First Geekbench Score Surfaces for MacBook Pro M1 Max With 2x Faster Multi-Core Performance Compared to M1

[DeepIn2U]

intel integrated graphics aren’t the bar though. intel integrated graphics are only a fallback if you don’t want/need a gpu. amd and nvidia graphics are the bar. unless apple is going to put amd and/or nvidia graphics in to the soc/logic board/whatever you want to call it, they are going to have to massively improve their own gpu if they want to claim it’s a full on powerful modern computer

…

win 11 doesn’t bother me at all. just seems like win 10 with a linux de skin.

not that i like windows at all. i only boot it if i need to for something

The bar I feel is integrated graphics as many corporate and consumer laptops do not have dedicated cards. Intel has made a huge business of this, while AMD is killing it in this aspect, of course back in 2008 NVidia started this somewhat integrating a south bridge with Apple on the Unibidy MB/MBP’s.

the Target for all high end video card performance and crypto mining is NVidia. So this is all in they’re court

 

[0134168]

deleted

 

[VArase]

Right now, the M chipset is a great mid level chip. Due to its efficiency, it makes it the best in its class for mobile and portable computing. When it comes to high end Windows vs M1 Max its no comparison. For $3300-$6000 you can build a top notch PC for that kind of money that will surpass the M1 Max MBP. You can build a AMD Ryzen 9 5950X + AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT and still have money left over! Sorry, but these components make it league leading. Not to hate on the M1 Max, but it is an incredible chipset! However, to compare it to lower efficiency, high end graphics card it will come up short. I believe the M3 Max may be more competitive, but Apple is still 3-4 years behind of overthrowing AMD or Intel in raw CPU/GPU benchmarks.

Personally, anyone shelling out this kind of money for a laptop are drinking the kool-aid. I would love to see the M1 Pro/Max performance in a smartphone. This would be truly game changing. The iPad Pro will get the M1 Pro chip next year so this wouldn't be considered ground breaking. For the average PC world the M1 Pro/Max are not game changers, but only in efficiency. That is why the keynote explained efficiency over performance. Very calculated.

No more expensive than high end Windows laptops - and probably a vastly superior experience.

Probably beats out the vast majority of desktop computers too. That's a lot to say for a laptop.

1000 NIT normal and 1600 NIT brightness playing HDR content with a billion colors at 120 hz. M1 Max has twin video encode/decode blocks for H.264, H.265, and ProRes so this is gonna be a beast for encoding/decoding/transcoding. The best speakers in the business (these are improved on the 2019 16" which already had the best speakers in the business). This is gonna be a great machine for creation and consumption.

Like any troll you feel like you've got to spec it up to the max so you can then complain about how expensive it is.

Do you have a laptop with 8 TB of expensive 7.4 GB/sec SSD? Why not?

Does your laptop have 64 GB of expensive 400GB/sec memory?

Mid level - huh. Wanna know where the median Windows machine is? Probably still down in el-cheapo ultrabook territory. The machines you're talking about occupy maybe the top 1% or 2% of the Windows market (excluding servers).

You're somehow trapped yourself in the top tier build-your-own bubble, and you have no idea what the laptop universe is like. Most of the PCs in use are commodity levels machines from HP or Dell, and in enterprises Wintel computers are being rapidly replaced by linux-based thin clients.

Oh, and here are some games Andrew Tsai has been playing on his 8 GB 8 GPU core M1 MacBook Air (with no fan).

My 16" MacBook Pro will have a full cooling system, 8/2 CPU cores instead of his 4/4, 32 GPU cores instead of his 8, and 32 GB RAM instead of his 8 GB, 1000 NIT display with 1600 in HDR mode and a 120 fps display instead of his 400 NIT non-HDR 60 hz display. You think that will change the experience?

 

[JahBoolean]

Right now, the M chipset is a great mid level chip. Due to its efficiency, it makes it the best in its class for mobile and portable computing. When it comes to high end Windows vs M1 Max its no comparison. For $3300-$6000 you can build a top notch PC for that kind of money that will surpass the M1 Max MBP. You can build a AMD Ryzen 9 5950X + AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT and still have money left over! Sorry, but these components make it league leading. Not to hate on the M1 Max, but it is an incredible chipset! However, to compare it to lower efficiency, high end graphics card it will come up short. I believe the M3 Max may be more competitive, but Apple is still 3-4 years behind of overthrowing AMD or Intel in raw CPU/GPU benchmarks.

