Just reading the press, it seems strange for Apple to release the M1X for MacBook Pro later this year, just to have the Air’s have a newer/better processor next year that outdoes the MacBook Pro? Seems like it would make sense for either:
Of course it would make more sense to customers if "bigger number = better". However, if Apple Marketing think this is a problem they can fix it at the stroke of a pen - it's a problem that begins and ends with a sticky label. The only
real problem is that some people start building arguments along the lines of "no, that can't be true because that's an M2 feature and the MBP is getting the M1X" as if these things were established facts.
The current speculation seems to be that "M1X" is a scaled-up version of the M1 with more CPU cores, more GPU cores, maybe a different balance of performance/efficiency cores - but presumably of the same type as found in the M1, whereas the "M2" will be a new core design
presumably with similar numbers of cores to the M1.
...but the sort of thing that could
realistically mean in terms of performance is that the "M2" might be, say, 10-20% faster than the M1 on a given task whereas an "M1X" with 16+4 CPU cores could be 3-4x faster M1 on a task which could take good advantage of multiple cores...
or little or no faster than a M1, and slower than the M2, on a task that didn't multi-thread well. Then, maybe the "M2" will have some new hardware acceleration feature that makes FCPX run twice as fast but that Adobe CS doesn't use... It's also possible that the big advantage of the M2 will be power consumption, which would be a big deal in an iPad or MBA but not so much in an iMac. Multi-thread performance & lots of performance cores is very much an issue for video/audio/3D/scientific applications which tend to parallelise well - not quite so much for everyday use/gaming where the "economy" cores seem to do a great job of keeping the UI smoothly.
So it would be a good idea to have a separate naming system for the "consumer" and "pro" chips to discourage false comparisons - more informed customers could always look deeper to find out core types etc.
Of course, the other issue is timing, and part of the "problem" is that current rumours make it sound as if the M1X MBP/iMac and M2 MBA could come out only a month or two apart. If the M1X MBP had come out in early summer (as rumoured) and the M2 MBA wasn't expected until next March then it wouldn't be such a big issue. It's highly plausible that Apple's schedule has been messed up by component shortages.
NB: the "M1X" naming scheme seems to derive from the A-series "A12Z"-type names - but there, the suffix usually referred to
an extra GPU core, a spot of overclocking, a tweaked neural engine etc. to give the iPad Pro a few more legs than an iPhone - not
twice as many cores. So it doesn't necessarily work for M series, which will potentially go in everything from an iPad to a Mac Pro....
But, still, to repeat - ultimately, it's only a label and the ultimate decision will be made when Apple make their fancy CGI rendering of the new MBP innards for their launch....
