Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #134708 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2020-11-12 17:37 +0000 |
| Last post | 2020-12-02 04:59 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 213 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2020-11-12 17:37 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Arlen Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-11-12 17:54 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-12 10:01 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2020-11-12 18:03 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-12 10:13 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-13 10:19 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-13 12:39 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-13 20:27 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-13 17:15 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-13 17:20 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-14 00:48 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-13 20:06 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-14 09:41 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-14 04:25 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> - 2020-11-17 17:18 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-18 02:09 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Krzysztof Mitko <invalid@kmitko.at.list.dot.pl> - 2020-11-18 08:51 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-19 11:08 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-19 11:43 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-20 13:00 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-20 13:45 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-20 19:22 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-21 00:51 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-20 20:03 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-21 03:26 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-21 11:50 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-22 18:37 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-21 11:05 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-21 16:47 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-21 12:02 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-21 17:54 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-21 13:30 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-21 21:06 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-22 09:43 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-21 16:03 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 16:50 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-22 14:41 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 18:24 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-22 16:43 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 16:37 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-22 22:35 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 18:20 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-22 18:41 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-23 04:58 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-22 21:04 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-23 16:54 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-23 09:25 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-23 14:53 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-23 20:10 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-24 00:30 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-22 18:39 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 20:32 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-22 18:23 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-23 05:00 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-23 16:51 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 16:31 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-22 17:21 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-22 18:37 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-22 18:42 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 20:32 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-22 18:22 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-23 16:50 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-24 00:57 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <Blackhole@entropy.ultimateorg> - 2020-11-24 16:46 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2020-11-24 16:16 -0600
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-25 00:25 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-25 15:55 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-25 08:45 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-25 14:59 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-18 15:09 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> - 2020-11-18 12:54 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-20 12:31 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-20 13:39 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> - 2020-11-21 14:58 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 16:45 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-22 17:21 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 18:18 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-22 18:42 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-22 15:57 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-22 22:37 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-22 15:00 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 18:29 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-22 18:42 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-22 15:58 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-22 20:10 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-22 18:20 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-23 16:12 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-23 16:52 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-23 14:58 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-23 20:13 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-23 13:18 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2020-11-23 