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.
M2 Chip Rumored to Arrive in 2022 With Redesigned MacBook Air
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, true but the only problem is that those cards are very very old. Apple should have those as baseline. 16core GPU is okish for the entry level but we need 5700 baseline with another gpu above it. Doesn't need to be 3090 or any of that but it should be able to be on par with the mid from AMD and Nvidia now. Not 3 years ago
Maybe. The current Intel 27" iMac tops out with a AMD Radeon Pro 5700XT which a 32 core M1 GPU can probably beat easily. A theoretical M2 GPU would probably be 10-20% faster. I don't know if Apple would feel the need to better that in an iMac.I really hope we get more than 32-core GPU for the bigger iMac
Best option, IMO, would be a 32" iMac with Jade C-Die and 10 CPUs and 16/32 GPUs with an "iMac Pro" in the same chassis with Jade 2C-Die with 20 CPUs and 64 GPUs.
That way people can pick which one best fits their price-performance envelope without having to go Mac Pro for Jade 2C-Die (though I expect they will have to for Jade 4C-Die).
Yeah, that could work too. I just hope we will get to see the bigger iMac this year in a fall event.
not sure it will be for power cords and for efficiency Corazon current and one has more?! Not sure where you’re getting us to Maddox from or what details are none of the 815 CPU as it still has yet to be mentioned or clarified by Apple.
These rumors are absurd. I've been holding off on buying a MacBook for so long now and I KNOW that the moment I decide to get it, the new one will be released
I hope this isn't the case, but it's certainly a possibility. Just like Intel Xeon lags the Core-i series but has substantially the same internals.
We might see Apple's version of Intel's Tik-Tok cadence, with a new micro-architecture every two years, and other improvements, such as more cores, in the alternate years.
In which case, I would probably wait for the next iteration in 2022. I have an M1 Mini and MBP16 to fill the gap until then.
Newsflash....they already have one!
...but I expect you mean a 3rd party GPU on a PCIe card or dedicated mobile GPU chip?
Answer: Highly unlikely.
Apple will develop their own on-die or on-package GPUs for everything with the possible exclusion of the Mac Pro which may get either an Apple-designed PCIe GPU or some kind of accelerator card like the AfterBurner.
If I were you, I'd hold off another 4-5 months. In fact, I am you, as I've been holding off for 3 years. In fact, next week will be 10 years to the day that I bought my mid-2011 MBA. It's still going strong despite being stuck on Sierra (I've been able to upgrade it from Lion all the way up), and while it is solid, Sandy Bridge is showing its age compared to Skylake, let alone the M1. When the new Pros come out is when I'm going to pull the trigger.
BL.
Oh, fanless 15” Air even with smth like A12 for 900$ would perfectly satisfy me. Actually, 95% of the Air users don’t need the m2 or even the m1 power.
Pentium2, Pentium3? Nope.
And by putting the M in the iMac, they messed up the mobile/desktop distinction.
They never did. Just at 15.6”, they couldn’t round up to 16” without getting sued. TV makers do it all the time by calling it a “class”. Our 48” is really 47.5”.
...so much pathetic wishful thinking .... core and gore counts and what not.
real world performance doing [some] things matter - not marketing performaces of "twice as fast"
if it is going to be able to do twice as much - it will cost at least half more than the one compared to.
is efficient and it will price not according to what it costs but to "what is the highest price average customer may be willing/able to pay"+ 30%
definitely - there will not be any sub 1K$ 15 "macbook air" for the next couple years. Neither will 30 cores or 64 graphic cores.
this over-wishful thinking leads to disappointment and post-event depression.
real world performance doing [some] things matter - not marketing performaces of "twice as fast"
if it is going to be able to do twice as much - it will cost at least half more than the one compared to.
is efficient and it will price not according to what it costs but to "what is the highest price average customer may be willing/able to pay"+ 30%
definitely - there will not be any sub 1K$ 15 "macbook air" for the next couple years. Neither will 30 cores or 64 graphic cores.
this over-wishful thinking leads to disappointment and post-event depression.
