69 ms·

Apple’s new M1 Pro and M1 Max processors

• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• pier25 5y ago
  Anyone can comment on what Intel and AMD are going to do now? Will they be able to catch up or will Qualcomm become the alternative for ARM laptop chips? (and maybe desktop chips too)
  • neogodless 5y ago
    This exact question was asked a year ago when the M1 was announced. In the year since, their laptop market share increased about 2% from 14 to 16%[0]. The reasons for this are: 1. When deciding on a computer, you often have to decide based on use case, software/games used, and what operating system will work best for those use cases. For Windows users, it doesn't matter if you can get similar performance from a Macbook Pro, because you're already shopping Windows PCs. 2. Performance for most use cases has been enough for practically a decade (depending on the use case.) For some things, no amount of performance is "enough" but your workload may still be very OS-dependent. So you probably start with OS X or Windows in mind before you begin. 3. The efficiency that M1/Pro/Max are especially good at are not the only consideration for purchase decisions for hardware. And they are only available in a Macbook / Macbook Pro / Mini. If you want anything else - desktop, dedicated gaming laptop, or any other configuration that isn't covered here, you're still looking at a PC instead of a Mac. If you want to run Linux, you're probably still better off with a PC. If you want OS X, then there is only M1, and Intel/AMD are wholly irrelevant. 4. Many buyers simply do not want to be a part of Apple's closed system. So for Intel/AMD to suddenly be "behind" still means that years will have to go by while consumers (and especially corporate buyers) shift their purchase decisions and Apple market share grows beyond the 16% they're at now. But performance is not the only thing to consider, and Intel/AMD are not sitting still either. They release improved silicon over time. If you'd asked me a year ago, I'd say "do not buy anything Intel" but their 2021 releases are perfectly fine, even if not class-leading. AMD's product line has improved drastically over the past 4 years, and are easy to recommend for many use cases. Their Zen 4 announcement may also be on the 5nm TSMC node, and could be within the ballpark of M1 Pro/Max for performance/efficiency, but available to the larger PC marketplace. [0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/576473/united-states-quarterly-pc-shipment-share-apple/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/576473/united-states-qua...
    • klelatti 5y ago
      These are unit market share numbers, so will include large numbers of PCs - both consumer and corporate - at price points where Apple isn't interested in competing because the margins are probably too low. I suspect by value their share is far higher and their % of profits is even bigger. The strategy is very clear and it's the same as the iPhone. Dominate the high end and capture all the profits. Of course gaming is an exception to this. The bad news for Intel is that they make their margins on high end CPUs too. For Intel and AMD there are two different questions: will Intel fix their process technology, and will AMD get access to TSMC's leading nodes in the volumes needed to make a difference to their market share?
      • manquer 5y ago
        Laptops are only small component of biz for CPU chip manufacturers like AMD/Intel. AMD is traditionally weak in laptops and has not decent market share ever. This doesn't impact their business that much (Intel's numbers are not down that much after loosing Apple's deal after all) AMD and especially Intel have high margin server CPU business, Apple's entire value prop is low power segment, their chips are not designed to compete in high power category and they will never sell outside their products offerings as only chips . AMD also does custom chip stuff like with PlayStation 5 etc, none of that is threatened by Apple. Servers Chips with ECC support, enterprise features and other typically high end chips have very high profit /unit lot more than even Apple can make per chip( maybe higher % for Apple, but not absolute $ / chip). Apple is a minor player in the general CPU business. There will be of course pressure from OEMs who stand to loose sales to Apple to step up their game, AMD/Intel are not loosing sleep over this in terms of revenue/margin yet.
        • klelatti 5y ago
          Sure Intel have a server business but that’s smaller than client computing and revenues there are falling. I don’t know what the precise % is but if Apple have 8% market share by volume their % of Intel’s client business by value is much higher. Losing a growing customer that represents that much of your business is not a trivial loss. Of course this is all part of a bigger picture where falling behind TSMC enables a range of competitors both on servers and clients. If they don’t fix their process issues - and they may well under PG - then this will only get worse.
  • ksec 5y ago
    >Anyone can comment on what Intel and AMD are going to do now? In the short term, nothing. But it isn't like Apple will magically make all PC user switch to Mac. Right now Intel will need to catch up with Foundry first. AMD needs to work their way into partnering with many people with GPU IP which is their unique advantage. Both are currently well under way and are sensible path forward. Both CEOs knows what they are doing. I rarely praise any CEOs, but Pat and Dr Lisa are good.
  • terafo 5y ago
    Intel is releasing heterogeneous chips in less than a month. Both Intel and AMD bet heavily on 3d stacking and it should hold Apple off desktop. A lot of Apple advantage is due to node advantage and I expect that AMD will start getting latest nodes much sooner than now, 5nm ryzen should be able to compete with m2, Intel's own nodes should get better in few years relatively to latest TSMC nodes(they are not that much behind). But x86 will surely loose market share in the coming decade.
• nrjames 5y ago
  I wish that these systems somehow could use/access the CUDA and DLSS pipelines from NVidia.
• WORMS_EAT_WORMS 5y ago
  I'm so ridiculously happy with my first generation M1 I have zero desire to upgrade. Kind of wild to consider given how long it has taken to get here with the graveyard of Apple laptops in my closet.
  • Unbeliever69 5y ago
    For sure. Mine has been the perfect dev machine. My Docker build times are the envy of the office.
  • maxekman 5y ago
    I was thinking the exact same thing! The fanless M1 Air is a dev monster in a mouse package. Couldn’t be happier with that combo.
    • dan1234 5y ago
      If the M1 supported 3 displays I would’ve bought an air last year. Feels like I’ll have to pay a lot for that 3rd monitor!
      • Aperocky 5y ago
        MORE PANES!
      • skunkworker 5y ago
        This, I currently run triple 24inch monitors in portrait off my work 2019 16" laptop rather smoothly. Unfortunately the M1 couldn't run it. The new 14 and 16 max can do triple 4k. Up to two external displays with up to 6K resolution at 60Hz at over a billion colors (M1 Pro) or Up to three external displays with up to 6K resolution and one external display with up to 4K resolution at 60Hz at over a billion colors (M1 Max)
        • Zenbit_UX 5y ago
          When they make those statements I'm always curious if they are expecting the user to use two external with the lid closed, or open (which would be 3 displays). I've always found MacBooks don't play well when the lid is closed, but maybe that has changed?
• soheil 5y ago
  It's a bit concerning that the new chips have special purpose video codec hardware. I hope this trend doesn't continue, requiring laptops from different manufacturers to play different video formats or at least with a non-degraded quality.
  • Synaesthesia 5y ago
    Video encode and decode have been GPU and integrated GFX features for quite a long time now.
    • astrange 5y ago
      Well, they've been features of special ASICs that just happen to be on the GPU. Video decoding is not really suitable for CPUs (especially since H.264 or so) but it's even less suitable for GPGPU.
• klelatti 5y ago
  Apple had a choice: many CPU cores or a bigger GPU. They went with a much bigger GPU. Makes sense: most software is not designed to run on a large number of CPU cores, but GPU software is massively parallel by design.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• MisterTea 5y ago
  Apple headline: New chip is faster than old chip. HN: 54 points Slow news day.
  • octos4murai 5y ago
    MacBook announcements are the opposite of slow news days. Consumer tech outlets are literally scrambling to cover every aspect of these things because there is so much interest.
  • fartcannon 5y ago
    Not suggesting this is whats happening, but you can pay for this kind attention. On HN you probably don't have to though. Lots of fans of Apple things here.
• slayerjain 5y ago
  Based on the numbers it looks like the M1 Max is in the RTX 3070-3080 performance territory. Sounds like mobile AAA gaming has potential to reach new heights :D
  • smileybarry 5y ago
    If Proton is made to work on Mac with Metal, there's some real future here for proper gaming on Mac. Either that or Parallels successfully running x64 games via Windows on ARM virtualization.
    • MetricExpansion 5y ago
      I’ve been looking into trying CrossOver Mac on my M1 Max for exactly this reason. After seeing the kinds of GPUs Apple is comparing themselves to, I’m very hopeful.
    • antifa 5y ago
      At this point I'd rather use parallels to run steam on Linux.
  • Ronson 5y ago
    Not to disagree, but what gave you that impression?
    • vesrah 5y ago
      The slides with performance numbers list the comparison machines
    • slayerjain 5y ago
      based on the relative differences between the m1 and the m1 pro/max, and also the comparisons shown by apple to other laptops from the MSI and Razerblade both featuring the RTX 3080.
  • slayerjain 5y ago
    And in the case for the M1 Pro, apple is showing it to be faster than the Lenovo 82JW0012US - which has a RTX 3050ti. so the performance could be between RTX 3050ti - RTX 3060. All of this with insanely low power draw.
• rcheu 5y ago
  400 GB/s is insane memory bandwidth. I think a m5.24xlarge for instance has something around 250 GB/s (hard to find exact number). Curious if anyone knows more details about how this compares.
  • Andys 5y ago
    Its still a bit unclear how much of the bandwidth the CPUs can use (as opposed to the GPUs)
    • ece 5y ago
      I think Anandtech showed a M1 P-core could max out 50+GB/s on it's own, so 8 P-cores alone likely can use 400GB/s. With both the CPU+GPU, they'd be sharing the BW. A 3060/6700XT have ~360-384 GB/s, so game benchmarks should be interesting to see at high res. Additionally, do the 24-core GPU and 32/64 GB RAM variants of the M1 Max all have 4 128-bit memory controllers enabled? The slide seems to just say 400GB/s (Not "up to"), so probably all Max variants will have this BW available. The value is in the power efficiency here (N5P?+), and if you can afford a $3k+ laptop.
• notquitehuman 5y ago
  I’m waiting on Apple’s final decision on the CSAM scanner before I buy any more hardware from them. These processors look cool, but I don’t think they’re worth the Apple premium if they’re also spying for law enforcement.
