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.
Apple M1 Chip: Everything You Need to Know
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Disappointing. I've been using minis for my main computer since 2009. I waited from 2102 until the 2018 mini to upgrade because I didn't want to get screwed on memory price due to the soldered in memory. Then it turned out to be soldered in SSD, ****** connectivity, and practically broken HDMI port when connecting to LG monitors. Now the M1 minis suck just as bad apparently. Hopefully the next mini will be better, but damn apple... get it together... I can't go back to windows.
Why Apple's New M1 MacBook Air Has Just Seven Cores (Rather Than Eight)
Last month, Apple introduced the first Macs to feature its new 8-core M1 chip. Among the recruits was a refreshed version of the MacBook Air, starting atwww.idropnews.com
It’s early for April fools articles.
Is it the source that's bothering you?
Here's an article from 9to5Mac about the same topic:
New MacBook Air specs: a comical difference for a good reason - 9to5Mac
A number of people commented on what appears to be a comical difference in the new MacBook Air specs, specifically 7-core versus 8-core GPU ...
9to5mac.com
No, it's the inaccuracies (and the poor writing).
(Some of) the M1 MBAs have seven GPU cores rather than eight. All of them have eight CPU cores: four p-cores, and four e-cores. The author doesn't make this distinction, leading me to believe they simply don't know. A headline like "Why Apple’s New M1 MacBook Air Has Just Seven Cores (Rather Than Eight)" implies a discussion of CPU cores.
Binning CPU cores on the M1 doesn't make any sense (but it might on future iterations, with more cores, like the TBN successors M1X and M2).
I didn't really get confused reading any of those articles, it was perfectly clear to me that it was GPU cores they were binning, not the CPU (performance, nor efficency ones), nor any of the 16 Neural Engine cores. Sorry for any confusion.
Hope the 9to5Mac-article was more precise, though.
Be that as it may (I don't agree — the Air performance would've been fine with just three performance cores), whether or not a hypothetical scenario makes sense isn't really relevant for my critique of the article.
Sure.
I don't see the author saying that anywhere.
It was, not that any of this was news to me.
I'm not quibbling with the story, just with the way the author lays it out. My guess would be that the author grabbed random bits of information from other stories and pieced their article together based on that.
I totally agree that the first one was from a non-technical blog, and might have oversimplified some things... that's why I added the other article, too. From a source that's normally better at that.
I totally agree that the first one was from a non-technical blog, and might have oversimplified some things... that's why I added the other article, too. From a source that's normally better at that.
Thanks, the second article at least doesn’t read like somebody copied a news article and reposted it in their own words while knowing not much about technology and computers.
This article, like all of the earlier articles, kind of dances around what I want to know: What is the speed performance of an M1 when being compared to Intel and AMD chips and graphics? Saying that the M1 beats Intel Apple based laptops is good, and battery performance is definitely a consideration, but if what you are after is speed at what point do PC based Intel and AMD computers running the same version of software- say Photoshop for now, but you could pick some other software- beat the currently available M1 MacBooks and Air? I don't want to know how these chips compare to old Macs running on Intels I want to know how they compare to non-Mac computers. Is a $1300 PC the equivalent to a $900 Air? Is it the other way around, a $800 PC equals a $1200 MacBook? I realize some of this is going to be subjective and its impossible to completely compare brand X to brand Apple but running the same software on the same pictures doing the same tasks ought to give you a feel for how far apart an M1 is from an AMD or Intel. And yes, don't just look at price. If adding more memory or graphics card or whatever will make a PC based laptop beat a maxed out M1 based Apple what are we looking at on the PC side? And what did it cost to achieve whichever side wins?
All I know is that my FANLESS M1 Macbook Air with only 8 GB RAM handles Wonderdraft at 4k map sized without slowing down at all. My 2015 Macbook Pro 15" i7 would cry and not do it. My 2019 Dell G7 2060 GTX with an i7 and 16 GB of RAM can do it reasonably well, but sounds like a jet taking off. My bet is that if you are willing to spend enough money to get a gaming laptop, it will definitely outperform the M1 chip if it can use the graphics card. Otherwise? GG for the Windows machines.
Comparing a 2015 processor to a current day M1 Apple ARM chip is crazy. Try an 11th Generation Intel i7. or even a 10th generation i9 10 or 14 core processor to an M1. Intel will beat it. PERIOD.All I know is that my FANLESS M1 Macbook Air with only 8 GB RAM handles Wonderdraft at 4k map sized without slowing down at all. My 2015 Macbook Pro 15" i7 would cry and not do it. My 2019 Dell G7 2060 GTX with an i7 and 16 GB of RAM can do it reasonably well, but sounds like a jet taking off. My bet is that if you are willing to spend enough money to get a gaming laptop, it will definitely outperform the M1 chip if it can use the graphics card. Otherwise? GG for the Windows machines.
