Apple VS NVidia: New Cinebench 2024 Results
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 сен 2024
- With Cinebench 2024 out, it's time for the ultimate test! NVidia vs Apple's M Series. Who's gonna come out on top?
Support the channel on Patreon: / katsafouros
VIDEO RELATED LINKS
Will Apple's M4 close the gap with NVidia? : • Will Apple's M4 close ...
3D Rendering with Apple's M2: • 3D rendering with Appl...
Is the Mac ever going to be good for 3D work?: • Is the Mac ever going ...
MY TUTORIALS | 3D ASSETS | TEMPLATES
🧱 3D scanned debris: www.marvelousd...
🥐 3D scanned food assets: www.marvelousd...
🧊 Cinema 4D Asset Browser: www.marvelousd...
✏️ Adobe Illustrator tutorial: www.marvelousd...
MUST HAVE APPLICATIONS:
📝 Notion: affiliate.noti...
💵 YNAB: ynab.com/refer...
MY GEAR:
Synology 1821: amzn.to/3OaZfS4
Western Digital Red Plus 12TB: amzn.to/3Gc8ldt
Audio Recorder: Zoom H8: amzn.to/3uEpoRq
Panasonic GH6: amzn.to/3KM2jlu
Sony MDR 7506 headphones: amzn.to/3EaKDgM
iPad Pro 12.9 inch: amzn.to/3xs4yq8
Note:
When you buy something using the affiliate links in this video or any of my other videos, I earn a small affiliate commission at no additional cost to you. Your support is appreciated!
---------
Host & Creator: Dimitris Katsafouros
Website: www.marvelousd...
Twitter: / marvelousdecay
Sigh, I feel your pain. As a former 15 year mac user I (all the way back to the beige boxes pre iMac) was very hesitant to switch to PC. Once they locked users out of a decent upgrade path and gave up on Nvidia, the cost just wasn't worth it. I made the same excuses about software, the OS, the "user experience" and was in denial about haw bad it really was once you put the cost into perspective. Now, 6+ years later, I'm so glad I switched, and my dollar has gone so much further than it would have with Apples hardware. I can render faster, deliver content quicker to my clients, and I'm getting more out of my hardware with a solid upgrade path for any equipment I purchase. If you're holding onto the Apple ecosystem at this point, it really is about the OS and the hardware lock-in for those folks. The benchmark results speak for themselves. When it comes to rendering, 3D rendering especially, you are paying a premium for the "Apple experience" with a significatnt performance hit, and that's about it.
Such a refreshing perspective (and not even a clickbaity sensationalist title!). As a Mac User, I appreciate your cold hard truth look at GPU performance. I do hope the M3 GPU gets ray tracing to help close the gap, but the 4090 has an awaful lot of extra power and hardware and cooling to pull off its performance. If Apple could give them a run for their money from a single Apple Silicon chip, that would be impressive. I believe the Mac Studio still has plenty of cooling to spare! Fingers crossed!-)
While the 4090 is impressive, it uses a lot of power, runs hot, and is expensive too.
But a much more modest NVidia card will do the job too: the RTX 4070 is less than 600 USD, and will completely mop-the-floor with the M2 Ultra. It's basically no contest.
At 1:53, 60 to 76 cores on the M2 Ultra does not equate to 8860 score (extrapolated). The number is actually lower. FYI
And by the way, actual Blender benchmarks show that 60 to 76 cores on the M2 Ultra, performance is less than would be expected.
Wait until Mac users find out that Redshift isn't particularly well optimised for the 4090 and the performance disparity on other leading renderers is even bigger.
Ouch!-)
Dude this content is desperately needed! 🎉
Glad you like it!
@@marvelousdecay Can you share that splashscreen?
Nice comparison, what would be interesting to see is performance per watt in a Macbook vs Windows Laptop. I think that's where Apple Silicon shines. Pretty niche scenario but for a 3D artist that wants to be mobile Apple Silicon would probably be the prefered choice.
For sure you will have a much better time with an Apple laptop than a PC laptop. It won't sound like a turbine, the performance will be the same plugged or unplugged and the battery will also be great. Unfortunately there are always tradeoffs! But yeah if you like a Mac it's really hard to switch to a PC. At least that's the case for me! :D
Definately... and imho oppinion this is what Apple should market. Their mobile solution still is class leading.
But the workstation - they are good - but Apple marketing tries to tell their users they would get a generations ahead performance using some hard to reproduce, optimally selected tests and comparison (like it is 15x faster, than the Intel Mac ... 4 years old... based on a 6 years old Intel CPU (made up the numbers, but you get the point)).
