Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
To those insulting Intel, please stop! The product managers on M1 recently said in an interview they still have a great relationship with the company. Also, keep in mind, Apple is still selling products with Intel in it and will continue to support existing Intel products. They sold 9 million Intel Macs this past quarter.

Also, take a page out of Steve Jobs book, in 1997, when people in the audience were booing Bill Gates on the big screen, Steve turned around and rebuked those same people in the audience. You want Office for Mac, yet you are booing the developer it.

Steve would do the same here, you can't bite the hand thats likely feeding you right now, since I last checked, PowerPC Macs don't do a great job accessing Macrumors. So, I'm sure some of you must be using an Intel Mac to access the site.

Be gracious and respectful, it did what it needed to do and it just reached a limit, doesn't mean we need to be nasty about it and for most, its still a great architecture for the Mac.
 
Do you think it’s possible for Apple to move the memory out of the package and allow user replaceable memory?

It’s certainly possible. No technical reason they couldn’t do it. But I doubt they will (other than, perhaps, for Mac Pro-destined machines). Of course, even for those machines they could keep a bunch of DRAM in the package and use it as an L3 cache :)
 
To those insulting Intel, please stop! The product managers on M1 recently said in an interview they still have a great relationship with the company. Also, keep in mind, Apple is still selling products with Intel in it and will continue to support existing Intel products. They sold 9 million Intel Macs this past quarter.

Also, take a page out of Steve Jobs book, in 1997, when people in the audience were booing Bill Gates on the big screen, Steve turned around and rebuked those same people in the audience. You want Office for Mac, yet you are booing the developer it.

Steve would do the same here, you can't bite the hand thats likely feeding you right now, since I last checked, PowerPC Macs don't do a great job accessing Macrumors. So, I'm sure some of you must be using an Intel Mac to access the site.

Be gracious and respectful, it did what it needed to do and it just reached a limit, doesn't mean we need to be nasty about it and for most, its still a great architecture for the Mac.

Those are all good reasons why Apple should not insult Intel.

But none of those are reasons why *I* should not insult Intel.
 
How the heck is Apple so far ahead in performance? It's incredible how much of a lead they have it's like alien technology.
Because they cheat and manipulate. Sadly, but true. I wouldn't doubt they used some AMD circuity in the design. No way an ARM is faster than an intel at this stage. If thats the case, then my iPhone 11 is faster than my 2010 Mac Pro.
 
this gives hope that if they modify Rosetta 2 so the hyper visor framework uses it, we might yet get usable windows on Apple silicon. That'd be freakin' cool.
 
Those are all good reasons why Apple should not insult Intel.

But none of those are reasons why *I* should not insult Intel.
Sorry, but you are in a very tiny minority of users who believe Intel Macs are not meeting their needs. But it has been for the past 15 years for many. I'm sure Jonathan Morris, MKBHD are not losing sleep using their Intel Macs to cut unboxing videos. Your views really part of what is defined as the Steve Urkle tech bubble. Karen in H&R could care less if its M1 or Intel, as long as she can open that budgeting Excel spreadsheet, type her reports in Google Docs, have meetings in Teams, watch her favorite series on Netflix and whiten those coffee stained teeth in Photos.

Thats the majority, thats the 9 million Intel Macs.

This is Apples core target audience and this represents the majority of Mac users.

Screen Shot 2020-11-15 at 8.02.09 PM.png

Yes, M1 is a exciting step forward for personal computers. But again, it doesn't make what we have today and still have to use less beneficial.
 
Karen in H&R could care less if its M1 or Intel, as long as she can open that budgeting Excel spreadsheet, type her reports in Google Docs, have meetings in Teams, watch her favorite series on Netflix and whiten those coffee stained teeth in Photos.

Thats the majority, thats the 9 million Intel Macs.
You do have a point.
 