  • ostenning 5y ago
    valid point
• Decabytes 5y ago
  What is it about the M1 architecture that makes it so speedy compared to x86 chips? Is it the Risc instruction set? The newer node process? Something else?
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • lowbloodsugar 5y ago
    RISC is a big part of it, and enabled the biggest part, which is Apple got to design their own SoC. And they have their own OS, so they can cause a complete paradigm shift without having to wait for the OS company/collective to come around.
    • astrange 5y ago
      RISC means nothing except "looks like MIPS" and has little impact on performance. ARMv8 doesn't look that much like MIPS anyway.
      • lowbloodsugar 5y ago
        Oh, them's fighting words =) I wrote ARM assembly before I wrote MIPS, so for me, MIPS looks like ARM. ARM was influenced by Berkeley RISC. MIPS came out of Stanford. ARM and MIPS CPUs were both introduced in 1985. And MIPS is dead, whereas ARM is doing slightly better, so, statistically, if you show a RISC assembly programmer MIPS code, they'll probably say "that looks like ARM". Now there are two approaches to the performance argument. First, I will argue that RISC processors provide better performance than CISC processors. Second, the counter argument to that is that, actually, no, modern RISC processors are just as Complex as CISC processors, and M1 is faster simply because Apple. My second argument is that Apple choose ARM because of RISC. So even if it were true, now, that one could build a CISC that is just as performant as a RISC, the fact that right now, the most performant chip is a RISC is ultimately because it is a RISC. Do RISC processors provide better performance than CISC? The #1 supercomputer in the world uses ARM. AWS's Graviton offers better price and performance than AWS Intel. M1 is faster power/performance than any x86. ARM holds all the records. But it's just a coincidence? I think PP's position is that CISC or RISC doesn't matter. One argument I've heard is that its the 5nm production node that matters, and that CISC or RISC, it's all the same nowadays. So how is Apple on 5nm? Why are the CISC manufacturers stuck on 7nm (or failing to get even there)? When the Acorn Computer team were looking for a new processor, they were inspired by the UC Berkeley and their RISC architecture. In particular, the were inspired by the fact that students were designing processors. They decided that they, too, could build a new CPU if they used RISC, and that was the Acorn RISC Machine. The ARM. I do not believe that RISC and CISC are "basically the same" when it comes to processor design. The fact that Intel is still stuck on 10nm(?) must in part be due to the thing being CISC. One might argue that it's because they made a particularly complicated CISC, but that would only make my point for me. I don't think that "only the instruction decoder is simpler so it doesn't make much difference" holds any water. I would love to hear from actual CPU designers who have worked on M1 or Graviton, but if they said "RISC is easier" then they would be dismissed as biased. But let's suppose that no, actually, the geniuses at Apple could equally create a CISC CPU that would be just as performant, I'd still argue that the success is because of RISC. M1 is the most recent of a long line of ARM CPUs. They are ARM CPUs because the first in that long line needed battery life - the Newton. M1 is ARM because ARM was RISC when RISC mattered. You may argue that RISC doesn't provide a benefit over CISC now, but it certainly did then. And how does Apple have such geniuses? Again, this is largely because the iPhone was perhaps the largest technological step-change in history. They have the market cap they do because of iPhone, and they have iPhone because RISC. So even if the argument is "Well, the M1 is fast because Apple has lots of money" well that is because of RISC. But I still think that its easier to build a faster CPU with RISC, and I expect the first RISC Mac Pro will prove me right. At which point, RISC will own performance/watt, performance/price, #1 supercomputer, and, at last, fastest desktop.
• danielovichdk 5y ago
  I feel happy for the Apple community with these processors. But I can't stop to think my Intel machine. It feels like I am left in the dust and nothing seems to be coming that remotely looks like the M1.
  • enraged_camel 5y ago
    Intel is years behind Apple, with no real strategy for catching up. Apple most likely already has the M2 ready, and the M3 under heavy development.
    • chasil 5y ago
      I just bought a new HP laptop with an i3-1125G4. I just found out that this is a 10nm chip, roughly equivalent to TSMC's 7nm. Maybe things are looking up for Intel?
    • rpmisms 5y ago
      The good news is that AMD is working their butt off on this, and seems to be much closer to Apple in terms of Watts/unit of performance. Intel needs to get in gear, now.
    • spacedcowboy 5y ago
      M2 was sent for manufacture earlier in the year, if you believe the rumor mill (and to be fair, they were spot on this time around)
    • terafo 5y ago
      Intel was stuck on the same node for 6 years. Alder lake looks very promising, Alchemist GPUs same. They will have CPU performance crown on laptops in less than 6 months. Power usage will be much better than now. Their 3d stacking strategy is very promising, it will allow for many very interesting SKUs. I wouldn't count them out.
• sharken 5y ago
  So with 57B transistors for the M1 Max you can fit the AMD 5800H (10 B) and the RTX 3080 Ti (28 B) and have 19B transistors left. So the performance should be top notch but cooling and power requirements will be quite high. So battery life of 21 hours is quite the achievement. Still, i prefer the open architecture of the PC any day.
  • Synaesthesia 5y ago
    I wish we had real open hardware with everything documented. Sadly that us very rare.
  • up6w6 5y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_count https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_count It seems to be way beyond any CPU for end users and even some servers like AWS Graviton 2
    • terafo 5y ago
      I think only company with more transistors on the chip is Cerebras.
  • Matthias247 5y ago
    I think memory is part of that, whereas it would be excluded for the other chips you mentioned. But OTOH 57B transistors for 64GB of memory means there would be less than one transistors per byte of memory - so I'm not sure how this works, but I'm not too knowledgeable in chip design.
• sydthrowaway 5y ago
  How is the memory bandwidth so much better than intel ?
  • jagger27 5y ago
    Seems to be a much wider memory bus combined with a new generation of RAM, LPDDR5.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• DeathArrow 5y ago
  I am not interested in Apple's ecosystem. While I stay with X86 I wonder if and when AMD and Intel will catch up. Or if another ARM chip maker will release a chip as good but without tying it to a proprietary system.
  • theshrike79 5y ago
    This is a chicken and egg problem. No one will bother to make an ARM chip for "PCs" if there is no OS to run on it. MS won't fully port Windows to ARM with a Rosetta-like layer unless there is an ARM computer to run it. Yes, Linux can run on anything, but it won't sell enough chips to make creating a whole new ARM computer line profitable.
    • glandium 5y ago
      MS has a full Windows for arm64 with a Rosetta-like layer already. It's been available for at least two years, although it only supported x86 at first (presumably because of the patents on x86-64). x86-64 was added recently (https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2020/12/10/introducing-x64-emulation-in-preview-for-windows-10-on-arm-pcs-to-the-windows-insider-program/ https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2020/12/10/introdu...)
• ricebunny 5y ago
  Compared to the M1, they kept the number of memory channels the same but increased the width of each channel. What are the performance implications of this from a pure CPU workload standpoint?
• suyash 5y ago
  wonder if they are any good for Machine Learning (large scale) ?
• d3nj4l 5y ago
  Did they really just claim 30-series tier performance on the max GPU? If that's true that would be insane!
  • KarlKemp 5y ago
    Equivalent to "the notebook with the fastest GPU we could find at half the power" is how I remember it... I'm just not entirely certain what GPU performance does for me...? I don't work with video, there aren't any games, and I'm not playing them, anyway. Does iTerm2 scrolling get better? I used to be quite happy with the GeForce 7xx(?) and tensorflow, and this seems like it would have quite a bit of power for ML. Unfortunately, the software just isn't there (yet?).
    • pjmlp 5y ago
      Something like this? https://developer.apple.com/metal/tensorflow-plugin/ https://developer.apple.com/metal/tensorflow-plugin/
  • adtac 5y ago
    the comparison was only on laptops, but still impressive if they did that with 70% (?) less power
    • neogodless 5y ago
      Well, no - they immediately followed the discrete laptop graphic comparison with a desktop graphic comparison, highlighting how much more power they draw for "the same" performance.
      • magicalist 5y ago
        > Well, no - they immediately followed the discrete laptop graphic comparison with a desktop graphic comparison pretty sure the comparison was with "the most powerful PC laptop we could find", which makes sense because they then talked about how much it was throttled when running only on battery while the new M1 is not.
• baybal2 5y ago
  I wonder what would the benchmark results be.
• pantalaimon 5y ago
  Let's see how fast we'll see support for those in Asahi Linux
• baybal2 5y ago
  Bad day for Intel®
• shartacct 5y ago
  M1 pro and max are very likely the fastest consumer CPUs in the world, despite being stuck in a 30-40w power envelope. Apple is embarrassing AMD and Intel engineers right now.
• WithinReason 5y ago
  Isn't almost every new Apple chip the most powerful chip Apple has ever built?
  • epistasis 5y ago
    They could have been optimizing for lower power consumption rather than more compute power. For example, the next iPhone chip will likely not be the most powerful when it comes to compute, even if it beats the other iPhone chips.
    • WithinReason 5y ago
      And that's exactly why I put the word "almost" in the sentence!
      • bee_rider 5y ago
        Maybe currently, but they are only on their second generation of laptop chips. I guess going forward the current A-series chip will be lower power/performance than any reasonably recent M-series chip (given the power envelope difference).
• JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  Can these drive more than one external monitor?
  • billyhoffman 5y ago
    Indeed. The M1 Max can drive 3 6K monitors and a 4K TV all at once. Why? Professional film editors and color graders. You can be working on the three 6K monitors and then Output your render to the 4K TV simultaneously
  • can16358p 5y ago
    Yes. Up to three on Max.
  • salamandersauce 5y ago
    Yes. The Pro and Max can drive 2 XDR displays.
    • Kiro 5y ago
      > XDR What does that mean?
      • salamandersauce 5y ago
        The 6K pro monitor Apple sells.
        • Kiro 5y ago
          Just so I don't misunderstand, does that mean I need XDR or will it work with any monitor? I was very surprised to see that the original M1 only supported one external monitor so just want to confirm before I press buy.
