News Apple M2 Ultra Graphics Outpaces RTX 4070 Ti in Early Compute Benchmarks

[Admin]

In early compute benchmarks, Apple's M2 Ultra chip appears to perform somewhere between an RTX 4070 Ti and RTX 4080 in Geekbench 6 and GFXBench testing.

Apple M2 Ultra Graphics Outpaces RTX 4070 Ti in Early Compute Benchmarks : Read more

 

[bit_user]

Something ironic about using OpenCL in a shootout with Apple hardware...

Note that GPU compute tends to scale far better with multi-chip approaches than GPU graphics

Yes. So, this won't necessarily translate well to graphics performance. I do wish we knew more about Geek Bench. Ideally, it should be open source, and then we could see what its data access patterns are like.

Turning to a graphics comparison, the new Apple M2 Ultra's 220,000 Geekbench 6 Compute scores (Metal) sit between the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti (208,340 OpenCL) and RTX 4080 (245,706 OpenCL).

No, if Nvidia is still using OpenCL, then we're definitely not talking about a proper graphics benchmark.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

No, if Nvidia is still using OpenCL, then we're definitely not talking about a proper graphics benchmark.

I've changed this to "different" rather than "graphics." Clearly, we know that this isn't a true comparison of graphics performance, but it's what we have right now.

 

[bit_user]

I've changed this to "different" rather than "graphics." Clearly, we know that this isn't a true comparison of graphics performance, but it's what we have right now.

Hey, 3DMark now has a cross-platform benchmark that includes MacOS support!

https://benchmarks.ul.com/news/new-...e-benchmark-for-windows-macos-ios-and-android
​

I found one result for the M1 Ultra Mac Studio: 29228 (Graphics Test 1)

https://benchmarks.ul.com/hardware/tablet/Apple+Mac+Studio+(M1+Ultra)+review
​

Still need to find some good PC dGPU points of comparison...

 

[hushnecampus]

This is cool, and people have been getting decent results just running games through Apple’s Game Porting Kit (which I understand is essentially a version of Wine) so would no doubt get even better results if games were properly ported.

But this chip costs thousands of pounds, and has waaaay more CPU than gamers need. If Apple want to get serious about game support on Mac (and I know that’s not the main target market for these chips, but they do keep suggesting they want gaming on Mac to be a thing) then they need a far more affordable option that still has good graphics, which I assume means a whole new line of chips with a different CPU to GPU ratio. Or just bump up the GPU across the whole lineup.

 

[NinoPino]

I understand OpenCL vs OpenCL or Metal vs CUDA, but for the sake of god what is the sense of Metal vs OpenCL ?

 

[bit_user]

I understand OpenCL vs OpenCL or Metal vs CUDA, but for the sake of god what is the sense of Metal vs OpenCL ?

It's a GPU Compute benchmark, and apparently they didn't bother to port it to CUDA, since Nvidia cards already support OpenCL. If they use OpenCL, then that takes care of Nvidia, AMD, and Intel. The only one left out is Apple, because they're apparently too good for any industry standards.

 

[newtechldtech]

I dont know about this but the new Mac pro huge case and expansion slots hints at a dedicated GPU coming from Apple... it makes no sense to use that huge expensive case with just an M2 ultra low voltage SOC ...

 

[bit_user]

the new Mac pro huge case and expansion slots hints at a dedicated GPU coming from Apple...

Yeah, you've got to wonder what else they expect people to use all those PCIe slots for. They already said you no longer need a dedicated video processing card like the previous gen had. So, there's got to be something else they're anticipating them used for, other than SSDs and a RAID controller. Plus, two of them are x16 and Apple sure does like multi-GPU setups.

 

[tracker1]

For the price of an m2 ultra mac pro, I can buy a 13900k with an RTX 4090. Let's see that comparison.