You can choose a 2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5. Tested with prerelease Affinity Photo 1.9.0.199 using the builtin benchmark version 1900.With third-generation Intel Core processors, Mac mini keeps up with computers twice its size. And even then only with powerful dedicated cards like the 5500M or VEGA II.Testing conducted by Apple in October 2020 using preproduction Mac mini systems with Apple M1 chip, and production 3.6GHz quadcore Intel Core i3based Mac mini systems with Intel UHD Graphics 630, all configured with 16GB of RAM and 2TB SSD. Processor: 2.8GHz dual-core intel core i5 (Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz) with 3MB on-chip shared L3 cache Storage: 1TB fusion drive Memory: 8GB of 1600MHz LPDDR3 memory Graphics: Intel iris graphics In the box: Mac mini, Power lead Operating System: macOS Sierra Video editing and rendering is super performant, only falling behind older machines when it leverages the GPU heavily. The Apple Mac mini 'Core i5' 2.8 (Late 2014/Aluminum Unibody) features a 22 nm 'Haswell' 2.8 GHz Intel 'Core i5' (4308U) processor with two independent processor 'cores' on a single chip, a 3 MB shared level 3 cache, 8 GB of onboard 1600 MHz LPDDR3 SDRAM (which could be upgraded to 16 GB at the initial time of system purchase, but cannot be.You’ve been carrying the load so long you didn’t know how heavy it was. If you’ve ever dealt with ongoing pain from a condition or injury, and then had it be alleviated by medication, therapy or surgery, you know how the sudden relief feels. One illustration I have been using to describe what this will feel like to a user of current MacBooks is that of chronic pain. That’s the best way I can describe it succinctly. And it does it while using a fraction of the power.This thing works like an iPad.
Apps install from the App Store and run smoothly, without incident. That’s the kindest thing I can say about it. Which brings us to…The iOS experience on the M1 machines is…present. It feels like an iOS device in all the best ways.At the chip level, it also is an iOS device. Every interaction is immediate. Torrent tv macYes, that’s right, no full-screen iOS or iPad apps at all. The apps launch and run in windows only. There is no default tool-tip that explains how to replicate common iOS interactions like swipe-from-edge — instead a badly formatted cheat sheet is buried in a menu. The current iOS app experience on an M1 machine running Big Sur is almost comical it’s so silly. I even ran an iOS-based graphics benchmark which showed just fine.That, however, is where the compliments end. Provided that the Catalyst ports can be bothered to build in Mac-centric behaviors and interactions, of course. But the app experience on the M1 is pretty firmly in this order right now: Native M1 app>Rosetta 2 app>Catalyst app> iOS app. It will get better, I have no doubt. And I’m happy to say that this is pretty easy to do because I was unable to track any real performance hit when comparing it to older, even ‘more powerful on paper’ Macs like the 16” MacBook Pro.It’s just simply not a factor in most instances. Apple would like us to forget the original Rosetta from the PowerPC transition as much as we would all like to forget it. But the real nut of it is that it has managed to make a chip so powerful that it can take the approximately 26% hit (see the following charts) in raw power to translate apps and still make them run just as fast if not faster than MacBooks with Intel processors.It’s pretty astounding. I’m sure we’ll get more detailed breakdowns of how Apple achieved what it has with this new emulation layer that makes x86 applications run fine on the M1 architecture. I ran a battery of tests designed to push these laptops in ways that reflected both real world performance and tasks as well as synthetic benchmarks. It’s a win-win situation.My methodology for my testing was pretty straightforward. But even now they’re just as fast. This is the one deviation from the specs I mentioned above as my 13” had issues that I couldn’t figure out so I had some Internet friends help me. I checked WebKit out from GitHub and ran a build on all of the machines with no parameters. 2019 Mac Pro 12-Core 3.3GHz 48GB w/AMD Radeon Pro Vega II 32GBMany of these benchmarks also include numbers from the M1 Mac mini review from Matt Burns and the M1 MacBook Air, tested by Brian Heater, which you can check out here.Right up top I’m going to start off with the real ‘oh shit’ chart of this piece. 2019 13” MacBook Pro 4-core 2.8GHz 16GB 2019 16” Macbook Pro 8-core 2.4GHz 32GB w/5500M All tests were run multiple times with cooldown periods in between in order to try to achieve a solid baseline.Here are the machines I used for testing: I tried multiple tests here and I could have easily run a full build of WebKit 8-9 times on one charge of the M1 MacBook’s battery. After a single build of WebKit, the M1 MacBook Pro had a massive 91% of its battery left. Even with that throttling, the MacBook Air still beats everything here except for the very beefy Mac Pro.But the big deal here is really this second chart. This is a pretty straightforward way to visualize the difference in performance that can result in heavy tasks that last over 20 minutes, where the MacBook Air’s lack of active fan cooling throttles back the M1 a bit. Change mac address on terminal emulatorTo give you an idea, throughout this build of WebKit the P-cluster (the power cores) hit peak pretty much every cycle while the E-cluster (the efficiency cores) maintained a steady 2GHz. Even with processor-bound tasks. The battery performance is simply off the chart. Games Mini Dual Core Series Of PagesBoth of them absolutely decimated the earlier models with gains at nearly 3X in some cases.This was another developer-centric test that was requested. That’s an iOS-like milestone.The M1 MacBook Air does very well also, but its smaller battery means a less playback time at “only” 16 hours. On an earlier test, I left the auto-adjust on and it crossed the 24 hour mark easily. Those margins were far greater in our performance testing.Results here are presented as hours:minutes.In fullscreen 4k/60 video playback, the M1 fares even better, clocking an easy 20 hours with fixed 50% brightness. The M1 outperformed the other MacBooks by just over 25%. In some cases they ran so long I thought I had left it plugged in by mistake it’s that good.I ran a mixed web browsing and web video playback script that hit a series of pages, waited for 30 seconds and then moved on to simulate browsing. But it also means massively faster access to that memory by chips on the system that need it most.If I was a betting man I’d say that this was an intermediate step to eliminating the concept of discrete RAM altogether. Moving RAM to the SoC means no upgradeability — you’re stuck on 16GB forever. The fact of it, however, is that I have been unable to push them hard enough yet to feel any effect of this due to Apple’s move to unified memory architecture. Faster than the 8-core 16” MacBook Pro, wildly faster than the 13” MacBook Pro and yes, 2x as fast as the 2019 Mac Pro with its 3.3GHz Xeons.For a look at the power curve (and to show that there is no throttling of the MacBook Pro over this period (I never found any throttling over longer periods by the way) here’s the usage curve.Much ado has been made of Apple including only 16GB of memory on these first M1 machines. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorAngelica ArchivesCategories |