Intel Macs performance vs M1 Macs

[Danny1982]

Hi all.

I read everywhere how the performance of the new M1 vs Intel was amazing (even vs I9 model!!).
So, obviously the support to a new architecture it is not developed in a year, so my question is: and if Apple was working on the optimization of the new architecture already before big sur at the expense of the optimization of the intel chips?

I think that examples like this (founded online): "Developer Paul Hudson shared this example of his M1 MacBook Pro with 16GB RAM rip through an Xcode unzip in just 5 minutes, meanwhile his 8-Core Intel i9 16-inch MacBook Pro with 64GB RAM took over 13 minutes to do the same." can only be explained by the optimization of the features of the new chip.

What do you think about?

 

[JohnnyGo]

Nope.

Besides the gains from the new cores, the M1 machines have great memory speeds/bandwidth with the new unified memory architecture and also great SSD speeds, both impacts a lot for Xcode compile times.

 

[CheesePuff]

Yes, Apple has been busy optimizing it for nearly a decade with their A-series chips for the iPhone and iPad running iOS/iPad OS, which are just like modified existing-ARM based versions of macOS.

 

[Gnattu]

if Apple was working on the optimization of the new architecture already before big sur at the expense of the optimization of the intel chips

They definitely planned this transition earlier, but they think now it's the time. The architecture's "optimization" is in fact largely borrowed from iOS devices, as the M1 are using basically the same(but with larger cache and maybe wider FP execution) Firestorm cores that the A14 is also using.

Great code complication speed could be perceived as optimization, but not only software, but hardware as well. A CPU architecture can be good at one specific task but not as good at the other. If the design goal is to excel at that specific task, then the design choice made can be called "optimization".

 

[mike...]

Something is wrong with that i9 MBP figure. My ancient 15" rMBP late 2013 can do it in 10.5 minutes.

 

[Gnattu]

Something is wrong with that i9 MBP figure. My ancient 15" rMBP late 2013 can do it in 10.5 minutes.

That's true. i9 MBP should completes it in 8 minutes I think, but still slower than M1 in this case.

 

[Danny1982]

Nope.

Besides the gains from the new cores, the M1 machines have great memory speeds/bandwidth with the new unified memory architecture and also great SSD speeds, both impacts a lot for Xcode compile times.

unified memory can impact like it? The article talks about unzip, only unzip not code compilation... I think, like CheesePuff said that in the last years Apple spent a lot of time optimizing code and functionalities around the new ARM architecture. I heard also that recently (before M1 announcement) more and more users complained of poor performance on Mac intel (someone users that use professionals Mac).

 

[Danny1982]

Something is wrong with that i9 MBP figure. My ancient 15" rMBP late 2013 can do it in 10.5 minutes.

Maybe I can try on my MBP 2020 I5 10th Gen... do you know when I can try a sample to make a test? ?

 

[Danny1982]

They definitely planned this transition earlier, but they think now it's the time. The architecture's "optimization" is in fact largely borrowed from iOS devices, as the M1 are using basically the same(but with larger cache and maybe wider FP execution) Firestorm cores that the A14 is also using.

Great code complication speed could be perceived as optimization, but not only software, but hardware as well. A CPU architecture can be good at one specific task but not as good at the other. If the design goal is to excel at that specific task, then the design choice made can be called "optimization".

Good point of view... It's absolutely correct. So, when I talk about optimization I think about hw-sw at 360 degree. Maybe till now Apple optimize the software around Intel hardware now that Apple optimize around it's own hardware, Intel Macs pay double in terms of performance...

 

[Bacci]

Well I have a 2020 2.0Ghz 13" MBP and I'm picking up an 8GB Air in the Apple store today.
Will post my experience. I'm most curious about what the M1 architecture and very fast SSD can do with just 8GB, as I pile on memory load.

 

[Danny1982]

Well I have a 2020 2.0Ghz 13" MBP and I'm picking up an 8GB Air in the Apple store today.
Will post my experience. I'm most curious about what the M1 architecture and very fast SSD can do with just 8GB, as I pile on memory load.

Serious? Are you already passed to a M1 MBP just from 2020 MBP??

 

[Bacci]

No it's for my high school daughter but dad gets to play around with it a bit first

 

[Danny1982]

No it's for my high school daughter but dad gets to play around with it a bit first

Ahauahuahua!!! And If that will like the new toys, daughter will inherit old toys ?
Let me know! I'm curiuous!

 

[Danny1982]

Ahauahuahua!!! And If that will like the new toys, daughter will inherit old toys ?
Let me know! I'm curiuous!

@Bacci have you some news for us? Now the new trend is to start all the apps together, because M1 opens them in an instant. I tried also on mine.... It's the same...

 

[Danny1982]

I talked to apple tech support. They guaranteed me that the support will be the same for both intel macs and mac arms with the same duration as now (including vintage systems)

 

[Bacci]

For the most part, both laptops feel the same to me. It's not like the M1 Air feels noticeably quicker in day-to-day use compared to the 2.0Ghz 13" MBP. I don't spend my days transcoding video or rendering 3D.
Really, I haven't had a "wow" moment yet. Compiling code in Xcode was maybe a hair quicker on the M1 Air but not by much.

Of course, needless to say I would never buy an Intel MBP today.

