DAW benchmarks on new Mac M4 chip

[abi]

I´ve been a Mac user since 2008. I think it happened a few times that I lost software due to apple lacking interested in backward compatibility. That happened twice or maybe thrice in 16 years, so it can get an issue but the risk of losing software is not much higher than in windows world in my experience.

But: when I upgraded recently from an intel iMac to a Mac mini m2pro working on my music changed dramatically. No fan noise, never. No need to render tracks or go back and forth with sample buffers because of performance issues. Essentially it feels like the computer is gone: I don't need to think about it while producing. This may sound like exaggerations but I really mean it, because for the first time ever in my 45 years, getting a new computer felt really like a gaint leap and also like permanent change in my workflow, as far as that there are, for me, virtually no constrictions imposed by the computer.

Sorry for going OT. But for me, the new apple computers are not just much more powerful than anything else, but they change the way you can interact with your virtual synths and effects. I mean I rendered my last project with about 25 tracks, all loaded heavily with synths and effects, plus a somewhat heavily loaded mastering bus at 64 samples without any rendering or hiccups. I feel like having paid the extra money to apple has been the most worthwhile thing I did with regard to music production in a very very long time.

[Lerian]

Hang on - I thought a GPU was just about the most specialized thing ever - which is outstanding at exactly one thing: massive parallel processing?

H.264 (and .265) is hardcoded into Intel CPUs as well..

Don't get me wrong: your reply sounded good and expertish - it's just that it wasn't really.

Things you can do on an nvidia GPU faster that any other GPU/CPU: LLM processing, crypto mining, 3d rendering, video encoding, and even DSP.

The fact that h264 is hardcoded in intel doesn't change the fact that the M chip is a very specialized one, with things like H264 being hardcoded into it - which was just an example for the audience to understand. If they want to know exactly what kind of hardware support they have, they can use google. I'm not here to explain everything, just to give an idea.

And if you are some kind of expert, why don't you give them better answers instead of whining about others? You basically came with zero added value to the table, only whining about some totally irrelevant details. Go ahead, explain the apple silicon architecture to the guy, I'm sure he's very interested in all the details.

[Freaqpeak]

AMD is NOT the choice for audio in 2024 and has never been. There are many reasons for that. Drivers, compatibility with hardware (major one), bad thunderbolt support if any. WORSE single thread performance (the most important thing for DAW usage and single track long plugin chains), in general compatibilty issues on AMD (even with USB). Even ilok was not working properly on the new AMD cpus. They provided some beta solution to customers who got in contact with them but not all developer plugins were working. This may have been fixed by now, I have not followed it but read it over at Steinberg forums. Also comparisons that you see online not always tell the truth because for example some decide to run the Intels with lower speed RAM to equate it to the AMD max ram speed. Some crazy stuff like that.

That perspective seems skewed and biased. You cherry pick specific things that isn't even affecting the majority of audio/DAW users. You claim that the hardware platform is some how not suitable for audio work in general. This is simply just not true based on both independant benchmarks and users experiences.

Let's break down your claims:
1. iLok issues
This was only an issue with Windows and newly released 9000-series. It didn't affect the rest of the AMD CPUs. This has been fixed already by official updates. AMD released BIOS updates and iLok released version 5.9 to fix stability issues.
These kind of things happen sometimes between platform generations and has happened to ALL platforms including Intel, AMD and variations of ARM.
It should also be known that iLok isn't exactly known for following best practices for stability and future OS/hardware compatibility. iLok itself is not good for people that are early adopters of different updates or upgrades of their system at all. You can google the well-documented issue where people have lost their iLok-based licenses due to simple Windows updates, firmware and driver updates for any hardware, even small hardware upgrades can trigger iLok to lock the licenses. This is another topic though.

I don't know if you are aware that iLok have had serious issues on many platforms during the years of its existence. For example, recent years, iLok have had serious issues with various versions of Apple MacOS platforms. Apple have also had serious issues with compatibility between releases for a lot of audio related software and 3rd party hardware.
Would you claim that Apple and MacOS should be avoided as well for this reason?

2. USB issues
Now USB issues is a topic of it's own. USB issues in general have not been AMD specific platform problems. This is very clear if you have worked with computers since USB first became a standard. I haven't had any issues on my AMD Ryzen 3950x running on X570, even though I know that there were reports around 2021 that some people had random disconnections of USB devices.
This issue have been heavily reported for INTEL platforms as well around the same year (Intel Z690). Intel 5/3400 chipset series also had well-documented issues. This is not a specific AMD platform issue. It happens to all platforms at some point. Of course, both AMD and Intel released BIOS updates to fix the issues (some earlier than others...).