In workstation tasks my home-use PC, recently upgraded with a 1500€ invest beats the M1 Ultra 20C - and the 500€ GPU renders almost 3x as fast, as the M1 Ultra. Yes - it has fans... but is under my desk, has big fans running slow and still almost silent under load.. I would never spend more than double the money for a Mac Studio, which prohibits me from upgrading in case I need more RAM or storage or a faster GPU?
Apple is just not there in the GPU department, as a game developer I was looking into these Apple silicon Mac's but they're just way to slow and even more expensive than PC's, so I'm not giving Apple my money anytime soon until they deserve it and making GPU's that doesn't suck. Technically I can make games with Apple silicon Mac's just fine, but money is basically our only way to vote on the direction of companies, and I'm not going to support their overpriced slow hardware even if it is good enough for me. They have some terrible practices like selling $8TB of storage for like $2400, 16 extra GPU cores for $1000, slow GPUs for the price of 2*4090's... I'm not going to support any of that.
Yeah adding upgrades to SSD and memory to the MacStudio can quickly get you bankrupt! :D
I am desperately waiting to hear your tests for the M3 Max. It will be interesting to see how many 3D artists Apple can sway.
Don't hold your breath on that
I assume the new CB Gpu test utilises RT cores? If so that explains the huge disparity.
I doesn't looks like it. Even in terms of Raw compute, 4090 is 4x faster than M1 ultra, 2x core count and 2x clocks. I have seen some 4090 hiting 36k in cinebench 2024 over twitter.
Why compare to M1 Ultra? M2 ultra is nearly double M1 perf @@vineetkumarbharti2633
There is no other way around it: I'll have to buy a PC, keep it in the garage, and control it remotely through my Mac.
So far I have managed to resist that but never say never…
@@marvelousdecay I was waiting for the m3 ultra as well. But Im wasting too much on render farms. Cant believe I’ll have to use file explorer and download drivers
One thing you failed to mention or not know about is that the 4090 is using ray tracing which Apple silicon does not have yet(it's rumored to debut in M3 series of chips). So the comparison is not comparing the raw gpu performance(which 4090 is faster by about 20%)
@@ehtasam806 That is false! The new Cinebench 2024 uses image rendering for benchmarking. And you know that rendering utilizes ray tracing to compute.
The raw GPU performance of the 4090 is not that massive a gap between M2 ultra. It's about 20-25%
@Dimitris What a refreshingly objective and candid comparison. TY
@Wisdomy I was going to mention the same thing… rumor for the M2 GPU was that it would see an upgrade including ray tracing. However, the upgrade did not happen (M2 GPU == M1 GPU). So the rumor is that the ray tracing got pushed until M3 (fingers crossed). Plus, Apple Silicon team has had another year to push further and shake it out (fingers crossed). So with the (heavily rumored, belated) 5nm -> 3nm jump in speed, and general performance improvements, and the ray tracing, perhaps the M3 GPU can give Nvidia a better run for the money.
copium
@@mikelay5360 Facts are facts! Go get yourself checked!
@@wisdomyaw03 please link sources to these outrageous claims. personal attacks are always an indication of defeat🤣maybe take your own advice
Thank you for this precise comparison! I am a Mac user for 20 years and as a Cinema 4D enthusiast using redshift, I am tired of waiting for any small changes to materials and scene to be refreshed! I decided to build my own PC with dual 4090s for productive work and I will keep my Mac for presentations and basic workflow! I think that apple will take years to compete with a dual 4090 GPU and I don’t think that they will ever catch up in a single system setup.
been rocking my M1 Max 64GB since March this year, by far my most satisfying machine for doing my work. I had an old PC with a 2080ti and a render pc with 2x4090 just in case i need the extra power. But honestly i'd love to have that kind of performance in a Mac device form factor & the experience of Mac OS. Text rendering feels life changing here.
Yeah NVidia type of performance on a Mac would be awesome! I think a lot of users would switch if that were to happen!
wait, you have a render pc with 2x RTX4090 'just in case'? Do you swim in money? :D
Great Clear Comparison 👍
On top of the premium price is the fact that it is not upgradeable
it's really bad when a company is even more greedy than nvidia but appeal has succeeded
Wow! Your video lighting and color grading are just top tier! The saturation in ur shadows and the falloff in ur facial highlights. Love this!!
Hopping M3 get Ray Tracing
I’m going to be hopping mad if they don’t!-)
@@joerama great news! A17 released with RT. Now it’s just a matter of time
@@TheJoaolyraaraujo
Yeah, a long time.
