4 ms·

This is the entry level M1. 15fps at 1400x900 isn't great (or even playable), but it's very impressive that it runs at all without any changes, let alone on ult

This is the entry level M1. 15fps at 1400x900 isn't great (or even playable), but it's very impressive that it runs at all without any changes, let alone on ultra settings.

Applejinx 3y ago
Yes, thank you. I mean, let's have a bit of context. I'm Mac based (well, my computing is, I'm still biological ;) ) and I took an interest in what's happening in the AI space. Knowing that RAM and CPU would be bottlenecks but that there would be open source ways to run stuff, I got a Mac Studio, which is M1 Ultra and 128G of RAM, which then becomes also GPU RAM because on M1 the architecture is like that. So I'm able to do AI stuff up to the heavy-lifting stuff (still steadily downloading LLaMA data on my old DSL, but I've got everything but 65B and have run 7B, 13B and 30B without issue, and of course I'm having no trouble running Stable Diffusion stuff) If a basic laptop with just an M1 and laptop amounts of RAM can do 15 fps at 1400x900, my 20-core M1 Ultra with 128G of RAM ought to do at least that at 3840x1600 on my big ol' curved monitor. And at that point it starts acting like the PC gamer experience, except at no point did I set out to make a gamer-specific system. The whole thing was put together to serve very much other purposes, and retains usefulness for those purposes. I'm sure I can tolerate pleb tier 30 fps or not being on Ultra settings or something, to get performance that's very similar to decent gaming rigs on games designed for Windows PCs, on a machine I got to serve entirely other purposes.
- lamontcg 3y ago
  A lot of us with the financial means to buy a Mac Studio are also old and are "PatientGamers" and fire up games like Skyrim from time-to-time and don't chase after the latest AAA titles. Even 10-15 years ago I used to a have a $200 limit on graphics cards and roughly $100 limit on CPUs and would wait to play games on highest resolution until it was a few years later and I went through a hardware refresh cycle, always staying about 2 years behind. I've never bought a $1000 GPU for a gaming rig. At the same time I find this interesting that Apple is clearly starting to notice the PC gaming market. Makes me wonder if they're going to start a more serious push soon, and if we might see some changes and repair the relationship that Apple has with AAA studios. [Edit: And another thought is that with virtual iPhone saturation in the US market, Apple may be facing the economic reality that in order to grow they need to enter into other markets like gaming, and this may as well be a necessary part of the long-term Vision Pro strategy]
  - actionfromafar 3y ago
    Maybe they want to do beefy VR stuff?
_mitchie 3y ago
This is not the M1. You can’t configure a MacBook Pro 16 inch (stated in the tweet) with anything other than an M1 Pro / M1 Max, or M2 Pro / M2 Max on the latest models.
- Version467 3y ago
  Huh where does it say that? It states 16GB of RAM, not screen size.
  - jlokier 3y ago
    The tweet says "M1 MBP". That is short for Macbook Pro and means the CPU is an M1 Pro or M1 Max. Not the entry level M1.
    - hoorible 3y ago
      The 13” M1 MacBook Pro does not have the pro or Mac chip. Not sure that’s what is being used here, but your assumption that this combination isn’t possible is false.
      - jlokier 3y ago
        Thanks for the clarification, I appreciate it. I knew about the 13" M2 MBP (although it seems very easy to forget somehow), but maybe due to marketing materials I encountered, I'd incorrectly thought that product line started with the M2 not the M1.
        hoorible 3y ago
        In fairness the 13” MBP is an entirely forgettable machine that IMO should not exist so I definitely don’t begrudge anyone making mistakes about it!
    - Version467 3y ago
      The 13" M1 Macbook Pro is a thing. You cannot infer M1 Pro/Max just from that.
heliophobicdude 3y ago
> This is the entry level M1. 15fps at 1400x900 isn't great (or even playable), but it's very impressive that it runs at all without any changes, let alone on ultra settings. And running non-natively through Codeweavers patch and through Rosetta.
- quitit 3y ago
  The people shaming this couldn't have any idea what they're looking at. It runs bad! I could spend less on a PC and get a better frame rate! Of course it runs bad, it's miracle-like that it runs at all or has a frame rate, let alone a rate that is based on high performance settings. The entire thing is hacked together through tenuous layer upon layer of emulation - no part of this is designed for the hardware it's running on. It should not be this fast, it should be spitting out a low-res, low-detail frame once every 30 seconds, if at all.

