MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

What an event… 14“ binned M1 Pro only gives you 8 CPU cores and 14 GPU cores… 16” is better though. Starts at 10 and 16. That's the only complaint I got. Really good MacBook Pros! The leaks were indeed correct.

ayo! who the heck needs 16 cores? I can do pretty much anything with 4. lol

16 GPU cores. It's not a ton of GPU performance even for a pro… 24 and 32 should be though!

b1048546 wrote:

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

What an event… 14“ binned M1 Pro only gives you 8 CPU cores and 14 GPU cores… 16” is better though. Starts at 10 and 16. That's the only complaint I got. Really good MacBook Pros! The leaks were indeed correct.

ayo! who the heck needs 16 cores? I can do pretty much anything with 4. lol

16 GPU cores. It's not a ton of GPU performance even for a pro… 24 and 32 should be though!

I meant CPU cores.

It's literally so annoying that it starts at 8-CPU cores. I think it's okay that they binned the graphics to 14 but the CPU? Whyyyyyy?!

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

What an event… 14“ binned M1 Pro only gives you 8 CPU cores and 14 GPU cores… 16” is better though. Starts at 10 and 16. That's the only complaint I got. Really good MacBook Pros! The leaks were indeed correct.

ayo! who the heck needs 16 cores? I can do pretty much anything with 4. lol

16 GPU cores. It's not a ton of GPU performance even for a pro… 24 and 32 should be though!

I meant CPU cores.

I think the base for CPU cores is 6+2 and everything else is 8+2. At least I'm ASSUMING it's 6+2. Like SERIOUSLY Apple. At least it's probably not 4+4. (gosh please no.)

b1048546 wrote:

It's literally so annoying that it starts at 8-CPU cores. I think it's okay that they binned the graphics to 14 but the CPU? Whyyyyyy?!

because, 8 core should be enough lol.

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

It's literally so annoying that it starts at 8-CPU cores. I think it's okay that they binned the graphics to 14 but the CPU? Whyyyyyy?!

because, 8 core should be enough lol.

It's a product for pro users that starts at $2000… It isn't a consumer product like the MacBook Air. It better be 6+2 and not 4+4…

b1048546 wrote:

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

It's literally so annoying that it starts at 8-CPU cores. I think it's okay that they binned the graphics to 14 but the CPU? Whyyyyyy?!

because, 8 core should be enough lol.

It's a product for pro users that starts at $2000…

thats why i say, apple sells overpriced aluminum. You could sell the macbook and get a better laptop of the same price.

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

It's literally so annoying that it starts at 8-CPU cores. I think it's okay that they binned the graphics to 14 but the CPU? Whyyyyyy?!

because, 8 core should be enough lol.

It's a product for pro users that starts at $2000…

thats why i say, apple sells overpriced aluminum. You could sell the macbook and get a better laptop of the same price.

Macs specifically, are not overpriced. They are EXPENSIVE. Not overpriced. You get something better for a price you would pay for a premium computer. Especially considering the software support, apps you get with Macs, and how long Macs last. (I have a 27" iMac from late 2009! Still works great!) 16 GB of ram and 512GB of storage. I don't think this is overpriced either, they increased the price and gave us a bunch of new features.

b1048546 wrote:

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

It's literally so annoying that it starts at 8-CPU cores. I think it's okay that they binned the graphics to 14 but the CPU? Whyyyyyy?!

because, 8 core should be enough lol.

It's a product for pro users that starts at $2000… It isn't a consumer product like the MacBook Air. It better be 6+2 and not 4+4…

To be fair, while not $2000, I have an i7 laptop that's only dual core, from 2018. 8 cores is great for a high-end system, in many cases.

dominic305 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

It's literally so annoying that it starts at 8-CPU cores. I think it's okay that they binned the graphics to 14 but the CPU? Whyyyyyy?!

because, 8 core should be enough lol.

It's a product for pro users that starts at $2000… It isn't a consumer product like the MacBook Air. It better be 6+2 and not 4+4…

To be fair, while not $2000, I have an i7 laptop that's only dual core, from 2018. 8 cores is great for a high-end system, in many cases.

If it's 4+4, then not for a $2000 system. If it's 6+2, that's fair but Apple REALLY should've just done 8+2. It's technically 4 or 6 cores. The 2/4 efficiency cores don't do much.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tobL8U7dQo wha

I might buy the 14" after looking at the benchmarks of the binned and ram/cpu/gpu comparisons. I'd say it should be 10-core at base but other than that, it's fine. Imagine having 32 GB or 64 GB of ram given to the GPU! What graphics card has 64 GB of ram to address directly? It literally isn't a matter of discrete or integrated. The issue with integrated for Apple is that it's hard to make an SOC the size of a pancake because of yields and uhh pancake?

god286 wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tobL8U7dQo wha

Yeah, there was just an Apple event. New faster chips were announced with MacBook Pros and AirPods 3. The rumored ones of course.

That notch actually looks REALLY good.

b1048546 wrote:

god286 wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tobL8U7dQo wha

Yeah, there was just an Apple event. New faster chips were announced with MacBook Pros and AirPods 3. The rumored ones of course.

I wonder what the benchmark results would be for the M1 Max. That would be cool to hear, it might beat the i9 lol

god286 wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

god286 wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tobL8U7dQo wha

Yeah, there was just an Apple event. New faster chips were announced with MacBook Pros and AirPods 3. The rumored ones of course.

I wonder what the benchmark results would be for the M1 Max. That would be cool to hear, it might beat the i9 lol

Which i9? Confirmed, it's 6+2. Not bad!

CPU performance: 6+2 will beat most Intel processors with good battery life, fast charging, and probably close-to zero fan noise. Expect its CPU performance to be about ~10,000 in Geekbench 5 and Cinebench R23. 8+2 could potentially beat the FASTEST Intel processor that's OUT right now. The Geekbench 5 and Cinebench R23 score could be ~13,700 or ~14,000.

GPU performance: Base 14“ will be around ~4.5 teraflops. (14 core.) 16 core GPU will be about ~5.2 teraflops! That's very close to the highest end option in the old 16”! 24 cores should be ~7.8 teraflops. And finally, 32 core gpu will be… ~10.4 teraflops. That is IMPRESSIVE! Especially with the power draw! I know that teraflops are a rough estimate of real world performance, but that's EXACTLY the good thing! It'll have access to a HUGE amount of memory directly and it has SO MUCH memory bandwidth. They switched to LPDDR5 (or x idk) and that helped their bandwidth a lot! It reached the estimates that I set for this and nobody is comparing with this GPU and CPU for now.

32-64GB of unified memory is insane. M1 Pro and M1 Max will be MUCH better than we think.

Also Apple, come on, why couldn't you have named it M1X? That sounds WAYYY better than M1 Pro or M1 Max.

When is Apple going to announce the iMac and Mac Mini? :thinking:

Waiting for leaked benchmarks… And no, I don't trust the ones from earlier today. Once there are more, I'll believe it. (The clock speed is OFF OFF and it feels a bit low.)

N+N has to do with big.little. 4+4 is the M1. 4 of the cores are high-performance and give it most of it's performance. 4 of the cores are high-efficiency cores that give a decent amount of performance and does any task that it can handle. Meaning, if you're doing light tasks like web browsing, the efficiency cores will be used to save battery. 8+2 is M1 Pro/Max. 8 performance and 2 efficiency. There's a reason we have worse battery life on the Pros. 2 efficiency cores instead of 4. 6+2 is the base 14".