[CPU only] Apple M1/2(Max/Ultra) (TSMC 5nm) vs AMD Zen 4 (TSMC 5nm) - Technical Analysis

[mr_roboto]

Obviously, that level of control over their devices means Apple decides what you can and can't do with their laptops. A good example of that is you can't play video games on MacOS and it is because Apple deliberately says so. In a lot of ways the Apple Silicon platform and the locked-down aspects of the Mac range draws parallels to the game console industry.

Maybe you want to explain specifically what you're complaining about here? Because the words you wrote aren't even remotely in contact with reality. You can play video games on macOS, and Apple explicitly does not lock Apple Silicon Macs down like a game console.

Ideally we will be able to use Linux on Apple Silicon someday - but Apple refuses to support those efforts so it's unlikely that experience will be competitive within my life time.

This also seems to be from a different timeline than the one I inhabit. Hector Martin, the leader of the Asahi Linux project, has written about things Apple did to make their life easier. We're not talking about extensive public support here, but we're also not talking about the cold shoulder (or worse, getting in the way).

Even the basic functionality of "boot a kernel not signed by Apple" required Apple to revisit its iOS boot security design and greatly enhance it for Macs. It puts the lie to this claim you're making that Apple is locking Apple Silicon Macs down. They had literally no practical reason to permit booting unsigned kernels other than empowering users to tinker, they absolutely knew it would lead to porting other operating systems, and they put extra work into making sure it could be done without even requiring users to downgrade the security state of Apple-signed macOS installations.

More to the point, you seem to have missed quite a bit of news. The general public has been able to easily download and install Asahi Linux on Apple Silicon for quite a while already - I think it might be about 1 year? And it's already good enough that none other than Linus Torvalds - you know, the Linux kernel lead dev, whose name is right there in Linux - has adopted a M2 MacBook Air as his daily driver work computer. And that GPU acceleration support is not quite fully baked yet, but is a real thing.

 

[leman]

Obviously, that level of control over their devices means Apple decides what you can and can't do with their laptops. A good example of that is you can't play video games on MacOS and it is because Apple deliberately says so. In a lot of ways the Apple Silicon platform and the locked-down aspects of the Mac range draws parallels to the game console industry.

*briefly stops playing a cutting edge computer game purchased from a third party software store* you can’t do what now?

 

[pastrychef]

A good example of that is you can't play video games on MacOS and it is because Apple deliberately says so.

What?!?!?

 

[thenewperson]

What?!?!?

Quite the car tire screech of a sentence definitely.

 

[alshdavid]

Sorry, didn't mean for that to come across as complaining, I guess I am disappointed that the things I have been able to do for years on MacBooks have suddenly become impossible.

I have had success in a few games on my M1, like Dark Souls 1 via CrossOver, Kerbal, Europa

It really stuck out for me over Christmas when I wanted to play some couch coop games and none of them worked properly. Cuphead (native) didn't work, Broforce had broken text/textures - we managed to play Risk of Rain 1 though. Ended up just closing my MacBook and talking 😂

I just sit there and wonder; my last MacBook could do this, why does this $4000 racecar of a computer fail at the most basic of entertainment tasks? It feels like such a waste to have the equivalent of 3080 and yet I can't play Elden Ring, most online games or any VR.

Maybe you want to explain specifically what you're complaining about here? Because the words you wrote aren't even remotely in contact with reality. You can play video games on macOS, and Apple explicitly does not lock Apple Silicon Macs down like a game console.

That's fair, it's not that there are no games at all on MacOS - but it kinda feels like MacOS gaming is in the place that Linux gaming was in in 2012. There's decent support for older titles, some you need to toy with to get working and they might be missing textures and stuff - but they work.

When I say "Apple deliberately decided to exclude support for games" I mean they don't want to make it easy to play games that don't use their graphics API.

Apple has voiced refusal in ever adding support for Vulkan - which would immediately open MacOS to Proton and every game on the Steam Deck. It's hard to know why they hold this stance; perhaps they want to try for vendor lock in with the Metal API in the same way Microsoft did with DirectX, after all, who would use Metal if Vulkan was supported?

