[HN Gopher] Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part II
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part II
        
       Author : dddddaviddddd
       Score  : 360 points
       Date   : 2021-01-22 17:34 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (rosenzweig.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (rosenzweig.io)
        
       | captain_price7 wrote:
       | I know enough about GPU to know how interesting this is, but not
       | enough to fully get it.
       | 
       | I wish there were some "Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU _for Dummies_
       | ".
        
         | war1025 wrote:
         | I imagine the "for graphics engineers" version has to get
         | figured out before they can do the "for Dummies" version.
        
       | supernova87a wrote:
       | [*Sure I get it, it's not interesting to talk meta about whether
       | a post is interesting. I'm already downvoted off the planet.
       | Fine.]
       | 
       | I'm sure it's a good blog post for the right reader, but for
       | something to land on HN front page, I generally look for either:
       | 
       | 1) a story that, while specialized, reveals something accessibly
       | technical and interesting to a semi-expert crowd, or
       | 
       | 2) explains something at a sufficient level of expertise/detail
       | that people not in the middle of it can grasp and apply to their
       | own knowledge.
       | 
       | This story seems not accessible to the general reader. Or it
       | reads like someone's private notes. I think it needs a level of
       | abstraction or summary to be accessible to the readership here.
        
         | faitswulff wrote:
         | ...well, this is _Hacker_ News, after all.
        
         | perardi wrote:
         | You're complaining this is too technical...on a site called
         | "Hacker News"...which is run by a firm named after an abstract
         | mathematical concept.
         | 
         | OK, kiddo. Upworthy is over that-away.
        
         | epistasis wrote:
         | I've never worked on GPUs, will likely never work on drivers
         | even, yet was able to follow along and find it interesting.
         | 
         | I'm going to upvote pretty much any reverse engineering
         | monologue, especially one as accessible as this.
        
         | NikolaeVarius wrote:
         | Then hide it and don't read it
        
         | jandrese wrote:
         | Are you saying this post is too nerdy for _Hacker News_?
         | Stories come all the time, if you don 't like it don't read it.
         | 
         | I didn't understand everything the author said, but I was able
         | to get the gist of it. There GPU has a list of valid addresses
         | and it's stored in a C style array with a terminator instead of
         | a 1 indexed array with an object count in the Apple API style.
         | The mismatch caused the author some confusion even after he
         | discovered the existence of the buffer due to his code failing.
         | 
         | It's one of the many details that has to be understood in order
         | to write an open source driver for the hardware. The open
         | source driver will be necessary for people who want to install
         | Linux on this Apple hardware.
        
           | asddubs wrote:
           | small correction: the author is a woman
        
           | bzbarsky wrote:
           | > even after he discovered
           | 
           | She, fwiw.
        
             | jandrese wrote:
             | Sorry. I completely forgot to check the byline.
        
         | cbozeman wrote:
         | Yeah, well, you know, that's just like... your _opinion_ , man.
        
       | __mp wrote:
       | The published code on Github looks very nice! It is easy to read
       | and understand.
       | 
       | Kudos to Alyssa!
        
       | rowanG077 wrote:
       | Amazing!! This is progresssing literally 10 times faster then I
       | expected.
        
         | Someone wrote:
         | Indeed. That single triangle likely is way closer to a million
         | triangles than to zero triangles.
         | https://rampantgames.com/blog/?p=7745:
         | 
         |  _"Afterwards, we came to refer to certain types of
         | accomplishments as "black triangles." These are important
         | accomplishments that take a lot of effort to achieve, but upon
         | completion you don't have much to show for it only that more
         | work can now proceed. It takes someone who really knows the
         | guts of what you are doing to appreciate a black triangle."_
        
           | jdashg wrote:
           | Roughly equidistant milestones for ports: 1. It crashes 2.
           | Black screen 3. Any drawing at all 4. The rest of the
           | friggin' engine
        
       | gjsman-1000 wrote:
       | Everyone, remember that in 2019 Alyssa was in _High School_.
       | Where do people get this knowledge? It's astounding.
       | 
       | She was literally reverse-engineering Mali for Panfrost starting
       | in her Sophomore year.
        
         | localhost wrote:
         | As one of the older folks here on HN, I fondly remember the
         | time when almost everything had to be done by reverse-
         | engineering. Some friends of mine and I were the first people
         | to reverse engineer the Commodore 4040/8050 disk drive
         | "computers". We had to write all of the software to do this,
         | including custom disassemblers that eventually spat out
         | printouts that we annotated first by hand and later transcribed
         | into source code files. There were no memory maps, and our
         | knowledge of electronics was too rudimentary to figure out much
         | by looking at the traces on the circuit boards. There were no
         | places for folks to discuss these ideas - bulletin boards of
         | the day were one-user-at-a-time things which meant that topics
         | like this were way too niche to garner any discussion at all. I
         | was fortunate enough to grow up in Toronto which was a hot-bed
         | of Commodore hackers and we had a vibrant community that could
         | gather to meet face-to-face to discuss ideas. But in between
         | meetups we had to sit and think harder until we figured it out.
         | 
         | It was a wonderful time to learn about computing from first
         | principles without the distractions that exist today.
        
         | floatingatoll wrote:
         | When I was 5, my grandmother the edusoft programmer let me
         | learn machine-code programming from one of her books.
        
         | PragmaticPulp wrote:
         | Truly impressive work.
         | 
         | > Where do people get this knowledge?
         | 
         | Time, hands-on experimentation, and focus.
         | 
         | Anecdotally, reverse engineering and low-level hacking felt
         | more popular back in the 90s and early 2000s. Back then, there
         | were fewer distractions to soak up the free time of young tech
         | enthusiasts. Old IRC chatrooms feel like a trickle of
         | distraction relative to the firehose of Twitter, Reddit, 24/7
         | news cycles, and modern distractions.
         | 
         | A common complaint among the younger engineers I mentor is that
         | they feel like they never have enough time. It's strange to
         | watch a young, single person without kids and with a cushy 9-5
         | (or often 11am to 5pm at modern flex/remote companies) job
         | complain about lack of free time. Digging deeper, it's usually
         | because they're so tapped in to social media, news, video
         | games, and other digital distractions that their free time
         | evaporates before they even think about planning their days
         | out.
         | 
         | It's amazing what one can accomplish by simply sitting down and
         | focusing on a problem. You may not reach the levels of someone
         | like Alyssa, but you'll get much farther than you might expect.
         | And most importantly, you probably won't miss the media
         | firehose.
        
           | conradev wrote:
           | There is a world of difference in free time between "having a
           | 9-5 job" and "being in high school", though.
           | 
           | In high school, I was lucky enough to not have to do laundry,
           | feed myself, or a variety of other tasks and chores that come
           | along with adulthood. I also could sleep like crap and make
           | it up during school the next day. Not to mention that the
           | time I spent at school wasn't spent programming, so when I
           | got home it wasn't more of the same, it was exciting. I could
           | sit at the computer programing from 3pm to 2am.
        
