|
Post by OtisGreying on Nov 11, 2020 19:25:00 GMT -6
Sounds like their marketing for one of their boxes around the time of the first gen iMacs. They had some strangely high benchmark number for a Photoshop filter, so they went around calling it a "supercomputer" even though the rest of the benchmarks were below their PC peers of the time. Yeah, comparing to an i3 and vague "best selling PCs" did not give the best impression to me. But my bet is that this M1 is just an entry level and the real ones to compare to the big processing powerhouses will come next. Phantom, they did state it was their most efficient chip ever meaning more efficient than the most recent A14 bionic for iPad. Their A14 bionic scores at 1650 per single core which is already 30% higher single core benchmark than the most recent and fastest 10th gen Intel chip (1250) inside Apple's highest spec i9 iMac. So I think it's safe to say M1 is most likely going to be the fastest CPU benchmarking chip to date and at the very least 30% faster than the current fastest iMac, as their A14 bionic chip is basically already so and M1 is supposedly faster.
So the new mini for 899 w/ 16gb ram, you get 30% or more faster single core processing than the current fastest iMac is pretty sweet, but of course it's really not the whole picture and optimization is hugely responsible for smooth & fast workflow.
The fact that nothing is optimized for this hardware will affect just how fast really these programs (pro tools, ableton, plug-ins) run. If things get optimized smoothly I think its a no-brainer, but thats definitely a pretty big if, and if so how will long it take?
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Nov 11, 2020 19:29:04 GMT -6
Amazed that the new models top out at 16gb of RAM. I've got 64gb in my top of the line 2018 Mac Mini and it still struggles with some tasks. Can't imagine anyone doing audio/video/editing buying any of the newer models Very important to note that RAM is not the end all be all and VERY far from it. Better single core processing CPU power will (in aggregate) make sessions run way faster than more RAM will.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Nov 11, 2020 19:37:40 GMT -6
Cut and paste from a ua forum post:
Some guy named imdog just posted this over at gearslutz, felt like posting it here.
“https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/4648107
2020 MacBook Air M1 Single Core: 1687 Multi Core: 7433
for comparison:
2019 16" MacBook Pro 8-Core i9 Single Core: 1118 Multi Core: 6762
Late 2019 Mac Pro 8-core Xeon Single Core: 1024 Multi Core: 7989
So the M1 Air has the best single core performance of any Mac (about 65% greater than the fully loaded late 2019 24-core Mac Pro, 25% greater than fully loaded 2020 10-core i9 iMac), and its multi core performance ranks behind the Mac Pro's & Fully loaded iMacs but ahead of any MacBook.
Edit: wanted to compare it to the fully loaded 16" MacBook Pro too. M1 air scores 36% better single core & 14% better multi core”
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Nov 11, 2020 19:42:23 GMT -6
But doesn’t the ram affect how many vi’s you can run more so that cpu grunt?
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,928
|
Post by ericn on Nov 11, 2020 19:58:44 GMT -6
Cut and paste from a ua forum post: Some guy named imdog just posted this over at gearslutz, felt like posting it here. “https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/4648107 2020 MacBook Air M1 Single Core: 1687 Multi Core: 7433 for comparison: 2019 16" MacBook Pro 8-Core i9 Single Core: 1118 Multi Core: 6762 Late 2019 Mac Pro 8-core Xeon Single Core: 1024 Multi Core: 7989 So the M1 Air has the best single core performance of any Mac (about 65% greater than the fully loaded late 2019 24-core Mac Pro, 25% greater than fully loaded 2020 10-core i9 iMac), and its multi core performance ranks behind the Mac Pro's & Fully loaded iMacs but ahead of any MacBook. Edit: wanted to compare it to the fully loaded 16" MacBook Pro too. M1 air scores 36% better single core & 14% better multi core” Interesting, the only thing is the biggest problem with the intel Mini, was the way it throttled down when it got because of extend use at full cpu use, so the question is how long can you get those kind of benchmarks? This is always the problem with various benchmarks, how does it translate to me? For the record as problematic as real world interpretations are Geekbench has been my personal standard for blind computer comparisons at least as far back as the G4 days.
