Apple Refreshes MacBook Air With M4 Chip, Lower Pricing (apple.com) 52
Apple has refreshed its MacBook Air lineup with the M4 processor, adding a new sky blue color option and reducing prices across the board. The 13-inch model now starts at $999, while the 15-inch begins at $1,199. Both models are available to order immediately and will ship on March 12.
The updated MacBook Airs feature the same thin design as previous generations but now include the 12-megapixel Center Stage webcam found in current MacBook Pro models. Both variants come with the M4 chip, aligning them with Apple's recent Mac Mini, iMac, and MacBook Pro refreshes.
Base configurations include an M4 with a 10-core CPU and 8-core GPU, 16GB of unified memory, and 256GB of storage. Customers can upgrade to a 10-core GPU (matching the base 14-inch MacBook Pro), 32GB of RAM, and up to 2TB of storage. A significant technical improvement is the support for two external 6K displays while keeping the laptop's lid open, addressing a limitation of previous Air models.
The updated MacBook Airs feature the same thin design as previous generations but now include the 12-megapixel Center Stage webcam found in current MacBook Pro models. Both variants come with the M4 chip, aligning them with Apple's recent Mac Mini, iMac, and MacBook Pro refreshes.
Base configurations include an M4 with a 10-core CPU and 8-core GPU, 16GB of unified memory, and 256GB of storage. Customers can upgrade to a 10-core GPU (matching the base 14-inch MacBook Pro), 32GB of RAM, and up to 2TB of storage. A significant technical improvement is the support for two external 6K displays while keeping the laptop's lid open, addressing a limitation of previous Air models.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps if you stopped sniffing that anus, maybe you would not have shit for brains
Re: (Score:2)
The iMac?! Starting from $1299, that is for 256GBs flash and 16GB RAM (not expandable I bet)! No way.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Compare to the mini PC's GP mentioned:
$276: Ryzen 7, 16gb RAM, 500gb M.2 SSD https://www.amazon.com/Beelink... [amazon.com]
$329: Ryzen 7, 32gb RAM, 1TB M.2 SSD https://www.amazon.com/Beelink... [amazon.com]
That $1299 iMac, 16gb RAM, 256gb storage is, "probably one of the best desktops you can buy right now for the money"??? You can get 3 of those mini pcs for less money, and you don't get stuck with a tiny 24" monitor :-)
Re:Honestly I hate to say it (Score:4, Informative)
A 5850U with 32GB of RAM almost seems like a sick joke.
The M4 iMac has close to 200% the single core performance, and 300% the multicore performance.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The little guy may have only 1/2 the single core performance, but it has:
* double the RAM
* four times the storage
* for less than 1/3rd the price
If we're talking about performance per dollar, it's winning. Also, my desktop CPU is often sitting near idle, but I gobble up disk and RAM. Your use case may well differ, but I'll gladly make that trade (CPU for RAM+Storage). And if you can make use of multiple computers, you can buy three of them, use the spare change for a network switch if you want, and have roug
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, I recently upgraded my proxmox server with the following new hardware:
12 cores
PCI 5
enterprise nvme raid array
Old server had at least twice the CPU power but was always waiting on IO:
48 cores
PCI 4
spinning rust raid array
Performance of the new server doesn't compare with the old one, like at least 5 times better if not 10 times. Server runs 50 vms very smoothly now with various workloads so quite representative of average workloads.
CPU usage was ~15% on the old server and is now ~40% on the new serve
Re: (Score:2)
What exactly did you get?
Re: (Score:2)
12 x AMD EPYC 4244P 6-Core Processor (1 Socket) / AMD EPYC 4244P - 6c/12t - 3.8 GHz/5.1 GHz
linux show 12 CPUs in /proc/cpuinfo while the old one was showing 48
IIRC old one was:
Intel Xeon Gold 6312U - 24 c / 48 t - 2.4 GHz / 3.6 GHz 2 sockets
Re: (Score:2)
The little guy may have only 1/2 the single core performance, but it has:
* double the RAM
* four times the storage
* for less than 1/3rd the price
So?
It's still an abysmally performing machine.
If we're talking about performance per dollar, it's winning.
Absolutely we are- just as we would be for a Pentium 90, because I know where I can get one for $5.
