M1 Apple Silicon for Chess?

[Milos]

I think we're talking at cross purposes here: I was praising SOC technology in general (of which the A1 is an example), and have conceded that systems with powerful CPUs like Ryzens are likely to outperform SOCs in calculation-heavy applications. I concede that the M1 SOC is expensive (especially as it's only available as part of a finished product), but there are SOCs available which are:

* inexpensive
* small
* low power consumption
* very capable in comparison with, say, "ordinary" (as opposed to gaming machines) PCs from not long ago

The "revolution" I was talking about was not in chess elo points, but in the fact that small, powerful, low power consumption computing is so cheap now that, IMO, it will change more things than most people expect in our everyday lives.

Your SoC trolling is becoming really boring.
In what sense is M1 more SoC than 5800U? Could you please elaborate, coz it seems to me you have no clue what you are talking about?

[AlexChess]

Indeed, try a benchmark that actually means something. The title of this thread says "M1 Apple Silicon for Chess?"

For example take Stockfish 10, double-click on it and type

uci
setoption name Threads value 8
setoption name Hash value 2048
go depth 32

And then give us the stats. Of course that may not be real life either because your M1 probably might not have started throttling at that point.

I have a Ryzen 7 3700U laptop - Lenovo Ideapad, Zen 2. A budget machine, £500 seven or eight months ago, and with 512GB M2 SSD and 16GB RAM for that price. I suspect there are compromises in performance for that price, e.g. the RAM speed.

info depth 32 seldepth 49 multipv 1 score cp 62 nodes 756773782 nps 6520089

The M1 is going to be faster no doubt, but price / performance ?

£500 = $700 ...they have the same price but the M1 is faster no doubt. I prefer a small computer with a big 24' LCD to a laptop, using my smartphone with droidfish when I'm not at home.

[Raphexon]

Indeed, try a benchmark that actually means something. The title of this thread says "M1 Apple Silicon for Chess?"

For example take Stockfish 10, double-click on it and type

uci
setoption name Threads value 8
setoption name Hash value 2048
go depth 32

And then give us the stats. Of course that may not be real life either because your M1 probably might not have started throttling at that point.

I have a Ryzen 7 3700U laptop - Lenovo Ideapad, Zen 2. A budget machine, £500 seven or eight months ago, and with 512GB M2 SSD and 16GB RAM for that price. I suspect there are compromises in performance for that price, e.g. the RAM speed.

info depth 32 seldepth 49 multipv 1 score cp 62 nodes 756773782 nps 6520089

The M1 is going to be faster no doubt, but price / performance ?

£500 = $700 ...they have the same price / performance ratio and the M1 is faster no doubt, also I prefer a small computer with a big 24' LCD, using my smartphone with droidfish when I'm not at home.

If something is $700 in US, you can expect it to be £700-1000 in the UK.

[Modern Times]

If something is $700 in US, you can expect it to be £700-1000 in the UK.

That is regrettably the case. Plus he had to buy a monitor on top. He's not comparing the same thing, compare an Apple M1 laptop to the Ryzen laptop.

[AlexChess]

If something is $700 in US, you can expect it to be £700-1000 in the UK.

That is regrettably the case. Plus he had to buy a monitor on top. He's not comparing the same thing, compare an Apple M1 laptop to the Ryzen laptop.

...Or better compare a Mac mini M1 to an Intel Nuc or Ryzen 9 mini PC, since I don't need a laptop

https://www.amazon.it/s/?ie=UTF8&keywor ... 6QQAvD_BwE

[wickedpotus]

If something is $700 in US, you can expect it to be £700-1000 in the UK.

That is regrettably the case. Plus he had to buy a monitor on top. He's not comparing the same thing, compare an Apple M1 laptop to the Ryzen laptop.

...Or better compare a Mac mini M1 to an Intel Nuc or Ryzen 9 mini PC, since I don't need a laptop

https://www.amazon.it/s/?ie=UTF8&keywor ... 6QQAvD_BwE

I am not sure wut you are comparing.. but a Ryzen / 4800U barebone MINI PC (more than twice as fast as a similar priced Mac) [for example Asus PN50] will be something like 600-700 USD [500 for a 4700 version], at least in the US. You can easily get 8GB ram and 256GB SSD for less than $100 these days. And the beauty of this kind of mini PCs is that you can expand and have both SSD and HDD in these small buggers and of course even replace the SSD if worn out.

And if you want to expand with 16 or 32 or 64 GB RAM or more SSD internally you are pretty much stuck on an M1 Mac without adding extra cables, adaptors, and s**t?

[AlexChess]

Yes,
I like much more this kind of configuration than a laptop or a big tower. But I want also the ability to run Mac, Linux and Windows applications. I was about to buy a NUC8 Core i7 compatible with macOS Big Sur Intel hardware, when Apple suddenly announced proprietary M1, instantly followed by Windows 10 and Linux ARM64. So the only way to have all latest OSs on a affordable computer was to buy a Mac mini M1. Apple devices based on Intel will become obsoletes in 2-3 years, so they aren't an option for me.

