3 ms·

The first gen went up to 16GB, so anyone buying 8GB was just price-chasing.

etempleton 3y ago
I do find it a bit odd they even offer the 8GB version. It truly does not feel like enough. 16 GB feels like it should be the entry point for MacOS.
- mrbuttons454 3y ago
  For someone that frequents Hacker News, maybe. My spouse has an 8GB M2 Air and has no complaints.
justsomehnguy 3y ago
> just price-chasing This is not the problem. You can find comments here how people literally said what 'it were running better than x86 Macs with 16+GBs'. ADD: and 'nobody needs more than 8GB, because it works so fine'. Just to clarify.
- mwint 3y ago
  I have one, and it did/does. Those statements were not untrue. Idk if it swaps fast or what, and I don't care.
  - LoganDark 3y ago
    'Unified memory' access on M1 is allegedly almost as fast as CPU cache, and I believe the SSDs are extremely close to the SoC as well. Swap might be faster than some computers' actual RAM.
    - pxmpxm 3y ago
      This is the exact kind of PR bamboozlement I was alluding to - literally none of the above is correct: M1 memory latency is 100ns, which wasn't really competitive with amd/intel at the time (70 something nano). Any SSD read be an order of magnitude slower than reading from ram - something to the tune of 5gb/s version vs 70gb/s for the SOC ram. For comparison, the intel trashcan mac pro clocked in at 60gb/sec a decade prior. Reference: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-teste... https://www.anandtech.com/show/16214/amd-zen-3-ryzen-deep-dive-review-5950x-5900x-5800x-and-5700x-tested/5 https://www.anandtech.com/show/16214/amd-zen-3-ryzen-deep-di...
      - LoganDark 3y ago
        > This is the kind of PR bamboozlement I was alluding to - literally none of the above is correct I'm basing my knowledge on discussions with other developers on rwkv.cpp because we were talking about how performance scales with the number of tokens per iteration. Memory speed/bandwidth came up and some things about M1 were said. Sorry about that.
      - mwint 3y ago
        See, this is the thing about M1: I don’t care about your numbers (which I have no doubt are true), I care about my personal experience with the magic cold $999 aluminum slab that runs circles around everything I owned before. Reading these always feels like winning an F1 race, then being gaslit about how that’s not possible because of inferior cylinder design.
        pxmpxm 3y ago
        And all it takes is some Apple PR magic to make you disregard objective measures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology)
        mwint 3y ago
        Not Apple PR magic, but true firsthand experience. Objectively, this is the computer that makes me happiest and most productive. It could run on a 6MHz slime mold processor for all I care.

I do find it a bit odd they even offer the 8GB version. It truly does not feel like enough. 16 GB feels like it should be the entry point for MacOS.

mrbuttons454 3y ago
For someone that frequents Hacker News, maybe. My spouse has an 8GB M2 Air and has no complaints.

justsomehnguy 3y ago

> just price-chasing This is not the problem. You can find comments here how people literally said what 'it were running better than x86 Macs with 16+GBs'. ADD: and 'nobody needs more than 8GB, because it works so fine'. Just to clarify.

mwint 3y ago
I have one, and it did/does. Those statements were not untrue. Idk if it swaps fast or what, and I don't care.
- LoganDark 3y ago
  'Unified memory' access on M1 is allegedly almost as fast as CPU cache, and I believe the SSDs are extremely close to the SoC as well. Swap might be faster than some computers' actual RAM.
  - pxmpxm 3y ago
    This is the exact kind of PR bamboozlement I was alluding to - literally none of the above is correct: M1 memory latency is 100ns, which wasn't really competitive with amd/intel at the time (70 something nano). Any SSD read be an order of magnitude slower than reading from ram - something to the tune of 5gb/s version vs 70gb/s for the SOC ram. For comparison, the intel trashcan mac pro clocked in at 60gb/sec a decade prior. Reference: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-teste... https://www.anandtech.com/show/16214/amd-zen-3-ryzen-deep-dive-review-5950x-5900x-5800x-and-5700x-tested/5 https://www.anandtech.com/show/16214/amd-zen-3-ryzen-deep-di...
    - LoganDark 3y ago
      > This is the kind of PR bamboozlement I was alluding to - literally none of the above is correct I'm basing my knowledge on discussions with other developers on rwkv.cpp because we were talking about how performance scales with the number of tokens per iteration. Memory speed/bandwidth came up and some things about M1 were said. Sorry about that.
    - mwint 3y ago
      See, this is the thing about M1: I don’t care about your numbers (which I have no doubt are true), I care about my personal experience with the magic cold $999 aluminum slab that runs circles around everything I owned before. Reading these always feels like winning an F1 race, then being gaslit about how that’s not possible because of inferior cylinder design.
      - pxmpxm 3y ago
        And all it takes is some Apple PR magic to make you disregard objective measures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology)
        mwint 3y ago
        Not Apple PR magic, but true firsthand experience. Objectively, this is the computer that makes me happiest and most productive. It could run on a 6MHz slime mold processor for all I care.