Great video, can't wait for a M3 video of yours once released by Apple.
Any further thoughts on this after the M3 release or will you wait for the M3 Ultra?
Yeah I’m holding on for the M3 Ultra but we can already get an idea of what kind of performance we will get out of it.
It will still lag way behind Nvidia’s 4090.
At this point I’m even considering if I should wait for the m4 lineup so I can get a more sophisticated raytracing chip.
@@marvelousdecay we'll have to see if the M3 GPU scaling holds up, I'm thinking 4070-4080 level performance.
What about M3?
Thanks for such a clear review! I'm getting tired of Apple paid bloggers telling me how cool the new Mac Studio is comparing to Nvidia PC :)) what a crap :) Thanks buddy!
The Mac Studio has its positives for sure. It’s an amazing editing machine and a great all rounder but when it comes to 3d rendering it’s severely lacking.
I can’t blame the reviewers though. They can only test the things they’re most familiar with.
Same here. Even if PC is cheaper and faster my peace of mind is better on mac. Quicker for me to get around and fast af syncing between devices.
Hope the m3 is good. Should be a brand new chip instead of just a speed boost like the m2.
Mac is all about fancy toys. I'm in the machine learning industry, my closet friend is one of the founders of Unity Technologies which is the leader in VR/AR as well as multi-platform gaming development, and I know many in the graphics industry, and construction data modelling industry to boot. Nobody who is anything and do anything in any of those areas, uses Macs these days. Name me one large render farm anywhere or engineering company with Mac workstations. I can't think of a single one who actually matters.
The way it is Nvidia "Meant to be fast"
Please, can you post tests and benchmarks between Mac M3 on a Laptop and Windows PC Laptop with Nvidia 4080 or 4090?
If I manage to get my hands on a M3 Mac I sure will!
@@marvelousdecayDoes Apple offer free 30 day returns where you live? This would be one way to complete the benchmark.
It’s a massacre! 😭 I’m on a M1 Max Mac Studio, now I know where I stand… 😅 I somehow got the impression that, even though way more expensive, the M2 Ultra was almost on par with Nvidia’s offering but it’s obviously not the case at all. I understand that the people who need this kind of GPUs are a microscopic fraction of Apple’s customer base, but I still hope they’ll close this huge performance gap in the nearish future.
100% agree! Apple has to catch up to the competition. Or in case that’s not possible, lower the prices significantly.
Marketing vs reality… womp womp… - i still hate PC - so. i just just put a pc in the corner with a 4090 in it and do Team Render with cinema 4d.. Best of both worlds Never need to touch the PC or windows hardly ever.
Seems like a smart move! I've never tried Redshift with Team Render - does it work flawlessly? @@cjadams7434
i feel like the lack of hardware accelerated raytracing massively handicaps the macs for 3d rendering work. the 4090 still has more raw power than an m2 ultra, but the addition of rtx just makes it a massacre
Hopefully the gap will close down with M3's raytracing capabilities. Here's hoping!
Interesting to see that there is barly any difference between M1 and M2 Ultra. The blender GPU benchmarks show huge differences.
And btw.
Switch... Switch... Switch... Switch... Switch...
hahaha I'm still holding on! Maybe when 5090 comes out and the difference will be x20!
a 21 watts arm chips vs an heavy chunky 450w graphics card
I think you got the wrong results. i have a 4080 super and it gives me 28200 in cb24. the 4090 should give around 36000. ;0 justsaying.
For sure, once you factor out the months it took to resolve the NVIDIA 4090 driver issue it beats the pants off of any Mac.😂😂😂
what driver issues? I had my 4090 from day 1 and i only had minor issues. The 3090 upgrade was much worse
even 3070ti laptop is on par with m2 ultra lol
I’m coming from the PC gaming world (very old 1060ti 😂) and I’ll be switching to Mac. Been using MacBooks and the wife has a older iMac so I’m use to it now. My issue with graphic cards is the current pricing. Building a new rig is just to expensive now. I’ll probably start on like a $500 Mac mini since I just play MOBA’s now, and learn blender on that. If I get deep into it then I’ll look at a professional machine.
If you want to do 3D, you should invest in a decent machine. Nothing is more frustrating than constant waiting and making hundreds of compromises because of that
@@Gromic2k I want to do it as a new hobbyist. I don’t even know if I like it yet lol. Not going to drop 2-3k on a new rig just for that
@@DariusJones05 Well it´s usually not only for that, because that PC will also be an incredible gaming PC
@@Gromic2k yep. If I was still into heavy gaming I might spend that type of money. But ain’t got that type of time or desire anymore. Will miss having a nice rig but it’s time to move on
@@DariusJones05Well then, good luck with your decisions. Took me 12 years to become a professional 3D artist. And one of the reasons is the stuff i said in the first comments.
