9 ms·

I'm curious why Geekbench haven't put the Mac Studio on their Mac leaderboard yet - https://browser.geekbench.com/mac-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/m

I'm curious why Geekbench haven't put the Mac Studio on their Mac leaderboard yet - https://browser.geekbench.com/mac-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/mac-benchmarks. There are plenty of benchmarks submitted https://browser.geekbench.com/search?page=7&q=Apple+M1+Ultra&utf8=%E2%9C%93 https://browser.geekbench.com/search?page=7&q=Apple+M1+Ultra...

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
- zamadatix 4y ago
  Outside the rest of the claim not making sense how exactly would one compare the price of the M1 Ultra to an Intel CPU in the first place? The M1 Ultra doesn't have a price tag and even if it did you'd still not have a number you'd compare to the cost of a CPU.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
    - semigroupoid 4y ago
      It is pretty useless to compare the price of a single CPU with the price of an entire PC…
      - seabriez 4y ago
        recuter 4y ago
        smoldesu 4y ago
        Ah yes, the bot accusation comment. Everyone's favorite subcategory of HN musing.
        recuter 4y ago
        Hey man, maybe I'm a bot too. Who knows. Blip bloop. But these are just computer chips and fresh low karma accounts with vitriol dialed to the max is a-typical of HN. By all means, M1 is the worst, why froth at the mouth about it in this manner? You explain it.
        ask_b123 4y ago
        Well, I have lower karma than seabriez and I'm neither a bot nor I thought that I had low karma points.
        smoldesu 4y ago
        I don't have to explain anything, HN is based on the ideals of arguing in good faith and not vilifying people for their opinions. If you think they're being harsh, then say that. If you think they're wrong, then refute them. But if you're solely seeking to bash them, why even comment in the first place? How does that advance anyone's understanding of the topic, or sway anyone's belief? It's the opposite of productive conversation, if you think they're encouraging a harmful or counterproductive dialogue then you can downvote them and move on. It's not rocket science.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        recuter 4y ago
        I specifically wrote that the comment is so harsh it reads like spam/bot. Wasn't sarcastic or trying to bash any humans, sincerely.
        sliken 4y ago
        Umm, running a 1990s fortran code that's a CFD simulation is a "real" workload. Seems relatively likely that any floating point heavy code would act similarly. Hard to say if it's the matrix multiple or the memory bandwidth that's giving apple such a large lead. Normally I'd discount using a 28 core Intel CPU from 2019, but from what I can tell Intel hasn't improved much since then. Keep in mind that Intel has a specialized vector unit (AVX256 or AVX512 depending on the model), and the listed CPU is pretty high end (with 6 memory channels) where the normal i5/i7/i9 is only 2. So sure it's not a video compression, gaming, or web browing benchmark, but some folks do run floating point heavy codes. Unlike CUDA, which requires a rewrite, this code wasn't specifically optimized for the M1.
      - dekhn 4y ago
        apple doesn't sell unbundled chips. Adding a motherboard and RAM would still be less than $4K for most configs.
      - jrockway 4y ago
        You're definitely right there. I put together a build with this CPU and chose the most expensive part available (except GPU because chip shortage, case because there are $5000 ATX cases for no good reason, PSU because I just got the best Seasonic one, and SSD because there are $12k enterprise ones): https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DYxhk9 https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DYxhk9 So that's $3500 without a GPU, buy a $500 used GPU on eBay and you're beating Apple. And, nobody buys $1000 motherboards, so that takes $500 off. You don't need a $300 case. Etc. Basically the point of the exercise is that you can max everything out, and get a faster computer for less money, which is what the comment was trying to say. Someone will reply and say that your time sourcing and assembling the components isn't free, or that it doesn't run OS X, etc. I get it, you don't have to say that. Just adding an actual computer that's expensive as possible that you could have right now to compare to.
