New 16-Inch MacBook Pro With M1 Max to Feature High Power Mode for Intensive Workloads

[Sf844]

Except that turbo typically slowed the machine down

You mean you used to keep Turbo mode ON all the time?

Are you a rock star or something?

 

[HylianKnight]

Sure - it has a 100W battery so will be larger. But is there a screenshot showing internals of the 14" and 16" so that we can compare the heatsinks?

I’m sure ifixit will have a teardown within a day or two of release.

 

[Codpeace]

Why they do my 14” dirty like that.

This **** made me literally lol.

 

[BreakYurAnkles]

I’m sure ifixit will have a teardown within a day or two of release.

livestream on launch day most likely.

 

[Taz Mangus]

Geekbench is more of a short burst test, so I'd expect thermals wouldn't play a leading role in the difference in per-core speeds for single-core vs. multi-core operation.

I would be interested to see GeekBench run in Low Power mode, norm mode and High Power mode.

 

[theorist9]

PugetBench for Premiere Pro 0.95.1 and Premiere Pro 15.4.1 for the M1 Max, posted today by Tom's Hardware (Oct. 22, 2021). This is a mixed CPU+GPU test. The overall score for the M1 Max (1168) beats the 3080-equipped Alienware x17 R1 (872) and 3060-equipped Zephyrus M16 (924) laptops, and about equals the 16-Core Ryzen 5950X/3080 Ti (1196) desktop.

[The competing laptops and desktops use NVIDIA laptop and desktop GPU's respectively. As a rough rule-of-thumb, the desktop version outperforms the laptop version by ~1.5x - 2x.]

You can see the M1 Max is especially well-optimized for video playback, beating out all the laptops and desktops. A 3090-equipped machine (laptop or desktop) would beat it for gaming performance, but this machine was not designed for playing games.

 

[mi7chy]

Premiere Pro on x64 is known to run like a pig though. Guess the handicap is handy.

 

[mrhick01]

I think you mean 100Wh... 100Mwh is what 10 average US homes use in a year.... or one 16" Intel MBP running Chrome.

Here's what a 100MWh battery looks like...

Yes, what you said, and not the whole field thingie.

 

[VArase]

Why they do my 14” dirty like that.

It's bigger so it has more thermal headroom.

 

[VArase]

That makes sense - the M1 Max 16" is a little heavier than the Pro, while the M1 Max 14" is the same weight as the M1 Pro 14". This probably means the 16" with the Max has a beefier thermal system.

We just have to wait and see what the differences are. I'm still sticking with the 14" unless this is a dramatic, dramatic difference which I doubt it is. 4.7 lbs vs. 3.5 lbs is a huge difference. Somethings have to give - and in this case, it's battery life and maybe a little bit of performance.

If you buy the 16" with the M1 Max it's about .1 lb heavier.

They obviously put in extra cooling ... the M1 Max isn't any heavier.

The 14" with an M1 Max isn't any heavier.

 

[VArase]

So after spending 3,200 grand… I can’t utilize the M1 Max to the fullest potential I upgraded to, because I bought a smaller screen? ?‍♂️

Cancel or return it and get a 16".

 

[VArase]

That makes sense - the M1 Max 16" is a little heavier than the Pro, while the M1 Max 14" is the same weight as the M1 Pro 14". This probably means the 16" with the Max has a beefier thermal system.

We just have to wait and see what the differences are. I'm still sticking with the 14" unless this is a dramatic, dramatic difference which I doubt it is. 4.7 lbs vs. 3.5 lbs is a huge difference. Somethings have to give - and in this case, it's battery life and maybe a little bit of performance.

I would expect the 16" to have better thermals even without the high power mode.

Bigger fans means better air flow.

 

[VArase]

I'm betting Apple defaults to running these cool and quiet, as they tended to before the whole 2016 thinning. Maybe this is like a go ham mode, and we'll see even more impressive figures than we have. With the big cores still at 3.2GHz, it seems they haven't budged past a certain efficiency point compared to M1, but this mode may let it go a bit more wild.

" In multi-core performance, the M1 Max is up to 2x faster than M1."

Ok, why has every news site decided 11,500 is 2x 7600 from the M1? That's closer to 50%. Double would be a score of 15200. It's like the first site said so and the rest never checked the math lol

It's up to 2x faster - but they plainly stated it's 70% faster.

Benchmarks are usually a composite of numerous common tasks; at some it's probably twice as fast. As a composite though, it's probably 70% faster.

 

[VArase]

This would explain the relatively poor showing in Geekbench 5 compute test. If the M1 Max is throttled to about the equivalent of a 24 core GPU instead of 32 then the benchmark makes sense.

Nah, those are probably 32 cord stats.

If you multiply it out, even if speed advanced linearly with the number of cores, the speed exceeds three times the 8 cores of the M1.

There are probably serialization and dispatch bottlenecks.

 

[BreakYurAnkles]

Personally, and actually,

(If) I'm planning on spending $2xxx.xx-$6xxx.xx dollars on one of these machines. I'd rather wait for you rich early adopters figure out the nuances for me.

Figure out the good and the bad of each model and processors, then make a purchase decision.

You'll thank me later.

let the games begin.