I’m confused about the complaints about the M1 chip in the iMac

[Adelphos33]

Last year, when the laptops were released, people said that the M1 chip was one of the best, most powerful chips ever made... People have ditched their 16” Macbook pros, their 27” iMacs, even their IMac Pros for the M1 Macbook Air and claimed that they have seen improved performance.

So when these same chips are included in the iMac, now they are underpowered? The chips were called superior just a month ago! And now, some of the tech blogs are saying that the M1 is the “low end,” “low-power” chip and that much better chips will be released soon. Again - based on current needs, isn’t the current M1 meaningfully better than anything the comparable computers were offering before?

 

[ZachNathan]

I think it's a small and vocal minority of "pros" who are dismayed they have to live without what they perceive as a professional-grade processor for 5 or so more months.

I work very closely with Apple products and Apple customers on a daily basis, and trust me -- there's ALWAYS a group of people who think the M1 (or ARM-based tech in general) will never live up to the sheer and unfathomable power of high end Intel processors and Nvidia or Iris graphics and maybe even Windows...

Actually, more than likely they're just upset the iMac didn't come with black bezels. If it had, I'm sure they'd be singing praise.

 

[FilmIndustryGuy]

driving a 4.5k screen vs a 2k screen may give less result towards other applications. no one will know unless this gets tested by the 1000 youtubers who buy it and then return it after their video. Apple owes the fans all the promised rumors because the fans are more more loyal to the brand than Kamikaze pilots were to Japan. The fans are entitled these days. These are the same guys who are overly nice and generous to a girl for a long time so that they can get the attractive girlfriend but then are bitter when the girl assumed they were just kinda friends all these months.

Its a 24 inch 4.5k beautiful screen. You can't even buy that resolution anywhere else. 24 inches is a perfect size for most people up close and you don't have to move your head or eyes much to see everything on the screen. its light, its portable, it runs cold and silent, it has a beautiful screen. I'm imagining moving this around the house instead of a laptop. For people who do mainly document work, this is probably going to be a wonderful device. Sure I prefer a space gray metallic look but ill go see these in person before I jump to criticism.

 

[Apple_Robert]

Last year, when the laptops were released, people said that the M1 chip was one of the best, most powerful chips ever made... People have ditched their 16” Macbook pros, their 27” iMacs, even their IMac Pros for the M1 Macbook Air and claimed that they have seen improved performance.

So when these same chips are included in the iMac, now they are underpowered? The chips were called superior just a month ago! And now, some of the tech blogs are saying that the M1 is the “low end,” “low-power” chip and that much better chips will be released soon. Again - based on current needs, isn’t the current M1 meaningfully better than anything the comparable computers were offering before?

A lot of people on here speculated in their heads that Apple would do x, y, and z. Their egos wanted the next gen chip. They see the M1 as the lowly base model for us common folk.

 

[TechZeke]

Last year, when the laptops were released, people said that the M1 chip was one of the best, most powerful chips ever made... People have ditched their 16” Macbook pros, their 27” iMacs, even their IMac Pros for the M1 Macbook Air and claimed that they have seen improved performance.

So when these same chips are included in the iMac, now they are underpowered? The chips were called superior just a month ago! And now, some of the tech blogs are saying that the M1 is the “low end,” “low-power” chip and that much better chips will be released soon. Again - based on current needs, isn’t the current M1 meaningfully better than anything the comparable computers were offering before?

People are going to complain no matter what. I think it's an incredible marvel of modern engineering that you get actual desktop-class performance in any form factor(tablet, fanless laptop, small desktop, All-in-one, etc) you want. The M1 already blows the average Intel iMac out of the water. A casual user, which this new 24" iMac is targeted for, will probably never reach the full potential of the chip. The M1 chip is a massive boost for entry level Macs.

It's fairly obvious that the larger/professional oriented Macs will be getting a more powerful M1X variant chip. Enthusiasts and professionals just need to be patient and stop trying to project their professional needs/need to show off on machines that obviously aren't meant for them.

 

[Mr.Blacky]

The M1 MacBook Air/Pro and Mac mini are in every way (besides the missing SD-card clot on the mini) either equally or better than the models they replaced. That's not true for the new iMac and that's kind of a bummer for me.

