top-level ~/.julia/packages/MATLAB/SVjnA/deps/build.jl:79 [ Info: Detected MATLAB executable at "/Applications/MATLAB_R2022b.app/bin/matlab"ĮRROR: LoadError: could not load library "/Applications/MATLAB_R2022b.app/bin/maci64/libmx"ĭlopen(/Applications/MATLAB_R2022b.app/bin/maci64/libmx.dylib, 0x0001): tried: '/Applications/MATLAB_R2022b.app/bin/maci64/libmx.dylib' (mach-o file, but is an incompatible architecture (have 'x86_64', need 'arm64')), '/System/Volumes/Preboot/Cryptexes/OS/Applications/MATLAB_R2022b.app/bin/maci64/libmx.dylib' (no such file), '/Applications/MATLAB_R2022b.app/bin/maci64/libmx.dylib' (mach-o file, but is an incompatible architecture (have 'x86_64', need 'arm64')) [ Info: Detected MATLAB library path at "/Applications/MATLAB_R2022b.app/bin/maci64" [ Info: Detected MATLAB root folder at "/Applications/MATLAB_R2022b.app" When I try to add the package with MATLAB R2022b. If anything, it just highlights why I no longer want an Intel or AMD laptop.I use MacBook Pro M1 Max with macOS 13.2. It means M1 can actually emulate x86 using either Rosetta 2 or running Windows in Parallels faster than most x86 processors on the market. So I actually see this as a positive thing for M1. Even more overhead.Īgain, if the M1 or M1 Pro/Max could beat a lot of CPUs under these "benchmarks", it would mean the machine can smoke Intel and AMD in. To run this 7-zip benchmark, you'd have to go through Parallels. Note that 7-zip for ARM is in Alpha right now (version 21) and heck, it's not even available on MacOS. I noticed he was using 7-zip version 19.0 in that video. Supposedly, Matlab R2021 will support ARM. And in fact, if M1 Pro did beat everything, that would just mean AMD and Intel might as well throw their processors away since an ARM processor simulating an x86 chip runs faster and more efficient than literally ALL of their designs. If M1 Pro could actually beat anything in that comparison, it's already a miracle brought about by Rosetta 2. In benchmarks that M1 isn't doing so well, note that Matlab R2020 doesn't even support ARM natively. It's simply just another set of benchmarks. I don't see how this one covers "a wider range". But that seems some distance away right now. Now if Dell, HP, Razer or some other company were to actually get to Apple levels of quality all around, then I might be tempted. well I'll stick with the MacBook Pro thanks. If a Ryzen chip performs, say, 30% better in a number of applications that matter to me then that's all well and good, but if I can only buy that CPU in a flimsy plastic Asus shell with terrible battery life, noisy fans and speakers that sound like a wasp in a tin can. A few come close, but none beats it overall (if you exclude Mac OS vs Windows as a factor). IMHO there simply doesn't exist on the market a PC that matches up to what Apple is selling right now. I think what's missing from this assessment in terms of buying choices are the platforms that M1 are offered in versus the platforms that the competing x86 chips are offered in.Ī MacBook Pro is a fairly unique beast in terms of its particular combination of OS, build quality, screen, speakers, support, trackpad, keyboard, battery life, performance on battery, heat/noise, etc. Basically it's very good (and incredible in certain task) and not so good in unoptimised applications. I think this is a reasonably fair assessment of M1 Pro performance.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |