Asahi Linux May Have OpenGL 2.1 For Apple M1/M2 By Year's End

[qarium]

This deserves to be emphasized.
LINUS FRICKING TORVALDS uses Asahi Linux on a Macbook.
This project is still early, sure, but can the skeptics please take account of this and perhaps adjust their outlook accordingly.

2 years ago when apple did release the m1 apple did show linux in their 2 hours promotion video of the apple m1...

i told people there is an alliance between apple and the linux people also the linux people did fix the linux kernel on 20-30 year old apple hardware at this time as a responds to the apple advertisement of linux in their promo video:..

and you get what people did not believe in this alliance ... now 1-2 years later Linus Torvalds is running a Macbook and these naive stupid people still believe there is no alliance between linux and apple.

what exactly need the linux people do and what exactly does apple need to do to make these people make believe in an linux+apple alliance ?

the funny thing is: these people who reject and denie this apple+linux alliance are the same people promote everything what is evil: means Intel and Microsoft and Nvidia...

i am sure in the next 5 years these companies intel+microsoft+Nvidia goes down very hard.

Valve steam deck is so successfulll with linux that the monopole of microsoft is over

Blender 3,3 + newest ROCm HIP has the patches to make Vega64 and Polaris RX480/590 run...
also WebGPU will kill the GPU-Compute market and because of HIP and WebGPU the time of CUDA is over.

AMD in 5nm with zen4 will kill any intel cpu thats for sure and nvidia is outgunnes as well with the radeon 7000series also has Matrix-AI cores to perform similar tasks like DLSS2+ on FSR3.0 and the 7000 series will also accelerate raytracing so fast that nvidia is lost in the dark.

and it is even clear now that next year apple m3 will have 2048bit Vector SIMD unit... better than AVX512...

and of course apple M3 will be on TSMC 3nm and 4nm... and i am pretty sure apple also will add AV1 video decode and encode.

[mdedetrich]

As far I know Apple M1 doesn't emulate any x86 instructions or at least I couldn't find any source that would confirm that. What is more Rosetta 2 actually can work on non Apple aarch64 CPU. After Apple released Rosetta for Linux somebody got it running on Amazon aarch64 server. Rosetta 2 doesn't need any hardware support but probably it has worse performance on more generic CPU.

According to some benchmarks Rosetta 2 can get about 70% of native performance. It's not that impossible to achieve. Especially due to fact that Rosetta is not just static interpreter. It can work ahead of time and cache code. With all that optimization I guess 70% of performance is possible to achieve without hardware level emulation. Box86 can achieve more than 50% of native performance and it's probably less optimized than Rosetta.

Emulating another architecture is power hungry so I guess that would be the reason for more heat.

So I did a bit of research and came across this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28954235

It appears to be kind of a hybrid, as you mentioned before there is the load/store memory ordering but Apple also added the capability in their CPU's completely accurately simulate IEEE 754 floating point numbers as they would behave on x86/64.

[Dukenukemx]

2 years ago when apple did release the m1 apple did show linux in their 2 hours promotion video of the apple m1...

I never heard of this. Got a link that shows this?

i told people there is an alliance between apple and the linux people also the linux people did fix the linux kernel on 20-30 year old apple hardware at this time as a responds to the apple advertisement of linux in their promo video:..

If there was an alliance then Apple would have open sourced Mac OSX and their drivers.

and you get what people did not believe in this alliance ... now 1-2 years later Linus Torvalds is running a Macbook and these naive stupid people still believe there is no alliance between linux and apple.

Linus isn't daily driving on a Macbook, and he's only owned 3 Apple products in his entire life. What he does on the Macbook is testing. As he puts it, he hasn't used it "for any real work". The last Apple he used was "for powerpc development on a ppc970 machine,".

This is the same guy that said, “Apple’s restrictive control measures and policies will ultimately fail, according to Linus Torvalds,” “‘Technologies that lock things down tend to lose in the end,’ said Torvalds at the keynote of LinuxCon Brazil,”. Last I checked Apple didn't open source their GPU drivers or any other parts of the Apple silicon.

what exactly need the linux people do and what exactly does apple need to do to make these people make believe in an linux+apple alliance ?

Open source everything would be a start. Hire people to work on the Linux kernel for Apple silicon, like AMD and Intel have been doing forever. Apple isn't hurting for money or anything either.

the funny thing is: these people who reject and denie this apple+linux alliance are the same people promote everything what is evil: means Intel and Microsoft and Nvidia...

They're all "evil" and Apple is their king. Microsoft tried to copy Apple with their surface devices, only to fail because they literally copied all the evil stuff Apple does. Who knew people didn't want a device that was expensive, had nearly zero repair ability, and ran hot due to limited cooling? Samsung copies Apple by being brave and removing headphone jacks and SD card slots. Didn't work too well and they ended up bringing those things back on some models.

The reason why we want open source and Linux is because they're all evil and we want to control our devices we bought.

i am sure in the next 5 years these companies intel+microsoft+Nvidia goes down very hard.

If you believe that then I have a bridge to sell you.

Valve steam deck is so successfulll with linux that the monopole of microsoft is over

Steam Deck is successful because it's cheap and open. The complete opposite of Apple.

also WebGPU will kill the GPU-Compute market and because of HIP and WebGPU the time of CUDA is over.

No it won't. It's going to be DX12 and some Vulkan for a very long time. This is why we have projects like DXVK and VKD3D-Proton.

AMD in 5nm with zen4 will kill any intel cpu thats for sure and nvidia is outgunnes as well with the radeon 7000series also has Matrix-AI cores to perform similar tasks like DLSS2+ on FSR3.0 and the 7000 series will also accelerate raytracing so fast that nvidia is lost in the dark.

Have you noticed a lack of reviews of the M2 vs AMD's Rembrandt? There's a reason for this, because the gap that Apple had with the M1, has been closed significantly with Rembrandt. Any sort of power advantage Apple had is gone, and hardly anyone is showing benchmarks of this. Not even Linus Tech Tips did a review of the M2 with any benchmarks outside of Apple. AMD's Rembrandt is more power efficient and faster than AMD's previous laptop chips, while the M2 is faster but also uses more power. The reviewers are favoring Apple, and it wouldn't shock me if Apple was paying them to make their silicon look good, because I've proven that the Apple silicon is not only no more power efficient but also not faster than what Intel and especially AMD is offering. It's all lies that I can prove with math. AMD's Rembrandt is handing Apple's M2 arse on a platter.

and it is even clear now that next year apple m3 will have 2048bit Vector SIMD unit... better than AVX512...

There's no info that shows anything about a 2048bit Vector SIMD. As for the M3, if Apple does call it the M3, it was suppose to be the M2 with 3nm. 3nm was delayed so we have the current M2.

and of course apple M3 will be on TSMC 3nm and 4nm... and i am pretty sure apple also will add AV1 video decode and encode.

I've heard of delays with 3nm with TSMC. Good chance everyone will be stuck on 5nm or move onto 4nm if that works.