I'm not right in saying that Apple is acting like a game console vendor - because you can still run whatever you want on a MacBook. It's more that they don't want to support open standards on any front. They drag their heels on web standards, graphics APIs and refuse to add basic development tooling available on other platform (as a developer, Apple products are hell to develop for, and increasingly develop on)

Makes me wonder whatever happened to the Apple that included a PS1 emulator in OSX, or OpenGL support.

More to the point, you seem to have missed quite a bit of news. The general public has been able to easily download and install Asahi Linux on Apple Silicon for quite a while already - I think it might be about 1 year? And it's already good enough that none other than Linus Torvalds - you know, the Linux kernel lead dev, whose name is right there in Linux - has adopted a M2 MacBook Air as his daily driver work computer. And that GPU acceleration support is not quite fully baked yet, but is a real thing.

I do follow Asahi quite closely and I think the M1 MBP would be the best general purpose laptop available if they can pull it off. It's difficult given Apple have provided no support in any form, not even documentation, but I couldn't imagine a better machine to daily drive Linux on.

I run Asahi Linux on a seperate partition and it's on the way to daily drivable, I'm certainly hopeful in your estimate of a year away. Performance is fantastic with the edge mesa drivers but there is a lot of work ahead of them. I wish I could contribute but I'm not that kind of dev.

I tried to get Box64 and Wine running to potentially get some older Direct X 7 titles working (Like COD 2) - but Box64 is kinda hard to install. Rosetta2 cannot legally be used in Asahi, right?

To me, if there was first class Linux support, the MacBook would reclaim its spot as the best laptop on Earth - or at the very least if Microsoft decided to play ball and we got Windows support

 

[leman]

Apple has voiced refusal in ever adding support for Vulkan - which would immediately open MacOS to Proton and every game on the Steam Deck. It's hard to know why they hold this stance; perhaps they want to try for vendor lock in with the Metal API in the same way Microsoft did with DirectX, after all, who would use Metal if Vulkan was supported?

It's not that hard to understand their stance. Vulkan caters to the lower common hardware denominator and its direction is controlled by big industry players. Apple's hardware is sufficiently different and by committing to Vulkan they would fall under the dictatorship of the committee. Let's not forget what happened the last time when Apple tried to be open and cooperative in this domain (I am talking about OpenCL). By deliberately refusing to support Vulkan (while making porting from Vulkan easy) they force those developers who are willing to bring their software to the Mac to actually optimise for the platform.

Furthermore, ease of access and developer ergonomy are important topics for Apple. Vulkan is a fairly terrible API. Modern Metal is a much more ergonomic, comprehensive and standardised solution.

P.S. Apple managed to cement a bunch of Metal elements in the next-generation WebGPU web API. This will mean that the future web developers will be trained on a Metal-like API, not a Vulkan-like. They are playing the long game.

 

[Joe Dohn]

Ideally we will be able to use Linux on Apple Silicon someday - but Apple refuses to support those efforts so it's unlikely that experience will be competitive within my life time.

You can already. Check Asahi Linux.

 

[alshdavid]

It's not that hard to understand their stance. Vulkan caters to the lower common hardware denominator and its direction is controlled by big industry players. Apple's hardware is sufficiently different and by committing to Vulkan they would fall under the dictatorship of the committee. Let's not forget what happened the last time when Apple tried to be open and cooperative in this domain (I am talking about OpenCL). By deliberately refusing to support Vulkan (while making porting from Vulkan easy) they force those developers who are willing to bring their software to the Mac to actually optimise for the platform.

Furthermore, ease of access and developer ergonomy are important topics for Apple. Vulkan is a fairly terrible API. Modern Metal is a much more ergonomic, comprehensive and standardised solution.

P.S. Apple managed to cement a bunch of Metal elements in the next-generation WebGPU web API. This will mean that the future web developers will be trained on a Metal-like API, not a Vulkan-like. They are playing the long game.

It's a reasonable assertion and perhaps I am overly cynical of their intentions.

When it comes to influence over the standard, Apple is a big player and they could certainly influence the standards should they choose to. It is hard to see them as the victim or underdog in this case, they are bigger than Microsoft and Google.

It is true that Metal is tailored to their hardware but that doesn't mean the two APIs couldn't co-exist on MacOS.

While Vulkan isn't tailored to their hardware, it wouldn't be less efficient to use and ultimately, standards like this aim to provide a cost efficient substrate for application development. Companies don't want to pay development teams to produce multiple identical products - that's partly why almost every application is a web application, even when they are desktop applications.

If a team of two can bring acceptable Vulkan support to Asahi within a year while having to reverse engineer everything about the Mac's GPU. Apple could probably have Vulkan support added for free by asking for volunteers to join an inside team to put it together 😂

 

[Joe Dohn]

I tried to get Box64 and Wine running to potentially get some older Direct X 7 titles working (Like COD 2) - but Box64 is kinda hard to install. Rosetta 2 cannot legally be used in Asahi, right?

Uh... it can? Apple facilitated the process for Linux developers to use the Rosetta API.
Of course, Rosetta is a temporary solution.

 

[Xiao_Xi]

Furthermore, ease of access and developer ergonomy are important topics for Apple. Vulkan is a fairly terrible API. Modern Metal is a much more ergonomic, comprehensive and standardised solution.

If Apple supported Metal and Vulkan, developers would be able to choose the most appropriate API for each task. Thus, developers could use Metal for Mac-specific applications and Vulkan for porting games.

P.S. Apple managed to cement a bunch of Metal elements in the next-generation WebGPU web API. This will mean that the future web developers will be trained on a Metal-like API, not a Vulkan-like. They are playing the long game.

The popularization of WebGPU in desktop applications, especially in games, is still very questionable.

 

[Joe Dohn]

It's not that hard to understand their stance. Vulkan caters to the lower common hardware denominator and its direction is controlled by big industry players. Apple's hardware is sufficiently different and by committing to Vulkan they would fall under the dictatorship of the committee. Let's not forget what happened the last time when Apple tried to be open and cooperative in this domain (I am talking about OpenCL). By deliberately refusing to support Vulkan (while making porting from Vulkan easy) they force those developers who are willing to bring their software to the Mac to actually optimise for the platform.

Furthermore, ease of access and developer ergonomy are important topics for Apple. Vulkan is a fairly terrible API. Modern Metal is a much more ergonomic, comprehensive and standardised solution.

P.S. Apple managed to cement a bunch of Metal elements in the next-generation WebGPU web API. This will mean that the future web developers will be trained on a Metal-like API, not a Vulkan-like. They are playing the long game.

That's the same strategy as the M1: "people will stay locked to our hardware because it is superior".
But guess what: this has actually driven people AWAY from Apple. And that's on a scenario where Apple has superior battery life / performance.

Why? Because their hardware is not playing well together with other hardware. But it turns out Metal and Apple's iGPU are getting behind. There's no way Apple's strategy will keep working if they can't catch up with Nvidia / AMD in features and performance (in fact, Apple's products would have to be MUCH SUPERIOR for people to feel justified in getting locked in, and their software quality has been slipping away).

 

[leman]

That's the same strategy as the M1: "people will stay locked to our hardware because it is superior".

That's the only strategy that makes sense for Apple. What would be the alternative?

But guess what: this has actually driven people AWAY from Apple. And that's on a scenario where Apple has superior battery life / performance.

It has? When? Mac market share is higher than it ever was.

There's no way Apple's strategy will keep working if they can't catch up with Nvidia / AMD in features and performance

I agree with this, but isn't that the very point? Apple has to catch up to Nvidia/AMD in terms of features and performance. In everyday mobile performance Apple is doing very well (their popular passively cooled laptops compete favourably with entry-level graphics from Nvidia and AMD alike). Right now Apple has no alternative to high-end GPUs in the desktop space, so if they want to compete there they will have to introduce new products with higher power consumption targets.

 

[Romain_H]

It has? When? Mac market share is higher than it ever was.

While true, I agree with the OP in that it could be even higher. As for me, my daily driver is an MBP 16, and it serves me extremely well. ASi is a game changer - in laptops, that is.

However, there is no desktop Mac any more I'd consider for the very reason the OP stated. Given the trajectory Apple is right now it seems I'm steering away from the Mac in the long term.

 

[leman]

However, there is no desktop Mac any more I'd consider for the very reason the OP stated. Given the trajectory Apple is right now it seems I'm steering away from the Mac in the long term.

