Why are so many of you hellbent that Intel folds? Is your fanboyism so great that you actually want a monopoly? Do you not remember what lack of competition looked like for Intel? Consumers lost for years.
You really want that to happen again?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Future Apple Silicon Macs Will Reportedly Use 3nm Chips With Up to 40 Cores
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You really want that to happen again?
More efficient and faster? Yes. My 16" M1 Max will get replaced as soon as M2 is revealed.
I agree. If you work with Adobe, Autodesk, Unity, Avid, Final Cut Pro, Ableton, Blender, Xcode, etc., it’s a needed upgrade.
If you’re watching Netflix in bed, I don’t know why you wouldn’t get an iPad?
I think the sound you heard was Intel execs passing out and hitting the floor.
They do seem to beat AMD on both single- and multi-threaded tasks.
It'll be more useful to see how CPUs with similar wattage do. Alder Lake-P (which I'm guessing we won't see until early next year) will be more comparable in wattage to M1 Pro and M1 Max, and Alder Lake-M (which will come even later) to M1. Until and unless an M1 Extreme for desktops comes out, this is tricky to compare.
But, yes, for a CPU generation that adds heterogenous cores, the power efficiency is still quite bad.
I feel sorry for those who purchased the maxed out Mac Pro's (2019). This same thing happened around the Power Mac G5 days. Steve Jobs sold us on how G5 was the future and it will be massively supported... barely a few years in, switched to Intel, that machine had the shortest useable lifespan of all my Macs. These Apple Silicon beasts will DESTROY the Mac Pro 2019. I can't wait for one of those in my studio!
What I like most about Apple M1 Chips is, that great Hardware becomes accessible zu everyone. For about 1000$ you get a M1 Mac Mini or even a M1 MacBook Air. Those already outperform high end Intel machines. Everything above are just nicer, better version of something that is already great.
Why? They got exactly what it said on the tin. Those machines didn't suddenly become less powerful (leaving aside all the internal expansion capabilities). If your workloads weren't heavily multithreaded, neither the iMac Pro nor the 2019 Mac Pro were a great choice. But if they were, they were pretty good.
He didn't exactly lie. He was, at the time, still hopeful that PowerPC was seeing a revival.
I don't understand this logic. The 2003 Power Mac G5 was a good machine. Better machines being released later on doesn't invalidate that.
If they go with two separate chips, that will then be what was done before the core-based Intel parts. e.g. both the dual G4 and dual G5 had two separate processors. If true, will be interesting what Apple will do for the interconnect between them.
Presumably each processor would only have access to its own integrated RAM? Or could it "reach out" to the RAM on the other processor (albeit at a performance cost)?
Presumably each processor would only have access to its own integrated RAM? Or could it "reach out" to the RAM on the other processor (albeit at a performance cost)?
If that were true we'd have seen Apple significantly expanding its share in the mobile space given its dominance in performance over Qualcomm, but we haven't - market share in the US against Android has decreased. People are locked into their ecosystems at this point and Apple's products are priced at a premium for top level specs.
CPU Mark scores on the M1X Pro/Max are 23,730 and 23,477 respectively. This M2 chip would easily best the AMD EPYC 7763, 87767 score. By the way the 7763, costs $8 grand!
Curious if they'll make Macs a yearly upgrade or will it be a few years — like can we expect a new iMac in 2022 with the newer chips? If so I'd hold off on purchasing one.
Last edited:
Don't feel sorry - Getting a lot of work done on my mac pro
Well, if you think of someone that bought a afterburner card for US$ 2k and the new laptop costs 500 more with 2 built in encoders AND decoders. (not counting the price of the MP)
If you need a tool, you buy the best tool you can afford that fits your needs the moment you need it. If you can afford to wait, then you don’t really need it.
I suspect most people that bought Mac Pros have already benefited from them in all the ways that having the extra features and power were designed to and will continue to benefit from them until such time a new more capable Mac is released that they can upgrade to.
First of all, the PC market is way larger than MacOS market. Until M Chips can go DIY, Macs will never sell over 10% market share globally. The M chips are just a microcosm for Apple to cut out their suppliers and control their own supply chain. Intel will never go away, unless AMD errodes their marketshare. Apple M chips will never take away Intel chipset marketshare. If AMD keeps their pricing vs performance ratio they can become the winner within 3 years.
I don't think we'll ever see a two-package design again.
Unless plans have changed, what we'll probably see is that they take the M1 Max ("Jade C-Die") and double or quadruple almost all of its chips, obviously with some coordinating chips in between. If you compare the M1 Pro to the M1 Max, the Pro is a "chopped off" Max; almost everything below that is mostly just the same chips (further LPDDR5 chips, SLC blocks, and GPU cores) doubled (on this picture, everything below the text "32-Core GPU" doesn't exist on the M1 Pro; other than that, it is almost the same). Take that entire thing and double it horizontally to get a 20-core (16+4, really) or a 40-core (32+8) CPU, and a 64-core or 128-core GPU. Which also means the M1 Extreme will have 800 GiB/s memory bandwidth, and the M1 Extreme Max will have 1,600 GiB/s — everything is simply doubled.
It's all on one package, with the big benefits of high bandwidth and low latency, and the drawback of low flexibility.
"My, CPU. Your cycles are SO plentiful!"
"Better to spend time using them to keep up with the Kardashians and to spy on you, my dear."
So, no 3nm until M3 in 2023? Sounds about right to me.
Back when rumors stated that M2 on 2022 was going to be the first 3nm chip, I was a bit sceptical, specially because all the delays the chipmakers are having. Now, 2023 seems like a more reasonable date for 3nm.
Back when rumors stated that M2 on 2022 was going to be the first 3nm chip, I was a bit sceptical, specially because all the delays the chipmakers are having. Now, 2023 seems like a more reasonable date for 3nm.
So the one company that will make the most powerful cpus that would benefit gaming are the one company making an OS on which, bar a handful of big titles, doesn’t have any gaming on it.