Apple made a BIG mistake

[Video Beagle]

11 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Wow, that's a really shitty title in that case. I sure hope Linus thinks the extra cash he makes is worth selling his integrity and tricking his viewers.

 

I think that's a bit harsh.

I'm not saying you're wrong in general terms....I think the clink bait titles aren't as effective as they once were, especially on a channel of LTT's viewership. (and I've noted that MKBHD and iJustine both don't do the click bait, and they're both channels Apple works with, and feel that the image confered by the titles are a major reason Apple doesn't look at LMG, as opposed to content, where I think they tend to be pretty solid).

I just think "selling integrity and tricking viewers" is a bit of a harsh characterization.
 

8 hours ago, like_ooh_ahh said:

Since ARM CPUs are scalable and the M1 performs well, I wonder if Apple will bring back Xserve from the graveyard of cancelled Apple products. 

I've said before, but i'd hope so..the XServe was a sexy hardware design, and I'd love to see a return.

[LAwLz]

9 hours ago, skywake said:

I wasn't a fan of the title, then I read some of the comments under the twitter post pushing the video. The number of people who live under the illusion that Linus is somehow "anti-apple" and are having a go at him for his "biased reviews". I mean it's always been clear that these people are full of it as a long time watcher of LTT (he's actually pretty Pro Apple if anything) but this makes that abundantly clear.

 

So for me, as misleading as the title is and as much as I don't like that it's a thing, it makes for a damn good social experiment in how little people actually engage with content. And for me that was more enlightening than the video itself could ever be.

 

And for what it's worth, as someone who doesn't have anything Apple outside of iPads.... after watching the video I'm tempted to get a Macbook....

What are you on about? It's not a "social experiment" to deliberately make a shitty title that will upset people and that doesn't reflect the actual content of the video. 

I watched the (terrible) video and the title upset me too. It's awful and doesn't reflect the content of the video. It's pure and simple click bait no matter what definition of the word you use.

[Amias]

This is insane.

 

Intel ... AMD ... what the f***? Apple's been in the game what 8-10 years custom designing silicone chips (Apple A6). Intel you've been in the game 50 years, AMD 30 years.

 

Apples come along, trounced all single core performance, trounced your efficiency per watt, trounced your core count (intel primarily), they've got multi-architecture support ... then incredible GPU performance on top. 

 

This is embarrassing. Utterly embarrassing. Do people not realise how much this is going to impact the PC market? This is just utterly bonkers.

[Video Beagle]

4 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

It's not a "social experiment" to deliberately make a shitty title that will upset people and that doesn't reflect the actual content of the video. 

I believe @skywake was refering to looking at the comments which I imagine have a number of people talking about the video for good or ill as if they've watched it, when it's clear they've only read the title.

 

I think it would be valuable to do a test of a video with both a click bait and a not click bait title being the difference (same video content) to see which truly does better over the long term, though i think Linus has mentioned that such a test could be bad for them due to the alogrythm and/or not valuble info.

[Video Beagle]

1 minute ago, Amias said:

This is embarrassing. Utterly embarrassing. Do people not realise how much this is going to impact the PC market? This is just utterly bonkers.

I think it may be too soon to really guess how much impact it will have on the PC market. While Apple often sets, or at least confirms trends, it's still  a very small part of it.

 

They have the advantages of having a lot of money to throw at R&D and to hire the best people available, of not having those decades of set procedures to work against, and to have specific goals to target, rather than a more general need of intel or AMD to be valuble to many companies.

Also, a function of all of that, Apple can afford to make mistakes. If a path on the way to M1 suddenly dead ended after being promising...they can, and likely did, toss the work and move backwards and try again. They have a nimbleness that a behemoth like Intel just doesn't have.

[Amias]

9 minutes ago, Video Beagle said:

I think it may be too soon to really guess how much impact it will have on the PC market. While Apple often sets, or at least confirms trends, it's still  a very small part of it.

 

 

Honestly after the benchmarks coming out, who in their right mind (ignore the minute fraction of professionals video editing) would go for a Windows 10 laptop?

 

10 minutes ago, Video Beagle said:

They have the advantages of having a lot of money to throw at R&D and to hire the best people available, of not having those decades of set procedures to work against, and to have specific goals to target, rather than a more general need of intel or AMD to be valuble to many companies.

Also, a function of all of that, Apple can afford to make mistakes. If a path on the way to M1 suddenly dead ended after being promising...they can, and likely did, toss the work and move backwards and try again. They have a nimbleness that a behemoth like Intel just doesn't have.

Just call it what it is. Bad Piss Poor Management.