You are steering away from the Mac because it does not offer something like a 196-core EPYC system (which is what OP seems to be talking about)? I somehow doubt this is the case (I mean, how many people use datacenter multiprocessor systems as their everyday desktop computer?).

More likely you concerned about the platform because you fear that a laptop chip in an ultracompact form factor might not serve your needs for a long time. This is absolutely justified and I think we all agree that Apple needs to produce chips that can scale up to the needs and capabilities of desktop form factors (in particular, higher thermal limits). But this doesn't require an EPYC-class system. It simply requires Apple Silicon that is capable of running at higher frequencies or a new wider design or both. A 16-core M2-equivalent CPU running at 4+ghz for example would favourably compare to top of the line Raptor Lake while still consuming significantly less power.

 

[Joe Dohn]

More likely you concerned about the platform because you fear that a laptop chip in an ultracompact form factor might not serve your needs for a long time. This is absolutely justified and I think we all agree that Apple needs to produce chips that can scale up to the needs and capabilities of desktop form factors (in particular, higher thermal limits). But this doesn't require an EPYC-class system. It simply requires Apple Silicon that is capable of running at higher frequencies or a new wider design or both. A 16-core M2-equivalent CPU running at 4+ghz for example would favourably compare to top of the line Raptor Lake while still consuming significantly less power.

The reason is more simple and obvious: Apple doesn't have the flexibility X86 / X64 has. And now, it can't even brag video editing: Da Vinci resolve is platform neutral, AND there are faster solutions if you are willing to accept solutions which aren't as power efficient.

Yes, you CAN virtualize it x86 / x64 on a M1 Mac if you need something specific to that platform. But they're making that process much more difficult, hoping that people will be locked out to their solutions. Even the stability and convenience they once had is slipping away.

 

[pastrychef]

The reason is more simple and obvious: Apple doesn't have the flexibility X86 / X64 has. And now, it can't even brag video editing: Da Vinci resolve is platform neutral, AND there are faster solutions if you are willing to accept solutions which aren't as power efficient.

Yes, you CAN virtualize it x86 / x64 on a M1 Mac if you need something specific to that platform. But they're making that process much more difficult, hoping that people will be locked out to their solutions. Even the stability and convenience they once had is slipping away.

You can always just buy an X86/X64 system and be happy...

 

[Joe Dohn]

You can always just buy an X86/X64 system and be happy...

Which is my point. If Apple is going to be more expensive and refusing to play well together with other systems, it must offer a clear advantage to the user. And if you can't easily point out what the advantage is (e.g, you answer "it makes me happy" instead of "it's incontestably better for AI development"), then the company at a more expensive price point (Apple) is getting in trouble.

 

[pastrychef]

Which is my point. If Apple is going to be more expensive and refusing to play well together with other systems, it must offer a clear advantage to the user. And if you can't easily point out what the advantage is (e.g, you answer "it makes me happy" instead of "it's incontestably better for AI development"), then the company at a more expensive price point (Apple) is getting in trouble.

I have no complaints about my Apple Silicon Mac Studio. I think it's one of the best computers I've ever had. If you disagree or if you have problems with Apple Silicon Macs, there are alternatives.

 

[dgdosen]

I have no complaints about my Apple Silicon Mac Studio. I think it's one of the best computers I've ever had. If you disagree or if you have problems with Apple Silicon Macs, there are alternatives.

It's this kind of inflammatory language that gets people banned!

 

[name99]

That's the same strategy as the M1: "people will stay locked to our hardware because it is superior".
But guess what: this has actually driven people AWAY from Apple. And that's on a scenario where Apple has superior battery life / performance.

Why? Because their hardware is not playing well together with other hardware. But it turns out Metal and Apple's iGPU are getting behind. There's no way Apple's strategy will keep working if they can't catch up with Nvidia / AMD in features and performance (in fact, Apple's products would have to be MUCH SUPERIOR for people to feel justified in getting locked in, and their software quality has been slipping away).

Meanwhile in the REAL WORLD:

PC Shipments Continued to Slump During the Holiday Quarter with Recovery Now Looking like 2024, According to IDC Tracker

IDC examines consumer markets by devices, applications, networks, and services to provide complete solutions for succeeding in these expanding markets.

www.idc.com

EVERYBODY's sales fell, generally by about 25% -- EXCEPT one company whose sales fell by 2%.
Any guess as to which company?

