|
I'm gonna buy an M1 Air and never open it and keep it for 30 years then sell it on eBay for a mint.
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 03:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:26 |
|
|
Penisaurus Sex posted:If you edit video to earn a living, but work alone and render locally buy the 16GB. Quantum of Phallus posted:If you edit video to earn a living then get a Mac Pro and use Premiere tbh yeah i tend to agree with both of these although if you're using premiere i dunno if i'd bother with a mac pro until they go m-whatever
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 03:18
|
|
|
Baronash posted:Since it was such a major talking point in this thread, I'm a little curious about what kind of workflow uses three displays and doesn't have one of those monitors as mostly text/other basic imagery that would be served just fine by something like displaylink. I'm not arguing that they don't exist, I'm just interested in what activity really benefits from that. I agree with you, but can you actually run two native external monitors on M1 if you close the lid?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 04:12
|
|
|
hatty posted:Just sold my 16” for $1700 which I will save until the 14” pro comes out whenever that happens. Pretty happy with my M1 air at the moment. What specs? I’m thinking of selling mine too. Also, where did you sell it? eBay?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 04:42
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:I agree with you, but can you actually run two native external monitors on M1 if you close the lid? No so far. You need a display link adapter atm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 04:53
|
|
|
Just buy one of those giant gently caress off Samsung 49” monitors
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 04:54
|
|
|
I have an ultra-wide monitor that easily works like two monitors and one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 04:55
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:I'm gonna buy an M1 Air and never open it and keep it for 30 years then sell it on eBay for a mint. Make sure you get it graded 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 05:23
|
|
|
The cost to get that thing graded was probably 3x what it will sell for, especially since Nintendo just decided to release another batch of them like a month ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 05:28
|
|
|
American McGay posted:The cost to get that thing graded was probably 3x what it will sell for, especially since Nintendo just decided to release another batch of them like a month ago. Yeah they were in the Black Friday ad lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 05:53
|
|
|
What's the performance hit look like of the M1 air vs Pro after thermal throttling? I keep seeing benchmarks putting them about the same, but it's tough to know what happens with like a sustained load (eg, games or something). Is it like 20%, 30%?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 06:03
|
|
|
PRADA SLUT posted:What's the performance hit look like of the M1 air vs Pro after thermal throttling? I keep seeing benchmarks putting them about the same, but it's tough to know what happens with like a sustained load (eg, games or something). Is it like 20%, 30%? I’ve never heard of the M1 ever getting hot enough to actually throttle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 06:05
|
|
|
PRADA SLUT posted:What's the performance hit look like of the M1 air vs Pro after thermal throttling? I keep seeing benchmarks putting them about the same, but it's tough to know what happens with like a sustained load (eg, games or something). Is it like 20%, 30%? 15-20% iirc, after 10 minutes of sustained load.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 06:16
|
|
|
KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:I think the caveat is that if you have an intel mac that's still got some value, then sell it now and buy an M1, because intel macs are going to be completely worthless very soon. There are plenty of systems that don't have a viable M1 replacement yet. And it's not like Apple is going to forcibly remote-disable x86 macs. The M1 is very good and it'll have an impact on the desirability of current systems, but they won't be worthless and people don't need to run out to replace working computers. The long-term price curve for the last x86 macs will be interesting to see. I'm guessing it'll fall off quickly at first but stick on a higher-than-you'd-expect price for the people who have to nurse along some obscure but vital piece of software that doesn't work quite right under Rosetta and won't ever see a port or replacement. G5 PowerMac towers are worth more than Mac Pros that are several years newer, and far faster and more power-efficient, because people have to keep their legacy software going.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 06:32
|
|
|
arbybaconator posted:What specs? I’m thinking of selling mine too. Also, where did you sell it? eBay? I sold it locally on offerup, It was a base 2019 16" with AppleCare. Guy said he needs windows so it'll be the last MacBook he'll buy for some time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 06:51
|
|
|
Some Goon posted:15-20% iirc, after 10 minutes of sustained load. FWIW, WoW of all things makes the MBA M1 throttle, lol.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 07:10
|
|
|
So are the M1 chips any beefier than the current iPhone 12/iPad Pro chips? Or are they the same power but just techno-alchemy'd into working on macos?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 07:15
|
|
|
buglord posted:So are the M1 chips any beefier than the current iPhone 12/iPad Pro chips? Or are they the same power but just techno-alchemy'd into working on macos? they're the exact same cores, just more of them on the m1
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 07:21
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:they're the exact same cores, just more of them on the m1 I believe the M1 cores can operate at a higher max frequency, and I believe possibly have more L1 and L2 cache (?), so a few tweaks here and there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 07:26
|
|
|
SourKraut posted:FWIW, WoW of all things makes the MBA M1 throttle, lol. What did you expect? It's only a powerful system in the context of fanless ultraportables. It's exceptionally good in its class but it's not a high end gaming system with a discrete GPU. Even if it was a high end gaming system with a discrete GPU, 3D games and applications are a worst-case scenario for power draw, and the complexity doesn't really matter. If they render a frame quickly, they don't drop into a low-power state; they get to work on the next frame instead, so they can keep the framerate up. Even if you run a limiter or are bumping up on a vsync'd output frame rate limitation, they're usually bad about dropping power consumption over the couple of milliseconds before they need to go full throttle again. It doesn't matter whether you're running a triple-A graphics showcase at a slow framerate or an ancient game at a gazillion fps- either way, the GPU will be working as hard as it can, and if the cooling isn't there to match the sustained power draw, it'll throttle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 07:29
|
|
|
mediaphage posted:i’m aware that ram is still ram but the new systems are better at taking advantage of it by all accounts. No please don't do this The bolded is telephone-game stuff being spread on the internet by people who think that M1 has magic which makes it need less RAM. The reality is that it probably needs slightly more. arm64 code is less dense than x86_64 - the same program compiled for ARM needs a bit more memory for code. Rosetta translation should use substantially more memory for code than either arm64 native software or x86_64 code on an Intel Mac. Data takes the same space, for the most part. There are some narrow opportunities for certain kinds of programs to save memory, mostly software which renders 3D graphics through Metal, but getting there will require optimizing them for M1. It's not automatic. I think a lot of why this idea has spread so easily is that there's lots of people who habitually overbuy memory. Those people are now buying M1 Macs with less RAM because that's all they can get, and when their workload runs great, they attribute it to the M1 having some kind of magic which makes it need less memory. Contributing factors: - anybody who doesn't have a CS degree who watches RAM use in Activity Monitor tends to form a belief that they need as much RAM as they have in their computer, because macOS will fill free memory up with disk cache and other temporary buffers. This is just macOS trying to make RAM useful even when there's more of it than required, but it primes people to believe that when a M1 Mac works great with less RAM, it must be because the M1 magically reduced memory requirements. - some of the loads out there which are perceived to need tons of RAM just don't. You've mentioned video editing as one, and it's a great example. Video editors are always designed to stream data from disk since there's no practical way to keep all the source clips for a bigger-than-trivial project in RAM, no matter how much RAM you have. Memory use does scale up with resolution and other factors, but generally speaking it isn't as much of a memory hog as popularly assumed. Especially when the editor has been designed around low-RAM computers - Apple's own FCP got some care to make sure it could run well on a 6GB iPad Pro.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 07:38
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:What did you expect? This is why I went with the pro. BobHoward posted:No please don't do this And this is why I went with 16GB.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 07:39
|
|
|
SourKraut posted:I believe the M1 cores can operate at a higher max frequency, and I believe possibly have more L1 and L2 cache (?), so a few tweaks here and there. this is just cooling. they can run them faster for longer because they can dissipate heat more effectively in a laptop frame than in a phone or ipad frame. i'm not sure about the cache, i'd be a little suprised if the l1 was different tho
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 07:42
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:If you edit video to earn a living then get a Mac Pro and use Premiere tbh Why you hating on Final cut? I feel this is like telling Writers they have to use Microsoft word
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 07:50
|
|
|
LionArcher posted:Why you hating on Final cut? I feel this is like telling Writers they have to use Microsoft word My hunch is they (like me, and pretty much anyone I know that used to edit things beyond being a hobbyist) felt completely abandoned by Apple after they moved to FCPX and moved on to Adobe and (probably) won’t ever look back. That being said I’ve heard FCP is much better now!
