M series chips are still slow... Are they gonna solve it?

[sunny5]

Despite Apple's claims, M1 Ultra GPU is not as powerful as RTX 3090 - VideoCardz.com

No, Apple M1 GPU is not as powerful as RTX 3090 Apple may need to reconsider its M1 silicon marketing. The company was claiming that their newest chip called M1 Ultra equipped with 64-core GPU is as good as high-end desktop GPU while consuming 200W less power. As proven today, this claim...

videocardz.com

Apple’s charts set the M1 Ultra up for an RTX 3090 fight it could never win

Better performance per watt doesn’t equal better overall performance.

www.theverge.com

M1 series especially M1 Ultra still suffer its GPU performance and it turns out Apple lied about the performance. Yes, the optimization is still a problem but people still believe that M1 series are still performing poorly. Do M1 Ultra really perform just like RTX 3090? How about now? If this continue in 2022 and later, it will be a huge problem. I'm still seeing videos of poor M1 series performance due to lack of optimizations.

Power per watt is the only advantage for M1 series so far but dont we really care more about the performance? At this point, I'm already worrying about the future of M series.

 

[thenewperson]

Power per watt is the only advantage for M1 series so far but dont we really care more about the performance?

Who's we?

What I would like to see is a big push by Apple to get big devs' code optimised for Metal. That'd probably help a lot with existing chips.

 

[Gnattu]

Power per watt is the only advantage for M1 series so far but dont we really care more about the performance? At this point, I'm already worrying about the future of M series.

At least the sales data disagrees with your argument so there is no "we". The Macs sales was all time high after the transition, which means lots of people like M1 series.

 

[sunny5]

At least the sales data disagrees with your argument so there is no "we". The Macs sales was all time high after the transition, which means lots of people like M1 series.

The sales data doesn't related to the performance. It's just better than old Intel Macs.

 

[Gnattu]

The sales data doesn't related to the performance. It's just better than old Intel Macs.

"Just better than old Intel Macs" won't result in an all time high sales record, period.

If the sales data doesn't relate to performance, then you mean most people buying M1 Macs do not care about performance, and this is probably not true.

But either way, you gave a point that "we" care more about performance(rather than power efficiency), and I showed you the sales data that people do not "care more about performance" like "we" you mentioned.

You are worried about the future because it is "slow" from your understanding, but it has a strong market response and proved it is competitive, you can still argue that Mac buyers do not care about performance, but again, there is no "we" if you argue that.

 

[DarthVader!]

Power per watt is the only advantage for M1 series so far but dont we really care more about the performance?

Power per watt and the fact that my MBP does not slow down drastically when on battery was the main reason why I bought a M1 MBP. I don't see that advantage being relevant at all with the desktop versions but for laptops its a major advantage.

Apple has a product line that is turning the competition on its ear, and sales data is bearing this out. Who needs or wants an RTX 3080 (there are no 3090s in laptops AFAIK) in a laptop? Its a very niche customer base, i.e., gamers and maybe some creative types where they need that amount of power on the go. Performance of the M1 and now the M2 is more then enough for most consumers, imo.

When I was looking for a laptop replacement, there was no other laptop that came close to providing a complete solution, other then Apple.

Do you want insane performance both computationally and graphically? Sure Lenovo, Asus, and Razer all offer high end machines, some of them are more expensive then the MBP. Yet with that said, all of those models have to deal with high amounts of fan noise due to the heat generated, even when they're using AMD processors.

None of them AFAIK, offer high performance laptops with great battery life. The Razer 14 is probably the closest machine that offers a mac-like experience, yet its more money then a MBP, its battery life is significantly shorter and if you operate it on the battery, its performance is much much less. Then there's the fan noise which is quite audible when the machine is on idle, never mind being pushed.

tl;dr Apple is the only one to offer high performance laptops with great aesthetics, build quality, battery life and user experience.

 

[sunny5]

"Just better than old Intel Macs" won't result in an all time high sales record, period.

If the sales data doesn't relate to performance, then you mean most people buying M1 Macs do not care about performance, and this is probably not true.

But either way, you gave a point that "we" care more about performance(rather than power efficiency), and I showed you the sales data that people do not "care more about performance" like "we" you mentioned.

