Apple is in a position to take it ALL(PC,Server,Embedded)

[genisboy]

Just now, igormp said:

And those aren't used for any CPU-intensive scenario. They are pretty good for IO-blocking stuff since they'll consume less power and the CPU power itself won't be necessary. They are cheaper for a reason.

 

Nvidia is going to build a platform where the compute focus relies on the GPU, the CPU just needs to throw data around and offer data buses for communication, nothing else.

As I said current benchmarks as posted above show that it beats Intel and AMD single threaded performance so saying it's weak is stupid. I never said that they copete with their cpu against Nvidias gpu but that they have the potentia (far more than Intel) to become a competitor to Nvidia when they eventually make theiur own dedictaed gpu's

[Nayr438]

31 minutes ago, genisboy said:

Their geekbecnh 5 benchmarks give them the Highest overall single thread performance beating even AMD and Intel desktop cpu's by a mile. ill add the link later

 

here is the benchmark link

 

https://thenextweb.com/plugged/2020/11/12/first-apple-silicon-geekbench-results-m1-macbook-pro-air-mac-mini-analysis/

 

in these benchmarks they beat everything AMD and intel have to offer in single threaded and performance per watt BY A MILE

Benchmarking completely different architectures on different Operating Systems is a bad performance comparison.

There are way to many factors that alter those results. For instance you can run the same benchmark on Linux and Windows on the exact same hardware and get vastly different results.

 

The chances of Apple taking over any market they are not already in is fairly slim and probably not the primary target. In the server space, Apples products are far to expensive and not user serviceable. This could result in even more expensive repairs and more downtime in the server space. In terms of DIY, that's one thing Apple wants to prevent.

 

We also have no idea what Apple may be giving up to obtain the performance they do on these chips.

[genisboy]

1 minute ago, Arika S said:

......?

 

Have you completely been missing the point of what i've been saying?

 

Apple's stuff will run better on their stuff

No guarantee it will run as good on non-Apple stuff

Soz been replying to a bunch of people this thread is on fire. Your statement is mostly towards Apple entering the DIY market right? I am mixed on that too and said Apple would do good not to enter it and if they Do only with an overpriced product just to make a statement. But what exactly can Apple really fine tune more than any other OEM? Thunderbolt and macOS are the only things that come to mind. And i would expect people to run macOS with their DIY Apple silicon.

3 minutes ago, Nuclear_Fermion said:

Honestly, you might be right. If the beta testers (those who just bought a silicon Mac) don’t find any issues then yeah, Apple can potentially take it all, smallest consumer grade lithography, more efficient chips and Apple already has experience baking in GPUs and hardware defined security. I could be talking smack but they have a legitimate chance here IMO.

Thanks for reading this thread. It's great to see people agreeing with me for once

[Eigenvektor]

10 minutes ago, genisboy said:

As I said current benchmarks as posted above show that it beats Intel and AMD single threaded performance so saying it's weak is stupid. I never said that they copete with their cpu against Nvidias gpu but that they have the potentia (far more than Intel) to become a competitor to Nvidia when they eventually make theiur own dedictaed gpu's

Top Single-Core Geekbench 5 CPU Result: 2181 points (AMD 5900X)

Top result from article you linked: 1714 points (Apple Silicon on MacBookPro)

 

The results shown in the article don't seem to be comparable, they don't mention the version they were obtained on. So Geekbench's own results refute that claim.

[genisboy]

6 minutes ago, Nayr438 said:

Benchmarking completely different architectures on different Operating Systems is a bad performance comparison.

There are way to many factors that alter those results. For instance you can run the same benchmark on Linux and Windows on the exact same hardware and get vastly different results.

The chances of Apple taking over any market they are not already in is fairly slim and probably not the primary target. In the server space, Apples products are far to expensive and not user serviceable. This could result in even more expensive repairs and more downtime in the server space. In terms of DIY, that's one thing Apple wants to prevent.

 

We also have no idea what Apple may be giving up to obtain the performance they do on these chips.

Geekbench is probably the closest we can get to (atleast roughly) compare those different setups

 

Basicaly If Apple lower their price to a reasonable Level and if what they say about their performance is true, they win is what you are saying, no?

[Blademaster91]

17 minutes ago, genisboy said:

I should have said A14 instead of M.1 for that purpose. Companies already deal with proprietary Nvidia hardware though?

Nvidia Quadro, Tesla, or Titan cards aren't limited to a platform.

You can only run an Apple mac with their hardware,and with the ARM chips you're forced to use their software, I doubt companies already running Linux based AMD or Intel servers would want to deal with Apple.

16 minutes ago, Arika S said:

......?

 

Have you completely been missing the point of what i've been saying?

 

Apple's stuff will run better on their stuff

No guarantee it will run as good on non-Apple stuff

Thats no different than Apple hardware running an Intel cpu, their stuff will run better with their stuff, running anything else there can be problems or software will run worse.

