It seems that Apple's ridiculously impressive consistent year-on-year gains up the M1 were in large part possible because they were behind the state of the art. Now that they've caught up with Intel and AMD we should probably expect the same slower more gradual improvements from Apple that we see from the other companies.
The M2 is underwhelming as its the same 5nm as the M1 was.
But rumors say the M2 pro and max are on the 3nm node. And it took so long for the release, as 3nm was delayed.
Apple has a monopoly right now on 3nm, which is a shame. But if we only got tsmc to fire on all cylinders because apple stuffed them with money, then so be it.
Not disputing this, but even Asahi Linux without GPU acceleration has pretty much whole-day battery life on an M1 Air. I'm not sure how well their kernel manages scheduling on the different cores but I suspect the vast majority of the perf/Watt is on the actual hardware.
It's fascinating to think about. If the Mac is currently a low-margin product, Apple might be forced to stay on one node until the better silicon becomes cheap enough to use in production. If Apple doesn't play their cards right, TSMC could shanghai Apple in the exact same way Intel got stranded in the sea of process enhancement.
https://medium.com/macoclock/is-apple-fleecing-you-a682c851a...
The battery lasts stupid long. Like, the fact that I can bring this thing on a plane or train without worrying if they’ll have working electric sockets is huge. The fact I can stash this thing under a desk with no power available and have it run graphics-intensive projections for a 3-hour theatre show is huge. The fact that I can achieve all that with zero throttling (I turned on High Energy use and never turned it off) is huge. The fact that I can achieve all of that with basically no fan noise is nonsensical.
Like, compared to the 2020 Razer Blade (RTX 2070 Max-Q) I use for work, it’s like a completely different class of device. My Razer Blade spins up like a jet engine under load, requires a cable if I’m going to do anything intense for an hour, underclocks from ~4.4GHz to ~1.5-2.5GHz when on battery (seemingly no way to disable this), and really only beats my MacBook for tasks that specifically require an Nvidia GPU.
Yesterday, there was an article about Intel showing off a "35 watt" chip that was benchmarking better than last year's 125 watt chip. Except, you go into the comments and people note that it'll draw 107 watts for short periods of time - probably just long enough to get good benchmark scores.
The magic of the M-series processors is that they have really great sustainable performance and without needing to draw power and create heat like Intel's. The Razor Blade machines are amazing in how they deal with the amount of heat generated with their liquid cooling and everything (it's quite a design), but as you note it's still a jet-engine sounding machine that requires being tethered to power.
One of the big things that Apple showed off when introducing the M1 Pro/Max was the idea that you could be a creator doing your job and no longer feel like you were tied to a power outlet. Photoshop from a park or edit video wherever you are: you really don't need more power than you'll always have with you.
As I said, I bought the M1 Pro and specifically upgraded to the 8 performance core version of it. I'd always bought the high-watt Intel processors for my MacBook, not the paltry 15W Intel parts. I had a 2020 MacBook Pro with 2.3GHz Core i7 (28W, 10nm) and I'd regularly have it get really hot, the fan often wasn't too loud but it was always a constant drone, and things felt slow.
My next machine is going to be a MacBook Air. I feel like I'm using nothing on this machine. I have 8 performance cores and 2 efficiency cores, but it just feels like there's no point to having that much CPU. It's a really crazy feeling for me. Yes, more performance will be useful for some people, especially people who do video editing, graphics, etc. But damn does all my work never even come close to stressing this thing - something I'd regularly have a problem with on Intel's greatest drawing a lot more power and making a lot more heat just a year before. Intel has made some strides since then and I'm happy that their newer processors are doing well, but for the first time in my life it just feels like I don't care.
I might grab a 3nm laptop from Apple when those come out, but I'm not anxiously awaiting them. I might just wait for whatever comes after TSMC's 3nm process. I am kinda excited that I can go to a MacBook Air.