18:21 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2020-11-22 16:28 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> - 2020-11-24 19:12 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-25 13:32 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-25 18:40 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2020-11-25 19:03 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-25 14:27 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-25 20:47 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <Blackhole@entropy.ultimateorg> - 2020-11-25 15:57 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-25 13:30 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2020-11-25 19:46 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-25 20:20 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-26 17:42 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-26 14:35 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-26 11:53 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-26 20:10 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-26 17:20 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-27 04:05 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-27 00:51 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-27 06:41 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-26 23:28 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-26 21:05 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2020-11-26 13:15 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <Blackhole@entropy.ultimateorg> - 2020-11-26 18:58 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-26 20:14 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-26 20:21 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-26 17:23 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-26 17:25 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-27 19:42 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-26 23:29 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-28 10:18 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-27 13:49 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-27 02:40 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-26 23:58 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-28 10:24 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-27 19:30 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-27 20:10 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-27 17:21 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-27 05:36 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-27 18:07 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-27 10:23 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-27 19:37 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-27 20:10 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-27 22:34 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-27 20:00 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-28 05:49 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2020-11-28 16:52 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-28 20:36 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-29 05:16 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-28 00:47 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-28 20:33 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-28 22:35 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-29 05:20 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-29 01:09 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-29 12:09 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-29 15:46 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-29 13:32 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-29 21:50 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-28 09:17 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-28 21:02 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-28 22:35 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-29 05:25 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-29 09:14 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-29 09:20 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-27 17:27 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-27 22:41 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-27 20:24 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2020-11-28 16:53 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-28 20:14 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-28 20:16 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-28 18:33 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-29 05:08 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-29 01:04 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-28 22:45 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-29 11:59 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-29 15:33 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-29 13:30 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-30 00:39 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-30 00:10 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-29 21:48 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-29 17:15 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-29 22:31 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-30 00:42 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-30 00:10 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-30 05:03 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-30 02:31 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2020-11-30 17:41 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-28 05:34 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2020-11-28 16:54 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-28 03:40 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-28 19:15 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-28 01:51 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-28 08:18 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-29 10:05 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-28 09:10 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-28 20:38 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-28 18:35 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-29 18:21 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-11-29 00:47 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-29 08:55 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-29 15:48 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-29 16:16 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-29 13:28 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-30 15:29 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-11-30 00:38 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-30 13:17 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-11-27 14:18 +1300
