Apple M1 Max Beats GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU in GFXBench 5.0, but Doesn't Shine in Geekbench

[Darmok N Jalad]

Let me pretend that there is Apple exclusive "$1400 laptop market" and that that market is somehow paying more for mobile CPUs.
Oh wait, I can't.

Which customer did AMD lose?

This makes no sense. I guess I’ll try to explain. There is a market (that is, consumers willing to pay) for $1400 laptops, be it for Windows, MacOS, even Linux. All of the hardware companies would love to sell as many components as they can to go into $1400 laptops, because that means they are selling a higher margin components to go into said laptop. A $200 Chromebook, on the other hand, is full of low margin hardware, from the CPU, to the display, to the storage. Low margin = low profit, maybe even selling at a loss for the sake of market share. It has nothing to do with Apple, but everything to do with selling products in a profitable range of a given market. Surely you can imagine that. Regarding Apple, who knows what they were paying Intel for CPUs, but they weren’t exactly spec’ing Pentium Golds or even many i3’s. It was i5 at entry level all the way to i9’s.

And in case you missed it, AMD has been supplying Apple with GPUs for pretty much a decade. Now that Apple is moving away from x86, they are also moving away from AMD. Hence, AMD lost a customer in Apple.

 

[medi01]

@Darmok N Jalad
I see.

Contrasting $1400 notebook by Apple with $200 chromebooks is a weird way to see things.

Even in US, Apple accounts for about 16% of PC's sold (units).
Much less so worldwide.
And while there is another extreme, chromebooks, vast majority of notebooks sold are neither Apple, nor chromebooks.

And, while yes, AMD has also lost a customer (it was mostly Intel), only a fraction of Apple's computers were equipped with AMD GPU anyhow.

And, oh, the irony, with current market trends, AMD might be happier NOT selling GPUs to Apple....

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

@Darmok N Jalad
I see.

Contrasting $1400 notebook by Apple with $200 chromebooks is a weird way to see things.

Even in US, Apple accounts for about 16% of PC's sold (units).
Much less so worldwide.
And while there is another extreme, chromebooks, vast majority of notebooks sold are neither Apple, nor chromebooks.

And, while yes, AMD has also lost a customer (it was mostly Intel), only a fraction of Apple's computers were equipped with AMD GPU anyhow.

And, oh, the irony, with current market trends, AMD might be happier NOT selling GPUs to Apple....

$200 is certainly the far end of the extreme, but even $500-1000 notebooks are likely less profitable for all the stakeholders than the $1400-3000 ones. Apple has always sold in a premium tier, which means less market share, but perfectly profitable. And I’m sure AMD doesn’t want to lose Apple as a customer for that very reason. Being the GPU provider of choice in a premium brand is great for consumer mindshare.

Love them or hate them, Apple is considered a key player in the consumer computing space. What they do matters, and the industry responds in kind. Just look at the non-Apple companies making ads attempting to lure Apple customers away. MS, Intel, Samsung, they all have such campaigns. If it’s such an “insignificant” segment of the computing space, why would they waste marketing dollars here? Because Apple has a really good handle on a particularly profitable section of the computing market. Despite the marketing material downplaying Apple, these companies actually don’t dismiss Apple so lightly. They just want you to.

 

[medi01]

Apple has always sold in a premium tier, which means less market share, but perfectly profitable.

But CPUs that they were using, were from lower tiers.
Why would they pay Intel more, than HP does?

Love them or hate them, Apple is considered a key player in the consumer computing space.

Love it or hate it, they are niche company, selling fashion devices.
It's a lovely niche to be in, but there is next to no competition between that garden and the rest of the world.

Just look at the non-Apple companies making ads attempting to lure Apple customers away. MS, Intel, Samsung, they all have such campaigns.

I have only seen Samsung mocking iphones (and it was hilarious)

If it’s such an “insignificant” segment of the computing space, why would they waste marketing dollars here?

Uh, you need to show me the "wasted dollars". (weak argument anyhow)

Pretty much any major notebook brand has POPULAR models well into $2k and beyond. There is no direct competition between them and Apple.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

But CPUs that they were using, were from lower tiers.
Why would they pay Intel more, than HP does?


Love it or hate it, they are niche company, selling fashion devices.
It's a lovely niche to be in, but there is next to no competition between that garden and the rest of the world.


I have only seen Samsung mocking iphones (and it was hilarious)
View attachment 222352



Uh, you need to show me the "wasted dollars". (weak argument anyhow)

Pretty much any major notebook brand has POPULAR models well into $2k and beyond. There is no direct competition between them and Apple.

Great example. Samsung mocked the notch and the removal of the headphone jack—only to do the similar things a generation later. Typically we call that influence.

