Fidelity Active Trader Pro is a Windows Application built on the Windows specific .NET 4.6 framework. It surprises me that it runs at all on MacOS.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Aspects where Intel Macs still outperform the M1 models?
- Thread starter jent
- Start date
-
- Tags
- apple silicon intel macs
- Sort by reaction score
Intel (and others) offer more solutions for multi-core tasks such as 3D rendering, 8 or even 16 rendering buckets won't cut it when the competition is at 128.
It would be cool if Apple put out a Multi-M1 system in a small Mac Pro form factor.
It actually makes sense, it would cost you around 10k (on the low-end) to built a 64-core rendering workstation and for the same amount you could get 10 minis and 80 cores.
We had Alpha Clusters back at DEC in the 1990s and they were a great way to share resources over a bunch of machines connected via network and cluster interconnect. The operating system has to include support though. I wish Windows and macOS had that functionality. You could hook a bunch of old computers together to produce the compute of a newer and faster system.
OS X used to include a grid processing server but it was discontinued. I am sure that there are open-source solutions that work on macOS though.
There are quite a few render managers for all platforms which do just that, it can be implemented by the app developers if their software have a use for it.
That presents a lot of problems because the M1 is basically a one chip computer. It'll certainly be interesting to see what the Mac Pro will become when it goes apple silicon.
To be fair though, Apple Silicon potential for multi-core configurations is tremendous. Given the power efficiency of it's CPU cores, Apple could deliver much higher performance with an identical TDP configuration. E.g. M1 multi-core performance (4+4 cores at combined ~20W TDP) is approximately 70-80% of a high-end Intel CPU (8 cores at 125W TDP). And the larger the CPU cluster, the bigger advantage will Apple have — Intel needs to severely underclock CPU cores to make the heat manageable, while Apple can still afford to run them at peak 3Ghz. A hypothetical 16+4 Apple CPU cluster (just four times the size of M1) should be able to match a 28-core Xeon while consuming 50-70% less power.
Not a win for Intel for performance, but for practicability:
Silicons can't do virtualization via VMware, for instance) for older Intel-dependent Mac OS-es (Snow Leopard-ish etc.). Have a definite need for it for several reasons I won't go into here.
I could just run the older OSs on the Intel Mac I have now and get a new silicon Mac for updated stuff going forward, and switch inputs as needed on my monitor, but that would be be very inefficient for my current work flow.
That, plus I've learned very hard lessons to never to buy Apple's first iteration of anything.
Silicons can't do virtualization via VMware, for instance) for older Intel-dependent Mac OS-es (Snow Leopard-ish etc.). Have a definite need for it for several reasons I won't go into here.
I could just run the older OSs on the Intel Mac I have now and get a new silicon Mac for updated stuff going forward, and switch inputs as needed on my monitor, but that would be be very inefficient for my current work flow.
That, plus I've learned very hard lessons to never to buy Apple's first iteration of anything.
I'd have to largely agree here. If one can wait, I expect the really impressive upgrades to be when chassis design changes come along with the next generation/iteration of the Apple Silicon
Do you mean a KVM switch? This is what I basically use now -- for a G4 Mac (to run a few Classic programs I really need for work) plus my current Intel Mac.
Have no desire to add a third Mac to the mix, that would take me to G4/Intel/M1.
Yep, that's what I mean, the HDMI ones are better than the old VGA's. I have a Windows PC and my Mac Mini on the same one... (mine supports HDMI2.1, so 4K) It's just a push button, or remote control push button, to switch between them.Do you mean a KVM switch? This is what I basically use now -- for a G4 Mac (to run a few Classic programs I really need for work) plus my current Intel Mac.
Have no desire to add a third Mac to the mix, that would take me to G4/Intel/M1.
It'd be fun to play with a G4, it's one mac type I totally skipped over, I went from an original Mac to the first Intel Mac, and several after that.
Internaut
macrumors 65816
Bearing in mind the only models launched so far are pretty entry level, how many of these limitations are really limitations? I’d say the failure to support more than one monitor, on the laptops, is a poor show. Virtualisation (including Windows on arm) is approaching far faster than I would have predicted...
I’m not so sure about the rest. To out things into perspective, an entry level MacBook Air can give a tricked out 16” Pro a run for the money though clearly won’t best it for the most GPU intensive tasks. That’s pretty remarkable given the price difference.
I’m not so sure about the rest. To out things into perspective, an entry level MacBook Air can give a tricked out 16” Pro a run for the money though clearly won’t best it for the most GPU intensive tasks. That’s pretty remarkable given the price difference.
We'll definitely see support for multiple displays and more RAM. Incidentally, these limitations were also present in the lower wattage CPUs from Intel. We'll see more storage as well, but I imagine few folks looking at the entry-level models need more than 2TB. I doubt we'll see booting X64 OS versions anytime soon, if ever. I also think that there will always be some tasks where other silicon will perform better. This was the case back during PPC vs Intel, and before that when it was 68K vs MIPS vs. PA-RISC vs SPARC vs Alpha, etc.
Technically, there isn't a reason why eGPUs shouldn't work, they just need drivers.
Technically, there isn't a reason why eGPUs shouldn't work, they just need drivers.
Yep, that's not a technical question, it's a policy question. That's why I doubt that we will every see them. Apple has nothing to gain by opening up their GPU driver framework to the third party, and the third party has nothing to gain by implementing drivers that work on Apple Silicon.
You forget to mention , user have gain upon ram usage if open and up e-gpu.. for god sake please open nvdia driver. amd nowhere to found now.
Currently, taken as a standalone macOS device, so obviously ignoring things the M1 cannot do - Run x86 windows, external GPU and so on. Then the M1 has been significantly better for everything I have used so far. Even a lot of the Intel apps I use, running under Rosetta 2 are shockingly better performers.
I normally (read as always) find something to complain about when I use a laptop over a desktop. But with the M1, I haven't found anything to complain about so far. I'm, well, happy. God, that's weird to say
I normally (read as always) find something to complain about when I use a laptop over a desktop. But with the M1, I haven't found anything to complain about so far. I'm, well, happy. God, that's weird to say