FM24 Performance Benchmarking Thread

[Daveincid]

I just wanted to add another point which may be useful for some people:

I have a AMD 7950x system and a Macbook M3 max. Performance is more or less the same with the 7950x only being faster in test D but....I've never had a single crash dump on a Macbook and I run test save's 24/7 all the time. On my windows system it's usually 1 per day. So I actually switched all my longterm tests from a high-end gaming PC to a Macbook

[JAwtunes]

1 hour ago, Daveincid said:

I just wanted to add another point which may be useful for some people:

I have a AMD 7950x system and a Macbook M3 max. Performance is more or less the same with the 7950x only being faster in test D but....I've never had a single crash dump on a Macbook and I run test save's 24/7 all the time. On my windows system it's usually 1 per day. So I actually switched all my longterm tests from a high-end gaming PC to a Macbook

The Mac performance has always impressed me in these threads. Tempted by an M4 Mac mini in a few months but worried about excel on Mac (never had a Mac). Off topic but would be keen to know Mac users experience with excel on Mac? 

[Daveincid]

vor 23 Minuten schrieb JAwtunes:

The Mac performance has always impressed me in these threads. Tempted by an M4 Mac mini in a few months but worried about excel on Mac (never had a Mac). Off topic but would be keen to know Mac users experience with excel on Mac? 

Indeed. I personally use libreOffice (which works absolutely fine on Mac) so I can't say much about the "classic" microsoft excel. 

[tim_gashead]

17 hours ago, JAwtunes said:

The Mac performance has always impressed me in these threads. Tempted by an M4 Mac mini in a few months but worried about excel on Mac (never had a Mac). Off topic but would be keen to know Mac users experience with excel on Mac? 

I use both a Windows 11 desktop and a MacBook M3 Pro so finally decided to bite the bullet and buy Office 365 (via a much reduced price on Amazon) which gives the boon of running full Office on both machines… can confirm Excel runs great on my MacBook and I often use it ahead of booting up my desktop due to ease of use. Hope that helps.

Edited September 15 by tim_gashead

[scythian12]

10 hours ago, tim_gashead said:

I use both a Windows 11 desktop and a MacBook M3 Pro so finally decided to bite the bullet and buy Office 365 (via a much reduced price on Amazon) which gives the boon of running full Office on both machines… can confirm Excel runs great on my MacBook and I often use it ahead of booting up my desktop due to ease of use. Hope that helps.

Quite offtopic, but isn't 365 a subscription model, Microsoft attempting to relieve you the price of the full program each year in essence?

[tim_gashead]

18 hours ago, scythian12 said:

Quite offtopic, but isn't 365 a subscription model, Microsoft attempting to relieve you the price of the full program each year in essence?

Apologies for adding to this, but yeah 365 is subscription, but Office 2021 for Mac will also work amazingly if a MacBook is your machine of choice for FM24 / FM25 👍🏻

[Bigpole]

On 26/08/2024 at 11:11, TheMattB81 said:

I've just a 9950X so will rerun this shortly.

Any results so far?

[SBII]

Type: Laptop

Model: Lenovo Ideapad 5 Pro

CPU Model: Ryzen 5 5600H

CPU Base Frequency: 3.3 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.2 GHz

RAM: 8GB

RAM Clockspeed: Unknown (Not shown in CPU-Z for some reason)

GPU: Integrated Radeon graphics

Graphics Level in 3D: Low

 

Benchmark 1 FM24: 00 min 59 Sec

Benchmark 2 FM24: 02 min 55 Sec

Benchmark 3 FM24: 05 min 17 Sec

Edited October 10 by SBII

[SBII]

Type: Laptop

Model: Lenovo Thinkpad P15v gen2

CPU Model: I7 11800H

CPU Base Frequency: 2.3 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.6 GHz

RAM: 32 GB

RAM Clockspeed:1600 MHz

GPU: NVIDIA T600 Laptop GPU

Graphics Level in 3D: High

 

Benchmark 1 FM24: 00 min 50 Sec

Benchmark 2 FM24: 02 min 52 Sec

Benchmark 3 FM24: 04 min 33 Sec

[TheMattB81]

On 05/10/2024 at 18:52, Bigpole said:

Any results so far?

I forgot about this, yes. I will run it soon and update. Curious to see how much faster it is myself. 