The hardware is basically equivalent, but unfortunately that's far from the case with the software. It's definitely useable as a home computer if you mainly browse the web or use office apps. But there's a lot of software that just isn't supported on the ipad. It would be pretty useless for me as a software developer.
Frankly though, I don't want most manufacturers to make ARM machines. While Apple is allowed to monopolize the latest TSMC silicon, it's completely pointless trying to compete with them. May as well focus on delivering a great x86 experience with AMD and switching to something more open like RISC-V when the time comes.
digression: I believe there's no way to disable that because the laptop's battery is physically incapable of reliably supplying the necessary amperage at those higher clock rates. It's an 80 watt-hour battery for a laptop that needs a 200W+ power adapter. The battery can't drain that fast even if it wanted to.
[1]: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/01/apple-unveils-m2-pro-...
I’m not exactly sure how Apple was “behind the state of the art” and has caught up. Can you explain?
The M1 was when they caught up. They were behind the state of the art (of laptop/desktop chip performance) with their A series chips starting with the A4. They gradually caught up over the course of several years to the point that when they released the M1 chip (which was really not that different to the A15) they were slightly ahead.
...but A series chips were never intended for laptops or desktops? And by all accounts, the A series nearly always out-competed comparable QC Snapdragon chips.
Sure, they’re all “Apple Silicon” but the chips should be compared to their equivalents, M-level with Intel/AMD and A-level with Snapdragon/Exonys. We don’t really compare Snapdragon to Core any other time, as they both optimize for vastly different things.
I would also argue that Apple is continuing to make big boosts in their A-level chips compared to their mobile counterparts.
What on earth are you talking about?! Alder Lake was a huge step up for Intel, and Raptor Lake has improved things more than I would have expected as well. Before Alder Lake, Intel's CPUs honestly sucked. AMD still seems to have a modest competitive advantage in terms of efficiency and battery life (making AMD not that far off from where Apple is in hours of practical battery life when doing something other than looking at a static screenshot for hours on end), but Intel makes up for that with performance, and as I recall, Alder Lake is still more efficient than what Intel had before in laptops.
Sapphire Rapids is also a huge innovation compared to what Intel had been doing for years in the server market. Intel has also been introducing some really interesting GPU products now to bring competition to AMD and Nvidia, but it will probably take another generation or two to iron things out. If none of that is "innovation", then I don't know what is!
The last 2 years are the first time Intel has really been innovating in the past 5+ years!
When M1 came out, it was awesome. Since then, Intel and AMD have released processors that are significantly more competitive, while M2 was a mediocre step forward. I appreciate my M2 MBA, but Apple Silicon needs a huge upgrade with M3 to remain competitive.
For a lot of legitimate use cases, there are at least half a dozen Windows laptops coming out right now that I would instantly pick over a MacBook, and the same would not have been said 2 years ago.
Would you mind listing a couple? I'd prefer to buy a Windows machine for my next laptop, but I've been SO burned by hibernation bugs, CPU throttling, battery issues, etc. And I've had an OG 13" M1 MBP from work for the past year or so, and the performance and battery life have been unreal to that point that I'm very much considering one of these 14" M2 MBPs for myself.
In terms of innovative form factors, look at these:
- A laptop with a nice OLED screen and a Color E-ink screen. This seems like an incredible combination, although the 60Hz limit on the OLED screen is unfortunate: https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/5/23541379/lenovo-thinkbook-...
- This dual screen (dual OLED, even!) concept seems like it would be challenging to pull off, but every hands-on review I've seen was really impressed with it, and I can totally see use cases for this: https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/5/23518872/lenovo-yoga-book-...
- The Flow Z13 is like a Microsoft Surface with an actual GPU and a 165Hz display. This one isn't as appealing to me as the two above, but it is neat: https://rog.asus.com/laptops/rog-flow/rog-flow-z13-2023-seri...