          • yarcob 5y ago
            It will of course work with other monitors, but there aren't that many high res monitors out there. The Apple display is the only 6k monitor I know of. There are a few 5k monitors and lots of 4k monitors. There's one 8k monitor from Dell, but I don't think it's supported by macOS yet.
• DiabloD3 5y ago
  Since these won't ship in non-Apple products, I don't see really the point. They're only slightly ahead of AMD products when it comes to performance/watt, slightly behind performance/dollar (in an Apples to apples comparison on similarly configured laptops), and that's only because Apple is head of AMD at TSMC for new nodes, not because Apple has any inherent advantage. I have huge respect for the PA Semi team, but they're basically wasting that talent if Apple only intends to silo their products into an increasingly smaller market. The government really needs to look into splitting Apple up to benefit shareholders and the general public.
  • pjmlp 5y ago
    Our local office only uses macOS and Windows for desktop computers, GNU/Linux nowadays only for servers in some Amazon and Azure cloud instances. Apple will have plenty of customers.
    • DiabloD3 5y ago
      OSX is less than 1/7th of the desktop OS market, and iOS is slightly over 1/4th of the phone market; the major cloud companies are the largest consumers of desktop and server scale CPUs, and buy mostly AMD with some Intel only when cluster compatibility requirements apply; when it is non-x86, it is a mix of things that do not include any Apple ARM offerings but do include larger scale higher performance ARM CPUs and some POWER as well. The most used architectures of any kind (including embedded, industrial, and automotive) are MIPS, then ARM, then POWER/PowerPC, then x86. Apple is a tiny player in the overall ARM market, and by hyper-focusing on desktop and phone alone, they are giving up important opportunities to diversify their business. At no point does "Apple will have plenty of customers" make sense in a context where Apple is a $2.45T company: either they have a large majority of possible customers in multiple industries at multiple levels, or reality is going to come crashing in and drive them back down to sub-$T levels. You cannot convince a company that only has a net income of $22B a year is worth that much, no matter how much "goodwill" and "brand recognition" and other nonsense intangibles they have. Steve Jobs died exactly ten years ago on Oct 5th, and the RDF died with him.
• eecc 5y ago
  Sigh… back to eating ramen (joking… I’m Italian, I’d never cut on my food)
• nodesocket 5y ago
  > 140W USB-C Power Adapter Wait huh? My current 16" Intel Core i9 is only 95watts. Does this mean all my existing USB-C power infrastructure won't work?
  • can16358p 5y ago
    It will work but it will charge slower and probably won't charge when maxing out the juice off the SoC.
    • robertrbairdii 5y ago
      I think the 140w power adapter is to support fast charging, they mentioned charging to 50% capacity in 30 mins, I'd imagine power draw should be much less than 140w
      • can16358p 5y ago
        Yeah, I don't know the peak power draw when everything's on 100% load, but I think (also thinking the efficiency of M1) 140W would keep charging even under highest load.
  • miohtama 5y ago
    It likely charges slower, though they is a minimum needed power - you cannot charge with a mobile charger.
  • salamandersauce 5y ago
    My guess is it will work like using a 65W adapter on a Mac that prefers 95W. It will charge if you're not doing much but it will drain the battery if you're going full tilt.
    • yellow_postit 5y ago
      Just like USB-C cables can differ in capacity I’m finding a need to scrutinize my wall chargers more now. A bunch of white boxes but some can keep my MacBook Pro charged even when on all day calls and some can’t. With PD the size isn’t a great indicator anymore either.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• tiffanyh 5y ago
  Are these M1 Pro/Max based on the A14 or A15? Does “M1” == “A14” or does it mean “M1” == “5nm TSMC node”?
  • Joeri 5y ago
    They share the core design, icestorm for efficiency cores and firestorm for performance cores, but these are recombined into entirely different systems on chip. To say the m1 max is the same as a14 is like saying a xeon is the same as an i3 because they both have skylake-derived cores.
  • supermatt 5y ago
    m1 is already very different to A14/15. Why do you think they are "based" on the mobile SoCs?
    • tiffanyh 5y ago
      Because CPU tears downs show that “Apple's M1 system-on-chip is an evolution of the A14 Bionic” [0] [0] https://www.tomshardware.com/amp/news/apple-m1-vs-apple-m14-floorplans https://www.tomshardware.com/amp/news/apple-m1-vs-apple-m14-...
  • wmf 5y ago
    The differences between the A14 and A15 are so small it doesn't matter. I suspect the CPU/GPU cores come from the A14 but the ProRes accelerator comes from the A15.
    • GeekyBear 5y ago
      >The differences between the A14 and A15 are so small it doesn't matter. The testing shows increases in performance and power efficiency. >Apple A15 performance cores are extremely impressive here – usually increases in performance always come with some sort of deficit in efficiency, or at least flat efficiency. Apple here instead has managed to reduce power whilst increasing performance, meaning energy efficiency is improved by 17% on the peak performance states versus the A14. If we had been able to measure both SoCs at the same performance level, this efficiency advantage of the A15 would grow even larger. In our initial coverage of Apple’s announcement, we theorised that the company might possibly invested into energy efficiency rather than performance increases this year, and I’m glad to see that seemingly this is exactly what has happened, explaining some of the more conservative (at least for Apple) performance improvements. On an adjacent note, with a score of 7.28 in the integer suite, Apple’s A15 P-core is on equal footing with AMD’s Zen3-based Ryzen 5950X with a score of 7.29, and ahead of M1 with a score of 6.66. https://www.anandtech.com/show/16983/the-apple-a15-soc-performance-review-faster-more-efficient/2 https://www.anandtech.com/show/16983/the-apple-a15-soc-perfo... Having your phone chip be on par with single core Zen 3 performance is pretty impressive.
• sunaurus 5y ago
  I would like to upgrade to Apple silicon, but I have no need for a laptop. I hope they put the M1 Max in a Mac Mini soon.
  • billyhoffman 5y ago
    Seems reasonable. They still sell the Intel Mac mini, despite having an M1 powered Mac mini already. The Intel one uses the old “black aluminum means pro” design language of the iMac Pro. Feels like they are keeping it as a placeholder in their line up and will end up with two Apple silicon powered Mac mini’s, One consumer and one pro
    • deltron3030 5y ago
      I doubt that we'll see a really powerful Mac Mini anytime soon. Why? Because it would cannibalize the MacBook Pro when combined with an iPad (sidecar). Most professionals needing pro laptops use the portability to move between studio environments or sets (e.g home and work). The Mini is still portable enough to be carried in a backpack, and the iPad can do enough on it's own to be viable for lighter coffee shop based work. Not many would do highend production work outside a studio or set without additional periphery, meaning that highend performance of the new MBP isn't needed for very mobile situations. A powerful mini and an iPad would therefore be the much better logical choice vs. a highend MacBook Pro. There where you need the power there's most likely a power outlet and room for a Mini.
      • stirlo 5y ago
        Compare to a battery powered laptop you can flip open and start working on from anywhere? Not a chance.
        • sunaurus 5y ago
          For myself, my iPad Pro actually covers all use cases that I would need a laptop for, so my current Macbook Pro is just in clamshell mode on my desk 100% of the time. That's why I would love to replace it with an M1 Max Mac Mini.
• ngngngng 5y ago
  The benchmark to power consumption comparisons were very interesting. It seemed very un-Apple to be making such direct comparisons to competitors, especially when the Razer Blade Advanced had slightly better performance with far higher power consumption. I feel like typically Apple just says "Fastest we've ever made, it's so thin, so many nits, you'll love it" and leaves it at that. I'll be very curious to see those comparisons picked apart when people get their hands on these, and I think it's time for me to give Macbooks another chance after switching exclusively to linux for the past couple years.
  • dannyw 5y ago
    They're just marketing to the audience (actual Pros; not the whole 'uni student with macbook pro for taking notees'.
  • zepto 5y ago
    They are selling these to people who know what the competition is, and care.
  • _the_inflator 5y ago
    I think that Apple took a subtle, not so subtle stand: power consumption has to do with environmental impact.
    • jeswin 5y ago
      Apple almost single-handedly made computing devices non-repairable or upgradable; across their own product line and the industry in general due to their outsized influence.
      • masklinn 5y ago
        Weirdly these machines have a "6.1 repairability rating" when you go in their store. I wonder what ifixit will think of them.
      • rubyist5eva 5y ago
        It’s almost like it’s just about marketing and not much else…
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• dewiz 5y ago
  ...and the Apple store is down lol :-)
• elromulous 5y ago
  As is typical for apple, the phrasing is somewhat intentionally misleading (like my favorite apple announcement - "introducing the best iphone yet" - as if other companies are going backwards?). The wording is of course carefully chosen to be technically true, but to the average consumer, this might imply that these are more powerful than any CPU apple has ever offered (which of course is not true).
  • eqtn 5y ago
    This time, they showed which laptop was used to compare the performance on the bottom left corner during presentation
    • Trex_Egg 5y ago
      Yeah, that is good ofcourse.
  • ukd1 5y ago
    Which are more powerful?
  • BitAstronaut 5y ago
    >this might imply that these are more powerful than any CPU apple has ever offered (which of course is not true). Excuse my ignorance, what is?
• yboris 5y ago
  Is there any VR for the Mac? Seems like the machine is more-than-ready for VR!
  • smoldesu 5y ago
    Apple had SteamVR support for a while, and even Valve Proton support for a while (meaning that Windows-only games were quite playable on Mac hardware). Unfortunately, Apple pulled 32-bit library support without offering a suitable alternative, so Valve was forced to scrap their plans for Mac gaming entirely.
    • thrwyoilarticle 5y ago
      I maintain that this was to avoid the lack of support for 32-bit games being blamed on the Apple Silicon.
      • astrange 5y ago
        There was only a 15-year transition period away from a seriously technically inferior architecture (for both performance and security.)
        • smoldesu 5y ago
          Works on my machine.
