Not really an ecosystem.
What you're saying you want is good cross platform support. Vendors that work cross multiple platforms.
nothing wrong with that.
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.
AMD Claims New Laptop Chip Is 30% Faster Than M1 Pro, Promises Up to 30 Hours of Battery Life
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What you're saying you want is good cross platform support. Vendors that work cross multiple platforms.
nothing wrong with that.
From Apples website:
"M2 is built using an enhanced second-generation 5‑nanometer technology. It features over 20 billion transistors — 25 percent more than M1. And its 16-core Neural Engine is capable of executing up to 15.8 trillion operations per second to accelerate machine learning tasks."
AMD states their chip can do up to 12 Trillion ops. And this test software was mobilenetv2.
I'm just going with math here, and stated specs from both vendors. The M2 should be faster, potentially (again up to 15.8 Trillion ops vs up to 12). And since the M1 Ultra does up to 22 Trillion (twice as much as the M1 Max not mentioned by AMD).
IDK, looks a bit suspect on AMD's part.
"M2 is built using an enhanced second-generation 5‑nanometer technology. It features over 20 billion transistors — 25 percent more than M1. And its 16-core Neural Engine is capable of executing up to 15.8 trillion operations per second to accelerate machine learning tasks."
AMD states their chip can do up to 12 Trillion ops. And this test software was mobilenetv2.
I'm just going with math here, and stated specs from both vendors. The M2 should be faster, potentially (again up to 15.8 Trillion ops vs up to 12). And since the M1 Ultra does up to 22 Trillion (twice as much as the M1 Max not mentioned by AMD).
IDK, looks a bit suspect on AMD's part.
You can boot camp to the ARM Version of Windows.
The reason why AMD's new chip is so good is the same reason Apple's chip was so good. Lots of transistors on a smaller node.
The Ryzen 7945HX has twice as many CPU cores as the old top of the line laptop CPU. That doesn't mean it uses twice as much electricity because you have more silicon area and lower voltages. The point is PC laptops are about to jump ahead massively this year. 4nm CPUs and GPUs. Not the old 7nm and 8nm stuff.
As for the iGPU product, the 7940HS, it is now 25 billion transistors. It is about 3x larger than the old CPUs.
The reason why AMD's new chip is so good is the same reason Apple's chip was so good. Lots of transistors on a smaller node.
The Ryzen 7945HX has twice as many CPU cores as the old top of the line laptop CPU. That doesn't mean it uses twice as much electricity because you have more silicon area and lower voltages. The point is PC laptops are about to jump ahead massively this year. 4nm CPUs and GPUs. Not the old 7nm and 8nm stuff.
As for the iGPU product, the 7940HS, it is now 25 billion transistors. It is about 3x larger than the old CPUs.
Last edited:
This is total nonsense. You can run x86 code in emulation. You can use Rosetta. You can run boot camp Windows ARM. Everything you do to keep compatibility, none of it costs battery life. You keep the OS and common apps native to the new silicon, but that doesn't mean you can't run the others at other times.
My iMac burned, the PSU finally died after 5+ years. Literally set itself on fire.
Yes they did kill compatibility. Rosetta works for 64 bit apps. You didn't even seem to understand what I wrote. 32 bit applications don't work. That's the problem. 64 bit windows apps and 32 bit Mac apps, both don't work now. Both worked on the old Macbook Pro. Can you imagine if Microsoft cancelled all 32 bit apps? Terrible idea.
And Apple is a big boy. They can make a laptop that can cool 35W of power consumption. That's what the Ryzen 7940HS needs. Just 35W. Macbook Air can handle it. Not the M2 Macbook Air as it has garbage cooling, but that is Apple's fault, and nothing to do with the CPU.
Look up the "ASUS Vivobook S 14X OLED". That's what you are missing. Double the ram and storage, 120hz OLED. AMD's best CPU. Same price as the cheapest M2. Beats the M1 Pro in performance. Stick the new one announced this month in there. That's what you will get.
Last edited:
The only shortcoming I see in Apple's future is GPU. Right now they are in AMD situation. GPU is good enough for a task it's made for, in AMDs case that's gaming and in Apples case that general GPU tasks but none of them excel in productivity like studio workflows, rendering, machine learning etc. Apples and AMDs GPUs are simply not versatile enough. That's why Apple has to to revert to asic route for prores video encoding boost and soon these tasks will pile up on the chip itself. I could be wrong as well.
Excellent news, looks like Apple Silicon really increased competition where it matters. This will also keep Apple somewhat on their toes, so we won't be stuck with small incremental upgrades milking Apple Silicon. Apple probably still has good lead on efficiency, but here's hoping AMD hits it out of the park and Apple gets it together and doesn't overextend themselves.
Although I agree that Apple ecosystem integrates nicely, Apple is not the only one with a well integrated ecosystem. In business / enterprise, MS has a large ecosystem with the PC all the way to the data center and the cloud. Apple has nothing similar as MS enterprise ecosystem.
Also I agree with you that Apple has excellent hardware, but I cannot say the same for their software and services. IMO, Google and MS have far better software and services than Apple. You have to be outside the Apple ecosystem if you want a better experience with software and services, with the benefit that can be used outside the Apple ecosystem.
