Intel's Processor Roadmap Leaves Uncertainty for Apple's 2014 Mac Updates

[quagmire]

I'm glad plans are more clear for desktop CPUs. I really hope apple will refresh the iMac this year with a new CPU and even better gpu than in the current. Of course a desktop gpu in the iMac would be ideal.

If a new CPU are imminent and GeForce 880M comes this month, then an iMac refresh might come sooner than usual.

The 880M won't be much of an upgrade according to leaked specs. As it will still be using Kepler with VRAM bumped to 8 GB. It's basically a rebranded 780M. I suspect you would hit the GPU's limits before using all of that space.

At least for me playing X-Plane.

 

[Piggie]

Of course you can change an UI... the point is: can it be improved? And as far as I'm concerned, the iOS UI is pretty much perfect for what it's meant to be: a content-consumption mobile device.

Really ?

If the best minds in the world were given a blank sheet of paper, and told they had a 10" screen display, with a resolution of 2048x1536

The very best, useful, informative display, the best minds in UI design could come up with, after years of consideration would be.................

A grid of 20 icons and a row of 5 along the bottom.

The pinnacle of design, given the size and resolution of the space to work with.

 

[mtneer]

With the experience of A-series; Apple can arguably be said to be the best processor design company in the world. And Apple is also one of the best in getting large scale manufacturing done successfully.

Intel, since the early 2000's, has proven to be clueless in processor design or manufacturing. So, how about Apple buying the manufacturing operations at Intel? With the decline in manufacturing operations in the US in general, Apple maybe able to buy those fabs on the cheap.

Apple can then design and manufacture its own chips, and not have to share it with anyone else.

 

[mrxak]

I really wish Intel had more competition. AMD is a bit of a joke. ARM isn't anywhere close to ready for primetime. Intel may be doing some very exciting R&D but their roadmap sucks.

 

[quagmire]

I think people are getting a bit carried away with the whole ARM discussion.

The A7 is just as fast as the C2D in my Early 2008 MBP. The Haswell chips in the MBA are still quite a bit faster. Plus, only the MBA makes sense for an A-Series chip and Apple isn't likely to rewrite OS X to work on ARM's architecture just for the MBA.

 

[wizard]

I'm not sure I'd go that far, that is calling them perfect.

The 'low end' MacBook Airs are pretty near perfect at the moment. Don't need more speed,

Speed is always a factor when the device is used as a computer and not an Internet access device. This idea that computers are fast enough is asinine and seems to crop up with every generation of hardware and software. For trivial needs we have iPad, but when that doesn't cut the mustard performance counts.

battery run time is brilliant, I suppose a SDD capacity hike would be nice.

Actually the SSDs are a big issue for me and many others. 256GB barely cuts it these days. Especially if you run VMs or process lots of data. I'd actually rather see Apple triple the size of the SSD storage in these machines than to deliver a worthless 100 MHz clock update on the processor. They need to take advantage of the falling SSD prices and hammer Intel for a discount for not having anything for the year*

Certainly not interested in retina.

Actually neither am I. However I would lie a higher quality screen that hopefully is also a lower power screen. Every little bit helps.

* all of these horror stories about Intel having basically nothing new until next year may be true or they may be disinformation. I really don't know. My point is they may have something for the summer that hasn't been acknowledged yet.

The other thing here is that AMD could catch up to the point where their hardware is at least respectable. In the Mini I still see Kaveri as a possibility, that is as long as Apple can get TB 2 to work with it. If AMD enabled the higher performance memory interfaces for Kaveri it would give outstanding performance GPU wise. Right now all APUs suffer from bandwidth issues which is something Intel could also address in the Haswell refresh if they wanted too.

 

[Michael Goff]

I think people are getting a bit carried away with the whole ARM discussion.

The A7 is just as fast as the C2D in my Early 2008 MBP. The Haswell chips in the MBA are still quite a bit faster. Plus, only the MBA makes sense for an A-Series chip and Apple isn't likely to rewrite OS X to work on ARM's architecture just for the MBA.