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2020-11-26 17:41 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-27 10:34 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <Blackhole@entropy.ultimateorg> - 2020-11-26 11:04 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <Blackhole@entropy.ultimateorg> - 2020-11-25 15:19 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-25 13:27 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2020-11-25 19:47 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-25 20:15 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-11-24 16:18 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-20 13:35 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2020-11-20 20:22 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-21 11:52 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Leo <leoblaisdell@sbcglobal.net> - 2020-11-15 17:00 -0800
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-11-13 12:45 -0500
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> - 2020-11-13 20:32 +0000
Re: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices Arlen Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> - 2020-12-02 04:59 +0000
Page 1 of 11 [1] 2 3 … 11 Next page →
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-12 17:37 +0000 |
| Subject | Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices |
| Message-ID | <i15a5sFk7a8U1@mid.individual.net> |
Apple's chip design team is *killing* it!i Bravo! Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices --- Apple introduced the first MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac mini with M1 Apple Silicon chips yesterday, and as of today, the first benchmark of the new chip appears to be showing up on the Geekbench site. <https://jmp.sh/X57oksC> The M1 chip, which belongs to a MacBook Air with 8GB RAM, features a single-core score of 1687 and a multi-core score of 7433. According to the benchmark, the M1 has a 3.2GHz base frequency. When compared to existing devices, the M1 chip in the MacBook Air outperforms all iOS devices. For comparison's sake, the iPhone 12 Pro earned a single-core score of 1584 and a multi-core score of 3898, while the highest ranked iOS device on Geekbench's charts, the A14 iPad Air, earned a single-core score of 1585 and a multi-core score of 4647. <https://jmp.sh/E0RKkIv> Single Core benchmarks In comparison to Macs, the single-core performance is better than *any* other available Mac, and the multi-core performance beats out all of the 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro models, including the 10th-generation high-end 2.4GHz Intel Core i9 model. That high-end 16-inch MacBook Pro earned a single-core score of 1096 and a multi-core score of 6870. Though the M1 chip is outperforming the 16-inch MacBook Pro models when it comes to raw CPU benchmarks, the 16-inch MacBook Pro likely offers better performance in other areas such as the GPU as those models have high-power discrete GPUs. <https://jmp.sh/qkyu8hL> Multi Core benchmarks It's worth noting that there are likely to be some performance differences between the MacBook Pro and the MacBook Air even though they're using the same M1 chip because the MacBook Air has a fanless design and the MacBook Pro has an new Apple-designed cooling system. There's also a benchmark for the Mac mini, though, and it has about the same scores. The Mac mini with M1 chip that was benchmarked earned a single-core score of 1682 and a multi-core score of 7067. Update: There's also a benchmark for the 13-inch MacBook Pro with M1 chip and 16GB RAM that has a single-core score of 1714 and a multi-core score of 6802. Like the MacBook Air, it has a 3.2GHz base frequency. A few other MacBook Air benchmarks have surfaced too with similar scores, and the full list is available on Geekbench. <https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/11/m1-macbook-air-first-benchmark/> -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arlen Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-12 17:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rojssf$1f6n$1@adenine.netfront.net> |
| In reply to | #134708 |
On 12 Nov 2020 17:37:00 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote: > Apple's chip design team is *killing* it!i Bravo! See also the actual _facts_ (not utter bullshit from Apple MARKETING)... o The new ARM technology TSMC Silicon powered MacBook Pro maxes out at 16GB of RAM & the M1 supports only 2 USB ports <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.system/c/5QbTpwJFT-0> o The new TSMC Silicon powered MacBook Pro can't use an eGPU (support for all non-Apple GPUs would be dropped) <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.system/c/_jHTerfLHF8> o Which Apple CPUs, bootroms, & SEP secure enclave coprocessors do NOT already have well-known unpatchable fatal design flaws? <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/6WKS9KpSyJA/m/ycaYwqSsCQAJ> o Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.system/c/qgnkyly9Aj4> o Did Apple (yet again) fail in chip design (just like they did with modems) this time with graphics chips? <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.system/c/Bz7wouZhKcU> o Yet another of the never-ending plethora of unpatchable security flaws in Apple's chips widely reported in the news today <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.system/c/l9nwDIdIIkU/m/FxNf1USgAwAJ> etc. -- Jolly Roger isn't archived in dejagoogle... but he is archived here: <http://comp.sys.mac.system.narkive.com> <http://comp.sys.mac.hardware.misc.narkive.com> <http://misc.phone.mobile.iphone.narkive.com> <http://comp.mobile.ipad.narkive.com> > From: Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> > Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.hardware.misc,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.mobile.ipad > Subject: Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices > Date: 12 Nov 2020 17:37:00 GMT > Message-ID: <i15a5sFk7a8U1@mid.individual.net> > > Apple's chip design team is *killing* it!i Bravo! > > Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch > MacBook Pro and All iOS Devices > > --- > > Apple introduced the first MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac mini with > M1 Apple Silicon chips yesterday, and as of today, the first benchmark > of the new chip appears to be showing up on the Geekbench site. > > <https://jmp.sh/X57oksC> > > The M1 chip, which belongs to a MacBook Air with 8GB RAM, features a > single-core score of 1687 and a multi-core score of 7433. According to > the benchmark, the M1 has a 3.2GHz base frequency. > > When compared to existing devices, the M1 chip in the MacBook Air > outperforms all iOS devices. For comparison's sake, the iPhone 12 Pro > earned a single-core score of 1584 and a multi-core score of 3898, while > the highest ranked iOS device on Geekbench's charts, the A14 iPad Air, > earned a single-core score of 1585 and a multi-core score of 4647. > > <https://jmp.sh/E0RKkIv> > Single Core benchmarks > > In comparison to Macs, the single-core performance is better than *any* > other available Mac, and the multi-core performance beats out all of the > 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro models, including the 10th-generation high-end > 2.4GHz Intel Core i9 model. That high-end 16-inch MacBook Pro earned a > single-core score of 1096 and a multi-core score of 6870. > > Though the M1 chip is outperforming the 16-inch MacBook Pro models when > it comes to raw CPU benchmarks, the 16-inch MacBook Pro likely offers > better performance in other areas such as the GPU as those models have > high-power discrete GPUs. > > <https://jmp.sh/qkyu8hL> > Multi Core benchmarks > > It's worth noting that there are likely to be some performance > differences between the MacBook Pro and the MacBook Air even though > they're using the same M1 chip because the MacBook Air has a fanless > design and the MacBook Pro has an new Apple-designed cooling system. > There's also a benchmark for the Mac mini, though, and it has about the > same scores. > > The Mac mini with M1 chip that was benchmarked earned a single-core > score of 1682 and a multi-core score of 7067. > > Update: There's also a benchmark for the 13-inch MacBook Pro with M1 > chip and 16GB RAM that has a single-core score of 1714 and a multi-core > score of 6802. Like the MacBook Air, it has a 3.2GHz base frequency. A > few other MacBook Air benchmarks have surfaced too with similar scores, > and the full list is available on Geekbench. > > <https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/11/m1-macbook-air-first-benchmark/> > > -- > E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. > I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. > > JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-12 10:01 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <rojt9o$1hv$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #134710 |
On 2020-11-12 9:54 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote: > On 12 Nov 2020 17:37:00 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote: >> Apple's chip design team is *killing* it!i Bravo! > > See also the actual _facts_ (not utter bullshit from Apple MARKETING)... > > o The new ARM technology TSMC Silicon powered MacBook Since that is utter bullshit, why should I bother looking further. Apple designs its own chips, Arlen. Accept it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-12 18:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <i15bnoFk7a8U5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #134712 |
On 2020-11-12, Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote: > On 2020-11-12 9:54 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote: >> On 12 Nov 2020 17:37:00 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote: >>> Apple's chip design team is *killing* it!i Bravo! >> >> See also the actual _facts_ (not utter bullshit from Apple MARKETING)... >> >> o The new ARM technology TSMC Silicon powered MacBook > > Since that is utter bullshit, why should I bother looking further. > > Apple designs its own chips, Arlen. > > Accept it. Poor little butt-hurt Arleen is a pathetic waste of life. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-12 10:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <roju11$a5e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #134713 |
On 2020-11-12 10:03 a.m., Jolly Roger wrote: > On 2020-11-12, Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote: >> On 2020-11-12 9:54 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote: >>> On 12 Nov 2020 17:37:00 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote: >>>> Apple's chip design team is *killing* it!i Bravo! >>> >>> See also the actual _facts_ (not utter bullshit from Apple MARKETING)... >>> >>> o The new ARM technology TSMC Silicon powered MacBook >> >> Since that is utter bullshit, why should I bother looking further. >> >> Apple designs its own chips, Arlen. >> >> Accept it. > > Poor little butt-hurt Arleen is a pathetic waste of life. > This one is particularly hilarious because he drones on endlessly about how he is never factually incorrect. :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-13 10:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrqsne6.a52.g.kreme@ProMini.lan> |
| In reply to | #134708 |
