M1 Performance: Geekbench vs Reality and heavy multitasking?

[ylluminate]

According to some discussion (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/m1-and-limited-external-monitor-support.2290450/post-29746633) I'm hearing reported that the Mac Mini M1 outperforms the i9 8 core MBP and is maybe slightly slower than the 12 core Mac Pro 2013 in Logic Pro X operations. I was kind of surprised to see this because of the general Geekbench scores (granted these are not "real world" usage).

In looking at Geekbench scores I thought I'd compare and contrast some of the results and ask if others who are using the M1 and have access to comparable have any experiences you might share:
Mac Mini (Late 2020) M1: Single-Core: 1,710 :: Multi-Core: 7,407
Mac Pro (Late 2013): Single-Core: 805 :: Multi-Core: 3,199
Mac Pro (Mid 2010 with 2.4 GHz): Single-Core: 476 :: Multi-Core: 3,436
MacBook Pro (13-inch Reina Late 2013): Single-Core: 642 :: Multi-Core: 1,389

From what Geekbench is telling us the M1 Macs should probably perform rather solidly better than the aforementioned Macs in Logic Pro X.

Anyone else with stories or experiences that can further elucidate the real world speed of M1 systems compared to other Macs?

In my particular case I have heavy multitasking requirements and have been stuck with a maxed out 2010 Mac Pro for quite some time. At this point, even with 128 GB of RAM, my system teeters like it's on its last leg with handling 20+ apps that I regularly have open + usually 10-15 shells in iTerm with tasks running.

I've come to the conclusion that the bus of the 2010 motherboard is always saturated - it's just not able to handle the IO and context switching requirements quickly enough at this point. According to the Geekbench scores I should see a considerable improvement, but I fear that even with all of this additional bus availability it might not be enough to make up for such a lack of RAM.

I suspect that perhaps if the OS is run on an external drive and the virtual memory (paging) is pushed solely to the integrated SSD that this might be enough to offset the lower memory availability since the SSD bus is so wide...

So in addition to your own experiences, are these expectations realistic?

 

[ed.]

I only have one point of comparison of real world usage: I have a 2017 5k iMac (32GB, i7 4,2Ghz quad core), and an M1 Macbook Pro (16GB).
I rendered the same AE project on both machines and while the iMac took a little more than 14 minutes, the Macbook took roughly 12 and a half. This on a machine with half the RAM (which is key for AE rendering), and AE is not optimised for M1 yet. Oh, and while it got a bit hot, the Macbook never revved up the fans audibly, while the iMac takes off very often and whooshed its way through the render.
I didn't have time to do a lot of other comparisons, but the real world usage feels snappier across the board.

As for your question, it seems to me that if you're used to that kind of workload you might saturate whatever capabilities of these M1 machines. You might want to wait for a machine that can have more than 16GBs and a bunch more cores to throw things at.

 

[majormike]

I mean, it all depends on the Application also, generally Cinebench is a good measuring tool, in which both my MBP and Air scored 7800 points compared to 9000 for the 8 core i9 MBP; however, in realtime computations, the M1 exceeds most competition.

 

[leman]

You have to test the performance using the tools and benchmarks relevant to your usage. Geekbench does a bit of everything, and while it can be a reasonable proxy of mixed performance, it probably won't work if all you care about is video editing. I don't know anything about video editing, but I can tell you that M1 absolutely screams for software development and data wrangling. High memory bandwidth to a single core paired with excellent numeric performance are a killer.

 

[bobcomer]

Believe the benchmarks. (The multicore ones, that's more like real usage) It's true Big Sur's UI on an M1 Mac is very responsive and appears to be faster at all times when comparing to intel machines of any kind, but for actual throughput, the benchmarks don't lie. Also, a RAM constrained intel machine doesn't page as efficiently, so it could be slower, just based on that.

