Yet a $499 Xbox Series X is 20% more powerful than a M1 Max.
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.
M1 Max is overkill, nobody needs this much power!!
- Thread starter UBS28
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
which benchmark? stockfish or digilloyd huge?
“M1 Max is overkill, nobody needs this much power!!”
however the beauty of living in the real world, we can buy whatever you want regardless if it’s more powerful than what we need. I think it’s called freedom of choice. ?
Xbox Series X = 12 TFLOPS
M1 Max. = 10 TFLOPS
And real world benchmarks is not something we need to go there as the Xbox Series X runs every AAA game at 4K resolution without any problems, while the M1 Max even struggles with super old games like Starcraft 2.
Looks like many people use more power than a M1 Max.
hmmm. M1 Max has better CPU, has a Neural Engine, supports more RAM up to 64GB and runs cooler than xbox.
Look at Mac Studio size and then look at xbox??
M1 Max is a computer with a OS that is not locked down!
I can't get xcode, word, zoom working at the same time can I?
great hardware the xbox has but its got a very locked down OS where the mac studio i can do everything but game
Its well known that at the beginning of a console’s lifecycle it is more powerful than commercially available, ‘normal’ computers. That was true for the PS2, its still true today. In a couple of years the normal computers catch up, and in the tail of a console’s lifetime it is hugely superceded.
Not many people buy Macs with gaming in mind, so I think we can discount that scenario.
I can't run my workloads on the Xbox Series X. What is the code mix, size of data set used in that benchmark was it FP64 or FP32? Was it a LINPACK or LAPACK Benchmark?
It’s very strange to compare a computer to a gaming console. One can do almost anything, the other can do only one thing. It’s like comparing a multi tool to a kitchen knife. If something is specialized then of course it’s going to be better at that one thing.
You should compare a computer to a computer if you want to draw any meaningful conclusions.
You should compare a computer to a computer if you want to draw any meaningful conclusions.
If an iPad is a computer, so is a Xbox Series X. You can do Microsoft Office, E-mails, internet browsing, ….. on a Xbox Series X too.
But the point is, the statement that Macrumors make that nobody needs this much power is BS, as “gamers” use more power on a daily basis, even cheap $499 consoles have more power than the M1 Max.
Also wanted to add, I assume the thread title:
M1 Max is overkill, nobody needs this much power!!
is a quote of some kind since it’s obviously not your belief. If anyone said that, then all that means is they don’t need that much power and they aren’t able to imagine other people’s workflows that do need that much power. That’s all. It’s a nonsense statement, therefore not a worthy starting off point for a debate.
Nonono, I understand what OP means. He is a hardcore gamer and he purchased Intel Macs, using bootcamp to game before, and was quite satisfied with the results. Now, with Apple silicon, what he was used to do is no longer possible, and running windows games using compatibility layers we can find is clearly less than optimal.
He criticized Apple bacause:
- He cannot run windows anymore
- M1 series is not fast enough to run games in compatibility layers
Thus, he concluded that the transition to Apple silicon cost too much. And then, he compares a computer with a game console, because it makes little difference for a gaming people.
I am just speaking facts. You guys claim all the time that only a small group of “professionals” use this much power, while it is complete non-sense.
Macrumors always seems to be spreading misinformation. An other famous one is the “8GB RAM is all you need”.
Last edited:
Half-Truth #1: while it is true that you can't run x86 Windows on Apple Silicon anymore, you can in fact run the ARM64 version of Windows in Parallels and other virtualization environments.
Half-Truth #2: while it is true that gaming performance may strongly vary between the different M1 models and games, there are hundreds of videos on YouTube that demonstrate that you can in fact run most modern games with Crossover, even though you'd surely get better frame rates with a dedicated gaming PC.
These make them worse than an Intel Mac, and that's all the point for some gamers.
All the power tha x box has is entirely dedicated to bettering the gaming experience- at which it excels and is very powerful. All other comparisons being equal, the mac in question is MUCH more powerful. There are plenty of top end gaming gpus for pc’s which excel at gaming but then at not so optimised and are more sub par for other gpu uses.
Leaving aside gaming, where no amount of power is ever enough, what exactly is this common activity which uses so much compute power? The M1 Max is a very capable chip which very few Mac consumers would use to its full potential.
In any case, the statement that only a small group of “professionals” can only use this much power is simply not true. The Xbox Series X is just an example to show this.
These depends on situation. I don't think anyone comparing M1 Max to systems with other vendors, but comparing Macs to Macs on this forum. If you don't have some professional workload to run, then a powerful GPU on a Mac is completely useless to you because you know, "Macs can't game".
The 8GB meme does not make sense to me either, and personally I cannot believe people could live with 8GB while browsers nowadays could easily eat up all those memory. I am very certain that, the amount of people need 16GB of memory is much more than the amount of people need a strong GPU on a Mac.
The Xbox may have some limited traditional computer functionality, but it’s limited. It’s still specialized for gaming, so the point still stands that it should be better at gaming.
All I’m saying is I don’t understand why you chose to compare to a specialized device. It’s like comparing apples to oranges, as they say. You can still make your exact same point much more effectively by comparing to a gaming PC, can you not?
So why not compare the M Max Mac to a gaming PC then? Those do the exact same things so they are in the same arena and can be compared. Again, a gaming console on the other hand has only one goal, so of course it has to be better at it.
That’s all you guys can come up with? “I am worse than a chess benchmark people. “He must be a hardcore gamer!”.
The fact still stands. The statement that only a small group of “professionals” use this much power is misinformation. It is not true.
Anyway, keep spreading this misinformation while it is fact that it is not true.
But sir, a powerful GPU on a Mac is useless if you don't have professional workloads to run, because "Macs can't game."
I'm not sure about that, since even back in 2017 my MacBook Pro didn't have a great gaming performance, even under Windows in Bootcamp, which also didn't run that great.
Simply get a gaming PC or console, if you're into that kinda stuff. Apple doesn't advertise their computers as gaming rigs for triple-A titles. Get the right tool for the job that you intend it to do.
Well these people can get a regular M1. What's the issue here? There are many tasks that require the power of M1 Max, Pro, and Ultra that are unrelated to gaming, like high-definition video editing, programming and compiling large projects, machine learning, CAD and CG work, etc.
This is pretty much true. The fact that Macs can't run triple-A titles that well has many reasons and it's not entirely the fault of Apple. They try by introducing stuff like Metal, as a framework for 3D on the Mac, but it only seems to get slowly adapted now with the Silicon chips 10 years later. Direct X on Windows has been around much longer and the OS is well established as gaming platform and has much more users.