Personally, anyone shelling out this kind of money for a laptop are drinking the kool-aid. I would love to see the M1 Pro/Max performance in a smartphone. This would be truly game changing. The iPad Pro will get the M1 Pro chip next year so this wouldn't be considered ground breaking. For the average PC world the M1 Pro/Max are not game changers, but only in efficiency. That is why the keynote explained efficiency over performance. Very calculated.

I mean, what is the point to compare a desktop to a laptop anyways.

Obvious troll is obvious.

 

[name99]

1700 single is great but
11,000 multi is no where near what's possible on the Mac Pro 2019

Are these scores (at 24 hz) legit?

So it's a good thing, isn't it, that Apple did NOT announce these as the replacement for the Mac Pro (or even the iMac Pro), no?

Honestly, people never cease to amaze me. Magician makes a car disappear right in front of your eyes and someone says "so what, you didn't make a house disappear did you?"

 

[VArase]

True statement...

Yes of course the M2 Pro/Max the will have improvements over M1 Pro/Max. However it was Apple that made it comparison to PC/laptops in terms of performance.

Actually, if I recall correctly they compared 'em to Windows laptops.

 

[paulchiu]

So it's a good thing, isn't it, that Apple did NOT announce these as the replacement for the Mac Pro (or even the iMac Pro), no?

Honestly, people never cease to amaze me. Magician makes a car disappear right in front of your eyes and someone says "so what, you didn't make a house disappear did you?"

good points. I did order the 16.2 64GB and 4TB SSD. I just hope the thermos is as good and quiet as the M1 on my kid's Macbook Air M1. ofc, I did not think the 16.2 M1max will match the Mac Pro 2019 with afterburners and 28 cores. Mac Pro users like myself would be pissed if it were.

 

[VArase]

geekbench is pretty decent.

and 5xxx amd gpu still crush apple silicon in metal scores. let alone 6xxx gpu

we’ll see if apple decides to improve gpu or if they don’t care cuz no games anyway

this is part of why I will miss macOS running on x86. I'm not a laptop guy so I don't care about heat or fan noise. I use my computer at a desk for Logic Pro, some light Microsoft office stuff for my day job, web browsing/email, screwing around with different operating systems, and when I have some time, a bit of gaming

it was nice well it lasted over the last almost 20 years to be able to build or buy whatever computer I wanted and run more or less any and all operating systems on it. seems like we are regressing back to the powerpc vs intel days. not sure if I'll buy a new Mac in a few years or just run logic on the hack I have now and build a new pc, or go all Mac + console. just don't know. but it was nice to be able to do everything on one machine for so long

Here are some games Andrew Tsai has been playing on his M1 MacBook Air with 8 GB RAM and 8 GPU cores.

My MacBook Pro M1 Max will have 8/2 CPU cores rather than his 4/4, 32 GPU cores rather than his 8, a full cooling system rather than his fanless laptop, 32 GB RAM instead of his 8, 1000 NIT display with 1600 for HDR and 120 hz instead of his 400 NIT 60 hz display with no HDR support, and I won't be running a screen recorder.

 

[VArase]

good points. I did order the 16.2 64GB and 4TB SSD. I just hope the thermos is as good and quiet as the M1 on my kid's Macbook Air M1. ofc, I did not think the 16.2 M1max will match the Mac Pro 2019 with afterburners and 28 cores. Mac Pro users like myself would be pissed if it were.

I have my doubts about the 28 core thing, but M1 Max should have two ProRes encode/decode blocks and can encode whereas from what I understand the afterburner could not.

Actually, M1 Max should have 2 video encode/decode blocks for H.264 and H.265 also, so encodes/decodes/transcodes should be pretty fast.

Of course, nobody has anything (to my knowledge) in their hot little hands yet so we'll have to see: but if things work out like Apple says - and they've been pretty good about delivering unbelievable results with Apple Silicon - there will be a lot of looonng nights and TUMS in store for anyone involved in the Wintel homogeny.