• turbinerneiter 5y ago
  It makes me sad that no one will never be able to build anything with those chips. I imagine there could me many, many innovative products built with these chips if Apple sold them and supported Linux (or even Windows).
  • userbinator 5y ago
    ...or just released the full documentation for them. Apple being Apple and wanting full control over its users, I don't see that happening. I really don't care how fast or efficient these are, if they're not publicly documented all I think is "oh no, more proprietary crap". Apple might even make more $$$ if it wanted to open up, but it doesn't.
    • uerobert 5y ago
      What do you mean? All the APIs (Xcode SDK, Metal, ML, etc) required to build on their devices are very well documented.
      • turbinerneiter 5y ago
        I'm not talking about apps on their devices, I'm talking about new types of devices based on their processors. If these were available for others to buy, I think we would be very surprised by the innovative new devices people would invent.
      • userbinator 5y ago
        I mean the documentation of the SoC itself. The thousands (or perhaps tens of thousands) of pages of information about every register and peripheral on it.
  • zionic 5y ago
    Imagine if apple was forced (via anti trust laws) to spin off their CPU division...
  • viktorcode 5y ago
    They wouldn't have existed in this form then. Open chip market has very different needs, and SoCs are designed accordingly.
• smoldesu 5y ago
  Great update, I think Apple did the right thing by ignoring developers this time. 70% of their customers are either creatives who rely on proprietary apps, or people who just want a bigger iPhone. Those people will be really happy with this upgrade, but I have to wonder what the other 30% is thinking. It'll be interesting to see how Apple continues to slowly shut out portions of their prosumer market in the interest of making A Better Laptop.
  • nharada 5y ago
    I agree this is very targeted towards the creative market (i.e. SD card port, etc), but I'm curious as a developer what you would have liked to see included that isn't in this release. I guess personally having better ML training support would be nice, since I suspect these M1 Max chips could be absolute monsters for some model training/fine-tuning workloads. But I can't think of anything design-wise really.
    • dmitriid 5y ago
      As a developer and a power user, I'd love for them to stop iOS'ifying Mac OS. There's such a huge disconnect between what they do with hardware and what they do to MacOS.
      • rpmisms 5y ago
        Honestly a MacOS "Pro Mode" would be great. Let me run the apps I want, not use my mouse, and be able to break things, but keep the non-power user experience smooth and easy.
        • smoldesu 5y ago
          Seconding this. If both iOS and MacOS had a "Pro Mode" that didn't treat me like a toddler, I'd be jumping into the Apple ecosystem head-first.
          • ece 5y ago
• gradys 5y ago
  M1 Pro Max is only $200 more. I'm tempted, but do we think it will be more power hungry under the same workload than the Pro?
  • awill 5y ago
    The full-blown Max they talked about is an $800 upgrade. https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/macbook-pro/16-inch https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/macbook-pro/16-inch It's combined with double RAM (32GB), double GPU (32-core). The $200 upgrade is called 'Max', but is still 16GB RAM, and 'only' 24 core GPU.
    • HunterWare 5y ago
      Nah, 200-400 more and memory size is an independent thing.
  • alex504 5y ago
    On Apple's website, see the notes below the battery consumption claims. https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-14-and-16/#footnote-23 https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-14-and-16/#footnote-23 They are using the m1 pro to get their battery claim numbers. I ordered an M1 Pro based on the slightly lower price and my assumption that it will be less power hungry. If it is only 200 dollars cheaper why else would they even offer the M1 Pro? The extra performance of he max seems like overkill for my needs so if it has worse power consumption I don't want it. I could probably get away with an M1 but I need the 16" screen. We will find out in a few weeks when there are benchmarks posted by 3rd party reviewers, but by that time who knows how long it will take to order one.
• gjsman-1000 5y ago
  For me, think about that memory bandwidth. No other CPU comes even close. A Ryzen 5950X can only transfer about 43GB/s. This thing promises 400GB/s on the highest-end model.
  • Woden501 5y ago
    No consumer CPU comes close. Just saw an article about the next-gen Xeon's with HBM though that blows even this away (1.8TB/s theoretically), but what else would one expect from enterprise systems. Getting pretty damn excited about all the CPU manufacturers finally getting their asses into gear innovation-wise after what feels like a ridiculously long period of piss-warm "innovation".
    • kzrdude 5y ago
      Thanks to Apple in this case for taking a holistic approach to making a better computer.
  • defaultname 5y ago
    As always, though, the integrated graphics thing is a mixed blessing. 0-copy and shared memory and all of that, but now the GPU cores are fighting for the same memory. If you are really using the many displays that they featured, just servicing and reading the framebuffers must be...notable. A high end graphics card from nvidia these days has 1000GB/s all to itself, not in competition with the CPUs. If these GPUs are really as high of performance as claimed, there may be situations where one subsystem or the other is starved.
  • Thaxll 5y ago
    And only 10 cores so a 5950x completely wreck an M1.
    • gbba 5y ago
      A 5950x uses ~4 times as much power.
    • kranke155 5y ago
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• sam0x17 5y ago
  Any indication on the gaming performance of these vs. a typical nvidia or AMD card? My husband is thinking of purchasing a mac but I've cautioned him that he won't be able to use his e-gpu like usual until someone hacks support to work for it again, and even then he'd be stuck with pretty old gen AMD cards at best.
  • neogodless 5y ago
    The video moved a bit too fast for me to catch the exact laptops they were comparing. They did state that the M1 Pro is 2.5x the Radeon Pro 5600M, and the M1 Max is 4x the same GPU. The performance to power charts were comparing against roughly RTX 3070 level laptop cards.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  • rudedogg 5y ago
    Wow, I had no idea M1 doesn't support eGPUs. I was planning on buying an external enclosure for Apple Silicon when I upgraded; thanks for pointing that out.
    • sam0x17 5y ago
      Not only that, but you're stuck with cards from 5 years ago with current macbooks. It's a shame too because the plug and play support is better than the very best e-gpu plug and play on linux or windows. I don't see Apple personally adding support any time soon, either. Clearly their play now is to make all hardware in house. The last thing they want is people connecting 3090s so they can have an M1 Max gaming rig. They only serve creators, and this has always been true. Damn waste if you ask me.
      • rudedogg 5y ago
        You could use the new AMD cards at least though right? I don't think Nvidia support will ever happen again though (I got burned by that, bought a 1060 right before they dropped Nvidia). I'm on a RX 5700XT with my Hackintosh, and it works well. Edit: Thinking about this more.. I bet third party GPUs are a dead end for users and Apple is planning to phase them out.
• yumraj 5y ago
  $400 to upgrade RAM from 16GB to 32GB -- Ouch!!
  • tyingq 5y ago
    Also $400 to go from 32GB to 64GB if you start with the 16 inch MPB with the M1Max. So $400 in that case buys 32G extra instead of just 16GB extra. Interesting.
    • Andys 5y ago
      Except you already paid more to get the M1 Max, too, the upgrade to 64 is not available on any other models.
  • asdff 5y ago
    Apple has always been so stupid about RAM pricing. I miss the days where you could triple your base RAM by spending maybe $75 on sticks from crucial and thirty seconds of effort.
• spaceisballer 5y ago
  Lots of junk comments, but I guess that happens with Apple announcements. Laptops seem impressive to me, I want to see the real world use metrics. Pushing hard on the performance per watt type metric and no doubt they have a lot of power and use less power. Seems like they listened to the outcry of people regarding the Touch Bar and more ports. Seems like this should sell well.
  • Woden501 5y ago
    Seems they may have finally noticed the hit from a decent number of the pro's using their products migrating to different platforms, and realized they needed to take a few steps back on the more radical innovations to put out a solid working machine. Hell I haven't wanted an Apple machine since the early days of the unibody when other manufacturers started releasing the same form-factor. This has me considering one for my next development machine depending on the price premium over the competition.
  • arvinsim 5y ago
    Yup, waiting for the performance review embargo to lift.
• Brakenshire 5y ago
  Can the M1 MacBooks be used with Linux?
  • pantalaimon 5y ago
    It's a work in progress. See https://asahilinux.org/blog/ https://asahilinux.org/blog/ for the latest updates.
    • duskwuff 5y ago
      And marcan42 has specifically promised to start bringup work on the M1 Pro next week: https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1450163929993269249 https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1450163929993269249
    • Brakenshire 5y ago
      This is interesting: > However, Apple is unique in putting emphasis in keeping hardware interfaces compatible across SoC generations – the UART hardware in the M1 dates back to the original iPhone! This means we are in a unique position to be able to try writing drivers that will not only work for the M1, but may work –unchanged– on future chips as well. This is a very exciting opportunity in the ARM64 world. We won’t know until Apple releases the M1X/M2, but if we succeed in making enough drivers forwards-compatible to boot Linux on newer chips, that will make things like booting older distro installers possible on newer hardware. That is something people take for granted on x86, but it’s usually impossible in the embedded world – and we hope we can change that on these machines.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
• bla3 5y ago
  This is about the processors, not the laptops, so commenting on the chips instead. They look great, but they look like they're the M1 design, just more of it. Which is plenty for a laptop! But it'll be interesting to see what they'll do for their desktops. Most of the additional chip area went into more GPUs and special-purpose video codec hardware. It's "just" two more cores than the vanilla M1, and some of the efficiency cores on the M1 became performance cores. So CPU-bound things like compiling code will be "only" 20-50% faster than on the M1 MacBook. The big wins are for GPU-heavy and codec-heavy workloads. That makes sense since that's where most users will need their performance. I'm still a bit sad that the era of "general purpose computing" where CPU can do all workloads is coming to an end. Nevertheless, impressive chips, I'm very curious where they'll take it for the Mac Pro, and (hopefully) the iMac Pro.
  • fotta 5y ago
    I think the higher memory is also a huge win, with support for up to 64gb.
    • ssijak 5y ago
      And NVMe with 7.5gbps are like, we are almost not even note worthy haha Impressive all around.
      • jeswin 5y ago
        It's not that noteworthy, given that affordable Samsung 980 Pro SSDs have been doing those speeds for well over a year now.
