Huh. Didn’t catch that.
True it’s not an even comparison, but it’s hella fun to watch these chips, even the trotted 14”, compete with the big boys with an API just recently added to Blender. If Blender Metal came out during 2.96 people would be …. themselves.
Nvidia has been coding stuff for Blender for years now and if it wasn’t for Optix…
What’s going to happen when Apple’s SOCs add or reconfigure current core to Raytracing specific task? Will things start getting awkwardly embarrassing? Lol
4 Likes
yes why I avoided posting it.
has some blender 3.1 too if you are curious 
A bit unrelated….
Now I am sad again that they died… blender was kinda born on the amiga?
Still can see the resemblance
good catch on the 2.93 thing. as an m1 max owner, I appreciate the steps apple is taking in the right direction with this hardware, and generally I’m happy with the balance and trade-offs they made with these machines. but I don’t think the YouTube review crowd does anyone any favours making these sloppy comparisons with click-bait-y “RIP Nividia” taglines. apple’s on a good trajectory, but there’s no need to over-sell it.
7 Likes
Don’t get me wrong I love my M1 Max, but I think we need to have fair and comparable testing on both sides. We can’t very well applaud M1 Max performance and then not have a fair comparison. Whenever the Mac “wins” we need to make sure its actually winning and not some doctored numbers or results imo.
I have issues with both Maxtech and LTT in that regard as they both show their biases (one more Apple focused and one more PC focused). So I take whatever they post with a huge grain of salt.
1 Like
I didn’t realize the Blender cursor has been around since the very beginning thats’ pretty neat. I started using Blender in version 2 or so before it went OS. I liked it because I could put it on a floppy disk and launch it pretty much anywhere.
M1 Air 16GB; 3.1a; Cycles, classroom
GPU: 5:53 @ 6W package
GPU+CPU (fixed 4 threads): 5:32 @ 12W
GPU+CPU (8 threads): 4:48 @ 17W throttled down to @ 12W after 2nd minute
2 Likes
I agree 100 percent, and that’s why I started my comment with “True, it’s not an even comparison”, and also explained the “buts.” 
I also agree that both review channels you mention aren’t doing themselves any favors…
I also take all of these test, on both sides, as entertainment only. I’m some what of a geek as I think most of us in this thread are, and I enjoy me some techie displays of what’s new out there.
The cringy titles do make the Mac aaaaand PC community as a whole look weird, but I can’t do too much about it. I pretty much stay in my lane with showing my Mac love to this thread only; minus my one review to enlighten fellow Blender Animators.
3 Likes
True it is hard to find a reviewer that is unbiased towards one or the other.
I think that the Razer makes a good comparison in some was as the chassis construction is a lot more like a Macbook so they have similar thermal constraints.
For me either way is fine I don’t need a 3080 in a Notebook and I am still waiting to see how their Desktops will be.
On a side note has anyone tried this on an M1 machine? Aw forget the question there is only an Linux and Windows version
1 Like
Thank you.
But I’d like to see some more specific and repeatable measurements, since what I want to know is whether it’s faster than the PC I have now.
I’d like to see Opendata’s benchmarks expanded to include simulation and animation measurement data.
Also, for example, in Blender 3.0, multi-res sculpting is incredibly fast, and with the Geforce 2080Ti, I can comfortably sculpt 50 million polygons (60,000 base mesh).
During sculpting, the GPU usage is very high, but what about Radeon or M1 for this comfort?
I would like to see a more comprehensive and objective benchmark.
1 Like
Just found this really useful power measurement tool for M1+ SoCs. Should nicely complement Your other benchmarking tools.
Also it looks kinda cool 
13 Likes
Yes it does very retro, could be from the movie Hackers or so.
2 Likes
I get the same results with my 1660ti laptop on the official 3.0 (Cuda, since my card doesn’t support optix) it’s sad that it is so hard to find serious information channels on youtube nowadays
This is a best case scenario, since it’s a full 90w 1660ti laptop. Still, I feel it’s more representative of where we stand with M1 rendering performance. I am sure when more optimization will come in however it’ll get a bit better.
1 Like
Interesting bit of news. I suspect we’ll see the new iMacs Pro/Max around March. Meanwhile I’m hoping for the Mac Mini Max to be released around that time too!
5 Likes
Yes has been so quitet about the mini, or a mini pro.
2 Likes
What if the new iMac 27" machines are still using Intel CPU’s?!?!?
give me that new small mac pro 
if the new iMacs still have Intel that would be like 
If they are as thin as the 24 inch I don’t see more are an M1 Max in those.
Would be great for those who still need and rely on Bootcamp or at least
Parallels for some niche X86 Apps, like financial and medical Apps.
Would contradict a bit the (2 year) transition to Apple ARM.
And I also think that iMac would look a bit different than the big M? iMac.
I would expect more an Intel Mini with a bit more GPU power,
to keep legacy customers happy.
It’s not going to happen. If you need Windows for some legacy apps, use Parallels.
We don’t want hot and noisy Intel now that we have seen Apple Silicon. The current models is just the start.
1 Like
Your card should be compatible with Optix since it has Compute 7.5 capability, requirement is 5.0. You need to have drivers 370 or above for that to be possible. You will not have the RTX raytracing cores advantage, but might get some denoising benefits.