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 07:55
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:Even if it was a high end gaming system with a discrete GPU, 3D games and applications are a worst-case scenario for power draw, and the complexity doesn't really matter. If they render a frame quickly, they don't drop into a low-power state; they get to work on the next frame instead, so they can keep the framerate up. Even if you run a limiter or are bumping up on a vsync'd output frame rate limitation, they're usually bad about dropping power consumption over the couple of milliseconds before they need to go full throttle again. It doesn't matter whether you're running a triple-A graphics showcase at a slow framerate or an ancient game at a gazillion fps- either way, the GPU will be working as hard as it can, and if the cooling isn't there to match the sustained power draw, it'll throttle. Not actually true on M1. It's clear Apple has put a lot of work into scaling how hard the GPU works based on real demand. They also seem to be insanely good at changing power / performance states very quickly. For example, I just fired up FTL. If you don't know what it is, it's an indie space game from quite a while back. Although it has the appearance of a 2D game, it's actually rendered in 3D with the GPU. Using that command line tool I mentioned a while back, powermetrics, I can see that while running FTL windowed the M1 GPU stays at ~40% utilization, never leaves its lowest frequency of 396 MHz (max is 1278 MHz), and uses about 100mW. Total M1 package power is between 500 mW and 1000 mW. You can probably run this game for ten hours, it uses less energy than the display backlight. I'm sure FTL could use lots more power if its frame rate wasn't capped by vsync, but there's no point in that. A lot of what we believe about how personal computers have to work is being set on its head by M1. We now get to see what a decade of relentless work on cellphone level power optimization looks like when applied to bigger computers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 08:16
|
|
|
Final Cut is great if you don’t need to collaborate. It’s the perfect YouTuber editing software.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 09:38
|
|
|
LionArcher posted:Why you hating on Final cut? I feel this is like telling Writers they have to use Microsoft word Final Cut Pro isn’t good enough for professional workflows. Not hating on it, I used it for years. It just doesn’t have the integration you need with graphics or audio programs. Any time you want to send something from FCP to be sound mixed, it’s a janky workaround that requires a paid plugin. Premiere and Avid it’s one click. I think FCP is great and if it was viable I’d use it for its performance with ProRes but it’s just isn’t good enough for most of the editing I do. Honj Steak posted:Final Cut is great if you don’t need to collaborate. It’s the perfect YouTuber editing software. Absolutely frogbs posted:My hunch is they (like me, and pretty much anyone I know that used to edit things beyond being a hobbyist) felt completely abandoned by Apple after they moved to FCPX and moved on to Adobe and (probably) won’t ever look back. I only used FCP7 a bit and never in a professional sense, it was all Avid and a few years of FCPX. Then later everyone except the legacy tv editors moved to Premiere for most stuff. If you’re working with design teams using Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects etc..., having a Premiere license is a godsend. There’s one new guy on our team who’s on FCP and trying to get all that stuff into his edits is a nightmare. Quantum of Phallus fucked around with this message at 09:48 on Dec 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 09:43
|
|
|
fwiw i don’t think it’s some kind of magic; it’s clearly not and i don’t know why people keep using that word. it’s just faster at moving things around memory especially on a system where the gpu is sharing it. if you need to load some dumb huge dataset into memory, you’ll still need to a lot of ram; my so just purchased a 128gb upgrade for their new imac because they’re doing something that requires it. regardless my overall point was people tend to wildly overstate how much ram they need and for the most part on the new systems 4k video or most photoshop doesn’t seem to be an issue and if you’re doing a bunch of 8k editing locally you’re probably doing this for money at which point the upgrade cost is no big deal. anyway as we were discussing all this within the context of video editing it looks like some preliminary blog tests aren’t showing a huge difference between the memory configs unless you bump things up to 8k mediaphage fucked around with this message at 09:57 on Dec 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 09:55
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:No please don't do this The ram being physically on the die DOES reduce the need somewhat. Being physically close to the places that need the stored data means that it takes less time to retrieve data onboard there, less powerful hardware is needed to successfully transmit the data to the ram for storage due to electrical losses from transmission distance. Less transmission time means slightly less of a ram buffer is needed to store pending calculation data. Also, if designed for it, the fact that the GPU and CPU can call on the same pool of ram for the relevant data rather than having separate copies stored locally does mean that the overall system cpu + gpu ram needed would be lessened. That said, I'm not at all confident that this reduction altogether reduces the need in a meaningful way to the end-user. I'm sure there is a real reduction but it's probably not much. MacOS just, in general, being more aggressive in throwing older applications and data into the swap than windows is probably does a lot more than any physical proximity of the ram does to reducing the utilization.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 14:07