           | salawat wrote:
           | That issue you describe, while intuitive and obvious to those
           | of us who were around for the transition period is simple to
           | arrive at. Keep in mind that youngsters nowadays may not have
           | much if any experience with the before world or know someone
           | reflective enough and willing to point it out to them. Many
           | just assume we all mastered it somehow.
           | 
           | There is also the possibility, _They might be right._ Before,
           | communication and the long access lag inherent in accessing
           | data in remote systems meant change propagated by trickle.
           | Now, change can happen and propagate across the world at
           | breakneck speeds. Which means if one is to have an effect,
           | one must be there /be aware.
           | 
           | This leaves precious little time for following the white
           | rabbit. I think everybody could do with a little somber
           | reflection on just the impact that rapid information
           | propagation has had on the world.
        
           | PurpleFoxy wrote:
           | For me, I have more than enough time, especially when working
           | from home. It's just that after work I feel like a brain dead
           | zombie and programming is the last thing I want to do after
           | work.
           | 
           | In the time before I started work and after finishing school
           | I used to do so much open source stuff in the time that I now
           | spend working.
        
         | aardvark179 wrote:
         | It's easy to think this sort of thing requires an incredibly
         | level of knowledge but it's often more about dedication and a
         | little lateral thinking. You need a broad understanding of the
         | process of putting something on screen, the ability to
         | construct a program that does something, some way to observe
         | the result, and the willingness to experiment.
         | 
         | Back in the 80s lots of kids that age wrote computer games and
         | often found novel ways to use the hardware because even though
         | video controllers might not be fully documented you still knew
         | where their control registers were in memory and could just try
         | altering the values in them.
         | 
         | Now, modern graphics hardware is more complex and controlled by
         | things like command buffers and shaders, but you can apply
         | similar ideas, and you've probably got easier tools for
         | examining the state of your process. Write a program that does
         | a simple thing and dump its state. Do a slightly different
         | thing and compare the states. When you think you understand
         | things either change your program and see if you're correct or
         | use a debugger to alter the state at runtime and see if you can
         | change the visible result.
        
         | chucky_z wrote:
         | Where did you get your knowledge? With places like HackerNews
         | along with folks like yourself and myself writing posts about
         | this kind of stuff it becomes trivial to walk down a rabbit
         | hole for anyone of any age. Think back to how much you
         | accomplished when you were younger because you were walking in
         | the footsteps of others. :)
        
           | noch wrote:
           | > With [...] folks like yourself and myself writing posts
           | about this kind of stuff
           | 
           | Please could you link to some of the reverse engineering
           | writing by you guys to which you're referring?
        
           | war1025 wrote:
           | A magical thing about high school / college that people fail
           | to appreciate is how few actual responsibilities you have at
           | that age.
           | 
           | It's why kids are able to devote so many hours to video games
           | and other time waster stuff.
           | 
           | Only difference is this person managed due to luck / skill /
           | timing to end up on a more productive path.
           | 
           | Time commitment is the big impediment for most open-source
           | projects. Late adolescence / young adulthood is one of the
           | few periods of life where you both are competent enough to do
           | useful things and have enough free time to actually commit to
           | that work.
        
           | noizejoy wrote:
           | > anyone of any age
           | 
           | and intelligence and education and intellectual curiosity and
           | non-working time and energy/stamina ...
           | 
           | That Venn diagram ends up with a pretty small number of
           | humans ...
        
         | viraptor wrote:
         | High school can be time when you have lots of spare time for
         | learning what you want. I remember spending one year, and
         | almost all of the summer break reverse engineering and writing
         | binary patches for the sl45i phone. There was a huge community
         | around it at the time so you just joined a forum and started
         | asking questions.
        
         | bitwize wrote:
         | When I was 14 I discovered that my computer's CPU (a 186) had
         | two on-chip programmable timers. One was used for DRAM refresh,
         | so I used the other to get fine-grained timing so I could bit-
         | bang the speaker output to get crude PWM sound.
         | 
         | Of course back then, people used to document the components
         | they put in computers...
        
         | pjmlp wrote:
         | At the age of 10 I was coding for the Timex 2068, using books
         | like these ones,
         | 
         | https://www.atariarchives.org/
         | 
         | Yes, they are for the Atari, just trying to make a point here.
         | 
         | So any smart kid in the age of Internet, instead of having what
         | is available at the local library, is quite capable to build up
         | the skills to achieve this kind of work at the high school
         | level.
        
           | shawnz wrote:
           | Strongly disagree. There is a big difference between doing
           | some interesting hacking at a young age and getting your GPU
           | driver included in the mainline Linux kernel. The author
           | appears to be a true CS prodigy.
        
             | pjmlp wrote:
             | In 8 and 16 bit home computers you wrote your own graphics
             | driver, in Assembly, if you wanted to draw anything beyond
             | the toy BASIC graphics commands.
             | 
             | I guess anyone doing games were a prodigy back then.
        
               | shawnz wrote:
               | Yes, perhaps, and at that time it was also a much simpler
               | proposition to do that.
               | 
               | I would imagine at that time there were also many fewer
               | kids at a high-school level doing that kind of hacking,
               | so it might not be totally wrong to say they were all
               | prodigies.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | I guess, C64, Amiga, Atari didn't had programmable
               | graphics hardware after all.
        
       | cambalache wrote:
       | OK I love this, but I am pretty sure my chances of getting a mac
       | in the future are zero. From which side should I expect the PC
       | response? Intel? AMD? Microsoft? ARM? Samsung? I think Apple
       | willingly or not has just obliterated the whole consumer pc
       | market.
        
         | yepthatsreality wrote:
         | And Apple will court (allow) developers until competition shows
         | up. Then they will shut it down and obfuscate. The fact that
         | Apple refuses to provide FOSS drivers themselves indicates
         | this.
        
           | unix_fan wrote:
           | Apple has never provided drivers for other operating systems,
           | including windows. The drivers used for BootCamp aren't even
           | developed by them.
        
             | floatboth wrote:
             | Well, they clearly at least commissioned them from someone
             | else, since they are the ones _distributing_ them.
        
               | wtallis wrote:
               | Intel Macs are literally PCs. The Windows drivers that
               | Apple bundled up for Boot Camp were the same drivers that
               | the respective component manufacturers provide for other
               | PC OEMs to redistribute. In the entire history of Intel
               | Macs, there have been very few components used by Apple
               | for which there wasn't already an off-the-shelf Windows
               | driver written by someone other than Apple for the sake
               | of their non-Apple customers.
        
               | floatboth wrote:
               | They do include these too, but I'm mostly talking about
               | stuff like the trackpads (before SPI, the protocol they
               | ran over USB was also custom, not HID)
        
         | altcognito wrote:
         | Apple willingly or not increased their market share? Seriously,
         | the AstroTurf in this thread is off the charts.
        
         | shmerl wrote:
         | Hardly. Apple has nothing to offer for high end gaming and I
         | don't think they care about it.
         | 
         | For me it's Linux with AMD both for CPU and GPU.
        