Also, my desktop CPU is often sitting near idle, but I gobble up disk and RAM.
Sure. Every machine sits near idle all the time.
Your use case may well differ, but I'll gladly make that trade (CPU for RAM+Storage).
Your loss.
And if you can make use of multiple computers, you can buy three of them, use the spare change for a network switch if you want, and have roughly 50% more CPU performance than the iMac, all for less money.
Yes, because that's how that works.
That said, we're comparing apples to oranges. An all-in-one to a mini PC. Different CPU architectures and OS options. This comparison was doomed from the start.
Bingo. We are indeed.
We're comparing a high performance machine to a low performance machine, which is why I said:
Those little PCs are indeed very cool, but they're not remotely performance competitive.
I.e., they're not really comparable.
Re: (Score:2)
Also you really should be comparing it to a AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS which is price parity with the m4 chip in the Mac mini. Ryzen 7 CPU based many PCs or half the price of the Mac mini. And Ryzen AI based mini PCs are coming and will go toe-toe 100% with the m4. In real world applications they will drastically outperform the Apple silicon.
Of course at that point you really are just splitting hairs because
Re: (Score:2)
I think you are drastically underestimating what a 5850U can actually do in real world applications.
No, I'm not.
Also you really should be comparing it to a AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS which is price parity with the m4 chip in the Mac mini.
No, I shouldn't- as the comparison they made were the 5850U for $350.
Ryzen 7 CPU based many PCs or half the price of the Mac mini.
Indeed they are. The mini will still run circles around them.
And Ryzen AI based mini PCs are coming and will go toe-toe 100% with the m4.
The Ryzen AI Strix * parts that are powerful enough to compete are not going into mini PCs, lol. Well, they will, if you don't mind them throttling in 0.6 seconds.
In real world applications they will drastically outperform the Apple silicon.
Wrong.
Of course at that point you really are just splitting hairs because if you really really really need that kind of performance you are probably building a full-blown desktop workstation. And at that point you're looking at one of those crazy 16 or 32 core CPUs
The 16 core M4 Max in my laptop outperforms every single non-Server CPU made by AMD or Intel, right now. And it's in a laptop.
I don't know where you get your news, chief- but you're in a different un
Re: (Score:2)
And my 3070TI graphics card can run AI workloads that that cause your shit tier "AI" GPU to shit its pants.
lol- as long as they're very, very small
I want to run at 0.0001 tokens per second... at least you won't run out of VRAM....
That's silly. For a 70b model at INT8, I get ~8t/s.
oh wait, the 3070 outperforms that steaming turd even when having to offload VRAM to system RAM.
Nope- not even close. Fractions of a token/s on a 70b model.
Whoopsies. Looks like your shitty apple taxed POS isn't that fucking great now.
It is, because you're full of shit, lol
Re: (Score:3)
I am using one of those Beelink mini PCs right now. Fully capable device for office/business use.
I have another one as a streaming & light-duty (steam) gaming box. Not a perfect device due to limited ram and graphics capabilities, but good enough for living room use.
They are surprisingly good for the price.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh and I said iMac I meant Mac mini. Sorry it's been a long day. You're right the iMac isn't a good deal.
Re: (Score:3)
For a desktop computer, you could make an argument that a cheap PC is a worthwhile purchase for a use case where CPU power isn't important. For laptops though, Apple is lapping the field right now on power consumption/performance/price.
Re:Honestly I hate to say it (Score:4, Interesting)
For laptops though, Apple is lapping the field right now on power consumption/performance/price.
Yes they are. I have a crazy custom PC for my desktop but for my daily driver laptop I have a M1 Macbook Air. I just can't find anything close to it in price/performance/battery life on the Windows/Intel side. Plus it's going on 5 years old and I expect to get another couple years out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
I still use my Air all the time. I love the form factor. It really was a game-changing laptop. You *still* can't get a competitive PC in that form factor.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
For price to performance to power consumption I think I'd have to agree. The AMD Ryzen AI laptops ( God I hate that name ) run rings around Apple silicon but they're also stupid expensive.
Um, wrong.
Even Strix Halo will be running no circles around my M4 Max. It barely matches an M4 Pro.
Re: (Score:2)
And insanely enough, isn't going to be much cheaper than one.
