No, the demo was on the ARM-MacMini connected to a Pro Display using the A12 CPU. I guess you missed the iPhone SE2 (2020) $399, which beats a $2500 MBP in single core performance. INTEL is so dead...
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 Transitioning Macs to Custom Chips With 'Incredible' Performance Starting Later This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, the demo was on the ARM-MacMini connected to a Pro Display using the A12 CPU. I guess you missed the iPhone SE2 (2020) $399, which beats a $2500 MBP in single core performance. INTEL is so dead...
I'm not investing in something Apple is clearly transitioning away from. If I had bought a Mac in the last year, I wouldn't be very worried. But I wouldn't buy one now.
Right, we'll have to wait for Mac specific CPUs. Desktops don't really need the efficiency cores. Imagine if the A12 had 8 high performance cores, that would already be something. Now extrapolate that to the new A14 and bring in 12 high performance cores. The thermal envelope and wattage would still be much better than anything Intel could be offering at the low end. Wait another year, at the end of 2021, and Apple will have better high end chips than Intel could be offering. Also, Apple could easily be pairing two or three chips for the high end and still be more energy efficient and more cost effective. Two 8 Core A14 based series anyone? I think the Intel emulation on Apple CPU will be quite fine once the real Macs come to market.
But didn't Intel sue Microsoft And Qualcomm Over x86 Emulation in the past?
No, I'd rather they didn't do it at all.
This has nothing to do with what's best for the consumer, it's entirely about what's best for Apple. From a consumer perspective, there is zero need to put Apple CPUs into Macs. A move which will cause enormous disruption and indeed setbacks for many customers.
[automerge]1592901746[/automerge]
Sure there will be all sorts of people who will buy whatever is available for all sorts of reasons.
However, most people do not like to buy "old" tech, or tech which is superseded the moment they buy it, especially if it's not available at a knock-down price.
Honestly, I see this whole move to different silicon as one spectacular waste of time and disruption as far as consumers are concerned. The Apple die-hard fans may be super excited (why, I have no idea) but for everyone else, it's a pain the ****.
Last edited:
Rightly so, the world will be moving to ARM, even Microsoft, and Intel will have made the wrong bet. They'd wish to have continued XScale development parallel to X86. Yes for a while, the trajectory of X86 was very good when Intel went Core architecture. But they haven't been able to deliver the performance per Watt that the move to full mobile solutions need (desktops have already been largely replaced with notebooks). The current Intel CPU thermal envelope is bad.
“History will not repeat itself and this one-sided prostrating to Intel as if they are God’s gift to computing is just astounding.”
Again with the tub-thumping playing to the crowd, setting up a straw man about “one-sided prostrating to Intel” like some cheap politician.
I’ve seen clueless fanboys deny reality again and again over the decades, some fancy themselves as a modern day Oscar Wilde. Stop doing it. It doesn’t make you right. In a few years it will be as embarrassing as those shell suit and mullet pictures that you swear you don’t have.
Why? Because Intel has not been able to deliver the goods. Yes, in the beginning their Core architecture was great. Incredible performance at low wattage. But the world has moved on, and when a phone can get better performance per Watt than your Intel MacBook, people will start to scratch their head. We're at that point. The A14 will give greater performance to a stupid iPhone than your MacBook Pro, which will heat up to 85-99 degrees Celsius and run fans full blast! Imagine to have the same MacBook pro that runs as fast as Intel but stays cool and fans won't run much at all? You don't have to be a die-hard Apple fan to want that future to happen. Sure, I will miss X86 compatibility to run Windows, but how long do you think Microsoft will be staying with Intel? They too will be moving ARM. Now is the time for Apple to make the bet, because waiting another 5 years will be too late. Apple made the right bet developing their own A series CPU. Imagine if they stuck with standard ARM reference design? iPhones would not have had a competitive edge at all. Apple will make the same bet for the Mac.
I think you have a rather biased (and BTW flawed) perspective. Microsoft will be staying with Intel for as long as I am alive IMO. And Intel will continue to dominate personal computer CPU sales for the same period.
If that is the way you're going, then either Dell XPS or Razor Blade would do you well.
It is hard to quantify in terms of $$, because Apple sells complete solutions not only including CPUs - in fact on Apple SoCs there is even licensed ARM IP inside, like Cortex-M.