         | devwastaken wrote:
         | I'd be excited to see arm competition in the desktop space but
         | I don't believe there are any arm chips that compete in
         | performance to high end x86. Arm can do lots of cores which is
         | very good for servers, but single threading performance is
         | still a significant necessity on user end hardware.
         | 
         | The M1 is great because it's low power with optimized
         | performance, but on a desktop you can have well over 500W+ and
         | that's normal.
         | 
         | I don't see anyone else making only mobile arm chips for
         | laptops other than trying to be like a Windows Chromebook. The
         | software compatability will be a nightmare.
        
           | tyingq wrote:
           | I do think that's a relevant point for desktops. The M1 is
           | incredible, but if you don't care about TDP, desktop can
           | catch up fairly quickly for either Intel or AMD.
           | 
           | I don't see an obvious player currently working on a "broad
           | market" high performance ARM chip for the commodity desktop.
        
           | wlesieutre wrote:
           | _> I don 't see anyone else making only mobile arm chips for
           | laptops other than trying to be like a Windows Chromebook.
           | The software compatability will be a nightmare._
           | 
           | I'd expect Microsoft to make a run at this with their Surface
           | line.
           | 
           | They've been trying to make ARM tablets for a years (see
           | Windows RT), and they just recently added the x86-64
           | compatibility layer so that it could be actually useful
           | instead of "it's an iPad but worse".
           | 
           | https://blogs.windows.com/windows-
           | insider/2020/12/10/introdu...
           | 
           | Will it see any success with 3rd party developers probably
           | not bothering to support ARM? Maybe for some people who spend
           | most of their time in Edge, Mail, or Office. I have a hard
           | time seeing it being as successful as Apple's change, since
           | the messaging from Apple is "This is happening in 2 years,
           | get on board or you'll be left behind" and the messaging from
           | Microsoft is "Look, we made an ARM tablet, and will probably
           | sell at least 10 of them."
        
           | zaptrem wrote:
           | M1 cores outperform Comet Lake cores and are basically tied
           | with AMD Vermeer despite using a fraction of the power.
        
             | stefan_ wrote:
             | They are also on a different process _shrug_
        
               | unix_fan wrote:
               | Process node improvements don'ty bring that much
               | performance.
        
               | stefan_ wrote:
               | Given the massive drop in power consumption and therefore
               | heat, they seem to bring inordinate amounts of
               | performance in a mobile chip.
        
               | floatboth wrote:
               | Even evolution within the same process node can bring
               | noticeable performance improvements. Launch day AMD Zen 2
               | (TSMC 7FF) chips could barely clock to 4.2GHz, ones
               | manufactured months later can often do 4.4.
        
               | happymellon wrote:
               | So they _are_ competitive, because they are a node ahead?
        
             | monkmartinez wrote:
             | Who cares if you have the darn thing plugged in anyway?
             | Does the M1 outperform the Threadripper 3990x?
        
               | astrange wrote:
               | Personally I like the noise level in my room being 32 dB
               | and don't like PCs having to run the fan at full speed to
               | show the desktop picture.
        
               | monkmartinez wrote:
               | That is fine and I get it. Just realize there are lots of
               | people that need/want more power, variety, compatibility
               | with a lower cost. Water cooling is plug and play these
               | days for desktop rigs. The gaming laptop market has
               | become shockingly good for professional level
               | CAD/Engineering apps with the industry focused on
               | drastically reducing noise levels (albeit still quite
               | loud in comparison to fanless). Trade offs... trade offs
               | as far as you can see...
        
               | floatboth wrote:
               | Any desktop PC, even with the beefiest Threadripper,
               | won't run the fan at full speed when you're just browsing
               | the web or watching videos.
               | 
               | Heck, if you're not squeezing the absolute maximum
               | performance from a chip by overclocking (I am :P) you can
               | run a 5950X on a regular tower cooler with the fan curve
               | never coming close to 100% and it will still be
               | incredibly fast.
        
               | singhrac wrote:
               | I think it's a moot question, since they're not
               | comparable here. Laptops have inherent thermal
               | limitations (not just power) that don't allow something
               | like the Threadripper to be workable.
               | 
               | If you wanted a fair comparison you'd wait to see what
               | processor Apple puts in their Mac Pro in 2-3 years, and
               | compare that to whatever is the Threadripper equivalent
               | then.
        
               | jrockway wrote:
               | I think to understand the M1, you have to be a Mac laptop
               | user. For years, Mac laptop performance lagged years
               | behind high-end desktop performance -- they have been
               | stuck on 14nm+ process chips with a mobile power budget,
               | while desktop users have had 7nm chips that can draw 500W
               | with no trouble. As a result, what M1 users tell you is
               | fast is what PC desktop users have had for ages. A
               | Threadripper and 3090 will blow the M1 out of the water
               | in raw performance (but use a kilowatt while doing it,
               | which a laptop obviously can't do).
               | 
               | At my last job, they issued us 2012-era Macbooks. I
               | eventually got so frustrated with the performance that I
               | went out and bought everyone on my team an 8th generation
               | NUC. It was night and day. I couldn't believe how much
               | faster everything was. The M1 is a similar revelation for
               | people that have stayed inside the Mac ecosystem all
               | these years.
        
               | macNchz wrote:
               | Yeah after years of company-issued Macbook Pros I built
               | myself a Ryzen 3900x dev machine last year and it was
               | like waking up from one of those dreams where you need to
               | do something urgently but your legs aren't cooperating.
               | 
               | Given the benchmarks I've seen I imagine the M1 would be
               | a somewhat comparable experience, but using a desktop
               | machine for software development for the first time
               | since...2003(!) has really turned me off the laptop-as-
               | default model that I'd been used to, and the slow but
               | steady iOSification of MacOS has turned me off Macs
               | generally. Once people are back to working in offices I'd
               | just pair it with an iPad or Surface or something for
               | meetings.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | MetaWhirledPeas wrote:
         | They have bitten off an even bigger chunk of the meal they had
         | nearly finished already:
         | 
         | - Developers
         | 
         | - Creatives
         | 
         | - Dutiful citizens of The Ecosystem
         | 
         | What they are no closer to biting off is gamers and hardware
         | enthusiasts. Anyone who actually needs to open their PC for any
         | purpose whatsoever.
         | 
         | I know Apple wants to be the glossy Eve to all the PC market's
         | Wall-E's, but I will continue to shun them forcefully as long
         | as they remain hell-bent on stifling the nerdy half of all of
         | their users.
         | 
         | I assume the developer popularity is a result of the iPhone
         | gold rush, which Apple exploited using exclusivity tactics.
         | Therefore I consider it an abomination to see developers
         | embrace the platform so thoroughly. iPhone development should
         | feel shameful, and when there's no way to avoid it, it should
         | be done on a dusty Mac Mini pulled from a cardboard box that
         | was sitting in the closet ;)
        
