Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Apple Destroyed my Expectations.

We finally got our hands on Apple Silicon and put it through its paces to answer the question on everyone’s mind: Can it really replace Intel and provide a smooth desktop experience?

 

 

Buy Apple Mac Mini M1
On Amazon (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/JEzh
On Best Buy (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/mmRBV
On B&H (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/b8lWK1

Anthony @ LINUS MEDIA GROUP             

I'm a handsome man with a charming personality. - Gabe Newell

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, GabenJr said:

We finally got our hands on Apple Silicon and put it through its paces to answer the question on everyone’s mind: Can it really replace Intel and provide a smooth desktop experience?

 

 

Buy Apple Mac Mini M1
On Amazon (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/JEzh
On Best Buy (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/mmRBV
On B&H (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/b8lWK1

Now that's automatic beyond belief! 

~New~  BoomBerryPi project !  ~New~


new build log : http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/533392-build-log-the-scrap-simulator-x/?p=7078757 (5 screen flight sim for 620$ CAD)LTT Web Challenge is back ! go here  :  http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/448184-ltt-web-challenge-3-v21/#entry601004

Link to post
Share on other sites

and my wallet.

PC specs:

Ryzen 9 3900X overclocked to 4.3-4.4 GHz

Corsair H100i platinum

32 GB Trident Z RGB 3200 MHz 14-14-14-34

RTX 2060

MSI MPG X570 Gaming Edge wifi

NZXT H510

Samsung 860 EVO 500GB

2 TB WD hard drive

Corsair RM 750 Watt

ASUS ROG PG248Q 

Razer Ornata Chroma

Razer Firefly 

Razer Deathadder 2013

Logitech G935 Wireless

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SlashedM said:

Anyone have this wallpaper?

E81F5E51-07B5-4427-8E44-53C488B7DA4C.png

 

Anthony @ LINUS MEDIA GROUP             

I'm a handsome man with a charming personality. - Gabe Newell

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GabenJr said:

 

Thanks Anthony!

Chicago Bears fan, Bear Down

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be very interesting to see how good Apple can scale this up. Because otherwise x86 will rule supreme.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the chart written 5600 (without x), a typo or a clue....??

Ryzen 2600 @ 4ghz | Radeon RX580 | 32gb HyperX 3200mhz | 500gb Samsung PM981a | 5 TB HDD | Corsair CX450

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't help but look at this image and wonder.
"Why such a specific number?"
image.thumb.png.2e67b2adaae2374924d806350e6d667f.png
Like nothing wrong with expecting roughly 2x performance from having 2x as many cores in a highly multithreaded application.

Though there can be other bottlenecks and limitations when moving to a higher core count solution that limits that peak performance.
Partly due to Amdahl's law, but more realistically due to bandwidth, power stability, or just cooling.

I am personally of the opinion that it would have been better to put a range for the theoretical score, like 12000-14400. Since it is an estimate, and not real world performance at current. Though, maybe Apple has an 8 core chip as well and you are just "discretely" putting out an actual measured value, but I somehow doubt that, for multiple reasons....

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NeuesTestament said:

It would be very interesting to see how good Apple can scale this up. Because otherwise x86 will rule supreme.

Probably fairly well. Like Nystemy suggested, doubling the cores wouldn't necessarily lead to double the performance. But Apple has a knack for wringing a lot of performance out of its chips, and there's a real chance we'll be wondering how higher-end MacBook Pros and lower-end iMacs are competing well against higher-end PCs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

from my very limited testing I couldn't get more than 4 displays (on an RTX 2080S) with MST hubs, so I would assume if it's limited to 2 displays you probably won't be able to get more with an MST hub (though maybe Apple has a different limitation).

Current:
Eluktronics THICC-17 (Clevo X170SM-G):
CPU: i9-10900k @ Up to 5.3GHz (4.8GHz) all cores 
GPU: RTX 2080 Super (Max P 200W) @ 2025MHz
RAM: 32GB (4x8GB) @ 3200Mhz

Storage: 512GB PRO-X-G2R NVMe SSD, 4TB WD Passport USB-C
Displays: IPS 1080p@240Hz (G-Sync), Asus VG248QE 1080p @144hz, 2x Dell SE2417HGR 1080p @60Hz

Dell Poweredge R720 (Server):
CPUs: 2x Xeon E5-2667v2 @ 3.6Ghz all cores
RAM: 120GB (15x8GB) @ 1333Mhz

Storage: 1x Intel 160GB SATA III SSD, 15x Seagate SAS Enterprise 1TB HDD in RAID 6

 

Old:

Eluktronics Mech-17 G1Rx:
CPU: i7-9750h @ 4.0GHz all cores
GPU: RTX 2070 @ 2004Mhz/(~1650Mhz)
RAM: 16GB (2x8GB) @ 2666Mhz
Storage: 512GB HP SX920, 4TB WD Passport USB-C
Displays: BOE NV173FHM-N44 1080p@144Hz, Asus VG248QE 1080p @144hz, 2x Dell SE2417HGR 1080p @60Hz
Custom SFF AMD Sleeper (Parted out and sold/sent to friends)
Dell Precision M6700 (both GPUs died, among other issues, officially shelved for now...)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GabenJr said:

We finally got our hands on Apple Silicon and put it through its paces to answer the question on everyone’s mind: Can it really replace Intel and provide a smooth desktop experience?

