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.
Why is the M1 all of a sudden 'not good enough'?
- Thread starter darthbane2k
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And you didn't know it had 2 ports when you bought it? And professionals and other high-end users were expecting blazing performance to surpass their 'old' high-end computer(s) from an entry-level Mac computer. Come ON people. Tomorrow you/they may just have the right computer with which to compare against their old hardware.
It's not that deep, I'm not sure why people are getting so angry at podcasters here. When people say the M1 is "not good enough" they mean in context with high end 'pro level' machines people need to do serious work. When they were raving about M1 being great they were doing so under the context of other 'ultrabook style' chips from Intel/AMD/etc. I don't think any of those people would say M1 sucks all of a sudden.
Lol
They are right M1 is not good enough! It only eats intel for breakfast but he who cares I just want my extra usb port and my 10++++ displays because I think I can multitask….
This is why apple put the m1 in the mac pro and the 27” inch imac and the 16” mbp! not……
Last edited:
The M1 is great for the most average users, but I feel like saying it's not what the "pros" need is fairly justified. It just doesn't quite pack that kind of a punch.
The fact that Apple is most likely going to launch a far powerful version of the same thing with a fresh revamped Pro line-up should be proof enough of that.
The fact that Apple is most likely going to launch a far powerful version of the same thing with a fresh revamped Pro line-up should be proof enough of that.
Yet they went out of their way to say the very opposite this time last year.
I think the reason it was praised when it came out and why people are 'crapping' on it right now is because of the price. For the price, the M1 is a fantastic processor and punches way above its weight. For professionals who spend $2K+ on laptops, the M1 is missing pro level features that they would gladly pay for. The M1 is both superb and not good enough.
Its the Apple Silicon hype machine working in reverse. All the commentators have to have something to say, so they prepare the ground by saying M1 was not quite good enough although it redefined the idea of an entry-level machine. Then when the M1X is revealed they can go into full-on worship mode, crying out that it is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
The real results of whatever Apple says won’t be revealed until the benchmark embargoes are lifted and we can see in detail what performance is like.
I Think it’s just a condition of them receiving pwwwessents form Apple and it comes across as so disingenuous. Consider they most likely already have these new Macs (all three colour variations no doubt) in their possession.
Three colour variants? Hopefully they add a matte black option along with the new midnight and starlight colours and that would be my pick of the crop.
Very possibly. The thing is, for an entry-level machine the M1 was game-changing. It was the equivalent of a recent (at the time of launch) Core i7 Intel processor, and that meant a lot of people used them for semi-pro applications, and they got reviewed as such. It really changed people’s expectations, to the extent that some people said, “I borrowed my wife’s M1 MacBook and I was underwhelmed. What were you doing? Oh well I was running Photoshop with some big files, Illustrator, InDesign, a dozen web browser tabs in three different browsers, and a few other minor graphic design utilities.” The hype was so successful that people expected to use the M1 for everything.
Tonight we get to see some more Pro level processors and machines, and we will see if Intel were right to be worried about the top end of their business. I thought it was classic that Pat Gelsinger, the Intel CEO, was talking about winning back Apple’s business. They will have to do a lot better in performance-per-watt, but we will see.
Putting CPU speed aside, there are plenty of areas already highlighted where M1 is 'not good enough' for some users.
Big ones are:
- RAM limited to 16GB
- IO ports limited to 2 USB4
- Display outputs limited to 2
- GPU too slow vs discrete options
Then there's also the form factor issue - in particular the M1 MacBook Pro is in the 5 year old 2016 MBP chassis. That chassis has big bezels by modern standards, a mediocre webcam and a touch bar... It's also far bigger than it needs to be for M1, given how tiny the M1 motherboard and cooling system is.
So plenty of room for improvement. I'm personally extremely happy with the M1 MacBook Air, but I can see how it would fall short for some types of serious use.
