bkkcanuck

tht said:

canukstorm said:

Xed said:

blastdoor said:

Meteor lake is supposed to launch in December. It will be very interesting to see how the m3 lineup compares. I wonder if meteor lake comparisons are one reason Apple is launching pro and max now

I've fallen out of following Intel's releases. Is Meteor Lake suppose to come close to Apple's performance-per-watt?

I don't think anyone outside of Intel knows.  The chip launches in December but systems using this chip won't go on sale until 2024

It will not be as energy efficient as Apple Silicon.

Meteor Lake is fabbed on Intel 7nm while Apple Silicon is on TSMC 3nm. That's too big of a fab advantage. Intel will do what they have been doing. Their high end laptop chips will consume 70 to 100 Watts for about 1 to 2 minutes than go down to 45 to 55 Watts depending on model. Mid-range Meteor Lake laptop chips will probably be 25 to 35 Watts sustained. It will have pretty good performance, probably class leading, but will pay for it with more heat, more noise and less runtime.

Meteor Lake is also a multi-chip package with silicon bridges between them. This will consume more power over the monolithic chip design Apple is expected to use for the M3 generation. So, the idle power consumption will be interesting to see with Meteor Lake. It's architecture will allow Intel to scale their packages in multiple axes though. Very flexible.

That does not sound even close to the M1 Max silicon.... I have a power meter on my MacBook setup (desktop connected right now)...  Computer is a MacBook Pro 14" M1 Max/32 core GPU, 64GB RAM, 2TB storage.  I have it connected up to 3 x 4K external Monitors (4 in total) through 3 Thunderbolt docks (one for each thunderbolt port)...  Although I have not yet measured the difference with it in laptop mode (will by end of next week), each monitor will draw more power from the GPU side of things (I remember plugging in the monitors and noticing a warmer laptop).  

Running non-graphics intensive applications (many open and doing their own thing in the background), web browser with lots of tabs, DEVONThink, Screen sharing to another Mac, Omnifocus, many chat apps, a game idling in the background waiting for me to get back to (simple Arcade game)... basically using the laptop without worrying about battery and power draw (does not power down anything).... it draws between 15 and 16 watts from the wall.  I am guessing if I disconnected the 4 external monitors and just use it as a portable in the same manner - probably 8 to 10 watts.  If I crunch it with lots of graphics processing (creative work)... I might at most push it up to 60 watts.  

I just don't see Intel coming close to that with an x86 processor, which always has to have a hardware transcoder adding a bit of inefficiency to convert the old x86 instruction set to a RISCish micro-ops before executing the code (Intel was running into a wall with CISC based architecture long ago so they effectively did a wonderful job and genius level design to keep it in the processor... and as long as they had the best node out there... they were hard to beat in their era.   Time always catches up though... and unless Intel has some magic pixie dust this time around... I don't see them being on the same level... HOWEVER, for a windows user - it will likely seem like a super major upgrade from prior generations for laptops and may keep their eyes from wandering too much.

crowley said:

hackintoisier said:

Seems frivolous. 

Seems like an open and shut case.  Apple didn't have permission, therefore Apple broke the law.

Sorry, but that is idiotic.  Retail is not manual labor.  I mean if emptying cash registers and opening boxes (at the sales desk) is considered manual labor... then typing as a programmer/software developer, or picking up a pen and writing is manual labor... absolutely idiotic position and it demeans those that are actually really manual laborers.  This lawsuit is frivolous.  You don't need permission, if you are not breaking the law in the first place.

Rogue01 said:

mac_dog said:

williamh said:

These self-congratulatory things Apple does occasionally should be a bit embarrassing.  The Mac Studio looks like a big Mac Mini and it’s the very computer people have requested for years. Apple folks were not psychic when they determined the need and didn’t come up with a revolutionary new design. Good on you for making the Studio Display speakers good. Why is the camera garbage?

I seem to recall Ive or somebody gushing over the shape of the Apple Pencil or something like that. It’s some kind of joke. 

Boo-hoo. Now go troll another apple site. 

He isn't trolling at all.  The Mac Studio looks like a Mac mini on steroids (it is 2 1/2 minis tall), the Studio Display's camera is garbage (read the reviews, including the ones here), and Jony Ive did make a big deal about the shape of the Apple Pencil, to a ridiculous degree.  All true statements.  That is not trolling.  Trolling is making stuff up to annoy people.

Apple has indicated that the camera software had a bug introduced late - just before release.... (which is how shall I say unfortunate) and that it will be fixed.   It is the same camera as used by the iPad camera used for Centre Stage functionality - which has a better picture... as such I accept Apple's explanation and will wait for the software update to make my judgement.  The camera is a 12MP camera, HD is 2MP (1920 x 1080)... but the camera has to have the resolution to follow you so in the end it will be the same as an HD camera (not a substitute for a professional camera)... which when used as a webcam for things like Skype and Facebook (which compresses on top of it)... will likely be sufficient for normal use.   Apple pencil has no relevance to this monitor, so that is easily considered trolling.  Trolling does not require making stuff up, it can be truthful information not applicable and misused.  In the end the story is about the Apple Studio and that is what we are discussing...  Personally, it is not sufficient a jump in the display to interest me enough to purchase it... the Mac Studio computer easily yes...   but I will be waiting on where the monitor or next step up from there goes in the future.  This monitor is really only a replacement for the head portion of the iMac for the now componentized  Mac solutions (higher end)... and for me... a move away from the iMac all-in-one computers on the higher end ... is welcome...  A good monitor, I will keep and repurpose long after I have replaced a computer with a newer version.  

corp1 said:

DavidEsrati said:

Looks like it can cool itself- and isn't a funky shape that no one knows what to do with- ie Cube or Trash Can Mac Pro.

It's like a half-height Cube or a double-height Mac mini. And it sits on your desktop just like those other machines, though its low-ish profile means it's still lower than the monitor, which is a nice feature.

But ... I could imagine it growing into a full-height (or maybe taller?) Mac Pro Cube.  

Yes, all you need to do to have it grow -- is water it regularly....

DoctorQ said:

DavidEsrati said:

Still not upgradeable- no slots- while every PC in this price range can and does do both.

I'm waiting on one. We'll see what it runs like when it shows up.

I have a feeling slots are superfluous at this point, since it’s pertinent only to Intel. A PCI bus, in this scenario, is likely a bottleneck. Apple’s architecture calls for keeping the internal busses short as possible, such as with the system RAM. Will M series based Macs eventually have PCI slots? Beats me, but if there’s no hardware to fill the slots, what difference does it make?

Internal expandability of the computer is necessary when you are buying a product that as sold -- will not do what you need it to do.  The Trashcan mac was pilloried over this in the past, but the vast majority of this sentiment was because as sold it had insufficient graphics capability and other functionality.   If the computer you are buying does everything you need it to do for the requisite amount of time for it to pay for itself -- then internal expandability serves no real need.   The vast majority of users -- could not care a less about expandability as it by its self serves no functional purpose... just give me what I need to do the job I need done... that is what I need.   I never considered buying the trashcan mac, but now here I am waiting for 10 to 12 weeks (because obviously no-one is interested in this device) for the configuration I wanted to order...  for the new Mac Studio.