 

 

Buy Apple Mac Mini M1
On Amazon (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/JEzh
On Best Buy (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/mmRBV
On B&H (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/b8lWK1

Still doesn't know how to read a graph I see

Dirty Windows Peasants :P ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NeuesTestament said:

It would be very interesting to see how good Apple can scale this up. Because otherwise x86 will rule supreme.

Scale up and put a real gpu in. They were nice enough on the video not to use 2070S in Blender with optix or not to do a gpu enabled Davinci Resolve benchmark.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How does this thing breathe? Looks like the entire underside is covered with that giant black plastic foot.

 

image.thumb.png.8970f06455f96de2b524a7deaf710eac.png

 

And underneath there are ventelation holes? I'm confused.

 

image.png.b5b2b2486346483b7ae7b938641c592b.png

05Gb/s - USB 3.2 Gen 1 (USB 3.0)

10Gb/s - USB 3.2 Gen 2

20Gb/s - USB 3.2 Gen 2x2

40Gb/s - USB 4.0, Thunderbolt 3, Thunderbolt 4

 

Some Wallpapers I created

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great work @GabenJr and Linus.

 

As some have seen I have a 16 GB M1 Mini and I, as a long time Mac user, am very happy with it. 

 

Only thing I thing you should have emphasized more on is the responsiveness of the system (I just don't know how you could do that), because that is a thing I feel is hard to get across to people that haven't tried an M1 Mac. 

 

Also someone at LMG should get Linus to daily drive a M1 mac for a month, I would like to see what Linus would think of a macOS once he has used it long enough to get out of the "it should be this way because it is like this in windows" mentality. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I misreading this chart? It looks like the i7 Mac Mini was beating the M1 by 23 seconds (12:32 on YouTube). Other than that I loved the video.

M1 Mac Mini Mystake.PNG

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, NeuesTestament said:

It would be very interesting to see how good Apple can scale this up. Because otherwise x86 will rule supreme.

There’s already large scale use of ARM chips in servers. I think Apple has already had that figured out especially for the likes of the future Mac Pro refresh, heck they can even bring back Xserve should they wish if only macOS Server is as good as Fedora, RHEL, or even Windows Server. 

There is more that meets the eye
I see the soul that is inside

 

Making Windows Defender as good or even better than paid options

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrote a short comment on floatplane about Prime95, but want to expand here now I tried to do some more digging.

 

Prime95 makes good use of FP64 resources, mainly through AVX instructions of modern x86 CPUs although older SIMD instructions are also supported. At least since Sandy Bridge and Zen. It is also the case these instructions consume relatively higher power than average. So x86 CPUs running hot on Prime95 relies on the CPU having a good FP64 execution rate. FMA instructions were added with Haswell which saw a good jump in performance over Sandy Bridge. Zen always supported FMA, but Zen and Zen+ only had two 128-bit execution units, and didn't match Intel's two 256-bit execution units until Zen 2. 

 

My concern is that we don't know how well the M1 runs Prime95 x86 code. If it runs it poorly, this will show up as lower power consumption. So throughput of Prime95 needs to be checked and compared also. There is a built in benchmark which will run various FFT sizes and give a throughput score. Different size FFTs can't be directly compared with each other. A rule of thumb guide is that FFT size multiplied by 8 gives the data set size. Multiply by number of workers for effective total data set size. A worker may have multiple threads working on the same data. The total data set size may be compared to L3 cache size to see if it can run "on CPU" or if it then also becomes subject to ram bandwidth considerations at bigger sizes. For time efficiency it may be worth manually running a small and large FFT size for comparison, as opposed to the whole range.

 

Quote

The four 128-bit NEON pipelines thus on paper match the current throughput capabilities of desktop cores from AMD and Intel, albeit with smaller vectors. Floating-point operations throughput here is 1:1 with the pipeline count, meaning Firestorm can do 4 FADDs and 4 FMULs per cycle with respectively 3 and 4 cycles latency. That’s quadruple the per-cycle throughput of Intel CPUs and previous AMD CPUs, and still double that of the recent Zen3, of course, still running at lower frequency.

From: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16226/apple-silicon-m1-a14-deep-dive/2

 

Above is the only write up on the FP execution potential of the M1 I've managed to find so far, and I find it confusingly written. 4x128-bit pipelines does match Intel since at least Sandy Bridge, and Zen 2, both of which essentially have two 256-bit execution units. It is unclear to me if the M1 can do FMULs across its entire width, or does it count separate FADDs to make up the numbers? I believe Intel and AMD can do FMAs across the width. Intel FMA latency is 4 cycles from memory (in Skylake), without looking up to double check, so that's comparable to the M1's FMUL. I don't see how the M1 can have higher cycle throughput as claimed in the article based on what's presented. In the best case I see parity. Also as far as I'm aware there was no change to the FP execution units in Zen 3 vs Zen 2 so I wouldn't expect a factor of two difference there.

