I would be happy with a 2020 old-school MacBook Pro Intel+Nvidia...😩
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.
Kuo: Apple to Launch Several Macs With Arm-Based Processors in 2021, USB4 Support Coming to Macs in 2022
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
... The rumour as claimed is that Macs will drop Intel processors and adopt Arm processors.
That will affect Bootcamp - the feature allowing a Mac user to boot into a regular Windows environment. We can't say how it will affect it - because maybe the support will change to Windows on Arm. Maybe it'll go away. But without an Intel processor, maintaining the status quo is impossible, and thus yes, we do know that this would without any question, affect Bootcamp.
They almost certainly wouldn't start on the high end, yes.
(Although, to advocate for the counterpoint: it's on the high end that Intel currently doesn't have a good story. Ice Lake-Y and -U have saved low- to mid-end laptops, but with 45W and beyond, their current chips are quite mediocre, with no fix in sight for another two years. Comet Lake won't fix it. Rocket Lake after that won't fix it.
Now, Ice Lake-SP should, and maybe we'll see that one trickle down to the iMac Pro and Mac Pro next year. We'll see.)
I really don't see this as a problem. This would be one of many times Apple has done fat binaries. They had 68k+PPC binaries in the 90s, PPC+x86 binaries in the 00s, and even PPC+PPC64+x86+x86_64 binaries in the 00s.
They almost certainly have internal builds of macOS running on various architectures. I would bet there are prototype builds of it running on RISC-V, even — just in case Apple wants to save some money on that ARM license.
Yeah, it’s an overall target gross profit margin; around 32% for hardware.
Especially within a product line, upgrade pricing subsidizes the base price. Overall that was the point I was trying to make. The reason you can have a $1,299 base price 13” MBP is because the 8G upgrade is $200. (And SSD upgrades are similarly high priced.)
OP wants a 16GB base model because he thinks he can get it for the $30 difference in the component pricing between 8 and 16GB. That’s not how it works.
I predict that in the first few years of its introduction, new ARM based processors will be a major failure for Apple causing them to loose most of their 10 percent share of the pc market. The reason is that initially a lot of software will be incompatible and just won't work on the new processors (at least for the first few years). The second reason is that there will no longer be the option to dual boot OSX with Windows as Windows won't be compatible. The only saving grace for arm based processors is if the speed majorly outperforms Intel chips and if the cost of chipsets is reduced.
Geekbench, Anandtech 's article. Along with AWS Numbers. Apple A13 Single Thread Performance. All of these are Data. You pointed to KeyDB as if Single Thread Performance doesn't matter in KeyDB and other DB while ignoring all others. There are number of company running their software on M6g at this moment.
1) people who really want windows buy a windows machine. Apple can’t base its strategy on windows. And windows-on-mac is a small portion of mac users.
2) there will initially be MUCH MORE software compatible with ARM mac, because it will be able to run most iPadOS and iOS software natively. There are orders of magnitude more of such software than is currently available for the mac.
It's not clear what point you're trying to make. Amazon's chips are for very different workloads than Apple's. Apple is focused on (and good at) single-core performance because that matters a ton; for the most part, JavaScript is limited to a singlt thread (yes, I know about workers), for example. Getting parallelism to make sense in general-purpose apps is also hard.
In contrast, Amazon is doing this for apps that are highly specialized.
My point was that some people are excited about an ARM Mac, but they should more be excited about an extra bump in ram and storage IMHO
Are you suggesting that existing iOS and iPadOS apps will run unmodified on an arm version of macOS?
I really don't see the basis for this assertion. Yes, Catalyst is a thing, but a Catalyst app on a Mac is an awful experience (just try launching Home), and changing CPU architectures isn't going to change that.
A lot of those who runs Windows on Mac do this because of Windows only software, not because they prefer Windows
x86 are 100% able to emulate ARM, the proof of this is that iOS app are often build inside xCode simulator
Give it time. They just now added keypress events and indirect pointer support to iPadOS. As iPadOS apps are updated to support keyboards and trackpads, those apps will work much better in catalyst. They have also been adding additional catalyst capabilities over the last couple of OS releases, so it will all get better.
Yes, the lack of Cuda on current Mac is really a Limiting factor for me and a lot of people in machine learning
Again, apple doesn’t really care about Windows on mac people anymore. They needed to a decade ago. Now they don’t.
Of course x86 can emulate Arm, but that’s not what the simulator does. When you build for the simulator it builds an x8–64 package.
Anyway, Arm is technically superior to x86, so Apple switching to it will be good.
I was replying to the point is we have ample of evidence that ARM can be and are already competitive to x86. And yet people constantly say otherwise. There is nothing different about work load on an N1 ARM than a x86 Desktop CPU other than the AWS CPU has many more core. It doesn't even offer SMT like Marvell's implementation of ARM on Server. And Apple has already shown their ARM chip perform faster in iPadOS / iOS Safari compared to Safari on x86 Mac.
People might not like ARM on Mac, That is Fine.
People might not agree ARM on Mac makes sense, That is Fine.
People might not think ARM on Mac makes financial sense, That is Fine.
I absolutely accept we may agree to disagree on opinions.
But suggesting ARM has not proved to be as fast as x86 now ( and in some cases will never be made as fast as x86 ), is misinformation at best, disinformation at worst.
Last edited:
They did, but they also went through a lot of effort to make those iPadOS pointers not look and feel like macOS or Windows pointers.
Which, yes, still helps Catalyst on macOS. But right now, Catalyst is pretty mediocre, has launched way prematurely, and Apple's own apps are mostly bad (one exception being Podcasts).
It will.
The other shoe that needs to drop for your assertion, though, is for app devs to care. Unless you're arguing that Apple will eventually force their hand and put iOS apps in the Mac App Store without the dev's input.
[automerge]1585416448[/automerge]
The iOS Simulator is called a simulator because it's not an emulator. iOS apps that run in the simulator are actually x86, not ARM.
Kind of? But Amazon's CPUs don't add to the evidence. They're completely irrelevant.
It's like taking Xeon Phi and saying "see? here's proof x86 can scale to 72 cores!" Which, yes, Xeon Phi is x86, but is otherwise is misleading.
No. The workload on an N1 is extremely different than on an x86 desktop. Or any desktop.
Maybe, but that's not really the point you were making.
No, lot of peoples do care and I think Apple too, especially if you work for a company with a Windows only internal software
You are right, but ARM emulator exist and run smoothly
no ARM is not superior, not at all
[automerge]1585416615[/automerge]
You are right, my fault
by arm emulator exist for x86, especially Android emulator and they run smoothly
Catalyst isn’t a magic “deploy on macOS” button. Your assertion is that most iOS/iPadOS will be available - but catalyst is available already and yet no flourish of catalyst apps on Mac - and the issue is unrelated to the cpu architecture.
Why do you keep repeating this same ridiculous claim?
Xeon Phi performers poorly in single thread performance, Which makes your point moot.
Workload is software dependent. That is nothing Hardware about work load. That is not even the correct terms to use in the first place. You could have ran Handbrake on the N1, Photoshop on the N1. SPEC on the N1. If you dont understand what Anandtech were testing then there is aboustely no point in further discussing.
So does Amazon N1.
So you concede that using N1 to make any point about mobile or desktop CPUs didn't make any sense.
Well, it is superior. In terms of engineering, ARM is better than x86.