commentzilla

Mike Wuerthele said:

golftango said:

with two sandisk ssd's plugged into the two tb ports on the m1 mini and using striped raid, i get approx 1500mb/s throughput. when i use the owc dock this drops to approx 1000mb/s. a single standalone ssd which clocks at about 750mb/s when plugged into the mini drops to about 550mb/s. owc basically blew me off after i sent them reams of test data and tried everything they suggested by saying the problem was the monterey os. first bad experience i've ever had with owc and now i'm stuck with a boat anchor. /guy

I haven't seen that problem. On a pair of NVMe-based drives I also bought after testing that did 2400 megabytes per second read and 2000 megabytes per second write, I got 2400 with one connected, and about 1500 megabytes per second with a read to one and a write to another. I haven't done SSD RAID testing, though. Which SanDisk drives?

That does feel like RAID-driver related in Monterey, but I can't say for sure, as I haven't tested it beyond finding no native support for RAID 5 in Big Sur on M1 versus having it on Intel.

mjtomlin said:

AniMill said:

I believe that the iMac Pro is only sunset as an Intel machine. I’m guessing that the next iteration will be a 28” iMac Pro w/ the M1 Pro, and an iMac Max with the M1 MAX chip. Also perhaps a Mac Mini Pro with both high-end chips (wishing). The rumor of a 27” Liquid Retina Display for said iMac’s and as a separate display are rolling out. I also think we’ll see the base 24” iMac get up to the best M1 Pro only.

Base M2 will come in 2 configurations; CPU 4/4 and 6/4, GPU 8 and 12. All lowest end base models will still ship with an M1 as they do now, but  24" iMac and mini will also get M2 models. The MacBook Air will stick with the M1. We'll see the return of "MacBook" with the M2, to fill the gap between the Air and new MacBook Pro. Starting at $1299. (13" MBP will be discontinued.)

I think we will see a mini "pro" using the new M1 SoC's. Still not sure what they're going to do with the iMac "pro" though. Low-end models could use the new M1 SoC's as well and possibly get a beefed up M1 Ultra with 16/4 CPU and 64 GPU cores.

anome said:

So, is it enough of a feature for me to change my mind about getting a 14 inch over a 16 inch? Probably not, but who can really say without actual numbers, or even something a bit more detailed than "this is a feature that exists".

Marvin said:

crowley said:

Marvin said:

commentzilla said:

tht said:

commentzilla said:

So if the 4x claim is true, what is a plausible explanation? 

It’s on the website:

Prerelease Cinema 4D S25 real-time 3D performance tested using a 1.98GB scene. 

Prerelease Cinema 4D S25 and prerelease Redshift v3.0.54 tested using a 1.32GB scene.

Tested with prerelease Affinity Photo 1.10.2.263 using the built-in benchmark version 11021. 

These all are 4x (M1 Max) and 2x (M1 Pro) over the 5600M.

Right, it's 4x faster than the 5600M but what I'm trying to say is that we cannot use the GeekBench numbers as a guide, which would match the M1 Max up to a 20+ TeraFLOPS AMD Radeon Pro W6900X. But the M1 Max clear match the top AMD or NVIDA mobile chips, using 40% less power.

One more chip to go! The M1 Max Extreme or whatever they call it. If it's a 64-core GPU it will match the top card but to match the dual cards it will have to be 128-cores. That's going to be one big wafer. If the power saving scale up, it's going to be a game changer.

Some tests will be affected by the memory setup. The 5600M has 8GB of video memory. If they load up a 3D scene with 4K/8K textures, it can run out of memory and then it has to keep swapping textures with system memory (similar to a system paging when it runs out of system memory). The M1 Max chip has up to 64GB of unified memory so it can keep everything in memory.

There was an image posted about the chip designs where the higher end chips will be multiples of the M1 Max, at least 2x and 4x. Maybe they will have a 3x too but that wouldn't be needed. They could call them Extreme and Ultimate or they could even use Duo like they do for the Radeon Pro Duo. M1 Max Duo, M1 Max Quad.

The largest would be 16x the size of the M1 chip, much like the Threadripper chips:

The M1 Max has 57 billion transistors, the 3990x Threadripper has around 40 billion (just for CPU, no GPU). 4x the M1 Max will have 228 billion if they just take multiples of the chips. If they multiply the cores separately then it will be a bit less.

