Apple Silicon see performance parity across the range?

[bronksy]

Like many I've been holding onto my old iMac waiting for Apple to launch a 27" with their new chips.

I'm a pro photographer and video producer- so I guess a power user

I've always gone for an iMac and fully loaded it to give me some future proofing, and generally have gotten way more power / value for money from a brand new iMac fully loaded than a brand new MacBook Pro fully loaded. I load up the RAM etc etc. This has seen me get a good 4 or 5 years from my kit. I've also got a 13" MacBook Pro (as loaded as it can be) but just for very light emergency location editing of some photos etc and it's a PITA to use for much more than basic photo/video work. Beach balls ahoy all the time.

Looking at the performance of the new MacBook Pro's it got me wondering if the arrival of Apple Silicon in all Mac's across the range will cause some parity in performance- negating perhaps the need to get a souped up iMac with upgraded GFX card etc. I may be wrong but the iMac looks like it's going to be an iPad on steroids

I would love to have ONE top end, fully loaded MacBook Pro and external display/dock for home use - but with a powerhouse 'on the road'. However I don't want to sacrifice power/render speeds by going mobile.

I know we dont know what the future holds but I'm not really tech savvy with processors etc.. but am I right in thinking that one the new chips appear across the range, then it wont be as bigger gulf in performance / robustness in the top end models in the Mac range?

Thoughts please folks?

 

[Falhófnir]

Parity? Probably not. Dramatically increased performance across the board? The M1 Macs seem to indicate yes. We will have to wait to see which models fall into which chip categories but you can expect upcoming MacBook Pro models to have higher multi-core performance from more cores, and possibly slightly higher single core scores if clocked more aggressively. With future iMacs they might use a specific desktop SKU, an 'M1T' for example, or they might share the higher performing 'M1X' MacBook Pro chip, or a mix. For the successor to the 27" at least I would lean towards it being a desktop SKU.

So single core performance might be ballpark similar across machines as they are likely to all use the same firestorm and ice storm cores (that we know of so far) but the number of cores included should mean vastly different multi core performance between machines. 4 on the MacBook Air, 8 on the MacBook Pro, 10 on the iMac is perfectly possible. The higher TDP on a desktop also allows more headroom for graphics cores, so again a similar story, the MBA gets 8, an upcoming MBP might get 12 or 16 and an iMac could have 20+ (Apple has a project called Lifuka which is graphics related, though probably won't be a dedicated graphics card strictly speaking).

Considering how well the basic M1 macs already do with video work though I doubt you'll be missing out on too much with the next generation of MacBook Pros, even if the iMacs are still more powerful!

 

[bronksy]

Parity? Probably not. Dramatically increased performance across the board? The M1 Macs seem to indicate yes. We will have to wait to see which models fall into which chip categories but you can expect upcoming MacBook Pro models to have higher multi-core performance from more cores, and possibly slightly higher single core scores if clocked more aggressively. With future iMacs they might use a specific desktop SKU, an 'M1T' for example, or they might share the higher performing 'M1X' MacBook Pro chip, or a mix. For the successor to the 27" at least I would lean towards it being a desktop SKU.

So single core performance might be ballpark similar across machines as they are likely to all use the same firestorm and ice storm cores (that we know of so far) but the number of cores included should mean vastly different multi core performance between machines. 4 on the MacBook Air, 8 on the MacBook Pro, 10 on the iMac is perfectly possible. The higher TDP on a desktop also allows more headroom for graphics cores, so again a similar story, the MBA gets 8, an upcoming MBP might get 12 or 16 and an iMac could have 20+ (Apple has a project called Lifuka which is graphics related, though probably won't be a dedicated graphics card strictly speaking).

Considering how well the basic M1 macs already do with video work though I doubt you'll be missing out on too much with the next generation of MacBook Pros, even if the iMacs are still more powerful!

That's what I was meaning. Perhaps not so much parity but a fully loaded MBP will be up there in terms of performance and likely wont end up missing out on too much by not getting an iMac this time.

I never thought I would need a super powerful laptop but being without my iMac for several months recently has proved me wrong. I would like to have something that would deal well with a couple of 8k video streams just in case but realistically I'll be on 4k for the time I have the next machine until I upgrade again/

 

[Robert McNewbie]

There's a 16" titanium MBP (about 3.5 pounds) in the works in Tim's shed for you. I think photo work deserves a large screen, the Mx chip is powerful and efficient so the only remaining problem of the 16", the weight, will be addressed soon, for the right price

 

[bronksy]

There's a 16" titanium MBP (about 3.5 pounds) in the works in Tim's shed for you. I think photo work deserves a large screen, the Mx chip is powerful and efficient so the only remaining problem of the 16", the weight, will be addressed soon, for the right price

The weight isn't really an issue TBH - 70% of the time I'm at my desk - so a proper calibrated screen etc will be the focal point but being able to edit on the move would be so nice for the times I need to do it.
At the moment I try and push work back to do when I'm back in the office.
Of course I'd have both iMac and MBP but that's a hefty investment!

