spheric
About
- Username
- spheric
- Joined
- Visits
- 255
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 3,367
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 2,560
Reactions
-
Apple's flavor of RCS won't support Google's end-to-end encryption extension
-
M3 14-inch MacBook Pro teardown shows few internal changes in new models
The 16" M2 Max MBP peaks at around 145W.tht said:
The M3 Max MBP16 consumes about 120 Watts sustained running stressing CPU+GPU loads, with peaks even in the 140 W range. The efficiency and density gains are decreasing with every new node. It's inevitable that Apple will inch up a few more Watts. Apple may choose not to play, hence I said "may", but there will be a lot of competitive pressure to inch up.Xed said:
That is happening with the desktop Macs running Apple Silicon so it is possible, just not a requirement like it used to be, and I can see if happening, especially if we get a nice bump in battery density tech. It's all about maximizing performance within a battery life window within a reasonable volume and weight.MikeJB said:Regarding the opinion, "120 to 150 W peak power consumption may be in play." I doubt seriously that Apple Silicon will EVER return to those power hungry wattage designs again.
-
Apple insists 8GB unified memory equals 16GB regular RAM
The memory compression really IS a remarkable feature. It literally doubled the useful life of my MacBook Pro at the time it was introduced — I was ready to replace it, and suddenly heavy productions that had stopped my machine in its tracks (heh, pun intended) started working fine again, literally overnight.
But that was in 2013 - a DECADE ago.
Arguing that in 2023 is a little weird.
-
M3 Max benchmarks show Mac Pro performance in a MacBook
chasm said:
I’m glad you posted, because I’m kind of in the same boat. I have few complaints about the Intel i9, but it does take its time on some audio processing and video transcoding I do. Other than that, it’s suitably speedy for my mostly-modest needs.soundsinmotion said:I have the last intel MacBook Pro from late 2019. Spent almost $4000 on it. Unfortunately can’t justify upgrading for thousands more when mine works great still.
Thankfully, I didn’t spend $4K on my 2019 last-of-the-15-inch MBPs, more like $2.5K, and that’s still MORE than it would cost me to get a 14-inch MBP with M3 Pro (again, more than I need right now), which runs about $2K (before tax) with the specs I want, and I prefer the smaller size anyway.I’m still agog that the price of the base 14-inch MBP with M3 now costs $400 **less** than the same model did last year. THIS NEVER HAPPENS! I can’t believe the Mac sites didn’t make a bigger deal about this.The base M3 14" is the successor to the M2 13" MacBook Pro.The 14" never came with a non-Pro/non-Max M1 or M2 processor.
-
Apple's 'carbon neutral' claims are misleading, say EU groups