Even if they did, prepare to have no real programs for it. I don't know why people want this.

 

[wizard]

You prefer process over architecture when deciding when to upgrade?

I don't know about him but in a laptop yes that is the preferred way to go. It allows you to realize the battery life time improvements

I'm the opposite myself. Unfortunately Intel has signficantly slowed down its tick-tock cycle, to more like 18 months from tick to tock rather than 12 as originally envisioned. Skylake is going to be very late.

I can actually see Apple shipping 14nm processors at the same time Intel does. Intels process advantage is slowly evaporating.

 

[Michael Goff]

I don't know about him but in a laptop yes that is the preferred way to go. It allows you to realize the battery life time improvements


I can actually see Apple shipping 14nm processors at the same time Intel does. Intels process advantage is slowly evaporating.

Their process advantage has always come in making huge amounts of them. They still maintain that advantage, and that isn't likely to change. How is it slowly evaporating? Also, when did Apple start making processors? I know they design them, but the process advantage is not dealing with R&D, but actually products being made.

 

[iMcLovin]

The 880M won't be much of an upgrade according to leaked specs. As it will still be using Kepler with VRAM bumped to 8 GB. It's basically a rebranded 780M. I suspect you would hit the GPU's limits before using all of that space.

At least for me playing X-Plane.

But 8gb VRAM is magnificant. Its exactly what I was hoping would happen this year around. I bought my top end iMac late 2012, that had 2 gb of VRAM. 8 gb of vRAM vs. 2 is a lot! Expecially when working in After Effects and such. ...that is a huge increase in RAM amount in less than 2 years.

with 2gb of VRAM after effects is constantly running out of GPU ram. I assume 8 would change that drastically.

 

[quagmire]

But 8gb VRAM is magnificant. Its exactly what I was hoping would happen this year around. I bought my top end iMac late 2012, that had 2 gb of VRAM. 8 gb of vRAM vs. 2 is a lot! Expecially when working in After Effects and such. ...that is a huge increase in RAM amount in less than 2 years.

with 2gb of VRAM after effects is constantly running out of GPU ram. I assume 8 would change that drastically.

Like I said for me, I am hitting the GPU's limits before running out of VRAM with the 780M playing X-Plane.

And X-Plane can be a VRAM hog as well.

 

[wizard]

Sadly this is all BS.

No way they will use ARM, since its far inferior to x86 in almost every way.

It is actually superior in many ways. Take a long hard look at Apple A7 and AMDs new ARM based server chip.

The 64bit chip has nothing to do with it except changing the architecture to support more efficient / faster performance for low level processing.

Again more BS. Apples early move to 64 bit is a huge step forward. They will quickly have the entire iOS ecosystem on a 64 bit platform. From that point the only direction is forwards.

It's like telling Apple to go back to PPC, there is no way they would do such thing. It just not cost efficient and consumer friendly. Overall its a downgrade path, and not a small one either.

Again totally irrational thinking, first you assume a performance down grade but that isn't a given. In fact the smaller, lower power ARM cores can mean a performance upgrade if more cores are available per watt or power. As for cost efficient Apple would not be paying for Intels very fat margins on processor chips. So the consumer would be getting far more performance per his computer dollar. With App Store and XCode all Apple would need to do is request of demand that apps be submitted with ARM binaries.

PS: Even Microsoft regret going after ARM with RT, it's essentially pointless and useless crap that does nothing but a Mobile Phone with bigger screen.

MS isn't regretting ARM, it is regretting that they tried to pass off crap as a respectable bit of competition for Apple. In fact I don't think you will find many that disagree with me here, RTs failure had nothing to do with ARM.

 

[Michael Goff]

Sadly this is all BS.


It is actually superior in many ways. Take a long hard look at Apple A7 and AMDs new ARM based server chip.