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Nov 11, 2020 20:00:09 GMT -6
But doesn’t the ram affect how many vi’s you can run more so that cpu grunt? For sampling VI's yes I believe according to @the other mark williams
But I'm not sure to what degree it's dependant on RAM versus CPU. Very curious. I'm probably gonna order a mini and just download everything and test it all out to see just how many kontakt VI's and soft synths I could load. Or try to convince the apple store to let me download & test a bunch of stuff onto a floor model Lol.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Nov 11, 2020 20:03:11 GMT -6
But doesn’t the ram affect how many vi’s you can run more so that cpu grunt? For sampling VI's I believe according to @the other mark williams
But I'm not sure to what degree it's dependant on RAM versus CPU. Very curious. I'm probably gonna order a mini and just download everything and test it all out to see just how many kontakt VI's and soft synths I could load. Or try to convince the apple store to let me download & test a bunch of stuff onto a floor model Lol.
Doesn't it depend on RAM if the software developer makes the VIs load into RAM if the CPu isn't fast enough to cycle with it? Genuinely curious.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Nov 11, 2020 20:09:15 GMT -6
Cut and paste from a ua forum post: Some guy named imdog just posted this over at gearslutz, felt like posting it here. “https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/4648107 2020 MacBook Air M1 Single Core: 1687 Multi Core: 7433 for comparison: 2019 16" MacBook Pro 8-Core i9 Single Core: 1118 Multi Core: 6762 Late 2019 Mac Pro 8-core Xeon Single Core: 1024 Multi Core: 7989 So the M1 Air has the best single core performance of any Mac (about 65% greater than the fully loaded late 2019 24-core Mac Pro, 25% greater than fully loaded 2020 10-core i9 iMac), and its multi core performance ranks behind the Mac Pro's & Fully loaded iMacs but ahead of any MacBook. Edit: wanted to compare it to the fully loaded 16" MacBook Pro too. M1 air scores 36% better single core & 14% better multi core” So, I might have a better single core performance with a $699 than with a $6000 one? Wow, if that is confirmed, we have a winner here. And just imagine what a mid/high end Mac will be.
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Nov 11, 2020 20:28:48 GMT -6
Cut and paste from a ua forum post: Some guy named imdog just posted this over at gearslutz, felt like posting it here. “https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/4648107 2020 MacBook Air M1 Single Core: 1687 Multi Core: 7433 for comparison: 2019 16" MacBook Pro 8-Core i9 Single Core: 1118 Multi Core: 6762 Late 2019 Mac Pro 8-core Xeon Single Core: 1024 Multi Core: 7989 So the M1 Air has the best single core performance of any Mac (about 65% greater than the fully loaded late 2019 24-core Mac Pro, 25% greater than fully loaded 2020 10-core i9 iMac), and its multi core performance ranks behind the Mac Pro's & Fully loaded iMacs but ahead of any MacBook. Edit: wanted to compare it to the fully loaded 16" MacBook Pro too. M1 air scores 36% better single core & 14% better multi core” So, I might have a better single core performance with a $699 than with a $6000 one? Wow, if that is confirmed, we have a winner here. And just imagine what a mid/high end Mac will be. It's definitely confirmed. You'd have better single core with a new iPad as of now. (25%+ more)
The question in my mind is are the DAW's, plug-ins, and other software I use to make my music perfectly usable/optimized on M1/oSbigsur? Who knows it could be smooth now, or I could buy the mini and find only in 6 months from now are all my tools fully functional and my workflow back to normal which would be a huge drag.
Also, to what degree may the mac mini have throttling issues as the last generation did and how will that affect these performance stats?
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Nov 11, 2020 21:12:17 GMT -6
So, I might have a better single core performance with a $699 than with a $6000 one? Wow, if that is confirmed, we have a winner here. And just imagine what a mid/high end Mac will be. It's definitely confirmed. You'd have better single core with a new iPad as of now. (25%+ more)
The question in my mind is are the DAW's, plug-ins, and other software I use to make my music perfectly usable on M1/oSbigsur?
And to what degree may the mac mini have throttling issues as the last generation did and how will that affect these performance stats?