 

Intel has likely bloated with inexperienced, ineffective and stupid executives pushing stupid decisions resulting in their soon demise into the technical history books. Those stupid set procedures? If they exist again, that's management failure to not address. Goals to target? Management failures. 

 

This isn't Apple is doing better, it's Intel is doing s***. Intel's revenue was $71 billion. AMD's revenue was $6 billion ... And AMD has trounced Intel the last few years with their Zen architecture. Intel CEO either needs to fire 90% of his executive directors, or face an inevitable future failure. Right now they're sat on their arse likely snorting their bonuses off of their secretaries while Apple and AMD are walking circles round them.

 

That to me is a failing company. Intel's CEO needs to wake the f*** up.

 

[Video Beagle]

21 minutes ago, Amias said:

Honestly after the benchmarks coming out, who in their right mind (ignore the minute fraction of professionals video editing) would go for a Windows 10 laptop?

People who prefer Windows?

 

I mean, I'm a 40 year Apple user. I'm typing on a MBP that's kept by my bed just for computing when I can't sleep (like now), and I find all this very exciting, BUT all the M1racles and killer benchmarks mean nothing if a person doesn't want to use MacOS.

 

[Egg-Roll]

I couldn't continue the video after 6:48 because...

 

[captain_to_fire]

1 hour ago, Video Beagle said:

BUT all the M1racles and killer benchmarks mean nothing if a person doesn't want to use MacOS.

Hope is not lost if:

1. Microsoft makes WoA available for the public 
2. If the likes of AMD, Qualcomm and other chip makers to match what Apple did with the M1

[just_dave]

20 hours ago, Commodus said:

The good news: there isn't as much of a rush to upgrade the RAM as there is with x86 machines (Mac or Windows). Even a system with 8GB can apparently handle quite a lot without struggling, if partly due to the extra-fast SSD. It's still worth considering 16GB if you're going to run a lot of memory-intensive tasks or intend to use your system for several years, but even then...

I want a school laptop capable of a lot of coding that will last 6-8 yrs, so i would be getting 8G/16G/512GB which is like 1600 euro :((

[Commodus]

Just now, just_dave said:

I want a school laptop capable of a lot of coding that will last 6-8 yrs, so i would be getting 8G/16G/512GB which is like 1600 euro :((

That's definitely a big outlay, but the good news is that it actually would last that long. If you can swing the up-front cost you might be happier than with a lower-end system that would need to be replaced sooner.

[just_dave]

3 minutes ago, Commodus said:

That's definitely a big outlay, but the good news is that it actually would last that long. If you can swing the up-front cost you might be happier than with a lower-end system that would need to be replaced sooner.

Would you say it is easier to get the battery or other parts serviced due to Macs' popularity? I checked some other manufacturers' sites and they usually sell the parts to large distributors that won't sell it to me directly, while Apple offers authorized original replacement for like 140 euro which doesn't seem like a bad deal considering the battery is OEM quality.

[Commodus]

1 minute ago, just_dave said:

Would you say it is easier to get the battery or other parts serviced due to Macs' popularity? I checked some other manufacturers' sites and they usually sell the parts to large distributors that won't sell it to me directly, while Apple offers authorized original replacement for like 140 euro which doesn't seem like a bad deal considering the battery is OEM quality.

I'd say so. Admittedly it's easier here in North America, where Apple has a strong retail network and other infrastructure, but it beats some OEMs. I'd do some homework into both the Czech support options as well as the ease of replacing the battery yourself (in case there's glue or other complications), but the system itself is dandy.

[Guest]

 

Glad you didn't use that frankly garbage title on Floatplane...

I get you have an algorithm game to play... but that's really silly.

[creemstah]

Can someone explain to me how we are comparing performance of two platforms, using benchmarks, but irl the only software existing on both ios (or whatever they called their os) and windows - is Tomb Rider, and its significantly worse? 

I mean am I the only person who thinks that benchmarks only describe raw numbers? 

It`s like we only can compare two using adobe products, is there anything else that you can use in both OS?
But even if we use that, there will be "optimization is bad for adobe on mac/for ms word on mac/ for (whatever) on mac".

so whats the point of comparing? Does benchmarks mean anything if its impressively good but there is no software to really experince that numbers? no irl scenarios whatsoever  

 

[LAwLz]

52 minutes ago, creemstah said:

Can someone explain to me how we are comparing performance of two platforms, using benchmarks, but irl the only software existing on both ios (or whatever they called their os) and windows - is Tomb Rider, and its significantly worse? 

I mean am I the only person who thinks that benchmarks only describe raw numbers? 

It`s like we only can compare two using adobe products, is there anything else that you can use in both OS?
But even if we use that, there will be "optimization is bad for adobe on mac/for ms word on mac/ for (whatever) on mac".

so whats the point of comparing? Does benchmarks mean anything if its impressively good but there is no software to really experince that numbers? no irl scenarios whatsoever 

I don't really understand what you mean.

