To me testing Mac computers should realize that video crunching a raw pictures exports times is true test on Macs these days, especially in Silicon era!
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.
M2 Pro and M2 Max will be disappointing?
- Thread starter Zest28
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
New to platform and new to product are two different things.
"... Apple CFO Luca Maestri said that the company has been growing its install base. There was a March quarter record for upgraders, and half of all Mac buyers during the quarter were new to the product. ..."
Pretty good chance is what Apple is 'counting' here is how many AppleID accounts have never had a Mac attached as being the primary owner with no previous Macs. More folks on the planet do not have any PC than do. Those folks are neither Windows or Mac users. Similarly some folks have had school or parent assigned Macs; they didn't own one while using one.
A sizable chunk of the '50%' is likely formerly iPhone only owners switching over to having an iPhone and a Mac that they actually bought ( going to college , moving out of house, etc. ) . Apple is going to likely count that as technically new owner product purchase.
Similarly, the year-over-year stats are 'goosed' if comparing a "new product introduction" quarter to one with nothing new. ( Apple recently warned of next to nothing growth given last year MBP 14/16 and this year $300-600 off just to move any substantial numbers this year on a up-freshed product. )
Macs are pulling some users from Windows but they are also giving some back. Apple only talks about the "good news" half. Probably oversell that there is any wholesale mass exodus from Windows ( which 50% all from Windows suggests ).
I think that was supposed to be fanless. Very amusing / confusing typo to anyone who's aware of the word fabless.
Ah, that's what it was supposed to be .... the Intel Core M3. I had visions of some ethereal chip fabricated without a fab. Like a hydroponic orange. Such an incoherent post...
Aah, thanks for shining a light of clarity into the ocean of madness. I now beliewe that the “fabless intel m3 thst was not popular” was supposed to mean the “fanless Intel i3” (you know, the model that constituted the bulk of Mac sales)
Exactly and that's the reason why it is to late for an M2 release and Apple will probably go directly for the M3 release next year.
But Intel will release next year the i9 14900K which will be much better than the i9 13900K and AMD will release too.
Here you can compare weak hardware: https://ipmanchess.yolasite.com/amd--intel-chess-bench-stockfish.php
There are various business models some of which can be described as fabless. At Intel chip design and chip manufacturing are in the same hands, they are not fabless. AMD used to make their own chips in their own factories until they outsourced their production into GlobalFoundries and became a fabless chip company. ARM was always a fabless chip designer, not even themselves ordering their own designs to be manufactured, but licensing them to other chip designers like Apple. Apple also doesn't run their own chip factories, they order TSMC to build Apple M-series chips, so Apple would be a fabless chipmaker. Except they don't produce chips for sale, only as integral parts of their own products. It's an open question, if fabless is in general a superior strategy and Intel should join the others by splitting design and manufacturing into two separate companies?
Apple is not able to create new generations of processors as fast as Intel . Two years ago was released
M1 chip which was comparable to the 10th Gen Intel. Since then Intel released three new generations cpus...
Even less efficienct graphics even in M1 ultra - performance not higher than RX 6600XT . Last AMD , Nvidia are not
available even in MacPro.
So now hackintosh is the King )
M1 chip which was comparable to the 10th Gen Intel. Since then Intel released three new generations cpus...
Even less efficienct graphics even in M1 ultra - performance not higher than RX 6600XT . Last AMD , Nvidia are not
available even in MacPro.
So now hackintosh is the King )
g
good joke man, while this is true, we always prefer quality over quantity.Apple is not able to create new generations of processors as fast as Intel . Two years ago was released
M1 chip which was comparable to the 10th Gen Intel. Since then Intel released three new generations cpus...
Even less efficienct graphics even in M1 ultra - performance not higher than RX 6600XT . Last AMD , Nvidia are not
available even in MacPro.
So now hackintosh is the King )
Last edited:
I agree that most people feel performance is on web. Most standards do change every decade or so. Yet JavaScript which I don’t fully understand all the nuances should work for a 10yr old computer browser as it does today yet I am aware browsers need to be updated and not all available for older computers. Unless I’m mistaken, surely modern web browser supporting current web code can be made available on a TiBook G4 today no? Is there limitations to doing this?
There shouldn’t be issues with excel 2016 to work on a 15yr old computer and using S&P capital CapIQ/IQ Pro to work just as it does today? There isn’t any PC spec defined for each so then why would performance be affected for such trivial tasks?
You could make it work but it would very slow. The G4 in a TiBook was 400 MHz-1GHz with 128 MB-512 MB RAM. The CPU was single core. In modern terms it would have run something like GeekBench 5 in low double digits. According to Activity Monitor, this page alone is taking up 150 MB with Safari using another 340 MB. That is more than was available to the an application in the highest end TiBook much less the original 400 MHz version.
Basically the software required for modern browsers is simply way too sophisticated for a computer from the TiBook era. 20 years is a very long time in computer technology.
I see you edited your post to remove “fabless” but you still mention a non-existing “Intel M3”. Might want to fix that too. I suppose you mean either the i3 series or the older m3 Y-series.
They are only disappointing to people who (unrealisticly) expect the same performance improvements from chip iterations as they do chip generations.
Seems there are leaks of the M2 Max and it is pretty much in line with what I predicted. Apple won't have the raw performance crown like they did with the M1 Pro and M1 Max. Upcoming Intel 13th-gen laptops easily beat these numbers.
www.macrumors.com
'M2 Max' Geekbench Scores Leak Online, Revealing Rumored Specs and Performance
Geekbench scores allegedly for the upcoming "M2 Max" chip have surfaced online, offering a closer look at the performance levels and specific...
www.macrumors.com
Correct. Every time you post something, I 100% agree. 😂
No, they will be fine regardless. Apple Silicon is the basis of billions of iPhones and iPads, for that alone it's a viable development target going forward. Windows on Intel x86 is the endangered platform and Windows on ARM is a stillbirth after Windows Phone failed even on Nokia hardware.
Yes, I admit that you were right in your prediction and that the hardware split I hoped for is probably not happening. Disappointing indeed.
That on the other hand is very doubtful. The 13-gen mobile is unlikely to significantly outperform the M1 series, save for M2.
then go move to an Intel device and join a PC forum.Seems there are leaks of the M2 Max and it is pretty much in line with what I predicted. Apple won't have the raw performance crown like they did with the M1 Pro and M1 Max. Upcoming Intel 13th-gen laptops easily beat these numbers.
'M2 Max' Geekbench Scores Leak Online, Revealing Rumored Specs and Performance
Geekbench scores allegedly for the upcoming "M2 Max" chip have surfaced online, offering a closer look at the performance levels and specific...
If we're taking leaked Geekbench scores as truth, we may as well say that the leaked M2 Pro/Max is faster than the leaked Intel i9-13900HK.
M2 Pro/Max Single Core (leaked): 1853
M2 Pro/Max Multicore (leaked): 13855
i9-13900HK (leaked): 1870
i9-13900HK (leaked): 12436
BTW, I don't believe in any of those numbers. The M2 Pro/Max leaked SC is *slower* than the regular M2 SC (~1899 for the M2 MacBook Pro). The M2 Pro/Max multicore crypto score is about half of the M1 Pro/Max, despite it improving significantly in single core. This happened with the regular M2 leaked geekbench too, and the actual multicore crypto score was much higher on the M2 once widely tested. The 13900HK appear to be in the ballpark of the 12900HK, with no clear improvements, which is also strange.