[TheMattB81]

On 19/08/2024 at 18:16, TheMattB81 said:

Type: Desktop

Model: Custom Built PC

CPU Ryzen 9 7950X3D

CPU Base Frequency: 4.20 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 5.7 GHz

RAM: 32GB

RAM Clockspeed: 8000Mhz

GPU: 7900 XTX TUF OC

Graphics Level in 3D: Very High

Benchmark 4 FM24: 6 minutes 40 seconds

 

Screenshots of overlay and time taken attached. 

7950X3D CPPC (BIOS option that determines which CCD is prioritised initially) Set to Frequency, as FM24 runs faster with higher clock speed rather than primarily using the Cache CCD on dual X3D parts.  

7950X3D tuned with 8000Mhz C34 memory, 2200FCLK, and 360 AIO using liquid metal. 

 

As promised above, here is a run on my Ryzen 9 9950X. The improved performance of Zen 5 has reduced processing time significantly vs my 7950X3D. Full details below and some screenshots. 

 

Type: Desktop

Model: Custom Built PC

CPU Ryzen 9 9950X

CPU Base Frequency: 4.30 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 5.70 GHz

RAM: 32GB

RAM Clockspeed: 8000Mhz

GPU: 4090 Aorus Master

Graphics Level in 3D: Very High

Benchmark 1 FM24: 24.86 seconds

Benchmark 4 FM24: 5 minutes 32 seconds

 

@Bigpole

Screenshots of performance overlay, HWINF64 showing power drawn etc, and time taken attached. 

9950X, PBO Enabled, X10 Scalar, Auto OC +200Mhz, tuned curve optimiser settings (-22 on the two best cores and -38 on all the others) 

9950X3D tuned with 8000Mhz C32 memory, 2200FCLK, and 360 AIO using liquid metal.

Is this thread still being updated? I don't see my results from my previous result with the 7950X3D on the leader board?

 

 

Edited October 14 by TheMattB81

[Brother Ben]

32 minutes ago, TheMattB81 said:

 

Is this thread still being updated? I don't see my results from my previous result with the 7950X3D on the leader board?

 

I'll update it this week  

Thanks for doing the tests

[TheMattB81]

20 minutes ago, Brother Ben said:

I'll update it this week  

Thanks for doing the tests

Appreciate it, thanks. 

[bakersdozen22]

Based on the results of the M3 Pro on Benchmark 3, would you say those speeds are sustainable for a long term save? 
 

I’m trying to find the best way to have the optimal setup possible for many years. I know the laptop is plenty powerful but I don’t know how much is too much! 
 

Any tips would be appreciated 

[Brother Ben]

2 hours ago, bakersdozen22 said:

Based on the results of the M3 Pro on Benchmark 3, would you say those speeds are sustainable for a long term save? 
 

I’m trying to find the best way to have the optimal setup possible for many years. I know the laptop is plenty powerful but I don’t know how much is too much! 
 

Any tips would be appreciated 

Its not an easy one to answer but the game slows noticeably in the second season and thats why we do these benchmarks then.

In my experience it will get marginally slower up until your 5th - 10th season and will then level out.

I'm in 2078, albeit on FM2022, and its remained steady for decades.  Don't forget of course that as your save evolves you can decide to remove leagues that you have little or no involvement with.

[bananahk]

Type: Desktop
Model: Custom build
CPU Model: Ryzen 5 5600X
CPU Base Frequency: 3.60 GHz
CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.60 GHz
RAM: 32GB
RAM Clockspeed: 3200Mhz
GPU: Nvidia GTX 3060 
Graphics Level in 3D: Very High

Benchmark 1 - 43s
Benchmark 2 - 2m 15s
Benchmark 3 - 3m 30s
 

[Snowflake Dave]

Hi, I find this thread interesting, I use an old laptop so my benchmark would really be of any help today but what I was wondering if anyone is offering ideas on how to produce better results?

For example most people know replacing the HD with a SDD will give better performance but that's not as relevant today as it used to be. The fact some SSD might write at speeds much lower than the read is and the fact new SSD speeds are here now.

Because my laptop is old & I used to work in IT I've looking at way I can save myself having to buy a new machine just for FM25. A couple of ways I've improve performance on my laptop are - Turning of indexing on the drive and excluding the folder and FM executable from the anti virus program. Of course the are downsides to both but most people would be able decide on that themselves. I'll be working on others if the is interest.

[Connor]

Hi All, very interested in these benchmarks and the M3 performance, so am going to purchase myself a Macbook Air/Pro

A couple of questions if I may of people that have either/experience of them for FM24 (and expectations are FM25 onwards):

1) Is the Macbook Air M3 (15 inch) enough for FM with 16GB RAM?

2) Would I get much benefit from upgrading to 24gb RAM, compared to 16GB (or not worth it?)

3) Fans on laptops cause me real irritation, therefore if Macbook Pro would be better, just how loud do they get when playing FM

Thanks in advance, appreciate any input

[Nurgle42]

I Have a MacBook pro M4 pro coming Friday, I will do the benchmarks over the weekend. 

Will be interesting to see the improvement over the M3 pro considering there has been quite the clock boost 

[Nurgle42]

On 24/10/2024 at 14:52, Connor said:

Hi All, very interested in these benchmarks and the M3 performance, so am going to purchase myself a Macbook Air/Pro

A couple of questions if I may of people that have either/experience of them for FM24 (and expectations are FM25 onwards):

1) Is the Macbook Air M3 (15 inch) enough for FM with 16GB RAM?

2) Would I get much benefit from upgrading to 24gb RAM, compared to 16GB (or not worth it?)

3) Fans on laptops cause me real irritation, therefore if Macbook Pro would be better, just how loud do they get when playing FM

Thanks in advance, appreciate any input

MacBook Air M3 16gb is plenty fast for FM 24.

You wouldn't get any benefit from a ram upgrade if it's just for FM.

On my MacBook pro M3 pro I think the fans have only come on a handful of times and it was barely audible, this will depend on how many leagues and what detail you are running though. 

[squirrel_plays_fm]

@Brother Ben hope not too self-promotional to post this but I did an analysis based on this thread and the new M4 chips, basically persuading myself that it makes sense to upgrade. I ended up making a video of it which is here

 

[TopToffee]

Type: Apple

Model: 14" MacBook Pro M4 Pro 1TB SSD

CPU Model: 14-core

RAM: 48GB

GPU: 20-core

Graphics Level in 3D: High

 

Benchmark 1 FM24: 0 min 25 sec

Benchmark 2 FM24: 55 sec

Benchmark 3 FM24: 2 min 13 sec

Benchmark 4 FM24: 7min 59 sec

 

I'll re-run this early next week as there's a chance there could still be indexing going on at the moment.

Edited November 8 by TopToffee

[Brother Ben]

On 08/11/2024 at 12:24, squirrel_plays_fm said:

@Brother Ben hope not too self-promotional to post this but I did an analysis based on this thread and the new M4 chips, basically persuading myself that it makes sense to upgrade. I ended up making a video of it which is here

 

Not at all mate, i'll give it a watch now 

[kevez27]

On 08/11/2024 at 23:48, TopToffee said:

Type: Apple

Model: 14" MacBook Pro M4 Pro 1TB SSD

CPU Model: 14-core

RAM: 48GB

GPU: 20-core

Graphics Level in 3D: High

 

Benchmark 1 FM24: 0 min 25 sec

Benchmark 2 FM24: 55 sec

Benchmark 3 FM24: 2 min 13 sec

Benchmark 4 FM24: 7min 59 sec

 

I'll re-run this early next week as there's a chance there could still be indexing going on at the moment.

Thanks for these results mate

Can I ask a favour? Can you load up a night game in a large stadium and see how that affects the smoothness of graphics on high/very high please?

On my M1 MacBook Pro, the graphics are super smooth in the daylight matches but as soon as I have a night game with the black sky and floodlights, I get a lot of lag. I would be interested in seeing if this is still the case on the M4 models

Many thanks in advance for any testing you can do on this. Cheers.

[richwarner]

In regards to MacBook - would I be better off getting the M3 Pro or the M4 base model? £100 difference with John Lewis atm. 