Re: (Score:2)
But the iMac is probably one of the best desktops you can buy right now for the money if you just want to grab something off the shelf and not follow the sales.
I wouldn't even say the iMac is the best desktop for the money right now in the Apple lineup, compared to the Mac Mini at $599.
Re: (Score:2)
Even for desktop computers, the absence of fan noise on a computer with high end performance specs is a gamechanger, especially for music production and other creative uses.
And still no touch screen (Score:2)
Seriously, Apple. WTF?
Re: (Score:2)
Does anyone other than you actually want a touchscreen on a pure laptop?
Our standard corporate laptop has been a 13" 2-in-1 for the past six years. I can count the number of people who have used it in tablet mode on one hand, and the only comments I've gotten about the touchscreen in laptop mode have all been negative.
Seriously, what's the use case here?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes me! That you and your co-workers don't use it is more about you and your co-workers. Where I work on our 2 in 1 devices we not only use the touch screen, we actively use the digitiser as well. I see about half the people have their laptop docked to their docking stations in tablet mode since it helps them use their pen, and you constantly see people stop typing and tap on the screen with their finger to do something in meetings.
Re: (Score:2)
Digitizer is a pretty decent use case (though it would be awkward on a pure laptop, no? As you point out, your colleagues are docked in tablet mode).
Re: And still no touch screen (Score:2)
No website should ever have horizontal scrolling.
Re: (Score:2)
With macbooks you can scroll in any direction by dragging two fingers on the touchpad.
Re: (Score:2)
If I'm leaning forward, I often use the touchscreen to scroll. I also use it for when there are many checkboxes. I know I want it because when I use a laptop without the touchscreen, I repeatedly touch the screen and then have to go back to the trackpad, for obvious reasons. When I last shopped for a laptop, I asked myself if I wanted a touchscreen. Then as I found myself scrolling through a list of various ultrabooks, I realized I was scrolling with my finger on the screen. That answered the question.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, please give me a touchscreen at added expense that almost nobody will use because it's ergonomically terrible, and the laptop is so light that if you actually touch the screen, you'll either be hinging the screen back, or lifting the front off the desk.
Also: Mac OS control widgets are not touch friendly, so using the touchscreen would always suck in comparison to the large trackpad that is right there and has none of these usability problems.
Touchscreens on notebooks only make sense if there is a 180 d
Re: (Score:2)
This 3 lbs dell laptop that goes maybe 110 degrees, and not 360 like you actually meant, doesn't tip when i touch the screen.
Mac OS X is not user friendly in any way. I find it frustrating and unintuitive, and I started using Macs in 1990.
But Apple hardware is superior, especially for processors and battery life, so I'd tolerate the UI for the benefits. Alas, I hate living without touch.
Re: (Score:2)
But Apple hardware is superior, especially for processors and battery life, so I'd tolerate the UI for the benefits. Alas, I hate living without touch.
Same boat.
Still not a fan of the fucking UI. Hate the BSD userspace. Lack of touch screen makes me sad.
But straight up, this is my second Apple Silicon M* Max MBP (M1 Max to M4 Max)- and I'm still intoxicated by how fucking excellently the software I'm developing runs on it.
I don't think I could kneecap myself by going back to a PC. Strix Halo is headed in the right direction, but it still falls short.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are some narrow uses cases that would benefit from a touchscreen, but those are rare and in most of those cases an iPad would be a better choice than a laptop with a touchscreen.
The M4 chip + 16GB of shared RAM is a beast (Score:2)
I purchased a stock Mac Mini M4, added an external SSD (4 times the capacity, half the price as an Apple upgrade), and plugged in my 4K monitor and wireless keyboard combo from an older Windows box. I do audio processing including multi track work. This thing flies. What used to take minutes to render now takes seconds. Nearly-instant on. Never a hiccup.
Apple, what I want in a laptop is a 2-in-1 laptop with a 15" or larger touch screen, running this new chip. I don't want an iPad with a keyboard, I want Mac
Re: (Score:2)
Apple, what I want in a laptop is a 2-in-1 laptop with a 15" or larger touch screen, running this new chip. I don't want an iPad with a keyboard, I want Mac OS.
That would be fucking incredible.
The fucking annoying part is they have the damn hardware, and the software, right now. They just refuse to put them together.