Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.


macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001

In its latest 10-K annual report (PDF) filed last month, Intel confirmed the end of its long-heralded "tick-tock" strategy of delivering new microprocessors to the market. Intel originally introduced the product cadence to the world in 2006 with the launch of the "Core" microarchitecture, alternating "ticks" of shrinking chip fabrication processes with "tocks" of new architectures.

Over the past ten years, Intel has successively delivered new processor families based on this tick-tock cycle on a nearly annual cycle from its 65 nm manufacturing node all the way up until recently. The tick-tock release cycle allowed Intel to reestablish dominance in both the consumer and enterprise CPU markets and had given OEMs such as Apple a regular update cycle to rely on for annual product updates. But with chip updates stretching about beyond a yearly cycle in recent generations, Apple's product launch cycles have started to be affected.

In the face of the difficulties in maintaining the tick-tock cadence, Intel has announced that the launch of Kaby Lake this year as the third member of the 14-nm family following Broadwell and Skylake will mark the official end of the tick-tock strategy. Instead, Intel will move to a new "Process-Architecture-Optimization" model for the current 14 nm node and the 10 nm node.

As part of our R&D efforts, we plan to introduce a new Intel Core microarchitecture for desktops, notebooks (including Ultrabook devices and 2 in 1 systems), and Intel Xeon processors on a regular cadence. We expect to lengthen the amount of time we will utilize our 14nm and our next-generation 10nm process technologies, further optimizing our products and process technologies while meeting the yearly market cadence for product introductions.
This development is not unexpected, as semiconductor foundries have had increasingly tough times creating smaller process nodes as fabrication of smaller transistors has become increasingly expensive and complex. Transistors are rapidly approaching the physical limits of traditional semiconductor geometries, and the famous Moore's Law regarding transistor density has been formally acknowledged to no longer be valid.

Intel has no doubt moved to this new release model in an attempt to get back to a regular product and platform cadence as it struggles with the technological challenges of bringing new fabrication nodes to volume production. As noted in our Mac Buyer's Guide, many of Apple's Macs have gone without update for the longest time since we began tracking them, though Apple has yet to update to the available Skylake microarchitecture for its Mac line. Some product uncertainty is due to continue as the launch of Intel's Kaby Lake microarchitecture has been recently delayed to the second half of 2016 after Skylake suffered similar setbacks last year.

Article Link: Mac Update Cycle Faces Uncertainty as Intel Abandons Tick-Tock Strategy


macrumors 68000
Jul 28, 2012
Intel has no doubt moved to this new release model in an attempt to get back to a regular product and platform cadence as it struggles with the technological challenges of bringing new fabrication nodes to volume production.

Color me ignorant if I'm wrong here, but will this not help get Macs back on a regular update cycle? Streamlined development process = less delays from Intel = less Mac delays?


macrumors G3
Nov 26, 2007
I see three possibilities for Apple:
- Stay with Intel. Have stagnant product lines.
- Swap to ARM. Theoretically you might see a performance decrease, but I kind of doubt it... It seems to me that ARM performance has eclipsed low end Intel performance by now, and it's gaining ground on the higher end stuff that Apple uses in the rMBP.
- End Mac. Move to iOS only. Until they get Xcode on iOS, I don't think it's feasible to end Mac. Unless they want to let Linux or Windows machines start programming iOS devices.
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jeremiah256


macrumors 6502
Nov 15, 2015
This is more of a reflection of computers optimizing for battery life and mobility rather than raw compute power. The money and the incentives are in mobile, so the economics of getting a 2x more transistors every 12 months is affected.

If it weren't for mobile, and all computers are tied to an electric plug, Intel can invest all of its money to the next generation of computers, (quantum etc.), and recoup its investments.

Now the goal is to get more power savings from the same chip so that you can make your device thinner...


macrumors 68020
Feb 13, 2005
So the question becomes, When is the best part of the cycle to purchase a Mac--at the shrink, at the introduction of a new architecture, or at the optimization? All have advantages and disadvantages.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.