First M2 Macs Expected to Launch Later This Year Using TSMC's 4nm Chip Process

[KYPackrat]

When the M1 Max and M1 Ultra needed that big of a heat sync to manage desktop performance, the iMac 27" was doomed. Even a liquid heat exchanger just isn't going to be thin enough to satisfy the Apple lust for "thin as possible" in the monitor. We might see an M2 Pro in an iMac, but they're going to have to have better heat dissipation than the chin currently allows.

If you want an all-in-one, make it. Get the VESA mount, a white VESA stand (or spray paint a black one), and a VESA stand computer mount that will hold the Mac Studio or Mac mini.

I just wish that they had stealth-released a M1 Pro Mac mini. I'm looking at light video work that would benefit from the M1 Pro, but no way am I buying the Max Studio. If forced, I'll get a 16G M1 mini, and probably be happy as a clam with it.

And I think we're looking at the Mac mini, MacBook Air, and the 13" MacBook (pro gets dropped) for consumers and most professionals, the 14" and 16" MacBook Pro and the Mac Studio for those needing it, and the Mac Pro for the people needing massive, phenomenal cosmic power in a less itty-bitty living space.

 

[theluggage]

When the M1 Max and M1 Ultra needed that big of a heat sync to manage desktop performance, the iMac 27" was doomed.

Let's fix that for you:

When the M1 Max and M1 Ultra needed that big of a heat sink to manage desktop performance, the unnecessarily thin iMac 27" based on the M1 24" design was doomed.

The old iMac could support an Intel i9 and a discrete AMD GPU. The iMac Pro could support a Xeon-W. Neither of those were known for their energy efficiency. If the M1 Max can work in a 16" MBP, it can work with less throttling in a 5k iMac.

I don't see that the cooler in the Studio, esp. the M1 Max version, is much larger than the one in the iMac Pro - it can spread out further horizontally and they could use the whole back of the case as a heatsink.

This sounds like the usual form-over-function problem.

I just wish that they had stealth-released a M1 Pro Mac mini.

With you there.

 

[cmaier]

When the M1 Max and M1 Ultra needed that big of a heat sync to manage desktop performance,

The reason it is so big is to allow the fan to operate as slowly as possible, to limit noise. We know M1 Max doesn’t need that big of a heat sync - look at the MBP with M1 Max, for example. It’s just a geometry thing. Because the box is cube-ish instead of spread out like a macbook, you need to go vertical in order to get the necessary air volume at low fan RPMs.

M1 Ultra would probably be fine in an iMac so long as the fans are large enough in diameter.

 

[Le0M]

A single silicon crystal is a cube with 0.543 nm long edges. Since a transistor requires a doped and undoped region, one would think that the transistor pitch couldn't be less than 2 * 0.543 nm = 1.086 nm. Maybe the height location of the transistors could be varied such that the doped regions wouldn't be adjacent with a single crystal (0.543 nm) pitch.

But is it possible to reduce the size of the silicon crystal?

 

[cmaier]

But is it possible to reduce the size of the silicon crystal?

No.

Of course, you don’t actually need silicon. And you don’t actually need a crystal. That’s just the most common way to do it now.

 

[nylonsteel]

m2 chips sound pretty cool... need more time and money to buy one of those new fangled things

 

[theorist9]

The reason it is so big is to allow the fan to operate as slowly as possible, to limit noise. We know M1 Max doesn’t need that big of a heat sync - look at the MBP with M1 Max, for example. It’s just a geometry thing. Because the box is cube-ish instead of spread out like a macbook, you need to go vertical in order to get the necessary air volume at low fan RPMs.

M1 Ultra would probably be fine in an iMac so long as the fans are large enough in diameter.

What's suprising is that the fan noise from the Max/Ultra Studio is reportedly more noticeable than that from the 16" Pro/Max MBP under routine operation. I would have expected the opposite, since heat dissipation should be much easier with the Studio.

The specs from Apple for very light operation (wireless web surfing) are consistent with this: 3 dB for the MBP, 15 dB for the Studio. Granted, the MBP is the Max, and the Studio is the Ultra, but anecdotal reports are that the Max and Ultra Studios have about the same fan noise (maybe the Ultra's copper heat sink helps to equalize the two).

[Yes, both 3 dB and 15 dB are extremely low. But these are for light rather than routine operation, and who knows how far away the "operator position" is? I couldn't find it specified in the ECMA-109 standards.]

Did Apple drop the ball in not taking advantage of the Studio's larger volume to optimize quiet airflow? After all, the Studio has more than twice the exterior volume of the 16" MBP (3.7 L vs. 1.5 L), and certainly a lot more than twice the free interior volume. Given its target use (hence the name "Studio") you'd think they'd want to make it as quiet as possible.


M1 Max 16" MBP:

MacBook Pro (16-inch, 2021) - Technical Specifications - Apple Support (MD)

support.apple.com

M1 Ultra Studio:

Mac Studio (2022) - Technical Specifications - Apple Support (KE)

support.apple.com

 

[CWallace]

I think the issue is that Apple has a minimum RPM they run the fans at in the Studio and unlike the MacBook Pros, which can turn the fans off, the Studio fans will always run at this minimum RPM.

And it sounds like (excuse the pun) that minimum fan speed is much higher than it needs to be. The fans could probably run at half that speed and still keep the SoC very cool.

 

[theorist9]

I think the issue is that Apple has a minimum RPM they run the fans at in the Studio and unlike the MacBook Pros, which can turn the fans off, the Studio fans will always run at this minimum RPM.

And it sounds like (excuse the pun) that minimum fan speed is much higher than it needs to be. The fans could probably run at half that speed and still keep the SoC very cool.

Good call! Based on your idea, I did some checking, and found this from CrystalIdea, the maker of Macs Fan Control.

Wonder why Apple did this. Clearly it would be easy for Apple to set the actual minimum at 1100 (which is their own spec for the minimum), and allow it to go up to the max (1315) as needed. Maybe it's just an error that they'll be correcting with a future firmware update.

Mac Studio fan control and fan noise - CrystalIDEA Blog

crystalidea.com

 

[theorist9]

And here's something from Max Tech indicating that Apple is oddly throttling the GPU on the Ultra, even though it doesn't get very warm. So this is likely not thermal throttling; could be a power supply issue, or something that limits the ability to deliver power to the chip. Note that the true throttling may not be as extreme as indicated here; this could be partly due to software.

 

[theorist9]

Curious about these other possible changes with the M2:

1) Support for >2 displays. The M1 only drives two displays (and thus only 1 external for the laptops), which is a deal-breaker for some.

2) >16 GB max RAM. The 16 GB M1 uses 2x 8 GB LPDDR4X. The 32 GB M1 Pro uses 2 x 16 GB LPDDR5. So if the M2 switched to using LPDDR5, it could also be configured with 32 GB memory without needing any additional memory modules.

3) Faster RAM, say LPDDR5X. https://news.samsung.com/global/sam...comm-technologies-snapdragon-mobile-platforms

4) HDMI 2.1

5) DisplayPort 2.0. Allows 80 Gb/s unidrectionally over TB4, enabling 8k @60 Hz/10 bit lossless.

6) Relatedly, 8k display support. Perhaps unlikely until Apple makes its own 8k display, or 8k TV's gain a greater market share. But maybe we'll see 7k if the 7k XDR rumors are true.

7) PCIe 5.0 SSD. These probably won't be seen until the M3, since they won't have significant non-enterprise commercial availability until 2023.