canukstorm

About

Username
canukstorm
Joined
Visits
178
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
4,021
Badges
1
Posts
2,701

Reactions

2.6KLike302Informative

  • iMac 24-inch M3 review: A clear sign that Intel Mac support is ending soon

    canukstormcanukstorm
    "Our review unit had a 512GB SSD" => How much RAM did your review consist of?
    williamlondon9secondkox2Alex1Nwatto_cobra

  • Apple confirms that there is no Apple Silicon 27-inch iMac in the works

    canukstormcanukstorm
    Rogue01 said:

    mike1 said:
    timmillea said:
    Next on the culling list is the Mac Studio. When a 14" MacBook Pro can outshine a Mac Pro in reported benchmarks, then the entire M3 SoC family can be fitted to a Mac Mini. There is simply no need for the Studio. 


    Wow. That is a ridiculous conclusion. Everyone should stop developing new computers and chips now. timmillea has decreed that computers can no longer get faster/smaller/more efficient or better in any way. Do you seriously not believe that the Studio, Pro with M4 and M5 or whatever is coming won't have better benchmarks than the current M3?!
    Actually it is not so ridiculous considering the M3 Pro is only 6% faster than the M2 Pro, and intentionally hobbled by Apple to upsell their other computers.  The M3 Max has the huge increase in performance, but the M3 Pro was hobbled with two less performance cores, one less GPU core, and 25% slower memory bandwidth than the M2 Pro.  Why would Apple do this when they claim Apple Silicon is so great?  So a MacBook Pro with M3 Max will be faster than a Mac Studio with M2 Pro and M3 Pro.  So the 3nm process for the M3 Pro did absolutely nothing for the chip.  If Apple maintained the 8 core performance and 4 core efficiency with the same GPU core and same memory bandwidth, the M3 Pro would be a much better chip.  So don't assume the M4 or later would be surprisingly better when everyone thought the M3 was going to be this huge performance boost.  Only true if you look at the M3 and M3 Max.  M3 Pro is a waste.
    Apparently, the 3nm process did wonders for the battery life.  This reviewer got the following SKU to test;

    "The model we reviewed is a step up, with an 11-core M3 Pro chip with 14 GPU cores, 18GB of memory, and a 512GB drive—all for $1,999"

    "    Apple claims that the new MacBook Pro will last 22 hours in battery tests, but we found that isn't accurate. In our video rundown test, the 14-inch Pro lasted even longer, crossing the 30-hour threshold, becoming the longest-lasting laptop we've ever tested. That it does so while driving increased processing and graphics performance over the previous long-lasting model is all the more impressive."

    Apple MacBook Pro 14-Inch (2023, M3 Pro) Review | PCMag
    FileMakerFeller9secondkox2tenthousandthingsAlex1Nwatto_cobra

  • Apple confirms that there is no Apple Silicon 27-inch iMac in the works

    canukstormcanukstorm
    timmillea said:
    32" is the new 27". You'll pay for it but get the best all-in-one money can buy, at any price, and it should last 20+ years.

    Next on the culling list is the Mac Studio. When a 14" MacBook Pro can outshine a Mac Pro in reported benchmarks, then the entire M3 SoC family can be fitted to a Mac Mini. There is simply no need for the Studio. 


    I assume an M3 Ultra is in the works.
    williamlondonpulseimagesAlex1Nwatto_cobra

  • Apple confirms that there is no Apple Silicon 27-inch iMac in the works

    canukstormcanukstorm
    "We should once again consider the iMac a consumer machine meant for hundreds of millions of home, office and school users."

    The Great iMac Realignment – 512 Pixels
    watto_cobra

  • Apple confirms that there is no Apple Silicon 27-inch iMac in the works

    canukstormcanukstorm
    22july2013 said:
    Apple practically invented the home computer, and practically invented the mouse, but those are the two main products it still can't win customers for.
    For the vast majority of home users, the smartphone and / or tablet has replaced their home computer. 
    dewmechasmwatto_cobra