In terms of the other category,
- The Acer Swift X 14 comes with a nice 120Hz OLED screen and an RTX 4050, so it seems like a nice, balanced laptop, but I wish it had the option for more than 16GB of RAM: https://youtu.be/va3OmoYHKYs?t=298
- The Flow X13 now comes with up to an RTX 4070 and 165Hz display and up to 32GB of RAM, and this is significantly more compact than the Swift X 14, but the display is not as nice as an OLED. This is also a convertible, so you can use the 360 degree hinge to make it into a tablet: https://rog.asus.com/laptops/rog-flow/rog-flow-x13-2023-seri...
- The new Zephyrus G14 is probably the one I find most exciting, offering a 165Hz MiniLED display that's almost as nice as OLED, as well as up to an RTX 4090 (Laptop) and 32GB of RAM, but it is about the same size as the Swift X 14, so not as small as the Flow X13: https://www.techradar.com/reviews/asus-rog-zephyrus-g14-2023
A number of these also have user-upgradeable RAM, SSD, or both. I really like OLED, so it's great to see so many options for that, and MiniLED is going to be significantly more common this year than it was last year. It would be nice if my M2 MBA offered OLED or MiniLED.
But I'm still really concerned about the consistency of hibernation and sleep so I'm not taking a searingly hot machine out of my bag at 1% battery life. Or the weird quirks of some new hinge or keyboard design that I have to live with for 4+ years of owning a machine.
I'd honestly take half the specs and double the thickness/weight if it meant that my keyboard felt like a keyboard and that I can confidently close the lid at any time and re-open it back to whatever I was doing.
I don't _like_ Apple. But they can do that. And I don't even have to compromise on anything except using macOS (which I can tolerate).
Those have a huge tie in with the software, so I wouldn't expect hardware innovation to help.
I didn’t bother addressing those points because it’s hard to know where things were going wrong without a lot more detail.
Sleep issues are definitely a hallmark of Windows Modern Standby, but one might hope that will be addressed soon. Supposedly Microsoft is looking into it now.
Generally speaking HN's average knowledge on Hardware isn't exactly up to date to say the least.
They then scaled up performance so much that a desktop ARM chip was made. That had never been done on a large scale before. So, no, imo Apple was never behind Intel and AMD, they were never competing in the same space.
And now of course TSMC / Apple haven’t caught up, they have surpassed comparable offerings from Intel.
I'm an enormous fan of the M series. But there is an interesting consequence of a couple of fundamental design decisions.
The M series has huge memory bandwidth but look at its focus on I/O. It reminds me of one of the design decisions of the Alto (memory bus was 3/2 the screen refresh rate, a mind-boggling decision for its time). The fact that the M1 can go in an ipad is insane, but is enabled by the way the M series was designed. Their design for long battery life while drawing onto directly connected displays is unmatched.
However I believe that same decision has hobbled the M1 in a way that may make a Mac Pro version "impossible" (i.e. too much change to be worth doing). M series are optimized to dash rapidly then quickly go to sleep.
I feel the Intel and AMD guys are still thinking of sustained performance, a holdover from the desktop world and its mainframe, or at least minicomputer roots. Psychologically their mobile chips look to me like scaled down desktop machines.
If my belief is right, AMD and Intel aren't really catching up on mobile, while Apple will probably never produce a Mac Pro worth buying (for me they never were, but I'm sure there are people for which they were a great deal).
AMD puts 96 cores into a 360w TDP (not counting spikes that go higher than that) at 3.6GHz. Apple could most likely fit 72 high-performance cores and 36 more efficiency cores into that same 360w TDP.
Given that AMD's chips require much higher clockspeeds to hit the same total performance (nearly 5GHz for Zen 3 to match a 3.2GHz M1), the final product from AMD would likely be quite a bit slower overall.
I believe the real reason for the Mac Pro not hitting the market is their insistence on unified memory. At that size, unified memory and controlling latencies explodes in complexity.
Even worse, the Mac Studio already appeals to most of the higher-end market meaning this $20-50k system probably doesn't have very many buyers either. They could sell such a product in the server market, but they left that market years ago and the reinvestment costs would be massive and very high-risk.
