3 ms·

I'm not sure this result is that interesting. First, there's the assumption that Apple bothered optimizing their proprietary ML library for Intel as much as the

I'm not sure this result is that interesting. First, there's the assumption that Apple bothered optimizing their proprietary ML library for Intel as much as they did for their own M1 chip: > Presumably, Apple has already done the work in optimizing CreateML for both for their Intel and M1 devices. Second, the M1 is faster than the Intel Macbook with an integrated GPU. But the article also notes this, which makes the comparison apples and oranges IMO: > Notably, training was unable to take advantage of the integrated Intel Iris graphics card to accelerate training but it was able to partially utilize the integrated graphics card on the M1. Third, the M1 lags the Intel with the discrete Radeon GPU, where the GPU is being utilized. But this is not exactly a surprising result. Nor is it a comparison against the state of the art. What matters more practically is a comparison between an M1 Macbook Pro and a leading competing laptop with a discrete nvidia GPU.

kergonath 6y ago
I think you’re right from a technical point of view. Sure, it might be slower than a dedicated GPU, and sure the Intel CPUs in the MacBooks are not the fastest in the world in the first place. However, the comparison still has value from a practical point of view: the new thing is more than 3 times as fast as the old thing. This matters to the people who use the things more than to people who just want to compare abstract chip performance. I assume we’ll see other data points, more relevant to some, when high-end ARM MacBook Pros are released in a couple of months.
- dontTango 6y ago
  It's incredibly deceptive headline. But then again I'd expect people doing ML to know better. But given Apple's marketing reputation, it's all about appealing to customers that have no idea what this means. They won't know, but it's sounds good.
yeldarb 6y ago
> What matters more practically is a comparison between an M1 Macbook Pro and a leading competing laptop with a discrete nvidia GPU. 100% agree. We would have liked to do that comparison but, as mentioned in the article, the required software is not yet supported on the M1.

kergonath 6y ago

I think you’re right from a technical point of view. Sure, it might be slower than a dedicated GPU, and sure the Intel CPUs in the MacBooks are not the fastest in the world in the first place. However, the comparison still has value from a practical point of view: the new thing is more than 3 times as fast as the old thing. This matters to the people who use the things more than to people who just want to compare abstract chip performance. I assume we’ll see other data points, more relevant to some, when high-end ARM MacBook Pros are released in a couple of months.

dontTango 6y ago
It's incredibly deceptive headline. But then again I'd expect people doing ML to know better. But given Apple's marketing reputation, it's all about appealing to customers that have no idea what this means. They won't know, but it's sounds good.

yeldarb 6y ago

> What matters more practically is a comparison between an M1 Macbook Pro and a leading competing laptop with a discrete nvidia GPU. 100% agree. We would have liked to do that comparison but, as mentioned in the article, the required software is not yet supported on the M1.