Mac are not good for 3D renders, period. Almost no 3D Artist is working on a Mac nowadays, and many former Apple users switched to PC for this reason. Mac is very good for other stuff though.
400€ for 1tb... lol
Does an e-gpu work on a mac studio?
7:12 How come the 24-core M2 Ultra CPU is slower than the 20-core M1 Ultra CPU?
There's always a little bit of variance when running the test. If we were to run the test again the number would be slightly different (probably higher). What you essentially can learn from this is that the CPU power on both machines is very very close but the GPU performance of the M2 is better.
4945€ of this pc is overpriced
3700€ max
id love to see the cinebench on the M2 vs i9
Nvidia has been in the game for more than a decade but apple silicon is still fresh. Give them time to catch up.
i would do it if they set their prices like they have to catch up. But they just show us the middlefinger
I9-13900K / RTX 4090 - GPU 34907 , CPU (Multi Core) 2047 , CPU (Single Core) 123
This is my first build. Not a tweaker,
I find the mac studio m2 ultra 76 core gpu is fine for lookdev.. scores better than my old 2070 super - and why i have a TeamRender PC with the 4090 in it for final frame!
Definitely a nice combo setup you have there!
My issue and the reason I haven’t bought an M-series Mac yet is the amount of money you have to spend for the type of performance you get.
Once that’s improved I’ll be all over it!
The CPU side of things for the M series especially the M2 is amazing the GPU not so much so that’s why I have the 4090 card in the PC but everything else runs like lightning on this Mac Studio M2 ultra@@marvelousdecay
Do not have big hopes that M3 will come near the performance of Nvidia GPUs.
i9 don't have enough PCIe lines to support 3 GPUS full 16 lines each + SSD. You need an workstation setup. I guess we will need to pump up the price for a PC. :) I wish 14K is a solution
Fair enough! How much would you estimate the price of the PC?
You don´t need full pci speed for rendering. @@marvelousdecay
with a good planning and budgeting additional 15% will do the work.
BTW good video, helps a lot. Thank you
You're welcome!
@@marvelousdecay I have one question, or request lets say. I'm not sure if you know
Orestis Konstantinidis in person but we miss him a lot. This is a genius and we are starving to hear from him. I hope he is okay and that he is still in the industry . If you could make an interview with him and maybe push him to share some ideas :) it will be awesome.
waiting for the M3 Hope is good
Keeping my fingers crossed!
I feel like everyone is forgetting that the m chips draw literally 8 times less power than the 4090.
Apple silicon...great for iPhones, iPads, Macbooks and Mini/Studio. Hilariously bad for 3D, VFX, CGI, game dev and archviz. Can't a formerly 3$ trillion company afford 2 lines of computers? AS for the low power, efficient devices. Imagine MacOS running on Threadripper Pros and Epyc workstations. It's a shame.
M3. M4 or M5 will never match a big GPU, that is not even physically possible...
Windows > Mac
Ofc 💙
I don't know why anybody buys any Apple products. They are greedy.
It's slightly misleading to compare dedicated GPUs to Apples INTEGRATED GRAPHICS. First of all, you have dedicated GPUs with their own power supply and MASSIVE coolers. The 4090 consumes up to 500 Watts and all that excess heat has to be cooled away. The ENTIRE Apple Silicon SoC, including the CPU, GPU cores and all of the included parts have a maximum power draw of 50 Watts or less, and less than a lightbulb in idle state.
Since Apple does not produce dedicated GPU units, the most applicable comparison would be between Nvidia or AMD and a Mac Pro with a dedicated GPU installed in an PCI slot. This video is unfortunately just clickbait.
Another word on the cost/benefit of Apple products and Macs in particular: Macs are NOT overpriced. In fact, they are very competitively priced. The problem is that the particular features you are paying for with a Mac might not be valued by every customer. Most people who invest in high-end PC rigs with power-hungry GPUs are PC gamers. PC gamers are what keeps the PC/Micro$haft industry afloat. And Microsoft in particular is also known for financing an army of gamer-influenced Apple-hater-influencers, although Apple has also done its share of anti-PC propaganda (Mac vs. PC commercials etc.) Gamers generally don't care if their PC rig consumes more electricity than a pizzeria or can heat an entire housing project. They care about getting 200+ FPS on the latest „Legends of Mytheralia“ or whatever AAA title, while most of that performance is needed to offset the horrid optimization job by game companies that all use the same crappy game engine having to account for massive hardware fragmentation, tight release schedules and profit hungry publisher deadlines. Add to that the fact that Winblows has legendarily poor memory management, power management and multi-core support.
