Guys, these are "entry level machines". Apple has said it themselves, and the availability of the higher specd Intel Mac mini in the options prove it too. Although the performances are comparable to i7, i9 Intels, these are entry level machines. They are meant for students, kids, moms, dads and general productivity work. They even removed 2 thunderbolt ports and 10Gb ethernet option in this particular release.

Apple will release pro machines in 2021 with higher specs and likely a higher CPU variant - M1x, M1z or something. In that release you will get all the 32 gb rams, more ports, etc.
But to the guy who wants an apple machine with a dual cpu with x86 amd or whatever, it's not gonna happen lol. That's not apple. They make a new chip, they stick with it. Even if they want to do it, the technical complication of a dual cpu with ARM and x86 in the same machine, I bet you it's not gonna happen. Not in 10 years from Apple. So, choose either x86 or ARM lol both ain't gonna happen anytime soon or at all.

 

"I wouldn't recommand this to anyone who doe music production on a day to day basis. Simply the software support isn't there yet". Apparently, the M1 processor is slower than the last gen i9 9900k. :D

 

Anyone of you bought one ?
For which Audio Interfaces are Apple Silicon Drivers available ?
How low can you set the latency and keep things stable ?

 

Last edited: Nov 22, 2020

Indeed. For an above average performing computer that consumes about 20W[!] this is quite impressive. I have absolutely nothing bad to say against these new Macs, except the usual: lacking more connectivity, everything soldered-packed up, no way or very hard to fix it when it breaks, and so on. Also, the Rosetta emulation/code translation layer for ARM is not really optimal solution in the long run, but it's the best for now.

With time, more apps will get coded for ARM architecture. I really like that idea... it gets us closer to having a completely open architecture computer, with open source OS, and lots of great software to run on it. Hopefully. [I'm just speculating here], but I don't think big companies will let that happen, just look at Android.

I would use an M1 based open architecture computer with Linux in a jiffy.

 

Last edited: Nov 22, 2020

The problem with the non-ported applications is a big deal but independent of the M1 performance. I remember similar issues when Apple
switched to Intel.

That would be heaven but with Apple or Microsoft behind... let's just wait for the Linux versions.. if they let them.

Hell yeah, I'd do it with open arms ;)

 

I agree with you on all the flaws of the Apple system. And I won't go to them.
The M1 chip is a proprietary system and I don't expect to find it in Windows or Linux for another three centuries. I hope I'm wrong.
I also read that the chip was developed by engineers and developers from Intel who fled from that company because they felt disaster was coming and Apple's money attracted them. Intel does not have the economic power of Apple. Nor does Amd. Apple is a colossal empire. They will keep the secret of their work for a long time even if some companies will try reverse engineering.
In terms of hardware and software unification, it is the most successful operating system for many customers.
Is Microsoft able to work like this? I don't think so.
What will be the new Intel processors? We don't know.

 

That's not what Linus Tech Tips said.

 

You're right in the sense that RAM is RAM. But placement is of utmost importance.

The M1 is a RISC processor. A completely different beast.

The error most people make is to compare it directly to X86 architecture. You can't. It's not in the hardware numbers. X86 requires caching at several levels. ARM doesn't. It's main design idea is to have data present when the software needs it. Not sooner, not later. That's why an ARM processor has a reduced instruction set. The KISS solution. Keep every part of the SOC at the same speed.

It's much easier to scale an ARM CPU to several cores. Most X86 software still runs on one core. Software on ARM doesn't need to know about cores. X86 basically is a single core 8 bit that evolved into a multiple CPU, multiple core platform. The software never followed, due to Microsoft's obsession with backward compatibility. The M1 needs Rosetta, or we'd end up with the same problem.

Apple has done this before. They'll do it again. Only, this time the company can spend a lot more, if they wish. Fortunately, Tim's a grocer, so I don't see any overspending ruining it. :D

 

Yes The New Macs are Going To Be a Game Changer For Audio and Video Production I Can't Wait For a Descktop Vertion

 

Some numbers Reaper users can compare to their own machines: MP3 rendering.

M1 with Rosetta2: 2.7 X realtime.
M1 native: 83 X realtime.

From the pre-release Reaper thread:

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=245263

 

WOWWWWWWWW.

 

Sorry for the mistake. But I'm impressed. I won't go for Apple because of the upgrade prices.