So the guy says it's unfair and goes on to compare the x86 PC running on GPU versus the M1 running on CPU though there's Blender running on M1 GPU now? At least the original comparison is fair as it's CPU vs CPU.'Nother M1 review. Conclusion was he liked the M1 more, personally.
Though in tests they where very close, thats not using the 3070, as pointed out in the comments section.
''Haizalio
8 days ago
I love this style of comparison. However, I see that the Blender test @ 13:36 seems unfair.
If someone is using Blender on the ProArt laptop, they would of course render with the RTX 3070 GPU using Optix rather than on their CPU.
According to aggregated data in Blender Open Data's website for the BMW Scene, here's the difference:
M1 Pro - CPU rendering: 211.36s ( ~3m 30s - Tallies with video)
R9 5900HX - CPU rendering: 190.59s (~3m 11s - Tallies with video)
RTX 3070 Laptop - Optix rendering: 17.8s.
That's over 10 times faster for a device 600$ cheaper.
This trend is comparable for the Classroom scene. About 10 times faster as well.
Maybe this should have been mentioned? Or maybe I missed something out.
You can check this out yourself at Blender Open Data's website.''
So the guy says it's unfair and goes on to compare the x86 PC running on GPU versus the M1 running on CPU though there's Blender running on M1 GPU now? At least the original comparison is fair as it's CPU vs CPU.
Yeah, my head aligns with eastmen's statement here.Reading it , I believe he is saying that the windows laptop also has a gpu in it and the total cost of the laptop is $600 less than the mac. If you buy the cheaper windows pc you get the additional graphics card which runs it 10 times faster than the mac.
Yeah, my head aligns with eastmen's statement here.
If you're just strictly doing CPU benchmarks, then I completely understand the perspective of a purely CPU vs CPU showdown. However, if we're talking about a complete product (which is how I interpret the review: laptop v laptop) then you should be using the full capabilities of the whole product. Said another way: why would someone who paid for a capable GPU for this work decide to NOT use it? There very well could be reasons why, and if they were relevant to this review, then it would've been nice to hear those reasons.
Absent other supporting details, this specific Blender result seems contrived.
Agreed. If Blender also provides a GPU accelerated mode on the Mac, the my statement above should apply equally: why wouldn't someone use a more efficient option if it's available? Honestly it makes the review even more suspect IMO.What I was saying is that the guy is running CPU+GPU on the Windows laptop, no issue here. But he fails doing the same on the Mac, using only the CPU while there was a Blender version with CPU+GPU. That's the issue I had, at least if I remember correctly.
Agreed. And there was another review that showed good results for M1 but was using an older version on the Intel laptop. Another suspicious review in the other direction...Agreed. If Blender also provides a GPU accelerated mode on the Mac, the my statement above should apply equally: why wouldn't someone use a more efficient option if it's available? Honestly it makes the review even more suspect IMO.
What I was saying is that the guy is running CPU+GPU on the Windows laptop, no issue here. But he fails doing the same on the Mac, using only the CPU while there was a Blender version with CPU+GPU. That's the issue I had, at least if I remember correctly.
Yep it has. It was in beta back in December and has been officially released some days ago.I dunno , I am just going based on the comments here. Does the mac also have a gpu that is supported in blender ? If so then yea they should compare equally.
I definitely agree! I know people who game on laptop, I'd never do that either.But to me the mac would have to be much faster to justify the $600 price difference to me. Aside from that I wouldn't buy a laptop for work unless I was doing work while traveling. So spending $3 grand or whatever on a laptop is a huge joke for me but that is why I don't really comment on laptop threads.
so was this review before or after it was released officially ?Yep it has. It was in beta back in December and has been officially released some days ago.
I definitely agree! I know people who game on laptop, I'd never do that either.
That being said I have no choice but to use a laptop for work when working for home for security reasons. But I didn't pay for it
It was before official release but after the beta release. That's why I wrote above I was hoping to see more fair comparisons now that the official release is out.so was this review before or after it was released officially ?
It was before official release but after the beta release. That's why I wrote above I was hoping to see more fair comparisons now that the official release is out.
I'm certainly not disputing that. I just dislike unfair performance comparisons; part of my day job is to help make sure CPU we design have good performance and doing wrong comparisons is the best way to make a very poor job.maybe a new review will come out then. But like I said you still have $600 worth of additional price that the performance has to over come
I'm certainly not disputing that. I just dislike unfair performance comparisons; part of my day job is to help make sure CPU we design have good performance and doing wrong comparisons is the best way to make a very poor job.
I'm certainly not disputing that. I just dislike unfair performance comparisons; part of my day job is to help make sure CPU we design have good performance and doing wrong comparisons is the best way to make a very poor job.