Of course I’m not going to be able to provide you actual dollar values on marketing. That gets buried in the financial reports. However, the commercials exist beyond just the one you mention. Intel recently hired Justin Long. Microsoft is constantly comparing Surface to iPads and Macs. When companies go to the trouble of hiring actors and paying for airtime aimed at a particular company, that is pretty much the definition of direct competition. All your PC OEMs are far more selective on airtime, and Intel often subsidizes those commercials (if it ends with the Intel jingle, Intel helped pay for the ad). HP, Dell, etc, aren’t going to take on Apple here—no, they are busy competing with each other to land very good corporate contracts that choose Windows as the platform.

I think your arguments are tired and dated. My (large) company does pro work every day on iPads. Some of our employees only need an iPad for their field-based work. Studios use Macs for photography and video. If people are making a living using Apple products as tools, that makes them something more than “fashion devices.” That’s like saying every GPU buyer is a kiddie that plays games all day. Broad statements and hyperbole are only true for a subset of people, certainly not all. You can pretend all you want that Apple doesn’t influence the tech sector, but that doesn’t make it reality. Intel’s current CEO talked about Apple before his first day on the job, and still talks about Apple today. I guess he didn’t get the memo that fashion company Apple doesn’t actually matter.

 

[medi01]

Great example. Samsung mocked the notch and the removal of the headphone jack—only to do the similar things a generation later.

No.
I own S10 and it still has it.
Later phone does not indeed.
I'll vote with my wallet on this one.

Anyhow, to the point:
1) mocking competitor is an old way to compete
2) Samsung alone has bigger market share in mobile phones, than Apple, so, uh, well
3) nothing to do with compute

Microsoft is constantly comparing Surface to iPads and Macs.

What is Surface's market share? 1%?
Microsoft does weird things at times.
Having too much money, they can afford it.

My (large) company does pro work every day on iPads.

My daughter is using it (pushed by school).
Tablet that is so ugly, so heavy, it hurts.
Samsung Tab Galaxy's were wiping the floor with it, and are wiping the floor with it.
(S2 still rocking, S5 is amazing, bar dropped headhpone jack)

But it being a fashion device, note how it does not compete directly, spec for spec, feature for feature. It's for people who buy it anyway.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

So early reports has the 32 core GPU rivaling a 3060 in actual gaming.

Mixed bag as expected not the 3080 killer it sounded.

It would be nice for a realistic review of this at some point, with reasonable testing etc
These hype trains don't help IMHO ,I like the news I won't lie, but I think it often dent's the end products reception.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

So early reports has the 32 core GPU rivaling a 3060 in actual gaming.

Mixed bag as expected not the 3080 killer it sounded.

It would be nice for a realistic review of this at some point, with reasonable testing etc
These hype trains don't help IMHO ,I like the news I won't lie, but I think it often dent's the end products reception.

Yeah, theoretical benchmarking has the GPUs doing well, but gaming, not as much. Part of this I’m sure is because games are running through Rosetta. Not sure if that situation will really change much in the near term. Macs generally aren’t people’s first choice for gaming. Being 64bit-only, you won’t be playing legacy games either! Traditional gaming on Mac hasn’t been great for some time (if ever), and I certainly wouldn’t buy one for that purpose.

Anandtech did a brief breakdown today, and possibly the most impressive real world feat they demoed was the ability to scrub 5k ProRes RAW video without lag through the specialized hardware, where a 5900X system was dipping into single digit FPS in a similar test. These Macs definitely seem to be aimed at video work. Interestingly, there is no official TDP on these chips, but rather performance is limited by thermals and the cooling. I suppose when you design the chip, chassis, and cooling solution, no TDP-rated cooler guidance is needed.

 

[Mussels]

@Darmok N Jalad
I see.

Contrasting $1400 notebook by Apple with $200 chromebooks is a weird way to see things.

Even in US, Apple accounts for about 16% of PC's sold (units).
Much less so worldwide.
And while there is another extreme, chromebooks, vast majority of notebooks sold are neither Apple, nor chromebooks.

And, while yes, AMD has also lost a customer (it was mostly Intel), only a fraction of Apple's computers were equipped with AMD GPU anyhow.

And, oh, the irony, with current market trends, AMD might be happier NOT selling GPUs to Apple....

He made a contrast, not an apples-to-apples comparison
Darmok, his metaphor wide

 

[medi01]

He made a contrast, not an apples-to-apples comparison

Yeah. A contrast of "if you don't make business with Apple, you sell those crappy chromebooks", a very appropriate one indeed...

There was also that wonder implication of that if Apple sells the same crap for more, it also shares that surplus with CPU/GPU manufacturers, for some unheard of reason.

Come on, people, look at what traditional OEMs are selling at well beyond $2k point. Lots of offering. Pretty much any premium is at about $1.5k mark.

 

[TheHughMan]

Imagination Technologies/PowerVR GPUs should go PC Desktop. Gaming on Apple is way too expensive.