Again more BS. Apples early move to 64 bit is a huge step forward. They will quickly have the entire iOS ecosystem on a 64 bit platform. From that point the only direction is forwards.

Again totally irrational thinking, first you assume a performance down grade but that isn't a given. In fact the smaller, lower power ARM cores can mean a performance upgrade if more cores are available per watt or power. As for cost efficient Apple would not be paying for Intels very fat margins on processor chips. So the consumer would be getting far more performance per his computer dollar. With App Store and XCode all Apple would need to do is request of demand that apps be submitted with ARM binaries.


MS isn't regretting ARM, it is regretting that they tried to pass off crap as a respectable bit of competition for Apple. In fact I don't think you will find many that disagree with me here, RTs failure had nothing to do with ARM.

It is superior in ONE way.

Also, yes, the biggest complaint about Windows RT is that it can't 'run full windows programs', which is an ARM issue.

 

[pacalis]

I think the GPU performance discussion is misguided. If anything the delay of Haswell hurt MS much more than Apple, because it whole-handedly threw off the initial Surface release (the battery life in the original surface was untenable for windows users, and this was due to a non-haswell chip).

The current issue with Apple's products is they have crappy display technology in two critical products - the MBA and the thunderbolt displays.

The MBA has the crappiest display on the market of anything within hundreds of dollars of it's price point, and it is an issue for a huge number of potential customers. It has a crappier display than all the tablets despite costing more, being less portable and presumably being sold for productivity.

And the thunderbolt displays don't integrate well with the super premium side of the product line -a bigger display that performs worse than the display in the rMBP. Apple is going cheap and lazy - which is unfortunately what happens when you have an operations guy in charge.

 

[wizard]

You still need the speed increases. That isn't an effort to support crappy software, but the reality that computing demands increase every year.

I agree. Apple should focus on providing more useful storage/RAM specs and better software optimization.

Well that would be far better than a tiny 100 MHz upgrade that is for sure!

For instance, I just tried iCloud (and iPhoto, so that I can use iCloud) to integrate better with my ATVs.

iCloud is a joke with 5 gigs, which also has to fit the back ups for all my iDevices.

Yeah I'm a bit pissed off with iCloud myself. That however has nothing to do with Mac performance, it is rather a management decision by Apple.

iPhoto is practically unusable with my library of less than 20k photos: it keeps spinning every time I do anything. This is on a $2.5k 2gHz i7 Air from 2012 with 512gb drive and 8 RAM.

Not enough core maybe or maybe no OpenCL support? By the way are you running Mavericks? You should because in my case anyways it helped performance.

But I had stopped using iPhoto a while back, because it is such a sorry piece of software and because it corrupted/destroyed the metadata of my whole photo library a few years ago. Aperture is better, but it still crashes much more often than Adobe's Lightbox.

Apple does seen to be loosing it QC wise when it comes to software.

I don't mind paying a premium for Apple's design, within reason, but Apple needs to step up its game and improve/innovate.

True! But again this doesn't mean faster computers aren't needed. I'm seeing way to much in the way of crappy apps from Apple. Crappy in the sense that the crash or loose data.

BTW, if they change the chips inside the Apple laptops to some proprietary concoction, it'll likely be the death knell for Apple's PC line -- I don't think I have the stomach for another transition through emulation and later all new software.

Gee wiz stop with the whining. For one you won't see emulation and for another I'm not expecting Apple to drop i86 for those that need it. I'm expecting ARM though to come in new products that are cost effective yet still have a reasonable margin for Apple. They might not call them Macs nor IOS products. Instead they will be unitized piece of hardware running their own variant of Apples operating systems.

 

[Mechanic]

apple is sad...just sad...
apple should have a big update for each year rather than minor spec bump.

Maybe need to focus more on MP.