[qarium]

I never heard of this. Got a link that shows this?

it was in this video release video: https://youtu.be/5AwdkGKmZ0I

If there was an alliance then Apple would have open sourced Mac OSX and their drivers.

the linux community has zero interest in an open-source-mac-OSX ... we do have linux and we do not want macos.
so your claim that apple is not linux friendly because macos is not opensource is a complete joke.
we do not want macosX we want linux.
also even if apple did open up the Iphone Ios to be able to install another OS we do not want an open-source IOS for iphone we want to install linux on a iphone.
at this point about opensource macosx you are a complete idiot really man.

linux friendly does not mean open-source macosX.-.-. i have zero interest in an opensource macosx. i do not want to use it. i do not even want to copy source code form this failed os...

Linus isn't daily driving on a Macbook, and he's only owned 3 Apple products in his entire life. What he does on the Macbook is testing. As he puts it, he hasn't used it "for any real work". The last Apple he used was "for powerpc development on a ppc970 machine,".
This is the same guy that said, “Apple’s restrictive control measures and policies will ultimately fail, according to Linus Torvalds,” “‘Technologies that lock things down tend to lose in the end,’ said Torvalds at the keynote of LinuxCon Brazil,”. Last I checked Apple didn't open source their GPU drivers or any other parts of the Apple silicon.
Open source everything would be a start. Hire people to work on the Linux kernel for Apple silicon, like AMD and Intel have been doing forever. Apple isn't hurting for money or anything either.

really man what a bullshit you talk to do linux support and be linux friendly does not mean "Open source everything would be a start" thats plain and simple bullshit you talk. apple has tonns and millions of software that the linux community has zero interest in. we dont want it we dont need it and hell we do not even want apple to waste time on this.

Linus owned 3 apple products in his enture life well i had only 1 apple product and this was my parents computer this means i owned zero apple products in my life. zero is better than 3... another point you talk bullshit.

well the linux community does not even want to: "Apple [...]open source their GPU drivers"
and we do not want it for multible reasons one reason is copyright another reason is patent problem and an reason is we want clean room reverse engineering to bypass the law. we know that apple can not opensource their gpu driver because of software patent problem in the USA because apple did license the gpu tech from PowerVR Imagination Technologies this means the driver is full of software patent problems. we the linux community want to remove this law problem by clean room reverse engineering..
also we do not want a shitty maxosX driver we want native linux driver.

"Hire people to work on the Linux kernel for Apple silicon,"

you have zero clue what is going on behind all the NDA stuff.
apple could already do this and you plain and simple don't know.

They're all "evil" and Apple is their king. Microsoft tried to copy Apple with their surface devices, only to fail because they literally copied all the evil stuff Apple does. Who knew people didn't want a device that was expensive, had nearly zero repair ability, and ran hot due to limited cooling? Samsung copies Apple by being brave and removing headphone jacks and SD card slots. Didn't work too well and they ended up bringing those things back on some models.
The reason why we want open source and Linux is because they're all evil and we want to control our devices we bought.

sorry i have to tell you that apple has no monopol to be evil...

Nvidia is abusing CUDA to maintain GPU-Compute monopole
Intel has the X86_64 ISA monopole to drive the ISA war (also AMD's x86-64 cpus are no real fix to this monopole because amd is forced to always be one step behind intel in the ISA war.)
according to valve steam statistic microsoft has a 97% monopole.

and apple has zero monopole in no segment of the market. means the ability of apple to be evil is very limited.

If you believe that then I have a bridge to sell you.
Steam Deck is successful because it's cheap and open. The complete opposite of Apple.

i am very happy about the fact that valve ends up the microsoft monopole.
and i am 100% sure the best would be if valve makes an ARM based SOC like the apple M2 to also end the x86_64 monopole.

the battery time of the steam deck is not very good and could be much better.

No it won't. It's going to be DX12 and some Vulkan for a very long time. This is why we have projects like DXVK and VKD3D-Proton.

you just did not do your homework to educate yourself about WebAssembly and WebGPU...

Have you noticed a lack of reviews of the M2 vs AMD's Rembrandt? There's a reason for this, because the gap that Apple had with the M1, has been closed significantly with Rembrandt. Any sort of power advantage Apple had is gone, and hardly anyone is showing benchmarks of this. Not even Linus Tech Tips did a review of the M2 with any benchmarks outside of Apple. AMD's Rembrandt is more power efficient and faster than AMD's previous laptop chips, while the M2 is faster but also uses more power. The reviewers are favoring Apple, and it wouldn't shock me if Apple was paying them to make their silicon look good, because I've proven that the Apple silicon is not only no more power efficient but also not faster than what Intel and especially AMD is offering. It's all lies that I can prove with math. AMD's Rembrandt is handing Apple's M2 arse on a platter.

to my knowelege wins all relevent benchmarks and loses irrelevant benchmarks like the benchmarks who do video decode or encode who apple has special purpose hardware. if you just count relevant benchmarks and you cut out all the irrelevent benchmarks then apple is the clear winner. just cut out any benchmark who apple has special purpose hardware on the chip.

another kind of benchmarks apple lose is the benchmarks who are highly optimised on x86-64 because of AVX2 AVX512 but it is clear that as soon as apple also has this kind of optiminisations it is clear apple wins. also these 2048bit vector unit in apple m3 will makes sure apple wins all the time as soon as there is optimisation for this SVE2048bit Scalable Vector Extension (SVE) unit.

There's no info that shows anything about a 2048bit Vector SIMD. As for the M3, if Apple does call it the M3, it was suppose to be the M2 with 3nm. 3nm was delayed so we have the current M2.
I've heard of delays with 3nm with TSMC. Good chance everyone will be stuck on 5nm or move onto 4nm if that works.

it is 100% sure that apple M3 has the SVE2048bit unit...

[Dukenukemx]

it was in this video release video: https://youtu.be/5AwdkGKmZ0I

Got the exact time cause that's a 48min video?

the linux community has zero interest in an open-source-mac-OSX ... we do have linux and we do not want macos.
so your claim that apple is not linux friendly because macos is not opensource is a complete joke.
we do not want macosX we want linux.

With MacOSX and drivers open sourced, we can use that code as reference to make Linux on Apple Silicon better. Also stop with the we. Everyone isn't you.

also even if apple did open up the Iphone Ios to be able to install another OS we do not want an open-source IOS for iphone we want to install linux on a iphone.
at this point about opensource macosx you are a complete idiot really man.

People do look at code and use it as a reference in how to get things working.

really man what a bullshit you talk to do linux support and be linux friendly does not mean "Open source everything would be a start" thats plain and simple bullshit you talk. apple has tonns and millions of software that the linux community has zero interest in. we dont want it we dont need it and hell we do not even want apple to waste time on this.

You don't know that. Maybe Linux could have a compatibility layer like Wine but to run Mac OSX apps on Linux. A lot of code that Mac OSX uses could be adopted to Linux.

well the linux community does not even want to: "Apple [...]open source their GPU drivers"
and we do not want it for multible reasons one reason is copyright

If it's open source then there's no copyright. So long as the license says it's ok to use it, then we can use it. You understand how open source works right?

another reason is patent problem and an reason is we want clean room reverse engineering to bypass the law. we know that apple can not opensource their gpu driver because of software patent problem in the USA because apple did license the gpu tech from PowerVR Imagination Technologies this means the driver is full of software patent problems. we the linux community want to remove this law problem by clean room reverse engineering..
also we do not want a shitty maxosX driver we want native linux driver.