Right now, as we speak, various enterprise-grade INTEL-based laptops have huge issues with USB in Windows. USB ports stop to work and requires you to shutdown hard. Workaround is to hold down the power button for 30 sec to do a complete power down, to get them enabled again. This workaround only works intermittently though. There are no real solutions yet from Intel. They have several support tickets pending, so I hope there will be a fix sooner than later as I have hundreds of clients using these INTEL-based laptops.

3. Comparisons not telling the truth
I'm guessing you are talking about some specific Youtuber or a specific blog or something?
People cheating and lying on the Internet isn't something new.
This is 100% not an AMD-platform issue.
For real independent transparent benchmarks go and check the professional testers like Gamers Nexus. Or if you want correct DSP benchmark results, use and check DAWbench.

4. Thunderbolt issues?
Not all AMD motherboards have built-in support for Thunderbolt 3 or 4, but why would anyone chose a PC or motherboard that doesn't have the things you need? That is not an platform issue.
I don't get the problem, just get a motherboard that has it.
Apples ARM-based computers have only semi-compatible Thunderbolt 3 support and they do not have Thunderbolt 4 at all. Again, is that a reason not to use it for audio work?

It's like complaining about problem with WIFI on a CPU platform when some motherboards don't have WIFI built-in. There are several AM5-motherboards for 9000-series with built-in Thunderbolt. Users reports I've seen shows that it is working (even though I haven't looked into if there are any specific hardware that has issues). If you have information about Thunderbolt audio interfaces not working and why, please share those sources.


Background (anecdotal):
I've been building computers since the early 1990's and DAW PC specific builds since about 1999.
I only had ONE single AMD-based workstation between 1990 and 2019, simply because Intel have had the best performing CPU's. AMD had problems with to heat, just like Intel is having now. worked great except it was way too loud because of too much generated heat (like Intel is having now). Before AMD released the 3000-series in 2019, I've only run Intel platforms for all my DAWs except once. That CPU had heat issues which made it almost impossible to create a silent computer, just like the issues Intel has now with its current CPUs. Nowadays better cooling systems are available though I don't doubt that you could be a silent Intel system today.

My current now-5-year-old AMD 3950x-setup is totally silent and works perfectly in Cubase and Bitwig with a RME USB card. I can't remember last time I had a computer more than 5 years and still happy with the performance.
It has been the best PC I ever built for DAW usage. It is quiet(!) (very important for me) and I have had zero issues with drivers or anything related to the platform. I can run whatever I throw at it. No isses with running 80-100 channels with 20-30 VST instruments, and plugin chains on every channel.
In fact, this build is the most quiet PC I ever built. I chose a motherboard with great VRMs and a premium PSU that doesn't even start it's fan during heavy load. The large CPU and Chassi fans are running *very* slow as well, which is the reason for this PC to be almost totally silent.
I can't hear the fan noise at all my listening position during my sessions. Even though no external noises is coming in from outside, the room is acoustically treated and the computer is placed under the desk just 30 cm from my legs.

I suspect that you never actually used a correctly built PC using any of the high-end Ryzen 3/5/7/9000 CPU's.
AMD is actually a great choice for audio in 2024. As always, you should do the research and select the correct parts before starting (incl audio interface).
So, in my opinion AMD has been really good ever since Ryzen 3000-series.

I do hope Intel or ARM catches up soon, competition is what drives the development further.
Back when Intel was owning the market, the Intel CPU's that were released every year didn't add so much and Intel put way too high prices for what you got (new motherboard each generation was a pain).

[jonljacobi]

You had me right until you said ARM catch up. The M4 is an ARM variant, and it doesn't need to catch up. And while it has specialized cores, the main cores are about as versatile as NVidia's.

The main difference is in transistor count. Blackwell has 208 billion, while the M4 has 28 billion. One would certainly hope that the nVidia chip could process more instructions than the M4 though the cost in power and heat are obviously going to be higher. Exactly how many instructions per watt each delivers I don't know.

You can do audio well on any of these chips and far older ones so this whole discussion is a tempest in a teapot. That said, I'm seriously considering trading in my Studio M1 Max for a M4 Pro Mini, but that's partly because I'll need to be testing Thunderbolt 5 SSDs for my job. The other part is the the single-core performance seems to be enough improved to actually make a difference which it wasn't on the M2/M3.

