cmaier
Suspended
At double the power and nearly twice the clock frequency (with 14 cores, in fact) they manage to tie M1 Max in single and multi-core. Not exactly a great showing.
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 Silicon Roadmap Based on 18-Month Upgrade Cycle, Claims Report
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
At double the power and nearly twice the clock frequency (with 14 cores, in fact) they manage to tie M1 Max in single and multi-core. Not exactly a great showing.
False
First of all, Intel is 7nm while M1 Max is 5nm. You are totally ignoring the manufacturing process between Intel and TSMC and Apple has one step advantage.
Second, 12900K was able to achieve 44W with better performance. Where do you even get results?
cmaier
Suspended
That’s dumb .First of all, you don’t buy a computer because of the design node - you buy it for what it can do.
Second of all, Intel 7nm has nearly identical design rules to TSMC 5nm. The name of the process is meaningless.
Thirdly, the numbers are for Alder lake mobile, and are posted in other threads on here. The “35W” you cite for intel is not the actual number, by the way. That’s Intel’s marketing number, whereas the actual number is double that.
First of all, there are advantages of using the design node which brings you better performance by watt. You are totally ignoring those advantages that Apple is taking from. People buy better process for better performance. Do you really wanna use 14nm then?
Second, Intel already changed their naming such as 10nm to 7nm in order to match with TSMC which you are not aware of. Intel's 5nm is TSMC 5nm. I thought you know this, huh? 12nm Alder Lake is based on 7nm process and Intel's 5nm is not yet released.
Third, that was an actual number tested by a YouTube on live video. I dont see your proofs at all.
Last edited by a moderator:
cmaier
Suspended
The thread I referred to is here: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/mobile-alder-lake-i9-geekbench-result.2328268/
Your second point is false. You’re simply making that up. In any event, as I said, TSMC 5nm gate pitch, metal pitch, min width, etc. is nearly identical to Intel 7nm.
As for your first point - what? If I can get the same performance from an Intel 7nm or a TSMC 5nm, why would the consumer care? At equivalent design rules, Intel’s processors simply can’t come close to competing at performance/watt with Apple’s.
Intel details new process innovations and node names, Alder Lake 10 nm Enhanced SuperFin is now Intel 7; Intel 20A is the 2 nm process for 2024
During the Intel Accelerated event, the company said that it will be moving to a more streamlined process nomenclature starting with Alder Lake, which will be part of Intel 7 followed by Intel 4 Meteor Lake in 2022/23. Intel also announced plans of entering into the Angstrom scale process with...
Intel May Rename its 7nm Process Node to 5nm to Highlight Similarity w/ TSMC's 5nm EUV Process | Hardware Times
Intel is finally expected to make the shift to its 10nm node later this year in the volume market with Ice Lake-SP and Alder Lake-S after nearly six years of 14nm lineups. Although the naming convention dictates that the Intel 10nm node should be behind TSMC’s 7nm in terms of density...
www.hardwaretimes.com
Intel renames process nodes to mirror Taiwan's TSMC | Taiwan News | Jul. 27, 2021 15:29
Intel's third-generation 10 nm chips rebranded ‘Intel 7' | Jul. 27, 2021 15:29
Nanometer no more: Intel changes its process names to match TSMC
Promising to "innovate with the magic of silicon" Intel is pushing towards the sub-1nm 'angstrom era of semiconductors'.
False, you are the one who is making that up. What, 12th gen Alder lake is false then? Are you kidding or what?
Intel 7nm(new name) is TSMC 7nm. Do you even read any news at all? The node density between Intel 7nm(old 10nm) is almost identical to TSMC 7nm. Clearly, you dont even have proofs at all instead of making things up. Intel 10nm is now Intel 7 or 7nm and they already renamed previous 7nm to Intel 5 or 5nm to match with TSMC 5nm and I have an article. INTEL RENAMDE THEIR PRCOESS. I have no idea where do you even get those kind of false info. Where does it even say Intel 7nm is identical or similar to TSMC 5nm? NO ONE BUT YOU. Intel 7nm = TSMC 7nm and therefore, Apple is taking advantages from better process.
And that's because Apple is using 5nm while Intel is using 7nm. Simple. If Intel bring 5nm, then it's a fair comparison, but not now.
Last edited:
cmaier
Suspended
Intel details new process innovations and node names, Alder Lake 10 nm Enhanced SuperFin is now Intel 7; Intel 20A is the 2 nm process for 2024
During the Intel Accelerated event, the company said that it will be moving to a more streamlined process nomenclature starting with Alder Lake, which will be part of Intel 7 followed by Intel 4 Meteor Lake in 2022/23. Intel also announced plans of entering into the Angstrom scale process with...www.notebookcheck.net
Intel May Rename its 7nm Process Node to 5nm to Highlight Similarity w/ TSMC's 5nm EUV Process | Hardware Times
Intel is finally expected to make the shift to its 10nm node later this year in the volume market with Ice Lake-SP and Alder Lake-S after nearly six years of 14nm lineups. Although the naming convention dictates that the Intel 10nm node should be behind TSMC’s 7nm in terms of density...Intel renames process nodes to mirror Taiwan's TSMC | Taiwan News | Jul. 27, 2021 15:29
Intel's third-generation 10 nm chips rebranded ‘Intel 7' | Jul. 27, 2021 15:29www.taiwannews.com.tw
Nanometer no more: Intel changes its process names to match TSMC
Promising to "innovate with the magic of silicon" Intel is pushing towards the sub-1nm 'angstrom era of semiconductors'.www.pcgamer.com
False, you are the one who is making that up. 12th gen Alder lake is false then? Are you kidding or what? Intel 7nm is TSMC 7nm. Do you even read any news at all? The node density between Intel 7nm(old 10nm) is almost identical to TSMC 7nm. Clearly, you dont even have proofs at all instead of making things up. Intel 10nm is now Intel 7 or 7nm and they already renamed previous 7nm to Intel 5 or 5nm to match with TSMC 5nm and I have an article. INTEL RENAMDE THEIR PRCOESS. I have no idea where do you even get those kind of false info. Where does it even say Intel 7nm is identical or similar to TSMC 5nm? NO ONE BUT YOU.
And that's because Apple is using 5nm while Intel is using 7nm. Simple.
You are confusing things. You said “7nm” which means “7nm.” That’s different than the process names (“Intel 7” - no “nm”) that Intel will be using going forward.
And density is not what matters, because no logic chip uses the maximum process density - they are all constrained by wire pitch and width. Only RAMs are constrained by process density, and we aren’t talking about RAMs.
Nor does any of this matter - your premise that Intel is somehow caught up with Apple is just plain wrong. You don’t grade on a curve - either a processor keeps up or it doesn’t. And Intel needs 5GHz and 14 cores to match M1 Max (if it even can match it), and pays the attendant power penalty for that lack of progress.
It's a same thing. Alder lake which is based on Intel 7 is 7nm. An old 10nm becomes Intel 7 or 7nm. I've been saying the same thing since the beginning. Is is really difficult to understand? Intel 7 or 7nm is identical to TSMC 7nm as they renamed their line ups in order to match with TSMC and I already included articles. READ FIRST.
Since Intel 7nm = TSMC 7nm, Apple is def taking advantages from 5nm as Intel is not using 5nm. You are totally wrong about the process and yet making unfair comparison with M1 Max which is using 5nm. Apple is already well known for taking the most advanced process among other companies.
Since you didnt even know that Intel 7 is 7nm, you are logically false. Comparing M1 Max with 5nm to Alder lake with 7nm is such a unfair test and it's quite laughable. It's a same thing that you are comparing TSMC 7nm to TSMC 5nm.
Last edited:
Wait, is it 2023 ALREADY?
Intel's 7nm PC Chip To Arrive in 2023 Next to TSMC-Made CPU
The strategy allows Intel to release competitive products using manufacturing from rival foundries as it plays catch-up in the chip wars.
Too bad, old news.Wait, is it 2023 ALREADY?
