Apple's M1 Pro, M1 Max SoCs Investigated: New Performance and Efficiency Heights
by Andrei Frumusanu on October 25, 2021 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
- Apple
- MacBook
- Apple M1 Pro
- Apple M1 Max
CPU ST Performance: Not Much Change from M1
Apple didn’t talk much about core performance of the new M1 Pro and Max, and this is likely because it hasn’t really changed all that much compared to the M1. We’re still seeing the same Firestrom performance cores, and they’re still clocked at 3.23GHz. The new chip has more caches, and more DRAM bandwidth, but under ST scenarios we’re not expecting large differences.
When we first tested the M1 last year, we had compiled SPEC under Apple’s Xcode compiler, and we lacked a Fortran compiler. We’ve moved onto a vanilla LLVM11 toolchain and making use of GFortran (GCC11) for the numbers published here, allowing us more apple-to-apples comparisons. The figures don’t change much for the C/C++ workloads, but we get a more complete set of figures for the suite due to the Fortran workloads. We keep flags very simple at just “-Ofast” and nothing else.
In SPECint2017, the differences to the M1 are small. 523.xalancbmk is showcasing a large performance improvement, however I don’t think this is due to changes on the chip, but rather a change in Apple’s memory allocator in macOS 12. Unfortunately, we no longer have an M1 device available to us, so these are still older figures from earlier in the year on macOS 11.
Against the competition, the M1 Max either has a significant performance lead, or is able to at least reach parity with the best AMD and Intel have to offer. The chip however doesn’t change the landscape all too much.
SPECfp2017 also doesn’t change dramatically, 549.fotonik3d does score quite a bit better than the M1, which could be tied to the more available DRAM bandwidth as this workloads puts extreme stress on the memory subsystem, but otherwise the scores change quite little compared to the M1, which is still on average quite ahead of the laptop competition.
The M1 Max lands as the top performing laptop chip in SPECint2017, just shy of being the best CPU overall which still goes to the 5950X, but is able to take and maintain the crown from the M1 in the FP suite.
Overall, the new M1 Max doesn’t deliver any large surprises on single-threaded performance metrics, which is also something we didn’t expect the chip to achieve.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
493 Comments
View All Comments
ruthan - Friday, October 29, 2021 - link
So great on paper and for some number crunching, compiling and maybe some video editing.. but where you really need performance for gaming it sucks... and all Apples lofty paper specs are gone. I know that there is some translation layer, but its Apple choice to use it.richardnpaul - Sunday, October 31, 2021 - link
I think that that is a bit of an unfair characterisation at this stage.jojo62 - Saturday, October 30, 2021 - link
I am programmer. Not a gaming programmer but I use my Mac Book Pro 2019 to connect to my work computer. I run Databases like Oracle 21c, microsoft sql server, and others in Windows 11 on my Mac. The performance is great and these laptops last forever. I still have my mac book pro 2012 laptop and it works. I've had many many computers over the years and they all seem to die after 3-4 years but not my apple computers. I think PC makers have implemented planned Obsolescence on their products. I am upgrading to the new mac book pro m1 max soon.razer555 - Saturday, October 30, 2021 - link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRPPLrlUeSAAnadtech, It seems you really need to test with Baldur's gate 3 which can perform 4K 100~120 FPS.
ailooped - Monday, November 1, 2021 - link
What 7? years back there were proof of concept ARM computers that proved you can run many many processors in parallel. I am not that technically apt, of course. However this seems like apple taking advantage of that fact.They are just doubling everything. I am guessing we will see a 64 core graphics and perhaps a max of 128 core for Mac Pro. With M2 cpu cores also doubling to 24 cores or something like that.
Yes, Apple chose to say goodbye to windows compatibility. However, they have a HUGE developer base in iOS. And they (Mac and iOS) are now on-par and running on the same silicone.
This is a disruption to the pc world no matter how you slice it. Of course, intel can see it hence the smear ads against apple. Windows is quietly tinkering with their ARM version of windows, just to see if apple can actually take off with it.
The pc ecosystem is already suffering from the influx of powerful smartphones/tablets. And now apple is in 100% with ARM computers, with a HUGE iOS user base what will be seduced by a seamless transition to Macs from iPhones? Perhaps.. Understandable that Apple is trying...
Do you really mind though? The Intel/AMD/Nvidia trifecta seems to be quite stagnant on CISC. Perhaps it`s better for the PC ecosystem to be on the same silicone as phones and tablets... To benefit from ALL that R&D money going into it...
ailooped - Monday, November 1, 2021 - link
silicon...ailooped - Monday, November 1, 2021 - link
To be quite honest, I am not sure I want to see Apple with their approach to hardware gain tons of marketshare on the desktop/laptops.. No upgradeability... RAM integrated into CPU... I DO however think Intel/AMD/Nvidia can do with a fourth player in the GPU/CPU game..jmmx - Tuesday, November 2, 2021 - link
It would be nice to see some discussion of the NPU. I imagine it would be hard to find any tests across platforms but some type of evaluation would be helpful.bgnn - Tuesday, November 2, 2021 - link
Clarification on node advantage.. I've designed in both 7nm and 5nm. The power and performance increases are marginal compared to good old days. Back then when we switched from 32nm to 28nm we had more than 70% perf/power increase. 7nm to 5nm it's more like 25% at best. Density is the main benefit. Interconnect is killing it for smaller nodes. Gate contacts are tiny and they are incredibly resistive..Hrunga_Zmuda - Sunday, November 7, 2021 - link
Anyone who actually designs in this corner of the computer industry must be familiar with the law of diminishing returns. Right?