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:The ram being physically on the die DOES reduce the need somewhat. Being physically close to the places that need the stored data means that it takes less time to retrieve data onboard there, less powerful hardware is needed to successfully transmit the data to the ram for storage due to electrical losses from transmission distance. Less transmission time means slightly less of a ram buffer is needed to store pending calculation data. i wonder if this memory on package architecture boosts the effectiveness of the memory compression introduced in mavericks. or if that tech was designed with this in mind (or allowed this to be a hardware optimisation)
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 14:41
|
|
|
I found 8GB of RAM was a bottleneck on my 2012 Mini, but less so on my 2018. Another factor that could come into it is if it does have to page these days, it’s doing it on ridiculously fast storage compared to the old days.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 16:11
|
|
|
Can the M1 MBA replace my 2018 MBP? My MBP has 16 GB RAM and 500 GB SSD which is what I'd go for with the Air so no loss there. My MBP is the base model i5 2.3 GHz and from what I can tell the M1 blows it out of the water. Screen resolution and technology seems to be the same and I think the only thing I lose is the touchbar which I have literally never used in the 2 years I've owned this laptop. Going from 4 USB-C ports to 2 might be potentially an issue but I don't think I've ever needed more than 2 at once (but the option is nice of course). I would use it for Office, PyCharm/VSCode/Xcode, and maybe get back into WoW. For the coding and gaming I'd probably plug it into a 24" or 27" 1080p/1200p monitor, nothing fancy. Just wondering cause apparently Apple will give me a $750 trade-in for my MBP making the 500GB MBA $400. I looked on Swappa for other people selling my MBP model but they are listed by people with no pictures and no ratings and for $1100 and tbf I hate dealing with people trying to buy stuff from me. Oh and I have some scratches on the underside that I know for sure people are going to nitpick about and demand discounts on. Boris Galerkin fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Dec 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 18:09
|
|
|
really sounds like you answered your own question. how exactly are you wanting people to answer?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 18:12
|
|
|
mediaphage posted:really sounds like you answered your own question. how exactly are you wanting people to answer? I dunno, like "no it's a bad idea because the MBA will explode the moment you start compiling code or run wow at 1080p" or "yes this is exactly my use case and I get 60fps for most games."
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:I dunno, like "no it's a bad idea because the MBA will explode the moment you start compiling code or run wow at 1080p" or "yes this is exactly my use case and I get 60fps for most games." It's a bad idea because the hype appears to be real and for all we know you'll become annoying and insufferable about it. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 18:29
|
|
|
A bit late but in case it helps anyone else decide, my reason for probably going 16gb Air for LP/LR/PS/FCP/Light gaming over a similar Pro is really down to the fact that I don't think it's worth the extra price for me and the idea of having a fanless computer is so cool. If you search around for throttling issues even on the stock base Air it's not that bad at all. If you have a reason to worry about throttling you'll probably know before you ask. The fanless design, it's just one of those things I find really fascinating on a hardware level. I love minimalism in design and I feel like the Airs have reached a place that Apple has been aiming for since the 00s when I was first getting into Apple/design in general. Not really the right thread but since the topic of FCP is active, that would be good for me right? I want to make music videos and assorted weird poo poo. I'm a control freak and don't really plan on working with others past basic collaboration. I also don't really get into super fancy modern effects and whatever at all so I don't ask for much past good software to learn and grow into and combine with my music.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 18:29
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:I dunno, like "no it's a bad idea because the MBA will explode the moment you start compiling code or run wow at 1080p" or "yes this is exactly my use case and I get 60fps for most games." i mean it's going to be better than your current system in pretty much all ways save for where it's basically the same. if that's worth the upgrade to you now vs waiting for some potential future upgrade then you should go for it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 18:37
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:I dunno, like "no it's a bad idea because the MBA will explode the moment you start compiling code or run wow at 1080p" or "yes this is exactly my use case and I get 60fps for most games." If you want to play games and know that you'll be OK with Mac and M1 gaming compromises, the Pro is almost certainly a better idea because of the active cooling. The M1 is very power efficient and seems close to miraculous for daily tasks where the CPU and GPU can race to idle most of the time, but complex games (including WoW) mean relatively high sustained power loads, and the physics of passive cooling mean that the system will throttle. A little fan will make a big difference in sustained performance. Alternately: just wait until there's a bigger M1X or M2 or whatever with a beefier GPU. Despite what some folks have posted in this thread, x86 Macs are not going to be instantly worthless, and you don't need to rush to replace whatever you've got now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:26 |
|
|
Throttling aside, the performance of the M1 MBA and Pro are identical (assuming the same core configuration), correct? Like they have the exact same SoC?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 18:42
|
|