As for the i9 in a laptop, it's main problem is cooling, but again, if it's RAM constrained, it's going to sit there and spin rather than get things done, in MacOS or Windows. But give me enough RAM and an i9 in a desktop case, I'm in hog heaven. I have a Lenovo Workstation with an i9-10900, 64G of RAM, and all SSD's running windows and it really shines. I can run multiple VM's and there's no noticeable impact on the UI or anything else. Love it!

My Intel Mac Mini (latest version) with an i7 and 64G of RAM isn't quite as nice, but I suspect it's a cooling issue.

Now my M1 MBA, 16G, 1TB, it's painful to run even one VM.

I'm a developer/IT Manager that uses VM's for testing/dev and emergency use machines that can basically be run anywhere just by moving the files.

You don't say what kind of drives that your Mac Pro has, but that could be your bottleneck compared to modern machines. Spinning disks are so painfully slow to use now. I haven't bought one for where I work in over 5 years. I really wouldn't suggest using a whole drive as swap, OS's just aren't designed to take advantage of that scenario anymore, and SSD's are fast enough overall, it really wouldn't matter. Even our biggest server has all SSD's. (But our NAS is still disks)

 

[ylluminate]

You don't say what kind of drives that your Mac Pro has, but that could be your bottleneck compared to modern machines. Spinning disks are so painfully slow to use now. I haven't bought one for where I work in over 5 years. I really wouldn't suggest using a whole drive as swap, OS's just aren't designed to take advantage of that scenario anymore, and SSD's are fast enough overall, it really wouldn't matter. Even our biggest server has all SSD's. (But our NAS is still disks)

All SSDs on PCIe adapters. 4 of them.

 

[ed.]

a Lenovo Workstation with an i9-10900, 64G of RAM, and all SSD's running windows and it really shines

Now my M1 MBA, 16G, 1TB, it's painful to run even one VM.

lol - it's a testament of how good these entry level M1 macs are that people keep comparing them to fully decked workstations...

 

[majormike]

lol - it's a testament of how good these entry level M1 macs are that people keep comparing them to fully decked workstations...

They are better than all the Intel Macs in every regard. The only downside is the lower Ram.

VMs are Beta man, what do you expect? After half a year of quickly making it work.

Look at properly ported Software, such as Logic Pro X, especially it is "realtime" processing, which means processing in a short amount of time. The M1 beats the Intel 8 Core i9 MBP easily.

 

[bobcomer]

lol - it's a testament of how good these entry level M1 macs are that people keep comparing them to fully decked workstations...

I compare them because they were the last 2 machines I bought, and they were fairly close to each other in price.

 

[BigMcGuire]

A few hours ago I had a 2020 MBP 13' i7. Traded it in for an M1.

"Intel doesn’t currently ship an eight-core Ice Lake mobile CPU, but Apple also ships Intel’s quad-core, ICL-derived Core i7-1068NG7. That chip scores 1352 / 4914."

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/4665696

M1 is 1687 / 7433.

After just a few hours with this thing, ice cold to the wrists as I type and no fan. Faster than my i7 ever felt.

While I enjoy benchmarks I too thought the M1 was a little overblown. But wow this thing feels instantaneous. No lag. Wow.

 

[ed.]

I compare them because they were the last 2 machines I bought, and they were fairly close to each other in price.

Yeah but it's like comparing an 18 wheeler and a Ferrari because they cost you the same, and being sore at the Ferrari because it doesn't fit as many crates of beer as the truck.

 

[bobcomer]

Yeah but it's like comparing an 18 wheeler and a Ferrari because they cost you the same, and being sore at the Ferrari because it doesn't fit as many crates of beer as the truck.

Partially true, one is portable, the other not, but the cost being the same make them direct competitors. If the MBA ever gets the x86 emulator I want, it'll be used for what I bought it for, traveling, but the Lenovo is going to get most of the work. I also have an Intel Mac Mini that'll get more work than the MBA, but then again, I don't travel so much any more.