That's not how things work. If it's open source then it's open for anyone to use within the license, and currently EVERYONE DOES THIS WITH THEIR GPU'S. Name me one GPU manufacturer that doesn't have open source drivers? Even Nvidia does, and Nvidia actually makes a good GPU, unlike Apple. So if there's anyone who had trade secrets they don't want anyone to know, it's certainly Nvidia. They're doing it too, because driver trade secrets are bullshit.

"Hire people to work on the Linux kernel for Apple silicon,"

you have zero clue what is going on behind all the NDA stuff.
apple could already do this and you plain and simple don't know.

That's the equivalent of saying the Earth could be flat and it's kept a secret. You cannot make shit up and use it as a factual response to anything. Apple's support to Linux doesn't exist.

sorry i have to tell you that apple has no monopol to be evil...

Nvidia is abusing CUDA to maintain GPU-Compute monopole

What do you call Apple's Metal API?

Intel has the X86_64 ISA monopole to drive the ISA war (also AMD's x86-64 cpus are no real fix to this monopole because amd is forced to always be one step behind intel in the ISA war.)

You do know many years ago many other companies made x86 CPU's right? IBM, VIA, Cyrix, and Texas Instruments all made x86 CPU's and failed at it. I think Via and DM&P Electronics still has their x86 license but isn't doing anything with it. You know how many companies made ARM SoC's and have since dwindled down to a handful? It's basically down to Apple and Qualcomm with Samsung, Broadcom, and Nvidia selling some chips. The amount of competitors in the ARM market will likely continue to shrink down as the demand for better ARM chips push out those who will not spend the money to compete. It won't matter if anyone can buy an ARM license to make their own SoC if they end up with something that can't compete against Apple and Qualcomm. Nvidia's best sales of their Tegra SoC is when they sold them to Nintendo to make the Switch. Other than the Switch, no other devices sold today use Tegra. It's only found in Nvidia products like the ShieldTV.

according to valve steam statistic microsoft has a 97% monopole.

Microsoft is successful because Microsoft does sell their OS to vendors. Guess who doesn't?

and apple has zero monopole in no segment of the market. means the ability of apple to be evil is very limited.

Apple is a bigger monopoly than Microsoft, because Apple won't let anyone compete against them. They have techno-feudalism which means you walk out of the market when you use an Apple product. Nobody can use Mac OSX or sell products with Mac OSX. Nobody can make hardware, either ARM or x86 that can legally run Mac OSX. iOS is much worse as nobody can do anything with those devices like replace the OS or repair their devices. Apple's the worst.

i am very happy about the fact that valve ends up the microsoft monopole.
and i am 100% sure the best would be if valve makes an ARM based SOC like the apple M2 to also end the x86_64 monopole.

Nobody should be a monopoly. If Valve was a monopoly then they would abuse it, like any company would.

the battery time of the steam deck is not very good and could be much better.

It's actually comparable to the Switch, which is how you'd compare it's form factor.

to my knowelege wins all relevent benchmarks and loses irrelevant benchmarks like the benchmarks who do video decode or encode who apple has special purpose hardware. if you just count relevant benchmarks and you cut out all the irrelevent benchmarks then apple is the clear winner. just cut out any benchmark who apple has special purpose hardware on the chip.

another kind of benchmarks apple lose is the benchmarks who are highly optimised on x86-64 because of AVX2 AVX512 but it is clear that as soon as apple also has this kind of optiminisations it is clear apple wins. also these 2048bit vector unit in apple m3 will makes sure apple wins all the time as soon as there is optimisation for this SVE2048bit Scalable Vector Extension (SVE) unit.

Doesn't matter who actually wins the benchmarks, because the selling point of the Apple silicon was power efficiency, and that advantage is no longer big enough to matter. AMD's Rembrandt isn't actually more or equally as power efficient, but the difference is so small that it doesn't matter anymore. What would you rather have, an AMD Rembrandt with software compatibility going back years and has Linux working with full Vulkan and OpenGL support, or Apple's M2 that currently doesn't have a 100% working Linux distro, and Mac OSX that basically dumped 32-bit along with all the software compatibility with it, as well as ARM which doesn't have the same amount of software support as x86 does?

This is AMD on 6nm, which by next year they'll be on 4nm for mobile parts along with Zen4 and RDNA3. Apple's silicon has a TTL until that is released. Apple has until then to improve their Silicon to make it worth anyone's time.

it is 100% sure that apple M3 has the SVE2048bit unit...

[qarium]

Got the exact time cause that's a 48min video?

its not worth it because it is only a very short timeframe showing a linux in a VM window.

With MacOSX and drivers open sourced, we can use that code as reference to make Linux on Apple Silicon better. Also stop with the we. Everyone isn't you.

what a bullshit talk. open-source is only a solution to the copyright problem but opensource is no solution at all to the patent problem. because of the software-patent problem you can not use that code as reference to make linux better.
you can only use clean room reverse-engineering code to make linux better.

people like you are just naive fools. the patent-trolls only wait for naive fools like you to sue you and rape you of all your money.

People do look at code and use it as a reference in how to get things working.

plain and simple wrong you naive fool... because of the software patent problem you can not use opensource code as a reference to get things working. you can only use clean room reverse-engineered information to make it work.

You don't know that. Maybe Linux could have a compatibility layer like Wine but to run Mac OSX apps on Linux. A lot of code that Mac OSX uses could be adopted to Linux.

to build a wine style macosx emulator for linux would only make sense if apple had any monopole but this is clearly not the case.
people use wine/crossover to run microsoft office because microsoft has a defacto standard and monopole in the office space of companies.
technically speaking you can do something like this but in the end there is no MACOS-X app you need to emulate on linux ...

and because this is only hypotetikal scenario without any real realworld usecase you are forced to do because there is no monopole this is what i call bullshit talk.

talk only to win an argument without any real usercase in realworld...

Wine/crossover/proton exists because microsoft has a real monopole and you are forced to use microsoft office if you want to use linux in the business world.

apple does not have any monopole.

If it's open source then there's no copyright. So long as the license says it's ok to use it, then we can use it. You understand how open source works right?

well you are a naive fool... copyright is fixed with opensource but software patent-law is not fixed.
also if you do not do clean room reverse-engineering then you can still claim you violated the copyright even if it is opensource.
and of course without clean room reverse engineering it is 100% clear the software patent law is fucking you hard.

That's not how things work. If it's open source then it's open for anyone to use within the license, and currently EVERYONE DOES THIS WITH THEIR GPU'S. Name me one GPU manufacturer that doesn't have open source drivers? Even Nvidia does, and Nvidia actually makes a good GPU, unlike Apple. So if there's anyone who had trade secrets they don't want anyone to know, it's certainly Nvidia. They're doing it too, because driver trade secrets are bullshit.

most if not all opensource licenses do not grand you a license on the software-patent.
not even GPLv3 does grand you a license on the software-patent.
i think the only one who does grand you a software-patent license is the old Sun Microsystem opensource licenses ...

