I'm but like everyone else this has to be 24 core so that is ok, I purchased the 32 core and I'm coming from a 5600m so I expect the 3x apple promised
... even if doesn't meet that I will be happy anyways its still a very nice upgrade for sure.
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.
MacBook Pro's M1 Max GPU is Over 3x Faster Than M1 in First Metal Benchmark
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
... even if doesn't meet that I will be happy anyways its still a very nice upgrade for sure.
If the leaked run is from the 24-core GPU, we can presume that the 32-core GPU may result in over 80K or even close to Radeon Pro VII.
If you look around on GitHub, you might find Apple’s SceneKit demos.
And if you run them in Xcode, you can get a glimpse of what the M1 Pro or M1 Max is capable of.
It looks like PS7 or something from 2040. Metal supports up to 8k textures. Open GL 2.0 is capped to 2048x2048.
The main issue is that most games are written in C# using the Unreal or Unity engine.
So… someone would have to port a game like Halo natively to Swift.
Which seems possible, but Microsoft owns it…
It looks like a 24 cores version. Because 32 core version has to be around 85000 base on M1's GPU performance.
M1's GPU performance is 21,000 base on the Geekbench. M1's GPU cores is 8 so 3 times will give you 63,000 which is the result above. For 32 cores, it will be 85,000.
M1's GPU performance is 21,000 base on the Geekbench. M1's GPU cores is 8 so 3 times will give you 63,000 which is the result above. For 32 cores, it will be 85,000.
I don't know about Unreal but export a game to Mac in Unity is fairly simple and easy.
Agreed. But I don’t think you can actually utilize Metal 8K textures if the game is cross platform.
Maybe I am mistaken?
Updated: OpenCL scores on M1 Max lower than Metal scores.
For comparison, RTX3060 70W is 43% faster with 17% more watt.
RTX3060 70W OpenCL Score 86390
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/3555295
M1 Max 60W OpenCL Score 60167
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/3551790
For comparison, RTX3060 70W is 43% faster with 17% more watt.
RTX3060 70W OpenCL Score 86390
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/3555295
M1 Max 60W OpenCL Score 60167
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/3551790
Last edited:
So OpenGL ES 2.0 on Android supports 2K max. OpenGL ES 3.x seems to support 4K, but it’s still Beta.
I think Switch runs Android, so a Unity port to Switch might be capped at 2K.
That doesn’t matter because Switch is 1080p.
Xbox and PS5 are 4K but might only use 2K textures.
Rendering a polygon in 4K is different than applying an 8K texture.
I think most textures in modern games are capped at 2k.
I think Switch runs Android, so a Unity port to Switch might be capped at 2K.
That doesn’t matter because Switch is 1080p.
Xbox and PS5 are 4K but might only use 2K textures.
Rendering a polygon in 4K is different than applying an 8K texture.
I think most textures in modern games are capped at 2k.
Last edited:
Close to [laptop] RTX 3080 which is currently the highest for gaming laptops.
We'll see the data but likely you won't see the leap over the m1 chip % wise as all these new chips are 10 core CPU vs 8 core CPU of the 8 core m1 chip
I ordered the 14" with 24-core GPU, and if this result is for that unit, I'd be quite happy!!!
I get very confused when researching Open GL.
Metal automagically works. You can try it yourself in Xcode using SceneKit.
I’m sure Apple has sent out test products of various configurations for review. I’m sure this is a 24-core version. Hopefully we start seeing hands on reviews this Friday…fingers crossed that’s when the embargo is lifted.
The reason devs use OpenGL ES is because it supports:
- iOS
- macOS
- Windows
- Linux
- PS5
- Xbox
- Switch
- Android
- ChromeOS
etc.
That was sort of my point in the first post. If you write a game for Apple using Swift / SceneKit / Metal you have:
- iOS / iPadOS
- macOS
- watchOS
- tvOS
So a 120HZ MacBook Pro with M1X might render the game at 120fps in 3K almost, but you might be capped to 512x512 textures…
From Google:
How big were PS2 textures?
In PS2 games the average size is 256x256. In future I think the average for PC will be 1024x1024 for most objects, though it might just stay at 512 for most. as for XBOX2 I think 1024x1024 will be the the larger texture size, with 512 and under for less important objects.Jan 19, 2005
- iOS
- macOS
- Windows
- Linux
- PS5
- Xbox
- Switch
- Android
- ChromeOS
etc.
That was sort of my point in the first post. If you write a game for Apple using Swift / SceneKit / Metal you have:
- iOS / iPadOS
- macOS
- watchOS
- tvOS
So a 120HZ MacBook Pro with M1X might render the game at 120fps in 3K almost, but you might be capped to 512x512 textures…
From Google:
How big were PS2 textures?
In PS2 games the average size is 256x256. In future I think the average for PC will be 1024x1024 for most objects, though it might just stay at 512 for most. as for XBOX2 I think 1024x1024 will be the the larger texture size, with 512 and under for less important objects.Jan 19, 2005
Last edited:
Very curious to see real world test comparisons between M1 Pro (16c) vs M1 Max (32c). I’m a photographer and would love to just go M1 Pro and 32GB RAM, but we’ll see.
No he seams to be right.You are comparing Metal score to OpenCL score buddy...
OpenCL M1 Max 32 core CPU 64GB memory
You can make an M3X Max Pro with a 300000 score but it’s not going to change the size of a Bitmap texture.
Given that's the GPU in last year's absolute-top-of-line 27" iMac, this is a pretty darned impressive result for something with a fraction of the energy consumption and thermals that work in a laptop.
If this is indeed the 24-core version, then this result is even more impressive. Extrapolating (quite a bit), it not all that far off the top-of-line mobile workstation GPUs in a vastly lower TDP, and seems like it'll live up to those over-simplified power-performance graphs.
I completely agree. Laptops have never been this powerful, historically…
What about the iPod Touch though?