Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Silicon: The Complete Guide

I know this is not the focus of this article, but does anyone know why Apple has not tried out AMD chips yet? The Zen 2 architecture, especially for the highend server processors are just insane. 64 cores and 128 threads on a mac pro? Yes please! And it would still be x86 so the rework would be small.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BOOMBA, FairlyKors and The Mercurian
Check out The Verge’s review of Microsoft’s ARM computer - hardly any software works on it so there’s little chance of Apple completely ditching Intel any time soon
 
  • Like
Reactions: jb-net
Can someone explain to me why the first ARM iMac won’t be just like a massive iPad Pro on a stand? Given how powerful, cool and silent iPad Pros are now, that seems entirely possible to me.
 
nihil0 said:
And what about making their own X86 chips? Like AMD does. Would that be impossible? With know how from Ax series of their own chips.
Click to expand...

I think it would just be easier for Apple to buy AMD chips. The latest AMD Ryzen chips, 7nm made by TSMC, are amazing and kick Intel's butt. They should just use those.

The reason Apple cannot simply make x86/x64 chips is licensing. AMD and Intel have a long-standing and historical cross-licensing agreement that basically lets them copy each others patents forever. Apple is not a party to that, and I doubt Intel and AMD would license their entire x86/x64 portfolios to Apple for any sum that Apple is willing to pay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pratikindia, pipis2010 and freedomlinux
My guess is Apple has been preparing for a move to ARM based chips for quite some time already.
Now that they are in desktop class speeds with their A-series chips on iPhones and iPads and that Mac Catalyst is being implemented they are moving in closer to migrating the mac line-up to ARM chips within the next two years.

I for one am curious to see how the macs will preform !
 
  • Like
Reactions: tigerintank
Darth Tulhu said:
Apple could bring back the iBook name and even produce a 2-in-1.

But I object to replacing Intel completely. They need to ADD to their lineup, not subtract.

Yea, I know... Apple is obsessed with subtraction.
Click to expand...
"Apple could bring back the iBook name and even produce a 2-in-1."

Great point
 
applepuree said:
When Apple switched to Intel, there was a massive increase in software from mainstream developers as they were comfortable with Intel. I fear a change to Arm will will cause the opposite to happen and we will loose a lot of good developers. I know in theory this should not happen due to platform development languages, but I can see it happening.
Click to expand...
Apple's iOS (ARM) developers are exactly what Apple are trying to tap into for the Mac with Marzipan/ Catalyst. The iOS developer community is by far and away larger and more dynamic than the Mac one, I can't see there being many who do develop for Mac solely (comparatively small user base) most will write software for Windows or iOS and then port/ create a Mac version as a lower priority if they want to tap into the platform.
 
The only thing I’ll need to know if this comes to a future MacBook Pro, is can I still virtualise Windows? Non-negotiatiable, mission critical requirement.
 
Don't think Apple will release an "ARM-based Mac' but will simply be a 2-in-1 (think iPad Pro with smart keyboard bundle) that can transition between iPadOS and MacOS.
 
Eorlas said:
i know this forum is oddly excited about this idea, but i would much rather apple keep the higher tiers with intel processors.
Click to expand...
Any particular reason you'd care to elaborate on, or just general resistance to change? If the end result is more stable Macs, with better developer support, more regular releases and decent performance improvements, why on Earth not?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Icaras
Apple shouldn't rush. Look at the Surface Pro X. Looks cool but the SQ1 chip just isn't good enough for proper 64 bit Windows applications.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jb-net
Falhófnir said:
Any particular reason you'd care to elaborate on, or just general resistance to change? If the end result is more stable Macs, with better developer support, more regular releases and decent performance improvements, why on Earth not?
Click to expand...

I can't speak for others, but for me it's because my work involves VMs and Docker. I also like that Boot Camp is an option, although I'm not currently relying on it for anything. A move to Arm means the end of virtualization on macOS and sends me off to a more flexible platform to do my job.

There's also the inconvenient fact that there is no example of an Arm CPU that's competitive with the high end desktop processors from Intel or AMD. There's a lot of hand-waving and unicorn fart talking points that people raise every time this topic is discussed. It's not as if simply slapping fans and heat pipes onto an A12X somehow turns it into a Xeon. Arm has never been demonstrated to be competitive with Intel and AMD for desktop platforms. Whatever processor Apple might use to replace the Intel CPUs in a MBP or iMac is purely theoretical at this point, and the path to that solution is hardly clear or free from risk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stefankm, magbarn, IG88 and 7 others
Another advantage of ARM and a custom chip is that Intel is $crewing everyone on price. The switch could easily shave $500 off the price of a Mac laptop making them much more price competitive while still keeping margins. The savings on iMacs could be even more. Oddly bad time to introduce the 2019 Mac Pro as the biggest baddest Intel machine you can buy, but if it has a 10 year life span like the old tower, who knows. Apple may split MBA's to ARM, a slow tranistion on MBP's as they know devs just can't instantly recompile code and it will work. This is especially true for apps that have assembly code written sections for anything from optimized image routine rendering to device drivers that have to run as fast as possible. It wouldn't be the last time apple has changed procs and it was mostly not too bad from the user perspective. it took a while for it to happen, but for devs is was a LOT of extra work, which apple seems to like giving them :(
 
I have the maxed out iPad Pro 12.9 now and after putting it through the paces this seems like a really good idea. The performance/battery/heat is borderline spooky.

Random stuff I’ve tried like turning fortnite to 60fps and running it a good while.. barely even leeches the battery and the iPad doesn’t even get hot. I know fortnite is a dumb test in some ways but this sort of performance in a laptop this slim? I’ve not seen it. Video rendering is fast, everything is fast. Battery life is immense.

As long as apple keep up with their chipset updates I’m really excited for an ARM based MacBook.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roscorito
Oh God... this again. Are there specific inside sources for this other than “some say” or “others have noted?” Who, specifically?

Mac delays caused by Intel delays have been shown to be complete BS, in most cases. Mac releases are delayed because Apple takes their sweet time refreshing their hardware, and, in the meantime, sells out of date hardware at new prices. Intel’s fault, indeed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: autrefois, iShater, Atlantico and 7 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back