These M1’s replaced the entry level versions of these macs. Which means they had a Mac of 16GB anyways. Plus this isn’t typical RAM, it’s Unified Memory. Look up the technical details. It’s much more efficient
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 Silicon M1 Emulating x86 is Still Faster Than Every Other Mac in Single Core Benchmark
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
“By generation two of the ARM era, I believe you will see the full benefits of the switch, with ARM Macs achieving 120% performance on integer code with maybe 80% of the power consumption.”
Oh boy were you wrong.They did better than that in generation one.
But other than that, incredibly prescient.
Yeah, but to be fair, back then, I think I predicted they’d start on this path a generation earlier
Still, they blew away my expectations (it also sounds like, from interviews, that they surprised themselves as well).
Try looking into iPad Pro performance on thermal throttling - it actually performs really well. That’s without fans. If anything, the efficiency of ARM makes it better in this regard than Intel, not worse.
Why the big deal about upgradeability? This is nothing new for Apple, and many other hardware vendors. The form factors of thin'n'light machines often preclude removable components. Larger devices or desktop workstations provide an upgrade path should you prefer this to portability.
I view these computers as appliances that will have a certain lifespan, much like my home appliances or my car. They will either develop faults that are not economical to repair, or I will desire greater performance. If the latter I will sell or gift the device to someone who will be satisfied with it. Everything has a lifespan (us included!) and sometimes upgrading doesn't make much sense. For example, I have a 2012 Dell Xeon workstation, which I could technically upgrade but not to the latest Xeon CPUs, or make use of newer PCIe4 GPUs. Sure I could replace the motherboard, CPU & RAM and re-use my existing GPU & SSD/HDDs, but this would probably cost more than just buying a new machine.
Maybe the Mac Pro will offer plug-in cards with multiple SoCs, and this is the upgrade path?
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
Oh. My. God.
I was not ready for results like these.
This level of performance is more than worth the reduction in external monitor support.
Truly can't wait for full system testing.
I was not ready for results like these.
This level of performance is more than worth the reduction in external monitor support.
Truly can't wait for full system testing.
even windows users...especially for laptops, most of them dont do that....only desktop pc users still exists that they do that in 2020..so not just apple users
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
I'm still on 2011/2012 Mac hardware because of Apple's move towards non-repairability back then.
And I RAGED against that machine until maybe last year.
But even my stubborn jackass self had to concede that the repairability ship had sailed and just wasn't coming back to Apple.
Finally, I came to realize that I love Apple products more than I (STILL) hate the fact that they're sealed, so it's going to be (more) expensive going forward, but at least for me it'll still be worth it (until it isn't).
From what I’ve read here, AutoDesk is apparently sitting on some patents that make it difficult for anyone else to create a competing product. Fortunately for Apple, only a sliver of a sliver of their users need it.
MMMMMmmmmmm, I don’t think this has ANY possibility to kill off the PC market, not even close. Those Pros that migrated away did so for OTHER reasons, too. Reasons that aren’t resolved by this. Like systems that can’t be upgraded for example
Apple’s prices are such that if you REALLY want a Mac, you can buy one. However, if all you’re doing is checking email, facebook and editing pictures, you can likely find an iPad for cheaper that will suit you. They’re not going to lower the price of the Mac to fit a market price because they’ve already got something in that range. Their share will stay around the same, with the same roughly 50% of folks buying Macs in a year being new to the Mac.
This does factor into it a lot, I believe. For example, Apple doesn’t need a decoder on their processor because it will ONLY ever get 64bit commands because that’s all Xcode is designed to spit out for Apple Silicon.
I find it funny that it’s stated that Geekbench isn’t a good representation of day to day usage and, yeah, it’s true. For 99% of the numbers you see on the Geekbench chart, that benchmark was the HEAVIEST thing their computer ever did!
