The CPU looks extremely impressive. I'm very hesitant to move away from x86 architecture until I have a great, economical CPU to use in my home server as well.
It's very unlikely, but wow it would be great if I could build a server using an M1 processor. Just the power saving alone would be phenomenal.
Aftermarket racked Mac Minis aren't a new idea in server spaces. Have you considered creating a cluster of them to fit into a rack? As far as price/performance goes the Mac Mini is about as good as you can get from Apple.
> It's very unlikely, but wow it would be great if I could build a server using an M1 processor. Just the power saving alone would be phenomenal.
Mac minis are designed with a stackable form factor, and in fact one of their selling points is to put together server farms for stuff such as running build jobs with Xcode.
If I'm not mistaken, mac minis with the M1 chip are sold starting at 700$ a pop.
Apple made server racks many years ago. This new silicon could give them a reason to re-enter that market. In the meantime, the new Mini could be a good fit for a home server.
I really want to see how these chips perform graphically in real-life games. It seems incredible how performant they are, so much so that I nearly can't believe it.
We know the answer to that.
The result you quote (7500 MT) is MBP. Light fan, audible but not too bad. Power consumed probably around 15W, but we'll have to wait for serious measurement.
For MBA (no fan. passive cooling) same ST number, MT number is 6300. So fall off, but not that bad, large cores at maybe 80% of peak. Device gets slightly warm, not hot, under this use case. Device power maybe 8..9 W I would guess?
Cinebench only stresses the CPU not the GPU or the AI coprocessor. Besides I find these scores pretty dissapointing after all the hype. Yes it's faster then an i7-1165G in multicore but actually slower in single core. Slower... After all that hype.
This is a score on macOS 11.0.0, which shipped with the hardware, 11.0.1 bumps clocks a bit to 3.2GHz, which makes Apple Silicon take the ST crown by a hair.
I'm comparing the M1 to a cpu that would have been used in a Macbook pro 13 if it weren't for the M1 soc. The current i7 intel Macbook pro 13 inch has the 1068NG7 model. Which is in fact a better cpu then the 1065g. Which is last gens 1165g. So I think this comparison is completely valid.
If we’re comparing low-end apples to apples, the bottom-end Intel MacBook Pro (MacBookPro16,3) has an i5 part (Coffee Lake 8257U)[1] and would be a better comparison.
I don’t think I’ve seen any indication from Apple the current M1 13” is all we’re going to see in this form factor.
The price difference is only like 300 dollars so pretending that one is low end and the other high end is not really true here. They are both high end devices.
I can't buy this hypothetical stronger arm Macbook so it means nothing. Apple's marketing material said the M1 would blow everything out of the water with a HUGE margin.
Now it turns out it's actually slower then their own laptop would be with a refreshed intel chip. That's what dissapoints me.
It's not really slower. It's comparable, with some clear benefits. But yeah, reality is caching up.
Apple is performance-wise matching their competitors (was clear from how they positioned m1 products that this would be the case).
Now one can say that it's lower power and low end, but then we can also say that when especially AMD catches up to 5nm (within a year) and adds on-chip memory (within 2 years) they'd be ahead, with a chip with the same die size..
True, in perf per watt M1 does an incredible job I'd wager. But I'm not interested in that. I simply want the highest performance in a 13 inch formfactor. Apple marketing material said the M1 would blow everything out of the water with a HUGE margin.
Now it turns out it's actually slower then their own laptop would be with a refreshed intel chip. That's what dissapoints me.
Apple's marketing material said the M1 would blow everything out of the water with a HUGE margin.
Could you provide a link to the marketing material that says the M1 would blow everything out of the water with a HUGE margin?
The M1 press release says "The World’s Best CPU Performance per Watt". That's true.
The M1 MacBook press release says "And with M1, the 13-inch MacBook Pro is up to 3x faster than the best-selling Windows laptop in its class."
The fine print:
Testing conducted by Apple in October 2020 using preproduction 13-inch MacBook Pro systems with Apple M1 chip, as well as production Intel Core i7-based PC systems with Intel Iris Plus Graphics and the latest version of Windows 10 available at the time of testing. Best-selling system based on publicly available sales data over the last nine months.
Translation: those laptops you see at Best Buy that are in the $800–$1200 range? Yeah, we blows those things out the water. By a lot.
Is it though? A "Pro" laptop has, by the very name, an implication of performance.
I don't know many professionals in any industry that are constrained so heavily by power - generally when you're doing professional work, you're not far from an outlet, save some rare use cases like on-location shoots for film and television.
I too had hoped that Apple might reduce the price of the new AS lineup to promote adoption by consumers, but it doesn't seem to be going that way. Depending on how these initial models sell (well I think), we may or may not see any improvement in the price/performance ratio.
Current single-core list:
https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu_benchmark-cinebench_r23_si...
And multi-core list:
https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu_benchmark-cinebench_r23_mu...
The M1's single-core result beats Intel i9-10900KF (score 1418) and is almost at Intel I7-1165G7 (score 1504)