[Bainsy]

Type: Apple Mac Mini 
Model: Mac Mini M4 Base Model 
CPU Model: M4 10 Core
RAM: 16 GB
GPU: 10 Core
Graphics Level in 3D: High

Benchmark 1 - 36s
Benchmark 2 - 1m 43s
Benchmark 3 - 3m 18s
Benchmark 4 - 15m 50s

[Kevinho7]

On 14/09/2024 at 16:20, Daveincid said:

I just wanted to add another point which may be useful for some people:

I have a AMD 7950x system and a Macbook M3 max. Performance is more or less the same with the 7950x only being faster in test D but....I've never had a single crash dump on a Macbook and I run test save's 24/7 all the time. On my windows system it's usually 1 per day. So I actually switched all my longterm tests from a high-end gaming PC to a Macbook

Since i’m on the fence of buying a macbook for the first time ever, reading this makes me more enthousiastic for it. I’ve heard the battery life is also great on a mac…

But does a macbook also run fm 3d at high graphics settings smoothly?

I’m just trying to find as much info as possible on it from experienced users before I invest a fairly big amount of money into buying a mac 😅

Edited November 14 by Kevinho7

[Daveincid]

vor 43 Minuten schrieb Kevinho7:

Since i’m on the fence of buying a macbook for the first time ever, reading this makes me more enthousiastic for it. I’ve heard the battery life is also great on a mac…

But does a macbook also run fm 3d at high graphics settings smoothly?

I’m just trying to find as much info as possible on it from experienced users before I invest a fairly big amount of money into buying a mac 😅

currently on a M3 max, 3d was never an issue.

I consider myself unbiased because I'm working with a desktop AMD 7950x, A Laptop also with an AMD CPU + the MacBook.

If it comes to efficiency, performance & price stability & mainly plqying FM -> Mac. 

Office-work which I'm used to + other games -> Windows.

[Brother Ben]

On 11/11/2024 at 14:13, richwarner said:

In regards to MacBook - would I be better off getting the M3 Pro or the M4 base model? £100 difference with John Lewis atm. 

The benchmarks here suggest that the M3 pro is better, for FM at least

[Brother Ben]

3 hours ago, Bainsy said:

Type: Apple Mac Mini 
Model: Mac Mini M4 Base Model 
CPU Model: M4 10 Core
RAM: 16 GB
GPU: 10 Core
Graphics Level in 3D: High

Benchmark 1 - 36s
Benchmark 2 - 1m 43s
Benchmark 3 - 3m 18s
Benchmark 4 - 15m 50s

Great to see this benchmark.

For £600 its really tempting

[big daddy]

Would be great to see how the new core ultra handles fm24

[Connor]

20 hours ago, Daveincid said:

currently on a M3 max, 3d was never an issue.

I consider myself unbiased because I'm working with a desktop AMD 7950x, A Laptop also with an AMD CPU + the MacBook.

If it comes to efficiency, performance & price stability & mainly plqying FM -> Mac. 

Office-work which I'm used to + other games -> Windows.

Hi @Daveincid may I ask what specific macbook/mac you have please?

And importantly as I find fan noise infuriating, how loud do fans get on a Macbook Pro, if thats what you have, when playing FM?

I am going to take the plunge and either get a Macbook Air (obviously no fan) or a Macbook Pro, which I want for FM25, but am struggling to get clear guidance on fan noise when playing FM24

Would really appreciate your input/advice?

Thanks in advance!

Edited November 15 by Connor

[Daveincid]

vor 4 Minuten schrieb Connor:

Hi @Daveincid may I ask what specific macbook/mac you have please?

MacBook Pro 14" M3 Max 14-Core CPU & 30 Core GPU

vor 5 Minuten schrieb Connor:

And importantly as I find fan noise infuriating, how loud do fans get on a Macbook Pro, if thats what you have, when playing FM?

I mainly simulate and don't play the game but simulating with full detail is the task which brings the CPU to it's limits. (and so create fan noise). The fan noise in general is "non-existent". During full detail simulations (mainly on matchdays for about 10-15 seconds) you'll hear the fans, but in my opinion, you won't find any other high-end laptop which is more quiet than a MacBook. Those chips are trimmed for efficiency, it's crazy. 
I even assume that if you go for a 16" model, the noise is even less than on my 14" model.