Did you read the article? Apple can't update there processors with anything but a minor speed bump because Intel has no major upgrade till Broadwell. Which is early 2015.
This also means that no other manufacturer is upgrading either.
Its not Apples fault Intel is slow getting there updates out.
Apple is already running the latest haswell's in there current Macbook Pro's.
And the latest in there iMac and Mac Pro. And in there Macbook Air's too.

 

[iMcLovin]

Like I said for me, I am hitting the GPU's limits before running out of VRAM with the 780M playing X-Plane.

And X-Plane can be a VRAM hog as well.

Yeah, Im just happy to have seen that 880 actually bumps the gpu from 4 to 8. Because AE is a complete hog. Its probably because of bad code, but after effects ray trace engine is so badly made, and adobe probably wont optimize it, so the only solution is to compensate with hardware.

I hope the imac 2014 will come sooner than usual.

 

[wizard]

Regardless of whatever problems there are with using Intel chips in Macs, there'd be a bigger problem if Macs were to transition to a new chip such as Apple's A series -- because many of us need Intel chips to run Windows. I rely on some Windows software for work. This is not an insignificant feature of Macs - the ability to run Windows directly off the chip. So let's not get any funny ideas of moving away from Intel!

This is why I don't see Macs leaving i86 anytime soon. Yet I can still see Apple introducing products that are personal computers but not Macs in name. I'd go for an ARM based laptop in a flash if I had Mac OS like control over the system. If Apple was to lock it down like iOS devices there would be far less desire.

Why? To get long long battery life even while expecting good performance. Done right it might even be a fan-less system, remove all rotating parts and you have far fewer failure mechanisms. I sit here with an iPad 3 and frankly I'm certain that Apple can deliver a high performance ARM based laptop either this year or next that would be a fine platform for most users. Apple would simply have to upgrade the GPU and add more 64 bit cores. None of this is difficult and is likely happening anyways at Apple right now.

I fully realize that it wouldn't be the machine for everybody but it would certainly be a good product and as good or maybe better than current AIR models. From my perspective if I get results similar to the AIRs at half the price why not go that route.

 

[George Zip]

'tis quite strange we've yet to see the Mac Mini make the jump to Haswell.

But as someone who recently got a late 2013 rMBP, I'm eagerly awaiting a Thunderbolt Display refresh. An iMac-like profile, reduced glare, Thunderbolt 2.0, and USB 3.0 would sure be delicious!

This EXACTLY. I just plunked down money on a new Monoprice Display (30"; 2560 x 1600) because my old Thunderbolt Display (2011 model, which is the last time it was frakking updated) got damaged in a lightning strike in the summer. I kept waiting and waiting, assuming that, surely, Apple would be releasing a new display in the fall prior to the release of the Mac Pro. Nope, nope, nope.

I've said it on these forums before, but it's still perplexing that Apple didn't do a silent refresh to USB3 at some point, or a full refresh after the tapered edge iMacs came out (to use that style enclosure) and go with USB3 and a couple of T'bolt ports, not to mention updating the magsafe connector.

This display (the Monoprice) is good, but the color/brightness is tough to calibrate (still fighting the back-of-display buttons).

I'm also a company man; I wanted to plunk my cash down on an Apple display, but I could absolutely not justify paying 2011 full price for a display that's nearly 3 years old (or older) technology-wise. That'd be like buying any 2011 Mac at the full original price nowadays.

I also want to see Apple get off their asses and actually release a display line again. I want some choices in size (21, 27, and 32 seem to be good sweet spots) and I do *not* want the next release to only be 4K (but I'm figuring it will be).

 

[wizard]

I'm with you on this, I'm a semi-pro user and I've been more and more disappointed by their pace with the updates and their software. I feel like they're leaving me behind so they can focus on their bigger stuff. I understand this from a marketing standpoint, but do they really want to sacrifice the pro market? I'm trying to move to Linux for this reason (wish me luck) and I often wonder if there are others like me doing this for the same reason.