It will be a very powerful chip and even crazier to think it would be able to fit into the 2013 Mac Pro cylinder enclosure. If Intel/AMD had kept up, it could have been with their chips but they didn't and Apple had to revert back to an old form factor to accommodate their inefficient hardware.

Does the integration of the memory and GPU on the M-series SoCs not create issues for multiple CPU architectures?  Seems like it might (I claim no expertise here, just guessing).

The image they showed at the event of the chip was this:

People have x-rayed the M1 chip to see the layout:

https://s3.i-micronews.com/uploads/2020/12/SP20608-Yole-Apple-M1-System-on-Chip-Flyer-1.pdf
https://www.eetasia.com/teardown-identifying-apple-m1s-distinct-circuit-blocks/
https://www.systemplus.fr/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SP20608-Apple-M1-System-on-Chip-Sample.pdf

They can scale the processing units separately from the memory. This would allow them to sell higher-end units with lower amounts of RAM.

I expect the 27" iMacs to offer M1 Pro, Max and Max Duo chips starting at 16GB RAM and going up to 128GB RAM. Mac Pro if there is one would be Max Duo and Quad, likely starting at 32GB and going up to 256GB - this config could easily go in an iMac too.

Marvin said:

crowley said:

Marvin said:

commentzilla said:

tht said:

commentzilla said:

So if the 4x claim is true, what is a plausible explanation? 

It’s on the website:

Prerelease Cinema 4D S25 real-time 3D performance tested using a 1.98GB scene. 

Prerelease Cinema 4D S25 and prerelease Redshift v3.0.54 tested using a 1.32GB scene.

Tested with prerelease Affinity Photo 1.10.2.263 using the built-in benchmark version 11021. 

These all are 4x (M1 Max) and 2x (M1 Pro) over the 5600M.

Right, it's 4x faster than the 5600M but what I'm trying to say is that we cannot use the GeekBench numbers as a guide, which would match the M1 Max up to a 20+ TeraFLOPS AMD Radeon Pro W6900X. But the M1 Max clear match the top AMD or NVIDA mobile chips, using 40% less power.

One more chip to go! The M1 Max Extreme or whatever they call it. If it's a 64-core GPU it will match the top card but to match the dual cards it will have to be 128-cores. That's going to be one big wafer. If the power saving scale up, it's going to be a game changer.

Some tests will be affected by the memory setup. The 5600M has 8GB of video memory. If they load up a 3D scene with 4K/8K textures, it can run out of memory and then it has to keep swapping textures with system memory (similar to a system paging when it runs out of system memory). The M1 Max chip has up to 64GB of unified memory so it can keep everything in memory.

There was an image posted about the chip designs where the higher end chips will be multiples of the M1 Max, at least 2x and 4x. Maybe they will have a 3x too but that wouldn't be needed. They could call them Extreme and Ultimate or they could even use Duo like they do for the Radeon Pro Duo. M1 Max Duo, M1 Max Quad.

The largest would be 16x the size of the M1 chip, much like the Threadripper chips:

The M1 Max has 57 billion transistors, the 3990x Threadripper has around 40 billion (just for CPU, no GPU). 4x the M1 Max will have 228 billion if they just take multiples of the chips. If they multiply the cores separately then it will be a bit less.

It will be a very powerful chip and even crazier to think it would be able to fit into the 2013 Mac Pro cylinder enclosure. If Intel/AMD had kept up, it could have been with their chips but they didn't and Apple had to revert back to an old form factor to accommodate their inefficient hardware.

Does the integration of the memory and GPU on the M-series SoCs not create issues for multiple CPU architectures?  Seems like it might (I claim no expertise here, just guessing).

The image they showed at the event of the chip was this:



People have x-rayed the M1 chip to see the layout:



https://s3.i-micronews.com/uploads/2020/12/SP20608-Yole-Apple-M1-System-on-Chip-Flyer-1.pdf
https://www.eetasia.com/teardown-identifying-apple-m1s-distinct-circuit-blocks/
https://www.systemplus.fr/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SP20608-Apple-M1-System-on-Chip-Sample.pdf

They can scale the processing units separately from the memory. This would allow them to sell higher-end units with lower amounts of RAM.

I expect the 27" iMacs to offer M1 Pro, Max and Max Duo chips starting at 16GB RAM and going up to 128GB RAM. Mac Pro if there is one would be Max Duo and Quad, likely starting at 32GB and going up to 256GB - this config could easily go in an iMac too.