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
No 64GB and 32Gb has the same 400Gb/s, just using 4x8 or 4x16 mem blocks, should be the same speed.
Yes it will make it a good gaming laptop, just need patience for AAA games which will come but that will take time.
It will be a better gaming laptop than anything Apple has released so far. I don't game anymore, and even if I game again, I only play world of warcraft, which is Metal native. So it'll run amazing on this machine.
I'm buying this for photo and video editing, and I think it'll be insanely good at those tasks.
The mini with m1 averages 30fps in shadow of the tomb raider at 1920x1080 high settings. So let's say, expected performance of this benchmarked gpu is 90 fps in that game with those settings.
That means performance somewhat between the 3050 and the 3060.
If that's the 24 core gpu, I am impressed. If it is the 32 core gpu it's a bit disappointing.
That means performance somewhat between the 3050 and the 3060.
If that's the 24 core gpu, I am impressed. If it is the 32 core gpu it's a bit disappointing.
Dude, I have literally ordered M1 Max with 24-core GPU, it was $200 cheaper than the 32-core version.
what are you talking about
No a 24c and 32 core version with M1X for both 32/64GB of ram, better check the Apple site please.
Correct, but why would Apple provide reviewers with a handicapped 24c version that is not even listed as a standard config let alone advertised? The amount of irrational believers here is unbelievable.
Unless Apple supports SDK/API etc like Microsoft supports DirectX, there is no way big devs would jump in and port their PC games onto Mac if Apple changes those things every single friking year during a multi year long development project, or expect more Monument Valley type of lightweight game where 24 GPU core is completely overkill.
Or, just own it and publicly declare no macOS gaming support from this point onwards since Apple has nothing else to lose anyways after they abandon OpenGL and 32bit support. Who cares about Apple Arcade on Mac anyways? We have 3D rendering and cinematic world where their performance demand is uncapped and explode every so often. Also things like fluid simulation could benefit from powerful GPU.
Game development company may also be unwilling to spend double the amount on game engine and underlying code development just for a still niche gaming market, and MacBook Air means even if they do, those games can‘t be that demanding anyways otherwise MacBook Air can’t run it.
All in all, AAA title coming to Mac is unlikely, and extra unlikely to have amazing graphics just because there are $4000 MacBook Pro that has 24 GPU cores. Enjoy those powerful GPU, science researcher, 3D modelling, Cinematic etc industry. MacBook Pro might be the best machine for those stuff without gaming distracting employees.
Or, just own it and publicly declare no macOS gaming support from this point onwards since Apple has nothing else to lose anyways after they abandon OpenGL and 32bit support. Who cares about Apple Arcade on Mac anyways? We have 3D rendering and cinematic world where their performance demand is uncapped and explode every so often. Also things like fluid simulation could benefit from powerful GPU.
Game development company may also be unwilling to spend double the amount on game engine and underlying code development just for a still niche gaming market, and MacBook Air means even if they do, those games can‘t be that demanding anyways otherwise MacBook Air can’t run it.
All in all, AAA title coming to Mac is unlikely, and extra unlikely to have amazing graphics just because there are $4000 MacBook Pro that has 24 GPU cores. Enjoy those powerful GPU, science researcher, 3D modelling, Cinematic etc industry. MacBook Pro might be the best machine for those stuff without gaming distracting employees.
Yep, which is $1,200 alone and comes packed with it’s own fan
Or ever. Performance alone is not enough incentives to develop Mac exclusive title. We are not in 1984 anymore.
Apple has Metal (as we see the score in this bench), but there aren't enough gamers on Mac, so companies aren't that interested.
OpenGL was ancient and not many games use it, and for Vulkan there is already MoltenVK.
The lack of games are mostly because companies don't earn that much by porting games to Macs, maybe this will change now that the Macbooks are so powerful, even the M1 can handle games very nicely!
But fear not, there are already some really good native games,
Baldur's Gate 3 is native ARM64 definitely AAA,
Disco Elysium is also native ARM64 now on App Store,
There is also World of Warcraft.
Timberborn is not AAA but a really nice native game in development.
I really hope we will see more AAA games soon now that the whole world is excited about M1 Pro and M1 Max.
I got Asus RX 580 OC 8GB desktop version's 41000 from that card on Intel i9 machine.
68000 corresponds to more modern AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 8GB desktop version, retails for 1k dollars or so.
In other words, we got a desktop-class graphic cards in new Macbooks.