 

[ed.]

but the cost being the same make them direct competitors.

you'll concede this is very arguable.

If the MBA ever gets the x86 emulator I want, it'll be used for what I bought it for

hmmmm. The way you phrased it, it seems like there might never be one. Doesn't this make it a risky purchase for you?

 

[bobcomer]

you'll concede this is very arguable.

Not really, 99% of the time I'm not traveling, so the best performance/cost is easily the Lenovo.

hmmmm. The way you phrased it, it seems like there might never be one. Doesn't this make it a risky purchase for you?

The MBA I take it, yes it was, no doubt about it, I knew that going in. That's mainly why I got an Air and not a Pro, well that and the touch bar. Learning new stuff is more important to me than that kind of money..

I'm a computer geek, what can I say.

 

[ed.]

Not really, 99% of the time I'm not traveling, so the best performance/cost is easily the Lenovo.

ahah alright alright, no use arguing about one's own need. I don't care really. But how you wrote it made it sound like any two computers that cost the same can be compared regardless of their actual features, intended use cases, software platform and so on. I don't think that sort of comparison would be a wise way to spend anyone's time. That's why I was surprised with the comparison of a machine that's clearly built for handling multiple VMs in mind (lots of cores, lots of RAM), with an admittedly entry leve one with, well, less of everything and no optimised x86 emulator on the horizon. Because all these things were known even before you made the purchase, it's strange reading how much the M1 sucks at things it's not really supposed to excel at. In any case, have fun with it, it's a great little machine and I hope it'll bring you joy!

 

[pshufd]

Believe the benchmarks. (The multicore ones, that's more like real usage) It's true Big Sur's UI on an M1 Mac is very responsive and appears to be faster at all times when comparing to intel machines of any kind, but for actual throughput, the benchmarks don't lie. Also, a RAM constrained intel machine doesn't page as efficiently, so it could be slower, just based on that.

As for the i9 in a laptop, it's main problem is cooling, but again, if it's RAM constrained, it's going to sit there and spin rather than get things done, in MacOS or Windows. But give me enough RAM and an i9 in a desktop case, I'm in hog heaven. I have a Lenovo Workstation with an i9-10900, 64G of RAM, and all SSD's running windows and it really shines. I can run multiple VM's and there's no noticeable impact on the UI or anything else. Love it!

My Intel Mac Mini (latest version) with an i7 and 64G of RAM isn't quite as nice, but I suspect it's a cooling issue.

Now my M1 MBA, 16G, 1TB, it's painful to run even one VM.

I'm a developer/IT Manager that uses VM's for testing/dev and emergency use machines that can basically be run anywhere just by moving the files.

You don't say what kind of drives that your Mac Pro has, but that could be your bottleneck compared to modern machines. Spinning disks are so painfully slow to use now. I haven't bought one for where I work in over 5 years. I really wouldn't suggest using a whole drive as swap, OS's just aren't designed to take advantage of that scenario anymore, and SSD's are fast enough overall, it really wouldn't matter. Even our biggest server has all SSD's. (But our NAS is still disks)

My main system is similar to yours though it has an i7-10700. Lots of RAM and multiple NVMe SSDs provide a lot of horsepower. Also, really good cooling helps too. I'm trying to get a 5900X or 5950X but those are unicorns.

 

[bobcomer]

ahah alright alright, no use arguing about one's own need. I don't care really. But how you wrote it made it sound like any two computers that cost the same can be compared regardless of their actual features, intended use cases, software platform and so on. I don't think that sort of comparison would be a wise way to spend anyone's time. That's why I was surprised with the comparison of a machine that's clearly built for handling multiple VMs in mind (lots of cores, lots of RAM), with an admittedly entry leve one with, well, less of everything and no optimised x86 emulator on the horizon. Because all these things were known even before you made the purchase, it's strange reading how much the M1 sucks at things it's not really supposed to excel at. In any case, have fun with it, it's a great little machine and I hope it'll bring you joy!