Last edited:
The funny thing here: You are thinking that that is what everybody wants.
My wife picked up the last 17" Mac they had, due to her disability (legally blind). To her, the screen size is what was more important, as she erred on the side of cheap after her 2008 17" MBP died, and she went to a 12" Macbook. She's happy with having the Core i7 with 16GB of memory and is completely fine with it.
For me, Anything that Apple has put out in the past 2 years would be a significant improvement over what I have; however, working at Intel and maintaining a data center at Intel, I happen to know firsthand the issues they have been having with their processors. SkyLake, Cascade Lake, Ice Lake, and Copper Lake have all had their share of problems that they have kept a set of Broadwell boxes around for their testing (at least in the DC I maintained; it was all related to Kafka and Splunk and the Green Lake project for HP), so I knew what I was passing up on. And even with passing on those, if I pulled the trigger on any of those CPUs even in the Core i5 let alone Core i9 range - hell, even Core i3 would have worked - All of them would have been an improvement over the Sandy Bridge Core i3 I have. But I saw the writing on the wall for those long before Apple went into production for M1.
So for me, marketspeak and what you are saying doesn't really matter, as any new MBP that comes up will be a huge 10-year improvement on the MBA that I have, even though it is still performing like a champ, yet more stable than a brick in the library at Oxford.
BL.
Is anyone else not excited by the idea of a redesigned Air? I feel like they finally got the current design so it's not an easily overheating pile of crap (i.e. by ditching Intel Y-series in favor of M1/Apple Silicon) and it's actually quite good!
Actually what burned me the most was when I bought the mid 2019 15" MBP, then 4 months later they released the 16" with better cooling and the better keyboard. I was so frustrated!
The computers were called 15inch machines by Apple. Everybody referred to the them as the 15inch MBP.
It will be interesting to see if apple changes the core layout, e.g. Instead of 4 big and 4 little cores they keep 4 little and go to 6, 8 or 10 big cores. Then pair these with 16, 32 or more GPU cores. The M1 already thrashes other notebook and desktop chips and that’s really only with 4 performance cores, doubling or trip them is going to be exciting to see.
I expect the baseline M2 will remain 4P+4E CPU cores and 8 GPU cores.
Based on reports / leaks, Jade C ("M1X") has 8 performance ("big") and 2 efficiency ("little") CPU cores and will be available with 16 or 32 GPU cores. I expect "M2X" will be similar.
by the time the redesigned low end line is released, there may not be any difference between a MacBook and a MacBook Air. Apple may decide to retain the Air branding or may go with just MacBook. We won't know for sure until then.
In terms of nomenclature, M2 as the successor to the M1 makes sense: M# where M is the chip class, # is the generation. Just like MacOS10, MacOS11, etc.
But M1X doesn't make sense, since that would be [chip class][generation][chip class modifier].
Instead, it should be: [chip class] [chip class modifier][generation], e.g., MX1.
Or even cleaner, use a different letter to differentiate the high-end mobile chips, e.g., P1 for the first generation.
Then again, I'm a chemist, so I'm used to logical nomenclature.
But M1X doesn't make sense, since that would be [chip class][generation][chip class modifier].
Instead, it should be: [chip class] [chip class modifier][generation], e.g., MX1.
Or even cleaner, use a different letter to differentiate the high-end mobile chips, e.g., P1 for the first generation.
Then again, I'm a chemist, so I'm used to logical nomenclature.
Last edited:
They should go back to having a base class MacBook (which could be the multicolored "MacBook Air" we keep hearing about with the M2 chip) and then redesign the MacBook Air around the smaller, discontinued MacBook 12" (which is still the lightest machine they've ever made and which I have and love).
Apple loves light and thin, so they are probably doing going to go that route.
Appending an "X" to the end is how Apple has identified more powerful variants of their A series SoCs (A8X, A9X, A10X, A12X) so it would not be out of character for them to do the same with the M series SoCs.
That's exactly what is happening. And it isn't lackluster in any way. You only have this weird perception because of how long it has taken to produce the product.