All the software LTT tested are cross-platform, which was far more than just Tomb Raider. They also used several real world applications. 

Can you elaborate what you mean, because it feels like you are missing words/sentences in your post.

 

[Velcade]

2 hours ago, Den-Fi said:

 

Glad you didn't use that frankly garbage title on Floatplane...

I get you have an algorithm game to play... but that's really silly.

This could work in their favor.

 

Are you tired of click baity titles?!  Join Floatplate today!!!

[GDRRiley]

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Dude, they were comparing a fanless M1 against a massive gaming laptop and you still don't think they gave AMD a big enough advantage? Come on. 

 

 

The Zen3 laptop chips will not match the M1 in single core performance. Remember, the desktop parts just barely edges it out in single core performance, and that's at 4.9GHz.

It will beat it in multi core score though, but that's because it will be an 8 core AMD processor vs a quad core Apple processor. 

If you think an 8 core low power Zen3 chips will perform better than an 8 or even a 10 core M1X (or whatever it will be called) then you're delusional. 

I have 0 faith in HP being able to make a good gaming laptop. I've got a business machine based on zen+. I know what they've made in the last few years

your forgetting that the mobile chips are just a bit faster than the desktop in single core. Zen2 APUs were faster than Zen2 desktop chips.
I'm not. I'm assuming good scaling on M1 meaning a 8 big and 4 little is 60-70% faster than the 4/4 and I'm talking mac mini not air. compared to what I expect from a 20-28W zen3 ryzen APU.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested/2

[AldiPrayogi]

I know the stupid YouTube algorithm game is kinda unavoidable today but that title is a bit misleading no? It was explained very early in the video but still man haha

 

These Macbooks are kinda amazing tbh. I might consider them in the future, sucks that I have to learn a new whole OS to experience it though.

[LAwLz]

45 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

I have 0 faith in HP being able to make a good gaming laptop. I've got a business machine based on zen+. I know what they've made in the last few years

My 840 G5 is really good. Not sure why you assume the Omen is throttling or whatever you think it does.

 

46 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

your forgetting that the mobile chips are just a bit faster than the desktop in single core. Zen2 APUs were faster than Zen2 desktop chips.

Ehm, what? Citation on that please.

I very strongly doubt a downclocked ~15W zen3 mobile SoC will be faster than the 5950X. They both share the same architecture but one is clocked at close to 5GHz with a TDP of over 100 watts, and the other is going to be something like a max of 3GHz with a TDP of ~15W. It makes no sense to assume the laptop chip will be faster than the desktop one.

 

48 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

I'm not. I'm assuming good scaling on M1 meaning a 8 big and 4 little is 60-70% faster than the 4/4 and I'm talking mac mini not air. compared to what I expect from a 20-28W zen3 ryzen APU.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested/2

I don't understand what you are saying.

We already know that the M1 at 3.2GHz is slightly slower than zen3 at 4.9GHz. Do we agree on that? It's something like 5% slower.

Maybe I am misunderstanding you but this:  

23 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

Zen3 still on 7nm will match it in single. beat it in multi even vs say a 8-10 big core+4 little. and thats still with AMD being a node behind.

to me means you think an 8 core zen3 mobile processor will match a future 8 or 10 core Apple ARM processor in single core, and outperform it in multicore.

I have a few questions.

1) Why do you think mobile Zen3 will match desktop zen3 in single core performance when this does not seem to be the case with zen2?

2) Why do you think the M1 will scale worse with cores than zen3?

3) Why are you so hellbent on trying to make AMD look as good as possible in every single thread that is about any of their competitors? You're often advocating for people to cherry pick results for AMD to make them look as good as possible. For example in this thread you are trying to downplay the results of the M1 because you THINK there MIGHT be a laptop that would show better results for AMD, even though you base this entirely on "well I don't like this one HP laptop I got".

[Arika]

what is it about the mention of the M1 chips being good that makes people go "but AMD!"

 

every single thread i've seen about the M1 performance always has people desperately trying to convince themselves (or others) that ryzen is superior like the mere existence of these chips is somehow going to make ryzen just completely disappear if they don't mention it at least once.

 

i still personally believe that the M1 chips can't be compared to anything else, because it's not even a choice, if you want a Mac, you WILL get the AS. If you want AS your HAVE to get a Mac.

[Commodus]

2 hours ago, Arika S said:

what is it about the mention of the M1 chips being good that makes people go "but AMD!"

 

every single thread i've seen about the M1 performance always has people desperately trying to convince themselves (or others) that ryzen is superior like the mere existence of these chips is somehow going to make ryzen just completely disappear if they don't mention it at least once.