There are obviously a ton of variables here, and there’s not going to be any way of knowing this stuff for sure without trying it out firsthand. Heat is going to be less of a problem with the M1 - that’s one of the big reasons Apple left Intel: Intel has struggled to get down below 10nm construction. The M1 is 5nm construction. Considerably less heat generated. The new MacBook Air doesn’t even have a fan. But the 16GB limit on RAM troubles me about the Mini. Although Jamie popmann said in a thread a few months ago (IIRC) not to be scared of 16GB, and he knows a hell of a lot more than I do. For me, I frequently need to run Final Cut and Logic at the same time (and sometimes Affinity Photo or Designer), and THAT’S where RAM really comes into play: how many apps can you work with at the same time. I would feel better about the M1 Mini if I could bump it up to 32GB RAM. Total guess, but I would imagine this places the roadmap for Apple Silicon with debuting the new ARM iMac around mid-year next year, the 16” MBP sometime next year, and the new ARM Mac Pro at the end of next year or sometime into 2022.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Nov 12, 2020 1:17:21 GMT -6
Did someone summon popmann? I could use some popmann explanation that I will have to decipher for a week. Btw Jamie - I mean that as a compliment.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Nov 12, 2020 3:49:56 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Nov 12, 2020 4:23:26 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Nov 12, 2020 6:30:11 GMT -6
Ok, but there’s no context. 3 times more instruments and effect plugs than what? 6 times faster than what? I doubt the comparison benchmark is Very high.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Nov 12, 2020 6:49:57 GMT -6
Agreed, in the specific, but previously in thread we had been wondering about cpu performance vs ram upgrades, if apple software runs more efficiently that contributes to performance gains and somewhat mitigates ram cap, so far?
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Nov 12, 2020 7:37:37 GMT -6
They're also talking about Logic V.I.s. Might not be same for third party. But still this is progress. I'm just wondering why the cap on RAM?
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Nov 12, 2020 8:05:51 GMT -6
True, think 3rd party vi would benefit from more ram, but if the M chip series offers such significant processing improvements and faster memory, then ram requirements should be lessened?
Seems likely the 16 gig limit will be on Intro models not all M series, new computers ?
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 12, 2020 8:43:34 GMT -6
Did someone summon popmann ? I could use some popmann explanation that I will have to decipher for a week. Btw Jamie - I mean that as a compliment. IF....you have the samples on fast storage: internal SSD or hypothetically Thunderbolt (NOT USBC) connected external SSD, you can lower the amount of RAM that buffers for an instrument. How much varies by engine. BFD or Kontakt will let you granularly adjust to fit your system. I'm pretty sure my Kontakt is set to use 1/6th the default RAM. So--if some cello takes 600mb to buffer by default, mine takes 100mb. Superior has a single setting for "HDD/SDD" for al library that seems to reduce the RAM usage by ONLY like 20% or something. VSL's VIPro makes it configurable to use nearly nada, where I don't know if they ever changed the regular Vienna Instruments to have a setting for that--when I bought VIPro the normal did NOT. There's is crazy--like instead of 1gb of RAM, how about 45mb? I built with 16GB two years ago. I've not hit the top other than synthetically. BUT....all my samples are on internal NVME OR SATA SSDs. But, also note that I might've opted for 32gb if it weren't a fully upgradeable machine--because I run the wheels off them. Important notes: -if you have terrabytes of samples on external magnetic drives? You NEED the default amount of RAM (or close). Thus 16gb MIGHT not be enough. It's still a lot for a songwriter level of use....for now. -if you fancy yourself Hanz Zimmer and want to open template projects with every ensemble from 3 different orchestral libraries....even with the RAM optimization, 16gb won't likely do....but for "songwriter" level use? See above. -I've said for years that if you're committed to the Mac platform, and use virtual instruments more than one at the time, you need to invest in external SSD arrays (like a Blackmagic dock). This is why. Anything you can do to move the proAudio use stuff outside the machine itself, will come back on you tenfold. These limits will get more and more divorced from traditional norms. How many people even know how much RAM is in their iPad? ------panned back thoughts on the new line: I'm encouraged. And certainly in the consumer space--those single core numbers look great, and if they have all hardware Metal pipelines, that should be a pretty stunning battery sipper for consumer users. For musicians? I'm skeptical about the claims of performance gain....vs what? That base model useless MINI from the current line? Using only Logic VIs? Would that be 3x while ONE demanding one is played low latency (how Logic's buffer works that won't globally apply)....and the inclusion of "only" USB4/Thunderbolt ports, when thunderbolt IS still an intel tech. They removed the licensing years ago--not many non intel machines have it still. But, Apple's more competent than AMD, so I'm more concerned it simply won't work for pro audio interfaces (or some)...most of which were still built for TB2 and people use adapters for TB3. Also, on a consumer note: I still object to not having a single REGULAR USB port. The idea that I have a portable computer that I need to carry a dongle allow me to plug into a projector in a conference room or pull a file off a thumbdrive I'm handed is weird AF to me. I know that's not new to THIS line...but, I'm still gonna bitch about it.
|
|
|
Post by brenta on Nov 12, 2020 9:33:48 GMT -6
I've been reading some third party analysis of the M1 chip, and while there is some criticism of the benchmarks Apple is using for their claims of how much faster the new chip is, the consensus is that the M1 will indeed be the fastest laptop CPU ever, and it's not close.