In message <i15a5sFk7a8U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > The M1 chip, which belongs to a MacBook Air with 8GB RAM, and: > In comparison to Macs, the single-core performance is better than *any* > other available Mac, and the multi-core performance beats out all of the > 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro models, including the 10th-generation high-end > 2.4GHz Intel Core i9 model. That high-end 16-inch MacBook Pro earned a > single-core score of 1096 and a multi-core score of 6870. Suck it, JF. -- A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-13 12:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <PxzrH.448161$I15.90313@fx36.iad> |
| In reply to | #134770 |
On 2020-11-13 05:19, Lewis wrote:
> In message <i15a5sFk7a8U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> The M1 chip, which belongs to a MacBook Air with 8GB RAM,
>
> and:
>
>> In comparison to Macs, the single-core performance is better than *any*
>> other available Mac, and the multi-core performance beats out all of the
>> 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro models, including the 10th-generation high-end
>> 2.4GHz Intel Core i9 model. That high-end 16-inch MacBook Pro earned a
>> single-core score of 1096 and a multi-core score of 6870.
>
> Suck it, JF.
Don't be a child about it. The poor bastard just plunked down hard
earned cash to upgrade his Mac Pro (which he neither needed nor could
afford at the time )...
--
"...there are many humorous things in this world; among them the white
man's notion that he is less savage than the other savages."
-Samuel Clemens
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-13 20:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrqtr17.12cb.g.kreme@ProMini.lan> |
| In reply to | #134787 |
In message <PxzrH.448161$I15.90313@fx36.iad> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote: > On 2020-11-13 05:19, Lewis wrote: >> In message <i15a5sFk7a8U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: >>> The M1 chip, which belongs to a MacBook Air with 8GB RAM, >> >> and: >> >>> In comparison to Macs, the single-core performance is better than *any* >>> other available Mac, and the multi-core performance beats out all of the >>> 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro models, including the 10th-generation high-end >>> 2.4GHz Intel Core i9 model. That high-end 16-inch MacBook Pro earned a >>> single-core score of 1096 and a multi-core score of 6870. >> >> Suck it, JF. > Don't be a child about it. The poor bastard just plunked down hard > earned cash to upgrade his Mac Pro (which he neither needed nor could > afford at the time )... that doesn't excuse his constant stream of pig-ignorance and bullshit and constant harping about how things worked on the VAX 30 years ago. -- ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE WORDS 'DEATH WAS HIS CONSTANT COMPANION'? 'But I don't usually see you!'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-13 17:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <VzDrH.541236$HY4.328729@fx37.iad> |
| In reply to | #134803 |
On 2020-11-13 15:27, Lewis wrote: > that doesn't excuse his constant stream of pig-ignorance and bullshit > and constant harping about how things worked on the VAX 30 years ago. Constant? Really? you can't find a better insult? The VAX examnple is relevat because VMS made the memory differences quite visible to the system manager because different areas of the OS were set as parameters in SYSGEN. On the OS-X, because the memory management is totally opaque to the user, you don't really see the difference. But the difference happens. Because for OS_X, the move was gradual, (first introduction of 64 bit on 8086, and now move to ARM), this move will be far less visible and small impact that if the move had been from 32 bit 8086 to 64 bt ARM. But just because the impact of this move is less doesn't mean that there isn't an impact, and it certainly does not mean you can halve the memory of your machines and expect same performance. Lets see how the Cinema 4D performance tests do. These tests require lots of RAM, and spin the cores at max for a long enough tome to cause them to heat up and throttle down if inadequately cooled. A geekbench test that does not require much memory won't see a difference bexause the latop only has half the memory. But a real app that does video rendering will Agian, this is in response from you or some of your evil twins that going from Intel to ARM reduces memory needs, hence the M1 having 8 to 15 vs 16 or 32 on Intel. Going from CISC to RISC does NOT reduce memory footprint of binaries. The difference berwene VAX and ALPHA was huge because VAX has a very uppsercase/biold/underline first C in CISC. The 8086 is far less complex so the difference with ARM is not as striking. However, just because memory footprint woN't increase as much does not mean you can argue it now runs with half the memory. Memory footprint still increases with RISC vs CISC. This is especially true when you consider that initially, many apps will be translated from Intel and more bloated than if compile and optimised for ARM. So I maintain my argument that reducing memory by half on its laptops is not going to be good.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-13 17:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <131120201720472269%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #134833 |
In article <VzDrH.541236$HY4.328729@fx37.iad>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > The VAX examnple is relevat no it isn't, nor has it been for 30-40 years. > So I maintain my argument that reducing memory by half on its laptops is > not going to be good. be prepared to lose.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-14 00:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrquabb.1fdt.g.kreme@ProMini.lan> |
| In reply to | #134833 |
In message <VzDrH.541236$HY4.328729@fx37.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 2020-11-13 15:27, Lewis wrote: >> that doesn't excuse his constant stream of pig-ignorance and bullshit >> and constant harping about how things worked on the VAX 30 years ago. > Constant? Really? you can't find a better insult? Stating facts is not an insult. > The VAX examnple is relevat Nope. Hint: as soon as you string the letters V A and X together, no one reads any further. -- Matters in hand. He'd put matters in hand all right. If he closed his eyes he could see the body tumbling down the steps. Had there been a hiss of shocked breath, down in the darkness of the hall? He'd been certain they were alone. Matters in hand! He'd tried to wash the blood off his hands. If he could wash the blood off, he told himself, it wouldn't have happened. He'd scrubbed and scrubbed. Scrubbed till he screamed. --Wyrd Sisters