In any case i am comparing by scope - full range from embedded M-cores over realtime R-cores to application processors aka A-cores plus lots of infrastructure and fabric components based on AXI, APB, AHB or whole coherent mesh interconnect solutions for instance for servers.
They will dominate, but not necessarily on mobile (notebooks included) and that's where the future is at. Sure desktops and servers will be Intel's playground for years to come. But the bet is mobile, and Microsoft will be introducing form factors in which the bet will be ARM. So the future will be this dance between Intel and ARM based devices. Apple is simply betting on a future in which they can deliver their mobile solutions better with ARM than they ever could with Intel. For years Apple has waited for the promised mobile CPUs that Intel constantly failed to deliver on time, and is still failing to deliver.
It will be fine. In the State of the Union presentation, Apple stated that have already started work on ensuring that multiple open source projects will work fine on the new Macs – with homebrew explicitly listed among these projects.
Even 3rd Party Kernel Extensions will be permitted on the new Macs – which surprised me – but with the limitation that these Kernel Extensions must be notorised to run on the new machines.
I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that TB4 (which is integrated into the USB4 spec that has a target release of Q4 2020 for consumer devices - conveniently timed for an Apple Silicon Mac to include it at release) will be backwards compatible with TB3, so by the time the new AS Macs are released all of the TB3 preipherals will work.
Yes, but also Mac-ification of the ipad.
In the demo it was clear that they brought the ipad versions of mutual apps ( photos ) ... closer to the desktop version. So it goes two ways...
Makes me wonder if we will be able to install MacOs 11 on ipad?
Or that recompiled proapps could run on ipad.
Maybe not ... 😬
This is what I find perplexing with MS. That was/is their own 1st party hardware carrying their brand name on it. Why release the Surface X at all if they weren’t going to develop proper emulation tools, and didn’t even bother to have their signature software running natively on the platform???
Apple just made them look like chumps. All of their 1st party software, including their signature professional apps, running from day 1 natively, and an emulation tool for 3rd party software that is obviously miles beyond what MS produced. MS even has their own signature software running natively on Apple Silicon macOS before they even have a Windows ARM version.
Not to mention Adobe et al. If that doesn’t say volumes about how the developer community is going to support this transition, then nobody will ever be convinced.
I mean, the fact that you are going to be running iOS and iPadOS apps natively - that alone - is going to drive developer adoption. You have just given the mobile developers a slam dunk at earning more money without having to do anything at all - and even more by doing the macOS UI work. Think beyond the MacRumors forum here. The average consumer that has an iPhone as their main device pretty much - and I am talking the non-tech interested younger and older generations here mostly - tell them that this machine will run all of the apps/games they use on their phone out of the box. Then tell them that this Windows PC over here will never be able to do that.
I actually see Mac market share going up.
[automerge]1592906129[/automerge]
This was my observation as well. iPadOS basically got macOS versions of all the core basic apps, i.e. Photos, Mail, etc. - at least from a UI standpoint.Yes, but also Mac-ification of the ipad.
In the demo it was clear that they brought the ipad versions of mutual apps ( photos ) ... closer to the desktop version. So it goes two ways...
Makes me wonder if we will be able to install MacOs 11 on ipad?
Or that recompiled proapps could run on ipad.
Maybe not ... 😬
They have now clearly shown that an iPad could easily handle a full on upgrade of iPadOS to be a touch first UX version of macOS in every meaningful way.
Apple Silicon is rumored to have performance 70-100% greater than Intel x86; why would the price come down?
Have no idea how you get to that conclusion by anything other than wild speculation and paranoia based on what we saw yesterday...
Vega II is a desktop class GPU used in the Mac Pro and the 5600M is a 2020 release for laptops. The former is always plugged in and the latter is designed for a laptop sized battery. Neither the A12X or A12Z was designed for either of those specific power use cases, so it's only a rough comparison to begin with. I'm just saying that a two year old GPU design that wasn't even meant for laptop use was still reasonably close to MBP GPUs from 2018, and would still qualify as mid-range for a laptop today. I think that bodes well for what Apple could roll out in 2020 that is specifically designed for a larger power source in laptops/desktops. Apple SoCs have had great performance per watt.
Where did they say they were locking down macOS?? I didn’t catch that part? What part of user freedom has been taken away that I missed???