[Sindikhate]

AMD is NOT the choice for audio in 2024 and has never been. There are many reasons for that. Drivers, compatibility with hardware (major one), bad thunderbolt support if any. WORSE single thread performance (the most important thing for DAW usage and single track long plugin chains), in general compatibilty issues on AMD (even with USB). Even ilok was not working properly on the new AMD cpus. They provided some beta solution to customers who got in contact with them but not all developer plugins were working. This may have been fixed by now, I have not followed it but read it over at Steinberg forums. Also comparisons that you see online not always tell the truth because for example some decide to run the Intels with lower speed RAM to equate it to the AMD max ram speed. Some crazy stuff like that.

That perspective seems skewed and biased. You cherry pick specific things that isn't even affecting the majority of audio/DAW users. You claim that the hardware platform is some how not suitable for audio work in general. This is simply just not true based on both independant benchmarks and users experiences.

Let's break down your claims:
1. iLok issues
This was only an issue with Windows and newly released 9000-series. It didn't affect the rest of the AMD CPUs. This has been fixed already by official updates. AMD released BIOS updates and iLok released version 5.9 to fix stability issues.
These kind of things happen sometimes between platform generations and has happened to ALL platforms including Intel, AMD and variations of ARM.
It should also be known that iLok isn't exactly known for following best practices for stability and future OS/hardware compatibility. iLok itself is not good for people that are early adopters of different updates or upgrades of their system at all. You can google the well-documented issue where people have lost their iLok-based licenses due to simple Windows updates, firmware and driver updates for any hardware, even small hardware upgrades can trigger iLok to lock the licenses. This is another topic though.

I don't know if you are aware that iLok have had serious issues on many platforms during the years of its existence. For example, recent years, iLok have had serious issues with various versions of Apple MacOS platforms. Apple have also had serious issues with compatibility between releases for a lot of audio related software and 3rd party hardware.
Would you claim that Apple and MacOS should be avoided as well for this reason?

2. USB issues
Now USB issues is a topic of it's own. USB issues in general have not been AMD specific platform problems. This is very clear if you have worked with computers since USB first became a standard. I haven't had any issues on my AMD Ryzen 3950x running on X570, even though I know that there were reports around 2021 that some people had random disconnections of USB devices.
This issue have been heavily reported for INTEL platforms as well around the same year (Intel Z690). Intel 5/3400 chipset series also had well-documented issues. This is not a specific AMD platform issue. It happens to all platforms at some point. Of course, both AMD and Intel released BIOS updates to fix the issues (some earlier than others...).

Right now, as we speak, various enterprise-grade INTEL-based laptops have huge issues with USB in Windows. USB ports stop to work and requires you to shutdown hard. Workaround is to hold down the power button for 30 sec to do a complete power down, to get them enabled again. This workaround only works intermittently though. There are no real solutions yet from Intel. They have several support tickets pending, so I hope there will be a fix sooner than later as I have hundreds of clients using these INTEL-based laptops.

3. Comparisons not telling the truth
I'm guessing you are talking about some specific Youtuber or a specific blog or something?
People cheating and lying on the Internet isn't something new.
This is 100% not an AMD-platform issue.
For real independent transparent benchmarks go and check the professional testers like Gamers Nexus. Or if you want correct DSP benchmark results, use and check DAWbench.

4. Thunderbolt issues?
Not all AMD motherboards have built-in support for Thunderbolt 3 or 4, but why would anyone chose a PC or motherboard that doesn't have the things you need? That is not an platform issue.
I don't get the problem, just get a motherboard that has it.
Apples ARM-based computers have only semi-compatible Thunderbolt 3 support and they do not have Thunderbolt 4 at all. Again, is that a reason not to use it for audio work?

It's like complaining about problem with WIFI on a CPU platform when some motherboards don't have WIFI built-in. There are several AM5-motherboards for 9000-series with built-in Thunderbolt. Users reports I've seen shows that it is working (even though I haven't looked into if there are any specific hardware that has issues). If you have information about Thunderbolt audio interfaces not working and why, please share those sources.


Background (anecdotal):
I've been building computers since the early 1990's and DAW PC specific builds since about 1999.
I only had ONE single AMD-based workstation between 1990 and 2019, simply because Intel have had the best performing CPU's. AMD had problems with to heat, just like Intel is having now. worked great except it was way too loud because of too much generated heat (like Intel is having now). Before AMD released the 3000-series in 2019, I've only run Intel platforms for all my DAWs except once. That CPU had heat issues which made it almost impossible to create a silent computer, just like the issues Intel has now with its current CPUs. Nowadays better cooling systems are available though I don't doubt that you could be a silent Intel system today.