Sorry, but you are in a very tiny minority of users who believe Intel Macs are not meeting their needs. But it has been for the past 15 years for many. I'm sure Jonathan Morris, MKBHD are not losing sleep using their Intel Macs to cut unboxing videos. Your views really part of what is defined as the Steve Urkle tech bubble. Karen in H&R could care less if its M1 or Intel, as long as she can open that budgeting Excel spreadsheet, type her reports in Google Docs, have meetings in Teams, watch her favorite series on Netflix and whiten those coffee stained teeth in Photos.

Thats the majority, thats the 9 million Intel Macs.

This is Apples core target audience and this represents the majority of Mac users.

View attachment 1668801

Yes, M1 is a exciting step forward for personal computers. But again, it doesn't make what we have today and still have to use less beneficial.

You changed the subject.

None of us owes Intel anything other than the money we pay computer makers which ends up going to Intel for their chips. If we want to insult Intel, we are perfectly within our rights to do so. And the fact that they have to keep adding “+” suffixes to their process nodes gives us plenty of good fodder.


p.s.: i don’t know who any of the names you listed in your post above are, and i don’t care.
 
Because they cheat and manipulate. Sadly, but true. I wouldn't doubt they used some AMD circuity in the design. No way an ARM is faster than an intel at this stage. If thats the case, then my iPhone 11 is faster than my 2010 Mac Pro.


(P.S.: I designed CPUs at AMD. Nothing special about their circuitry.)
 
Apple does sell an Intel-based 13” MBP that supports & can be upgraded to 32GB RAM. They have since early this year.
Actually ntil last year there were still 13"MBP with a maximum of 16GB RAM:


I expect the higher end 13" (14"?) that fill the $1700 zone between the cheaper 13" and the 16" to come with the higher end M chip and higher max RAM.

Because they cheat and manipulate. Sadly, but true. I wouldn't doubt they used some AMD circuity in the design. No way an ARM is faster than an intel at this stage. If thats the case, then my iPhone 11 is faster than my 2010 Mac Pro.

Dude you have a guy here that worked designing CPUs, yet you just choose to omit what he says. And yeah, your iPhone 11 is 3x faster than your 2010 Mac Pro in single core, and in multicore aswell if your Mac Pro is the 8 core version. You can check it yourself with a quick search.
 
Like with the Intel transition, it is going to be an interesting few years. When we are a couple of generations in and more software is properly native, and the general specs are a bit upgraded, it will be pretty tempting to re-enter the Mac market! Last seen on Snow Leopard. The speeds out the gate are impressive, but I think what comes next is going to be the kicker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cdcastillo
Ya know, your attitude is the worst.
Either that or you don't know what "doubt" means or, very likely can't simply handle criticism of Apple.

There's nothing wrong, at all, with doubting a company or someone. There's still plenty of doubt to be had.

Further, failing to virtualize x86 is not insignificant. Software, in the real world, isn't always $0.99 from the store on Macs. It can be very expensive. Asking people to pay for it twice? That's.. a tough pill to swallow and Apple needs to offer something huge in return. Or risk people jumping to Microsoft.

When you force people to jump into a new ecosystem -- then their options to jump into ANY ecosystem because possible and reasonable. It's a very risky move.

There's always the option of buying a $100 Intel Compute stick for that "10% Windows" workload – and accessing that via RDP.
 
stop making us wait and spend all our money. Make a M1 chip that runs at 4.5 to 5 gigahertz
you know that's the brick wall
can't make a faster chip in anything because it requires water cooling. HEAT. TOO MUCH HEAT.

M1 only 3.2 gigahertz
 
Because they cheat and manipulate. Sadly, but true. I wouldn't doubt they used some AMD circuity in the design. No way an ARM is faster than an intel at this stage. If thats the case, then my iPhone 11 is faster than my 2010 Mac Pro.
You sound like a certain President who's been on the news recently.... :)

It is your assertion that it is impossible for the Apple M1 to be faster than the Intel chips they replace (and those found in more expensive machines).

Let us see your supporting evidence for this belief.