If you consider iOS doesn't take away any of your freedom, then of course you cannot understand what I said. Now you can have wishful thinking that this Bad Sur thing is only an aesthetic change that won't limit your freedom as iOS does... well... I wouldn't keep that hope, because in Apple, aesthetics follows function.
Yes, you’re right - Apple haven’t used the reference Cortex ARM cores designs since the A5 or A7, something around there, but my understanding is that it is the ISA Gruber is talking about. In order to use the ARM Instruction set, you have to keep the full compatibility with the full ARM instruction set. You can add new customized instructions to create an extended instruction set for your custom core design though, and I think this is what Apple is doing. So they are going to have instruction sets that won’t run on just a standard Cortex core reference design chip either because some of the custom instructions they use will be specific to the custom core designs and implementations they use in their Silicon.
This is probably why it is most accurate to say that Apple Silicon is ARM-based, rather than saying Apple’s ARM chips.
Oh.
Great.
THIS again.
Bye, Bootcamp (using one computer as two platforms - also bye bye Windows-based gaming on Macs)...
Bye, WINE (Windows API on non-Windows OSes, though this was already killed by Catalina’s ditching of 32-bit)...
Bye, any and all hardware older than one year which relies on custom drivers (not class-compliance), which wont be ported to Apple Silicon machines by the company that originally sold it (the audio production market is going to suffer a LOT here, just as it did with Catalina)...
Bye, literally hundreds of pieces of commercial & freeware software & plugins that also wont be maintained or ported because the companies no longer exist, don’t care to maintain their products beyond one year, or can’t afford yet more Apple hardware to do ports... Some of those companies might even simply abandon Mac support entirely.
Et cetera.
This is going to be a slaughter, for a not-insignificant portion of the Mac user world... but not significant enough for Apple and most Apple customers to care. The commentary here is typical: anyone voicing legit concerns is barked down by cultish Apple fans. Most of you could be served by pretty much any computer anyway, so I’m not sure why you get so upset when Apple users like myself take issue with Apple over stuff like this. It’s like people like me aren’t allowed to prefer Mac OS, too, just because I have non-mainstream needs for my computing. If your needs are so basic that you cannot empathize with those of us with specialist needs, why do you attach to Macs in the first place?
Great.
THIS again.
Bye, Bootcamp (using one computer as two platforms - also bye bye Windows-based gaming on Macs)...
Bye, WINE (Windows API on non-Windows OSes, though this was already killed by Catalina’s ditching of 32-bit)...
Bye, any and all hardware older than one year which relies on custom drivers (not class-compliance), which wont be ported to Apple Silicon machines by the company that originally sold it (the audio production market is going to suffer a LOT here, just as it did with Catalina)...
Bye, literally hundreds of pieces of commercial & freeware software & plugins that also wont be maintained or ported because the companies no longer exist, don’t care to maintain their products beyond one year, or can’t afford yet more Apple hardware to do ports... Some of those companies might even simply abandon Mac support entirely.
Et cetera.
This is going to be a slaughter, for a not-insignificant portion of the Mac user world... but not significant enough for Apple and most Apple customers to care. The commentary here is typical: anyone voicing legit concerns is barked down by cultish Apple fans. Most of you could be served by pretty much any computer anyway, so I’m not sure why you get so upset when Apple users like myself take issue with Apple over stuff like this. It’s like people like me aren’t allowed to prefer Mac OS, too, just because I have non-mainstream needs for my computing. If your needs are so basic that you cannot empathize with those of us with specialist needs, why do you attach to Macs in the first place?
A few things,
- Performance
- Why would apple continue to be chained to intel's increasingly frustrating chip design?
- Intels chips have been thermally limited for years now
- Trade off between power/performance is getting worse with intel
- Bootcamp support
- This is probably the reason they are still going to release intel based macs, until they work out Bootcamp
- Apple knows a lot of users use bootcamp and if they don't eventually support this they will lose customers
- Your recently purchased MCP is not obsolete
- How often do you upgrade your machine? This transition will take 5 years to fully complete
Well im so glad i did not enter the mac system a few months ago. yes, big software will be supported. but not the specialized audio programs im using wont. at least not in time. most developers took until recent to adept to 64bit.... so no apple for me. staying on windows. this made my decision really easy.