I had thought M1-based, but based on yesterday’s rumors now I am thinking M2.
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's 'M2' Next-Gen Mac Chip Enters Mass Production, Expected to Debut in Redesigned MacBooks Later This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I had thought M1-based, but based on yesterday’s rumors now I am thinking M2.
You would fall into the category of someone needing the 4 port iMac model then.
Your personal requirements are probably not the general rule for a "business" computer though (which is of course covers an extremely long list of potential uses and industries).
Most users will just use what they are given and will adhere to corporate IT policies regarding backups and devices etc. (I've worked in places where the USB ports are disabled in BIOS to prevent people inadvertently spreading viruses via flash memory).
So, they will use the standard Bluetooth keyboard, work with network storage that is backed up centrally, and their role may not require a second screen.
I will accept that plugging in your phone to charge is a very common use case, and that many activities can benefit from a second screen. You'd be surprised at the number of people I see in offices working with just a 14" laptop screen though (even with an unused monitor on the desk!), so clearly a lot of people have no need for the screen real estate.
For me personally? No, I wouldn't buy a 2 port iMac and would think 4 ports is barely adequate - because, like you, I use a lot of external disks and devices (audio interface, SD card reader, 2-3 disks, 2 screens). But we are in the minority.
Why are you faulting a screwdriver for its inability to drive nails?
notice the 27” iMac hasn’t transitioned to Apple Silicon.
You’re trying the Left shoe on the wrong foot … and blaming the shoe for not fitting.
Pay attention. Apple’s transition is obvious. Lower tier consumer level systems first. Higher tier / pro / business oriented system layer. We’re in the middle and haven’t moved on to the many ports higher tier systems yet.
So…
other than placement, is there a functional difference between:
#1: microsd into SD card carrier into mac SD card port
#2: microsd into USBC card reader into mac USBC port
Oops, my mistake! When I assume, I make an ass of u and me. Well, less of you and more of me, lol!
We shall see. Y'know, 20 years ago, hardly anybody was even thinking we could have different CPU cores in the same chip, due to timings and what not. Even dual CPU chips had to have the same clock frequency or the whole thing would either run at the slower chip's speed or not at all.
Today, we actually HAVE multi-core/multi-purpose CPUs built in. So that changed. Why not think that the whole architecture might allow more efficient memory management too, either in these early versions or maybe in a future version?
For sure I never would have thought that I could even have a real computing device WITHOUT traditional storage? Or traditional virtual memory/swap files, etc? Enter iPhone and iPad.
Those things don't even HAVE ways to set virtual memory or otherwise fuss around with those settings. Due to these and many more changes, I'm holding open the possibility that maybe I won't really need to buy a computer with 64 GB of RAM anymore. The architecture is different. The instruction set is different. The way it does things is ALL DIFFERENT.
I don't know if you're right or wrong, but I will say this: What an amazing time to be alive! To witness a new dawn such as what the Mx (M1 or M2 chip; people, don't start saying there's going to be an MX chip because I wrote that, lol) brings to us? This is amazing and I look forward to seeing what happens and how things turn out.
I do dream of one day being able to go into an Apple store and filling out an online form with a bunch of checkboxes of things I want my computer to do. Graphic rendering, compiling code, games, audio, storing movie and music libraries, etetera. And then Apple just says I need "model whatever". And that's it, I buy that one, the cute lady genius puts it in a bag and I'm on my way home to start writing code or my next opus.
So what you’re SAYING is I should call it Mxyzptlk. Gotcha!
You got me, props! And to send it back to the 5th dimension, you have to make it say its name twice. Backwards!
I would tend to gravitate towards M1-based tho. Wouldn't it be a lot riskier to deploy a high-core count SoC based on a new architecture compared to an older architecture that's been proven in existing product? Especially for products that would show case Apple's engineering capabilities?
Not really. Every year or so they are going to produce a new core microarchitecture. Better to debut it in the lowest volume product (high end macs) in case of production problems. (E.g. a bigger die size results in unexpectedly worse yields)
And, really, the only risk is production snafus. By the time we tape these things out, we know they are going to work (As long as the fab can fab them). The real risk is always fab process, not the microarchitecture.*
* in real life, sometimes the physical design is a risk. But the physical design would almost certainly change even if they stuck to the same core microarchitecture.
Makes sense. I guess Apple have enough experience with new u-arch that it's probably no problem for them. I suspect we won't have long to find out, as it looks likely new Macs will be introduced during WWDC '21.
