Nice try at downplaying the M1's graphics because no matter which way you try to spin the nonsense you're putting out the GTX 1050ti is a great GPU. Doesn't matter if it's a 2-3 years old. It's still a very capable chip, and it's a dedicated GPU at that so for Apple's Integrated Graphics to match it (because Intel's crap iGPU's don't) is a marvel in itself. Try again.
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.
M1 Chip Beats GeForce GTX 1050 Ti and Radeon RX 560 for Graphics Performance
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh, I see, you're being obtuse on purpose. That makes sense.
NVIDIA hasn’t had real competition in the past decade. AMD is doing a shakedown of green and blue, and if they can get units into customers hands than they might be able to do something with their recent innovations. Intel should be nervous, but NVIDIA merely alert.
Really this comes down to a difference in culture. The people I’ve met at NVIDIA have never been satisfied with their work. I talked to an engineer last year and while he didn’t reveal anything you could tell he wasn’t happy about the 2000 series cards. Seeing what the 3000s look like I suspect he was championing for more time.
Yup. These guys are dummies. I have the latest MBA with an i7 and Iris whatever whatever. It doesn't even pretend to compete with those graphics cards. Anyone arguing just how good the M1 is either doesn't understand advancements or doesn't want to understand advancements. Knuckleheads who hug their Pentium 4s at night. lol
I don't think the "knuckleheads" are struggling to fathom what Apple has produced, but they are struggling to fathom why fanboys think this is some utopia.
It's a bit like saying Apple have made a much better Nissan Leaf and somehow that equates to be now making the best electric car available...it's not. For an iGPU is good, currently the best iGPU, but not the best GPU. They have come up with a iGPU that is about 50% faster than the latest Intel iGPU, great but hardly earth-shattering and will not materially make a dots bit of difference when playing "arcade style" games since most AAA games don't run on ARM...and that's the material point since the article compares the M1 with older "gaming cards"
What is this nonsense? GTX 1050ti is no not a great card, nobody would put that in their machine. However the performance of the ingreated graphics is indeed mind blowing, that fact is true and very impressive. But it has nothing to do with gaming or performance. It's like saying the new vw golf is way faster than a smart in a drag race and branding it a as a super car ;D. Still impressive for integreated, but a gamer would certainly not use a a macbook or Apple products in general. But excited for the future, hope they can release something that blows an rtx 3090 out of the water.. that would be a game changer for my workflow. Still nice to see the entry level domination.
How good is the Series X with Divinci Resolve or Blender, for example. I want to see some numbers.
Apple make toys that don't use a lot of power. So what? Yes, there is a huge market for toys, but that does not make them revolutionary, no matter how much money Apple spends saying its so.
There's nothing to not understand.
The M1 is:
* The first Mac processor using Arm.
* A LOW END processor. Sorry, but the MBP 13" is a low end machine, no matter how Apple spins it.
* Showing impressive numbers that previous low end Intel chips couldn't attain and still don't.
There's nobody in their right mind who believes this is an amazing gaming processor. But there's no Intel iGPU that can even pretend to be competing.
So, yes, it's impressive to see the M1, a low end, low-power-consuming processor competing with any discrete GPU.
I'm well aware this is not the best GPU on the market. For a very-first processor solely meant for low-end, good-battery-life machines, this thing is amazing and paints a very good picture of what's still coming.
When we think about GPUs, do we ONLY think about games on desktop PCs? Games are great, I'm a gamer, but most of my GPU computing time isn't games, especially in macOS.
Last edited:
What's the point of all this graphics performance if there are barely any proper games you can play on the Mac like Overwatch and Fortnite?
Whilst any news of faster GPU's in Apple products is always excellent news, and I hope Apple GPU's get faster and faster, I do feel we should see just where the GTX 1050 Ti stands on a graph.
Note: This graph is well over a year old, before the current cards came out.
(Hint, it's 3rd from the bottom)
Fully aware the M1 is in a low power laptop so we have to accept it's a long way from modern gaming standards.
Note: This graph is well over a year old, before the current cards came out.
(Hint, it's 3rd from the bottom)
Fully aware the M1 is in a low power laptop so we have to accept it's a long way from modern gaming standards.
Last edited:
Critics have likely rapidly calculated that M1 GPU is competitive and has difficulties to accept it. As GPU scale nearly linearily with cores and the number of cores approximately scale with power draw an Apple GPU at 2.5 TFLOPS (10W) would be 25 TFLOPS at 100W. The new 6900 XT draw 300 W. That would be 75 TFLOPS in Apple GPU At 300 W while AMD has 43...Not a walk over victory as in the CPU field but clearly competitive. Amazing what people can complain about.
These are really good benchmarks for the igpu in the M1, but until Apple works with all the major game studios to bring the best games natively to Mac then it’s kind of wasted. We should be getting titles like Witcher 3, Call of Duty, Ubisoft franchises etc on the Mac to play on the M chips but alas at this moment they are all on consoles and Windows.
I just want to remind people that the GeForce 1050Ti uses up to 75W as a stand-alone card.
The M1 uses only up to 15W for the entire SoC.
The M1 uses only up to 15W for the entire SoC.
It can run Capture One faster, much faster. It can run Affinity Photo and soon Adobe Photoshop faster. The GPU is not just for games, buy a PS5 if you want to play games.
Seems like an awful lot of people missing the point, perhaps intentionally. I've got a really good Mac mini, and I'll be the first to tell you that the only part of it that feels like a limitation is the Iris iGPU. If the M1 iGPU is in the class of a reasonably good mid-range discrete graphics card -- not a face-melter, but a good solid result -- then that's great news in the world of iGPUs.
When Apple can beat a GTX 2080 ti or the new 3080, I'll be impressed until then they are still playing catch up... but appreciate the efforts all the same.
What "effort"? You do know that Intel made the chips for those Macs, and that M1 is Apple's first Mac chip right?
This type of benchmarking is more important than CPU benchmarking. If the M1 actually beats the best integrated graphics in Intel chips then we might be able to consider the M1 is a challenge to Intel chips. But given the lack of real pro reviews yet we'll have to wait and see.
Then the article and plenty of others should stop comparing the performance with gaming cards then [albeit, old budget ones]