The Space Shuttle used some x86’s, but I’d guess the majority of standalone probes and other chip bearing systems use something that doesn’t have the power sucking decoder of x86 chips.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Chip Supplier Hit by Intel Delay Ahead of 'A17 Bionic' Production in 2023
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Fair points but the writing is on the wall.I don’t doubt that AMD and Intel are locked in a back and forth, BUT there’s no real direct competition between what Apple’s doing and what AMD/Intel are doing. For every Dell that’s like “create chips that can compete relatively well with Apple”, Intel or AMD would reply, “OK! We can do that by next year, but it won’t run any of your old software” to which they will likely hear “Oh, ok, then just keep giving us the same old stuff but faster?” THAT they can do.And it’s not like Intel/AMD’s going to make a “special” chip JUST for Dell. Or, JUST for Lenovo. That HP system may be lacking in battery life due to poor efficiency, but it won’t materially affect sales because EVERY system will be lacking in battery life in exactly the same way! Luckily for Intel and AMD, Apple’s not out to hold the crown in single threaded or multithreaded benchmark performance, so one of them will ALWAYS be able to say “We have the best performing processor this quarter!”
AMD/Intel will make iterative slow steps to improve efficiency, but not threatening Apple, Apple will make iterative steps towards higher performance, but not threatening AMD/Intel.
Intel added E cores to its Alder Lake chips and same will be true with Raptor Lake (doubling the E core count) and future client Lakes.
Intel is also aiming to seriously improve the performance of its E cores with future lakes… Skymont, Darkmont. Why add E cores if performance per watt and efficiency was not on their mind during chip design? AMD is also rumored to introduce a hybrid chip based on Zen 5/Zen4… Strix Point. This might be laptop only but we will see.
If large customers like dell Lenovo hp are pushing them for more efficient chips that means those customers currently have an unmet need. A need that could be met by a merchant ARM vendor for the client market, if one were to emerge.
Qualcomm Nuvia is coming, we don’t yet know at what performance level, but if Qualcomm’s ARM chip is very efficient and high performance, then that is a threat to future sales of Intel and AMD x86 chips. If Qualcomm Nuvia does well, that could spur other ARM vendors to enter the ring… Mediatek for example. And since windows on arm is getting better and currently runs many x86_64 apps without need for modification, ARM could proliferate. I currently test windows on ARM (in a virtual machine), and many of my x86 programs work just fine… x86 programs that I compiled years ago work on windows on arm…without modification or the need for recompilation. Very surprising to me.
Apple’s financial success and experience with m1 and it’s progeny shows that end user customers care about efficiency and battery life. Apple’s success demonstrates that ARM could have a bright future. Apple’s success demonstrates that developers could code for ARM… if developers could develop for ARM on macOS, they could do the same on windows.
And the dell Lenovos HPs of the world have taken notice. Also, efficient ARM chips from companies like Ampere are doing well in the data center and it’s just a matter of time before ARM comes to the client market.
Therefore, the prudent course of action for the x86 vendors is to not remain complacent thinking that their de facto hegemony will remain in tact. The prudent course of action is to design and manufacture x86 chips that are as efficient as possible to head off the competitive threat posed by ARM.
Last edited:
Oh, I do agree that they’re adding E cores and they’re adding them to improve efficiency, but it’s more to compete against AMD. They’re not trying to beat Apple, they’re trying to beat AMD.
I agree that there is an impending threat, but it wouldn’t be pressure from Apple that’s causing it. It would be pressure from the performance gains realized by non-Apple vendors, like Qualcomm and others.
Due to the “backwards compatibility” focus of that market, though, how well any ARM solution performs is going to depend on how backwards compatible it is. Apps already stumbling over Intel’s feature lacking e-cores are likely to completely collapse with ARM cores.
There is definitely competition. But, due to the natve-OS gap (realized by Apple’s switch to Apple Silicon), there’s limited competition on the Apple side (competing essentially against themselves as they have been for years and years with their chip production efforts) and there’s growing competition on the non-Apple side, where AMD and Intel vie for preeminence as ARM newcomers may bring levels of efficiencies never before seen on non-Apple systems. Apple’s effectively no longer directly competing with anyone. If one wants a Mac, one get the performance Apple provides, no better no worse. If Intel performs better for what one needs to do, then one gets an Intel system. Fortunately for Apple, as has been mentioned here, most folks don’t need more than a phone processor’s level performance, so losing a few hundred to Intel still helps Apple maintain their 20-30 million a year Mac unit sales.
Rembrandt doesn't have poor single core performance.
Geekbench is not the only existing benchmark that tests single core prformance. In Cinebench R23 the 6900HS is actually slightly faster than the M2 in single core. Not to mention AMD's APUs offer really nice multicore performance especially VS Tiger Lake where the difference is often 40-50%.
Also the only way Intel bets AMD's 6000 series APUs is bey using way more power.
The fight between Intel and apple reminds me a lot about the fight between KODAK and Fujifilm...
KODAK once was the by far biggest company for imaging and film... until a new technology was of exploding interest in photography: The digital revolution.
Kodak was far too arrogant and did not approach radically to the digital revolution. Though some years before still the leader, they went bankrupt.
Fujifilm adapted himself radically and did not only survive, they are now stronger than before and took the path of diversification of products.
apple understood many years ago that their greedy ans arrogant chip-provider Intel did neither do more than just enough to stay rich nor invest in future-proof technology - while Intel only produced more or less only just the same product with tiny bit of more performance.
so, apple consequently invested themselves in future-proof technology.
Now, they are going to get one of the big leaders in development of highly-integrated and super-performing chips and offer the best energy-efficient chips in the industry. Which will become more and more important if we want that our children and grand-children will have a life that is worth the word "life" ... and energy efficiency will even get more and more simply an economic factor for customers since price for energy will know only one direction: more and more expensive.
Another analogy is the fight between the industrial leader IBM and a joung man who founded an enterprise called "Microsoft"....
bottom-line:
Intel stays on its path to more and more problems... they are about to fail and to lose...
regarding TSMC apple should and will surely support TSMC as they did already in the past to fight against the growing dominance of Samsung. Maybe this is the chance for stronger and more advanced cooperation of both companies. If one looks at the step of apple in the R&D of chip development, it seems only a logical further step for apple to enter with a further step into chip production...
KODAK once was the by far biggest company for imaging and film... until a new technology was of exploding interest in photography: The digital revolution.
Kodak was far too arrogant and did not approach radically to the digital revolution. Though some years before still the leader, they went bankrupt.
Fujifilm adapted himself radically and did not only survive, they are now stronger than before and took the path of diversification of products.
apple understood many years ago that their greedy ans arrogant chip-provider Intel did neither do more than just enough to stay rich nor invest in future-proof technology - while Intel only produced more or less only just the same product with tiny bit of more performance.
so, apple consequently invested themselves in future-proof technology.
Now, they are going to get one of the big leaders in development of highly-integrated and super-performing chips and offer the best energy-efficient chips in the industry. Which will become more and more important if we want that our children and grand-children will have a life that is worth the word "life" ... and energy efficiency will even get more and more simply an economic factor for customers since price for energy will know only one direction: more and more expensive.
Another analogy is the fight between the industrial leader IBM and a joung man who founded an enterprise called "Microsoft"....
bottom-line:
Intel stays on its path to more and more problems... they are about to fail and to lose...
regarding TSMC apple should and will surely support TSMC as they did already in the past to fight against the growing dominance of Samsung. Maybe this is the chance for stronger and more advanced cooperation of both companies. If one looks at the step of apple in the R&D of chip development, it seems only a logical further step for apple to enter with a further step into chip production...
Last edited: