3 ms·

Which is typical of devices in this size/cost. Intel Iris/UHD is exactly the competitor in this class. Some of the recent integrated AMD graphics are modestly

Which is typical of devices in this size/cost. Intel Iris/UHD is exactly the competitor in this class. Some of the recent integrated AMD graphics are modestly capable but are also part of a 35w or higher TDP packages. Looking beyond this arbitrary test, results like these: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested/3 https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-teste... are incredible for Rise of the Tomb Raider on those settings with that power consumption.

sudosysgen 6y ago
The correct comparison is not to integrated graphics. At that package and price the competition is against laptops with a mix of integrated and dedicated graphics.
- hellotomyrars 6y ago
  I don't think that entirely holds up when you consider the size aspect but regardless the moment you are bringing a dedicated GPU into the equation you aren't holding things equal. It should be compared to integrated graphics because that is what is is both competing against and running circles around in performance, and what it is on-par with (better actually) in power consumption.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Really not, no. The design of the M1 laptops precludes the use of discrete GPUs. They replace laptops that have discrete GPUs (Macbook Pro). Also note that it is not correct to compare CPU+GPU power draw in other systems, as in M1 macbooks the power budget is shared between CPU and GPU which leads to throttling. Also, if you really want to get pedantic, the most powerful integrated graphics are much more powerful than the M1. They are just not ported to laptops, because it makes no sense since you can get much more performance at better power consumptions with dual integrated/discrete GPUs and switching.
    - hellotomyrars 6y ago
      I think this has devolved to the point of no longer being constructive but I'll just summarize quickly the point I am making. The M1 performance is incredibly impressive in relation to the power it takes to do it. This is relevant and meaningful to a user of this type of device and allows fantastic battery life even under heavy load which is unmatched by other devices in its class. Yes it isn't the most performant, but it is the most efficient and it also isn't a slouch. I think that is impressive. That is all.
      - sudosysgen 6y ago
        There are GPUs that use the same amount of power for more performance. There are laptops with discrete GPUs that have similar battery life in those workloads where the M1 gets 20h. There is no improvement to user experience. This is trying to spin a closed platform that is not compatible with discrete GPUs as somehow a good thing. Just FYI. The M1 GPU consumes 0-30% less than the Xavier NX series GPUs, which are the next comparable thing, and delivers a third of the performance. It's way behind in every way to Volta or rDNA. A spade should be called a spade - it's a sub-par product due to Apple making closed, non-standard systems, with worse performance than it could have had.
        hellotomyrars 6y ago
        Unfortunately none of those things are currently available in a consumer device even remotely resembling an M1 Mac. It really sounds like you have an axe to grind against Apple. It's okay to both criticize Apple for certain aspects of it's products at the same time as respecting/praising others. I think Apple makes great mobile hardware but they also sell aluminum caster wheels for the mac pro that costs $200 more than the price I paid for my iPhone SE 2. This is stupid and makes no rational sense. I have 0 desire to own a traditional mac because the price is absurd compared to more capable products and I don't care about paying the Apple tax to look cool. The M1 Macs are actually a compelling hardware offering.
        sudosysgen 6y ago
- tambourine_man 6y ago
  Can you please link to the fanless laptop that's as thin as the Air, with 20h of battery life and discreet graphic card that you are refering to?
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Fanless? None, it is a stupid decision. Why have a powerful GPU if you cannot use it at the same time as your CPU, as in the Macbook Air? As for battery life, any 10-15W Ryzen 5000 series processor with discrete graphics mostly disabled will do it.
    - tambourine_man 6y ago
      HAhahaha

sudosysgen 6y ago

The correct comparison is not to integrated graphics. At that package and price the competition is against laptops with a mix of integrated and dedicated graphics.

hellotomyrars 6y ago
I don't think that entirely holds up when you consider the size aspect but regardless the moment you are bringing a dedicated GPU into the equation you aren't holding things equal. It should be compared to integrated graphics because that is what is is both competing against and running circles around in performance, and what it is on-par with (better actually) in power consumption.
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  Really not, no. The design of the M1 laptops precludes the use of discrete GPUs. They replace laptops that have discrete GPUs (Macbook Pro). Also note that it is not correct to compare CPU+GPU power draw in other systems, as in M1 macbooks the power budget is shared between CPU and GPU which leads to throttling. Also, if you really want to get pedantic, the most powerful integrated graphics are much more powerful than the M1. They are just not ported to laptops, because it makes no sense since you can get much more performance at better power consumptions with dual integrated/discrete GPUs and switching.
  - hellotomyrars 6y ago
    I think this has devolved to the point of no longer being constructive but I'll just summarize quickly the point I am making. The M1 performance is incredibly impressive in relation to the power it takes to do it. This is relevant and meaningful to a user of this type of device and allows fantastic battery life even under heavy load which is unmatched by other devices in its class. Yes it isn't the most performant, but it is the most efficient and it also isn't a slouch. I think that is impressive. That is all.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      There are GPUs that use the same amount of power for more performance. There are laptops with discrete GPUs that have similar battery life in those workloads where the M1 gets 20h. There is no improvement to user experience. This is trying to spin a closed platform that is not compatible with discrete GPUs as somehow a good thing. Just FYI. The M1 GPU consumes 0-30% less than the Xavier NX series GPUs, which are the next comparable thing, and delivers a third of the performance. It's way behind in every way to Volta or rDNA. A spade should be called a spade - it's a sub-par product due to Apple making closed, non-standard systems, with worse performance than it could have had.
      - hellotomyrars 6y ago
        Unfortunately none of those things are currently available in a consumer device even remotely resembling an M1 Mac. It really sounds like you have an axe to grind against Apple. It's okay to both criticize Apple for certain aspects of it's products at the same time as respecting/praising others. I think Apple makes great mobile hardware but they also sell aluminum caster wheels for the mac pro that costs $200 more than the price I paid for my iPhone SE 2. This is stupid and makes no rational sense. I have 0 desire to own a traditional mac because the price is absurd compared to more capable products and I don't care about paying the Apple tax to look cool. The M1 Macs are actually a compelling hardware offering.
        sudosysgen 6y ago
tambourine_man 6y ago
Can you please link to the fanless laptop that's as thin as the Air, with 20h of battery life and discreet graphic card that you are refering to?
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  Fanless? None, it is a stupid decision. Why have a powerful GPU if you cannot use it at the same time as your CPU, as in the Macbook Air? As for battery life, any 10-15W Ryzen 5000 series processor with discrete graphics mostly disabled will do it.
  - tambourine_man 6y ago
    HAhahaha