 

[bowen1506]

I hope this is fake results because it is pretty underwhelming. Why is nobody mentioning this?
There is pretty much 0% improvement on single core performance, really? After 1 year apple has made no progress on that?
The multi-core improvement is also not 70% better than M1 as apple said in the event.
I think this is fake. I am expecting 2000+ single and 13000 on multi.

 

[ajfahey]

Hot dog! Now, when can I get one of these Max chips in an iMac?

Not advanced enough. 🤣.

 

[mi7chy]

I would have to agree with Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger and say Apple has done a "pretty good job" with Apple Silicon.

Wouldn't be possible without TSMC 5nm which is also available to Intel to close the gap if they weren't so arrogant.

 

[VArase]

I hope this is fake results because it is pretty underwhelming. Why is nobody mentioning this?
There is pretty much 0% improvement on single core performance, really? After 1 year apple has made no progress on that?
The multi-core improvement is also not 70% better than M1 as apple said in the event.
I think this is fake. I am expecting 2000+ single and 13000 on multi.

I'll bet the M1 Pro and Max use the same cores as the M1 - Firestorm and Icestorm.

That's why it's the M1 Pro and Max rather than the M2 Pro and Max (which would be based on the Avalanch and Blizzard A15 cores).

BTW, Apple said the multicore performance would go up about 70% - not the single core speed.

 

[ajfahey]

I’d like to see an M1 Plus MacBook with an upgraded M1 chip with 2 monitor TB-4 support, an SD reader and 16/32 GB RAM built into the 14 inch chassis. Keep the current low end specs for the Air model.

 

[VArase]

Wouldn't be possible without TSMC 5nm which is also available to Intel to close the gap if they weren't so arrogant.

Yeah ... so what?

Lot's of fabless silicon design houses. You throwing shade at Qualcomm, AMD, and nVidea too? Damn their arrogance!

 

[nathansz]

I'll bet the M1 Pro and Max use the same cores as the M1 - Firestorm and Icestorm.

That's why it's the M1 Pro and Max rather than the M2 Pro and Max (which would be based on the Avalanch and Blizzard A15 cores).

BTW, Apple said the multicore performance would go up about 70% - not the single core speed.

exactly. some cores. more of them

 

[bobcomer]

I hope this is fake results because it is pretty underwhelming. Why is nobody mentioning this?
There is pretty much 0% improvement on single core performance, really? After 1 year apple has made no progress on that?
The multi-core improvement is also not 70% better than M1 as apple said in the event.
I think this is fake. I am expecting 2000+ single and 13000 on multi.

Why would it be improved in single core performance -- it's the same core. The idea of this second edition was more cores and a better GPU. Single core really isn't the be all and end all of computing, no matter what the benchmark geeks say -- I don't even pay attention to the single core score, because I control lots of PC's and they most certainly are not single thread machines.

I was actually hoping for more than 8 performance cores, but it got a respectable score -- not top end it's true, but definitely good. I only have one machine that's as fast, a 10 core i9 in a desktop with a lot of RAM.

I'd have been one of the first orderers if only... I think I would have gone for the 14" pro as long as I could get 64G of RAM. I don't need much in the way of GPU.

 

[0134168]

You say that like it's a bad thing. The M1 MBA and MBP are more than powerful enough for the vast majority of users. If you need more power (for whatever reason), you've got the M1 Pro and M1 Max.

My only complaint is it would be nice to get a 14" or 16" without all the additional power. A 14" MBA would be really nice.

I would buy a 16" MBP M1, so many years using the 17" MBP. But it does not exists.

 

[0134168]

No more expensive than high end Windows laptops - and probably a vastly superior experience.

Probably beats out the vast majority of desktop computers too. That's a lot to say for a laptop.

1000 NIT normal and 1600 NIT brightness playing HDR content with a billion colors at 120 hz. M1 Max has twin video encode/decode blocks for H.264, H.265, and ProRes so this is gonna be a beast for encoding/decoding/transcoding. The best speakers in the business (these are improved on the 2019 16" which already had the best speakers in the business). This is gonna be a great machine for creation and consumption.

Like any troll you feel like you've got to spec it up to the max so you can then complain about how expensive it is.

Do you have a laptop with 8 TB of expensive 7.4 GB/sec SSD? Why not?

Does your laptop have 64 GB of expensive 400GB/sec memory?

