Apple announces new Mac Mini, Air + 13" MBP featuring their own M1 chip.

[Bombadil]

I'm finding this fascinating as it unfolds. It's not a paradigm shift per se, since ARM chips have been around a long time. But Apple has really changed things with this chip and the stronger ones that will be unveiled in due course. Double battery life on MacBooks? Smoking speed on native apps? Less thermal throttling?
If I had the money for a gadget, I'd likely get one of the MacBook Airs, but €1,100 is too much for a 'gadget.' I'll wait for the iMacs.

[Ploki]

I'm finding this fascinating as it unfolds. It's not a paradigm shift per se, since ARM chips have been around a long time. But Apple has really changed things with this chip and the stronger ones that will be unveiled in due course. Double battery life on MacBooks? Smoking speed on native apps? Less thermal throttling?
If I had the money for a gadget, I'd likely get one of the MacBook Airs, but €1,100 is too much for a 'gadget.' I'll wait for the iMacs.

If the 13" i5 wasn't enough for my portable needs i'd wait too, but replacing it with an M1 is a nobrainer.

i sold my Mini i7 in advance tho, since all reports seem to indicate it's going to work better anyway, then waiting for a new Mini Pro for studio, using the M1 as stop gap.

[masterhiggins]

Are there rumors of a Mac mini pro?

[Double Tap]

So, if the M1X etc second wave of Silicon SoCs really are as powerful as people expect, what will that mean for plugin makers?

Are there things that people want to make that the can't because processors aren't powerful enough?

[masterhiggins]

I think it’ll be interesting to see cross-platform performance between silicon and x86 and how many people will complain about the disparity.

[Ploki]

Are there rumors of a Mac mini pro?

Nothing substantial just the fact that i5 and i7 are still for sale

[re.mark]

So, if the M1X etc second wave of Silicon SoCs really are as powerful as people expect, what will that mean for plugin makers?

Are there things that people want to make that the can't because processors aren't powerful enough?

I don't think its a case of developers unable to make plugins that computers can't power. It's more track count and user limits. Granted products like Massive X do make use of beefy processing, so chunkier processing ability paves the way for even more complex voice handling.
Most users are limited to a certain amount of VSTs/VSTI's before they need to bounce/render/print. As processing power jumps up exponentially the ability to process 'live' free's up the user. I know of projects where the track count regularly exceeds 500, so advanced processing here will have a huge benefit.

[Markus Krause]

Here are my benchmark results (Cinebench R23 - more points is better):

My Ryzen 3900X does 18401 points (12 core)
My two year old Ryzen 3600X does 13034 points (8 core)
My Mac M1 mini does 7487 points (8 core)
My 5 year old Intel I7 does 6197 points (4 core with hyper-threading)

[Sascha Franck]

Here are my benchmark results (Cinebench R23 - more points is better):

My Ryzen 3900X does 18401 points (12 core)
My two year old Ryzen 3600X does 13034 points (8 core)
My Mac M1 mini does 7487 points (8 core)
My 5 year old Intel I7 does 6197 points (4 core with hyper-threading)

These are multithread results, so that's kinda to be expected.

[Ploki]

Here are my benchmark results (Cinebench R23 - more points is better):

My Ryzen 3900X does 18401 points (12 core)
My two year old Ryzen 3600X does 13034 points (8 core)
My Mac M1 mini does 7487 points (8 core)
My 5 year old Intel I7 does 6197 points (4 core with hyper-threading)

your results are inline with other i've seen.
honestly M1 is more of a quad-core. Are the others desktop chips?

I think that given the thermal envelope of the M1, it's insanely good.
The performance/watt they're claiming is actually not overblown marketing, it's really that good.
If they scale the same performance/watt to the 16" 85W TDP, they can get desktop-grade performance in an ultrabook form factor, so 15 vs 85W and some losses, i suspect the M1X in a 16" will either do at least 30K on the R23, or 25K without ever throttling at all.
We'll see how off i am

The i9 16" macbook pro's get around 8-9K
https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu_bench ... ti_core-16

[Passing Bye]

I think that given the thermal envelope of the M1, it's insanely good.

It's amazing mobile chip, that can compete with desktop ones and have no competition in his domestic one.

[Double Tap]

I don't think its a case of developers unable to make plugins that computers can't power. It's more track count and user limits. Granted products like Massive X do make use of beefy processing, so chunkier processing ability paves the way for even more complex voice handling.

Yeah that's sort of what I was trying to imagine. I mean, I can see the instant application of extra tracks and when mine arrives I'm looking forward to getting 20 Omnispheres running through some spectral processing FX, but I can imagine developers thinking that with more processing power, there are more things they could do. But what would that be? A 100 oscillator synth? I can't see much of a use for that. Maybe more detailed GUIs?

[Cinebient]

Running 20 Omnisphere already works for me on M1.
But I would think about really CPU intense FX like Kaleidoscope where you cannot change a lot parameters in real-time.
I guess there is so much more possible with much more powerful CPU´s. Some creative minds might create the next generations of physical modelling or something else.
As usual more is almost always better

[Passing Bye]

Maybe more detailed and nuanced everything without cutting corners because of CPU... maybe developers could finally make plugins without worrying about people crying about CPU usage...

[Chapelle]

---