With a Mac, you're paying for features that have zero benefit for gamers. Enormous retina displays (my 5k iMac display from 2017 wasn't even available for purchase in ANY standalone display for PC... and if it had been, you'd have been looking at around 10k$ just for the display alone, while my iMac cost less than 2 grand). You are paying for things like silent operation, fantastic preservation of value and countless other quality-of-life features. Large companies like IBM did comprehensive TCO analyses on Mac vs. PC years ago and found that large operations could save up to 50% of TCO of their IT hardware by switching to Macs, which is partly why they're hated by so-called "experts" in IT departments: Macs would cost many of them their M$-accredited jobs because fewer of them would be needed!
And the control Apple holds over both software and hardware means in the real world that this M3 Mac will still export your 8K video timeline in FCP faster than your Premiere timeline with your i9 and 4090, while consuming a fraction of the power. The features you're paying for in a Mac are those which matter most to working professionals, while PCs place emphasis on excessive, power-hungry Chinese junk so that little Kevin can play "Feast of Cthulhu" or some other time-wasting crap in 5D surround and 10 billion colors. Let's face it: that 5000 dollar gaming rig was financed by daddy who works on a Mac.
Not exactly sure how you can call the video clickbait or unfair comparison. The video doesn't even have a sensational title or thumbnail!!
Fact: If you’re a professional doing 3D rendering you cannot get anything comparable to a PC’s performance. Simple as that.
Doesn’t matter how you want to measure things. If you’re on a deadline and you need to deliver your renders, your client won’t be sympathetic if you delay the project, just because Apple has integrated graphics. Let’s call things like they are.
The Mseries Macs are great computers but have bad performing GPUs. Why is it so difficult to accept that?
@@marvelousdecay They don't have „bad performing GPUs“. They don't have any GPUs at all. They have INTEGRATED GRAPHICS processing on the SoC, and those are the best performing IGPs on the planet, at a fraction of the power draw of the other guys. If you need to 3D render professionally, that is usually done on CPU. And if you really need to render on a GPU, there's a Mac Pro for you, into which you can stick a dedicated professional accelerator card and a pro GPU specifically for rendering (yes, those are entirely different beasts from GAMING GPUs).
@@sonjaspackenberger9250 I’m sorry but you’re wrong on multiple levels but I’m going to stick to the basics. First off I’m not exactly sure why you think an integrated GPU is not a GPU at all but that’s neither here nor there. Now to the important bits.
3D rendering at any decent capacity happens on GPU and not on CPU. You can of course render on CPU but it’s going to be much slower than any decent GPU. And if you don’t believe me you can run the most basic of tests. Run the same scene on the same renderer on CPU and GPU and see which one finishes first. Heck, just run Cinebench if you don’t own a 3D program. It runs the same scene on CPU and GPU.
Second off, you can’t really do any serious 3D rendering with the Mac Pro because Apple has excluded all NVidia cards the biggest and best player when it comes to rendering. And that’s with the old Mac Pro. With the new Mseries Mac Pro you can’t even add a GPU at all. Whatever the brand.
Also you don’t need a “professional accelerator card” to render. You’ve built these divides in your head that don’t even exist. You can get a “gaming card” as you say and you can easily run your renders with them. I could go through your other post point by point and dismantle your arguments, but that’s something for you to work on.
If you want to come in strong with your statements and sound like a pompous prick, either stick to the things you know or start reading up on the things you don’t know.
Mac is expensive shit like iphone
This is like listening to someone in a bad relationship making excuses about their horrible partner. Leave the ecosystem, you’ll meet someone new and they’ll for sure treat you nicer.
So disappointing. That's exactly why I keep a PC around, even If I have a fully specced Mac Studio. With the energy efficiency targets Apple has, I don't think they will ever go beyond those results. I really hope for at least to consider having the Mac Pro totally not-energy efficient to at least match nVidia offerings.
never trust redshift and cinebench their benchmark is shiet and not accurate at all
There’s nothing inaccurate about it. Cinebench is not a synthetic test as most people say. It’s based in a real world scenario. A real world 3d application, a real world 3d scene and an actual production renderer.
The only thing you could say about it is that it’s only using one scene. I would have preferred if they used 3 or so scenes and then averaged the results. But even without doing that it’s still a great gauge at how machines perform in rendering.
c4d and redshift is actual product that 3d artist uses