"Name me one GPU manufacturer that doesn't have open source drivers?"

all of them who are not made based on clean room reverse-engineering do not have open-source drivers
because they all just did move the IP intellectual property and patent relevant trade secrets inside the firmware.
AMD did go the little-firmware route and Nvidia did go the big-bigger-the biggest firmware route.
these all are not opensource drivers because they do not run without closed source firmware.

the only cards who have real opensource drivers are the one who are hacked by this: clean room reverse-engineering

"Even Nvidia does"

no Nvidia does not. Nvidia does have closed source firmware and also closed source userspace.

thats the problem with you you always talk bullshit... if you want a gpu with opensource drivers give your money to libre-soc...

i say it clearly even AMD does not have opensource drivers because of closed source firmware.

apple m1/m2 will have real opensource drivers because of: clean room reverse-engineering

That's the equivalent of saying the Earth could be flat and it's kept a secret. You cannot make shit up and use it as a factual response to anything. Apple's support to Linux doesn't exist.

the asahi-linux developers clearly say that apple do in fact support linux. apple spend developer man-hours to make linux work.

What do you call Apple's Metal API?

you fool believe apple metal api is a monopole ? ... with 2-3% marketshare ?
man really go to a madhouse and get your brain fixed.

You do know many years ago many other companies made x86 CPU's right? IBM, VIA, Cyrix, and Texas Instruments all made x86 CPU's and failed at it. I think Via and DM&P Electronics still has their x86 license but isn't doing anything with it.

you really really really don't get the point. yes there where many companies make x86 cpus and yes amd does x86 cpus but thats not my argument at all.

you know why they all failed ? its because of the ISA war. intel controls the ISA and this means the newest version of the ISA is always made by intel and all other companies are forced to be 2-3 generations behind on the isa level.
SSE4.0 is the best example. and also 4FMA is also a good example. and 3Dnow is also a example. there are many examples like this.

the story of 3Dnow is this: intel did MMX then later AMD did invent 3dnow and did over 3Dnow to intel to make it the official x86 isa. then intel said fuck you and made incompatible SSE and all the existing AMD cpus lost on the market because the software did run SSE on intel cpus and only general purpose code on AMD cpus. and only in very rare cases did software implement 3dnow.

SSE4,0 was the same AMD did SSE4.0 in the believe intel will also support it intel lied to amd they will do it but then intel said fuck you to AMD and intel did only do cpus with SSE4.1 and intel did make sure the intel compiler only did SSE3 or SSE4.1 but no SSE4.0 and all the AMD cpus did lose in the market because of this ISA war.

same with 4FMA AMD did develop 4FMA in the believe that intel will use it and intel lied to amd they will use it and then intel said fuck you and all the future intel cpus only did support incompatible 3FMA what was inferior but intel did make sure by intel compiler that all the software only did 3FMA and not 4FMA. and AMD lost the ISA war again.

i could make multible more examples but one thing is a fact: Intel has a monopole on X86_64 because they control the future versions of the ISA and all other companies lose and fail agaist intel because they are forced to be 2-3 generations behind in the ISA war.

many companies have a x86 license but they know because of the ISA war they can never compete agaist intel.

and AMD are also always forced to use outdated intel ISA in the ISA war but they compensate this with better TSMC nodes and 3Dcache stagged chips and other technologies but on the ISA level AMD always lose agaist intel.

You know how many companies made ARM SoC's and have since dwindled down to a handful? It's basically down to Apple and Qualcomm with Samsung, Broadcom, and Nvidia selling some chips. The amount of competitors in the ARM market will likely continue to shrink down as the demand for better ARM chips push out those who will not spend the money to compete. It won't matter if anyone can buy an ARM license to make their own SoC if they end up with something that can't compete against Apple and Qualcomm. Nvidia's best sales of their Tegra SoC is when they sold them to Nintendo to make the Switch. Other than the Switch, no other devices sold today use Tegra. It's only found in Nvidia products like the ShieldTV.

many companies do ARM SOCs who cares ?

"and have since dwindled down to a handful?"

non of them dwindled down because of a ISA war because ARM itself does regulate the future ISA versions for all customers.

"The amount of competitors in the ARM market will likely continue to shrink down as the demand for better ARM chips push out those who will not spend the money to compete."

ARM does not have a ISA monopole this means there could only be 1 single ARM cpu company and there would still not monopole.

also... for linux it looks like Rockchip is better than the apple one because it has AV1 decode and encode in hardware on the SOC and other good stuff.. also rockchip has mainline linux support...

"It won't matter if anyone can buy an ARM license to make their own SoC if they end up with something that can't compete against Apple and Qualcomm."

right now it looks like it is easy to compete with apple in the linux market like rockchip just add the stuff linux people want like av1 encode and also support the rockchip socs in the linux kernel and mesa... done... looks easy to me.

Rockchip RK3588 based QuartzPro64 looks high performant and nice to me... with 16gb of ram and 2,4ghz on the high performance cores.
and ARM Mali-G610 MP4 with opensource drivers...

https://www.pine64.org/2022/03/15/march-update-introducing-the-quartzpro64/

man this is maybe not as fast as the apple chip but on linux this is a hell of competition.

Microsoft is successful because Microsoft does sell their OS to vendors. Guess who doesn't?

the only fact that count for me is that apple does not have monopole.

and if you have monopole you are my enemy. so microsoft is my enemy and apple is not.

Apple is a bigger monopoly than Microsoft, because Apple won't let anyone compete against them. They have techno-feudalism which means you walk out of the market when you use an Apple product. Nobody can use Mac OSX or sell products with Mac OSX. Nobody can make hardware, either ARM or x86 that can legally run Mac OSX. iOS is much worse as nobody can do anything with those devices like replace the OS or repair their devices. Apple's the worst.

who fucking cares? apple has no monopol and i do not want macosX i do want run linux.
you do have psychosis if you think apple has a monopole to force you do do anything.

if you don't like apple just buy Rockchip RK3588 based QuartzPro64 and run linux and be happy.

i tell you something about monopoles: if a company has a monopole you are FORCED to use it no matter what you do agaist it.

and apple has no monopole you are not forced to buy apple product. you can buy rockchip based soc and run linux.

and apple will never touch you... never.

Nobody should be a monopoly. If Valve was a monopoly then they would abuse it, like any company would.
It's actually comparable to the Switch, which is how you'd compare it's form factor.

you do have psychosis if you think that apple has a monopole. they do have zero monopole.

Doesn't matter who actually wins the benchmarks, because the selling point of the Apple silicon was power efficiency, and that advantage is no longer big enough to matter. AMD's Rembrandt isn't actually more or equally as power efficient, but the difference is so small that it doesn't matter anymore. What would you rather have, an AMD Rembrandt with software compatibility going back years and has Linux working with full Vulkan and OpenGL support, or Apple's M2 that currently doesn't have a 100% working Linux distro, and Mac OSX that basically dumped 32-bit along with all the software compatibility with it, as well as ARM which doesn't have the same amount of software support as x86 does?
This is AMD on 6nm, which by next year they'll be on 4nm for mobile parts along with Zen4 and RDNA3. Apple's silicon has a TTL until that is released. Apple has until then to improve their Silicon to make it worth anyone's time.

it looks like you life in another parallel universe or what is more likely you are to stupid to read benchmarks.