           | bonestamp2 wrote:
           | > I assume the developer popularity is a result of the iPhone
           | gold rush, which Apple exploited using exclusivity tactics.
           | Therefore I consider it an abomination to see developers
           | embrace the platform so thoroughly.
           | 
           | That's not why most developers I know use macs. We use them
           | because we got tired of spending a couple days a year (on
           | average) unfucking our Windows machine after something goes
           | wrong. When you're a developer, you're often installing,
           | uninstalling and changing things... much more than the
           | average personal or business user. That means there are a lot
           | of opportunities for things to go wrong, and they do. Even
           | most Google employees were using macs until they themselves
           | started making high end Chromebooks; tens of thousands of
           | google employees still use macs. Some users have moved on to
           | linux, but most stay on mac because they want to spend time
           | in the OS and not on the OS. I can appreciate both
           | perspectives, there's no right answer for everyone.
           | 
           | I share your wish that the hardware was more serviceable but
           | everything is a compromise at the end of the day and that's
           | the compromise I'm willing to take in exchange for the other
           | benefits.
           | 
           | Some complain about the price, but the high end macbook pros
           | aren't even more expensive than windows workstation laptops.
           | Our company actually saved several hundred dollars per
           | machine when we switched from ThinkPads with the same specs.
           | Not to mention, our IT support costs were cut almost in half
           | with macs.
           | 
           | So, aside from gaming or some specific edgecase requirements,
           | it's hard for me to justify owning a PC. That said, I have
           | one of those edgecase requirements with one of my clients so
           | I have a ThinkPad just for them. But, it stays in a drawer
           | when I'm not working on that specific thing.
        
             | evilduck wrote:
             | On the gaming front, I've been trying GeForce Now recently
             | and while it may not be great for competitive FPS games, it
             | has otherwise destroyed any reason why I'd ever purchase
             | another gaming PC unless they start jacking up the monthly
             | price. It works on basically all platforms (including my
             | iOS devices), it doesn't spin up my MBP's fans and doesn't
             | eat through battery life. I don't have to worry about ARM
             | vs x86, I don't even get locked in to the platform like
             | Stadia, it connects to Steam, Epic and GOG.
        
           | evilduck wrote:
           | Wow, obvious bias much? Great way to engage in reasonable,
           | level headed conversation is to lead with telling people they
           | should be ashamed for not holding your values and opinions. I
           | honestly can't think of a better way to demonstrate to most
           | people why they _should_ get a Mac than to just show off
           | comments like yours.
        
         | ActorNightly wrote:
         | > I think Apple willingly or not has just obliterated the whole
         | consumer pc market.
         | 
         | They definitely won the "general public use laptop" market (if
         | you conveniently ignore the rest of the laptop and OSX, which
         | are utter crap IMO), but its important to understand that they
         | really didn't invent anything, they just optimized. And
         | optimizing something like this means you make the stuff that is
         | most commonly used better, while reducing the functionality of
         | the rest.
         | 
         | Compare the Asus Zephyrus RoG 14 laptop with the Macbook pro.
         | G14 has the older Ryzen 9 4900HS chip, and while the single
         | core performance of the MBP is better, the multi core is the
         | same despite the 4900HZ being a last gen chip. G14 gets about
         | 11 hours of battery time for regular use, MBP gets about 16,
         | but the G14 also has a discrete GPU that is superior for gaming
         | than the integrated GPU of the mac. Different configurations
         | for different things.
         | 
         | Then, even ignoring the companies decision to mix and match
         | components, the reason why you can buy any windows based laptop
         | and install Linux on it and have 99% of the functionality
         | working right out of the box is because of the standardization
         | of the cpu architecture. With the Apple M1, even though Rosetta
         | is very well built, its support is not universal across all
         | applications, some run poorly or not at all.
         | 
         | And while modern compilers are smart, they have a long way to
         | go before true cross operability with all the performance
         | enhancements. Just look at any graphical linux distro, and the
         | fact that all android devices out there run linux, but there
         | isn't a way to natively run it on them without the chroot
         | method that doesn't take advantage of the hardware.
         | 
         | So in the end, if you are someone that just wants a laptop with
         | good performance and great battery life, and don't care about
         | any particular software since most of your time will be spent
         | on the web or in the Apple Ecosystem software, the M1 machines
         | are definitely the right choice. However, if you want something
         | like a dev machine with Linux where you just want to be able to
         | git clone software and it work without any issues, you are most
         | likely going to be better off with the "windows" based laptops
         | with traditional AMD/Intel chips for quite some time.
        
         | tambourine_man wrote:
         | > but I am pretty sure my chances of getting a mac in the
         | future are zero
         | 
         | Why?
        
           | monkmartinez wrote:
           | I cannot speak for OP, but software is the reason for me. I
           | can not run Solidworks on MacOS without bootcamp or other
           | tricks, for example. Photogrammetry apps? GIS apps? CNC CAM
           | apps? I mean, compare the Mac[1] compatible apps to the
           | catalog of Apps Autodesk has.
           | 
           | The fact of the matter is GPU support on MacOS is just not
           | there in the same way it is with windows. It is really hard
           | to justify the price of Apple when you compare directly to
           | Windows offerings spec for spec. When you compare the sheer
           | volume of software available for Windows as compared to
           | MacOS, especially if you need a discrete GPU there are really
           | no comparisons.
           | 
           | [1]https://www.autodesk.com/solutions/mac-compatible-software
        
             | criddell wrote:
             | I'm always surprised when I see discussions about somebody
             | dumping one operating system for another. Isn't your
             | operating system choice dictated by the applications you
             | want to run?
        
           | cambalache wrote:
           | Price for one, also I still consider PC and Linux (and god
           | heavens even windows) more open than Mac. I also work with
           | many windows-only automation software.
        
             | chrisweekly wrote:
             | sorry but what's "PC" above, given it's not windows?
        
               | cambalache wrote:
               | A generic term for hardware able to run linux and/or
               | windows. Or any personal computer not build by Apple. You
               | can have any combination of open/closed hardware and OS.
        
           | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
           | For me:
           | 
           | 1. A huge catalog of apps and games, old and new, that are
           | mostly windows and linux, but all exclusively x86.
           | 
           | 2. I don't want to get locked in to an ecosystem with no
           | variety. For example, if Dell's offering laptop has a
           | keyboard I hate or poor selection of ports, then I can switch
           | to Lenovo or HP or go for a gaming laptop with an Nvidia GPU
           | and use it to train NN, etc, the variety is amazing. While if
           | Apple's next machine has a flaw I dislike, then too frikin
           | bad, I'll be stuck with whatever Apple bestowes upon me.
        
         | fossuser wrote:
         | You might have to bite the bullet and get a mac - I don't see
         | much promise from others in this space.
         | 
         | Intel's CEO change may save them, but they're definitely facing
         | an existential threat they've failed to adapt to for years.
         | 
         | Amazon will move to ARM on servers and probably some decent
         | design there, but that won't really reach the consumer hardware
         | market (probably - though I suppose they could do something
         | interesting in this space if they wanted to).
         | 
         | Windows faces issues with third party integration, OEMs, chip
         | manufacturers and coordinating all of that. Nadella is smart
         | and is mostly moving to Azure services and O365 on strategy - I
         | think windows and the consumer market matter less.
         | 
         | Apple owns their entire stack and is well positioned to
         | continue to expand the delta between their design/integration
         | and everyone else continuing to flounder.
         | 
         | AMD isn't that much better positioned than Intel and doesn't
         | have a solution for the coordination problem either. Nvidia may
         | buy ARM, but that's only one piece of getting things to work
         | well.
         | 
         | I'm long on Apple here, short on Intel and AMD.
         | 
         | We'll see what happens.
        
