Dead and buried?That's great but where is my iMac Pro??? 🧐
It's coming!Where is the Mac Pro?
Dead and buried?That's great but where is my iMac Pro??? 🧐
It's coming!Where is the Mac Pro?
...the M1 Pro starts at 16GB. As I posted in another thread, the difference between a M1 Pro MBP and M1 Max MBP is $600, so $1400 would be quite plausible for a $2000 Studio Max "downgraded" to M1 Pro.At 32 GB RAM minimum, that won’t happen within the next several years if ever.
It would be more confusing to the customer if the higher-end SoCs were not labled M2 Pro, M2 Max and M2 Ultra.
M2 is exactly what those of us who have been following the SoC's development expected. The only thing that might be considered different is many thought it would be fabricated on a 3nm process as opposed to the 5nm process it is using (at least at launch - Apple could easily move later M2 production to 3nm, as well).
End of life doesn't mean what you think it meansSeeing as has how Apple has dorked me over by effectively end of lifing devices like my 2018 iPad Pro, which can’t run Stage Manager, I’m in no rush to buy anything with an M2 chip — pro extreme or otherwise. I have no confidence that chips even a year or two old will be able (read allowed) to run newer system software processes.
Vadim Yuryev, host of the YouTube channel Max Tech, has adamantly expressed his opinion that the M2 Pro will indeed be 3nm in a series of tweets over the last few weeks.
Why the need for so many?How many cores? I will upgrade when Apple offers a 20+ core laptop.
No, because 90% of consumers couldn't give a wet slap whether it is 5nm, 3nm, or a platinum/iridium sponge - and even then, Apple have never suggested that the "M-number" says anything about the process node. It's only confusing for people who got too invested in the rumours that Apple were going to make a chip called the M2 that was absolutely definitely fact triple-exclamation-mark going to use the 3nm process.Doesn't this seem a little confusing for the customer?
Sounds like M2 was really M1.5, and the M2 Pro is the "real" M2.
Yes. It does. I wrote ‘effectively end-of-life.’ Apple is no longer supporting my device with its current services. Their solution: buy a new one. Hence, for me and anyone else wishing current support, end of life.End of life doesn't mean what you think it means
Bold move considering the yields for TSMC not there yet. But hey, Apple may be willing to eat the yield and delays.
Can I get a tl;dr version?Yet is when? If Apple doesn't start until Q4 22 or Q1 23 the yields will be better. It isn't like there is a magical cut off at TSMC HVM mark that yields don't still continue to get better. At a slower rate but better.
![]()
AnandTech Forums: Technology, Hardware, Software, and Deals
Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.www.anandtech.com
"There Yet" as in now , June-August , yes N3 is likely looking somewhat like N7 ( and bit less like N5) at the -Q1 point (or perhaps closer to the -2Q point). The change for N7 from -1Q to +1Q is a pretty decent leap. If Apple were going to stop production after +3Q might be an issue, but higher end M2's on N3 are likely more longer lived than that. So taking lumps for a Quarter isn't that big of a deal. At the markups that Apple is charging for a Mx Max ( > $200 ) even less so.
Pretty good chance N3 isn't going to actually get to HVM until very end of Q3 ( it is now Q2) or very beginning of Q4 . Both of those hit the "broad side of a barn" mark laid down by TSMC ( 2H22). TSMC has said they don't expect to receive revenue for finished N3 product until 2023. So it isn't like HVM is going to start in a couple of weeks from now (i.e., not early or mid Q3; about the first 'half' of that 2H22 is missed. ). The yields in Feburary-March of 2023 will likely look different. By June 2023 even more so.
As for Apple going to eat yields/delays. Apple likely picked N3 years ago. They are along for the ride.
If Apple is using N3 primarily to get a shrink, then the yields will get slightly better with smaller dies. The Pro and Max are exactly 'small' dies. They are not reticle busting but not particularly small. The plain M2 has die size bloat ( like the A15 did over the A14). That is actually bad for the Ultra package because it is limited to 1x recticle size. While one Max isn't at the limit. Two is getting pretty close. It may not have been an option to bloat out the Max configuration die and disrupt the Ultra Package. If have to pull the Max back then pretty easy "trickle down" to a Pro die ( since that is basically a chopped down design of the Max. If have to do Max on N3 doing Pro on N5P doesn't buy much.)
If Apple puts in just 2 E cores ( a full E complex instead of a chopped down one) and adds just two GPU cores to each cluster. Toss in the cache and other uncore updates and likely gets a Pro and Max that is smaller by -15-20% instead of bigger by that same amount over the Pro/Max die sizes. Smaller dies means Apple will eventually get more product from fewer wafers. If they keep the same (or higher markup ... inflation) , then that is more money generated per wafer.
The risk management for to taking on N3 'early' would have been to not try to fill up the same size die size will "more stuff" but to take some substantive shrinkage to get more dies per wafer. Figure out N3 and then go about trying to stuff "much more " into a N3-generation wafer at the same size as the first iteration. ( the old 'tick / tock' model).
If N3 has started HVM at the beginning of Q3 then they probably could have finished off the transition by the end of 2022. They probably aren't. It isn't the end of the world (lots of products over last two years got delayed due to factors outside of company's control). So even if M2 Pro/Max/Extreme slid into 2023 the vast bulk of the Mac line up would have been on M-series. Inertia wise it will not make that much of a difference. The M2 power ( MBA , MBP 13" , Mini , and possible iMac 24" ) are the vast bulk of Mac sales anyway ( which are on a lower risk N5P which there should have been close to zero doubt could use as it over a year old by mid-2022. ) The lower margin stuff is not on N3.
That is not what end of life means. So when the iPhone 4S came out, the iPhone 4 was "effectively end-of-life" because it couldn't use Siri? I don't think so. You are mixing up support and new features.Yes. It does. I wrote ‘effectively end-of-life.’ Apple is no longer supporting my device with its current services. Their solution: buy a new one. Hence, for me and anyone else wishing current support, end of life.
My prediction: M2 anything won't be 3nm. Apple is saving that for M3.However, it's worth tempering expectations until any additional reports corroborate the M2 Pro chip being 3nm
Best guess would be that the M2 Pro will be to the M2 exactly as the M1 Pro is to the M1 - more of the same cores, extra I/O, extra RAM channels, same process. However, M2 Pro is also a brand, not a specification Apple could perfectly well decide to use it for something else, as long as the practical upshot was that it was faster than the base M2,
Can I get a tl;dr version?
I am not calling them bad for one main reason, I have no idea what they are. However, given that TSMC has stated the mass volume for N3 isn't till later this year it stands to believe that perhaps the yields are not where they want them to be which is why they are still working on it.Right now, it is way too early to call TSMC N3 yield rates bad. It isn't finished yet. Is that simple enough for you?
I have a room full of Apple devices dating back to 1980s - macs that power up, but cannot do many useful things. To me, that is end of life; not what some corporate engineer or beancounter declares.That is not what end of life means. So when the iPhone 4S came out, the iPhone 4 was "effectively end-of-life" because it couldn't use Siri? I don't think so. You are mixing up support and new features.
It won't be a huge upgrade; it'll likely be comparable to M2 gains over M1. Nice, but definitely not something that'll render your computer obsolete by any stretch. M1 Pro is gonna be a serious beast for years to come. Plus, once M2 Pro does drop, prices for M1 Pro will come down (esp on the used market) and you can save a pretty penny and still get some serious bang for your buck.Just as I’m about to pull the trigger on a 16 inch M1 Pro ugh. Really wanna take advantage of the current education deal, but don’t wanna miss out if this will be a significant upgrade.
You are using an industry wide term inappropriately. Bottom line.I have a room full of Apple devices dating back to 1980s - macs that power up, but cannot do many useful things. To me, that is end of life; not what some corporate engineer or beancounter declares.
Apple, one of the world’s largest corporations, is increasingly doing underhanded things to customers. Many of us with a third-Gen iPad were told ‘these are powerful devices and you should just wait for the OS to catch-up.’ Now we find out the new OS services won’t even work on our devices. That to me represents end of life.
Having experienced this, and seeing Apple’s vigorous chip updates, I have reasonable doubts about what other ‘powerful’ hardware will be left behind and effectively end-of-lifed. A 3nm die is very advanced. Simply, I don’t trust Apple any longer not to leave me with obsolete equipment that, for me, is end of life.
I'm not criticizing Apple for releasing a 3nm chip, I AM criticizing them for the very likely dumb slides which they'll show off at the next event comparing it to M2. They're basically two different chips with the same name. And how does that effect compatibility long term? 8 years down the road will they drop support for the M2 generation all at once or just cut off 5nm chips (which would be another confusing issue)?
If M2 Pro is coming to Mac mini next year perhaps it'll be binned versions due to as yet unknown yield rates for M2 Pro? That's my first take on the situation as minimum package will surely be 16Gb with 512Gb storage - making a high end Mini easily approach $1499.Right now, it is way too early to call TSMC N3 yield rates bad. It isn't finished yet. Is that simple enough for you?