5 ms·

I also think the marketing was genius. NOT labeling that graph they showed did exactly what they wanted. It was impressing the non tech people and the tech peop

I also think the marketing was genius. NOT labeling that graph they showed did exactly what they wanted. It was impressing the non tech people and the tech people ALL kept talking and talking about it - because it wasn't labeled. Apple's marketing is brilliant. It really gets the kind of people who think they are too smart to be marketed to AND the normies, all in one message.

jchw 6y ago
I consider myself a tech person and was immediately intrigued by the claims. Because I thought Apple could do it. And, after getting the Mac Mini in my hands as the only Apple computer in the house, I can mostly confirm it is quite astounding. Maybe adding to the mystique helped some sales from curious people; it would help explain why benchmarks have been kept quiet and vague for the most part, even though they are very impressive. I’ve witnessed single core performance on this device that I have not seen before and likely would need overclocking to hit if it can be done. For some workloads, it’s truly something. Even thinking about it, I do expect some of this move was about performance, especially performance per watt. I doubt any other mobile processor is holding a candle at the moment. The control grabs, I think, might be secondary.
vvwvvwvvw 6y ago
I was wondering why Gamer Nexus (a very rigorous YouTube review channel) didn't sent a M1 device, while those Apple fanboy channels got it. Probably the dude would've torn the M1 performance claims apart.
- my123 6y ago
  Because those outlets never get Macs usually, and it isn't what they cover. Note that a laptop chip also isn't a gaming product, for obvious reasons.
  - fomine3 6y ago
    Thankfully AnandTech received Mac mini unit from Apple, Thanks Anand now at Apple?
  - vvwvvwvvw 6y ago
    Gamers Nexus also does CPU tests, when reviewing CPUs. Gaming benchmarks are an aside. Also if Apple's opening statement for M1 is that its industry-leading, then they should let these reviewers substantiate it, because that's what they usually review.
- Tade0 6y ago
  Because the GPU there is okay-ish, but not amazing - not really suitable for gaming.
  - bfgoodrich 6y ago
    The power-sipping, integrated GPU has performance 30% better than a GTX 1050 Ti [1]. The GTX 1050 Ti is still a current, sold product [2], selling for $150 or so USD [3], and consumes about 75-100W in your PC. We can no true Scotsman this, but that GPU performance is a literal magnitude+ greater than what the majority of users have in their computers (and I am including full desktops in this discussion). The overwhelming majority of users are not paying $500-$1000 for a GPU (now add the 700W+ PSU, and what in effect becomes a space heater), which is the current going rate for the mythical gaming market. Is it intended for enthusiast gamers who have giant $1000 graphics cards sucking 300W? No, of course not. There is no surprise that Apple didn't send it to a guy who targets that crowd. But for the vast majority of people that chip would represent a pretty significant upgrade over what they currently have. [1] - Even in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, demonstrated purely given that it was running under Rosetta 2, it did quite decent. [2] - Current products from EVGA, Gigabyte, ASUS and others feature the GTX 1050 Ti, making it a current product. [3] - Which is a range, and above, that similar cards sell for. If you can time travel you may be able to get an equal performance level for less, but I lack time travel abilities.
    - vmvarga 6y ago
      That was some Fake news using worthless benchmarks. It's not even near 1050 Ti in the real world, check any game, M1 gets destroyed by that 4 year old 1050 Ti GPU. For example, Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45 fps 1080p medium vs 26 fps on M1. You might say it's because of Rosetta (not that it makes any difference because probably most games will never be ported anyway, so Rosetta is all you get when talking about current games), but there's another game which has Apple Sillicon support - World of Warcraft. That one measures high 30s to mid 40s fps on ultra 1080p vs 58.1 avg fps on 1050 Ti. Comparisons are from userbenchmark.com regarding 1050 Ti and youtuber tests regarding M1. So all those claims "30 % better" were just a manipulative scam using benchmarks nobody cares about.
- JoshTko 6y ago
  Gamers Nexus audience is very niche - PC enthusiasts. Apple has a much larger demo that they are targeting.
bfgoodrich 6y ago
Non tech people didn't care. Tech people could read the many details that Apple provided on specific performance claims. And to be clear, the presentation claimed "this is a fast mobile processor that's very efficient". Both claims have been very soundly proven. So I'm not sure why they would attempt the deception you seem to be implying. There was simply no need. The M1 release is fascinating because never have I seen such a frantic effort to dismiss something in the face of overwhelming evidence that it's a pretty great thing. Eh.
dangus 6y ago
And yet, the reviewers’ real world tests show that the unlabeled graph wasn’t a lie. Here’s a labeled graph from Anandtech, scroll down to “Apple vs Intel Top Performance” https://www.anandtech.com/show/16226/apple-silicon-m1-a14-deep-dive/4 https://www.anandtech.com/show/16226/apple-silicon-m1-a14-de... Apple’s unlabeled graph wasn’t a lie. Early reviewers confirm that the performance from a fanless, body-temperature laptop with 15+ hours of battery life is downright mind blowing. There is nothing else like it on the market. Marketing only gets you so far. This product speaks for itself.