 

[Danny1982]

For the most part, both laptops feel the same to me. It's not like the M1 Air feels noticeably quicker in day-to-day use compared to the 2.0Ghz 13" MBP. I don't spend my days transcoding video or rendering 3D.
Really, I haven't had a "wow" moment yet. Compiling code in Xcode was maybe a hair quicker on the M1 Air but not by much.

Of course, needless to say I would never buy an Intel MBP today.

View attachment 1675248

Thanks @Bacci !!! You kept your word and you came with your feeling. So, of course so do I. I would buy an Intel Mac maybe, but a M1 neither. Probably the best is to wait a couple of years..

 

[Bacci]

Thanks @Bacci !!! You kept your word and you came with your feeling. So, of course so do I. I would buy an Intel Mac maybe, but a M1 neither. Probably the best is to wait a couple of years..

YW! I do prefer the thinner, fanless design of the Air somewhat. The touchbar doesn't add much and a TB3 docking station can take care of the lack of ports.

 

[Kung gu]

For the most part, both laptops feel the same to me. It's not like the M1 Air feels noticeably quicker in day-to-day use compared to the 2.0Ghz 13" MBP. I don't spend my days transcoding video or rendering 3D.
Really, I haven't had a "wow" moment yet. Compiling code in Xcode was maybe a hair quicker on the M1 Air but not by much.

Of course, needless to say I would never buy an Intel MBP today.

View attachment 1675248

The battery life is what u will be fawning over

 

[Danny1982]

YW! I do prefer the thinner, fanless design of the Air somewhat. The touchbar doesn't add much and a TB3 docking station can take care of the lack of ports.

Yes I understand... Thinking about same “house power” if not better and a fanless design, yes you are right. The design of MBP for me continue to be better than MBA (I don’t like wedge design)

 

[Danny1982]

Only to share with you all: Apple has introduced trade in for 2020 Macs that are still in for sale (MBP 2020 I5 10th Gen 16Gb 512Gb like mine at 2229€). I think they are completely crazy. 770 euros (trade in values) for a pc that sells for 2229 euros. 3 times devalued just out of the shop ...

 

[LinkRS]

I do think that Apple has been artificially inhibiting their Intel designs for a couple of years now. What I don't know is if it is an intentional action, to make the Apple Silicon systems seem that much better, or simply the results of the Intel chips not suitable for what Apple was using them for. Take for example, my 6-month old 2019 16" MacBook Pro with Core i9 CPU. It regularly and routinely lets the CPU get up to 90C before kicking in the fans, and even then only drops it down to like 80C before turning the fans off. The CPU regularly spikes to 100C (which is the thermal limit for most Intel Core i-series CPUs). If this happened when I am doing something intensive, that would be one thing, but it happens when I am just running an app that engages the AMD GPU (engage, not pushing it). Linus Tech Tips demonstrated how the discontinued 2020 13" MacBook Air (the fanless one) uses an air-gap to transfer heat from the Intel CPU to the heat spreader, which of course severely impacts cooling performance. People have been complaining about how hot (and loud) the Intel products have been for years now. The real question is, did Apple do this to make the case for their own SOCs, or is it simply the result of Intel not meeting the requirements Apple wanted, and Apple doing it anyway? A case could be made (despite the heat and the noise) that Apple laptops are "fast enough" with the Intel chips, and it didn't (doesn't?) matter that they weren't running as fast as they could? Regardless, they are all very pretty .

 

[thenewperson]

The real question is, did Apple do this to make the case for their own SOCs, or is it simply the result of Intel not meeting the requirements Apple wanted, and Apple doing it anyway?

It's more Intel claiming they could meet Apple's requirements (get to 10nm) and then not meeting it for 4 years. This is a simplification, but I can't imagine why Apple would have designed the 2016 15" MBP (which now doesn't even exist) for a transition that would only start 4 years from its introduction.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Hi all.

I read everywhere how the performance of the new M1 vs Intel was amazing (even vs I9 model!!).
So, obviously the support to a new architecture it is not developed in a year, so my question is: and if Apple was working on the optimization of the new architecture already before big sur at the expense of the optimization of the intel chips?

I think that examples like this (founded online): "Developer Paul Hudson shared this example of his M1 MacBook Pro with 16GB RAM rip through an Xcode unzip in just 5 minutes, meanwhile his 8-Core Intel i9 16-inch MacBook Pro with 64GB RAM took over 13 minutes to do the same." can only be explained by the optimization of the features of the new chip.

What do you think about?

Optimization of Big Sur for Apple Silicon didn't occur at the expense of optimization of Big Sur for Intel. Apple Silicon is just better, and unlike Intel, Apple has complete end-to-end control of the entire hardware and software stack with an M1 Mac that they don't with Intel (though the T2 in the T2 Intel Macs does get them closer than ever before).

 

[Danny1982]

Optimization of Big Sur for Apple Silicon didn't occur at the expense of optimization of Big Sur for Intel. Apple Silicon is just better, and unlike Intel, Apple has complete end-to-end control of the entire hardware and software stack with an M1 Mac that they don't with Intel (though the T2 in the T2 Intel Macs does get them closer than ever before).

Thanks @Yebubbleman!!! Very good explanation. My concerning is related to the code optimization; let me say: If apple will write certain code to make something on MacOs, maybe it is possible to make some kind of programming choose in order to obtain optimal performance on M1 instead of Intel?
Second question: can you give me an overview of T2 chip? Why does the T2 chip bring it closer to an M1?