Regards, AlexChess

[towforce]

I think we're talking at cross purposes here: I was praising SOC technology in general (of which the A1 is an example), and have conceded that systems with powerful CPUs like Ryzens are likely to outperform SOCs in calculation-heavy applications. I concede that the M1 SOC is expensive (especially as it's only available as part of a finished product), but there are SOCs available which are:

* inexpensive
* small
* low power consumption
* very capable in comparison with, say, "ordinary" (as opposed to gaming machines) PCs from not long ago

The "revolution" I was talking about was not in chess elo points, but in the fact that small, powerful, low power consumption computing is so cheap now that, IMO, it will change more things than most people expect in our everyday lives.

Your SoC trolling is becoming really boring.

Again, SOCs deliver:

* inexpensive
* small
* low power consumption
* high computer power compared to non-gaming PCs of the recent past

This enables powerful systems to be cheaply available in more situations that we realise. This could be revolutionary (they've already revolutionised fitness and sleep monitoring watches). If you find this boring, I accept that you feel this way, and I won't try to change your POV.

In what sense is M1 more SoC than 5800U? Could you please elaborate, coz it seems to me you have no clue what you are talking about?

I don't know, so I'll have to guess: the 5800U is a Ryzen CPU, so it's missing stuff needed for a complete computer. SOCs typically deliver CPU, battery management, network, memory and other features that complete computers need at very low cost and power consumption. Nothing at all wrong with a Ryzen CPU (they're a good choice when there's a lot of computing to do) - but I don't think it counts as an SOC: the "S" part isn't all there.

[Raphexon]

I think we're talking at cross purposes here: I was praising SOC technology in general (of which the A1 is an example), and have conceded that systems with powerful CPUs like Ryzens are likely to outperform SOCs in calculation-heavy applications. I concede that the M1 SOC is expensive (especially as it's only available as part of a finished product), but there are SOCs available which are:

* inexpensive
* small
* low power consumption
* very capable in comparison with, say, "ordinary" (as opposed to gaming machines) PCs from not long ago

The "revolution" I was talking about was not in chess elo points, but in the fact that small, powerful, low power consumption computing is so cheap now that, IMO, it will change more things than most people expect in our everyday lives.

Your SoC trolling is becoming really boring.

Again, SOCs deliver:

* inexpensive
* small
* low power consumption
* high computer power compared to non-gaming PCs of the recent past

This enables powerful systems to be cheaply available in more situations that we realise. This could be revolutionary (they've already revolutionised fitness and sleep monitoring watches). If you find this boring, I accept that you feel this way, and I won't try to change your POV.

In what sense is M1 more SoC than 5800U? Could you please elaborate, coz it seems to me you have no clue what you are talking about?

I don't know, so I'll have to guess: the 5800U is a Ryzen CPU, so it's missing stuff needed for a complete computer. SOCs typically deliver CPU, battery management, network, memory and other features that complete computers need at very low cost and power consumption. Nothing at all wrong with a Ryzen CPU (they're a good choice when there's a lot of computing to do) - but I don't think it counts as an SOC: the "S" part isn't all there.

You do know that "SoC" means just "System on Chip"?
The "inexpensive", "small", "low power consumption", "high computer power" aren't part of the definition.
You're just spewing buzzwords with less than zero knowledge.


Also all modern Ryzen ARE a SoC.

And even if you have a narrower definition:

https://www.amd.com/en/products/embedded

[wickedpotus]

Yes,
I like much more this kind of configuration than a laptop or a big tower. But I want also the ability to run Mac, Linux and Windows applications. I was about to buy a NUC8 Core i7 compatible with macOS Big Sur Intel hardware, when Apple suddenly announced proprietary M1, instantly followed by Windows 10 and Linux ARM64. So the only way to have all latest OSs on a affordable computer was to buy a Mac mini M1. Apple devices based on Intel will become obsoletes in 2-3 years, so they aren't an option for me.

Regards, AlexChess

Running Multiple OS as a reason to buy a Mac - Yeah right As if the M1 even support multiboot of different OS: es - Running MacOS on a modern Ryzen 7/9 box will most likely even give a faster performance for most use-cases, even though you have to go through a virtualization layer, than you get natively on an M1),

Hmm.. the "only" reason you have to hack stuff to run Apple's OS on other Mini-PCs is their draconic stance on un-openness. You decided to "vote" with your money for a vendor taking advantage of other systems' openness while at the same time trying to lock users into "their" proprietary platform, and other users out.

I look at it completely differently. The way Apple tries to Frock openness is a reason for me NOT to buy it, rather than opposite, simply because they take advantage of a less locked-in system, to run more software on their system at the same time they stop other systems from accessing theirs... Not a behavior from a technology partner I want to promote with my money.

And if the price is high and the performance is less than half of the competition (for chess), the value proposition is poor from Apple..