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-13 20:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <131120202006308802%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #134844 |
In article <slrnrquabb.1fdt.g.kreme@ProMini.lan>, Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote: > In message <VzDrH.541236$HY4.328729@fx37.iad> JF Mezei > <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > The VAX examnple is relevat > > Nope. > > Hint: as soon as you string the letters V A and X together, no one > reads any further. you're missing out on additional laughs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-14 09:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrqv9hq.25ei.g.kreme@ProMini.lan> |
| In reply to | #134850 |
In message <131120202006308802%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > In article <slrnrquabb.1fdt.g.kreme@ProMini.lan>, Lewis > <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote: >> In message <VzDrH.541236$HY4.328729@fx37.iad> JF Mezei >> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: >> > The VAX examnple is relevat >> >> Nope. >> >> Hint: as soon as you string the letters V A and X together, no one >> reads any further. > you're missing out on additional laughs. Seen the same drivel so many times it's no longer funny. -- In other news, Gandalf died. -- Secret Diary of Boromir
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-14 04:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <hoNrH.321798$GQ4.246205@fx02.iad> |
| In reply to | #134844 |
On 2020-11-13 19:48, Lewis wrote: > Hint: as soon as you string the letters V A and X together, no one > reads any further. Since you don't actually read my posts and just find any spot where you can start insulting me, it doesn't matter. But admitting you don't read the post should send a message that your insults are not based on facts, just just automatically insult withourt reading, and whenever challenged to provide actual facts to show I was wrong, you refuse. I have experience going from one platform to another where memory requireements differences were very visible to the system manager. Yet, you instead choose to discredit and insult me. When the 8086 went from 32 to 64 bits, the transition was basically invisible because neither Windows nor OS-X exposes one to the intricate memory management now done by the OS automatically. And more importantly, compatibility means that existing 32bit binaries ran unchanged using 32 bit addresses and opcodes. The change was gradual as more and more applicatiosn were compiled in 64 bit mode. In the acse of Apple, the progressive move to 64 biuts was compensated by progressive removal of 32 bit frameworks and eventually removal of all 32 bit frameworks which meant only one copy loaded onto memory. But with this all done before move to ARM, the move to ARM does expose the binary size to how many ARM opcodes are necessary to replace 8086 ones. Againa, you or your ilk claimed that binaries would be smaller to explain why the Laptop only has 8GB or 16GB.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-17 17:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <rp1i7t$poo$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #134867 |
On 2020-11-14 09:25:33 +0000, JF Mezei said: > On 2020-11-13 19:48, Lewis wrote: > >> Hint: as soon as you string the letters V A and X together, no one >> reads any further. > > Since you don't actually read my posts and just find any spot where you > can start insulting me, it doesn't matter. But admitting you don't read > the post should send a message that your insults are not based on > facts, just just automatically insult withourt reading, and whenever > challenged to provide actual facts to show I was wrong, you refuse. There's also the discussion of whether investing the time and effort involved in reading and responding is viewed as worthwhile—of the many folks effectively using Brandolini's Law as an attack, too. > I have experience going from one platform to another where memory > requireements differences were very visible to the system manager. Yet, > you instead choose to discredit and insult me. Main memory is not something that Apple even particularly discusses with iPad and iPhone devices. As for your comparisons, I'm somewhat familiar with the OpenVMS ports from VAX to Alpha, and from Alpha to Itanium. And from PDP-11 / RSX-11M to then-VAX/VMS, for that matter. (There's also an OpenVMS port underway to x86-64. Yes, any Apple M1 Arm discussions aside, a few folks have humorously posited that OpenVMS port as a harbinger of doom for x86.) Architectural transitions with any associated storage requirements changes can be a murky comparison within the same operating system, and can be specious across disparate operating systems. > When the 8086 went from 32 to 64 bits, the transition was basically > invisible because neither Windows nor OS-X exposes one to the intricate > memory management now done by the OS automatically. If by "basically invisible" you mean "a whole lot of work, and very much a substantial effort for many developers", sure. From the Microsoft PDC in Denver some twenty years ago, where Microsoft was announcing their 64-bit transition (which eventually included XP 64-bit Edition for Itanium, etc), the Microsoft speakers were telling an interesting tale about recompile-and-go at that PDC, but in retrospect that transition involved a whole lot more work from them and for third-party providers, and a whole lot of time and effort to get from 32-bit OS and apps to 64-bit. This having completed the transition from 32-bit OpenVMS VAX to 64-bit OpenVMS Alpha port a few years prior to that PDC. It's taken macOS over a decade to transition to 64-bit, and all the old apps got rebuilt, and many—not the least of which