 

[Falhófnir]

That's what I was meaning. Perhaps not so much parity but a fully loaded MBP will be up there in terms of performance and likely wont end up missing out on too much by not getting an iMac this time.

I never thought I would need a super powerful laptop but being without my iMac for several months recently has proved me wrong. I would like to have something that would deal well with a couple of 8k video streams just in case but realistically I'll be on 4k for the time I have the next machine until I upgrade again/

Yep, I want to say it's a sound bet the next 16" MacBook Pro at least will handily outperform the current iMacs. Graphics power is a bit muddy yet, but I can't see it being a downgrade on the Intel model with AMD graphics, so there's likely to be something potent brewing in Apple's chip labs ?

 

[leman]

There will be feature parity (all Apple systems will largely support the same technologies and offer a streamlined, predictable environment for developers), but certainly no performance parity. Macs will continue to come in different performance ranges, it’s just that everything will get a step up compared to what you were used to.

 

[dmccloud]

There will be feature parity (all Apple systems will largely support the same technologies and offer a streamlined, predictable environment for developers), but certainly no performance parity. Macs will continue to come in different performance ranges, it’s just that everything will get a step up compared to what you were used to.

Just to illustrate just how much higher Apple has set their performance "floor" with the M1 - MaxTech dropped a video comparing a 16GB M1 Mac Mini to a $15K Mac Pro with a 12-core Xeon and 192GB RAM - the results were stunning:

 

[bronksy]

Just to illustrate just how much higher Apple has set their performance "floor" with the M1 - MaxTech dropped a video comparing a 16GB M1 Mac Mini to a $15K Mac Pro with a 12-core Xeon and 192GB RAM - the results were stunning:

This is what I’m seeing lots of.
However. The thing is that the M1 iMac or whatever it is compared to the m1 MacBook Pro at the time will surely be something of a beast. The question is whether having that iMac will positively affect much more of my productivity than a laptop.

 

[dmccloud]

This is what I’m seeing lots of.
However. The thing is that the M1 iMac or whatever it is compared to the m1 MacBook Pro at the time will surely be something of a beast. The question is whether having that iMac will positively affect much more of my productivity than a laptop.

That's what I was getting at - these M1 Macs are the bottom of the barrel from a performance perspective. Future iterations of the M-series will only get more powerful. Logically speaking, an 8-core M1 system with iGPU and 8GB RAM should not be able to compete with a Mac Pro running a 12-core Xeon, 192GB RAM, and a beastly dedicated GPU. Yet MaxTech (and others) have consistently shown that these new SoCs do compete in a lot of areas of actual usage (rather than just synthetic benchmarks). Based on your last sentence, it appears that your real question is which form factor is best suited for your needs and usage patterns. That's honestly a matter of personal preference. I know that I personally prefer to use laptops because I can take them with me if needed, even if I just want to take my laptop with me.

While I am interested to see what Apple does for both the iMac and Mac Pro going forward, my primary concern at this time is what will they replace the existing 4-port MacBook Pros (both the 13" and 16") with., as those models would be better aligned with how and where I use my machines.

 

[bronksy]

That's what I was getting at - these M1 Macs are the bottom of the barrel from a performance perspective. Future iterations of the M-series will only get more powerful. Logically speaking, an 8-core M1 system with iGPU and 8GB RAM should not be able to compete with a Mac Pro running a 12-core Xeon, 192GB RAM, and a beastly dedicated GPU. Yet MaxTech (and others) have consistently shown that these new SoCs do compete in a lot of areas of actual usage (rather than just synthetic benchmarks). Based on your last sentence, it appears that your real question is which form factor is best suited for your needs and usage patterns. That's honestly a matter of personal preference. I know that I personally prefer to use laptops because I can take them with me if needed, even if I just want to take my laptop with me.

While I am interested to see what Apple does for both the iMac and Mac Pro going forward, my primary concern at this time is what will they replace the existing 4-port MacBook Pros (both the 13" and 16") with., as those models would be better aligned with how and where I use my machines.

Agreed. Trouble is for me I’ve really suffered a massive hit to what I can do by not buying a more powerful laptop. There wasn’t one that was at the time. I bought the 13” touchbar top end. The only option was the 15” but that was too much money for that AND the iMac.
There’s no way I can work properly on my current MBP and my 5 year old iMac still outperforms it.

A 16” Apple silicon fully loaded MBP would be delicious but I know for the same cash I could buy an absolute stonkingly fully loaded Apple Silicon iMac.

Laptop would he used mostly in the office but on the times I need the power it will be incredible.

I’m gonna end up with both.