Submission + - Mac Studio Shows Disappointing Performance Despite Apple's Claims (tomsguide.com)
exomondo writes: Latest benchmarks of Apple's new M1 Ultra show their performance claims in the announcement were misleading. It falls short of Intel's 12900K in single core performance though Apple's 20-core CPU does beat last year's Intel 16-core (8 performance, 8 efficiency) flagship. While it has an edge in power efficienct this highest end 64-core GPU sku also falls far short of Nvidia's 18 month old RTX 3090 despite Apple's claims, not even managing half of the Nvidia GPU's score in Geekbench even when using Apple's own Metal API.
It's much the same story as with the M1 Max announcement where Apple compared its GPU performance to Nvidia 3080-equiped laptops but in real gaming benchmarks it was lucky to get even half the performance while in the case of renderers like Arnold, Cycles and Octane it fell behind by up to 15x.
When it comes to performance-per-watt Apple takes the lead but in raw performance terms their claims appear to be quite exaggerated, particularly when it comes to desktops where power efficiency is much less of a concern.
It's much the same story as with the M1 Max announcement where Apple compared its GPU performance to Nvidia 3080-equiped laptops but in real gaming benchmarks it was lucky to get even half the performance while in the case of renderers like Arnold, Cycles and Octane it fell behind by up to 15x.
When it comes to performance-per-watt Apple takes the lead but in raw performance terms their claims appear to be quite exaggerated, particularly when it comes to desktops where power efficiency is much less of a concern.