[Connor]

21 minutes ago, Daveincid said:

MacBook Pro 14" M3 Max 14-Core CPU & 30 Core GPU

I mainly simulate and don't play the game but simulating with full detail is the task which brings the CPU to it's limits. (and so create fan noise). The fan noise in general is "non-existent". During full detail simulations (mainly on matchdays for about 10-15 seconds) you'll hear the fans, but in my opinion, you won't find any other high-end laptop which is more quiet than a MacBook. Those chips are trimmed for efficiency, it's crazy. 
I even assume that if you go for a 16" model, the noise is even less than on my 14" model.

That's really helpful thank you @Daveincid, I have mainly found on other games using windows gaming machines, that fan's are really annoying during playing matches (watching in 3D)

Have you had any experience of hearing much when actually playing/watching the matches in 3d?

 

Edited November 15 by Connor

[Daveincid]

vor 16 Minuten schrieb Connor:

Have you had any experience of hearing much when actually playing/watching the matches in 3d?

very little to no noise

[JAwtunes]

23 hours ago, Bainsy said:

Type: Apple Mac Mini 
Model: Mac Mini M4 Base Model 
CPU Model: M4 10 Core
RAM: 16 GB
GPU: 10 Core
Graphics Level in 3D: High

Benchmark 1 - 36s
Benchmark 2 - 1m 43s
Benchmark 3 - 3m 18s
Benchmark 4 - 15m 50s

Thanks for posting- I've been waiting to see this.

[caz]

Would love to see if anyone has bought a 9800x3D, and who is running this benchmark....

I am upgrading my gaming pc "soon", and currently I am considering the 9950x, but I am unsure if it is worth the wait for the 9950x3D.

What surprised me is that the latest x3d CPU (9800x3d) beats the 9950x significantly in Stellaris turn simulation (which I imagine to be the most like FM benchmarks of the traditional CPU benchmarks)...So potentially there could be real advantage of the 3d cache for FM too? Though the 7800x3d does not seem to be that good for FM due to low core count.

[TopToffee]

On 10/11/2024 at 09:29, kevez27 said:

Thanks for these results mate

Can I ask a favour? Can you load up a night game in a large stadium and see how that affects the smoothness of graphics on high/very high please?

On my M1 MacBook Pro, the graphics are super smooth in the daylight matches but as soon as I have a night game with the black sky and floodlights, I get a lot of lag. I would be interested in seeing if this is still the case on the M4 models

Many thanks in advance for any testing you can do on this. Cheers.

Buttery smooth. There's a huge difference in power between the base M1 and the M4 Pro. Particularly graphically (roughly triple).

Edited November 18 by TopToffee

[kevez27]

On 18/11/2024 at 15:17, TopToffee said:

Buttery smooth. There's a huge difference in power between the base M1 and the M4 Pro. Particularly graphically (roughly triple).

Many thanks for the reply mate

I currently have the 16 inch M1 Pro MacBook Pro with 16 core GPU but really tempted to upgrade now 

[big daddy]

On 17/11/2024 at 16:42, caz said:

Would love to see if anyone has bought a 9800x3D, and who is running this benchmark....

I am upgrading my gaming pc "soon", and currently I am considering the 9950x, but I am unsure if it is worth the wait for the 9950x3D.

What surprised me is that the latest x3d CPU (9800x3d) beats the 9950x significantly in Stellaris turn simulation (which I imagine to be the most like FM benchmarks of the traditional CPU benchmarks)...So potentially there could be real advantage of the 3d cache for FM too? Though the 7800x3d does not seem to be that good for FM due to low core count.

Fm does not benefit from 3d cache, it is the cpu speed that matters. Therefore a 9950 x is better than a 9800x3d for fm.

 

[caz]

18 hours ago, big daddy said:

Fm does not benefit from 3d cache, it is the cpu speed that matters. Therefore a 9950 x is better than a 9800x3d for fm.

 

That would be my initial reaction as well....though it does seem a number of simulation and CPU bound titles also benefits from the 3d cache. Stellaris is the most used example in reviews/benchmarks.

But I went back to the previous resutls, and from there is does not look like the 7800x3d is significantly better than the non-x3d chips from same gen Ryzen CPUs....so seems to be more about number of cores and speed per core.

