > The PS5 is, in raw performance, 4 times faster than the M1 chip. I already said that the ps5 GPU is a generation ahead of M1, so it is no wonder it is more performant. Anyway, like I said, we will have to wait for some comparable benchmarks. Not sure how that will ever happen though.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      The PS5 isn't just a generation ahead, 4 times more compute power is 2-3 generations. As for the 1050Ti, while it has a bit less raw compute power, it uses many tricks like variable rate shading, streaming memory compression, and vastly faster memory, that the M1 doesn't have. The difference between those features, exposed via extensions but not used on macOS, is that they actually significantly speed up the rendering of video games. If there were in the M1 chip, I don't know why Apple wouldn't expose them. NVidia does, on every platform except macOS because Apple doesn't want them to. As for benchmarks, the best you're going to get is a Vulkan benchmark running on the Nvidia card via the native driver and on M1 via MoltenVK.
      - supermatt 6y ago
        Nope - ps5 is same as last generation GPU in terms of both performance and features (e.g. Nvidia Turing). The 1050ti is the generation before that (Pascal). M1 has "variable rate shading", and "streaming memory compression" (since, at least, A12) - in addition to many, many more features both before and since. I don't understand why you would think otherwise. Go read the docs. We can't just talk about "faster memory", as the architecture is so completely different. But lets just start by saying that it is DDR4 in the M1 vs DDR3 (GDDR5) in the 1050ti. i.e. its MUCH lower latency, and has a higher bandwidth per module. It is also utilises a unified memory pool. i.e. the CPU can GPU access the same memory - so there is no "transfer" involved. This isn't your "shared memory integrated GPU" of old. As I said, there is no fair benchmark to compare theses two. Based on openGL, the m1 wins. You think the 1050ti features would make it more performant - I'm saying the m1 has those same features (and more), that also wouldn't be utilised up by a simple openGL benchmark. By all means enjoy your ps5. It is a great console (I want one myself), and it isn't being threatened by the m1. But don't deceive yourself into thinking it is something magical, or cutting edge - or that a trillion-dollar computer hardware designer and manufacturer doesn't have the know-how to create something as performant.