 

[Abazigal]

Last year, when the laptops were released, people said that the M1 chip was one of the best, most powerful chips ever made... People have ditched their 16” Macbook pros, their 27” iMacs, even their IMac Pros for the M1 Macbook Air and claimed that they have seen improved performance.

So when these same chips are included in the iMac, now they are underpowered? The chips were called superior just a month ago! And now, some of the tech blogs are saying that the M1 is the “low end,” “low-power” chip and that much better chips will be released soon. Again - based on current needs, isn’t the current M1 meaningfully better than anything the comparable computers were offering before?

It sounds like many people here were expecting the iMac to come with a M1x or even M2 chip (basically something better that was already in the MBA). Perhaps with 16gb ram default, with an option for 32gb ram.

Instead, what they were shown is likely not going to be enough to replace their 27" iMac anytime soon. It won't for me. Not right now at least. But I am not complaining.

It's probably cognitive dissonance of sorts. People were so used to Macs using Intel chips of differing performance. The MBA got the slow chip, the iMac gets the better one with more cores etc. It was a "given" that a desktop computer should get better specs than an entry level laptop.

Instead, we see Apple using the same M1 chip on 5 products now (MBA, MBP, Mac mini, iMac and even the iPad!). To be fair, it's still going to offer better performance than anything Intel offers save for maybe their highest-end processors. But much of this is because Apple believes the M1 is more than enough performance for anyone using these computers (and isn't too bothered about trying to segment these products by performance), vs them simply choosing to use the same chip across all devices to better manage costs (which I feel is a pretty astute move actually)?

Now, you simply buy the form factor that best suits your needs. No need to make a cost-benefit analysis on whether to sacrifice performance for cost or size or whatever. It's simplicity at its finest, IMO.

 

[kinster]

The M1 MacBook Air/Pro and Mac mini are in every way (besides the missing SD-card clot on the mini) either equally or better than the models they replaced. That's not true for the new iMac and that's kind of a bummer for me.

So the new iMacs are not faster then the old ones?

 

[mrcat]

We are seeing the move to a SOC, this is a much more efficient design. And Rosetta 2 is showing what is capable in translating apps. With this design, apple can get higher performance from a less power hungry system.

it is all about performance and power efficiency baby.

The goal of the M1 right now is to prove it can out match the intel models more efficiently, given their approach apple have done very well.

 

[navaira]

much better chips will be released soon

This is literally always true. The day M1X/M2 becomes available, much better chips will be released soon.

 

[Starfia]

M1 is clearly a breakthrough compared to Intel chips. Compared to future Mac chips, I imagine they are the lowest-end just because they're the first. I think that's just a fact, not a complaint.

I'm loving the simplicity of seeing essentially the same processing system in every consumer-level Mac, and that's so much of Apple's customer base that it's understandable they're rolling all those out now.

My prediction: iPhones in September, and in October, the "pro" Mac event with higher-end iMacs, MacBook Pros, and desktop standalone Macs with new chips that will outdo the M1 and dazzle the powerhouse-cravers.

 

[Mr.Blacky]

So the new iMacs are not faster then the old ones?

Where did I say that? 🤨

 

[gnasher729]

Apple has taken the low-end MBA, the low-end MBP, the low-end MacMini and the low-end iMac and replaced the processor with an M1 processor. In every single case a massive improvement. The high-end machines haven't been touched.

Some people are just not capable of understanding that. "Apple wants me to replace my 12 core 27" iMac with 64GB with a quad core 24" iMac with 16GB how awful" when the reality is, no, Apple doesn't want you to swap your high-end iMac with a low-end iMac. They just are selling a much improved low-end iMac now.

To be fair, it's still going to offer better performance than anything Intel offers save for maybe their highest-end processors.

I'd say the current M1 is about equivalent to a (non-existing) 7 core Intel processor. Somewhere between 6 and 8 cores. With software that requires Rosetta about between a 5 and 6 core Intel processor. For the next generation with 8 performance cores, double these numbers, and there isn't much that isn't beaten by the next Silicon chip.