           | spideymans wrote:
           | I just got my M1 Air. This thing is unbelievably fluid and
           | responsive. It doesn't matter what I do in the background. I
           | can simultaneously run VMs, multiple emulators, compile code,
           | and the UI is always a fluid 60 fps. Apps always open
           | instantly. Webpages always render in a literal blink of an
           | eye. This thing feels like magic. Nothing I do can make this
           | computer skip a beat. Dropped frames are a thing of the past.
           | The user interface of every Intel Mac I've used (yes, even
           | the Mac Pro) feels slow and clunky in comparison.
           | 
           | Oh, and the chassis of this fanless system literally remains
           | _cool to the touch_ while doing all this.
           | 
           | The improvements in raw compute power alone do not account
           | for the incredible fluidity of this thing. macOS on the M1
           | now feels every bit as snappy and responsive as iPadOS on the
           | iPad. I've never used a PC (or Mac) that has ever felt
           | anywhere near this responsive. I can only chalk that up to
           | software and hardware integration.
           | 
           | Unless Apple's competitors can integrate the software and
           | hardware to the same degree, I don't know how they'll get the
           | same fluidity we see out of the M1. Microsoft really oughta
           | take a look at developing their own PC CPUs, because they're
           | probably the only player in the Windows space suited to
           | integrate software and hardware to such a degree. Indeed,
           | Microsoft is rumoured to be developing their own ARM-based
           | CPUs for the Surface, so it just might happen [0]
           | 
           | [0] https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/18/22189450/microsoft-
           | arm-p...
        
             | uncledave wrote:
             | So much this. M1 mini here. I am absolutely chuffed with
             | it. It's insanely good.
             | 
             | I'm going to be the first person in the queue to grab their
             | iMac offering.
        
           | monkmartinez wrote:
           | Are you saying you don't see much promise for AMD, Intel and
           | Nvidia in the GPU space or with computers in general? I had a
           | hard time following your logic.
           | 
           | Apple may own their stack, but there are a TON of use cases
           | where that stack doesn't even form a blip on the radar of the
           | people who purchase computer gear.
        
             | fossuser wrote:
             | My prediction is x86 is dead.
             | 
             | External GPUs will remain and I think Nvidia has an
             | advantage in that niche currently.
             | 
             | The reason stack ownership matters is because it allows
             | tight integration which leads to better chip design (and
             | better performance/efficiency).
             | 
             | Windows has run on ARM for a while for example, but it
             | sucks. The reason it sucks is complicated but largely has
             | to do with bad incentives and coordination problems between
             | multiple groups. Apple doesn't have this problem.
             | 
             | As Apple's RISC design performance improvements (paired
             | with extremely low power requirements) become more and more
             | obvious x86 manufacturers will be left unable to compete.
             | Cloud providers will move to ARM chipsets of their own
             | design (see: https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/graviton/) and
             | AMD/Intel will be on the path to extinction.
             | 
             | I'd argue Apple's M1 machines are already at this level and
             | they're version 0 (if you haven't played with one you
             | should).
             | 
             | This is an e-risk for Intel and AMD, they should have been
             | preparing for this for the last decade, instead Intel
             | doubled down on their old designs to maximize profit in the
             | short term at the cost of extinction in the long term.
             | 
             | It's not an argument about individual consumer choice
             | (though that will shift too), the entire market will move.
        
               | The_Colonel wrote:
               | > My prediction is x86 is dead.
               | 
               | I don't see that. At least in corporate environment with
               | bazillion legacy apps, x86 will be the king for the
               | foreseeable future.
               | 
               | And frankly I don't really see the pull of ARM/M1 anyway.
               | I mean, I can get a laptop with extremely competitive
               | Ryzen for way cheaper than MacBook with M1. The only big
               | advantage I see is the battery, but that's not very
               | relevant for many use cases - most people are buying
               | laptops don't actually spend that much time on the go
               | needing battery power. It's also questionable how
               | transferable this is to the rest of the market without
               | Apple's tight vertical integration.
               | 
               | > I'd argue Apple's M1 machines are already at this level
               | and they're version 0
               | 
               | Where is this myth coming from? Apple's chips are now on
               | version 15 or so.
        
               | fossuser wrote:
               | This is the first release targeting macOS, I'm not
               | pretending their chips for phones don't exist - but the
               | M1 is still version 0 for macs.
               | 
               | > "And frankly I don't really see the pull of ARM/M1
               | anyway. I mean, I can get a laptop with extremely
               | competitive Ryzen for way cheaper than MacBook with
               | M1..."
               | 
               | Respectfully, I strongly disagree with this - to me it's
               | equivalent to someone defending the keyboards on a palm
               | treo. This is a major shift in capability and we're just
               | seeing the start of that curve where x86 is nearing the
               | end.
               | 
               | "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame."
        
               | The_Colonel wrote:
               | > but the M1 is still version 0 for macs.
               | 
               | Fair enough, it's just important to keep in mind that M1
               | is a result of decade(s) long progressive enhancement. M2
               | is going to be another incremental step in the series.
               | 
               | > to me it's equivalent to someone defending the
               | keyboards on a palm treo. This is a major shift in
               | capability ...
               | 
               | That's a completely unjustified comparison. iPhone
               | brought a new way to interact with your phone. M1 brings
               | ... better performance per watt? (something which is
               | happening every year anyway)
               | 
               | What new capabilities does M1 bring? I'm trying to see
               | them, but don't ...
        
               | fossuser wrote:
               | > "That's a completely unjustified comparison. iPhone
               | brought a new way to interact with your phone."
               | 
               | People don't really remember, but a lot of people were
               | really dismissive of the iPhone (and iPod) on launch. For
               | the iPhone, the complaints were about cost, about lack of
               | hardware keyboard, about fingerprints on the screen.
               | People complained that it was less usable than existing
               | phones for email, etc.
               | 
               | The M1 brings much better performance at much less power.
               | 
               | I think that's a big deal and is a massive lift for what
               | applications can do. I also think x86 cannot compete now
               | and things will only get a lot worse as Apple's chips get
               | even better.
        
               | The_Colonel wrote:
               | > People don't really remember, but a lot of people were
               | really dismissive of the iPhone (and iPod) on launch.
               | 
               | I do remember that. iPhone had its growing pains in the
               | first year, and there was a fair criticism back then. But
               | it was also clear that iPhone brings a completely new
               | vision to the concept of a mobile phone.
               | 
               | M1 brings a nice performance at fairly low power, but
               | that's just a quantitative difference. No new vision.
               | Perf/watt improvements have been happening every single
               | year since the first chips were manufactured.
               | 
               | > I also think x86 cannot compete now and things will
               | only get a lot worse as Apple's chips get even better.
               | 
               | Why? Somehow Apple's chips will get better, but
               | competition will stand still? AMD is making currently
               | great progresses, and it finally looks like Intel is
               | waking up from letargia as well.
        