[genisboy]

9 minutes ago, Eigenvektor said:

Top Single-Core Geekbench 5 CPU Result: 2181 points (AMD 5900X)

Top result from article you linked: 1714 points (Apple Silicon on MacBookPro)

 

The results shown in the article don't seem to be comparable, they don't mention the version they were obtained on. So Geekbench's own results refute that claim.

https://technosports.co.in/2020/11/13/amd-ryzen-9-5900x-crushes-geekbench-database-totally/

 

they said to take those benchmarks with a pinch of salt as there is no officially announced ryzen imacpro and earlier claims of an imacpro ryzen 5950x have been refuted...

[igormp]

20 minutes ago, genisboy said:

As I said current benchmarks as posted above show that it beats Intel and AMD single threaded performance so saying it's weak is stupid

Did you just ignore my previous post? I said that you shouldn't take a single benchmark for granted, specially one that favors some ISAs way more than others, and which take advantage of coprocessors not found in every CPU.

 

Looks like you don't want to discuss, but rather have people agreeing with you.

[genisboy]

2 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

Nvidia Quadro, Tesla, or Titan cards aren't limited to a platform.

You can only run an Apple mac with their hardware,and with the ARM chips you're forced to use their software, I doubt companies already running Linux based AMD or Intel servers would want to deal with Apple.

 

But what you are saying is that you will need an Apple motherboard to run their Apple Cpu. This is to be expected. You will need an Amd Or intel board to run their stuff too? Apple's future dedicated Gpu's would also not be limited by a platform.

[Nayr438]

Just now, genisboy said:

Geekbench is probably the closest we can get to (atleast roughly) compare those different setups

 

Basicaly If Apple lower their price to a reasonable Level and if what they say about their performance is true, they win is what you are saying, no?

It might be the closest, but the problem is that they are not directly comparable in any way. Apples silicon could be much worse or much better, regardless of the silicon however, it will also come down to the software itself. 

 

The chances of Apple lowering prices enough to make it worthwhile is slim to none. The non serviceability will also be another major hit. The chances of Apple being adopted any more than it already has is unlikely. However that's not really Apples target either. So it depends on what you consider a win. For Apple this is a win regardless as they have more control, for everyone else, no not really. As far as your original post goes, no it does not put them in a place to eat away at AMD, Intel, or NVIDIA.

[genisboy]

3 minutes ago, igormp said:

Did you just ignore my previous post? I said that you shouldn't take a single benchmark for granted, specially one that favors some ISAs way more than others, and which take advantage of coprocessors not found in every CPU.

 

Looks like you don't want to discuss, but rather have people agreeing with you.

Come on don't get upset. This is all currently hypothetical. I am just saying WHAT if Apple says Is TRUE? We will know next week. But if What they say is true aren't they the best you can get then?

[Nuclear_Fermion]

Guys can we just cool it for a second? We’re missing the fact that intel refused to budge from old architecture and lithography and that AMD may have pulled a greedo in all of this. The fact is Apple is setting an interesting precedent insofar as it will be one of the first major tech companies to have all of its hardware entirely designed in house, it’ll lead to some interesting performance and might trigger other companies to follow (dell, hp etc.)

[genisboy]

2 minutes ago, Nayr438 said:

It might be the closest, but the problem is that they are not directly comparable in any way. Apples silicon could be much worse or much better, regardless of the silicon however, it will also come down to the software itself. 

 

The chances of Apple lowering prices enough to make it worthwhile is slim to none. The non serviceability will also be another major hit. The chances of Apple being adopted any more than it already has is unlikely. However that's not really Apples target either. So it depends on what you consider a win. For Apple this is a win regardless as they have more control, for everyone else, no not really. As far as your original post goes, no it does not put them in a place to eat away at AMD, Intel, or NVIDIA.

Yeah we will have to wait for next week for Linus to bench it. i doubt he will let that chance slip. He is very excited about Apple silicon. Way more than I am.

 

Why exactly would they not lower prices to enter the server market? They never had anything real to offer to them till this point. TYhis is totally different they now could have a superior product. 

[DavidKalinowski]

55 minutes ago, genisboy said:

But what you are saying is that you will need an Apple motherboard to run their Apple Cpu. This is to be expected. You will need an Amd Or intel board to run their stuff too? Apple's future dedicated Gpu's would also not be limited by a platform.

Thats the thing though, this apple silicon is not just a CPU. its an SOC(system on Chip) the CPU,RAM, GPU, memory controler, etc are integrated into one unit. They basically took the ipad pro hardware, upgraded it, and slapped it into macbooks.

 

Even if they do show up more powerful than their PC counter parts, being technically better wont necessarily win the day.  betamax vs VHS, BLu-Ray vs HD-DVD, Sega Dreamcast etc. It will be interesting to see what apple does have in store though, for all we know you could be right and they might be planning to try and take over other industries lol

[Eigenvektor]

49 minutes ago, Nuclear_Fermion said:

The fact is Apple is setting an interesting precedent insofar as it will be one of the first major tech companies to have all of its hardware entirely designed in house, it’ll lead to some interesting performance and might trigger other companies to follow (dell, hp etc.)

