Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
My biggest frustration with MacOS and iPadOS is Safari. It isn't equipped to handle the modern web very well. My second biggest peeve with iPadOS is crappy external monitor support. iPadOS could be great if it had a proper browser and monitor support.

I use *only* safari and have had no difficulties with it. I suspect external monitor support improvements are coming soon. Thunderbolt port on the ipad pro is a hint at things to come.
 
People may disagree, but looking at the new iPads and Macs, I’m pretty sure the next iPhone will come with the M2 as well.

There’s no point in making a “special chip” just for the iPhone. It’s cheaper to make one chip for all three devices.
 
So I finally read the original article at Nikkei Asia. I get the impression they do not actually know for sure what the chip is called.

All they are really saying is that it's now in production, it's on the TSMC 5NP process, and that new Macs with it will be out later this year. That shouldn't really come as a major surprise to anyone.

As other people in this thread have already suggested, the "M2" moniker as quoted by the article can be confusing, since some people in this thread have pre-conceived notions of what "M2" is supposed to mean, and the article isn't solid on that name anyway.

Personally, I think the chip, whatever it is called, will be a beefed up version (or versions?) of M1 with better graphics and better CPU, and that would be perfect for a late 2021 release of higher end MacBook Pros and higher end iMacs in somewhere around the 29"-32" size. I also believe it will support way, way more RAM, likely up to 64 GB or perhaps even more.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dustSafa
This is great news. Been waiting to upgrade my 2019 16" and my 2014 iMac.

tenor.gif
 
I really really hope they pump up the GPU power as it's the M1's worst downside, even worse than the RAM limitations.

I love my M1 mini, but I'll switch to a more powerful chip at the first chance.
 
That was quick, I was expecting M2 next year and the M1X this year? I wonder what the core count and GPU will be?

MacBook Pro for Oct then and maybe the fabled 30+" iMac.
You assume some random journalist has a better understanding of the situation than you? You are way too optimistic about the state of journalism.

OF COURSE this is the "M1X", not the M2! ie it's A14 generation hardware with more cores and DRAM; it's not A15 generation hardware!
 
I'm thinking this maybe a GPU instead. Coming out with M2 at this point is too early in my opinion, generally new CPU's are a year apart...
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: bklement
Define "better" though.

For a bunch of folks there's substantial value in simplicity of choosing an AIO system, and they're willing to pay for that.

You likely don't fit into that market segment. I don't either. Yet I know folks who do.
Base iMac has the 7 gpu core variant just like the base Air. The mini is hence better - as I stressed - internally. I can't recall this ever being the case.
 
32gb. Ram is not the be all and end all, and unified memory is much faster and more capable in general. The chip set, whilst having less configurable ram is demonstrably faster and more capable than the predecessors- by a long way.

You’re not comparing a machine to the machine it superseded but to some other machine? That’s a bit ridiculous don’t you think?
Then it was ridiculous too when everyone complaind about the air and pro, right? It's about product separation, which right now is minimal.

You can't do much with ram speed when you need ram size. Faster, but not at all more capable by any way.
 
Its purpose is to provide a nice all-in-one computer with a screen that is much larger than is reasonable for a laptop. It may not be for you, but it is exactly what lots of us want.



A thunderbolt monitor would definitely be a welcome addition, but certainly not a replacement.
It's not an AIO with the adapter. I cant' see much difference whether you "have to hide" a mini or an adapter.
 
This all makes sense to me. Every year Apple revs the Axx chip, along with their efficiency and high power cores. The way the A14 is related to the M1, you'd think the A15 would be related to the M2 and its probable evolution of efficiency/high power cores.

This also makes sense because from every indication, TSMC is on track for volume N5P (started risk production in 2020) and it looks like Apple will be the first out of the gates with TSMC on N5P -- hopefully with a bit of automatic perf improvement (10%?) a bit of power efficiency improvement (15%?) and a bit of transistor density improvement? Combine that with 'more cores' and 'more juice' rumors for these more new chips, along with Apples wont to beat Intel/AMD, and we'll probably see a repeat of November's jaw dropping stuff on 2021-06-07.
 
  • Love
Reactions: ModusOperandi
I can't wait to get the new MacBook Pro 16". My current 2019 felt instantly old when the new M1 MacBook came out earlier.
 
You assume some random journalist has a better understanding of the situation than you? You are way too optimistic about the state of journalism.

OF COURSE this is the "M1X", not the M2! ie it's A14 generation hardware with more cores and DRAM; it's not A15 generation hardware!
Whatever the new chip is called is kind of irrelevant to me. It will be the new chip that came out after the M1. And who knows, perhaps it is based on the upcoming A15?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ErikGrim
Praying that high-end audio interfaces like Apogee and Universal Audio can get full compatibility by then. So far, with the M1, there's no good news for my thunderbolt 2 rack gear.
 
Everyone worries about the upgrade cycle. Apple should just do tiered subscription model, you get upgrades each year.

Tier 1: $1000/yr – entry level iPhone, iPad, MacBook or iMac
Tier 2: $2000/yr - Mid level phone, tablet, and computer
Tier 3: $3000/yr - Pro level stuff
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: bklement
But kinda makes the iMac redundant. With intel macbook air/ pro 13 had the worst sustained performance, then mini with integrated graphics as cheap desktop entry, then imac with dedicated graphics. Now all four are the same except a fan. A desktop should be more powerful, configurable with more ram, have more ports. Imac delivers neither. It's only purpose is to push the price of the real entry imac with better chips much higher.
Translation: “HEY mobile processors should be WAY underpowered/underfeatured compared to desktop processors. Why? Umm, well it’s what I’m used to. This strange new world where mobile and desktop performance (That, across the board, leads the industry) is unfamiliar and frightening.”
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.