               | fossuser wrote:
               | > "Why? Somehow Apple's chips will get better, but
               | competition will stand still?"
               | 
               | Arguably this has been the case for the last ten years
               | (comparing chips on iPhones to others).
               | 
               | I think x86 can't compete, CISC can't compete with RISC
               | because of problems inherent to CISC
               | (https://debugger.medium.com/why-is-apples-m1-chip-so-
               | fast-32...)
               | 
               | It won't be for lack of trying - x86 will hold them back.
               | 
               | I suppose in theory they could recognize this e-risk, and
               | throw themselves at coming up with a competitive RISC
               | chip design while also somehow overcoming the integration
               | disadvantages they face.
               | 
               | If they were smart enough to do this, they would have
               | done it already.
               | 
               | I'd bet against them (and I am).
        
               | spideymans wrote:
               | >M1 brings a nice performance at fairly low power, but
               | that's just a quantitative difference. No new vision.
               | Perf/watt improvements have been happening every single
               | year since the first chips were manufactured.
               | 
               | I'd say the M1's improvements are a lot more than
               | performance per watt. It has enabled a level of UI
               | fluidity and general "snappiness" that I just haven't
               | seen out of any Mac or PC before. The Mac Pro is clearly
               | faster than any M1 Mac, but the browsing the UI on the
               | Mac Pro just feels slow and clunky in comparison to the
               | M1.
               | 
               | I can only chalk that up to optimization between the
               | silicon and the software, and I'm not sure that Apple's
               | competitors will be able to replicate that.
        
               | phkahler wrote:
               | Remember, M1 is on _the_ leading edge 5nm fab process.
               | Ryzen APUs are coming and may be competitive in terms of
               | power consumption when they arrive on 5nm.
               | 
               | Apple software is also important here. They do some
               | things very much right. It will be interesting to run
               | real benchmarks with x64 on the same node.
               | 
               | Having said all that, I love fanless quiet computers. In
               | that segment Apple has been winning all along.
        
               | monkmartinez wrote:
               | Ok, I still have questions.
               | 
               | To start... How would a city with tens of thousands of
               | computers transition to ARM in the near future?
               | 
               | The apps that run 911 Dispatch systems and run critical
               | infrastructure all over the world are all on x86
               | hardware. Millions if not Billions of dollars in
               | investment, training, and configuration. These are
               | bespoke systems. The military industrial complex
               | basically custom chips and x86. The federal government
               | runs on x86. you think they are just going to say,
               | "Whelp, looks like Apple won, lets quadruple the cost to
               | integrate Apple silicon for our water system and missile
               | systems! They own the stack!"
               | 
               | Professional grade engineering apps and manufacturing
               | apps are just going to suddenly rewrite for apple
               | hardware, because M2 or M3 is sooooo fast? Price
               | matters!!!! Choice Matters!!!
               | 
               | This is solely about consumer choice right now. The cost
               | is prohibitive for most consumers as well, as evidence by
               | the low market penetration of Apple computers to this
               | day.
        
               | nzmsv wrote:
               | Notice how the only counter examples you came up with are
               | legacy applications. This is the first sign of a
               | declining market. No, Intel will not go out of business
               | tomorrow. But they are still dead.
               | 
               | The growth markets will drive the price of ARM parts down
               | and performance up. Meanwhile x86 will stagnate and
               | become more and more expensive due to declining volumes.
               | Eventually, yes, this will apply enough pressure even on
               | niche applications like engineering apps to port to ARM.
               | The military will likely be the last holdout.
        
               | fossuser wrote:
               | You make bets on where the puck is going, not on where it
               | currently is.
               | 
               | "How would a city with tens of thousands of HDDs
               | transition to SSDs in the near future?"
               | 
               | It happens over time as products move to compete.
               | 
               | Client side machines matter less, the server will
               | transition to ARM because performance and power is better
               | on RISC. The military industrial complex relies on
               | government cloud contracts with providers that will
               | probably move to ARM on the server side.
               | 
               | It's not necessarily rewriting for Apple hardware, but
               | people that care about future performance will have to
               | move to similar RISC hardware to remain competitive.
        
             | nzmsv wrote:
             | I think we'll see a lot of ARM use cases outside of the
             | Apple stack and x86 is dead (but it will of course take its
             | sweet time getting there). For the longest time everyone
             | believed at a subconscious level that x86 was a
             | prerequisite due to compatibility. Apple provided an
             | existence proof that this is false. There is no longer a
             | real need to hold onto the obsolete x86 design.
             | 
             | The only way for Intel and AMD to thrive in this new world
             | is to throw away their key asset: expertise in x86 arcana.
             | They will not do this (see Innovator's Dilemma for reasons
             | why). As a result they will face a slow decline and
             | eventual death.
        
         | vbezhenar wrote:
         | What exactly do you expect? x86 is quite competitive. M1 might
         | be slightly better, but it's not like it's miles ahead.
        
           | cambalache wrote:
           | I want a return to the status-quo when for 80% (it could be
           | even less but let's not dwell in the number) of the price of
           | an Apple laptop I could get a windows/linux machine matching
           | or surpassing its specs(including stuff like battery
           | life,energy consumption, screen dpi, noise, etc). This is not
           | true now and I am not seeing an option in the short term.
        
             | shawnz wrote:
             | Perhaps it is still true, but Apple is somehow becoming the
             | budget option in that equation?
        
           | cwhiz wrote:
           | Fiddling around on an M1 MBA it felt faster than my 2020 16"
           | MBP. It's half the weight, seems to get double the battery
           | life, and costs less than 1/3.
           | 
           | I just can't even imagine what the gap is going to look like
           | when Apple really refines this down.
        
             | pimeys wrote:
             | You should compare it to other than the old Apple laptops.
             | The Ryzen models, such as ThinkPad T14 are very fast, and
             | if you want to go tenfold from there, there is no
             | comparison with the modern Ryzen desktop CPUs. Why Apple
             | always failed with Intel and its thermals is why they feel
             | so slow compared to the M1.
        
               | esturk wrote:
               | A 2020 16" Macbook Pro isn't old by any measure. This
               | argument seems disingenuous.
        
             | jayd16 wrote:
             | >It's half the weight
             | 
             | Its 70% the weight at 70% the volume of the 16". What is
             | the point of comparing the weight of a 13" and a 16"
             | laptop?
        
               | junipertea wrote:
               | It is faster despite the lower battery capacity and
               | thermals. In fact, the Macbook air has no fan.
        
         | banana_giraffe wrote:
         | The response from Intel seems to be betting on the Evo platform
         | [1], with third parties announcing laptops like the XPG Xenia
         | XE
         | 
         | 1
         | https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/evo.ht...
        
           | andromeduck wrote:
           | That looks more like ultrabooks but not watered down again -
           | I'm not impressed.
        