[yohanes1985]

On 14/11/2024 at 18:33, Bainsy said:

Type: Apple Mac Mini 
Model: Mac Mini M4 Base Model 
CPU Model: M4 10 Core
RAM: 16 GB
GPU: 10 Core
Graphics Level in 3D: High

Benchmark 1 - 36s
Benchmark 2 - 1m 43s
Benchmark 3 - 3m 18s
Benchmark 4 - 15m 50s

I just got Mac Mini M4 base model, here is my benchmark.

Type: Apple Mac Mini 
Model: Mac Mini M4 Base Model 
CPU Model: M4 10 Core
RAM: 16 GB
GPU: 10 Core
Graphics Level in 3D: Very High @1440p

Benchmark 1 - 25s
Benchmark 2 - 1m 19s
Benchmark 3 - 2m 30s
Benchmark 4 - 12m 19s

[Brother Ben]

5 minutes ago, yohanes1985 said:

I just got Mac Mini M4 base model, here is my benchmark.

Type: Apple Mac Mini 
Model: Mac Mini M4 Base Model 
CPU Model: M4 10 Core
RAM: 16 GB
GPU: 10 Core
Graphics Level in 3D: Very High @1440p

Benchmark 1 - 25s
Benchmark 2 - 1m 19s
Benchmark 3 - 2m 30s
Benchmark 4 - 12m 19s

Thanks Yohanes.  I wonder what @Bainsy is doing/not doing to get such a slower result.  Your timings are more in line with what I expected to be honest

[yohanes1985]

1 minute ago, Brother Ben said:

Thanks Yohanes.  I wonder what @Bainsy is doing/not doing to get such a slower result.  Your timings are more in line with what I expected to be honest

I ran Benchmark 1 three times, consistently got 25s
00:25.51
00:25.85
00:25.88

I Hope another Mac Mini M4 Base Model will share the results here...

[Brother Ben]

8 minutes ago, yohanes1985 said:

I ran Benchmark 1 three times, consistently got 25s
00:25.51
00:25.85
00:25.88

I Hope another Mac Mini M4 Base Model will share the results here...

Yep fingers crossed, like I said I think Bainsy probably has an issue with his, maybe he didn't restart or something similar

 

[Brother Ben]

 

Spreadsheet is updated   79 systems tested

Massive thanks to all involved.

If you spot any issues let me know.

 

 

Spreadsheet

(Contains full details, Cores, Ram speed, Graphics cards etc)

 

 

OVERVIEW - Handheld

 

 

OVERVIEW - Combined

 

---------------------------------------

 

--------------------------------------------------------

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 21 by Brother Ben

[Bainsy]

4 hours ago, Brother Ben said:

Thanks Yohanes.  I wonder what @Bainsy is doing/not doing to get such a slower result.  Your timings are more in line with what I expected to be honest

Strange, have ran benchmark 1 a few more times and still consistently getting 35 seconds. 

[Brother Ben]

44 minutes ago, Bainsy said:

Strange, have ran benchmark 1 a few more times and still consistently getting 35 seconds. 

I wonder what it can be then?  Maybe you should try other CPU benchmarks online to see how results compare to other M4 minis as there is a massive difference in these tests.  More than what I would consider a margin of error.   When you consider that they are exactly the same.  With a custom PC you could put it down to components or drivers maybe but its not the case here.

[yohanes1985]

10 hours ago, Bainsy said:

Strange, have ran benchmark 1 a few more times and still consistently getting 35 seconds. 

Benchmarks 1 and 3 are Single Threaded tests, the results are not far from the M4 Pro, this is why the M4 chip is special in single thread scores.
I ran Benchmark 1 three more times to make sure there were no errors, my worst result was 26 seconds, still quite fast.
00:25.62
00:25.91
00:26.24

[Brother Ben]

2 hours ago, yohanes1985 said:

Benchmarks 1 and 3 are Single Threaded tests, the results are not far from the M4 Pro, this is why the M4 chip is special in single thread scores.
I ran Benchmark 1 three more times to make sure there were no errors, my worst result was 26 seconds, still quite fast.
00:25.62
00:25.91
00:26.24

Thanks Yohanes. 

Yeah I think for most users the M4 Mini is great deal.  As has been said before I very much doubt many run, or indeed know about, running in full detail.  So yeah 1 & 3 are more relevant to your average user.

I'm sorely tempted to get one.  It's £500 with a student discount too.  Feel a bit bad blowing big money on myself just before Christmas though