Which is very fine
68000 corresponds to more modern AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 8GB desktop version, retails for 1k dollars or so.
In other words, we got a desktop-class graphic cards in new Macbooks.
Which is very fine
I don't think Apple will release an M1 variant on the Mac Pro.
If I had to bet, next year we will have: 27'' iMac sucessor with M1 Pro/Max, Mac Mini with M1 Pro/Max, then M2 Macbook Air in the middle of the year.
Then in the end of the year, M2 Pro/Max refresh for the 14''/16'' Macbook Pro's. By that time, the M2 Max will offer more options than the M1 Pro. This year the difference from Pro and Max is GPU basically. Next year certainly we will have more difference CPU wise.
M2 Pro could be an 8-10 core cpu like the M1 Pro. M2 Max could be 10-16 core. Then, on the Mac Pro, you could have 2x M2 Max, which would give you 32 cores... Basically replacing the current top end Mac Pro which is a 28 core setup... 2x M2 Max being 32 cores would be... 28 performance cores and 4 energy efficiency ones...
So it adds up, at least.
In regards to Vram actually better than most desktop cards even. Suppose that you could use 48 Gb as Vram on the 64 GB Max that would leave 16 GB for System Memory.
That is Nvidia RTX A6000 Vram level and that is a 5k card.
I thinks a lot of people “ignored” that imortance when they said it in the keynote with the space ship
[Edit: ignore this - I didn't see the Radeon 5600M line at the bottom - and it's clearly indicating the M1 Max has about 4x the performance (however, they are measuring it). It probably isn't with Geekbench 5 though, because there is a huge gap between 68,000 and about 160,000]
The slide states 4x MBP16 - which could have the lowest GPU config (Radeon Pro 5300M), which has a Metal score of about 23,000 IIRC.
So the 32-core GPU *could* be about 90,000...
Personally, I'm not convinced that what we're seeing is the 24-core GPU, and we might be disappointed. Alternatively, Geekbench may be under-reporting. Let's see real-world comparisons in actual applications.
Even if the geekbench results are correct, I don't think it makes any sense to compare Apple Silicon with previous chipsets.
I have an iMac 5K 2017 with 4 Core i7 at 4.2 Ghz and Radeon Pro 580.
On paper and Geekbench it's faster than my iPad Pro 2020.
But run the exact same app on the iPad and iMac, the iPad runs circles around the iMac for the exact same tasks. But you will not see this on Geekbench. And this is the iPad with A12Z, not M1 even.
Love all the speculation. Just need to wait for real world results people before getting your nickers in a bind.
All, lots of games on Mac. Not as many AAA, but I find those titles to be over priced, filled with stupid online connection only requirements, and massive in file size. IMO, most AAA titles provide less entertainment for me than most of the Mom and Pops or two guys in a basement style studios.
If you want native intel/M1 MacOS online games you got WoW and EVEonline (they just release a native Mac client, it runs beautifully on my i7 2018 Mac mini with 32GB ram with an 580 in a eGPU.
If you want games on a Mac, don’t hold your breath for AAA, go find those hidden treasures and have way more fun.
All, lots of games on Mac. Not as many AAA, but I find those titles to be over priced, filled with stupid online connection only requirements, and massive in file size. IMO, most AAA titles provide less entertainment for me than most of the Mom and Pops or two guys in a basement style studios.
If you want native intel/M1 MacOS online games you got WoW and EVEonline (they just release a native Mac client, it runs beautifully on my i7 2018 Mac mini with 32GB ram with an 580 in a eGPU.
If you want games on a Mac, don’t hold your breath for AAA, go find those hidden treasures and have way more fun.
If Apple can transition the Mac to a whole new architecture in just 2 years, it is not impossible goal to have all 50 most-played game on Steam being adapted to have a native support for Apple Silicon. If Apple wants that, they can achieved it. For example, Apple could offer Blizzard-Activison a 2-3 years exemption from AppStore fees if they bring their best games to the Mac.
I think Apple's plan on gaming is as follows:
Transition the Mac to Apple Silicon. That way basically any iOS game runs on Mac, but more importantly any iOS developer can also easily develop games for the Mac or port their iOS games to Mac.
This grows the developer base for Mac gaming to a whole new level never seen before since there are tons of iOS developers who do not develop for the Mac, yet.
Together with this growth I think we'll see many more AAA titles for the Mac in the upcoming years.