           | AtlasBarfed wrote:
           | So they're announcing a "platform". Smacks of managerial
           | bottom-covering. Almost like forming a committee to
           | investigate the problem.
           | 
           | - where was this 1/2/10 years ago?
           | 
           | - how would this address the fundamental CPU performance gap?
           | 
           | - Intel has no competitive GPU offering, yet another glaring
           | failure on their part
           | 
           | - why would OEMs go along with this when Ryzen is a better
           | CPU, GPU, aside from getting Intel bribes and the usual
           | marketplace branding momentum?
           | 
           | - will this actually get ports migrated to laptops faster? It
           | was criminal how long it took for HDMI 2.0 to hit laptops.
           | 
           | I get Intel doesn't own the stack/vertical integration, but
           | Intel could have devoted 1% of its revenue to a kickass Linux
           | OS to keep Microsoft honest a long time ago and demonstrate
           | its full hardware.
           | 
           | Even if only coders/techies used it like Macbooks are
           | standard issue in the Bay, it would have been good insurance,
           | leverage, or demoware.
        
             | banana_giraffe wrote:
             | Yeah, on top of it all, given all of the shots of the
             | reference models look vaguely like a Mac Book, it really
             | feels to me like Intel dug around in their couch cushions
             | to come up with a response.
        
             | wg0 wrote:
             | "I get Intel doesn't own the stack/vertical integration,
             | but Intel could have devoted 1% of its revenue to a kickass
             | Linux OS to keep Microsoft honest a long time ago and
             | demonstrate its full hardware." Interesting point.. makes
             | one wonder why didn't they do it while having a mountain of
             | cash.
        
               | nine_k wrote:
               | They had Intel Clear Linux, a server-oriented distro.
               | Quite good at what it targeted.
        
               | tambre wrote:
               | They do have something - Clear Linux [0]. Definitely not
               | too mcuh investment, but they do differentiate by
               | compiling packages for much newer instruction sets
               | compared to other distros.
               | 
               | [0]: https://clearlinux.org/
        
               | AtlasBarfed wrote:
               | The real differentiator would have been an army of good
               | driver coders and contributors to KDE/GnomeX.
        
               | AtlasBarfed wrote:
               | They were so in bed with Microsoft.
               | 
               | Microsoft being a true monopoly might have struck fear in
               | the timid souls of Intel executives that they would go
               | headlong for AMD.
               | 
               | Or Google had this opportunity for years, and half-assed
               | ChromeOS. Or AMD. Or Dell/HP/IBM who sold enough x86 to
               | have money on the side.
               | 
               | I don't buy that it would have been hard. Look at what
               | Apple did with OSX with such a paltry market share and
               | way before the iPhone money train came. First consumer
               | OSX release was 2001.
               | 
               | Sure, Apple had a massive advantage by buying NeXT's
               | remnants and Jobs's familiarity with it and the people
               | behind it, but remember that Apple's first choice was
               | BeOS.
               | 
               | So anyone looking to push things could have got BeOS, or
               | an army of Sun people as Sun killed off Solaris. The
               | talent was out there.
               | 
               | Instead here we sit with Windows in a perpetual state of
               | the two-desktop tiled/old frankenstein, Linux DE
               | balkanization and perpetual reinvention/rewrite from
               | scratch, and OSX locked on Apple.
        
             | Fnoord wrote:
             | > I get Intel doesn't own the stack/vertical integration,
             | but Intel could have devoted 1% of its revenue to a kickass
             | Linux OS to keep Microsoft honest a long time ago and
             | demonstrate its full hardware.
             | 
             | Moblin, MeeGo.
        
             | selectodude wrote:
             | >- where was this 1/2/10 years ago?
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrino#Notebook_implementat
             | i...
        
           | neogodless wrote:
           | You have to read between the lines here. They make no claims
           | about CPU performance - just integrated GPU performance from
           | Xe (which is a big improvement from previous Iris GPUs.) Then
           | they claim battery life (9 hours, FHD, 250-nits, etc.)
           | 
           | What that means is laptop OEMs will have to limit TDP on CPUs
           | - probably 15W or less. Given current Intel chips being very
           | power hungry, these are likely NOT going to be great CPU
           | performers.
           | 
           | The only competition in CPU space to M1 will be Ryzen 5000U
           | chips in the 15-25W thermal envelope. They should be ~19%
           | more powerful/efficient than Ryzen 4000U chips, but I would
           | not expect M1 levels of cool or battery life yet.
        
         | flatiron wrote:
         | The new Ryzen mobile processors should be interesting. Their
         | GPU drivers (while not of the best code quality) are in the
         | mainline Linux kernel. So it all should just "work"
        
           | gnarbarian wrote:
           | Currently using a Renoir laptop. It's smoking fast but I had
           | to install a bleeding edge kernel to get the display driver
           | to work at all. That should be fixed in the next ubuntu
           | release though.
        
             | imhoguy wrote:
             | 5.10.x kernels are very stable and feature complete with
             | AMD Ryzen Renoir - I update one almost weekly once new
             | patch version is out on Ubuntu Kernel PPA. Here is nice
             | script which makes the update trivial:
             | https://github.com/pimlie/ubuntu-mainline-kernel.sh
        
             | threentaway wrote:
             | Weird, I had no issues with the built in display on Ubuntu
             | 20.04, but I had to update the kernel to 5.8 to get display
             | out over USB-C to work. Now that Ubuntu 20.10 is out and
             | uses 5.8, I'm just using that so I don't have to mess with
             | custom, unsigned kernels.
        
               | pedrocr wrote:
               | I just installed 20.04.1 on a 4750U Lenovo T14s and
               | everything just works as far as I can tell.
        
           | unix_fan wrote:
           | The new mobile chips are basically a mix of new and old
           | stuff, with them rebranding ryzen 2 parts. Kind of
           | disappointing.
        
             | neogodless wrote:
             | But the slightly tweaked "old stuff" is _relatively_ low-
             | end - up to and including the 5700U. You 'll find it in
             | thin 'n light, budget and business laptops that will have
             | more than enough power from a Zen 2 core. If you really
             | absolutely need more power, you'll know it and you'll be
             | shopping for a 5800H (or above).
             | 
             | If you don't know enough about CPUs to even read reviews
             | that compare the CPU to other CPUs, then you either don't
             | need the extra IPC of Zen 3 (and you won't notice when you
             | use your laptop day to day) or you just... don't care.
             | 
             | If you care, get a 5600U/5800U or H line and it will never
             | affect you. The laptops these come in should be priced
             | accordingly.
        
         | littlestymaar wrote:
         | > Apple willingly or not has just obliterated the whole
         | consumer pc market.
         | 
         | Apple probably has the best laptop out there as of today, but I
         | don't think Apple sales performances are impacted that much by
         | their hardware perf actually: around 2012-2015 or something
         | they had several years with a subpar mobile phone, both on the
         | hardware a and the software side, and it still sold very well.
         | A few years later, they have the best phone on the market
         | and... it didn't change their dynamic much: it still sells very
         | well, as before. On the laptop market, they have been selling
         | subpar laptops for a few years without much issue, and I guess
         | it won't change much that they now have the best one.
         | 
         | Apple customers will get a much better deal for their bucks,
         | which is good for their long term business, but I don't think
         | it will drive that many people out of the Windows world[1] just
         | for that reason (especially with the migration/compatibility
         | issues which are even worse now than they where running on
         | Intel).
         | 
         | Also, many people outside of HN just don't listen to Apple
         | "revolutionary" announcement, they have used that card too
         | much, for no good reason most of the time, so people just
         | stopped listening (even my friends who are actually Apple
         | customers).
         | 
         | [1]: which is where most people are tbh, and I don't think that
         | many Linux people would switch either.
        