You say this: AMD's Rembrandt has equal good power efficiency in massive multicore general purpose -performance tests.
but that does not matter at all.
and why? because in the end the one who has more specialized hardware party for different tasks win. means not the general purpose performance is the relevance instead the one who has more specialised ASIC wins.
also M2 still wins the singlec-core general purpose case

in your day by day work there are more times apple m1/m2 wins compared to AMD Rembrandt than the other way around
AMD only wins this: massive multicore general purpose -performance tests
apple m1/m2 wins all other cases. also general purpose is not the relevant part at all.
the one who has more ASIC wins the power efficiency game.

you can use your hardware the complete day without needed a single time of multicore general purpose compute....

millions of people watch youtube edit videos and do all kind of stuff who is all run on ASICs without the need ot general purpose compute...

on linux AMD Rembrandt is only better in my point of view because of linux driver support ... but i told you many time apple could do linux driver support as well if they want to.

[Dukenukemx]

its not worth it because it is only a very short timeframe showing a linux in a VM window.

Linux in a VM isn't Apple working with Linux. So basically Apple supporting Linux doesn't exist.

what a bullshit talk. open-source is only a solution to the copyright problem but opensource is no solution at all to the patent problem.
because of the software-patent problem you can not use that code as reference to make linux better.
you can only use clean room reverse-engineering code to make linux better.

If people had documentation or access to the source code to Apple's drivers then yes it can be used within their license. You're making things up like you did with that video.

people like you are just naive fools. the patent-trolls only wait for naive fools like you to sue you and rape you of all your money.

if Nouveau used Nvidia's source code in anyway to assist their drivers, would they... "sue you and rape you for all your money"? No they wouldn't.

plain and simple wrong you naive fool... because of the software patent problem you can not use opensource code as a reference to get things working. you can only use clean room reverse-engineered information to make it work.

You act like you know something about it. So which part would they get sued? The texture compression algorithm?

to build a wine style macosx emulator for linux would only make sense if apple had any monopole but this is clearly not the case.
people use wine/crossover to run microsoft office because microsoft has a defacto standard and monopole in the office space of companies.

By your definition how is Microsoft a monopoly and Apple isn't? Do you know what tech-fudalism is? Apple is in a monopoly position to force owners of their products to do what Apple wants. Microsoft by comparison isn't as bad. You can install Windows on just about any device you want, unlike Apple. Microsoft allows you to install other OS's like Linux, unlike most Android and iOS devices. Chromebooks are far worse about letting you erase ChromeOS in favor of a GNU/Linux distro. Microsoft not only uses Linux themselves, but actually does provide code and software for it. Microsoft is trying to get DX12 on Linux. You don't see Apple doing this with Metal, though why anyone would use DX12 or Metal. Microsoft is trying to bring .net to Linux as well.

The only positive thing I can say about Apple towards Linux is that Apple isn't stopping anyone from porting Linux to Apple silicon. Microsoft is no friends to Linux but Apple is far worse.

technically speaking you can do something like this but in the end there is no MACOS-X app you need to emulate on linux ...

I can imagine some people might want to run Final Cut Pro.

Wine/crossover/proton exists because microsoft has a real monopole and you are forced to use microsoft office if you want to use linux in the business world.

apple does not have any monopole.

When did you see Apple bring Final Cut Pro or GarageBand to Linux? None of Apple's software works on Linux.

"Name me one GPU manufacturer that doesn't have open source drivers?"

all of them who are not made based on clean room reverse-engineering do not have open-source drivers
because they all just did move the IP intellectual property and patent relevant trade secrets inside the firmware.
AMD did go the little-firmware route and Nvidia did go the big-bigger-the biggest firmware route.
these all are not opensource drivers because they do not run without closed source firmware.

You're moving goal posts. Does Apple supply the blob needed to work their GPU's? For all intents and purposes, AMD and Nvidia's drivers are now open source. Nouveau doesn't even use the binary blob, so it's just convenient that the blob exists. The blob is closed due to DRM. Most devices need firmware and their drivers are still considered open source anyway. Apple does not supply either a blob or source code to make the GPU work on Linux. Alyssa Rosenzweig will probably end up making a GPU driver blobless for this reason. Apple Silicon depend on some number of blobs anyway so it's not like Apple is any different about this.

apple m1/m2 will have real opensource drivers because of: clean room reverse-engineering

Yea like Nouveau who also don't use a blob but their drivers aren't as fast as Nvidia's either.

the asahi-linux developers clearly say that apple do in fact support linux. apple spend developer man-hours to make linux work.

What Apple did was fix a bug while the Asahi devs were working on it. That's not supporting Linux as much as fixing a bug.

you fool believe apple metal api is a monopole ? ... with 2-3% marketshare ?
man really go to a madhouse and get your brain fixed.

Marketshare isn't how monopolies entirely work. Technically Apple and Linux existing means Microsoft isn't a monopoly, but we know that's bullshit because we don't have any real choices. Apple having a low market share doesn't mean Apple isn't a monopoly. Apple has proprietary standards meant to lock you into their ecosystem, which is techno-feudalism, which is an isolated monopoly. Amazon for example is also techno-feudalism because once you log onto their website, you stepped out of the capitalist market. Nobody can compete within Amazon's market freely. Microsoft wants the same thing but Microsoft hasn't been very successful in getting people to use their app store.

you know why they all failed ? its because of the ISA war. intel controls the ISA and this means the newest version of the ISA is always made by intel and all other companies are forced to be 2-3 generations behind on the isa level.
SSE4.0 is the best example. and also 4FMA is also a good example. and 3Dnow is also a example. there are many examples like this.

They failed long before SSE or 3DNow was ever created, let alone SSE4.0 or AVX. Yes, they failed because Intel never gave them any designs beyond the 286. That doesn't mean ARM won't have similar issues. Over time other companies who used to make ARM has stopped because Qualcomm was just better at it. Apple stopped buying from Samsung and started making their own ARM chips, but for the most part Samsung doesn't sell as many of their SoC's as Qualcomm. Eventually over time the performance gap will widen and at some point Qualcomm and Apple will make their own instructions and separate themselves from other ARM SoC's.

the story of 3Dnow is this: intel did MMX then later AMD did invent 3dnow and did over 3Dnow to intel to make it the official x86 isa. then intel said fuck you and made incompatible SSE and all the existing AMD cpus lost on the market because the software did run SSE on intel cpus and only general purpose code on AMD cpus. and only in very rare cases did software implement 3dnow.

SSE4,0 was the same AMD did SSE4.0 in the believe intel will also support it intel lied to amd they will do it but then intel said fuck you to AMD and intel did only do cpus with SSE4.1 and intel did make sure the intel compiler only did SSE3 or SSE4.1 but no SSE4.0 and all the AMD cpus did lose in the market because of this ISA war.

same with 4FMA AMD did develop 4FMA in the believe that intel will use it and intel lied to amd they will use it and then intel said fuck you and all the future intel cpus only did support incompatible 3FMA what was inferior but intel did make sure by intel compiler that all the software only did 3FMA and not 4FMA. and AMD lost the ISA war again.

i could make multible more examples but one thing is a fact: Intel has a monopole on X86_64 because they control the future versions of the ISA and all other companies lose and fail agaist intel because they are forced to be 2-3 generations behind in the ISA war.