        hedgehog 4y ago
        To save the click a 12900K machine from Dell is about $3k. If you need CUDA or say SolidWorks get the PC, for video and multithreaded workloads the Mac would probably be faster, but really only benchmarks of your use case can tell you.
        Forgeties79 4y ago
        So made a build to essentially show how expensive an M1 Mac is compared to an intel machine but left out a critical component because it’s too expensive?
        chadcmulligan 4y ago
        Though you'd have a possibly noisy large black box, compared to a small quieter silver box. This is a factor in computer design - cooling is hard. A quiet small box with performance of a noisy large black box is something a lot of people would pay for (including me).
        tedunangst 4y ago
        But why would you buy the M1 ultra model for single core performance? I think it would be helpful for people to occasionally restate what they think the thesis is.
    - Razengan 4y ago
      For your own sake I really hope you’re trolling and not actually having your brain in a configuration where your comment makes any sense to you.
- ceeplusplus 4y ago
  That seems like a poorly thought out theory considering the $500 12900K needs 50 watts to beat the 2 year old M1 in single core performance. Whether you're a laptop user or an enterprise server customer you care about efficiency.
  - seabriez 4y ago
    For a workload that is optimized on M1 for 10 more watts you get way faster and better functionality than a 2 yo M1 that uses 40 watts and cant even export h264 format video faster than a 5 year old computer.
    - mwint 4y ago
  - paulmd 4y ago
    where did you come up with the 12900K pulling 50W? The 12900K is a 240W-class processor at full boost, so the M1 is pulling 1/6th the power... (the 12700K is much more reasonable but the 12900K and 12900KS are a "win the benchmarks" SKU and intel turned everything to 11 to get it over the top of the 5900X.)
    - ceeplusplus 4y ago
      50W is the single core package power at peak boost (~5.1GHz). M1 single core package power is around 4-7W depending on workload.
- jdlshore 4y ago
  Do you have any evidence for this statement ("Apple paid them not to"), or are you just making shit up?
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
    - phs318u 4y ago
      Please don’t turn HN into Slashdot. I regularly downvote comments that make no points, are solely there to make a gag, and add no substance to the discussion.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
        Intel wins on single core performance as well as price though.
        recuter 4y ago
        Spec us out a full comparable system and show benchmarks.
        2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
        https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/intel-core-i9-12900k https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/intel-core-i9-12900... https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14464705 https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14464705 Intel Core i9-12900K - 1991 Apple M1 Ultra - 1554
        joakleaf 4y ago
        That's kind of disingenuous. Searching on Geekbench for Apple M1 ultra single core scores returns values mostly in the 1770-1780 range. E.g. https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14597244 https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14597244 Most 12900K score are between 1900 and 2200 but then there is this outlier with single core score of 1252: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14572307 https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14572307 Intel certainly wins on single core, but the m1 Ultra multicore scores are still impressive in comparison being generally 23-24000, while the 12900k are around 15-20000.
jfpoole 4y ago
There’s a bug in the Browser that we haven’t been able to track down yet that’s preventing the Mac Studio from appearing on the leaderboard.
- wonderbore 4y ago
  How could a new computer be so different that it can’t be shown? Aren’t the results plain text? This makes no sense
  - adtac 4y ago
    hence the "we haven’t been able to track down yet", I'd imagine
  - sliken 4y ago
    I suspect because one of the benchmarks is browser based, and that's not working. It's not the display of the benchmarks that isn't working, but the running of them.