Big ones are:
- RAM limited to 16GB
- IO ports limited to 2 USB4
- Display outputs limited to 2
- GPU too slow vs discrete options
Then there's also the form factor issue - in particular the M1 MacBook Pro is in the 5 year old 2016 MBP chassis. That chassis has big bezels by modern standards, a mediocre webcam and a touch bar... It's also far bigger than it needs to be for M1, given how tiny the M1 motherboard and cooling system is.
So plenty of room for improvement. I'm personally extremely happy with the M1 MacBook Air, but I can see how it would fall short for some types of serious use.
I love my M1 Mac mini. It's the best computer I ever owned and it does everything I need perfectly, but.. Apple have to either work harder on the quality of macOS or put an even better GPU there because it's not acceptable that their latest and greatest computer can't render all animations and transitions 100% stutter free. But I doubt that the new SoC will fix that, it's for a long time a software issue.
Would you mind posting actual quotes or links instead of your interpretations of what was said?
It is hard to know what exactly you are referring to, unless you let us know what you are referring to.
I have a M1 iMac at home with 16gb ram and have had zero issues having tons of apps open and working on giant RAW photo files with multiple layers as well as inDesign at the same time.
I can only imagine what a M1X or M2 chip can do.
I can only imagine what a M1X or M2 chip can do.
Well it's a little more than 3 hours... but who's counting... ok it's me... I'm counting... obsessively.
Its because the currency that YouTubers, podcasters, etc deal with is attention.
Their shows/channels are not successful unless there are eyes and ears on them all the time. Saying "Everything is Great!" doesn't draw any attention. Stirring up controversy does.
Their shows/channels are not successful unless there are eyes and ears on them all the time. Saying "Everything is Great!" doesn't draw any attention. Stirring up controversy does.
M1 is a fantastic chip for its current applications. It's essentially what would have otherwise been marketed as an A14X chip if it had been only for the iPad Pro. However, it cannot compete with the higher end things like my 8 core i9 MBP that has 32GB of RAM and a beefy Radeon Pro GPU that can drive multiple external displays, has 4x thunderbolt 3 ports, and more things that are simply limitations of the M1 chip.
One thing I find interesting about Apple's chip designs is that they are great for their current implementation, but they hardly go beyond that, which I suppose is not a big deal when Apple is the sole customer of their own chips.
One nice thing back in the early 2010's, was Apple would release a Mac and only advertise a RAM limit of 8GB, but the Intel chipset used would be able to support say 16GB, so there was many times an actual limit that went beyond the advertised limit, but nowadays, the M1 chip, even if Apple wanted to, they could not put more than 16GB of RAM into it as the chip cannot support it.
One thing I find interesting about Apple's chip designs is that they are great for their current implementation, but they hardly go beyond that, which I suppose is not a big deal when Apple is the sole customer of their own chips.
One nice thing back in the early 2010's, was Apple would release a Mac and only advertise a RAM limit of 8GB, but the Intel chipset used would be able to support say 16GB, so there was many times an actual limit that went beyond the advertised limit, but nowadays, the M1 chip, even if Apple wanted to, they could not put more than 16GB of RAM into it as the chip cannot support it.
Well, yes.
The M1 has impressive multi-core performance compared to other mainstream processors.
It is a processor that equips a thin and light laptop. I would say it is very high-end for its purpose, as the low-power 11th gen Intel Core i7 cannot touch its multi-core performance.
However, it is no match for a workstation. If you need this kind of horsepower, then the M1 is not suitable. But most users should be happy with the M1, provided they can live with 16 GB.
Again, I agree with everything you are saying, the wording (or my initial interpretation of it) of your initial post kind of sounded like you did not agree with me saying that multi-core performance gains over the M1 is something people are looking forward to in the new AS.
While it looks like it still isn't as powerful as the higher end Intel Xeon chips in the Mac Pro and iMac Pro, the new M1 Max is getting really close according to the initial Geekbench scores, beating out all Mac Intel chips, with the exception 12-core and up Mac Pros, and the 18-core iMac Pro.
Workstation performance, but running on a battery in a tiny portable form factor.
To the OP: That alone is proof why the M1 could be considered "not good enough" for many people out there.