WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:07.640 I've always had a problem comparing Apple Silicon to PC parts because gaming wasn't 00:00:07.640 --> 00:00:15.240 ready. I've always wanted to know how Apple Silicon compares to off-the-shelf PC GPUs and CPUs. 00:00:15.240 --> 00:00:19.360 And that's not something we've been able to test because Macs and PCs now use completely 00:00:19.360 --> 00:00:25.480 different architectures, and there were no games that ran natively on both. 00:00:25.480 --> 00:00:33.640 But that's changed. Check this out. I'm playing Baldur's Gate 3, one of the hottest video games right now, on a Mac. 00:00:33.640 --> 00:00:40.360 And it's running natively on Apple Silicon. There's now a growing list of games that support both Apple's graphics hardware and 00:00:40.360 --> 00:00:44.200 metal graphics APIs without any sort of translation layer. 00:00:44.200 --> 00:00:48.760 So with the help of LMG Labs, we're going to finally compare Apple chips with PC graphics 00:00:48.760 --> 00:00:54.680 cards and see what GPUs from NVIDIA and AMD compete with Apple's M series. 00:00:54.680 --> 00:01:00.160 Though not in this video. That's part two because in part one, we need to build the test benches that the GPUs will 00:01:00.160 --> 00:01:05.400 be on. And those test benches have CPUs, so we're going to figure out what CPUs are the closest 00:01:05.400 --> 00:01:13.840 to Apple Silicon. And I need to ask Labs if they'll help me. 00:01:13.840 --> 00:01:16.840 What did I think? Oh my god. Well, it's going to be interesting. 00:01:16.840 --> 00:01:22.800 It's going to be a learning experience. We haven't tested Macs really all that much, so this is going to be the first time Labs 00:01:22.800 --> 00:01:27.040 really tackles Macs. Nicholas, hey. 00:01:27.040 --> 00:01:30.520 This is Nicholas Harris. He's LTT Labs software developer. 00:01:30.520 --> 00:01:36.880 Part of his job has been developing and automating the tests for PCs and other parts here. 00:01:36.880 --> 00:01:42.960 The first step is figuring out the tests. And so Nicholas worked with test technician John Deuren to figure out how to measure these 00:01:42.960 --> 00:01:51.320 two completely different computers. Our primary goal was to find tests that can natively work on either system to avoid the 00:01:51.320 --> 00:01:55.840 Rosetta layer, because that's another variable that we want to isolate for. 00:01:55.840 --> 00:02:00.280 But we're also isolating for the CPU that also limits us, because we do have tests that 00:02:00.280 --> 00:02:05.440 test the whole system, but we're not looking to test the memory and the SSD and the graphics 00:02:05.440 --> 00:02:12.000 card yet. But our current test suite for Markbench is very Windows focused, so there wasn't really 00:02:12.000 --> 00:02:18.520 anything we could just reuse from that. There is a test framework out there called Pheronix, which has been there out there for 00:02:18.520 --> 00:02:26.200 a long time. So we tried to find some that did compression, stuff that did maybe some encoding, things 00:02:26.200 --> 00:02:30.000 that were just pure computational. Okay, so I have to confess something. 00:02:30.000 --> 00:02:35.160 I had this idea, fantasy really, that Labs would test a bunch of Macs and then compare 00:02:35.160 --> 00:02:39.960 it to a matrix of CPU data that would show us what desktop and laptop CPUs perfectly 00:02:39.960 --> 00:02:46.480 match their M-series counterparts. But we have to use new tests, so we're starting from scratch. 00:02:46.480 --> 00:02:49.720 While we would have loved to investigate every CPU, it is wholly unreasonable to get 00:02:49.720 --> 00:02:56.360 Labs to test them all. For instance, here in Logistics, there are about 150 different CPUs available to test, 00:02:56.360 --> 00:03:00.120 and that doesn't even include the laptop CPUs and all the shapes and sizes they're 00:03:00.120 --> 00:03:06.440 cooled in, either. So we have to make tradeoffs, and this is about graphics cards, and so that's why we're 00:03:06.440 --> 00:03:14.200 only including desktop components. If you're after gaming performance, the question then becomes like, okay, cool, we have three 00:03:14.200 --> 00:03:19.840 contenders, right? Apple, Intel, and AMD. Intel changes their socket all the time. 00:03:19.840 --> 00:03:24.760 But AMD, you can go back three generations on AM4 on the same platform. 