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago

zamadatix 4y ago
Outside the rest of the claim not making sense how exactly would one compare the price of the M1 Ultra to an Intel CPU in the first place? The M1 Ultra doesn't have a price tag and even if it did you'd still not have a number you'd compare to the cost of a CPU.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  - semigroupoid 4y ago
    It is pretty useless to compare the price of a single CPU with the price of an entire PC…
    - seabriez 4y ago
      - recuter 4y ago
        smoldesu 4y ago
        Ah yes, the bot accusation comment. Everyone's favorite subcategory of HN musing.
        recuter 4y ago
        Hey man, maybe I'm a bot too. Who knows. Blip bloop. But these are just computer chips and fresh low karma accounts with vitriol dialed to the max is a-typical of HN. By all means, M1 is the worst, why froth at the mouth about it in this manner? You explain it.
        ask_b123 4y ago
        Well, I have lower karma than seabriez and I'm neither a bot nor I thought that I had low karma points.
        smoldesu 4y ago
        I don't have to explain anything, HN is based on the ideals of arguing in good faith and not vilifying people for their opinions. If you think they're being harsh, then say that. If you think they're wrong, then refute them. But if you're solely seeking to bash them, why even comment in the first place? How does that advance anyone's understanding of the topic, or sway anyone's belief? It's the opposite of productive conversation, if you think they're encouraging a harmful or counterproductive dialogue then you can downvote them and move on. It's not rocket science.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        recuter 4y ago
        I specifically wrote that the comment is so harsh it reads like spam/bot. Wasn't sarcastic or trying to bash any humans, sincerely.
      - sliken 4y ago
        Umm, running a 1990s fortran code that's a CFD simulation is a "real" workload. Seems relatively likely that any floating point heavy code would act similarly. Hard to say if it's the matrix multiple or the memory bandwidth that's giving apple such a large lead. Normally I'd discount using a 28 core Intel CPU from 2019, but from what I can tell Intel hasn't improved much since then. Keep in mind that Intel has a specialized vector unit (AVX256 or AVX512 depending on the model), and the listed CPU is pretty high end (with 6 memory channels) where the normal i5/i7/i9 is only 2. So sure it's not a video compression, gaming, or web browing benchmark, but some folks do run floating point heavy codes. Unlike CUDA, which requires a rewrite, this code wasn't specifically optimized for the M1.
    - dekhn 4y ago
      apple doesn't sell unbundled chips. Adding a motherboard and RAM would still be less than $4K for most configs.
    - jrockway 4y ago
      You're definitely right there. I put together a build with this CPU and chose the most expensive part available (except GPU because chip shortage, case because there are $5000 ATX cases for no good reason, PSU because I just got the best Seasonic one, and SSD because there are $12k enterprise ones): https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DYxhk9 https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DYxhk9 So that's $3500 without a GPU, buy a $500 used GPU on eBay and you're beating Apple. And, nobody buys $1000 motherboards, so that takes $500 off. You don't need a $300 case. Etc. Basically the point of the exercise is that you can max everything out, and get a faster computer for less money, which is what the comment was trying to say. Someone will reply and say that your time sourcing and assembling the components isn't free, or that it doesn't run OS X, etc. I get it, you don't have to say that. Just adding an actual computer that's expensive as possible that you could have right now to compare to.
      - hedgehog 4y ago
        To save the click a 12900K machine from Dell is about $3k. If you need CUDA or say SolidWorks get the PC, for video and multithreaded workloads the Mac would probably be faster, but really only benchmarks of your use case can tell you.
      - Forgeties79 4y ago
        So made a build to essentially show how expensive an M1 Mac is compared to an intel machine but left out a critical component because it’s too expensive?
      - chadcmulligan 4y ago
        Though you'd have a possibly noisy large black box, compared to a small quieter silver box. This is a factor in computer design - cooling is hard. A quiet small box with performance of a noisy large black box is something a lot of people would pay for (including me).
      - tedunangst 4y ago
        But why would you buy the M1 ultra model for single core performance? I think it would be helpful for people to occasionally restate what they think the thesis is.
  - Razengan 4y ago
    For your own sake I really hope you’re trolling and not actually having your brain in a configuration where your comment makes any sense to you.
ceeplusplus 4y ago
That seems like a poorly thought out theory considering the $500 12900K needs 50 watts to beat the 2 year old M1 in single core performance. Whether you're a laptop user or an enterprise server customer you care about efficiency.
- seabriez 4y ago
  For a workload that is optimized on M1 for 10 more watts you get way faster and better functionality than a 2 yo M1 that uses 40 watts and cant even export h264 format video faster than a 5 year old computer.
  - mwint 4y ago
- paulmd 4y ago
  where did you come up with the 12900K pulling 50W? The 12900K is a 240W-class processor at full boost, so the M1 is pulling 1/6th the power... (the 12700K is much more reasonable but the 12900K and 12900KS are a "win the benchmarks" SKU and intel turned everything to 11 to get it over the top of the 5900X.)
  - ceeplusplus 4y ago
    50W is the single core package power at peak boost (~5.1GHz). M1 single core package power is around 4-7W depending on workload.
jdlshore 4y ago
Do you have any evidence for this statement ("Apple paid them not to"), or are you just making shit up?
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  - phs318u 4y ago
    Please don’t turn HN into Slashdot. I regularly downvote comments that make no points, are solely there to make a gag, and add no substance to the discussion.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
      Intel wins on single core performance as well as price though.
      - recuter 4y ago
        Spec us out a full comparable system and show benchmarks.
        2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
        https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/intel-core-i9-12900k https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/intel-core-i9-12900... https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14464705 https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14464705 Intel Core i9-12900K - 1991 Apple M1 Ultra - 1554
        joakleaf 4y ago
        That's kind of disingenuous. Searching on Geekbench for Apple M1 ultra single core scores returns values mostly in the 1770-1780 range. E.g. https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14597244 https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14597244 Most 12900K score are between 1900 and 2200 but then there is this outlier with single core score of 1252: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14572307 https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/14572307 Intel certainly wins on single core, but the m1 Ultra multicore scores are still impressive in comparison being generally 23-24000, while the 12900k are around 15-20000.

jfpoole 4y ago

There’s a bug in the Browser that we haven’t been able to track down yet that’s preventing the Mac Studio from appearing on the leaderboard.

wonderbore 4y ago
How could a new computer be so different that it can’t be shown? Aren’t the results plain text? This makes no sense
- adtac 4y ago
  hence the "we haven’t been able to track down yet", I'd imagine
- sliken 4y ago
  I suspect because one of the benchmarks is browser based, and that's not working. It's not the display of the benchmarks that isn't working, but the running of them.