Apple Plans to Ditch Intel and Use Custom Mac Chips Starting in 2020

[LordVic]

And Parallels or Fusion won’t allow you to do so?

for clarity since it's probably not necessarily known.

Virtual Machines (Parallels) does not emulate hardware. it uses Virtualization technology built into the CPU's. you still require running compatible software with the x86 platform.

essentially with Virtualization, the "virtual software" does nothing more than provide a "sandbox" to run a different operating system in, with direct access to hardware resources it needs. (there is some overhead performance loss, but it's minor today)

What Parallels would require doing is running something called emulation for an ARM chip to run x86 software. Emulation is essentially the CPU Pretending to be something else. this is often extremely costly from a performance standpoint since it generally requires translation between the instruction sets.

 

[Glockworkorange]

They might find a solution. Remember there is a new version of Windows for ARM. That one emulates a 32-bit x86 chip, though. Perhaps Apple can license technology from AMD and/or Intel to maintain compatibility but wants more control over the feature set.

I think this is right. Chrome can run on ARM, Windows can run on ARM (and in two years, I am sure the kinks will be ironed out)--why shouldn't MacOs run on ARM? Perhaps in the next two years, the chips will be powerful enough to drive an iMac. Now, for the really heavy stuff and gaming, perhaps they'll stay with intel for awhile, but these ARM chips do have some crazy power.

 

[Analog Kid]

I get the feeling someone misunderstood something along the line-- I doubt they're dumping Intel as the workhorse, but I wouldn't be surprised to see more Apple designed coprocessors and such included.

Also worth remembering that Apple had an Intel build of OS X running for years with no real plans to transition-- it was just a smart backup plan.

I hated the move away from PowerPC. I hated seeing personal computing become a monoculture. I also think Steve was sold a bill of goods-- I don't think the roadmap that Intel pitched him ever materialized.

That said, I don't think it turned out badly for Apple, and probably turned out to be a net positive. I haven't run Windows on my Mac for years, but there's comfort in knowing I can do so-- especially in a work environment.

If they really do want to go it alone, I feel like it would be a lot smarter to buy AMD and take control of the roadmap but maintain compatibility.

If nothing else though, it's good to shake Intel's stock price a bit and remind them we're important.

 

[dirt_farmer]

I think this is right. Chrome can run on ARM, Windows can run on ARM (and in two years, I am sure the kinks will be ironed out)--why shouldn't MacOs run on ARM? Perhaps in the next two years, the chips will be powerful enough to drive an iMac. Now, for the really heavy stuff and gaming, perhaps they'll stay with intel for awhile, but these ARM chips do have some crazy power.

You have this backwards.

Windows has been shipping on ARM since 2012 -- and has run fine the entire time.

People won't buy it because a) devs won't write apps for a platform with little to no penetration, and b) MS tried to make it a walled garden where all apps were only curated by them.

Sound familiar?

 

[LordVic]

If they really do want to go it alone, I feel like it would be a lot smarter to buy AMD and take control of the roadmap but maintain compatibility.

IIRC, if AMD gets sold, they lose the x86 license. So would have the same end result as designing their own CPU's based around ARM at this point.

AMD also has turned around their finances since RyZen has been launched. not sure if the asking price would be worth it for Apple now, especially considering the above

 

[0388631]

Except in Apple hardware. In Apple hardware, Apple cripples Intel CPUs so that Apple's other products won't look so bad. Now, Apple calls it a feature to improve battery life. But call it what you will, it still results in lower performance, which Apple, for some reason, thinks is an extremely important part of the design.

What? What Intel processor have they crippled to save battery life? Or are you referring to the iPhone, that doesn't use an Intel processor at all and was the one product affected by their induced crippling to preserve battery life?

 

[Little Endian]

To everyone complaining about slow emulation speeds.... We have come a very long way since the days of slow emulation like we had on PowerPC emulating x86 circa 15-20 years ago. Even back 12 years ago during the switch from PowerPC to Intel emulation speeds were vastly improved. look back at bencmarks from that era and you will find that most PowerPC software ran just fine on Intel with usually only a 20-30% drop in performance. If Apple can build processors as fast as the extremely thermaly constrained ones they do now it would be quite interesting what they may be able to do with a full feature processor design.

People have complained about the same concerns back when Apple made the move from 68k to PowerPC and then From PowerPC to Intel. Apple is still around and is the only PC maker than can do these complete 180 degree maneuvers yet still survive and thrive. Yes Intel may be the industry leader but they did not always have the best designs or best performing chips. During various points in time the PowerPC consortium and AMD have had better performing chips than Intel.

 

[Glockworkorange]

You have this backwards.

Windows has been shipping on ARM since 2012 -- and has run fine the entire time.

People won't buy it because a) devs won't write apps for a platform with little to no penetration, and b) MS tried to make it a walled garden where all apps were only curated by them.

Sound familiar?

I'm not referring to Windows RT. I'm referring to Windows 10 x86 applications running on ARM laptops (and not the gimped version that runs on Surface Laptop). There was no Windows 10 in 2012.

Here---it's emulation but still Windows 10 on ARM: http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-debuts-windows-10-on-arm/

 

[0388631]

IIRC, if AMD gets sold, they lose the x86 license. So would have the same end result as designing their own CPU's based around ARM at this point.

AMD also has turned around their finances since RyZen has been launched. not sure if the asking price would be worth it for Apple now, especially considering the above

Actually, in theory, if AMD were sold, Intel would *have* to make a new deal with the new owners or face the system like they did many years ago.

 

[Regime2008]

And you know how?........