This is the entry level M1. 15fps at 1400x900 isn't great (or even playable), but it's very impressive that it runs at all without any changes, let alone on ultra settings.

Applejinx 3y ago

Yes, thank you. I mean, let's have a bit of context. I'm Mac based (well, my computing is, I'm still biological ;) ) and I took an interest in what's happening in the AI space. Knowing that RAM and CPU would be bottlenecks but that there would be open source ways to run stuff, I got a Mac Studio, which is M1 Ultra and 128G of RAM, which then becomes also GPU RAM because on M1 the architecture is like that. So I'm able to do AI stuff up to the heavy-lifting stuff (still steadily downloading LLaMA data on my old DSL, but I've got everything but 65B and have run 7B, 13B and 30B without issue, and of course I'm having no trouble running Stable Diffusion stuff) If a basic laptop with just an M1 and laptop amounts of RAM can do 15 fps at 1400x900, my 20-core M1 Ultra with 128G of RAM ought to do at least that at 3840x1600 on my big ol' curved monitor. And at that point it starts acting like the PC gamer experience, except at no point did I set out to make a gamer-specific system. The whole thing was put together to serve very much other purposes, and retains usefulness for those purposes. I'm sure I can tolerate pleb tier 30 fps or not being on Ultra settings or something, to get performance that's very similar to decent gaming rigs on games designed for Windows PCs, on a machine I got to serve entirely other purposes.

lamontcg 3y ago
A lot of us with the financial means to buy a Mac Studio are also old and are "PatientGamers" and fire up games like Skyrim from time-to-time and don't chase after the latest AAA titles. Even 10-15 years ago I used to a have a $200 limit on graphics cards and roughly $100 limit on CPUs and would wait to play games on highest resolution until it was a few years later and I went through a hardware refresh cycle, always staying about 2 years behind. I've never bought a $1000 GPU for a gaming rig. At the same time I find this interesting that Apple is clearly starting to notice the PC gaming market. Makes me wonder if they're going to start a more serious push soon, and if we might see some changes and repair the relationship that Apple has with AAA studios. [Edit: And another thought is that with virtual iPhone saturation in the US market, Apple may be facing the economic reality that in order to grow they need to enter into other markets like gaming, and this may as well be a necessary part of the long-term Vision Pro strategy]
- actionfromafar 3y ago
  Maybe they want to do beefy VR stuff?

_mitchie 3y ago

This is not the M1. You can’t configure a MacBook Pro 16 inch (stated in the tweet) with anything other than an M1 Pro / M1 Max, or M2 Pro / M2 Max on the latest models.

Version467 3y ago
Huh where does it say that? It states 16GB of RAM, not screen size.
- jlokier 3y ago
  The tweet says "M1 MBP". That is short for Macbook Pro and means the CPU is an M1 Pro or M1 Max. Not the entry level M1.
  - hoorible 3y ago
    The 13” M1 MacBook Pro does not have the pro or Mac chip. Not sure that’s what is being used here, but your assumption that this combination isn’t possible is false.
    - jlokier 3y ago
      Thanks for the clarification, I appreciate it. I knew about the 13" M2 MBP (although it seems very easy to forget somehow), but maybe due to marketing materials I encountered, I'd incorrectly thought that product line started with the M2 not the M1.
      - hoorible 3y ago
        In fairness the 13” MBP is an entirely forgettable machine that IMO should not exist so I definitely don’t begrudge anyone making mistakes about it!
  - Version467 3y ago
    The 13" M1 Macbook Pro is a thing. You cannot infer M1 Pro/Max just from that.

heliophobicdude 3y ago

> This is the entry level M1. 15fps at 1400x900 isn't great (or even playable), but it's very impressive that it runs at all without any changes, let alone on ultra settings. And running non-natively through Codeweavers patch and through Rosetta.

quitit 3y ago
The people shaming this couldn't have any idea what they're looking at. It runs bad! I could spend less on a PC and get a better frame rate! Of course it runs bad, it's miracle-like that it runs at all or has a frame rate, let alone a rate that is based on high performance settings. The entire thing is hacked together through tenuous layer upon layer of emulation - no part of this is designed for the hardware it's running on. It should not be this fast, it should be spitting out a low-res, low-detail frame once every 30 seconds, if at all.