        • nojito 5y ago
          980 pro maxes at 7.
          • jeswin 5y ago
            But it's also been around for at least a year. And upcoming pcie 5 SSDs will up that to 10-14GBps. I'm saying Apple might have wanted to emphasise their more standout achievements. Such as on the CPU front, where they're likely to be well ahead for a year - competition won't catch up until AMD starts shipping 5nm Zen4 CPUs in Q3/Q4 2022.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• sva_ 5y ago
  I suppose the future of personal computing may be ARM then? For now
  • kfprt 5y ago
    If Nvidia buys ARM they'll flee like rats on a sinking ship. I'd bet on RISC-V.
    • lowbloodsugar 5y ago
      Or we'll see Windows laptops with ARM Cpus and an RTX 4090.
      • kfprt 5y ago
        Probably. It will be an expensive niche product though. Will probably sell about as well as the shield.
• ryanjodonnell 5y ago
  Is it possible to dual boot windows with the new m1 chips?
  • aldanor 5y ago
    You can most definitely use the latest Parallels IIRC, why dual boot?
    • ryanjodonnell 5y ago
      Mostly for gaming. I use bootcamp now to play MTG Arena and StarCraft 2 on windows which seems to have much better perf. I imagine gaming doesnt work well in parallels?
      • cweagans 5y ago
        I don't think I'd make that assumption. https://www.applegamingwiki.com/wiki/M1_compatible_games_master_list https://www.applegamingwiki.com/wiki/M1_compatible_games_mas... , for instance, has a number of games that do pretty well in Parallels.
      • Synaesthesia 5y ago
        You can play SC2 via rosetta. Unfortunately not optimised for M1
  • pantalaimon 5y ago
    No.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• throwaway879080 5y ago
  how does this new GPU and "neural engine" perform comparing to Nvidia GPUs, and do they support Tensorflow and something similar to CUDA SDK
  • vimy 5y ago
    The M1 gpu was comparable to a 1080. https://blog.tensorflow.org/2020/11/accelerating-tensorflow-performance-on-mac.html https://blog.tensorflow.org/2020/11/accelerating-tensorflow-... I believe they are working on PyTorch support.
• pastelsky 5y ago
  Does this leap sound big enough to eat into the traditional windows pro laptop market? ITs going to have a tough time justifying purchases.
  • p_l 5y ago
    Doubtful, because those purchases are often driven by software reasons, and there Apple loses heavily (whether it's corporate manageability of the laptops, or access to special software which rarely has Mac versions)
• octos4murai 5y ago
  Do these new processors mean anything for those of us who need to run x86 VMs or is Apple Silicon still a no-go?
  • sharikous 5y ago
    you can always run an emulator such as QEMU if you really need x86 once in a while working with it would be a pain, however, if you absolutely need x86 better get an Intel mac (possibly used) or a PC
• lisper 5y ago
  "Apple’s Commitment to the Environment" > Today, Apple is carbon neutral for global corporate operations, and by 2030, plans to have net-zero climate impact across the entire business, which includes manufacturing supply chains and all product life cycles. This also means that every chip Apple creates, from design to manufacturing, will be 100 percent carbon neutral. But what they won't do is put the chip in an expandable and repairable system so that you don't have to discard and replace it every few years. This renders the carbon-neutrality of the chips meaningless. It's not the chip, it's the packaging that is massively unfriendly to the environment, stupid.
  • sktrdie 5y ago
    Won't that make the chip bigger and/or slower? I think the compactness where the main components are so close together and finely tuned that makes the difference. Making it composable probably means also making it bigger (hence won't fit in as small spaces) and probably slower than what it is. Just my two cents though am not a chip designer.
    • Tuna-Fish 5y ago
      Just making the SSD (the only part that wears) replaceable would greatly increase the lifespan of these systems, and while supporting M.2 would take up more space in the chassis, it would not meaninfully change performance or power.
  • threeseed 5y ago
    I just used Apple's trade-in service for my 2014 MacBook Pro and received $430. So there is another, quite lucrative, option besides discarding it.
    • grvdrm 5y ago
      Good to know and thanks! Looking forward to doing the same as I have a 2014 MBP that works and is in good condition.
  • oblio 5y ago
• sk0g 5y ago
  Now, if only Unreal Engine builds were available M1 native, I could get rid of my huge and heavy desktop entirely! Interestingly, some improvements to Rosetta were mentioned, extremely briefly.
  • out_of_protocol 5y ago
    Apple very much against games, they've even broken OpenGL just because. Don't expect any type of gaming ecosystem around Apple anytime soon.
    • dewey 5y ago
      > Apple very much against games They are not against games, they just don't care about supporting anything else that's not coming through their frameworks and the app store. This can easily verified by the way-too-long segments of game developer demos at the annual WWDC.
      • out_of_protocol 5y ago
        Thats not how industry works, thats not how any of this works. iPhone ecosystem is big enough to move itself forward, but desktop market plays by different rules.If you don't follow what majority of the market do, it's much cheaper to just ignore that tiny customer segment which requires totally alien set of technologies
        • GeekyBear 5y ago
          >If you don't follow what majority of the market do, it's much cheaper to just ignore that tiny customer segment which requires totally alien set of technologies iOS and Macs both use Metal. You can't refuse to support Metal without missing out on a very big slice of total gaming revenue.
          • out_of_protocol 5y ago
            On mobile devices - definitely On desktop - missing what, 2% or less? Checked Steam stats - yep, about 2%
• citilife 5y ago
  Those power comparisons aren't really fair IMO. They're testing power consumption... They're using a "msi prestige 14 evo (intel CPU)" vs an optimized laptop using an M1. Further, where's AMD? They have a better power vs performance ratio. I'm not sure it's as good or not, but that's a lot of cherry picking.
  • marricks 5y ago
    Can you be more specific in how the M1 is optimized while MSI's isn't? Also why was MSI a bad comparison? It seems reasonable to me but I don't follow PC much these days.
    • terafo 5y ago
      Intel chips eat much more energy than AMD ones. Comparatively to AMD gap isn't that big(and it's mostly due to better node).
• mohanmcgeek 5y ago
  Disingenuous for Apple to compare these against 2017 Intel chips and call them 2x and 3.7x faster. I would love to see how they fare against 2021 Intel and amd chips.
  • james33 5y ago
    They did that to compare against the last comparable Intel chips in a Mac, which seems rather useful for people looking to upgrade from that line of Mac.
    • peterkos 5y ago
      Reminds me of AMD comparing their insane IPC increase when Ryzen first came out.
  • lowbloodsugar 5y ago
    The slide where they say its faster than an 8-core PC laptop CPU is comparing it against the 11th gen i7 11800H [1]. So it's not as fast as the fastest laptop chip, and it's certainly not as fast as the monster laptops that people put desktop CPUs in. But it uses 40% of the power of a not-awful 11th gen 8-core i7 laptop. The M1 is nowhere near as fast as a full-blown 16 core desktop CPU. I am sure we will see reviews against high end intel and amd laptops very soon, and I wont be surprised if real world performance blows people away, as the M1 Air did. [1] https://live.arstechnica.com/apple-october-18-unleashed-event/images/Screen%20Shot%202021-10-18%20at%2012.21.54%20PM.jpg https://live.arstechnica.com/apple-october-18-unleashed-even...
    • spacedcowboy 5y ago
      ... and neither is the M1 (in any configuration) a "full blown 16 core desktop CPU". Those will be called M2 and come later next year, according to the rumor mill anyway.
      • lowbloodsugar 5y ago
        Sorry, that is what I meant. I'll edit.
• yodsanklai 5y ago
  > This also means that every chip Apple creates, from design to manufacturing, will be 100 percent carbon neutral. How is that even possible?
  • bee_rider 5y ago
    I guess it must be net, right? So maybe carbon offsets or providing more green energy than they consume, to the grid?
  • trenchgun 5y ago
    With offsets.
    • robocat 5y ago
      There are two kinds of offsets: 1. existing offsets where you buy them but there is no net offset creation, 2. newly created offsets where your purchase makes a net difference. An example of (1) could be buying an existing forest that wasn’t going to be felled. An example of (2) could be converting a coal electricity plant to capture CO2 instead of shutting the plant down. A quick skim of the Apple marketing blurb at least implies they are trying to create new offsets e.g. “Over 80 percent of the renewable energy that Apple sources comes from projects that Apple created”, and “Apple is supporting the development of the first-ever direct carbon-free aluminium smelting process through investments and collaboration with two of its aluminium suppliers.” — https://www.apple.com/nz/newsroom/2020/07/apple-commits-to-be-100-percent-carbon-neutral-for-its-supply-chain-and-products-by-2030/ https://www.apple.com/nz/newsroom/2020/07/apple-commits-to-b...
  • supertrope 5y ago
    Collecting juicy tax credits for installing solar power. Carbon credits.
  • strobe 5y ago
    likely they not but is possible to say that because they buying a Carbon offsets or similar products to make it 100 neutral https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_offset https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_offset (obviously apple can afford that)
• citilife 5y ago
  I thought this link was far better: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/10/introducing-m1-pro-and-m1-max-the-most-powerful-chips-apple-has-ever-built/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/10/introducing-m1-pro-an...
  • dang 5y ago
    Ok, we've changed to that from https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/18/22726444/apple-m1-pro-max-chip-processor-arm-macbook-fastest https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/18/22726444/apple-m1-pro-ma.... Thanks!
• dcdevito 5y ago
  No M1 Pro/Max Mini announced and my conspiracy theory on that is: they couldn’t justify a high price tag for it and instead are pushing pro users to the MacBook Pro and eventually Mac Pro and maybe iMac Pro. If they did an M1 Pro Mini would cannibalize these MacBook pros. I’m glad I pulled the trigger two weeks ago and I just received my M1 mini last week, I am relieved and will be continuing to enjoy it
• klelatti 5y ago
  I think the M1 Max has more transistors than any commercially available CPU or GPU? In a $3499 laptop!