Keep in mind that AMD and Intel both must share instruction sets they created with each other. This is why AMD uses SSE and AVX that Intel created, and Intel uses AMD's X64 architecture they created. ARM doesn't have any such agreement. If Qualcomm makes a very useful instruction set and they have the majority of the market, then the ARM instruction set divides. Same goes for Apple, as they also own a substantial amount of the market share, and can also add new instructions and make coders lives a nightware. The only problem with AMD and Intel is that they don't immediatly adopt each others instruction set, so it may take a while before they do.

many companies have a x86 license but they know because of the ISA war they can never compete agaist intel.

It's called R&D, and you need lots of it to stay competitive. The difference here is that Apple doesn't have as much market share available as as AMD and Intel do. Remember, these companies make products for servers and many other devices besides the laptops and desktops we use. Apple does not, so they must be careful not to speed too much R&D in developing for what is 10% of the desktop/laptop market share.

and AMD are also always forced to use outdated intel ISA in the ISA war but they compensate this with better TSMC nodes and 3Dcache stagged chips and other technologies but on the ISA level AMD always lose agaist intel.

AMD isn't losing anything to Intel right now. Maybe in the past, but that's more their fault than Intel's. Also it's a good thing AMD made their own x86 as the Athlon 64 was superior and today Ryzen is superior. When AMD had Bulldozer, it was Intel that was superior. This relationship that AMD and Intel have is why x86 is as good as it is today. PowerPC didn't have this, and this is why PowerPC faded away from existence. ARM also doesn't have this, and that will be a problem for them in the future.

Apple and Qualcomm are not using the entire ARM design. They had to make their own to stay competitive. If what you're saying was true then Broadcom and Nvidia's ARM SoC's should be just as fast as Apple and Qualcomm. That clearly isn't the case.

also... for linux it looks like Rockchip is better than the apple one because it has AV1 decode and encode in hardware on the SOC and other good stuff.. also rockchip has mainline linux support...

AV1 codec is not part of the ARM standard.

right now it looks like it is easy to compete with apple in the linux market like rockchip just add the stuff linux people want like av1 encode and also support the rockchip socs in the linux kernel and mesa... done... looks easy to me.

Rockchip RK3588 based QuartzPro64 looks high performant and nice to me... with 16gb of ram and 2,4ghz on the high performance cores.
and ARM Mali-G610 MP4 with opensource drivers...
https://www.pine64.org/2022/03/15/ma...e-quartzpro64/

Talking about performance not Linux support. In that regard Broadcom beat Apple years ago with Raspberry Pi's.

in your day by day work there are more times apple m1/m2 wins compared to AMD Rembrandt than the other way around
AMD only wins this: massive multicore general purpose -performance tests
apple m1/m2 wins all other cases. also general purpose is not the relevant part at all.
the one who has more ASIC wins the power efficiency game.

AMD wins because x86 has many years of software to use, while Apple struggles to get iOS games working on Apple silicon. You can defend Apple all you want, but Apple silicon shit the bed with software compatibility. AMD Rembrandt wins because I can actually use it.

critra M1.png

you can use your hardware the complete day without needed a single time of multicore general purpose compute....

I'm not Karen or Kevin who bought a $1,500 laptop to play YouTube videos and read email. Lets be honest here, Kevin is looking at porn. I'm a gamer and my laptops will be used to play games. How's the Apple M laptops in gaming battery life? Oh that's right, they're shit.

millions of people watch youtube edit videos and do all kind of stuff who is all run on ASICs without the need ot general purpose compute...

Millions of people will also try to play games and then go to r/wine_gaming to ask for help because a Windows game won't run on their M1 Pro. Which I do visit and laugh at all the people who spent that kind of money to find that Apple Macbooks with M1/M2's are not for gaming. Like this guy who didn't know Apple doesn't have 32-bit support anymore. Warcraft III works fine on my Linux setup because for one I'm using Linux and two I'm using x86.
https://www.reddit.com/r/wine_gaming...n_support_but/

This is also why I stopped buying Rapsberry Pi's as I got sick and tired of the lack of software I could run. Also, I've learned that you can buy cheap NUC's with AMD or Intel CPU's that cost the same, but offer much better performance and utility. A lot of hospitals end up replacing those little computer NUC's and sell them for $50 on Ebay. I've done this for friends and family, with an installation of Linux Mint. As far as I know, Linux Mint doesn't have an ARM build.

I'm almost certain at this point you're what I would call a corporate troll. People who get paid to patrol forums to spread misinformation and promote products. I've seen it from Nvidia, Google, and even AIB board partners. If you're not then I would get on Apple's payroll. Nothing you say makes sense. You're constantly acting like you're for team Linux by making claims that Apple is 110% behind Linux, which is clearly not the case. You still praise Apple's hardware despite any issues it clearly has. You make wild claims about its battery life, which I've proven it not to be remotely true. I know the Apple paycheck looks good but please stop. I feel stupid just responding to you.

[qarium]

Linux

well can you tell me is apple forced to put linux in their advertisement videos ?
i think this is clearly not the case.

you claim apple linux support does not exit but the people working at asahi-linux reported multible times that there is linux support from apple. apple did fix multible problems and bugs who did not affect macos and did in fact only affect linux.

for example the image support in the bootloader of apple m1/m2... macos does not need image support.

again you talk about opensource licenses like they grand you software-patent licenses but this is clearly not the case.
believe me it is better to not have documentation and not have source code if you deal with patent-trolls and software patents.
in the past they sued single developers who had access to documentation and source code because of software patents.
and the only secure way to avoid this is: clean room reverse-engineering

it would be different if the opensource license grand you a software patent license but this is clearly not the case.
not even GPLv3 does grand you software patent license.

the only one i know is the old no longer in use Sun microsystems open source licenes and back in the time this was big dispute vs Richard Stallmann becuase stallmann did design GPLv3 do not grand software patent license...

so even if theoretical possible no company like appe will ever do this. because they all use software patents in court to sue other companies even the most good companies do this in defence means if someone attacks them they will strike back.

man you have no fucking clue whatsoever about linux and Nvidia i can tell you Nvidia is the one single reason why linux never did get their "year of the linux desktop"

this goes back to OpenGL Kronos pre 1.0 days microsoft did join Kronos to sapotage openGL1.0 but what most people did not unterstand that yes microsoft left kronos after this and nvidia did sapotage open-standards means openGL for longer than 25 years.

and they did it this way: Nvidia did make sure the OpenGL standard is not "tight" instead of releaxed means mathematically not 100% exact definited means Nvidia was able to produce Nvidia-GL this means for like 25 years if you wanted to run all openGL apps you where forced to buy a Nvidia card. because this OpenGL code did not run on intel and did not run on PowerVR and it did not run on AMD hardware and many other hardware ther where tonns of games and tonns of apps who only did run on Nvidia hardware and even more evil not even nivida hardware but Nvidia Quadro hardware. because nvidia did not add the bug-fixed in the normal geforce driver and only in the Nvidia Quadro driver.

now the joke in reverse: AMD did interpred the OpenGL standard more "tight" this means if you developed for AMD hardware your openGL code would run on nvidia hardware in 99% of the cases.

now you know what is the FireGL FGLRX amd driver ? yes its a full joke AMD did hack the bug-fixed of the Nvidia Quadro driver into the AMD FireGL FGLRX driver to make the professional software run on AMD hardware.

this was all Fraud complete fraud and yes this in fact did "rape you"