were Microsoft Office, per Microsoft reps—required substantial effort. Or the apps failed at Catalina. Sure, apps using OO frameworks have been largely protected from a whole lot of the pointer "fun", but that's far from all apps. > And more importantly, compatibility means that existing 32bit binaries > ran unchanged using 32 bit addresses and opcodes. The change was > gradual as more and more applicatiosn were compiled in 64 bit mode. If by "gradual" you mean that older and newer APIs had coexisted for a while, um, sure. macOS did that fairly well. Windows had 32- and 64-bit editions, too. OpenVMS tried mostly-having-it-all with a hybrid preserving both 32- and 64-bit APIs, and ended up with one of the more complex implementations. It's now ~possible to write fully 64-bit OpenVMS apps with code in P2 space now, if you're on Itanium and happen to know a few cryptic build commands. A gradual transition from old to new APIs is the only way you can transition without clobbering your installed base, if the deprecation and removal of the older and 32-bit APIs is necessary. > In the acse of Apple, the progressive move to 64 biuts was compensated > by progressive removal of 32 bit frameworks and eventually removal of > all 32 bit frameworks which meant only one copy loaded onto memory. If by "progressive removal" you mean "32-bit support ended at macOS Catalina", sure. Apple has had a long history of replacing problematic frameworks, and it wouldn't usually make sense to replace a 32-bit framework with another 32-bit framework, discussions of OpenVMS API compatibility aside, during a longer-term transition to 64-bit. > But with this all done before move to ARM, the move to ARM does expose > the binary size to how many ARM opcodes are necessary to replace 8086 > ones. I fail to see the connection from your earlier statements within this posting to your discussion of differing instruction sets and instruction densities. There's also the complicating factor of the Universal and more recently now Universal 2 multi-architecture binaries, and of ignoring and/or of removing executable code for architectures other than that of the current platform. Multi-architecture binaries being a detail which does not exist on OpenVMS. > Againa, you or your ilk claimed that binaries would be smaller to > explain why the Laptop only has 8GB or 16GB. I expect the main memory capacities were chosen due to the differences in paging I/O speeds, due to intentionally constraining initial product design and support and testing, and with the expectation that numbers of I/O connections and such factors will be part of the eventual product differentiation. Upcoming Macs will undoubtedly feature more and faster I/O connections and more memory and more storage too, as well as faster Arm processors. Strictly for app performance, larger main memory masks slower persistent storage performance; caching main storage data and code in main memory. Faster persistent storage can mask smaller main memory. Less caching is necessary, and paging is faster. Similar performance trade-offs arise with processor caches and main memory designs. The Alpha EV7 processor had smaller caches than had the earlier EV6 processor design, but EV7 was faster in aggregate due to the faster EV7 processor I/O speeds. Trade-offs are inherent. These trade-offs vary due to the technologies available. The advent of hypothetical fast byte-addressable persistent storage with speeds approaching that of volatile main memory conceivably allows the read-only portion of apps to be accessed and executed directly from storage, with only the read-write data loaded into and stored in volatile main memory, for instance. Related reading on some details and the evolving trade-offs of code density and processor design: http://web.eece.maine.edu/~vweaver/papers/iccd09/iccd09_density.pdf -- Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-18 02:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tM3tH.2635$gR8.2277@fx45.iad> |
| In reply to | #134998 |
On 2020-11-17 17:18, Stephen Hoffman wrote: > If by "basically invisible" you mean "a whole lot of work, and very > much a substantial effort for many developers", sure. From the user point of view, the Mac transitions did not expose the user to system memoriry management changes. This is in the context of the RAM limitations of the new Macs. Someone argues that moving from x86 to ARM would require less memory, a premise I disagree with. (they said an 8GB M1 Mac would be just as capable as a 16GB Intel one). I tried to explain than going 64 bits and going RISC end up with larger binaries and provided the exmaple of VMS where were were exposed in SYSGEN to those changes, needing far greater allocation of space for shareable images, larger working sets etc. This is all opaque to Mac users, but it doesn't mean that moving from X86 to ARM will end up requiring less RAM. The transition to 64 but on x86 was more gradual and as each 32 but framework was widthdrawn over the years, in increased size of new 64 but apps was comendated by reduced footprint with elimination of 32 bit APIs. But with the move to ARM, Apple has already copmpleted the pruning of 32 bit APIs so there is no saving in RAM from removing old APIs, so it is just a matter of whether the ARM binary is larger than the x86 binary fo same app (needing more memory to load). The data alloactions would be the same. (with regards to the Universal, the file containing the binary may be larger, but one assumes that the image loader only loads the appropriate portion of the universal into memory). > I fail to see the connection from your earlier statements within this > posting to your discussion of differing instruction sets and > instruction densities. This was in relation to someone arguing the binaries for an ARM platform would e smaller than those for X86, thus iot was OK for the new laptops to have less RAM in them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Krzysztof Mitko <invalid@kmitko.at.list.dot.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-18 08:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rp2nav$388$1@adenine.netfront.net> |