  • nazgulnarsil 5y ago
    57 billion transistors? a 5950x has under 20 a 3060ti has under 20 are they counting the RAM?
    • klelatti 5y ago
      Does either have a 10 core CPU or large cache memory?
      • wmf 5y ago
        Yes, the 5950X has 16 big CPU cores and 64 MB of L3 cache.
        • klelatti 5y ago
          My mistake. But it doesn't have a 32 core GPU! Agreed these counts look high - but the fact that they can slot this into a $3,499 laptop is remarkable and must say something about the cost effectiveness of TSMC 5nm process.
          • zamadatix 5y ago
            The CPU may not have a 32 core GPU inside it but that doesn't stop you from adding the 2 numbers together and seeing it's still significantly less than 57 billion. Would be very curious to see what took all of the die space. Neural engine? Those additional video encoding engines? I doubt we'll get to know unfortunately.
            • klelatti 5y ago
              https://www.anandtech.com/show/17019/apple-announced-m1-pro-m1-max-giant-new-socs-with-allout-performance https://www.anandtech.com/show/17019/apple-announced-m1-pro-...
• dang 5y ago
  All: let's keep this thread about the processors, and talk about the new MBPs in the other thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908383 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908383. Edit: to read all the 600+ comments in this thread, click More at the bottom of the page, or like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908031&p=2 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908031&p=2 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908031&p=3 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908031&p=3
• euroderf 5y ago
  Any guesses how long it will take for Apple to update the pre-existing M1 Macs ? (Price drop, performance boost)
  • slayerjain 5y ago
    maybe around next fall
• thuccess129 5y ago
  Still have not solved the tinytiny inverted Tee arrow key arrangement on the keyboard. Need to improve on the former IBM's 6-key cluster below the right shift key, or arrange full sized key arrows in a crossplus pattern breaking out of the rectangle at the lower right corner.
• gpt5 5y ago
  It’s interesting that the M1 Max is similar in GPU performance to RTX 3080. A sub $1000 Mac Mini would end up being the best gaming PC you could buy, at less than half the price of an equivalent windows machine.
  • cloogshicer 5y ago
    If only the Software compatibility was there. I'd love to be able to skip buying expensive desktop machines exclusively for gaming.
  • burmanm 5y ago
    But without games to play on it. Instead, you could just get an Xbox Series X for half that price.
    • lowbloodsugar 5y ago
      PS5! Not true apple owner buys a Microsoft product!
      • lost-found 5y ago
        Based on aesthetics and hardware design, the Series X is way more in line with Apple compared to the PS5.
  • neogodless 5y ago
    The M1 Max starts at $2700 for the 16" 10-core CPU, 24-core GPU. The comparison to higher end graphics uses the M1 Max 32-core GPU which starts at $3500. I'm not seeing a way for a Mac Mini to have the M1 Max, and still be priced below $1000.
    • 6a74 5y ago
      While not that big of difference, the 14" is a little cheaper: * The 14" MBP with M1 Max 10-core CPU, 24-core GPU, 32gb memory is $2,900 * The 14" MBP with M1 Max 10-core CPU, 32-core GPU, 32gb memory is $3,100. The Mac mini with the Max variant chip will certainly be more than $1,000. But I expect it will be more reasonable than the MBPs, maybe $2,100 for the 32-core GPU version with 32gb of memory. That's how much the currently available Intel 6-core i7 Mac mini with 32gb of memory and 1TB of storage costs.
• lowbloodsugar 5y ago
  There appears to be a sea change in RAM (on a Macbook) and its affect on the price. I remember I bought a Mac Book pro back in 2009, and while the upgrade to 4gb was $200, the upgrade to 8gb was $1000 IIRC! Whereas the upgrade from 32GB to 64GB was only $400 here. Back then, more memory required higher density chips, and these were just vastly more expensive. It looks like the M1 Max simply adds more memory controllers, so that the 64GB doesn't need rarer, higher priced, higher density chips, it just has twice as many of the normal ones. This is something that very high and laptops do: have four slots for memory rather than two. It's great that Apple is doing this too. And while they aren't user replaceable (no 128Gb upgrade for me), they are not just more memory on the same channel either: the Max has 400GB/s compared to the Pro 200Gb/s.
• alberth 5y ago
  Server Chips: if you removed the GPU, and added ECC - these would be dang nice server chips.
  • ttul 5y ago
    There is technically no reason Apple could not introduce a cloud computing service based on their silicon at some point. But would it generate the kind of profit margins they need? An interesting space to watch.
    • jbverschoor 5y ago
      2 years when their contracts expire
    • thissuchness 5y ago
      More important than profit margins are the return on capital vs. the alternative uses for that capital.
  • Weryj 5y ago
    I was having a vision last night of a server rack filled with iPad Pros /w Ethernet through the USB-C. I still wonder what the performance per mm^3 would be in comparison to a traditional server.
  • awiesenhofer 5y ago
    AFAIK LPDDR5 already uses ECC internally so you are halfway there.
• mem0r1 5y ago
  I really wonder if the CPU cores are able to access the memory with the specified high bandwith or if its just for the GPU cores.
• fwip 5y ago
  I wish that we could compare Intel/AMD at the 5nm process to these chips, to see how much speedup is the architecture vs the process node. Also, all of the benchmarks based on compiling code for the native platform are misleading, as x86 targets often take longer to compile for (as they have more optimization passes implemented).
• systemvoltage 5y ago
  Does anyone want to guess their packaging arch? Is it CoWoS? How are they connecting memory with 200 Gb/s bandwidth? Interposer?
• humantorso 5y ago
  I'll wait for the Linus benchmarks/comparisons.
  • Synaesthesia 5y ago
    You mean Anandtech
  • jagger27 5y ago
    That's funny, I stopped watching LTT videos immediately after his awful "dumpster fire" M1 first impressions video last year.
• lvl100 5y ago
  I wonder if 64GB in unified memory will jumpstart ML developments for Macs. I cannot wait to run a Mac Mini farm.
• SalimoS 5y ago
  Why no one is talking about the base 14" 8-Core CPU and 14-Core GPU but not a single mention in the presentation ? How the new M1 Pro 8 core compared the the M1 8 core ?
  • masklinn 5y ago
    The M1 has 4 small cores and 4 big while the Pro is 2/6. Didn’t really see if they claimed difference in the performances of the cores themselves.
  • bnastic 5y ago
    I don't think the 'old' M1 13" Pro is long for this world - for £100 more (16GB+1TB spec) you get a much better machine in the 14" model. But independent comparisons will follow. I'd love to see a Pro/Max Mac Mini, but that's not likely to happen.
• WoodenChair 5y ago
  Is there any reason to believe these will have improved single-core performance? Or are these just more M1 cores in the same package?
  • eugeniub 5y ago
    FWIW initial Geekbench scores that surfaced today do not show a significant improvement in the single-core performance for M1 Max compared to M1. https://www.macrumors.com/2021/10/18/first-m1-max-geekbench-score-surfaces/ https://www.macrumors.com/2021/10/18/first-m1-max-geekbench-...
• aqme28 5y ago
  I hate the naming. By name alone and without looking at specs, can you tell me which is the faster chip-- the M1 Max or the M1 Pro?
  • rbilgil 5y ago
    Well I'm not necessarily a fan of the naming but assuming Max stands for maximum, it's pretty clearly the best one. The one you get if you want to max it out. But they should've called it Pro Max for consistency with the iPhones...
  • twic 5y ago
    The M1 Pro is faster. The M1 MAX is an M1, but with new control software which makes it keep crashing.
    • btzo 5y ago
      wrong
      • 19h 5y ago
        I assume it was a reference to the 737 Max..
    • filoleg 5y ago
      M1 Pro is on the cheapest model, and M1 Max is on the most expensive model. So I think you are just flat out wrong here.
      • aroman 5y ago
        You missed the joke they were making about the Boeing 737 MAX.
  • billyhoffman 5y ago
    In isolation, maybe. But it follows the naming convention of their iPhones models: base model < pro model < pro max model
• mattfrommars 5y ago
  I am in the market for a new laptop and bit skeptic for M1 Chips. Could anyone please tell me how is this not a "premium high performance Chromebook" ? Why should I buy this and not Dell XPS machine if I will be using it for web development/Android Development/C#/DevOps. Might soon mess with machine learning
  • sjroot 5y ago
    I am a very satisfied Apple customer, but will gladly tell you that a Windows machine would make more sense for the use cases you’ve described.
    • raydev 5y ago
      C# is the only odd item there. Entire companies are doing everything else in that list using exclusively MacBook Pros.
      • skohan 5y ago
        Isn't C# quite available on mac?
        • other_herbert 5y ago
          Yes and dotnet 6 (release date scheduled for 11/9, but is available now as rc2) works natively on the m1... REALLY quickly I might add :)... I go between vs.code and JetBrains Rider (rider now has an EAP that runs natively on the m1)... I am going to upgrade just because I didn't get enough ram the first time around :)
    • bengale 5y ago
      Other than the ML work maybe. The Apple chips claim to be very performant with ML workloads.
  • raydev 5y ago
    Better battery life while performing faster than any Intel/AMD chip at equivalent power usage. Portability is the reason for the existence of laptops.
• hydroreadsstuff 5y ago
  How do they get 200/400GB per second RAM bandwidth? Isn't that like 4/8 channel DDR5. 4/8 times as fast as current Intel/AMD CPUs/APUs? (E.g. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/201837/intel-core-i710750h-processor-12m-cache-up-to-5-00-ghz/specifications.html https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/201837/... with 45.8GB/s) Laptop/desktop have 2 channels. High-end desktop can have 4 channels. Servers have 8 channels. How does Apple do that? I was always assuming that having that many channels is prohibitive in terms of either power consumption and/or chip size. But I guess I was wrong. It can't be GDDR because chips with the required density don't exist, right?
  • G4E 5y ago
    That sound like HBM2, maybe HBM3 but that would be the first consumer product to include it afaik. Basically the bus is really large, and the memory dies must be really close to the main processing die. Those memory were notably on the RX Vega from AMD, and before that on the R9 Fury. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Bandwidth_Memory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Bandwidth_Memory
    • hydroreadsstuff 5y ago
      If that were the case you could probably see an interposer. And I think the B/W would be even higher.
      • kingosticks 5y ago
        And the price would be even higher.
    • ben-schaaf 5y ago
      If it was HBM it would have considerably higher bandwidth. A single HBM2E stack is 16GB at 460GBps, at 64GB that's 1.8TBps of bandwidth.
  • Tuna-Fish 5y ago
    It's LPDDR5, which maxes out at 6.4Gbit/s/pin, on a 256bit/512bit interface. It's much easier to make a wider bus with LPDDR5 and chips soldered on the board than with DIMMs.
• sharkjacobs 5y ago
  This is roughly in line with what I expected, given the characteristics of the M1. It's still very power efficient and cool, has more CPU cores, a lot more GPU cores, wider memory controller, and presumably it has unchanged single core performance. Apple clearly doesn't mean these to be a high performance desktop offering though because they didn't even offer an Mac Mini SKU with the new M1s. But what I'm really curious about is how Apple is going to push this architecture for their pro desktop machines. Is there a version of the M1 which can take advantage of a permanent power supply and decent air flow?
  • julienb_sea 5y ago
    I don't think they are going to make desktop versions, they'll probably put the pro and max versions in a new iMac body during Q2 2022 and might add config options to mac mini. Might be for supply chain reasons, focusing 100% on macbook pro production to meet the absolutely massive incoming demand.
    • Zenbit_UX 5y ago
      Indeed, ETA on a 16" was already late December for an order placed when the presentation ended, I'm sure it's into 2022 now.
  • grecy 5y ago
    I think it likely that Apple will just ramp up what they've been doing so far - make an "M1 Ultra" that has 32 or 64 or even 128 cores of CPU, at least that many GPU and scale the memory and I/O in the same way. Put the one with fewer cores in the iMac Pro and the one with the most cores in the Mac Pro. Every couple of years when they upgrade again every product they make will go up to M2, then M3, etc. etc.
• FearlessNebula 5y ago
  Can somebody check up on intel? Are they okay?
• m15i 5y ago
  Will the 64GB RAM max chip be practical for training deep learning models? Any benchmarks vs GTX 3090?
  • andrewl-hn 5y ago
    Their comparison charts showed the performance of mobile GPUs, not the desktop ones. So, I wouldn’t call this “practical”. Most likely depends on what kind of models you are building and what software you use and how optimized it is for M1.
  • terafo 5y ago
    It will be definitely handy for finetuning large models due to huge ram, but in training from scratch 3090 is certainly better. They are seemingly cooking 128 core GPU, if they release this kraken it will beat 3090 in pretty much everything.
• hbn 5y ago
  These things came at a great time for me. My late-2014 MBP just received its last major OS upgrade (Big Sur), so I'm officially in unsupported waters now. I was getting concerned in that era from 2015-2019 with all the bad decisions (butterfly keyboard, no I/O, touchbar, graphics issues, etc.) but this new generation of MacBooks seems to have resolved all my points of concern. On the other hand, my late-2014 model is still performing... fine? It gets a bit bogged down running something moderately intensive like a JetBrains IDE (which is my editor of choice), or when I recently used it to play a Jack Box Party Pack with friends, but for most things it's pretty serviceable. I got it before starting university, it carried me all the way to getting my bachelor's degree last year, and it's still trucking along just fine. Definitely one of my better purchases I've made.
  • breiti 5y ago
    You could easily upgrade macOS using https://dortania.github.io/OpenCore-Legacy-Patcher/MODELS.html https://dortania.github.io/OpenCore-Legacy-Patcher/MODELS.ht.... On the hardware side, you could open it up, clean the fan, re-apply thermal paste (after so many years, this will make a big difference) and maybe even upgrade the SSD if you feel like it. That way, this laptop can easily survive another 1-3 years depending on your use-cases.
    • hbn 5y ago
      Interesting, thanks for the link I actually ended up pulling the trigger on the base model 14 inch that was announced today, but I'll probably still keep this laptop around as a tinkering device in the future. If not only because it's still fairly capable, but I've got some good nostalgia for it!
  • Aperocky 5y ago
    > JetBrains IDE Runaway feature creep IDE? I use it too.
    • hbn 5y ago
      Do you think it suffers feature creep? I've used it since 2017 and it hasn't changed much since then. I guess they recently added some online code pairing feature I don't plan on using, but that's all that comes to mind.
• throwawaysea 5y ago
  I know Apple has a translating feature called Rosetta. But what about virtual machines? Is it possible to run Windows 10 (not the ARM edition but the regular, full Windows 10) as a virtual machine on top of an Apple M1 chip? It looks like UTM (https://mac.getutm.app/ https://mac.getutm.app/) enables this, although at a performance hit, but I don’t know how well it works in practice. What about Parallels - their website suggests you can run Windows 10 Arm edition but doesn’t make it clear whether you can run x86 versions of operating systems on top of an M1 Mac (see old blog post at https://www.parallels.com/blogs/parallels-desktop-m1/ https://www.parallels.com/blogs/parallels-desktop-m1/). I would expect that they can run any architecture on top of an ARM processor but with some performance penalty. I’m trying to figure out if these new MacBook Pros would be an appropriate gift for a CS student entering the workforce. I am worried that common developer tools might not work well or that differences in processors relative to other coworkers may cause issues.
  • thoughtsimple 5y ago
    Neither Apple, Microsoft, nor Parallels is planning to support x86-64 Windows on Apple silicon. You can run emulation software like QEMU and it works but it is very slow. UTM uses QEMU.
  • raihansaputra 5y ago
    If they're entering the workforce, gift them for their personal use. The office should provide them with the laptop instead of a personal one.
• mannymanman 5y ago
  So if I want a new Macbook purely for software development and building mobile apps, what should I pick between the $2499 14" and the $3499 16"? Doesn't look like there's any difference in Xcode build times from their website
  • rpmisms 5y ago
    Probably depends on your eyesight. I like small laptops with very high resolution, but I have good eyes.
  • methyl 5y ago
    It’s only a matter of your preference, whether you like more real estate on the screen or better portability.
  • seviu 5y ago
    14" + M1 Max (24 GPU cores) with 32 Gb Ram is the sweet spot imho. It costs a bit more but you get twice the memory bandwidth and double the ram, which will always prove handy. I develop iOS apps and I think this is the sweet spot. I am not sure what impact the extra bandwidth of the M1 Max will have though. We will have to wait to see. For video editing is clear. For Xcode not so sure. 14 or 16 inches is up to personal preference. I just value more the smaller package and the reduced weight. Performance is about the same.
  • symlinkk 5y ago
    I’d get the 16”, 14” is pretty small for something you’d be using every day
• haberman 5y ago
  I always thought it was strange that "integrated graphics" was, for years, was synonymous with "cheap, underperforming" compared to the power of a discrete GPU. I never could see any fundamental reason why "integrated" should mean "underpowered." Apple is turning things around, and is touting the benefits of high-performance integrated graphics.
  • fulafel 5y ago
    The software side hasn't been there on x86 GP platforms, even though AMD tried. It's worked out better on consoles.
    • boardwaalk 5y ago
      What software is missing? I figured the AMD G-series CPUs used the same graphics drivers and same codepaths in those drivers for the same (Vega) architecture. My impression was that it was still the hardware holding things back: Everything but the latest desktop CPUs still using the older Vega architecture. And even those latest desktop CPUs are essentially PS5 chips that got binned out.
      • dannyw 5y ago
        iGPU Vega is actually really, really good esp when it comes to perf/watt. It is bottlenecked by the slow memory bandwidth. DDR5 will more or less double iGPU performance.
      • fulafel 5y ago
        Deep OS support for unified memory architectures for one. Things they tried to do with HSA etc. Also NVidia winning so much gpu programming mindshare with Cuda, and OpenCL failing to take off on mobile, dooming followon opencl development plans, didn't help. In the wider picture, gpu compute in general on PC also failed to become mainstream enough to sway consumer choices. Development experience for GPUs is still crap vs the cpu, the languages are mostly bad, there's massive sw platform fragmentation among os vendors and gpu vendors, driver bugs causing OS crashes left and right, etc. Re your impression, yes, AMD shifted focus more toward cpu from gpu in their SoCs after a while when their initiatives failed to take off outside consoles. But it's been an ok place to be, just keeping the gpu somewhat ahead of Intel competition and getting some good successes in the cpu side.
• titzer 5y ago
  These chips are impressive, but TBH I have always been annoyed by these vague cartoon-line graphs. Like, is this measured data. No? Just some market doodle? Please don't make graphs meaningless marketing gags. I mean, please don't make graphs even more meaningless marketing gags.
• yellowapple 5y ago
  If Apple ever gets around to putting an M1 Max in a Mac Mini, that'd probably push me over the edge toward buying one.
  • soheil 5y ago
    Can't you buy a MBP 16" and connect it to whatever display you were going to connect your Mac Mini to?
    • jb1991 5y ago
      But there’s a huge difference in the price if you don’t need all the other stuff that comes with the MacBook Pro.
      • cmckn 5y ago
        Agreed, and the mini has different I/O that you might prefer (USB-A, 10 gig eth). Also, it’s smaller (surprise, “mini”). Plus, clamshell mode on a MacBook just isn’t the same as a desktop for “always-on” use cases.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  • Andys 5y ago
    Yeah, especially if it could run Linux. This would be a powerful little server. I decked out my workstation with a 16 core Ryzen & 96GB RAM and it didn't cost anywhere near the price of this new 64GB M1 Max combo. (But it may very well be less powerful, which is astonishing. It would be great to at least have the choice.)
    • fastball 5y ago
      Ubuntu already has an ARM build. Is there a reason you wouldn't be able to run linux?