00:03:24.760 --> 00:03:28.760 And so that's why we're going to be sticking with AM4 chips in our conclusion, though we 00:03:28.760 --> 00:03:32.280 did run the tests on a few Intel chips earlier in this project. 00:03:32.280 --> 00:03:36.240 Alright, so let's go through the tests and the results. 00:03:36.240 --> 00:03:40.160 The first we did is, of course, Cinebench, it's widely used in the tech media space 00:03:40.160 --> 00:03:43.960 and they just came out with an update for it, though we did R23. 00:03:43.960 --> 00:03:47.400 It includes both a multi-core and single-core score. 00:03:47.400 --> 00:03:53.200 We chose Cinebench because it kind of chooses itself as it's the prolific go-to processor 00:03:53.200 --> 00:03:59.400 benchmark, and it's really good that it supports Apple natively as well as Windows. 00:03:59.400 --> 00:04:03.200 Looking at the single-core results, you can see how the newest chips rise to the top, 00:04:03.200 --> 00:04:08.200 but once all the cores get involved, you can see just how the 24 and the M2 Ultra push 00:04:08.200 --> 00:04:14.080 it to the top. Along with single-core tests, Lab did a Flak encode test where they encoded a bunch of 00:04:14.080 --> 00:04:17.600 copies of a 9-inch nail song from Wave to Flak. 00:04:17.600 --> 00:04:21.920 We actually struggled to find single-core tests because most tests are all about loading 00:04:21.920 --> 00:04:26.380 the CPU and trying to, you know, how fast you compute this thing. 00:04:26.380 --> 00:04:31.640 In this test, and another you'll see, Apple Silicon is so far ahead of the other chips, 00:04:31.640 --> 00:04:37.920 and they're all grouped together. That's why we're going to be weighing this test less when we figure out our matches. 00:04:37.920 --> 00:04:43.160 The last single-core tests are the XZ and LZ4 compression tests, with both compressing 00:04:43.160 --> 00:04:49.640 an Ubuntu image. We actually tried like four different compression algorithms, or compression tests, but not 00:04:49.640 --> 00:04:55.380 all of them worked. Sometimes they worked on one, but not the other, even though they're advertised for cross-platform. 00:04:55.380 --> 00:05:00.960 So we did find that XZ and LZ4, we were able to compile for both natively. 00:05:00.960 --> 00:05:06.080 LZ4 single-core shakes out slightly differently from Cinebench, with most of the Ryzen 5,000s 00:05:06.080 --> 00:05:13.040 closer to the M3 generation. But it appears that with the XZ compression test, Ryzen has a bit more strength than it 00:05:13.040 --> 00:05:18.360 does in Cinebench. What was it like to do all the testing? 00:05:18.360 --> 00:05:25.280 Illuminating. Testing's pretty straightforward. Once you identify the tests and you come up with your test suite, the execution is just 00:05:25.280 --> 00:05:31.200 while you do your testing. And now as results come in, it's like putting your puzzle together, right? 00:05:31.200 --> 00:05:34.640 As the pieces slowly fit in more, you get more of the picture. 00:05:34.760 --> 00:05:38.480 However, the difference is you're completing a puzzle that doesn't, you don't know what 00:05:38.480 --> 00:05:43.920 the end picture is. So it's interesting that way to kind of see the story reveal itself to you. 00:05:43.920 --> 00:05:48.360 Alright, so how about the puzzle pieces that tested multiple CPU cores? 00:05:48.360 --> 00:05:53.120 Blender is a popular 3D modeling program, and in it, Labs rendered the barbershop scene. 00:05:53.120 --> 00:05:56.240 We might need to find a new scene as it can render fairly quickly. 00:05:56.240 --> 00:06:00.240 It's a popular scene used to benchmark rendering performance in Blender. 00:06:00.240 --> 00:06:04.960 In Blender, the mid-range AMDs provide a transition between the M2 and M3s. 00:06:04.960 --> 00:06:08.720 The 5600X and G are surprisingly weaker here. 00:06:08.720 --> 00:06:11.920 Another render type test that I'd never heard of is C-Ray. 00:06:11.920 --> 00:06:15.720 It's a simple ray tracer that outputs this 90s looking image. 00:06:15.720 --> 00:06:23.080 C-Ray gives us another render type of test, but mostly we chose it because it works on 00:06:23.080 --> 00:06:27.040 both. That's definitely got for some of these. 