           | noizejoy wrote:
           | Agreed - since MacOS is even more of an entire eco-system,
           | moving in and out of that is much more of a long-term
           | commitment for most regular users.
           | 
           | People who are multi-platform in daily life, are much more
           | likely to switch - and that's a rather small percentage of
           | computer users (and of course very much over-represented here
           | at HN).
           | 
           | > they have used that card too much
           | 
           | you can never have enough "magic" :-)
        
       | chrisbrandow wrote:
       | question from ignorance - Why not use Metal? Is that too embedded
       | in the macOS system to be useful for something like Linux? Or is
       | this for the sake of understanding the bare metal?
        
         | lunixbochs wrote:
         | If you used metal as the graphics api on Linux, literally no
         | existing Linux software would work with it unless you also used
         | a layer like MoltenGL or MoltenVK (which have been written for
         | a Mac system and would likely need modification). Linux
         | graphics drivers also tend to have extra APIs for buffer
         | management for X11/Wayland, which a molten compat layer
         | probably doesn't do as molten is meant to run in-process with
         | each app I believe.
         | 
         | Some of the Metal APIs are also a little intertwined with swift
         | and objc.
        
         | pantalaimon wrote:
         | The goal is to write a driver for Linux, this is from scratch.
        
       | wg0 wrote:
       | This might be a stupid question but if someone wants to start
       | with some basic GPU to get an an understanding of how these
       | things work, what that GPU would be that's wide spread, not that
       | archaic?
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | Anything that supports shaders is fine, but M1 is a mobile-
         | style GPU so it doesn't behave exactly like a desktop GPU.
        
         | remexre wrote:
         | Intel's GPUs are fairly well-documented at
         | https://01.org/linuxgraphics/documentation/hardware-specific...
         | 
         | IMO, writing some Vulkan (it being a thin layer over what a
         | modern GPU's "actually" doing) would be good to get
         | fundamentals down first, not the least of which because you'll
         | have the validation layers to yell at you for incorrect usage
         | instead of getting mysterious GPU behavior.
        
       | ogre_codes wrote:
       | While this is a long way from being a proper graphics driver, it
       | is a good indication that we're going to see a functional driver
       | for Linux before too long. I was concerned this bit would take
       | years to work out, this suggests it'll be months to get a working
       | driver.
       | 
       | Chuffed.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | varispeed wrote:
       | So Apple strategy seems to be to commit as little resources as
       | possible to their products knowing that "open source" developers
       | will do their work for free thus Apple will not have to pay extra
       | salaries and taxes? I don't understand why people bother working
       | for free to e.g. run Linux or even write a GPU driver? I get this
       | is a nice developer challenge, and being involved with Apple
       | stuff is still being seen as "cool", but why don't those
       | developers actually support some truly open source projects
       | instead of helping filthy rich company for nothing?
        
         | ogre_codes wrote:
         | > So Apple strategy seems to be to commit as little resources
         | as possible to their products knowing that "open source"
         | developers will do their work for free thus Apple will not have
         | to pay extra salaries and taxes?
         | 
         | Apple has no Linux strategy. Nobody is working for Apple for
         | free. People are working on their own time (or supporting the
         | project with their own money) because they want to see this
         | happen.
         | 
         | There is no skin in this for Apple either way.
         | 
         | What I don't understand is why people insist on criticizing a
         | project which won't fundamentally affect them at all. Having
         | Linux on Mac isn't going to hurt you and stands to benefit the
         | community as a whole.
         | 
         | While the GPU port is unlikely to benefit others, it's very
         | likely some of the other work will. Any improvements to the
         | Broadcom drivers will be useful for the entire community.
         | Improvements and optimizations to ARM64 support will likewise
         | benefit the whole community.
         | 
         | Really tired of the mis-directed zealots who think they have
         | the right to tell other people where to direct their time and
         | energy.
        
         | tenebrisalietum wrote:
         | Maybe because ... those developers want to use Linux on
         | hardware they _bought and own_ instead of the built-in
         | operating system? The developers are helping themselves, not
         | Apple.
         | 
         | Apple could save some money by selling bare metal M1's without
         | an OS installed, but then it might get into the hands of people
         | who want a "cheaper Mac but your hacker friend can get it
         | working" and it would damage their brand, so I see why they
         | don't do it.
        
           | varispeed wrote:
           | Well, is this M1 really _that_ good to commit considerable
           | amount of time into it instead of working on something more
           | meaningful or benefitting ones personal life more? Are they
           | able to make a commercial product out of it? Unless it gives
           | the person the same kick as fishing or building Lego - but
           | these hobbies don't have a side effect of filling the pockets
           | of a big co.
           | 
           | The idea about "cheaper Mac" is weak, because you can already
           | buy a cheap Mac - it's not going to be the latest gen, but
           | let's take into account that Intel has not made big progress
           | in the last couple of years and then M1 is actually on the
           | affordable side.
           | 
           | Isn't actually more damaging to their brand that they don't
           | support their products that will benefit professional users
           | and that they rely on people doing work for free and thus
           | Apple is avoiding paying fair share?
        
             | tenebrisalietum wrote:
             | > Well, is this M1 really _that_ good to commit
             | considerable amount of time into it instead of working on
             | something more meaningful or benefitting ones personal life
             | more?
             | 
             | M1 is an ARM chip that's up there with Intel desktop PCs.
             | That's awesome. It's possibly the real beginning of the end
             | of the effective Wintel monopoly on personal computing and
             | if we are going to continue to have Linux on hardware
             | that's not locked-down phones it needs to happen. I'd
             | certainly put my effort there if I had the skill.
             | 
             | > Isn't actually more damaging to their brand that they
             | don't support their products that will benefit professional
             | users and that they rely on people doing work for free and
             | thus Apple is avoiding paying fair share?
             | 
             | Apple has $100 billion in cash. Whatever they are doing
             | now, is working.
        
               | varispeed wrote:
               | This is like building a house on a swamp. Without
               | official Linux support, Apple can pull the plug anytime.
               | It's likely what is going to happen is that eventually a
               | viable open source project emerges that Apple didn't pay
               | anyone to build and then they will announce how they
               | embrace open source and tell their own developers to
               | contribute few lines for PR.
               | 
               | > Whatever they are doing now, is working. If you are
               | using child labour, avoid taxes, use anti-competitive
               | measures, make stuff deliberately difficult to repair and
               | easy to break and then have money to shut any politicians
               | willing to look into their shady business then yes it is
               | definitely working.
        
         | orangecat wrote:
         | It's not about helping Apple. The M1 beats every x86 CPU in
         | absolute single threaded performance, as well as multicore
         | performance per watt. Hopefully AMD will close the gap (I don't
         | have much hope for Intel), but for now it's an extremely
         | attractive target for Linux.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-01-22 23:00 UTC)