Apple has always designed their own hardware, with the exception of x86 CPUs. They were involved in the earlier PowerPC. They gave it up when they couldn't keep pace with Intel.

 

I doubt Dell, HP, etc. are going to do that, unless you expect them to design their own OS to run on top of it as well. Unless Microsoft makes Windows for ARM widely available and achieves feature-parity. Apple can do this thing since they control everything, hardware and software.

[Nayr438]

1 hour ago, genisboy said:

Yeah we will have to wait for next week for Linus to bench it. i doubt he will let that chance slip. He is very excited about Apple silicon. Way more than I am.

 

Why exactly would they not lower prices to enter the server market? They never had anything real to offer to them till this point. TYhis is totally different they now could have a superior product. 

They used to offer server products, not sure if they still do. The problem then was software, then slowly leading up to serviceability. The same I would imagine would still hold true. MacOS isn't a targeted Operated System in the server space outside of businesses use.

Then we also have the transition of x86 to ARM, something that with further increase initial cost from a software standpoint.

We also have to consider upgradability, which is something Apple is typically against. When they are not against it, it usually means that parts are near double cost and need to be installed by a Apple certified Tech, which could mean sending it off or paying Apple to send someone out. So now we are talking possibly more downtime and further increasing cost.

And while you could staff a Certified Apple Tech, which you would probably want, the ones you can staff can't touch most of the system.

Apple has a very strict and locked down process, something that is not beneficial for server use regardless of cost.

[foldingNoob]

2 hours ago, genisboy said:

Apple and their vast wealth and expertise

careful with this claim. Apple is the new kid on the block for servers.

2 hours ago, genisboy said:

Apple said it has the Best integrated graphics beating anything AMD and intel have to offer

do servers need integrated graphics?

2 hours ago, genisboy said:

Highest single thread performance of any general purpose cpu

have they achieved this by cutting out instructions/features that server software needs? I remember intel did this with their low power mobile CPUs in the past.

 

 

 

 

[Silentprototipe]

2 hours ago, genisboy said:

• Highest single thread performance of any general purpose cpu
• is Only 10 Watt yet on par with AMD 65-95 Watt TDP zen 3 cpu's
• Apple said it has the Best integrated graphics beating anything AMD and intel have to offer
• Best in class neural network.

This is all said by Apple themselves. Take what they say with a large pinch of salt especially with how vague they were being. On top of the fact that this is ARM were talking about. X86 and ARM performance cant be compared easily (Geekbench is a poor way of comparing performance between em). Believe me I want to believe Apple genuinely pulled something like this off but we can only wait until actual reviews of it come out 

[foldingNoob]

14 minutes ago, Nayr438 said:

They used to offer server products, not sure if they still do.

before the intel nuc I used to see mac minis in small offices running as file & print servers. A software engineer told me he loves using macs for running older printers.

[Mark Kaine]

They should give it to Nintendo. Finally a Switch PRO worthy of its name /s

[RoseLuck462]

19 hours ago, RollinLower said:

i feel like you're pretty grossly overestimating the M.1 chip.

sure it's pretty great. but it's nowhere near server-level or even high-end consumer level performance. 

 

also, DIY and Apple? have you seen what apple has been doing lately?

 

Well obviously the M1 is just the first gen step so future iterations will definitely make OP's claims much more realistic.

[Ωmegα]

Yikes. So many biased replies. The post itself is biased.

 

Apple is not a god, calm your tits.

[Orange1]

9 minutes ago, Ωmegα said:

Yikes. So many biased replies. The post itself is biased.

 

Apple is not a god, calm your tits.

It seems Apple is either everything or its nothing.

[Donut417]

On 11/13/2020 at 8:13 AM, genisboy said:

/discuss

I dont see this happening.

 

Why?

 

Well firstly do you see other phones running iOS? Do you see other computers LEGALLY running MacOS? The answer is no. Apple likes to have a closed ecosystem. They like to have control. Apple is not known for share is tech or software with others. The only way any servers or embedded systems will come to light is if Apple makes them. It would be very hard for Apple to really get in to the server space in a meaningful capacity. Microsoft Windows Server and Linux to a great degree (I think Novell has even moved its OS to Linux) pretty much owns the pie at this point. Its the same reason why Microsoft failed at Windows mobile, because Apple and Google owned the market by the time Microsoft gave a shit. 

 

Now Im not going to say that Apple's CPU is not impressive. Though Id like to see detailed reviews and benchmarks before giving them a pat on the back. The other fact is these are first gen desktop CPU's from Apple. I dont have the highest hopes because they are first gen. Like Linus was saying on the WAN show, this is kinda like a beta product. Apple is going to pay attention to how well it does, and make the necessary adjustments for gen 2 and beyond. It might take a generation or two before these products are really GREAT. 

[RaddedMC]

Hopefully if Apple does take over the CPU/GPU market the US. Gov will force them to break apart / sell chips to others so we can all reap the benefits