00:06:27.760 --> 00:06:32.320 It's a very simple, efficient load to multi-core. 00:06:32.320 --> 00:06:37.480 AMD is relatively weaker in this test with the 3600 sitting between the M1s and their 00:06:37.480 --> 00:06:44.560 different cooling. The next test Labs did is LibRAW, which tests how well CPUs handle raw photographs. 00:06:44.560 --> 00:06:49.680 LibRAW is also nice that it has a built-in post-processing benchmark, which we run 30 00:06:49.680 --> 00:06:54.480 times on the test image that comes with Fronix, and then it spits out like a megapixels per 00:06:54.480 --> 00:06:59.080 second. LibRAW is the other test we're going to have to weigh less because of Apple Silicon's apparent 00:06:59.080 --> 00:07:04.760 supremacy. It does feel like the Macs are especially tailored to calculate audio and visual codecs. 00:07:04.760 --> 00:07:08.440 And lastly, if you're into numbers, there's PrimeSiv. 00:07:08.440 --> 00:07:12.920 We chose it because Y Cruncher doesn't work natively on Mac, because we do favor Y Cruncher. 00:07:12.920 --> 00:07:19.160 It's a very popular benchmarking one, but we found PrimeSiv, PrimeSiv, PrimeSiv, PrimeCV, 00:07:19.160 --> 00:07:23.200 PrimeSciEV, it calculates Prime numbers up to a certain length. 00:07:23.200 --> 00:07:29.440 So we consider that it's our stand-in for Y Cruncher and that it's something computational, 00:07:29.440 --> 00:07:32.880 generating number over a long period. 00:07:32.880 --> 00:07:38.040 It's multi-core as well. We learned a lot by doing this, and that is that this is hard. 00:07:38.040 --> 00:07:42.720 For one, picking AM4 means that we've got an array of chips that don't quite fit with 00:07:42.720 --> 00:07:47.720 single-core performance, as that's where Apple Silicon shines, and these are old. 00:07:47.720 --> 00:07:52.080 But then, with AM5, there aren't any low-end chips to compare with the lower-end Mac chips 00:07:52.080 --> 00:07:57.280 either. Single-core is more important for gaming, so we waited higher, but we waited Flak and 00:07:57.280 --> 00:08:01.800 Libra less because they favor Apple Silicon egregiously in a way that's not related to 00:08:01.800 --> 00:08:09.080 gaming. Alright, our picks. These choices for CPUs are still even a best guess, because we don't know what's the bottleneck 00:08:09.080 --> 00:08:13.320 CPU-wise once the GPUs are installed in running games. 00:08:13.320 --> 00:08:18.480 So these are not exact matches. I really was in Fantasyland thinking this was possible. 00:08:18.480 --> 00:08:25.080 But we've learned a lot. We're going to use the AMD 5800X3D as a control and to match the M2 Ultra, because 00:08:25.080 --> 00:08:30.280 its 3D cache really helps in gaming, and the M2 Ultra screamed well ahead in every test 00:08:30.280 --> 00:08:36.840 we threw at it. The M2 Pro and Max, as well as the M3 Pro chips, will be matched against the 5800X. 00:08:36.840 --> 00:08:42.960 The 5700X were pitting alongside the basic M3, and the basic M2 and M1 chips are matched 00:08:42.960 --> 00:08:47.200 against a 5600G. I'm feeling as well as I could. 00:08:47.920 --> 00:09:02.240 And that, I guess, is the biggest lesson on this journey. 00:09:02.240 --> 00:09:08.680 And it's that we're always learning. But now that we have our CPUs figured out, the next step will be to test the GPUs. 00:09:08.680 --> 00:09:12.960 Have NVIDIA and AMD met their match? We're going to have to see where they line up. 00:09:12.960 --> 00:09:21.080 But things are looking good in their own little way. Personally, I wasn't expecting the Mac, the Apples, to be as strong as they were. 00:09:21.080 --> 00:09:25.360 I knew they were super efficient, so this is my first really experience. 00:09:25.360 --> 00:09:31.800 Now during this project, I started daily driving the 15-inch MacBook Air, and I loved it. 00:09:31.800 --> 00:09:37.640 The fact that I could close it, neglect it for three days, and it still had power. 00:09:37.640 --> 00:09:40.800 I mean, I ended up buying one. What? 00:09:40.800 --> 00:09:44.240 You bought a Mac from this project? I mean, I did immediately stick or bomb it. 00:09:44.240 --> 00:09:48.840 How dare you? Thanks for testing this Mac Address, Labs. 00:09:48.840 --> 00:09:53.520 If you want to check out another video we did, check out the iPad tier list video. 00:09:53.520 --> 00:09:57.680 And I'm curious in the comments below, who of you are like Nicholas and bought a Mac 00:09:57.680 --> 00:09:58.400 for gaming?