My current now-5-year-old AMD 3950x-setup is totally silent and works perfectly in Cubase and Bitwig with a RME USB card. I can't remember last time I had a computer more than 5 years and still happy with the performance.
It has been the best PC I ever built for DAW usage. It is quiet(!) (very important for me) and I have had zero issues with drivers or anything related to the platform. I can run whatever I throw at it. No isses with running 80-100 channels with 20-30 VST instruments, and plugin chains on every channel.
In fact, this build is the most quiet PC I ever built. I chose a motherboard with great VRMs and a premium PSU that doesn't even start it's fan during heavy load. The large CPU and Chassi fans are running *very* slow as well, which is the reason for this PC to be almost totally silent.
I can't hear the fan noise at all my listening position during my sessions. Even though no external noises is coming in from outside, the room is acoustically treated and the computer is placed under the desk just 30 cm from my legs.

I suspect that you never actually used a correctly built PC using any of the high-end Ryzen 3/5/7/9000 CPU's.
AMD is actually a great choice for audio in 2024. As always, you should do the research and select the correct parts before starting (incl audio interface).
So, in my opinion AMD has been really good ever since Ryzen 3000-series.

I do hope Intel or ARM catches up soon, competition is what drives the development further.
Back when Intel was owning the market, the Intel CPU's that were released every year didn't add so much and Intel put way too high prices for what you got (new motherboard each generation was a pain).

I agree on some of the things you said.

One magic word you used in your reply is this... R M E!

Then you will say, but why is it AMD's fault if other manufacturers/developers cannot get it right... Well...

A lot of my friends use perfectly tuned Ryzen machines. I do not know how far you are pushing yours but there are hiccups (same with intels too of course). The fact that I mentioned hardware compatibility was not random based on a few cases. There are a lot of them.

But if it works for you, and you have no issues I am happy to hear it.

Although as a technological advancement Windows on ARM might be interesting and exciting in some way, I am not really excited to possibly having to lose software I paid money for because some developers might not update their software to work on it.

I think we exhausted this and we are off topic completely (partially my fault).

So let's get back to the new Apple machines!

[Sindikhate]

You had me right until you said ARM catch up. The M4 is an ARM variant, and it doesn't need to catch up. And while it has specialized cores, the main cores are about as versatile as NVidia's.

The main difference is in transistor count. Blackwell has 208 billion, while the M4 has 28 billion. One would certainly hope that the nVidia chip could process more instructions than the M4 though the cost in power and heat are obviously going to be higher. Exactly how many instructions per watt each delivers I don't know.

You can do audio well on any of these chips and far older ones so this whole discussion is a tempest in a teapot. That said, I'm seriously considering trading in my Studio M1 Max for a M4 Pro Mini, but that's partly because I'll need to be testing Thunderbolt 5 SSDs for my job. The other part is the the single-core performance seems to be enough improved to actually make a difference which it wasn't on the M2/M3.

I think he meant Windows on ARM.

Current Nvidia and Blackwell series are using Cuda cores and this is different to what the Apple M series is using. Different tools for different jobs.

[PAK]

Yes, the multicore score is important too because audio softwares has been multithreaded for years

Whilst it’s natural, to want an easy way to know how powerful something is, synthetic benchmarks have lost some relevance as hardware diverges and targets specific tasks. Many users appear oblivious to various issues (EG Cinebench 23 Vs 24+). Expecting to predict performance by testing anything, other than the software you’ll use, is not the best idea..

The vast majority of plugin audio engines are still single-threaded. They rely on the hosts to distribute plugins to CPU cores. Multi-core plugins are relatively few and far between (HALion 4 being the first afaik, with Diva not long after). Multiple CPU core types also complicate things, for the host, too.

EG You might fit 100 reverbs, you’d never use, into a bunch of efficiency cores. But a very CPU heavy single-core synth may not run on them with full polyphony. 128 cores might look great on paper, and generate an impressive benchmark number. But it won’t do you any good if all of those cores glitch when you hit max polyphony on a single synth. This is why EG a Ryzen usually makes more sense, for an audio user, than a lower clocked Threadripper CPU, even ignoring cost.

What actually matters for audio users? How many plugins you can run might. How hot your computer makes your room in summer might. How noisy the fans are, when you’re trying to record a mic, might. It’s best not to lose sight of your actual needs. In terms of knowing how many plugins you can run, look for audio specific tests. Though these also tend to be full of caveats, and frequently come from sources which stand to financially gain from results going a certain way..

[AdvancedFollower]

The vast majority of plugin audio engines are still single-threaded. They rely on the hosts to distribute plugins to CPU cores. Multi-core plugins are relatively few and far between (HALion 4 being the first afaik, with Diva not long after). Multiple CPU core types also complicate things, for the host, too.