25 years later and 25 years of rape and complete clusterfuck the good people did get an unterstanding that all this nightmare was a evil malicious plot of Microsoft and Nvidia to make sure 2 points stay: microsoft directX will always defeat opengl and the second point that outside of directX Nvidia will have a absolut monopole.

all this evil malicious plot endet in 2013 when the good side did release the Mantle (API) what in 2016 did become DX12 and also later did become Vulkan and also the same technology is in apple metal...
the good side did push this to end the evilness of microsoft and nvidia means to end NvidiaGL and DirectX because DX12 is in fact not directX it is in fact copy of mantle api.

so the evil company Nvidia did fuck the linux people for like 25 years and you claim that nvidia does not rape opensource developers. and i tell you any sane opensource developer will never touch any nvidia hardware.

man thats the joke about it if you know it then it is not dangerous... the danger is in the submarine software patents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_patent

you think you are expert if you know it and you can show it around... what a joke.
you are expert in this topic if you know that YOU DO NOT KNOW IT and that Submrine Patents will hit you hard in the end.

to have real monopole you need large marketshare
show me one single apple app i need to run... i did not run any apple app for like 25+ years and you can not show me any app i need to use...
best example is government and school i was forced in school to use microsoft windows and i was forced to learn microsoft office...
and i was never forced to use any apple product.

microsoft/intel/nvidia all have real monopoles and if you want to learn computer science on a university it is nearly impossible to avoid them... and this is the definition of monopole that there is force to force you into it.

i know you don't like apple but again you speak with a person who never had a single apple product in his complete life.
so your anti-apple argumentation is some kind of miss balanced like you tell be dont buy apple product but i never did buy a apple product in my complete life and you claim they have monopole when it is 100% clear that they do not have a monopole.

i dont care about apple tech fudalism because i do not have a single apple product. and you lie about apple has a monopole because they plain and simple do not have a monopole because monopole means they can force you to use apple products.
also if you use linux on apple m1/m2 hardware apple tech-feudalism plain and simple does not work they can not force the OS on you they can not force the appstore on you and they can not force any app on you.
stop liying... your lies are stupid... no one who is reading this forum will believe you this shit.

Microsoft is much more evil than apple. of course you can install windows on any device but this is like injecting poison into your venes... no sane human will ever touch windows... sane people use linux and do not touch windows.

what a joke the same mechanism why some andorid or ioos devices block any other OS can be used by microsoft to block linux...

but feel free to continue your bullshit talk. also closed hardware is only dangerous if you have real monopole like microsoft/intel/nvidia if you do not have a monopole you plain and simple do not buy it problem solved.

you are not forced to buy these closed devices ...

tell me are you forced to buy a chromebook ?.

if you are not forced to buy it than you have no problem to install GNU/linux on it.. right ? stop liying...

vulkan and metal is compatible with WebGPU and DX12 is not... find the error...
you can put vulkan bytecode into WebGPU and it will run
you can put metal high shader language into WebGPU and it will run.
DX12 is the only evil player who is not willing to comply to standards.

no sane person will ever use .net ... Submarine_patent microsoft can sue you and ruin your company if you do so.

it is proofed multible times that apple did in fact pay developers hours to make linux run.

i think microsoft is far worse than apple. because they have real monopole and apple does not have monopole.

tell me why not use the non-linear video editing part in blender?

TELL ME WHY NOT JUST USE THIS OPENSOURCE ALTERNATIVES:

https://www.lifewire.com/best-open-s...ftware-4590219

why not just use Ardour instead of GarageBand ?

Nouveau only does not use closed source firmware on older hardware because they used clean room reverse-engineering.
and i am sure that they will get a blob free clean room reverse-engineering driver for apple m1/m2 to.

if you want to be a slave to Intel ME and also AMD PSP then go one and use intel and amd hardware.

i am on AMD hardware right now and i am sure if i get the opportunity to move on a system without closed source firmware or closed source bios/UEFI i will do it.

you are free to be as unfree as you want if you want closed source whatsoever you can do it. i will not.
i even support libre-soc for this reason.

Nouveau on old nvidia hardware is only without blob because of clean room reverse-engineering

and this is no longer possible on any modern nvidia hardware. means you will never see this again.

the fact is they did not only fix 1 linux bug... they fixed many many linux bugs.

and this is called linux support. companies like redhat make billions of euros/dollars this way.

because of the marketshare microsoft has a defacto monopole. and big marketshare is the only legal reason why it is a monopole.
if you are evil company with only 1% marketshare no one cares they just buy another brand.
evil people can only do harm if they have large marketshare.-

wrong there is legal definition by law what is a monopole and the definition is: large marketshare.

you can not have a monopole with 1% marketshare. because if you are evil company at 1% marketshare no one will buy your products they will just buy another brand from another company.

if you don't buy an apple iphone they can lock you into their ecosystem?
if you buy an apple m1/m2 and install linux on it they can lock you into their ecosystem ?

there is nothing like isolated monopoly and apple does not have a monopoly because this need by definition to have high marketshare. if you are evil company and you only have 1% marketshare people will just buy from another company .

I do avoid amazon i just use ebay.... means amazon does not have a monopoly ... amazon also try to sell cloud steaming services of movies and series but i just use youtube and most people i know use netflix... means amazon is not very successfull in selling them the amazon steaming service...

this is only the case because the people know that microsoft is evil... valve has a successfull appstore and people buy it because they know valve is the good guy.

yes right they failed long before but also because of ISA war... before SSE there was MMX
and before MMX there was x87 floading point unit...
and before x97 there was co processor... and so one.

they all failed because of ISA war intel controls the future of the ISA because of this they all fail because intel is always 2-3 steps in the future ...

even AMD with their AMD64 success have a hard time agaist intel and AMD compensate this with newer TSMC node and 3d stacked cache and so one. but without all these extra on ISA alone AMD is lost in the dark.

this is a complete differnt case ... ARM does not do ISA WAR.
and the competition stop their activity because qualcomm is "better" not because of ISA war.

thats speculation. right now there is zero fraud in the ARM business.

yes intel and amd share instruction sets but intel proofed multible time that they are fraudulent company who cheat on AMD multible time.

ARM is jesus in comparison to this. also because of RISC-V and openPOWER ARM can not become evil.
if they become evil all will go with RISC-V and OpenPOWER.

this is a hypotetical scenario and will never happen and the problem with x86 is that intel is a fraudulent company.
Intel is a convicted felon


i am sure apple will enter the server market as soon as linux driver is ready for m1/m2...

intel is a fraudulent company andIntel is a convicted felon... of course AMD did lose becuase of this.