Early evidence from Geekbench (still be corroborated) seems to show that the M1 is indeed faster than all Intel and AMD CPUs at the same power (TDP), and may well exceed many CPUs that use a lot more power, including the 8-core i9 in the MBP16. https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/search?page=2&q=Apple+Silicon

Presumably, you are aware that patents and intellectual property rights exist and are protected by law, and that there will be intense scrutiny on the design of the M1, that would reveal plagiarism of said patents and IP. This would be a very risky proposition indeed for Apple. You would need to provide some evidence to support the use of AMD's proprietary designs in an Apple-designed SoC.

We can find plenty of benchmarks comparing iPad / iPhone performance to Intel/AMD laptop & desktop CPUs and in many cases beating the latter in real-world tests (browser benchmarks and video encoding being two examples).

You appear to be in denial of what is a soon-to-be-proven reality.

I'm happy to reserve judgement until I've seen some thorough testing, but you might want to do some reading on AnandTech and other reputable sources to get yourself prepared for the shock to your system.
 
Last edited:
This is crazy performance. Too bad there's only 16 GB RAM max for now ...

That's because the first Macs rolled out with the M1 were desktops and laptops that maxed at 16 GB anyway.

MacBook Air. Entry-level MacBook Pro (the two port version, reintroduced as entry-level that maxed at 16 GB). Mac Mini. Rene Ritchie had a point: there is a reason that the M1 version is silver and the Intel version (which they still sell) remains space gray.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage
There's always the option of buying a $100 Intel Compute stick for that "10% Windows" workload – and accessing that via RDP.
If you're going to do that, then just spin up an Azure or AWS instance for the time you need the app. You can get a lot hours of usage for your $100 and don't have to worry about installation, updates, security etc.
 
Like with the Intel transition, it is going to be an interesting few years. When we are a couple of generations in and more software is properly native, and the general specs are a bit upgraded, it will be pretty tempting to re-enter the Mac market! Last seen on Snow Leopard. The speeds out the gate are impressive, but I think what comes next is going to be the kicker.

Agreed. I am very excited about weird form factor machines - apple can finally stop saying “what can we build with this class of Intel processor” and start saying “what processor do we need to build this crazy new machine?”

We *will* eventually get Apple Pencil support, 5G support, faceid, touch, etc., but i think we will all be surprised by new computing form factors coming from apple.

I mean, just think about Apple TV with an m1-style chip in it - will Apple finally try (post-Pippin) to compete with consoles for real?
 
stop making us wait and spend all our money. Make a M1 chip that runs at 4.5 to 5 gigahertz
you know that's the brick wall
can't make a faster chip in anything because it requires water cooling. HEAT. TOO MUCH HEAT.

M1 only 3.2 gigahertz
My basic understanding is that higher frequency requires higher voltage, and power usage increases by the square of the voltage. I'm sure there are other limiting effects of running at higher frequencies, but power must be a big one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage
My basic understanding is that higher frequency requires higher voltage, and power usage increases by the square of the voltage. I'm sure there are other limiting effects of running at higher frequencies, but power must be a big one.
Yep. At a given voltage you have a range of possible frequencies, but to get faster than that you need to increase the voltage so that the rate that signals change from 1’s to 0’s (or vice versa) is faster, allowing signals to change completely within the time permitted by the clock.

And P = CfV^2
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage
Because they cheat and manipulate. Sadly, but true. I wouldn't doubt they used some AMD circuity in the design. No way an ARM is faster than an intel at this stage. If thats the case, then my iPhone 11 is faster than my 2010 Mac Pro.
Maybe you should watch this video, pretty impressive about what the A14 is capable of doing. The M1 is even more powerful than the A14. Apple is shattering the old ideas of how CPUs are designed and their power requirements.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Spock1234
But what are all the Apple-haters and Me-doubters going to complain about if that’s the case?

Oh, I know. They’ll fall back to “but it doesn’t virtualize x86.”

Anyway, that’s actually more of a Rosetta-speed hit than I expected, but we’ll see when we get real world data.
Absolutely non upgradable Macs?

‘because these 3 are absolute disposable appliances.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.