You are worried about the future because it is "slow" from your understanding, but it has a strong market response and proved it is competitive, you can still argue that Mac buyers do not care about performance, but again, there is no "we" if you argue that.

Mac is Mac. Mac users buy over Mac and Apple Silicon is just better than old Intel Macs, not latest Intel and AMD CPU. You probably living in a closed environment.

 

[Gnattu]

Mac is Mac. Mac users buy over Mac and Apple Silicon is just better than old Intel Macs, not latest Intel and AMD CPU. You probably living in a closed environment.

This is not the correct understanding of Apple’s business model. Your statement will be true if there is a fixed percentage of people on this planet are born to be Mac users no matter what, and if this is the case there is no need to worry about the future for any Macs. Mac users become Mac users for a reason, and they will leave if the reason is no longer the case. The environment I lived in is probably more “open” than yours because my job requires me to use computing devices from various vendors, from MIPS routers to big ass Dell EMC x86 servers on the rack.

 

[chrfr]

Power per watt is the only advantage for M1 series so far but dont we really care more about the performance? At this point, I'm already worrying about the future of M series.

The power-per-watt advantage has completely changed the user experience in laptops. Having a MacBook Air that can easily run all day on battery while still offering excellent performance and doing so with no fan is a substantial improvement.
For most people, any computer is "fast enough" now so no, I would not say that "we" care more about performance.

 

[sunny5]

This is not the correct understanding of Apple’s business model. Your statement will be true if there is a fixed percentage of people on this planet are born to be Mac users no matter what, and if this is the case there is no need to worry about the future for any Macs. Mac users become Mac users for a reason, and they will leave if the reason is no longer the case. The environment I lived in is probably more “open” than yours because my job requires me to use computing devices from various vendors, from MIPS routers to big ass Dell EMC x86 servers on the rack.

Doesn't really change the fact that Apple Silicon chip's performance is poorer than PC side.

 

[Ifti]

Just got my M1 Max last week. Hope the M2 Max doesn't come along for a while yet just to make me feel better! lol

 

[Gnattu]

Doesn't really change the fact that Apple Silicon chip's performance is poorer than PC side.

But there is no need to worry about the future because of this. Engineering decisions have to be made and engineers are not magicians, so most of the time you can only optimize one design goal. Intel and AMD has a strong focus on per core performance (this is still true after alderlake due to how Intel’s E core is used)while Apple mainly focus on power efficiency. There is no wrong decisions here, just different ones. Intel and AMD are both successful in their design goals using different approaches to deliver exceptional per core performance, and Apple provides industry leading power efficiency while still competitive in per core performance.

If you want to talk about GPUs, then Nvidia has both strong hardware and feature complete software stacks that no other companies in this industry can provide. So this is not really “PC vs Mac” situation but rather, Nvidia vs other GPU vendors situation.

 

[jav6454]

Despite Apple's claims, M1 Ultra GPU is not as powerful as RTX 3090 - VideoCardz.com

No, Apple M1 GPU is not as powerful as RTX 3090 Apple may need to reconsider its M1 silicon marketing. The company was claiming that their newest chip called M1 Ultra equipped with 64-core GPU is as good as high-end desktop GPU while consuming 200W less power. As proven today, this claim...

videocardz.com

Apple’s charts set the M1 Ultra up for an RTX 3090 fight it could never win

Better performance per watt doesn’t equal better overall performance.

www.theverge.com

M1 series especially M1 Ultra still suffer its GPU performance and it turns out Apple lied about the performance. Yes, the optimization is still a problem but people still believe that M1 series are still performing poorly. Do M1 Ultra really perform just like RTX 3090? How about now? If this continue in 2022 and later, it will be a huge problem. I'm still seeing videos of poor M1 series performance due to lack of optimizations.

Power per watt is the only advantage for M1 series so far but dont we really care more about the performance? At this point, I'm already worrying about the future of M series.

RTX 3090 is a a much bigger die than the M1 Ultra itself. I think Apple didn't lie about it performing better than a desktop class GPU, but they simply omitted which GPU they compared to. Most likely they went with an average GPU like a 3050/3060 in the mobile variant.

 

[CraigJDuffy]

Doesn't really change the fact that Apple Silicon chip's performance is poorer than PC side.

Is it? On a performance per watt standpoint? I don’t care if a computer is faster if it uses more power.