And... AND... then it’s indicated that the only test that would be a real representation of day to day usage would be... a test that pegs the processor for an extended time? Processors are rarely pegged if they’re designed properly. They get the work done quickly and they’re back down to idle. Now, I understand that some folks want to know what the behavior of the systems will be when pushed to the edge, but “pushed to the edge” should in no way be confused with “day to day usage”!
They’re waiting for the REAL real real world tests. You know, the world that existed before the M1 was introduced that showed AMD and Intel at the top!Don't forget the "It doesn't run Windows x86 in bootcamp, Mac is dead" stuff.
No, it will not.
You'll have the option maybe to spin up windows XP in BOCHS (or similar), but that's not virtualisation in the same way VMware is. Its quite a bit slower. But really. If you're depending on XP applications - you've had like... 10 years of no OS support telling you its time to get off.
It really is TIME TO GET OFF it.
iPad office is nothing but a gimped pointless version with 90% of its features missing. If you really believe what you have written here than you have no idea how to use a spreadsheet or word processor
See above post. It will be an emulator, not (much higher performance) virtualisation.
It may be a parallels product, but it won't be the same.
Last edited:
This is perhaps a different topic. But is the “slowest” M1 MBA supposed to be the one with the 7-core GPU? If so there’s a noticeable difference between the 7 and 8-core GPU model.
I never said the iPad version was feature complete. I said Microsoft is supporting the iPad better than their own products.
Depends what you want. If you want a touch friendly version of office (as you do, when running on a tablet) the iPad version works better than the desktop version trying to pretend it is a touch based application running on an MS surface as a tablet.
MS released the surface, crippled Windows 10 with touch based garbage and then didn't support office on it properly.
Hence: Microsoft is supporting the iPad better than they are supporting their own Surface products.
edit:
besides, most people never use 90% of the office suite features anyway - but if you do, you run it on a desktop. not a tablet, in touch mode, like microsoft would like you to THINK the surface is good at.
No. We mocked up the graphic with the Rosetta result to show where it falls. The official page Geekbench doesn’t have it included yet.
Attention, musicians!!!
If you are using UA Apollo MKii as your audio interface...be warned that UA won't have their stuff (SW, HW, plugs) compatible with Big Sur for a few more months and with M1 based computers, several months after that. Guessing 2nd Qtr 2021. So if your studio is working fine with Apollo, best to wait until things get sorted out. Check UA website for updates!!!
And yea, Apple looks like they have hit a home run with the M1 machines!!!! (fingers crossed for actual Logic project comparisons)
If you are using UA Apollo MKii as your audio interface...be warned that UA won't have their stuff (SW, HW, plugs) compatible with Big Sur for a few more months and with M1 based computers, several months after that. Guessing 2nd Qtr 2021. So if your studio is working fine with Apollo, best to wait until things get sorted out. Check UA website for updates!!!
And yea, Apple looks like they have hit a home run with the M1 machines!!!! (fingers crossed for actual Logic project comparisons)
I'd say its a case of the JIT compiler not being able to make as optimal code generation decisions as say, Xcode compiling a native version of it due to Apple making a (deliberate) compile speed vs. optimisation trade-off.
Even with a 30% performance penalty vs. native code, its still a lot faster than the previous model intel machines, so they probably "set the slider" of Rosetta2 translation speed vs. generated code speed at pretty much "generate the code as fast as possible, run-time performance optimisation be damned, it's fast enough anyway".
Because they want it to be fairly transparent, and nobody wants to be waiting around for minutes every time they run or install an app for the first time.
For now it doesn't. It may in the future, noone knows for sure. But if it doesn't, they will likely have a reason for why (as in performance is enough.) Apple Silicon Mac Pros will have some kind of options here (unless they decide to discontinue it.) Doubting they do personally. Feels like this is every time something hits the market we get his FUD responses and it's just tiring. Anyway, people can complain if they want to, it's still free to do so.
4 performance cores x 1313 = 5252. Add in a little bit for the efficiency cores and you’re in the ballpark.