I was nodding along about M2 being a minor bump over M1, but I'm not even sure what you mean here. Apple previously used Intel processors - how is Intel not caught up with Intel?
Apple was key to many many computing technology adoption - USB, Thunderbolt, even early WiFi. Now that they're making their own desktop processors and entire SoC, I think they can move in ways that are not constrained by Intel or other players. It's possible we see the laptop market move more like the smartphone market.
Intel doesn’t really seem to make any strides in low-power designs, they just throw more mid-power cores at the problem to achieve better multi core efficiency as well as manipulate power brackets. Shirt-time (benchmark-relevant) consumption of Intel chips is insane and their published TDP figures are utterly meaningless. AMD has very scalable cores and Zen4 performs admirably at low power, but AMD too falls victim to power inflation to keep pace with Intel.
It seems tacky to me because the M2's competition isn't really 2019 Intel MBPs- it's laptops using modern Intel/AMD CPUs (the M2 may still be better than those, but if that's the case those are the benchmarks they should be giving us)
Granted, I don't think they will 100% kill intel. My guess is, it just won't be public. They will keep a few internal machines that MacOS is minimally functional on so if they ever want to switch back, they already have a base. Would be my guess.
EDIT: I see they actually do just that for some specific applications.
In my case, living in the US, we all do our taxes in the first three-ish months of the year. Last year Turbo Tax told me they wouldn't support my 2013 MBP this tax season, so I decided to wait until fall 2022 and get whatever Apple released. Fall 2022 came without a release, so I've been biting my nails: Turbo Tax won't run on my MBP, and I don't want to upgrade to an "outdated" M1.
(As you can infer, I'm planning on using my next MBP for ~10 years.)
I use FreeTaxUsa, which is entirely online and free for your federal return. I think it may be $15 or so for state returns, but I live in Florida so it's not really something I think about.
You just are unlikely to know/find the rules for optimal results, and the process will take a lot longer.
Not a fan of turbotax, but it's not _necessary_.
https://www.irs.gov/filing/free-file-do-your-federal-taxes-f...
It does some calculations itself, and some you have to do yourself, but it is very easy to use and file online, and get a pdf return to save for yourself.
Any half decent state also has had free online tax return filing for some time now.
https://www.irs.gov/filing/free-file-do-your-federal-taxes-f...
The form-based approach is fine if you like that kind of thing, or just have 1-2 W2s.
Paid Tax-prep software is "worth it" because it simplifies the whole process.
But again, nothing wrong with filling out the forms yourself if you like that kind of thing.
https://www.irs.gov/filing/free-file-do-your-federal-taxes-f...
Any half decent state also offers free online tax returns. If all you are is an employee with stocks/bonds in a brokerage that gives you the necessary forms, it is super easy.
The bigger issue has to do with how US politics work. "What makes sense," is what most countries do: the government sends you a completed tax return and you just verify that it is completed correctly. Due to lobbying, the US government is prohibited from telling you how much tax you owe. Instead, what happens is the government does your taxes for you in secret, and if the amount you pay is significantly different from what they believe you owe, the government sends you a bill with a suggested payment. You don't have to actually pay the amount that they suggest, but if you don't, you better have a darn good reason to explain why the government calculated your tax wrong.
In general, it is to your benefit to err in your favor. The interest rate on a "tax mistake" is extremely low. But, if you accidentally overpay, the government will very rarely send you a refund automatically.
I tried the web version, but I didn't like it.
It's also 4 years old at this point. Where is the comparison to current-gen Intel/AMD?
For as long as I can remember, Apple has compared new products to the previous product. And it is a more sensible approach than picking some arbitrary competitor from a huge collection of possible options, because it gives a fixed frame of reference, one of which many of the target audience are aware of. 6x faster than the previous model is very good marketing.
Yep, my opinion on the matter has changed to the GP comment's.