Why would you think resale value = trade-in value. Resale value is going to always be better selling it privately.
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.
Developer Delves Into Reasons Why Apple's M1 Chip is So Fast
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There are articles like this surfacing around: https://wccftech.com/intel-and-amd-...apples-m1-in-cinebench-r23-benchmark-results/
They say things like 11th generation Intel or latest AMDs “trash” the M1 chip. Quite misleading and pinning real 8-core CPUs against the 4+4 that the M1 actually is. And by “trashing” is maybe 10% faster in some tests. However, for the layman, that will read just as that: M1 are indeed trash ☹️
What is really solid is the comments sections, quite a few people have been calling it out. With the assorted “I don’t care about TDPs”, “PC master race”, etc comments.
Anyways, interesting article, giving this rundown a read.
Note that nearly all these reasons the dev mentions, which are all true, do NOT show up at all in these CPU benchmarks we've been seeing on MR. Those merely test the CPU's arithmetic operation speed, not even the memory.
Pretty soon there will be a need for new benchmarking tools as the traditional notion of CPU + RAM + GPU on a mobo falls apart. I've been calling this for years. Standardization of computing components has provided its advantages over the past two decades, but that has ended, and layers of abstraction are about to be broken, including hardware-software ones. Just like what happened with the TCP/IP stack in SDN. The result of all this will be a huge advantage to corps like Apple that have always controlled things end-to-end, and no, that bit isn't a good thing.
Pretty soon there will be a need for new benchmarking tools as the traditional notion of CPU + RAM + GPU on a mobo falls apart. I've been calling this for years. Standardization of computing components has provided its advantages over the past two decades, but that has ended, and layers of abstraction are about to be broken, including hardware-software ones. Just like what happened with the TCP/IP stack in SDN. The result of all this will be a huge advantage to corps like Apple that have always controlled things end-to-end, and no, that bit isn't a good thing.
Last edited:
25W CPU beats a 10 or 15W CPU in multi-core and still loses in single-core. That's not impressive.
A better read would be AnandTech's masterful pair of articles...
and
www.anandtech.com
and
The 2020 Mac Mini Unleashed: Putting Apple Silicon M1 To The Test
Nah, there are always people who buy old stuff. Either it's really not worth, or they just want the cheapest Mac possible at any other cost. Don't tell them I said that, I've got a 2015 MBP to sell later.
Although it's true that the M1 is insanely impressive.... my 2015 15" rMBP still handles every use case I have with aplomb. It runs quiet and cool (designed before Apple gimped the cooling system in their newer Intel laptops), the fan rarely fires up, and I'm typing with it sitting on my lap in my boxers right now. It's responsive, and never seems slow. It also has a wealth of ports, an upgradeable SSD, and cheap repairability. Obsolete junk? Far from it. Will I own an AS MBP/MBA in the future? Highly likely, but there's no rush. The things that will make me jump certainly won't be the speed (I don't need or use it), but will be a bigger 16" screen, better audio, and longer battery. However, my chances of getting a 16" without a touchbar seem horrifically slim, so I won't be parting with this legendary machine in a hurry.
That's a fascinating article. Engheim did a good job of keeping it detailed yet understandable. The future of the Mac looks bright indeed.
I agree, they had fewer options when considering the creation of something “faster than an iMac” especially when there’s only a single digit percentage of their customers that need something faster than an iMac. I’m actually questioning myself of what they will do for the next Mac Pro.
Can't wait for the M2. Remember how the first generation (Core Duo) Intel Macs were relatively clunky and slow compared to the Core 2 Duos that came along a little while later?