Mid level - huh. Wanna know where the median Windows machine is? Probably still down in el-cheapo ultrabook territory. The machines you're talking about occupy maybe the top 1% or 2% of the Windows market (excluding servers).

You're somehow trapped yourself in the top tier build-your-own bubble, and you have no idea what the laptop universe is like. Most of the PCs in use are commodity levels machines from HP or Dell, and in enterprises Wintel computers are being rapidly replaced by linux-based thin clients.

Oh, and here are some games Andrew Tsai has been playing on his 8 GB 8 GPU core M1 MacBook Air (with no fan).

My 16" MacBook Pro will have a full cooling system, 8/2 CPU cores instead of his 4/4, 32 GPU cores instead of his 8, and 32 GB RAM instead of his 8 GB, 1000 NIT display with 1600 in HDR mode and a 120 fps display instead of his 400 NIT non-HDR 60 hz display. You think that will change the experience?

Comparing a laptop with a desktop is nonsense. Comparing a mac laptop with a pc box is ridiculous.

 

[bowen1506]

Why would it be improved in single core performance -- it's the same core. The idea of this second edition was more cores and a better GPU. Single core really isn't the be all and end all of computing, no matter what the benchmark geeks say -- I don't even pay attention to the single core score, because I control lots of PC's and they most certainly are not single thread machines.

I was actually hoping for more than 8 performance cores, but it got a respectable score -- not top end it's true, but definitely good. I only have one machine that's as fast, a 10 core i9 in a desktop with a lot of RAM.

I'd have been one of the first orderers if only... I think I would have gone for the 14" pro as long as I could get 64G of RAM. I don't need much in the way of GPU.

Apple chips have always been a single core leader, that's the main reason why stuff like UI, apps and webpages are snappier on apple devices. Apple always had better core design than its competitors. It's just weird so see them make no progress on this, sure they could cram more cores into the package, but they use exactly the same core? A year of no core design improvments? That sounds like what intel had been doing.
We will see. But given the ambition and the hype train on apple silicon, I expected better from apple than this.

 

[TheGrinch67]

I hope this is fake results because it is pretty underwhelming. Why is nobody mentioning this?
There is pretty much 0% improvement on single core performance, really? After 1 year apple has made no progress on that?
The multi-core improvement is also not 70% better than M1 as apple said in the event.
I think this is fake. I am expecting 2000+ single and 13000 on multi.

I did, but people disagree. This is stagnation, Intel already catched up, on windows (desktop for sure, you can get 200-2300 GK5 single cores)

 

[TheGrinch67]

Comparing a laptop with a desktop is nonsense. Comparing a mac laptop with a pc box is ridiculous.

It's not in apple case, cause their single core perfs is the only one we'll get from iPhone, Laptops, and Desktops. That's unfortunately, so far their strategy. I'd love to see desktop with higher frequencies than 3.2 Ghz, but they won't do that

 

[Renoktation]

I think Intel Alder Lake with it's 10 nm fabrication might beat Apple's 5 nm M1 Max.

I suppose Intel's 7nm Alder Lake scheduled to release next year will improve the scores further. It will be an interesting battle, with Intel having an edge on performance while Apple on efficiency.

Intel Corporation Alder Lake Client Platform - Geekbench

Benchmark results for an Intel Corporation Alder Lake Client Platform with an Intel Core i9-12900K processor.

browser.geekbench.com

 

[bowen1506]

I did, but people disagree. This is stagnation, Intel already catched up, on windows (desktop for sure, you can get 200-2300 GK5 single cores)

Indeed that would be stagnation. Even Intel from Gen to Gen there would be SOME design improvement, like they would not reuse the exact same core from last year...

 

[TheGrinch67]

Indeed that would be stagnation. Even Intel from Gen to Gen there would be SOME design improvement, like they would not reuse the exact same core from last year...

I think that's due to the chip supply situation, that probably they would have hoped to release them sooner. But now I fear that they'll delay M2 not to steal the light from the M1Xs, because M2 macs will be faster for most people than those Pro. So either apple plays marketing-wise, and they delay M2Xs to 2023, risking to be late vs intel, or they'll do the best technically meaning M2Xs next year and regain their absolute lead. But I fear they'll choose marketing approach, especially in those chip constrained times.