This is one reason CLAP looks very interesting.

Better Performance From Modern CPUs
Developed with modern CPUs in mind, CLAP takes multi-thread management to a new level, with a clear and efficient allocation of roles between plug-in and host. Specifically, CLAP allows collaborative multicore support between plug-in and host through a so-called "thread-pool", also allowing hosts to manage CPU-threading for plug-ins that provide their own multicore support. Preliminary tests show significant performance gains compared with current solutions.

(https://thesoundboard.net/viewtopic.php?t=5239)

Having an actual framework for how multithreaded plugins are managed instead of the current "wild west" situation will make running multi-threaded plugins more feasible.
Of course there will still be situations where a single CPU core bottlenecks the entire project, for example if you run a lot of CPU intensive plugins in series on the master bus.

Polyphonic synth plugins benefit tremendously from being multithreaded however, since each voice is essentially an independent synth (up until the mixer and master FX). Currently plugin developers are wary of making their plugins multithreaded, because with no system in place to manage the thread usage between plugins and the host, there's the risk that a highly multithreaded plugins might spawn too many threads and steps all over other plugins and the host itself.

[Kypresso]

Nice write up.
One thing that i think you got wrong though.

4. Thunderbolt issues?
Not all AMD motherboards have built-in support for Thunderbolt 3 or 4, but why would anyone chose a PC or motherboard that doesn't have the things you need? That is not an platform issue.
I don't get the problem, just get a motherboard that has it.
Apples ARM-based computers have only semi-compatible Thunderbolt 3 support and they do not have Thunderbolt 4 at all. Again, is that a reason not to use it for audio work?

Apple arm computers M1, M2, M3 and M4 support Thunderbolt 4 and the M4 mac mini pros support the new Thunderbolt 5.

[AdvancedFollower]

The instances where you need Thunderbolt for audio production are very few however. A stream of 192 KHz/24-bit audio is just under 5 Mb/s, meaning even USB 2.0 can support 96 channels of 192 KHz/24-bit audio.

[apoclypse]

The instances where you need Thunderbolt for audio production are very few however. A stream of 192 KHz/24-bit audio is just under 5 Mb/s, meaning even USB 2.0 can support 96 channels of 192 KHz/24-bit audio.

That may be true but in general you get much lower latency on TB device than you do on USB devices and more consistent performance. You have exceptions like RME, but that's not the norm.

[Kypresso]

The instances where you need Thunderbolt for audio production are very few however. A stream of 192 KHz/24-bit audio is just under 5 Mb/s, meaning even USB 2.0 can support 96 channels of 192 KHz/24-bit audio.

Thunderbolt is not just for audio interfaces.
Copied from intel press release.
"Thunderbolt 5 builds upon Thunderbolt 4 in several ways, including:

Two times the total bi-directional bandwidth; Bandwidth Boost provides up to three times the throughput for video-intensive usage, up to 120 Gbps.

Double the PCI Express data throughput for faster storage and external graphics.

Built on industry standards including USB4 V2, DisplayPort 2.1 and PCI Express Gen 4; fully compatible with previous versions.

Double the bandwidth of Thunderbolt Networking for high-speed PC-to-PC connections.

Utilizes a new signaling technology, PAM-3, to deliver these significant increases in performance with today’s printed circuit boards, connectors and passive cables up to 1 meter."

[jonljacobi]

I ran Ableton Live on a M4 Pro MacBook Pro (48GB/2TB) yesterday, and it was smooth as a baby's behind. Played a demo file with around 10% CPU usage according to Live, and pretty limited CPU usage on the Activity meters. In other words the M4 is fast. Enough faster than my M1 Max Studio that I'm a bit envious.

[jonljacobi]

Be careful with Thunderbolt 5. I've been testing OWC's new Envoy Ultra SSD and it's failed to enumerate on two Asus Thunderbolt 4 motherboards. One 790 and one 870. Also, Apple Silicon requires Sonoma or Sequoia to utilize the drive, and Intel-based Thunderbolt 3 Macs must be running Sequoia. You can not use Thunderbolt 5 SSDs or other stuff on Thunderbolt 1/2, even with an adapter.

On the other hand, 6GBps reading, and 5GBps writing.

[Freaqpeak]

That video didn't use the standardized DAWbench-tests so it is impossible to compare results to anything that wasn't included in the test (AMD/Intel or ARM for Windows) .

EDIT: Seems like SGA1566 isn't available for Apple Silicon so the previous DAWbench isn't possible to do...