 

[gnasher729]

So the new iMacs are not faster then the old ones?

They are significantly faster than the low-end iMacs they are replacing. They are a tiny bit faster than the high-end iMacs with six cores if you have software built for the M1, and slower than the high-end iMacs with 10 cores. Which they are not replacing.

 

[Cassandle]

The M1 MacBook Air/Pro and Mac mini are in every way (besides the missing SD-card clot on the mini) either equally or better than the models they replaced. That's not true for the new iMac and that's kind of a bummer for me.

How is the 21" iMac better than the M1?

 

[Mr.Blacky]

How is the 21" iMac better than the M1?

32 GB RAM (+ up to 4 GB VRAM)?
(Much) more I/O?

 

[Bodhitree]

I think also there is still a perception that in terms of processor speed desktop beats laptop beats tablet. By just putting an M1 in all of those, they are now at performance parity. Which means that if you want to buy a new computer, you can now buy any of them and do some quite demanding tasks... it’s a bit of a paradigm shift in the industry.

 

[MistrSynistr]

From all I've seen on videos with performance on apps, the M1 can handle almost anything blazing fast aside from maybe producing your own full length Pixar movie.

 

[fishkorp]

32 GB RAM (+ up to 4 GB VRAM)?
(Much) more I/O?

That is a “better on paper” scenario. It doesn’t always translate to better performance. Here’s an example. For simple splicing and rendering, DaVinci Resolve on our 8GB M1 MBA is quicker, cooler, and quieter than on our 32GB i9 16” MBP. My wife switched to doing her basic video editing on the Air because it was overall better. Again, not all cases, but in some, numbers are just that, numbers.

 

[Captain Trips]

A lot of people on here speculated in their heads that Apple would do x, y, and z. Their egos wanted the next gen chip. They see the M1 as the lowly base model for us common folk.

Yeah, instead of “Let them eat cake” it is now “Let the use an M1.”

 

[AxiomaticRubric]

I think some iMac users were expecting more powerful graphics options than what the M1 currently offers.

I would advise being patient. This is just the first M-series iMac. Future models will certainly be more powerful and maybe Apple will offer multiple options for the SoC, including chips that have better graphics capabilities.

It's also possible that Apple plans to keep the iMac as an entry-level device like it was originally, and save the more powerful M-series SoCs for the Mac Pro and the rumoured mini-tower Mac Pro. In that case professional users will need to look at options other than the iMac.

 

[Mr.Blacky]

That is a “better on paper” scenario. It doesn’t always translate to better performance. Here’s an example. For simple splicing and rendering, DaVinci Resolve on our 8GB M1 MBA is quicker, cooler, and quieter than on our 32GB i9 16” MBP. My wife switched to doing her basic video editing on the Air because it was overall better. Again, not all cases, but in some, numbers are just that, numbers.

I'm pretty sure, in this case, that's mainly because of the M1 and the difference in RAM has almost nothing to do with it.

 

[CWallace]

As others have noted, this forum is overly-represented with power-users and enthusiasts (I am the latter), so they're naturally going to dismiss / criticize the 24" iMac just as they did the 21.5" because it doesn't have a honking CPU or GPU with shedloads of RAM and exabytes of storage. But it is anything but a "toy" or "Fisher Price My First Computer". It is a powerful machine capable of handling a significant number of tasks.

 

[omenatarhuri]

The problem is that desktop has the potential to be faster. Without battery concern and more thermal headroom in a bigger chassis, it just seems like a wasted opportunity to see literally the same specs as MacBook Air.

As a result, it also makes more sense to buy an MBA and hook it up to external display so you get same power and portability.

That I believe is the pebble in the powerusers' shoes, personally I'm not too bothered, I'll just wait.

 

[CWallace]

The problem is that desktop has the potential to be faster. Without battery concern and more thermal headroom in a bigger chassis, it just seems like a wasted opportunity to see literally the same specs as MacBook Air.

Even if the M1 is clocked at the same ~3.2GHz as the other models, that there are two fans means it should be able to maintain full load better then the MBP and Mac mini (with one fan) and much better than the MacBook Air (no fan).