Desktop Gaming system: Asrock Z370 Pro4, i7-8086k, Noctua D15, Corsair Vengeance Pro RGB 3200 4x16GB, Gigabyte 2070, NZXT E850 PSU, Cooler Master MasterBox 5, Optane 900p 280GB, Crucial MX200 1TB, Sandisk 960GB, Acer Predator XB241YU 1440p144 G-sync
TV Gaming system: Gigabyte Z490 Elite AC, i5-10600k, Noctua D15, Kingston HyperX RGB 4000@3600 2x8GB, EVGA 2080Ti Black, EVGA 850W, Corsair 230T, Crucial P1 1TB + MX500 1TB, LG OLED55B9PLA 4k120 G-Sync Compatible
Streaming system: Asus X299 TUF mark 2, i9-7920X, Noctua D15, Corsair Vengeance LPX RGB 3000 8x8GB, Asus Strix 1080Ti, Corsair HX1000i, GameMax Abyss, Samsung 970 Evo 500GB, Crucial BX500 1TB, BenQ XL2411 1080p144 + HP LP2475w 1200p60
Former Main system: Asus Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700k, Noctua D14, G.Skill Ripjaws V 3200 2x8GB, Gigabyte GTX 1650, Corsair HX750i, In Win 303 NVIDIA, Samsung SM951 512GB, WD Blue 1TB, Acer RT280k 4k60 FreeSync [link]
Gaming laptop: Asus FX503VD, i5-7300HQ, DDR4 2133 2x8GB, GTX 1050, Sandisk 256GB + 480GB SSD [link]


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who doesn't follow Apple's business plan, the switch the non-x86 (ARM I assume?) is somewhat surprising to me.

Anyone wanna enlighten me as to why Apple has made this move?

So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

Anyone wanna enlighten me as to why Apple has made this move?

1) Dramatically lower power consumption.

2) Potentially higher performance.

3) Lower heat output.

4) Bigger control over their own release schedule. A delay from Intel will no longer delay upgrades of Apple's own products.

5) Easier to maintain compatibility and share resources with their iPhone and iPad development and designs.

6) Probably lower cost for the manufacturing of the chips. If they are buying chips from Intel, Intel wants to make a profit as well. If Apple makes their own chips, they do not have to share the profits with Intel.

 

There are also a lot of drawbacks, such as a massive risk, and needing a ton of investment, but a lot of that is something they are already doing because they develop their own iPhone and iPad chips.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Bigger control over their own release schedule

I thought nVidia was trying to buy ARM, is this a case of Apple licensing the ability to produce their own ARM chips so they control the workflow (so to speak) and what happens to ARM (the company) is immaterial?

 

So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

As someone who doesn't follow Apple's business plan, the switch the non-x86 (ARM I assume?) is somewhat surprising to me.

Anyone wanna enlighten me as to why Apple has made this move?

I think this move make total sane for apple. There three reason:

 

1: is apple love total control over everything from  software, hardware to reaper, by going ARM with they own CPU now there have total control over that part of hardware. I did think there may more back to Power (PowerPC) or something different CPU. I think there will try to block Linux and Windows from running maybe on M2. 

 

2: To make them more different from PC, so there can say there not a PC it also make easy to hard problems or performance.  

 

3. There was make ARM CPU anyway for the Iphone so by doing this could have to cut costs. 

 

They did a really good job with the M1, I think for reason two they will not every sell this or any CPU for other company or PC. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Radium_Angel said:

I thought nVidia was trying to buy ARM, is this a case of Apple licensing the ability to produce their own ARM chips so they control the workflow (so to speak) and what happens to ARM (the company) is immaterial?

 

It most likely nvidia will keep licensing ARM instruction set out, but apple can added new instructions to make them self different from others.  Who know how long the licensing term are for, it could be 10+ year. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

I thought nVidia was trying to buy ARM, is this a case of Apple licensing the ability to produce their own ARM chips so they control the workflow (so to speak) and what happens to ARM (the company) is immaterial?

Yes exactly.

Nvidia might buy ARM, but ARM in and of itself is just an instruction set, just like x86 is an instruction set. Just because a CPU is an ARM CPU does not mean it is just like all other ARM CPUs, in the same way an Intel CPU is not the same as an AMD CPU.

Both accept the same instructions (x86 in the case of Intel and AMD, ARM in the case of Apple, Qualcomm, etc).

 

So even if Nvidia buys ARM, the cores in Apple products are designed in-house. Apple (ARM CPU maker) won't be at the mercy of Nvidia (potential ARM owner) anymore than AMD (x86 CPU maker) is at the mercy of Intel (x86 owner).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×