 

i still personally believe that the M1 chips can't be compared to anything else, because it's not even a choice, if you want a Mac, you WILL get the AS. If you want AS your HAVE to get a Mac.

I can't help but think it's a bit of insecurity. Folks 'need' to have at least one comparable x86 chip on top, because if it's not that means Macs are clearly faster and... well, they can't have something challenging their choice of computer, now can they?

 

I'm not even disagreeing that Ryzen chips outperform the M1; sometimes they do. It's that the performance is so high, particularly against Intel chips, that it puts Windows PC fans on the defensive.

[GDRRiley]

19 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

My 840 G5 is really good. Not sure why you assume the Omen is throttling or whatever you think it does.

 

Ehm, what? Citation on that please.

I very strongly doubt a downclocked ~15W zen3 mobile SoC will be faster than the 5950X. They both share the same architecture but one is clocked at close to 5GHz with a TDP of over 100 watts, and the other is going to be something like a max of 3GHz with a TDP of ~15W. It makes no sense to assume the laptop chip will be faster than the desktop one.

 

I don't understand what you are saying.

We already know that the M1 at 3.2GHz is slightly slower than zen3 at 4.9GHz. Do we agree on that? It's something like 5% slower.

Maybe I am misunderstanding you but this:  

to me means you think an 8 core zen3 mobile processor will match a future 8 or 10 core Apple ARM processor in single core, and outperform it in multicore.

I have a few questions.

1) Why do you think mobile Zen3 will match desktop zen3 in single core performance when this does not seem to be the case with zen2?

2) Why do you think the M1 will scale worse with cores than zen3?

3) Why are you so hellbent on trying to make AMD look as good as possible in every single thread that is about any of their competitors? You're often advocating for people to cherry pick results for AMD to make them look as good as possible. For example in this thread you are trying to downplay the results of the M1 because you THINK there MIGHT be a laptop that would show better results for AMD, even though you base this entirely on "well I don't like this one HP laptop I got".

I do like my HP machine I got but it runs hotter than I'd like and has ram limited to 2400. HP doesn't make the machines run their fastest

I wasn't saying a 15W but a 20-25W
I didn't realize a single zen3 core needed 100W to reach max boost? its under 10W
 

I'd say closer to 8-10$% but yeah
Yep
1.  490 vs 500 for non 3950x or 525 for it. so its max within 5%

2. If I remember right the Ice Storm cores are being used. I don't expect the amount of those to change. I estimated that they represented 25-30% of the score. so thats why I didn't 2x the score.

3. My point is mostly the M1 isn't the fastest chip and is being compared to last gen parts. AMD could have given us APUs in the fall but they've waited till Q1 2021.
 

I know there are laptops that do better than the 2 HPs used here, the G14 would be a better case for the gaming laptop at the macbook pro m1 price and their are laptops that aren't 2 in 1s that have the 4800U. they showed of the 4500U a 6/6 instead of a 6/12 or 8/16
 

[Video Beagle]

18 hours ago, like_ooh_ahh said:

Hope is not lost if:

1. Microsoft makes WoA available for the public 
2. If the likes of AMD, Qualcomm and other chip makers to match what Apple did with the M1

on 1.  I think it's a "when" not if. I wouldn't be surprised if in the presentation about the next batch of M1* machines this spring that there is of those spotlight sections with Microsoft.

 

on 2. I don't think they can achieve parity just due to Apple controlling the whole thing, so software and hardware synch perfectly while AMD and others have to be more generalized in their products. If Apple finds that they need a M1 that has flanges on it for the iMac to be just right...they just make a batch with flanges. That's not really sometihing that can happen on the other side.

8 hours ago, AldiPrayogi said:

These Macbooks are kinda amazing tbh. I might consider them in the future, sucks that I have to learn a new whole OS to experience it though.

They're really not that different. While granted I'm a mac user who uses windows often rather than windows user who uses macs, I think the transition from windows -> Mac is the easier one. Windows has a lot of features and settings buried in different systems due to it's layers of compatabilitiy needing to go back so far, so related settings may be in older areas and newer ones and so on. Mac OS not having that built in history, just puts stuff in a place (sometimes a stupid place, but a singular place nontheless). 

 

Really the main difference is the hot key combos...since Mac's don't have the @#$@$@#$ windows key, you don't get the #@$!@#$@ start menu popping up every @#$@#$@# time you mis-press a @#!#!@# key combo.

[Spindel]

If the software you need exists on mac (through rosetta or native), or there is an feasable alternative, I urge people to take the plunge and try one of the M1s. 
 

This switch is a big deal, in a positive way.