M1 Max have double the memory bandwidth and double the GPU cores compared to the M1 Pro, in case you missed this point.
Yes, but the CPU can barely use the added memory bandwidth, and as for the GPU, that’s not what we’re discussing.
Actually, IMHO, M1 Max should be able to push more data compared to M1 Pro due to the additional bandwidth afforded to it.
Anadtech tested the M1 Max CPU being able to push over 200GB/s of bandwidth. The M1 Pro have a memory bandwidth ceiling of only 200GB/s.
For computation that are orthogonal and not related, I.e. if the data to process are spread all across the memory space, the M1 Max has an advantage.
There’s a reason why AMD only pit their latest againsts the M1 Pro and not the M1 Max. Only AMD knows.
We can see that the M1 Pro 10 core is virtually identical to an M1 Max. Seeing that AMD didn't compare to an M1 Max we can safely assume AMD compared to the 8 core. Beating the 8 core by 30% puts it firmly in M1 Max territory but of course, no company is going to say "Hey we match a year-old chip!"
The M2 beats the M1 by about 15% and if we extrapolate the performance a theoretical M2 Max would be beating the M1 Max by about 15%. Given that the new chip is about equal to an M1 Max an M2 Max would beat the AMD chip by 10-15%.
So if we are taking into account unannounced, unreleased, products then yes Apple probably does have the upper hand but if we are talking about released and soon-to-be-released products then AMD is very competitive with Apple.
It's pretty clear Apple is not as far ahead as some people in this thread would like to believe.
Yeah I suspect the 7940HS iGPU will offer a sizable performance boost over previous generation making thin and light office Windows laptops at around 1500$ properly gaming capable. The iGPU also can run at 3ghz if I'm not mistaken. I hope AMD allows more than 54W boost, it would be a shame to not use the additional performance the SOC is capable of, if it can go up to 70W for example. Laptops that will alow this will have 2 fans anyway and 2 fans can handle up to 120w.
The Ryzen 7945HX is a different class SKU, offering high end desktop level CPU performance in a laptop. At its lower TDP setting it can easily fit in normal sized laptops and will offer anyway +60% performance boost over AMD's previous generation. That's quite a jump in performance no matter how you look at it.
I really don't understated what's the huge mystery for so many users here. What AMD showed is very simple and logical.
First lets establish something, so everything is clear:
The Ryzen 7940HX IS NOT AMD'S HIGHEST END laptop SKU.
Now that this is out of the way. The very simple reason for which AMD didn't compare their 7940HX with the M1 Max was because the M1 Max is used in a different class of laptops in terms of price in comparison to the kind of Laptops we will see the 7940HX in. Makes sense? Because it's super logical. The suggestion that they should have used the M1 Ultra is ridiculous.
Even if let's say the 7940HX matches the M1 Max in CPU performance there's no point for AMD to suggest that the two SKUs are in competition because they aren't. This is why when AMD launches a new CPUs Line and even the mid-range R7 would beat Intel's highest end consumer i9, AMD still compares their highest end with Intel's highest end and the mid-range with the mid-range.
Also regarding the M2, it was only used to compare the AI performance. The M2 according to Apple has 40% better AI performance. So the M2 is better than the M1 Max in this regard and AMD was just being fair, there's no mystery.
And to end it. They didn't mention a power level because their SKU's have configurable TDPs, if they mention a power level in a benchmark than that's the default expectation and their chips will get undeserved criticism for not matching this expectation, even if it's the laptop's manufacturer's fault.
Anyway, AMD showed us a few really promising laptop chips that will make Windows laptops way more competitive in 2023 than they were in 2022.
Im totally agree with you about the macOS stability in the latest 3 years. Is awful, I filled 45 bugs just in Vnetura since public release.
About the reboots, totally. Airdrop AKA Failsdrop is a pain, transfering files from iDevices no longer has progress bar and lot of nosense features like this one.
Bud so many bugs is what really “bugs” me. Tired and disapointment.
They need to stop adding features and do something like “Leopard-Snow Leopard” just fixing bugs and improving stability
Yeah for 3100-3300$ which coraborates really nicely with what I wrote. The 7940HX is meant for a different price bracket.
Last edited:
Actually, Apple sells the 14" MacBook Pro with M1 Max for $2900.
The M1 Max can run in a form factor that is the 14" MacBook Pro.
Besides, Apple has always been more expensive compared to the competition.
It doesn't matter, it's about the price bracket for that category of chips and on Apple's site it starts at 3100$.
Why should AMD's middle of the pack SKU compete with the way more expensive M1 Max or the upcoming M2 Max? it doesn't make any sense.
If Apple has already been more expensive than the competition it's their fault not AMD's fault.
It starts from $2900.
Edit: In case it escaped you, Apple sells computers. AMD sells CPUs.
The chip itself maybe able to go for 30hrs on one charge BUT not in real world terms because the devices display will be the determining factor of how long a batteries charge will last due to lcd displays requiring a lot of power for their backlights. Therefore unless AMD has been able to produce a super low power LCD panel, their promise of 30hr charge is laughable at best.
I'm not sure why we need to keep repeating this, but the answer is: because AMD's "middle of the pack SKU" already burns more power according to AMD's own specs than the M1 Max. The higher-end 7945HX burns way more power, so it is disqualified from the comparison.