 

[Basic75]

Uh... it can? Apple facilitated the process for Linux developers to use the Rosetta API.

Rosetta 2 can be used in ARM Linux running virtualised on macOS, but @alshdavid was talking about Asahi Linux which presumably means booting into Linux without macOS. I wouldn't expect Rosetta 2 to be available in that case, or is it?

 

[Joe Dohn]

Meanwhile in the REAL WORLD:

PC Shipments Continued to Slump During the Holiday Quarter with Recovery Now Looking like 2024, According to IDC Tracker

IDC examines consumer markets by devices, applications, networks, and services to provide complete solutions for succeeding in these expanding markets.

www.idc.com

EVERYBODY's sales fell, generally by about 25% -- EXCEPT one company whose sales fell by 2%.
Any guess as to which company?

I'm not sure what your point is.

No matter how good Apple is doing, the desktop market (as in "the market that sells big, non-portable towers to people") is a declining market. So much so that everyone discusses here all the time how they AREN'T prioritizing the iMac.

It's nice that Apple is doing well here, but I wouldn't be proud of it.

I have no complaints about my Apple Silicon Mac Studio. I think it's one of the best computers I've ever had. If you disagree or if you have problems with Apple Silicon Macs, there are alternatives.

You are misunderstanding a few things. I'm not arguing on a personal level. You might "like" Apple, but "liking" a company is not grounds for anything in a discussion that doesn't involve your personal taste. Generalizing our argument a little bit, I "like" Linux too, but I wouldn't be crazy enough to affirm your average Linux distribution is a mainstream OS for the average user.

So, you liking Apple doesn't say much about concrete advantages and value to the average Joe.

 

[Joe Dohn]

Rosetta 2 can be used in ARM Linux running virtualised on macOS, but @alshdavid was talking about Asahi Linux which presumably means booting into Linux without macOS. I wouldn't expect Rosetta 2 to be available in that case, or is it?

That's exactly what I mean: it is. Apple makes Rosetta 2 available for Linux too, which means they can process X86 Mac code to speed up processing. That's exactly how Crossover Office and Wine work under the Apple Silicon Architecture.

 

[Romain_H]

You are steering away from the Mac because it does not offer something like a 196-core EPYC system (which is what OP seems to be talking about)? I somehow doubt this is the case (I mean, how many people use datacenter multiprocessor systems as their everyday desktop computer?).

More likely you concerned about the platform because you fear that a laptop chip in an ultracompact form factor might not serve your needs for a long time. This is absolutely justified and I think we all agree that Apple needs to produce chips that can scale up to the needs and capabilities of desktop form factors (in particular, higher thermal limits). But this doesn't require an EPYC-class system. It simply requires Apple Silicon that is capable of running at higher frequencies or a new wider design or both. A 16-core M2-equivalent CPU running at 4+ghz for example would favourably compare to top of the line Raptor Lake while still consuming significantly less power.

Not exactly. I am steering away - at least on the desktop - because Apple no lnger offers anything akin the Mac Pro 5.1. The 7.1 is not really in that ballpark for Apple has priced me (and a lot of others like me, i.e. enthusiasts) out. So not talking about Epyc. But a machine with replaceable RAM, SSD, Graphics

And whatever Apple comes up with, even IF - and that‘s a big if - with something like that, I fear its unlikely that the offer is going to be halfway reasonably priced considering the studio and current MP offers.

I‘d be happy to be proven wrong, but chances, I guess, are pretty slim.
I find myself in the somewhat paradox situation that Apple has finally found the near perfect processor (ASi), yet this near-perfect CPU might force me to change to x86_64 / Linux

 

[Basic75]

That's exactly what I mean: it is. Apple makes Rosetta 2 available for Linux too, which means they can process X86 Mac code to speed up processing. That's exactly how Crossover Office and Wine work under the Apple Silicon Architecture.

$ file /Library/Apple/usr/libexec/oah/RosettaLinux/rosetta

/Library/Apple/usr/libexec/oah/RosettaLinux/rosetta: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, ARM aarch64, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, stripped

Ah, so Apple's instructions are only for VMs ("Running Intel Binaries in Linux VMs with Rosetta") but you can just copy the executable into your bare-metal Linux. Got it.