Intel's 7nm PC Chip To Arrive in 2023 Next to TSMC-Made CPU
The strategy allows Intel to release competitive products using manufacturing from rival foundries as it plays catch-up in the chip wars.www.pcmag.com
It’s current. According to YOUR links. What Intel used to call 10nm, they’re now calling Intel 7. And, what they used to call 7nm, they’re now calling Intel 4. So…
This is incorrect (in a couple ways) BUT I don’t blame you. It appears Intel may have been playing fast and loose with designations this year. For example, there’s currently no processors listed in Intel’s ARK that are designated “Alder Lake” so a designation that doesn’t exist can’t be based on a lithography that does.
CWallace
macrumors G5
Thank you, Mods, for suspending the Intel marketing intern so they stopped polluting the thread.
And thank you, cmaier, for continuing to use your direct knowledge and experience to educate those of us interested in learning.
And thank you, cmaier, for continuing to use your direct knowledge and experience to educate those of us interested in learning.
As iMac 24” was a little “slow” getting M1 in, 6 months later than Air, is it still a good time to buy an M1 iMac now?
I presume they won’t update it for a while, even if M2 comes in spring ‘22 as have to update other Mac’s first, 27” one particularly?
I presume they won’t update it for a while, even if M2 comes in spring ‘22 as have to update other Mac’s first, 27” one particularly?
southerndoc
Contributor
Reviving an old thread here... Wish Apple would align the Mx lineup so that when things are updating (M2, M3, etc.), all hardware lines are updated (Pro, Max, and Ultra) at the same time.
Abazigal
Contributor
My guess is to spread out demand and manufacturing capacity. They don’t want a scenario where they update all their hardware at one go and face extreme supply bottlenecks and everyone is clamouring to upgrade all at the same time. And then your factories go under-utilised for the other of the year as demand peters out.
I'd prefer Apple aligned the 19.5 month Mac chip refresh cycle with the 12 month iPhone chip cycle.
So that their CPU, GPU, Neural Engine, Media Engine and Neural Engine cores would align to the same generation.
- Sep: iPhone chips
- Q4/Q1: M chips
- Q2/Q3: Pro & Max chips
- Q3: Ultra & Extreme chips
More people buying means more R&D spend on macOS support lasting a decade and better improvements on the next Mac you buy 4-6 years from purchase.
Unless of course you want to suffer like 2012, 2019 and 2023 Mac Pro users who had to wait that long for PCIe slots.
For Mac, I’m not sure that’s the driving force for the breaks between the different sub-chips within each M cycle.
Most people keep a Mac for 3-4 years minimum and most people only buy one in that period. So someone buying an M2 MacBook Air in Q2 is not going to be the same person looking for a M2 Pro MacBook Pro in Q4.
The breaks will mostly be about supply chain and evening out the demand caused by new product launches into stores and delivery partners. Logistically and operationally, it’s easier to manage.
Boil
macrumors 68040
A slight change, since the Mn Max is the base for two other SoCs...?
- September
- A-series
- iPhone
- iPhone Pro
- iPhone Pro Max
- iPhone Ultra
- iPhone Ultra Max
- iPad mini
- iPad
- Q4/Q1
- Mn/Mn Pro
- iPad Air
- iPad Pro
- iPad Studio
- Vision Pro
- 13" MacBook Air
- 15" MacBook Air
- Mac mini
- 24" iMac
- Q2/Q3
- Mn Max/Mn Ultra/Mn Extreme
- 16" MacBook Pro
- 18" MacBook Pro
- Mac Studio
- Mac Cube
- Mac Pro
Last edited:
I feel it unlikely Apple would do it that simply. They need to fill in fab capacity at over 90% throughput as they're paying for the time. Hence the M chip Macs being spread out over the quarters.
Also positioning the MBP that late belays their importance to Apple.
After the MBA, MBP 13" & Mac mini it is often the MBP 14"/16" with M Pro and M Max chips that gets refreshed soon after.
Oh goodness... when will Apple bring back the larger iMac M2 & M2 Pro chips. I have the $1799 or $2499 ready already!