Consumer computers are all general purpose machines to me and all compete with each other.

As for my comparison -- I have a personal "rule" about all my computers/OS's -- I have to be able to do everything I normally do, no matter which machine I'm using. One may be slower than another and I might have to figure out another way to do something, but if there's something I can't do, that's it, I don't usually use that computer. And yes, like I said the Air was a risky venture, totally new hardware that only MacOS runs on. I take the place of the VM's with remoting to one of my other PC's that have that capability, either at home or work. I don't like it, it's not optimal, but it can get the job done most of the time. But that said, I don't use my MBA very much, only check the latest build of Windows on Arm running on Parallels mostly. I'm hoping it will be more useful in the future as the software gets better.

 

[ed.]

Consumer computers are all general purpose machines to me and all compete with each other.

if you ever come across someone with a t shirt with this sentence on it, it will be me.

 

[bobcomer]

if you ever come across someone with a t shirt with this sentence on it, it will be me.

Please don't, I know it sounds weird, especially the way I phrased it. But a computer is a computer. I think it's my work experience that made me that way, as I've usually been the only one that knew anything about computers where I've worked, so I have to be able to do anything at a phone call or text at any time, no matter which computer I'm nearest. You should see what I have to do when the only thing I have near me is my phone!

 

[ed.]

Ahaha, no worries. It would still make for a badass tshirt.

 

[cakeloverpro]

If you are a developer, you will be happy with the performance of the m1 compiling, ML, and various other operations. Recently Sublime Text 4 Beta is released that supports the silicon m1. They ported 3.3 python for a tech reason. they done things the hard way, to make sure the customer experience is perfect.

If you are using VSCode and already have a ST license. stop and install ST4 beta and LSP package. LSP is just as good, i dare say better than VSCode. Electron is why our computers are now taking gigs of ram to run... drum roll... a editor... a task manager... a simple form....

In short, m1 mac is a great dev machine, ( rust compiles fast ) , use nova / st4 , stay awway from electron apps... and all of a sudden 8 gb is enough. ( Thought I am on a MBA 1TB 16gb ram, and instant buying the iMac the day i can order with m1 chip. )

 

[bobcomer]

If you are a developer, you will be happy with the performance of the m1 compiling, ML, and various other operations. Recently Sublime Text 4 Beta is released that supports the silicon m1. They ported 3.3 python for a tech reason. they done things the hard way, to make sure the customer experience is perfect.

If you are using VSCode and already have a ST license. stop and install ST4 beta and LSP package. LSP is just as good, i dare say better than VSCode. Electron is why our computers are now taking gigs of ram to run... drum roll... a editor... a task manager... a simple form....

In short, m1 mac is a great dev machine, ( rust compiles fast ) , use nova / st4 , stay awway from electron apps... and all of a sudden 8 gb is enough. ( Thought I am on a MBA 1TB 16gb ram, and instant buying the iMac the day i can order with m1 chip. )

I'm actually not a Mac developer, my main development is for a machine called an IBM i. It's a midrange computer that actually runs what became of the PowerPC processor when it grew up. (Currently called the Power9) I also do some Windows development. The only time I run something MacOS native for development, it's for the iPhone and I just dabble at that. Maybe in the future...

 

[ArPe]

M1 is 1687 / 7433.

I got 1750/7800 last time I checked. Nothing running in background and I don’t have any kind of 3rd party menu bar monsters.

 

[pshufd]

I got 1750/7800 last time I checked. Nothing running in background and I don’t have any kind of 3rd party menu bar monsters.

There's variation between the three types of systems that it's put in.

 

[Ursadorable]

As an interesting sidenote, I compared the i7 Mini 2018 to the M1 Mini for graphics prowess.

The Intel integrated graphics on the i7 scored 4900 on Metal, the M1 scored over 22000.