jchw 6y ago

I consider myself a tech person and was immediately intrigued by the claims. Because I thought Apple could do it. And, after getting the Mac Mini in my hands as the only Apple computer in the house, I can mostly confirm it is quite astounding. Maybe adding to the mystique helped some sales from curious people; it would help explain why benchmarks have been kept quiet and vague for the most part, even though they are very impressive. I’ve witnessed single core performance on this device that I have not seen before and likely would need overclocking to hit if it can be done. For some workloads, it’s truly something. Even thinking about it, I do expect some of this move was about performance, especially performance per watt. I doubt any other mobile processor is holding a candle at the moment. The control grabs, I think, might be secondary.

vvwvvwvvw 6y ago

I was wondering why Gamer Nexus (a very rigorous YouTube review channel) didn't sent a M1 device, while those Apple fanboy channels got it. Probably the dude would've torn the M1 performance claims apart.

my123 6y ago
Because those outlets never get Macs usually, and it isn't what they cover. Note that a laptop chip also isn't a gaming product, for obvious reasons.
- fomine3 6y ago
  Thankfully AnandTech received Mac mini unit from Apple, Thanks Anand now at Apple?
- vvwvvwvvw 6y ago
  Gamers Nexus also does CPU tests, when reviewing CPUs. Gaming benchmarks are an aside. Also if Apple's opening statement for M1 is that its industry-leading, then they should let these reviewers substantiate it, because that's what they usually review.
Tade0 6y ago
Because the GPU there is okay-ish, but not amazing - not really suitable for gaming.
- bfgoodrich 6y ago
  The power-sipping, integrated GPU has performance 30% better than a GTX 1050 Ti [1]. The GTX 1050 Ti is still a current, sold product [2], selling for $150 or so USD [3], and consumes about 75-100W in your PC. We can no true Scotsman this, but that GPU performance is a literal magnitude+ greater than what the majority of users have in their computers (and I am including full desktops in this discussion). The overwhelming majority of users are not paying $500-$1000 for a GPU (now add the 700W+ PSU, and what in effect becomes a space heater), which is the current going rate for the mythical gaming market. Is it intended for enthusiast gamers who have giant $1000 graphics cards sucking 300W? No, of course not. There is no surprise that Apple didn't send it to a guy who targets that crowd. But for the vast majority of people that chip would represent a pretty significant upgrade over what they currently have. [1] - Even in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, demonstrated purely given that it was running under Rosetta 2, it did quite decent. [2] - Current products from EVGA, Gigabyte, ASUS and others feature the GTX 1050 Ti, making it a current product. [3] - Which is a range, and above, that similar cards sell for. If you can time travel you may be able to get an equal performance level for less, but I lack time travel abilities.
  - vmvarga 6y ago
    That was some Fake news using worthless benchmarks. It's not even near 1050 Ti in the real world, check any game, M1 gets destroyed by that 4 year old 1050 Ti GPU. For example, Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45 fps 1080p medium vs 26 fps on M1. You might say it's because of Rosetta (not that it makes any difference because probably most games will never be ported anyway, so Rosetta is all you get when talking about current games), but there's another game which has Apple Sillicon support - World of Warcraft. That one measures high 30s to mid 40s fps on ultra 1080p vs 58.1 avg fps on 1050 Ti. Comparisons are from userbenchmark.com regarding 1050 Ti and youtuber tests regarding M1. So all those claims "30 % better" were just a manipulative scam using benchmarks nobody cares about.
JoshTko 6y ago
Gamers Nexus audience is very niche - PC enthusiasts. Apple has a much larger demo that they are targeting.

bfgoodrich 6y ago

Non tech people didn't care. Tech people could read the many details that Apple provided on specific performance claims. And to be clear, the presentation claimed "this is a fast mobile processor that's very efficient". Both claims have been very soundly proven. So I'm not sure why they would attempt the deception you seem to be implying. There was simply no need. The M1 release is fascinating because never have I seen such a frantic effort to dismiss something in the face of overwhelming evidence that it's a pretty great thing. Eh.

dangus 6y ago

And yet, the reviewers’ real world tests show that the unlabeled graph wasn’t a lie. Here’s a labeled graph from Anandtech, scroll down to “Apple vs Intel Top Performance” https://www.anandtech.com/show/16226/apple-silicon-m1-a14-deep-dive/4 https://www.anandtech.com/show/16226/apple-silicon-m1-a14-de... Apple’s unlabeled graph wasn’t a lie. Early reviewers confirm that the performance from a fanless, body-temperature laptop with 15+ hours of battery life is downright mind blowing. There is nothing else like it on the market. Marketing only gets you so far. This product speaks for itself.