Let's Analyze Video and Leaks: Apple's Navi 22 GPU part of APU?

Haeven

macrumors member
Original poster
May 9, 2020
34
6
Hi all, Earlier, in another thread (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/will-arm-macs-have-arm-gpus.2243362/), I posted this video:
and conducted a basic analysis.

Recent rumors stated that Intel iMac will be launched on Q3 2020, (maybe) integrated AMD GPU for ARM Macs (no Navi 2x for ARM Macs) and Navi 2x will be shown/announced in September or October. Four Navi 2x GPUs will be released by end of 2020 (according to video). Two of them will be in consumer cards. And the video stated that two GPUs will be in APUs.

Does that mean Apple's Navi 2x GPU, in 2020 Intel iMac, will be in APU form? And if it is in an APU, does that mean the GPU will not be as powerful as a discrete GPU?

Edit: Nevermind. It can't be an AMD APU because it has an Intel CPU. I'm so dumb because I think too quickly haha.
 
Last edited:

verticalines

macrumors newbie
Mar 12, 2015
28
8
AMD needs one Big Navi to take on Nvidia's upcoming Ampere flagship. Holy hell do they need to show some promise on their graphics front. They seem to do ok with the compute models so a refresh of one of those models would help. Then the typical consumer refresh would be a 5 -> 6 refresh we come to expect.

For these designs, there's no possibility of an APU without a reconfiguration (so essentially separate design). You would see the same building blocks in future APUs but you can't physically cram the big ones in without well, running out of space on the CPU die. It's why the APUs have like Vega 8/11 instead of the full card configurations. With node shrinks, the potential for denser designs open up but still, if it's an APU, you only have so much space and it's a balancing act.

The 5700 XT takes up like 240W by itself at peak full load. APUs combined are generally what, 65W or so? Apple tends to pick the mobile graphics chips which are around 50W and when paired with a 95W max desktop CPU, not exceed say 145W. Their desktops, sans the iMac Pro, are essentially their laptops with bigger screens attached and some desktop processors when available. About halfway from the 240W needed to dissipate a 5700 XT by itself. AMD isn't the most aggressive power sipper like Nvidia but don't expect miracles--let's say 215W peak next release. That's an improvement on their end, still not enough for say the non-Pro iMac chassis.

Cooling dictates what Apple can configure and offer.
 

Haeven

macrumors member
Original poster
May 9, 2020
34
6
^^ I suggested to Apple, a few years ago, that they could cool using water cooling. Water cooling surrounds GPU or CPU and lays flat on back of chassis. Greater surface area at the back would dissipate heat while water around PU collects heat. haha That was fun. But it probably wouldn't work right?

But I understand what you're saying. Apple probably won't use an APU because APUs are not as good as cards. APUs are very limited by thermals and power constraints.
 

verticalines

macrumors newbie
Mar 12, 2015
28
8
I think the general long-term reliability of water-cooling would make me hesitant, especially since Apple does all-in-ones. A air cooler can effectively last the whole lifespan of the desktop with some cleaning so no worries. Since they don't really overclock on Macs, designing to a maximum is a bit easier to account for. I actually would like to see them use more passive cooling vents ala those spheric exhausts in the Pro line, hoping the future iMacs can go more passive because that's a big heatsink on the back.

For APUs, their own Apple SoC can pretty much match or near something from AMD with some desktop tweaks and accelerators. APUs are more limited by silicon size because if you're going to add more, why waste die space and not just go for a discrete or even separate chip? It has to fit a more specific user case that prioritizes space and size like laptops or tiny machines like a Mac Mini or iMac where midrange is enough.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.