The max RAM of 16GB is surprising. The new macs have a new "Unified Memory Architecture", and Apple is also claiming "2x faster SSD performance." Maybe these new technologies will allow better performance with less RAM than we've needed in the past. Some of Apple's claims, like being able to edit multiple 4k video timelines, would have needed considerable RAM in the past.
My biggest concern is how long it will take to port over all of the audio programs and plugins to be able to use the new architecture. There's an emulator "Rosetta 2" that will allow x86 programs to run on the M1, but I have doubts on how well that will work. This seems like the type of thing that will take Avid years to optimize and make stable.
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Nov 12, 2020 13:09:29 GMT -6
My biggest concern is how long it will take to port over all of the audio programs and plugins to be able to use the new architecture. There's an emulator "Rosetta 2" that will allow x86 programs to run on the M1, but I have doubts on how well that will work. This seems like the type of thing that will take Avid years to optimize and make stable. There are definitely a lot of outstanding questions here, and they'll only be resolved by users actually trying things out over the next 2-4 weeks and reporting back. HOWEVER, regarding Rosetta 2, Apple has said that some 3rd party applications are actually running faster on M1 under Rosetta 2 than they run natively on x86. Now, I don't know what those applications are, but the fact that it's true at all is pretty stunning. But I can't imagine Pro Tools is one of those.
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Nov 13, 2020 0:14:46 GMT -6
My biggest concern is how long it will take to port over all of the audio programs and plugins to be able to use the new architecture. There's an emulator "Rosetta 2" that will allow x86 programs to run on the M1, but I have doubts on how well that will work. This seems like the type of thing that will take Avid years to optimize and make stable. There are definitely a lot of outstanding questions here, and they'll only be resolved by users actually trying things out over the next 2-4 weeks and reporting back. HOWEVER, regarding Rosetta 2, Apple has said that some 3rd party applications are actually running faster on M1 under Rosetta 2 than they run natively on x86. Now, I don't know what those applications are, but the fact that it's true at all is pretty stunning. But I can't imagine Pro Tools is one of those. Can we run third party plug-ins though within a DAW within Rosetta? Is everything that worked on Intel gonna work on Rosetta? How much will this eat into the performance gains that are literally the reason I spent my money on this?
If I could run ableton smoothly within rosetta with my plugs I'd be willing to buy a mini right away, these are the big questions..
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Nov 13, 2020 0:18:09 GMT -6
Does anyone know if once Apple has the floor models to what extent they let us try out software? Like will they let us test pro tools/ableton within Rosetta on the apple floor if we request to download the free versions etc.? Download some plug-ins and bring our iLok and see what the results are. That'd be really helpful and we wouldn't have to completely wait in the dark for random testimonials.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Nov 13, 2020 0:30:15 GMT -6
pretty good break down here.
Hope no one was holding out for this new mini. Does not seem worth it. Id be waiting for the next gen after this probably.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Nov 13, 2020 0:31:51 GMT -6
Does anyone know if once Apple has the floor models to what extent they let us try out software? Like will they let us test pro tools/ableton within Rosetta on the apple floor if we request to download the free versions etc.? Download some plug-ins and bring our iLok and see what the results are. That'd be really helpful and we wouldn't have to completely wait in the dark for random testimonials. random testimonials? I don't know about you but all week I've been getting emails from software companies warning me to NOT update to Big Sur. Because they are all pretty confident it won't work right. I think it'll be a little while before everything is running smoothly on OSX11.
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Nov 13, 2020 1:35:37 GMT -6
pretty good break down here. Hope no one was holding out for this new mini. Does not seem worth it. Id be waiting for the next gen after this probably. All I got was no upgradeable Ssd/ram, no eGPU's and no 10 g ethernet (what is that?) with the mini, doesnt seem that bad but I guess Linus Tech I Don't Write My Own Videos Tips thinks its super terrible.
Idk, I feel 16gb of ram would be fine especially given the CPU gains. Same thing with GPU, given the gains would a eGPU be necessary? Would any current eGPU's even be compatible with the new chip?
I will say though I did not realize the Macbook Air has the M1 as well and it's basically the same thing with a screen and keyboard, if the performance is the same as the MBP and Mini, that looks pretty good.
|
|