Some dont dismiss the M1, just waiting for the loaded big brother
You might be right, but I think you will be proven wrong. I suspect apple wont be making the intro M1 an orphan so soon but the M1-V2 might have more thunderbolt/usb and maybe 2-4 more big/little cores. it will be feature creep and benchmarks should prove me right the AIR is the one to buy until the next generation M2 comes out and even then I suspect the M1 will hold its own until the ARM-V9 instruction set is implemented but if its done in the M1-V2 then Im wrong and your right... Its the future of ARM chips and Im betting apple will be the first to get it done.
Quite possibly. If Luke Miani's YouTube post (
At the very least, these "high-end" MBPs will need to offer more than 16GB RAM, have more CPU and GPU cores, and support at least 2 external displays. Whether these changes require anew micro-architecture in the form of the M2 or will be an extension of the existing M1 (just bigger), remains to be seen. Whatever they turn out to be, they will be more expensive than the current M1 Macs, so it's not as though new buyers will be getting a better machine for the same money.
I would actually be a bit hesitant about buying an "M1 Pro" (this name makes sense to me) in July, if there is a possibility that there could be big improvements in an M2 chip, based on the same core design as the A15 which will presumably be released in Sep/Oct. If the next release is an "M1 Pro" and not an "M2", then this makes the purchase of the original M1 a solid decision for those who bought in the December-February timeframe.
We might not see an M2 until the end of 2021 (to coincide roughly with the anniversary of the M1 launch), or even early 2022. M1 users will have a had a year of use by that time, which to my mind, justifies any purchase in early 2021.
Last edited:
Doesn‘t mean a thing. It just describes the process node, it says nothing about the chip architecture. Plus: M1X, M2, all just marketing terms.
Last edited:
Who knows what they'll call it, but for sake of our discussion I think it's fair to say the M1X would use the same CPU cores as M1, but simply have more of them (GPU approach is still TBD), while M2 would be something with updated CPU cores also to be used on the A15.
I would also expect an M1X to be built on the same 5nm process as the M1, but that is not guaranteed.
At this point it certainly seems possible they're going to skip the M1X and go straight to the M2... but if the M2 is a higher end chip designed for the larger MBP and the larger iMac, will there also be a "lite" version for the Air/13"/small iMac, or will they skip a year, or what. Until we go through a complete cycle with AS chip releases for all the Macs, we can't really assume how Apple is going to manage this whole thing. My current best guess is that Macs are handled like iPads and/or Apple Watches, where each model does not necessarily get a new CPU every year. The iPhone will be the only product that absolutely gets a new chip each year.
But we'll see. Exciting times.
You can't really change process without some level of redesign at which point you might as well put the "A15" cores in.
If they are really just retrofitting 5nm fabs to "r5nm" fabs it really doesn't make sense to produce new products with older specs as the number of chips that can be produced stays the same.
So I would guess:
5nm -> M1 and A14 "legacy" HW with the core counts as they are today.
"r5nm" -> A15 with usual low core counts used for iPhones and non-Pro iPads plus "M2"/"M2X" with core counts beyond 4/4/8 for "Pro" Macs
iPadPro and 24" iMac will stay on M1 for at least 1 year (maybe 2)
13" MBP will be silently discontinued (might linger around in the background for a while) after a 14" MB(P) gets released
MBA won't seen an update till (late) 2022 might be "M3" by then.
M1-MacMini will stay as the low end option till a redesign in 2022.
Probably true, but if TSMCs next process is an "enhanced 5 nm", then it's not totally out of the question that they could build an M1X on it without making significant changes and perhaps squeeze out an extra bit of performance. But more likely that you're correct.
I agree with all of this. I don't think every Mac is going to get a new processor every year.
How so? M2 means “new core micro architecture” not “new fab process”
Whatever it is, will end up being something between M1 and M2. Call it as you like, but this is just another scaled up iteration of 5nm. TMSC was planning on getting the 3nm in production to 2022, that what the rumored schedule was few months ago.. which is the next big gen of Apple Silicon.
You don‘t get it: you are talking the manufacturing process. This has nothing to do with the chip‘s architecture
This is a gibberish statement. Take a testable position. Will the chip in the 16”MBP use the same core microarchitecture as the M1? If so, it’s an “M1X.” If not, it’s an M2. There’s no such thing as “between M1 and M2.” The fab node has nothing to do with any of this, so I don’t know why you keep bringing it up. Even Intel used to do its major new architectures as the *second* design on each node. You don’t want to do a shrink at the same time you introduce a new microarchitecture.