| In reply to | #135011 |
JF Mezei wrote: > On 2020-11-17 17:18, Stephen Hoffman wrote: > >> If by "basically invisible" you mean "a whole lot of work, and very >> much a substantial effort for many developers", sure. > > From the user point of view, the Mac transitions did not expose the user > to system memoriry management changes. > > > This is in the context of the RAM limitations of the new Macs. Someone > argues that moving from x86 to ARM would require less memory, a premise > I disagree with. (they said an 8GB M1 Mac would be just as capable as a > 16GB Intel one). > > I tried to explain than going 64 bits and going RISC end up with larger > binaries and provided the exmaple of VMS where were were exposed in > SYSGEN to those changes, needing far greater allocation of space for > shareable images, larger working sets etc. You know that instead of drawing analogies you can actually measure it, right? Open a project in XCode 12.2, go to Build settings -> Architectures, set the architecture you need (x86_64 for Intel, arm64 for M1), archive, check size. I tested two random small Cocoa apps I written in ObjC and sometimes the ARM binary is bigger… file VC840* VC840-ARM: Mach-O 64-bit executable arm64 VC840-Intel: Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64 ls -l VC840* -rwxr-xr-x 1 kmitko staff 90384 Nov 18 09:31 VC840-ARM -rwxr-xr-x 1 kmitko staff 74032 Nov 18 09:28 VC840-Intel …and other times is not (same codebase and no optimization, mind you). file Data* Data Thief-ARM: Mach-O 64-bit executable arm64 Data Thief-Intel: Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64 ls -l Data* -rwxr-xr-x 1 kmitko staff 125568 Nov 18 09:35 Data Thief-ARM -rwxr-xr-x 1 kmitko staff 125712 Nov 18 09:36 Data Thief-Intel Grab some big open source project and try for yourself and you'll have better proof than theories about VAX. > > This is all opaque to Mac users, but it doesn't mean that moving from > X86 to ARM will end up requiring less RAM. > > The transition to 64 but on x86 was more gradual and as each 32 but > framework was widthdrawn over the years, in increased size of new 64 but > apps was comendated by reduced footprint with elimination of 32 bit APIs. > > But with the move to ARM, Apple has already copmpleted the pruning of 32 > bit APIs so there is no saving in RAM from removing old APIs, so it is > just a matter of whether the ARM binary is larger than the x86 binary fo > same app (needing more memory to load). The data alloactions would be > the same. > > (with regards to the Universal, the file containing the binary may be > larger, but one assumes that the image loader only loads the appropriate > portion of the universal into memory). > > > >> I fail to see the connection from your earlier statements within this >> posting to your discussion of differing instruction sets and >> instruction densities. > > This was in relation to someone arguing the binaries for an ARM platform > would e smaller than those for X86, thus iot was OK for the new laptops > to have less RAM in them. -- The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-19 11:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ULwtH.6996$J92.3733@fx48.iad> |
| In reply to | #135013 |
On 2020-11-18 03:51, Krzysztof Mitko wrote: > You know that instead of drawing analogies you can actually measure it, > right? Have you seen cases where the ARM binary is half the size of the Intel one which would make an 8 GB M1 Mac function with same amount of page/swap files as a 16GB Intel? This disccusion is happening because of of the nospam/lewis/whatever argued the M1 chip didn't need as much memory to function as the Intel and that the 8GM Mac in 2020 was perfectly suitable. > …and other times is not (same codebase and no optimization, mind you) Optimizations happen in the compiler and then by the LLVM layer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-19 11:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <191120201143150655%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #135050 |
In article <ULwtH.6996$J92.3733@fx48.iad>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > Have you seen cases where the ARM binary is half the size of the Intel > one which would make an 8 GB M1 Mac function with same amount of > page/swap files as a 16GB Intel? utterly bogus assumption. > This disccusion is happening because of of the nospam/lewis/whatever > argued the M1 chip didn't need as much memory to function as the Intel it doesn't > and that the 8GM Mac in 2020 was perfectly suitable. it is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-11-20 13:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrrffga.2gf5.g.kreme@ProMini.lan> |
| In reply to | #135050 |
In message <ULwtH.6996$J92.3733@fx48.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 2020-11-18 03:51, Krzysztof Mitko wrote: >> You know that instead of drawing analogies you can actually measure it, >> right? > Have you seen cases where the ARM binary is half the size of the Intel > one which would make an 8 GB M1 Mac function with same amount of > page/swap files as a 16GB Intel? You keep repeating the same dumbass mistakes. > This disccusion is happening because of of the nospam/lewis/whatever > argued the M1 chip didn't need as much memory to function as the Intel > and that the 8GM Mac in 2020 was perfectly suitable. That is what technical people WITH THE MACHINES are saying, dumbass. Go read Anandtech. Stop assuming that you are right and everyone else is wrong about something you have never seen or used and THEY HAVE. <https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested/2> "In this first-time view of the popular Cinema4D based benchmark, we see the Apple M1 toe-to-toe with the best-performing x86 CPUs on the market," You fucking idiot child. You don't know what the fuck you are talking about, > Optimizations happen in the compiler and then by the LLVM layer. You haven't a clue. -- "Are you pondering what I'm pondering?" "I think so, Brain, but if we give peas a chance, won't the lima beans feel left out?"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 11 [1] 2 3 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web