News Apple Details First Arm Chips for Mac

[nofanneeded]

Final Cut is an Apple product, which is why I didn't even bother mentioning it. It's very obvious it would be well optimized for Metal and this M1 chip of theirs.



Yes, I would want to have 32gb myself, which is why I edit on PC. But Apple only recommends 8GB minimum for 4k editing with most people still editing on 16gb of ram.


You totally missed the point because clearly you never heard of macroblocking. I wasn't talking about real time editing, I'm talking about the final render.

I dont care if it is optimized or not for the new chip. I care about the final result , and I doubt this is anything near upgrade . it is a downgrade . and time will tell.

more over , Memory recommendation is not optimal recommendation . All people I know with an iMac are using 32-64 GB of RAM for editing.

also we are living in the 64-128GB RAM notebook Era , and you think that 16GB is okay as a max? , and it is not really 16 ? will be 8 GB or 12 GB only after GPU usage ? Come on ! it is not even 16GB machine

If you were not talking about real time editing this does not mean it is not important. it is very important. and will be much slower on this chip.

 

[valuearb]

Okay I saw them , I will wait for the real review and applications benchmarks , because that benchmark he is using is saying even 28 watts intel i7 1185G7 is same speed as intel i9 10900k ...

NO COMMENT , He is just comparing SINGLE CORE performance !

The i7 1185G7 is actually signfiicantly faster than the i9 10900k in single core performance (which is what that chart measures) but gets smoked in multicore. I don't know enough about Spec benchmarks to know how much they exercise multicore, but you can see the i9's total speed score is above the i7 so it's definitely incorporating some multicore performance.

There was a Geekbench A14X multicore benchmark that leaked last week that scored a 7,000, just above of an 8 core Intel I-9. That's an iPad processor, it seems reasonable the M1 will multicore benchmark well above that with its higher clock speed Firestorm cores and much higher power budget and active cooling. It's not unreasonable the M1 will be 9,000+, which would be very strong but still trail the i9 and various Ryzens.

So I can't definitively comment on what the Anandtech reviewer means by fastest CPU, I'm assuming he must think the M1 single core will be so strong that it will provide an overall performance better than other CPUs with higher multicore performance? Either way I will say that Anandtech knows benchmarking, this isn't an Apple fan site.

Whether the M1 turns out to be faster in use than top Ryzen and i9 CPUs or not, it's still only the Apple Silicon entry level CPU, and will be using a lot less power and cost quite a bit less than AMD and Intel's fastest laptop and desktop CPUs.

 

[gggplaya]

I dont care if it is optimized or not for the new chip. I care about the final result , and I doubt this is anything near upgrade . it is a downgrade . and time will tell.

more over , Memory recommendation is not optimal recommendation . All people I know with an iMac are using 32-64 GB of RAM for editing.

also we are living in the 64-128GB RAM notebook Era , and you thin that 16GB is okay as a max , and not really 16 ? will be 8 GB or 12 GB only after GPU usage ? Come on !

If you were not talking about real time editing this does not mean it is not important. it is very important.

Optimizations matter for real time editing, and will make an ARM processor seems quick and snappy.

16GB is fine for the demographic they're catering to. I only have 16gb in my laptop and it's fine. 32gb in my desktop and never use near that much. 4k video is what it is, the machine should be fine well into the future if you only edit 4k video. Now if you want to do 8k video in the future, it'll be a problem.

The only people I know that professionally use more than 32gb of ram, use it for Engineering Simulation work. A place where you would never use this computer or even a laptop for that matter.

In the future we might end up using less ram because of these new faster NVME drives pushing over 7000MB/s which is inside of DDR3 speeds. Many tasks won't need as much to be loaded into memory.

 

[margrave]

I'm curious as to how well Apple can execute x86/ARM transition. Microsoft tried it with Windows RT with dismal results. Apple has a more controlled environment, but it's still a huge task. People who buy a very expensive laptop might not react well if they keep hitting compatibility walls, and if it takes too long to fix that the product will be burnt already.

When Apple had to switch from 64000-based CPU to the Power PC nearly 30 years ago, the lack of backwards compatibility nearly killed the Mac, and it paved the way for Windows.

The latter was an also-ran POS at the time. But when Apple's customers had to give up all their software to move to Power PC, they had for the first time a reason to switch to Windows. If not for that, this would be a Mac world, not a Windows world.

So now Apple is making another CPU switch? Big mistake.

 

[gggplaya]

When Apple had to switch from 64000-based CPU to the Power PC nearly 30 years ago, the lack of backwards compatibility nearly killed the Mac, and it paved the way for Windows.

The latter was an also-ran POS at the time. But when Apple's customers had to give up all their software to move to Power PC, they had for the first time a reason to switch to Windows. If not for that, this would be a Mac world, not a Windows world.

So now Apple is making another CPU switch? Big mistake.

I'm sure price had nothing to do with it. I remember buying my first computer when windows 95 came out and building my first computer when windows 98. There was no way my family could afford a Mac, wasn't even within reach.

Ultimately since Windows could be sold by any manufacturer, you had dozens of companies making PC's for significantly less than Apple was selling theirs.

 

[Murissokah]

When Apple had to switch from 64000-based CPU to the Power PC nearly 30 years ago, the lack of backwards compatibility nearly killed the Mac, and it paved the way for Windows.

The latter was an also-ran POS at the time. But when Apple's customers had to give up all their software to move to Power PC, they had for the first time a reason to switch to Windows. If not for that, this would be a Mac world, not a Windows world.

So now Apple is making another CPU switch? Big mistake.

I have my concerns too. I guess Apple has the resources to make this happen if they go all in, but I don't buy or a second that it will be a seamless transition. They might have a great emulator and all, but I've never seen an architectural change of this magnitude that didn't have some form of compatibility issue. Back in the first Rosetta implementation, much of the cons were outweighted by the amazing generational leap that Intel's Core 2 was.

 

[nofanneeded]

In the future we might end up using less ram because of these new faster NVME drives pushing over 7000MB/s which is inside of DDR3 speeds. Many tasks won't need as much to be loaded into memory.

DDR3 speed is 25GB/s on i7 4770 ...

and that nvme speed is sequential , and is nothing like memory I/O access times.

big no Sequential speed is not memory speed . you dont know what you are talking about.

and when you have a huge MAP editing in RAW mode even 16 GB is not enough for editing , and adding like 50 layers above it ... and I am speaking from Experience .

 

[gggplaya]

DDR3 speed is 25GB/s on i7 4770 ...

and that nvme speed is sequential , and is nothing like memory I/O access times.

big no Sequential speed is not memory speed . you dont know what you are talking about.

and when you have a huge MAP editing in RAW mode even 16 GB is not enough for editing , and adding like 50 layers above it ... and I am speaking from Experience .

The M1 chip is not their only chip. It's going to be their entry level chip which is why it's in the Air and Entry level Mac PRO which is the same as their intel offerings which didn't have discreet graphics. You act like it's their PRO model that should cover ALL professionals. It's not! It comes a NICHE demographic of professionals that don't need to have the most powerful computers on the planet to do their job. 16GB is fine for these people. If you need a more powerful laptop, you'll buy one with a better processor, more ram and discreet graphics anyways.