I'm a Linux and Mac user and I fail to see how moving to Linux will solve the problem of no new Intel chips worth a damn. Beyond that if you think the software running on those Linux machines is better I have a few bridges to sell you. I can say without hesitation that the user space sucks big time on Linux! That doesn't mean that Linux doesn't have its uses, as noted I still use it, but if you expect great consumer apps that are as reliable as Apples you will be disappointed.

 

[Michael Goff]

I'm a Linux and Mac user and I fail to see how moving to Linux will solve the problem of no new Intel chips worth a damn. Beyond that if you think the software running on those Linux machines is better I have a few bridges to sell you. I can say without hesitation that the user space sucks big time on Linux! That doesn't mean that Linux doesn't have its uses, as noted I still use it, but if you expect great consumer apps that are as reliable as Apples you will be disappointed.

No new Intel chips are worth a damn? They're some of the best chips on the market. If they aren't worth a damn, what does that say about every other chip out there?

 

[wizard]

The iPad is a media consumption device, a tablet, a computer is much more than that.

Absolutely wrong! At times the iPad is actually a better creation device than a laptop or desktop. It all depends upon what you are doing. If you see iPad as only a consumption device you are missing the boat or are being willfully ignorant.

 

[bigpics]

apple should have a big update for each year rather than minor spec bump.

There goes Moore's Law (coined about Intel itself)

 

[wizard]

Is there eventually going to be a point in ti,e to where processors are so fast that we dont need to get faster?

Nope! We will continue to hit mini plateaus on the way to more and more advanced computers but I don't ever see them getting to the point where faster won't help. Faster will allow for more intelligent and robust operating systems for example. One day AI will be incorporated into to OS. The screens of today may very well be replaced by walls in the future with billions of pixels. Go far enough into the future and your computer will have legs and follow you around like in Star Wars.

People that think today's computers are fast enough are living in the past and are devoid of any sort of imagination.

 

[casperes1996]

No way.

If Apple does another CPU chip change to their own ARM, I'm going to be pissed.

But then again, so we really need faster chips at this point for the average Facebook, email, & Spotify consumer? Nope. We need more optimized software.

The reason why PowerPC became outdated, and Apple switched to Intel in the first place, was the RISC instruction set used by PowerPC. I would make no sense to switch to another RISC based chip, with perhaps the exception of the MacBook Air, as RISC CPU's can achieve a maximum of around 1 instruction per clock. To achieve the same speeds on an ARM chip, you would on a modern x86, would require a lot of cycles or/and a lot of cores. ARM has become quite fast, but does not compare to the level of performance you can draw from an Intel chip. For some users, a low power chip, perhaps based on ARM, or perhaps based on the new Atom Core, might be a better solution than your high power i-series, but for devices like the MBP, iMac, to an extend Mac Mini, and of course Mac Pro, such a switch would not make sense, and I just don't see it happening (unless Apple has a magic A8 running at 100GHz with 20 cores).

I think an interesting miss by this article, is the GPU upgrade cycle. First of all, will the Haswell refresh bring higher clocks to the iGPU too? And what about GeForce 800/R7/R9? The CPU isn't the only thing in a computer you can upgrade, and accelerators are becoming more and more important, with AMD's R series having dedicated sound processors on some models, and incredible OpenCL performance, and Nvidia actually incorporating an ARM chip directly on their Maxwell GPUs. Perhaps the general purpose compute speed bump for the next lineup won't come from CPU, but from better accelerators, and more apps using OpenCL, Cuda, CG, and OpenGL for more.

Broadwell not coming out until 2015 is old news by now, but that doesn't mean that this year won't bring interesting update. Better GPUs, faster SSDs, more retina displays, better networking with more 802.11ac, and more could still be in store, and I for one is quite excited for the Maxwell GPU lineup to come. On top of that I'd also like the dent around the keyboard on the retina MBPs to be just a tad bigger, making it more like the (old) non-retina ones... Just in case you're listening Jony...