      • 5y ago
• 41209 5y ago
  Has anyone tried extremely graphically intense gaming on these yet, I actually would love to consolidate all of my computer usage to a single machine, but it would need to handle everything I need it to do. $2000 for a laptop that can replace my desktop, is not a bad deal. Although that said I’m in no rush here.
  • smoldesu 5y ago
    Gaming is a non-starter on MacOS since 2018. You can get certain, specific titles working if you pour your heart and soul into it, but it's nothing like the current experience on Linux/Windows unfortunately.
    • 41209 5y ago
      Darn. Hard pass then. I already have a pretty fast Windows laptop. The only real issue is it sounds like an helicopter underload. ( It also thermal throttles hard ).
      • bpicolo 5y ago
        Depends on the games you play. Some publishers are good about this, some aren't. Worth checking.
        • 41209 5y ago
          I'm actually using Xbox gamepass for a lot of stuff. I doubt this will work well, unless M1's can emulate windows at native speed.
• throwawaywindev 5y ago
  The M1 Max is drool worthy but Mac gaming still sucks. Can’t really justify it given that I don’t do video editing or machine learning work.
• Asmod4n 5y ago
  Prediction for Mac Pros and iMac Pros: several SoCs on the mainboard, interconnected with a new bus, 16 CPU cores for each SoC, 4 SoCs max. The on SoC RAM will act as a L4 Cache and they will share normal, User replaceable DDR5 RAM for „unified“ access.
  • fomine3 5y ago
    Looks like Naples. It seems to not easy to treat NUMA especially as a personal computer. So I wondered whether Apple uses Chiplet approach for M1X, but seems not.
• taurath 5y ago
  Kind of surprising to me they’re not making more effort towards game support - maybe someone can explain what the barriers are towards mac support - is it lack of shared libraries, x64 only, sheer number of compute cores? When I see the spec sheet and “16x graphics improvement” I go okay what could it handle in terms of game rendering? Is it really only for video production and GPU compute tasks?
  • thcleaner999 5y ago
    Price you can’t win the gaming market with 2000+$ product
    • terafo 5y ago
      Have you seen GPU prices lately? Desktop 3070 level performance in portable laptop for 3500$ is not that bad of a deal. If they make Mac Mini around 2500$ it would be pretty competitive in PC space.
    • taurath 5y ago
      Gaming market spends the most of any home electronics user except ultra rich mansion hi-fi outfitters. Entry gaming laptops are $1300, entry GPUs are $400 if you can find them. Not competing against consoles, but against big rig gaming PCs, and products from Asus and Razor, and companies like Nvidia/Amd in compute.
  • terafo 5y ago
    They never before had good graphics in mainstream products. And there's no official support for any of the industry standard API(to be fair there is MoltenVK, but not much traction yet), yes, there is support for Metal in UE4/5 and Unity, but AAA games use custom engines and cost/benefit analysis didn't make much sense, maybe now it will change.
  • modulusshift 5y ago
    The gaming capability is there, but Apple only officially supports their own Metal on macOS as far as graphics languages, meaning the only devs with experience with Metal are the World of Warcraft team at Blizzard and mobile gaming studios. MoltenVK exists to help port Vulkan based games, but generally it's rough going at the moment. I'm personally hoping that the volume of M1 Macs Apple has been selling will cause devs to support Macs.
• thecleaner 5y ago
  Naive question - is this chip purely home-made at Apple or does it use Arm licensed IP ?
  • thoughtsimple 5y ago
    Apple uses the Arm Aarch64 instruction set with Apple silicon which is Arm IP. I don't believe that any Apple silicon uses any other Arm IP but who really knows since it is likely Apple would have written any contracts to prevent disclosure.
  • modulusshift 5y ago
    Apple has an architecture license from ARM, so they're allowed to create their own ARM-compatible cores. They do not license any core designs from ARM (like the Cortex A57), they design those in house instead.
• franciscop 5y ago
  > M1 Pro and M1 Max also feature enhanced media engines with dedicated ProRes accelerators specifically for pro video processing Do we know if this includes hardware encoding/decoding of AV1? I've found it to be quite lackluster on my M1, and would love to jump formats.
• agluszak 5y ago
  Ah yes, the naming. Instead of M2 we got M1 Pro & M1 Max. I'm waiting for M1 Ultra+ Turbo 5G Mimetic-Resolution-Cartridge-View-Motherboard-Easy-To-Install-Upgrade for Infernatron/InterLace TP Systems for Home, Office or Mobile [sic]
  • terafo 5y ago
    It's scaled up M1. No new cores, no new modules. Just more of everything. I would've been disappointed if it was called m2.
• chovybizzass 5y ago
  every time i buy a macbook they release a new one 2 days later.
• lincpa 5y ago
  Apple M1 uses my "Warehouse/Workshop Model", It's a IT architecture with the simplest and most vivid mathematical prototype: the "water in/out of a pool" problem in elementary school mathematics. Software and hardware are factories that manufacture data, so they have the same "warehouse/workshop model" and management methods as the manufacturing industry. the "Warehouse/Workshop Model" will surely replace the "von Neumann architecture" and become the first architecture in the computer field, and it is the first architecture to achieve a unified software and hardware. Because "von Neumann architecture" lacks mathematical model support, it is impossible to prove its scientificity. It is an epoch-making theoretical achievement in the IT field, it surpasses the "von Neumann architecture", unifies the IT software and hardware theory, and raises it from the manual workshop production theory level to the modern manufacturing industry production theory Level. Although the Apple M1 chip has not yet fully realized its theory, Apple M1 chip has become the fastest chip in the world. It has a wide range of applications, from SOC to supercomputer, from software to hardware, from stand-alone to network, from application layer to system layer, from single thread to distributed, from general programming to explainable AI, from manufacturing industry to IT industry, from energy to finance, from the missile's "Fire-and-Forget" technology to Boeing aircraft pulse production line technology . The Grand Unified Programming Theory: The Pure Function Pipeline Data Flow with Principle-based Warehouse/Workshop Model: https://github.com/linpengcheng/PurefunctionPipelineDataflow https://github.com/linpengcheng/PurefunctionPipelineDataflow Why my "warehouse/workshop model" can achieve high performance and low power consumption (take Apple M1 chip, Intel AVX-512, Qualcomm as examples) https://github.com/linpengcheng/PurefunctionPipelineDataflow/blob/master/doc/why_wwmodel_fast_en.md https://github.com/linpengcheng/PurefunctionPipelineDataflow...
• eointierney 5y ago
  Great design, abolute nope, human rights are more important Don't feed the monsters
• srvmshr 5y ago
  Doing stuff on two different windows just became a bit clumsier every time e.g. code reviews. I can imagine manually resizing windows when in a tiling mode.
• tmellon2 5y ago
  Does anyone have a handle on how the new M1X is expected to perform on Deep Learning training runs vs a NVIDIA 1080Ti / 2080Ti. I think the 400 Gbps bandwidth and 64 GB unified memory will help - but can anyone extrapolate based on the M1 ?
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • uuddlrlr 5y ago
    Nit: the M1 Max has 400GB/s (3.2Tbps) bandwidth.
• adamleo 5y ago
  I'm switching now, after waiting for the M1 16' one for more than a year now. However, my current laptop is a 2015 MacBook, I've never had any issues with it when it comes to coding. If anyone here's switching and you don't do anything like 3D/video editing, I'm curious what's your reason?
  • sumnuyungi 5y ago
    To finally use my laptop as it's intended: without being tethered to an outlet. The battery life on these is phenomenal.
• ngcc_hk 5y ago
  Wonder will we see apple server one day and will the 27 inch goes sepearate box ( a macmini like Microsoft desktop).
• gandalfgreybeer 5y ago
  I’m not super familiar with how hardware works so this might be a stupid question but how different are the tiers of processors for each upgrade and what’s a reasonable use case to choose any of them?
• runeks 5y ago
  Does the M1 Pro/Max support running/building x86 Docker images using x86 hardware emulation? As as developer, this is the feature I've missed the most after having used my M1 MacBook Air for about a year.
  • mirekrusin 5y ago
    docker buildx should be able to handle it, no?
    • runeks 5y ago
      What makes you think that?
      • mirekrusin 5y ago
        Because it's used to build multi architecture docker images.
        • runeks 5y ago
          Ah, sorry. I didn't mean building, just running with x86 hardware emulation.
• perryizgr8 5y ago
  Wow! Amazing CPUs. Any word on pricing yet? I'd love to build my new PC with these. /s
• meerita 5y ago
  My dream setup would be dual 27" 5K screens and M1 Max 16" with 64GB. I guess it's like 8k EUR.
• lostmsu 5y ago
  Napkin math based on Ethereum mining, which on original 8 GPU core M1 was about 2MH/s, puts M1 Max GPU performance (8MH/s with 32 cores) to be only 1/4 of mobile 3060, which does over 34MH/s. So I am extremely skeptical about Apple claims on "comparable" GPU performance to RTX 30xx mobile series. And again, that RTX is still using 7nm.
• notSupplied 5y ago
  Hardware people: We worked our asses off for this breakthrough in performance. Software people: Thanks buddy, so we can move everything to Electron now? On a serious note, it does saddens me how a portion of hardware advancement is lost to inevitably sloppier software in the name of iteration speed.
• deepdmistry 5y ago
  Does anyone know how the single core performance matches to the M1 chip ?
• Teknoman117 5y ago
  Is it disclosed anywhere what the bandwidth the CPU complex has to memory? There's the overall bandwidth to memory, which was probably made so high to feed the GPU, but can the CPUs together actually drive 200 or 400 GB/s to memory? If they can, that's an absolutely insane amount of bandwidth. You can only get ~200 GB/s on an AMD EPYC or Threadripper Pro CPU with 8 channels of DDR4-3200, so here we have a freakin' LAPTOP with as much or even double the bandwidth of the fastest and hungriest workstation CPUs on the market. Excited to see what a future Apple Silicon Mac Pro looks like and makes me quite envious as someone who is stuck in the x86 world.