I dunno, I think the old ones will still fetch a decent price. People buying second hand are on a second hand budget, and the old ones work perfectly fine for most peoples' use cases, as most people simply don't need the speed of the M1, just as most people didn't need an i9 MBP. I still have my mid-2015 15" rMBP, and have no plans to upgrade in the immediate future. That said, if I only needed a 13" screen, and would be happy with 8GB/256GB, then I probably would have done the same as you. But even when they put out a 16" AS Mac, it will be horrendously overpriced with 16GB/2TB, and will come with a touchbar, so I will wait, and continue enjoying my brilliantly designed (one of the best ever, and in some ways, still the best ever) rMBP.
what about the poor SOB's that bought the Core Solo? Best to wait 6 months here.
Nothing new here ... Co-Processors have been around for a long, long time !
There is no doubt that Apple as taken a good lead over AMD and a huge lead over Intel. I will order a Macbook Air soon.
That being said I feel peoples are missing one of the major point of the article. The M1 is super fast in some task like video editing because Apple has put some special hardware for those tasks in the chip. Inversely it means that tasks for which they have not done so will likely be fast too but you will not see the domination you see in video editing.
As a concrete example I am a competitive chess player and I have a chess engine that analyze billions of chess positions. I expect the M1 to be good in that respect but not better than a high end Intel chip. I will know when I receive my laptop.
That being said I feel peoples are missing one of the major point of the article. The M1 is super fast in some task like video editing because Apple has put some special hardware for those tasks in the chip. Inversely it means that tasks for which they have not done so will likely be fast too but you will not see the domination you see in video editing.
As a concrete example I am a competitive chess player and I have a chess engine that analyze billions of chess positions. I expect the M1 to be good in that respect but not better than a high end Intel chip. I will know when I receive my laptop.
Benchmarks are all well and good.
What about real world performance?
My i7 4790 2015 iMac gets 3745 in Cinebench R23 multicore - it's amazing where we have gotten in the 5 years since this was a new system. That's a 4 ghz clock CPU.
Current 11th generation i7 gets slightly more than this with a 1.6 ghz clock speed.
My super expensive computer is outrun by my shiny iPhone 12 ProMax in terms of geekbench scores!
iPhone 12 ProMax in Geekbench 5 benches 4219
iMac 2015 4ghz Corei7 in Geekbench 5 benches 3468
It's apples to oranges but it's interesting nonetheless.
Last edited:
iMac Pro is a pricing tier.
A bit of connectivity and a bit of performance gated behind a very big price jump.
Don't hold your breath waiting for Apple to detune the Pro purchasing sweetspot.
Majority of PC sales are for non-configurable (outside of RAM and storage) laptops. Building a system is great for hobbyists, but the reality is that much of the world doesn't care for barebones homework. An added caveat is how the iPad eats up a lot of the PC market too.
I think it will be interesting to see how other companies try to compete. That is, will we see one of the big OEMs try to do what Apple has done and develop their own software platform to run on their own hardware? Perhaps it's the impetus for AMD to partner with a large OEM to develop another closed software-hardware player in game, such as Samsung developing Tizen OS to run on a AMD-built SoCs across phones, tablets, laptops and desktops. They'd be playing catchup for a long time but it would be good to have another player in the market.
Wait till a custom-built PC is substantially slower or otherwise less capable than these all-in-one systems.
uh, and? That's the way you would want it. Why want a generic hot mess of old architecture designed to pretend to be an aging architecture with separate chipsets and a hot mess of an OS (Windows) that supports it in a legacy way?
Best thing MS can do is move on as well. Maybe support legacy in the cloud and stream games from XBox.
These are not co-processors. On-die cores and subsystems.
Apple has a lot to be proud of with the M1. Can’t wait to see how the Mac evolves with all this power.
The used macs will keep their value just as before. There are always users that think they need to run some old x64 apps or want to be able to run windows
I've been extremely happy with the M1 Air. It's nice to use a Mac for simple tasks and not feel heat through the keyboard which always happened with my intel MBPs.
It isn't a "system on a chip". A system on a chip would be all of the microcircuit devices on a single semiconductor wafer. It a multi-chip microcomputer system packaged in a ceramic substrate instead of in separate packages mounted to a printed circuit board. The M1 is a hybrid circuit device.