 

[MayaUser]

Again with this? So limited vision on people that cannot see 5 years ahead
x86 needs to end sooner or later...servers are changed or talked to be changed because of the water and cooling that those big buildings needs because of the energy power drawing and heat
In Maya, objectively i can say the M1 Ultra is on par with my Gtx 3070 (so yes not with 3090), but the whole mac studio system draws around 223W at wall power source while my Gtx 3070 system draws over 620W (what the hell) and now multiply this difference around the world in millions and millions of use cases.
This old architecture must die sooner than later because it draws too much power, produce too much heat and all that just for a little more power. Probably nvidia 5090 will draw 600W alone and Intel cpu by end of 2030, will draw another 300W for a total system of 1000W...this is insane from any point of view except "peak performance"
No wonder Microsoft is trying for years so hard to make big steps for arm

 

[darngooddesign]

...M1 series especially M1 Ultra still suffer its GPU performance and it turns out Apple lied about the performance...

Meh, My 16" MBP handles everything I throw at it without breaking a sweat. Performance is superb.

 

[haralds]

1. Most of the world is using laptops. There is also the "minor" issue of climate change. My cMP averaged 750W, my Mac Studio does not even show in power in comparison to my Dell panel. Power and heat mean a lot.
2. The Resident Evil demo at WWDC showed that games using Metal 3 have amazing graphics and performance.
3. Since Metal is shared among platforms (iOS, iPadOS, macOS,) game engines will start to focus more on optimizing for it.
Benchmarks are one thing, real world performance and game availability count more.

 

[sunny5]

1. Most of the world is using laptops. There is also the "minor" issue of climate change. My cMP averaged 750W, my Mac Studio does not even show in power in comparison to my Dell panel. Power and heat mean a lot.
2. The Resident Evil demo at WWDC showed that games using Metal 3 have amazing graphics and performance.
3. Since Metal is shared among platforms (iOS, iPadOS, macOS,) game engines will start to focus more on optimizing for it.
Benchmarks are one thing, real world performance and game availability count more.

And Apple also claimed that M1 Ultra's GPU is as powerful as RTX 3090 but it turns out to be false.

 

[pappkristof]

I agree. M1 series is slower than the best Intel/Nvidia CPUs/GPUs, but it’s more interesting to see how they compare to the current 12th gen. Intel processors and Radeon Pro gpus that would be suitable for macs.

 

[pappkristof]

Intel Core i9 12900K vs Apple M1 Max: performance comparison

We compared Intel Core i9 12900K (32 GHz) against Apple M1 Max (3.2 GHz) in games and benchmarks. Find out which CPU has better performance.

nanoreview.net

 

[pappkristof]

M1 Max compared to an i7 (that could have made it to the 27” iMac) it looks quite disappointing:

Intel Core i7 12700K vs Apple M1 Max: performance comparison

We compared Intel Core i7 12700K (3.6 GHz) against Apple M1 Max (3.2 GHz) in games and benchmarks. Find out which CPU has better performance.

nanoreview.net

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

Slow?

My M1 mini runs circles around my 2021 iMac, then twerks. I'm not sure what speed you're after...

 

[DarthVader!]

Here's the thing - performance is not a problem.

Let's change tact and say this. If you need to play AAA games, or want an RTX 3090 GPU, then get a PC. This is the great advantage of competition and choice.

You're mistaken in saying that M1 is slower then PCs - you're using generalizations to a degree that you're assumptions are incorrect. for instance I googled macbook air alternatives, and one option was the MS Surface laptop. Here we have clear evidence that the MBA is faster then a PC. The difference in our arguments I'm giving precise examples and comparing apples to apples.

 

[chabig]

M1 Max compared to an i7 (that could have made it to the 27” iMac) it looks quite disappointing:

Intel Core i7 12700K vs Apple M1 Max: performance comparison

We compared Intel Core i7 12700K (3.6 GHz) against Apple M1 Max (3.2 GHz) in games and benchmarks. Find out which CPU has better performance.

nanoreview.net

125W Intel desktop chip vs 30W M1 portable chip. It's not even close. Intel excels at generating heat.

 

[MayaUser]

i love that you are feeding this topic still )
Hope this will not make 4- 5 pages
The fact that 4 Apple SoC destroys 80% of the PC industry is a fact...4 SoC compared with how many from intel amd and nvidia? 200-300?