An AMD Threadripper 24 or 32 Core will WASTE APPLE ARM. PERIOD.
hehe i'm using m1 macbook arm and imac 2017.. imac much stable compare m1. But fighting amd heatstroke vs m1 coolness is diff world ..
Have purchased before huawei d15 ryzen 3500
- not for gaming.. quirck
- no usb c thunderbolt
- fast
- heat issue but not worst like before try to use a6 .Why da heck opening microsoft word 60 degree Celsius ( non usa degree ya) and 4000 rpm fan speed
i have a 10400 i5 and my m1 is significantly faster than it.
sure i9's and threadrippers will beat it for now , but when higher core versions come AMD and Intel in general will be in trouble.
if they maintain current clock speeds and add cores , 8 cores will demolish that i9. the i9 is not even that great , it scores a 20k passmark. 5950x is over double that in performance.
Why is “a 32-core CPU is significantly faster in multi-threaded code than a 4+4-core CPU” noteworthy?
The person you are quoting at least has two real world experience points mentioned. Don’t act as if the entry level Apple cpu is out there to play in the niche gaming sector. It fires well made almost silent devices- and much better than previous intel crap did in that place.
AMD is not part of Apple world. You know what to do to get your so beloved AMD.
I watched a video that showed Apples M1 chip is Multi Core but NOT Multi Thread like X86 processors because of the way it handles Data.
Look I'm going AMD Thread Ripper 32 core 64 thread CPU and Windows 10 in the future.
Most 3D graphic shops are dumping APPLE over AMD Thread Ripper systems because of much better performance.
I could care less how much WATTS a powerful CPU draws. I've got Solar Power in California anyway so my electric is almost FREE.
a 32 Core Apple Mac Silicon Pro is gonna cost most likely more than the 2019 Mac Pro which was 6 GRAND
I can build a 64 Core AMD Thread Ripper PC for under that.
a 32 core AS will obliterate a 64c amd , thats just extrapolating the data. im sure it will be even better than extrapolated data.
the threadripper still gets beat in single core (3990x) , AS is 22% of the speed of the 3990x in multicore, a 32core will yeild 4 times that , thats assuming its a 16c big , 16c little based on the current data, which it wont be. it will be something like a 28c big , 4c little. also assuming they do not increase clock speeds. which further spells trouble for AMD.
most 3d shops are dumping apple for AMD . care to provide a source....?
Last edited:
Hahahaha. Okay. So, just to clarify. You are comparing a FANLESS entry level ultrabook with a Threadripper DESKTOP HIGH-END processor. Okay. Got it. You win the argument.
We should just all ignore the fact that pound-for-pound the M1 Fanless MBA kicks the crap out of anything short of a high-end desktop processor or a pc/laptop that can take advantage of a higher end graphics card. Okay.
One more thing. What's the battery life on that Threadripper beast?
Edited to add: oh and you ignored where I compared it to an i7 from 2018 (I forget the exact generation) and where the 2015 i7 was a top-of-the-line MBP at the time. Both of which had double the RAM. It's okay to be impressed with the M1.
hhehe, some of us leave gaming for xbox, playstation because plug and play.
For me, i bring my macbook to the beach . Sit work there few hour without thinking battery life out. I not staying in my couch patato everyday. I need long long view.
Last edited:
The only heavy task I use my MacBook Air for is chess. The M1 is around 35% faster using Stockfish chess engine then my 3 year old Intel laptop which use an I7-7700HQ at 2.8Ghz , this is a 45 watts cpu from 2017.
I would think this is representative of what you can expect at data crunching tasks.
Most of what I do is pictures,so Photoshop or LightRoom and I also have a few other photo/videos related software. I don’t make a living but if I can chop time off then I would be happy. And if I’m going to buy something new and spend a significant amount (for me anyway) I don’t want to buy a computer then regret it.
I would expect performance gains to be much better for photo editing because Apple probably added special instructions for it like they did for video editing but I don't do that stuff so I can't comment.
I plan to wait, but I still don’t really have a direct comparison. Since I don’t need a laptop and I won’t have any battery life concerns the only thing I am concerned with is to get the best performing computer for X amount of money. If a Apple MacBook M1 equals or outperforms a $2000 model from anyone else then that answers my question. But the reviews keep saying that the M1 beats the old Intel versions of the same Mac Air or entry Mac PowerBook computer. I want to know how they stack up against Intel/AMD computers with roughly the same performance including graphics performance, and how much that Intel/AMD computer costs.
I’ve read the M1 reviews and been impressed by the numbers but comparing Apple to Apple doesn’t tell me how Apple to Dell compare.