AMD bulldozer was a superior design 4FMA was 56times faster than anything what intel had.
SSE4.0 was superior to intels SSE3 and years before intel did SSE4.1
the bulldozer „Core Multithreading“ (CMT was much better design than intel's hyperthreading
the 34nm SOI-node was the last 2D planar tranistor node what did make much higher clocks possible for bulldozer.
intels 22nm was in reality a 45nm node (tranistor size) moddeled in 4D to get high dencity what resulted in much lower clock speed.
the performance of amd bulldozer on linux was much better compared to the bulldozer performance on windows.
microsoft and the intel compiler did in fact sapotage the amd bulldozer design because intel never added support for CMT and microsoft only did it years behind.

in games with modern technology like Ashes of the Singularity amd bulldozer FX8370 did score much better than Core i7-3770, and 4770 cpus...

believe it or not intel won with inferior products ... of course most wana-be experts who have zero clue will disagree and claim intel was better. but for example i had a intel fanboy friend from this time he had core i7 3770 and 4770 and like 6 years later we did make simple test with monero mining on my amd bulldozer and he on his intel cpu and my AMD bulldozer did win big.

so i tell you this is all a joke. intel did win with inferior products and the people where to stupid to get it.

the reason why intel did get away with this is this: amd did design bulldozer for modern software (Ashes of the Singularity)and modern new compiled software (GCC/LLVM) and modern apis like dx12/vulkan and intel did something very different intel did optimisations for old software and old-compiles means old closed source software and old apis like dx9-11/openGL and so one.
and then intel fraudulently did pay all the computer magazines and testing websites to perform the tests in the way that makes intel products look good.

back in the time of bulldozer all the very skilled technical people did buy bulldozer and all the stupid non-experts did buy intel.
the skilled technical experts also did run linux at that time and the stupid non-experts did run windows.

i already did explain to you everything above just read it.

also wrong intels hyperthreading is a failure and if you count latency in games all the hyperthreading cpus lose 5% performance.

hyperthreading only wins in syntetic benchmarks without mouse and keyboard input but as soon as you have mouse and keyboard input the latency is king and hyperthreadig is bullshit.

also in 2022 the modern x86_64 only has 3FMA an inferior version who lose 1 number of the calculation and with 4FMA you have all the numbers of the calculation to make future calculations.

Power9 on 14nm had superior single-thread performance compared to intel and AMD... intel and amd could only be faster because of more modern node like 10nm or 7nm TSMC...

again intel wins with inferior products..

most differences between apple design and ARM's design are trival...

for example in arm design ARM v8 needs to be 32bit and 64bit in hardware and in arm v9 design the 32bit part can be removed...
apple did remove the 32bit part in their arm v8 design...
thats so trivial that something like this will never be a problem.

there are a lot of ASICs stuff outside of the ARM standard thats matters.

thats true but are you happy with Raspberry Pis 4 performance ?

Rockchip RK3588 based QuartzPro64 has 16gb ram and much faster performance and much more ASICs parts like aV1...

again only closed source care for compatibility in the opensource world this does not matter at all.

so you claim you never watch youtube...
and also i already explained to you that intel sells you as a gamer bullshit technology like hyperthreading that will lose 5% performance compared to disabled hyperthreading because mouse and keyboard input hits the latency hard.

yes now you say your closed source game is x86 yes of course. but as soon as you compare a opensource game compiled for m1/m2 apple will win.

you know that the apple m1 just lose on battery time because this old closed source game Fortnite force you to use Rosetta 2

i am not surprised at all... Rosetta 2 runs at 70% of the speed in other words for the same performance it drains 30% more power.

but what do we learn from this ? the only thing we learn from this is this: closed source is bad ... if the game is opensource it can be recompiled to the ARM ISA and then you have a 30% better result.

we can say something like this 1hour and 36 minutes on a closed source x86 app emulated with rosetta2 and we can asume that it is more like 2 hours if it is a opensource game natiely compiled to ARM ...

intel sells you anti-gaming technology as well... hyperthreading with mouse and keyboard input will make sure you have 5% less performance compared to disabled hyperthreading...

also your example was a x86 game Fortnite and was emulated with rosetta2 ...

also your claim that you need 32bit in hardware to calculate 32bit is plain and simple wrong.

believe it or not but you can calculate 32bit in 64bit. and this is what rosetta2 does with 32bit x86 apps on apple m1 hardware.

we can agree on one point: apple m1/m2 is not for gaming but this is not the fault of ARM and not the fault of Apple this is the fault of closed source world that most games are x86 and closed source.

as soon as a game is opensource you can compile it for ARM and then you have better result than x86_64 and let it only be better because of anti-gaming technologies like hyperthreading. Apple m2 does not have hyperthreading.

I agree on this one. one time someone offered me a Rasberry Pi for free as a gift and i rejected it because i do not have a user-case for this ultra lowend device. even the most performant with the most ram 8gb rasberry pi 4 will end up in the landfill as garbage because it is to slow to less ram and also the lag of native software will force you to use emulation in virtual machine and this will be super slow.

but all this negativity does not fit as an argument agaist these apple m1/m2 because much more ram and much higher clock speed and much more performance and so one so much performance that not even Rosetta2 or virtual machine gives you a big penalty of performance.

it also looks like Rockchip RK3588 based QuartzPro64 is much faster than Rasberry Pi 4

I can garantee you that i am not paid by anyone.

and i garantee you that i do not spead misinformation and i only promote the truth what can be defined by science.

i can garantee you that i never had ownership of any apple product in my complete life.

man i am on wellfare 449€ per month (hartz4) in germany. no company has any use for someone like me.

that could be for other reasons you think. it could also be that the problem is on your side.
i also do not write what i write for you because i know someone like you with your opinion is hopeless means i only write for the other people who read here. that they know you do not speak the truth. many times you simple lie ...

man really... the complete linux community history is a history of reverse engineered hardware support
i know today it is modern to buy what gives you the best linux support from the start
but historically it was different historically the linux people did buy the fasted hardware without linux support and then did reverse engineer the drivers and force the linux support.

and in this old-school linux community spirit apple is 110% behind linux as long as they do not take action to sapotage or delete or ban linux on their m1/m2 hardware.

you just don't get it... in this post alone i praise AMD bulldozer you claimed is shit
i also praise IBM power9 you claimed is shit...

i do not praise apple i praise anything what is fast and efficient and performant and innovative.

and you proof it with an x86 app run in rosetta2 ... LOL if you really want to proof it then do it with an 100% native compiled game.

and really man if apple would pay me for PR it world be the worst PR ever.

you should feel stupid because you promote benchmark cheating anti-gamer technologies like intel-hyperthreading.
as long as there is no mouse and keyboard input hyperthreading performanc very well in syntetic benchmarks
but as soon as there is mouse and keyboard input the latency penalty is so high that your cpu runs 5% slower compared to disabled hyperthreading.

[dragon321]

So I did a bit of research and came across this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28954235

It appears to be kind of a hybrid, as you mentioned before there is the load/store memory ordering but Apple also added the capability in their CPU's completely accurately simulate IEEE 754 floating point numbers as they would behave on x86/64.

Nice catch, that sheds some light on this. I wonder why they made Rosetta 2 work without this as it can run just fine on non Apple CPU.

[mdedetrich]

Nice catch, that sheds some light on this. I wonder why they made Rosetta 2 work without this as it can run just fine on non Apple CPU.

This is a bit above my pay grade but from what I could tell, IEEE 754 spec for floating numbers is very loose so both x86 and ARM made their own specs on how to implement IEE 754 which is more strict then the main standard.

If you think about this you can kinda see why, i.e. it means that if you have an x86 server that does FP computations and an x86 client, because x86 has that stricter spec you know that you are not losing more precision then necessary.

So I guess to answer your point I would assume the reason they did this is that M1/M2 is an ARM processor, so if engineers are writing an ARM binary to be run on M1/M2 (or any other ARM processor for that matter) then they expect it to follow the ARM spec for floating point calculations.