History shows that apple is a slug compared to the industry.

 

[LordVic]

What? What Intel processor have they crippled to save battery life? Or are you referring to the iPhone, that doesn't use an Intel processor at all and was the one product affected by their induced crippling to preserve battery life?

not sure if the current MacBook Pro's are throttling. once i saw what they were and price i said "Nope"

But they have had problems in other devices with thermal throttling due to "form over function". the i7-7700k iMac is notorious for thermal throttling under heavy load. (I've heard the iMac Pro's have a new thermal design to avoid this)

the MacBook's also thermal throttle under sustained load due to no fans.

The user you were posting was being hyperbolic, but it is a fctor with several of their devices in the past

 

[Falhófnir]

Think this was the evident direction of travel, Apple are moving in house for more and more - as they are excelling in chipsets this is a pretty logical move. Hopefully intel can still be involved in fabrication, they undoubtedly are still a step ahead of the competition in that regard. I’m pretty excited about what they could achieve if their Mac chipsets are as good as their iOS ones...

 

[DNichter]

...which do not fully support quite a number of applications, run them only at severe costs of performance, or cannot run them at all.

Today

 

[Glockworkorange]

But they have had problems in other devices with thermal throttling due to "form over function"

Cough.. cough...Mac Pro...cough...cough

 

[LordVic]

Actually, in theory, if AMD were sold, Intel would *have* to make a new deal with the new owners or face the system like they did many years ago.

why would they HAVE to. they might want to, but i'm not sure if there's any legal requirement to do so.

They could very well say "now you're competing with us, we dont want to, so, no license for you".

I admit, there could be mroe to the contract that i'm not privy to or aware of. But it's a risk that would need to be considered in such a buyout of AMD

 

[citysnaps]

MacBook Pro i7-7820HQ replace by i7-8650u

That's hardly an upgrade. For an incremental boost in max turbo clock speed (and a hit on base cpu speed) you give up max memory, graphics performance, bus speed, graphics max memory. It is lower power, though, as one would expect with the hits it incurs.

If Apple updated with that cpu, many here would slam the choice.

Overall, Intel creates different mixes of processor/graphics/memory/I/O capability, but overall performance increases has been mediocre.

 

[LordVic]

Cough.. cough...Mac Pro...cough...cough

the amount of times i forget about the Mac Pro, you'd think i worked for Apple.
[doublepost=1522709245][/doublepost]

That's hardly an upgrade. For an incremental boost in max turbo clock speed (and a hit on base cpu speed) you give up max memory, graphics performance, bus speed, graphics max memory. It is lower power, though, as one would expect with the hits it incurs.

If Apple updated with that cpu, many here would slam the choice.

https://ark.intel.com/products/124968/Intel-Core-i7-8650U-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz

in Thoery the HQ can handle 64. But Apple isn't currently providing 64gb as an option, so it's Moot.

 

[Glockworkorange]

the amount of times i forget about the Mac Pro, you'd think i worked for Apple.
[doublepost=1522709245][/doublepost]

max memory is the same between CPUs (32gb)

Ouch!

 

[dirt_farmer]

I'm not referring to Windows RT. I'm referring to Windows 10 x86 applications running on ARM laptops (and not the gimped version that runs on Surface Laptop). There was no Windows 10 in 2012.

Here---it's emulation but still Windows 10 on ARM: http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-debuts-windows-10-on-arm/

There has been Windows on ARM shipping continuously since 2012. It was called Windows 8 back then, just like OS X was called Mountain Lion / 10.8.

Whatever you call it, full Windows has shipped on ARM devices for >half a decade. Nobody buys these devices.

MS are writing an emulation layer as yet another attempt to drive adoption. But there's nothing new about Windows on ARM.

 

[DNichter]

You have this backwards.

Windows has been shipping on ARM since 2012 -- and has run fine the entire time.

People won't buy it because a) devs won't write apps for a platform with little to no penetration, and b) MS tried to make it a walled garden where all apps were only curated by them.

Sound familiar?

If only Apple could turn that approach into a success somehow.

 

[Analog Kid]

IIRC, if AMD gets sold, they lose the x86 license. So would have the same end result as designing their own CPU's based around ARM at this point.

AMD also has turned around their finances since RyZen has been launched. not sure if the asking price would be worth it for Apple now, especially considering the above

Ah, didn't know about the poison pill...

That's a problem.

 

[citysnaps]

max memory is the same between CPUs (32gb)

Nope. 64 GB on the 7820, assuming the correct memory type is used. There are tradeoffs with that, though.

 

[Glockworkorange]

There has been Windows on ARM shipping continuously since 2012. It was called Windows 8 back then, just like OS X was called Mountain Lion / 10.8.

Whatever you call it, full Windows has shipped on ARM devices for >half a decade. Nobody buys these devices.

MS are writing an emulation layer as yet another attempt to drive adoption. But there's nothing new about Windows on ARM.

Then forget the timing---my point is that I do not feel it is unreasonable to see Apple moving their OS to ARM, as others have done.

If you want to dive in the weeds and pick, pick, pick, that's fine, but the larger point is that it's not unreasonable to see Apple moving in that direction.

And the more powerful the ARM chips get, the better the software will run, irrespective of platform.
[doublepost=1522709480][/doublepost]

If only Apple could turn that approach into a success somehow.

Lol

 

[DaveP]

For those who have been around for a while: G5 Powerbooks on Tuesday.

 

[dirt_farmer]

If only Apple could turn that approach into a success somehow.

Yes, I hope that they do.

From where I'm sitting it's not looking likely.