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

Reliable Leaker Suggests Redesigned MacBooks in 2021 Will Include Both Apple Silicon and Intel Models

13" Macbook Pro and Air are moved to Apple Silicon so that is not changing and 2H2021 will be releasing 14" MBP(& possibly 14" MBA). 24" iMAC will be on M1 in 1Q2021. So, left is 16" MBP,27" iMAC,MAC Pro. Only possibility for Intel based MAC to continue is MAC Pro. In 2H22 or 1H23; MAC Pro will move to Apple Silicon.
 
What use cases will benefit from Intel hw?

I just bought a new Intel 13" and it's fine, but not great. The new M1's sound great.
 
brandsteve said:
What use cases will benefit from Intel hw?

I just bought a new Intel 13" and it's fine, but not great. The new M1's sound great.
Click to expand...
But be careful, benchmarks. Sometimes you get what you play for, and other times, you don't. I can't remember what Intel processor it was, but it rocked at standard stuff, but failed at anything 'hard''. Yeah, it usually sucked. At least for anything I tried to do with it.
 
I don't think the ARM processor architechture is the issue directly, but rather the relative lack of performance in their integrated graphics and seeming lack of PCI-E lanes for adding additional hardware.

The real compatibly problem is the lack of 32bit binary support which plagues all Macs right now thanks to the OS. I can't use a new Intel Mac without replacing nearly everything I have - I've calculated it would more than triple the cost of buying a new system. Also would break 90%+ of my games collection.
 
Maybe Intel for a return to plastic shell education grade laptops? Or a line for mass corporate deployment? Otherwise, what’s the point?
 
I don't believe that - I don't see why they would do that.
The M1 puts most Intel computers in the world to shame. The M2 or whatever it'll be called is probably around the corner with the iMac.

Maybe Apple wants to prove their point that even by releasing the latest and greatest Intel products, they will grab the crown for the next 10 years?
 
Bogus. No more Intel Macs. 2020 iMac was the last new Intel Mac. Future Macs will all be Apple Silicon to finish the transition.
 
CarlJ said:
There was already an article here about someone running 6 monitors on an M1 Mac, so 2-3 shouldn’t be a problem.
Click to expand...
That was using display link, which is a trash usb monitor implementation. It’s not considered a fully capable monitor output, and should not be used as a benchmark for other devices (since any computer can theoretically just add a bunch of displaylink monitors over usb)
 
  • Like
Reactions: freedomlinux, EugW and CarlJ
Once the Intel shift to lower nm process, the performance and power efficiency will boost and similar to Apple Silicon.
(however the Intel chips provide much more enterprise, custom,VM and external links function, it not good for power save)

Also currently the TSMC 5nm process is not good for higher frequency, as some as Intel current facing problem of achieve high frequency low nm process.

As M1 is similar design and frequency as A14 chip used in iPad and iPhone, the develop and manufacturing cost can be min. because of large volumes, limit of without eGPU function and 16GB memory controller can save dynamic costs and power, as most user should sufficiency especially on mobile products.

Redesigned a new housing for both two platform is much easy and no technology barrier for current engineering.
It only mean two different PCBA.
 
evec said:
Redesigned a new housing for both two platform is much easy and no technology barrier for current engineering.
It only mean two different PCBA.
Click to expand...
It means confused customers and longer dragging out of support for Intel-based Macs. Every year they release new Intel Macs is another year they have to support them with MacOS.

As a result, software that people need, does NOT need to be adapted to the M1 and makes that transition take longer too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ModusOperandi
Prof. said:
For professionals who can’t fully transition away from intel yet due to compatibility issues?
Click to expand...
Haha.
Love the naivety.
It’s about when the contract with intel expires. They had to have a little bit of an overlap timeframe wise in case things got nasty.
It’s also about the stock of processors they have at hand.
You lot think ‘reasonably’.
That’s why you’re wasting time reading and writing on forums. Myself included. But at least I’m not delusional. 🙂
#neveramillionaire
 
EugW said:
This makes perfect sense. I don't know why people would find it so hard to believe. Some customers will need Intel Macs for years to come. They will be in the minority, but they exist.
Click to expand...
It makes perfect sense to use the existing package, maybe even with updated processors.

However, if they are designing a new one, they certainly would streamline that to the new processors. Plus they certainly like to make it obvious, that these machines are the new ones.

So, new Intel Macs: Yes. New Intel Macs in a new enclosure: Highly unlikely IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vionc
subjonas said:
? Apple explicitly said there are new intel macs in the pipeline.
Click to expand...

We got it. When Joz was asked about more Intel-based Macs, he said:
What we did say from a system standpoint, is that we still had Intel systems that were in the pipeline, that we were yet to introduce. And certainly that was so. The very next month, we introduced an Intel-based iMac.
Click to expand...
 
thadoggfather said:
I wonder why

it is awkward the 2019 "new form" 16" is getting smoked by Air now, there's no 14" MBP anywhere to be seen nor an iMac redesign
Click to expand...
Smoke? Based on what? For example, just try to convert on M1 MacBook Air and Pro footage from iPhone 12 Pro 4K HDR Dolby Vision 24fps or 60 fps in Compressor 4.5 (latest version) to the in-built preset for Apple Devices, 4K HDR 10-bit, Dolby Vision 8.4. Video footage of 25 seconds 24 fps takes to export to this preset 2m 21sec, 60fps takes to export 5m 01sec. That is ridiculously slow. None of reviewers over the internet or YouTube have even tested it (period).
And there is no point to talk about video card, where 16" smokes both M1 MacBook Air and Pro.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ModusOperandi
Right now the M1 is faster, specifically core for core than any Intel / AMD offering.
However, there are some current (high-end performance) drawbacks in which I wonder what Apple's next step will be:

• Discrete Grfx.
Sure M1 GPU is better than Intel's, but AMD just launched the fastest grfx card: RX 6800XT. Normally we would have looked at Intel's next CPU and hope to get the AMD GPU in the next lineup of Macs.
What will be Apple's answer to the high-end GPU? I don't thing the Apple "M2" will be able to compete with the current high-end AMD / nVidia lineup.
• Loads of RAM
16 GB seems the current limit, and sure the "M2" will be able to increase the maximum RAM (maybe to 32 GB?), but... I wonder if > 100 GB will be a possibility soon with Apple Silicon.

Keeping those in mind, could it be that Apple doesn't have dedicated GPU and "loads of RAM-support" on the near-future roadmap?
And that there will be some need to deliver Intel / dedicated based GPU Macs for some time for high-end Macs?

Besides that, maybe Intel will get some kind of breakthrough coming up? As the iX-series development seem to have hit a wall for some time now... just a few % performance increase per series (feels like the Motorola issue with the G4 20 years ago...)
Maybe Apple could support x64 longer than we might think just to be safe.
 
I think after the Late February update of Windows 10 you will see Microsoft focus on Windows on Arm
After all the pitched Windows 10 as a service which means at some point those of us still on X86 hardware at some point will no longer be able to upgrade to the next update in favor of only ARM architecture.
 
MacsRgr8 said:
Right now the M1 is faster, specifically core for core than any Intel / AMD offering.
However, there are some current (high-end performance) drawbacks in which I wonder what Apple's next step will be:

• Discrete Grfx.
Sure M1 GPU is better than Intel's, but AMD just launched the fastest grfx card: RX 6800XT. Normally we would have looked at Intel's next CPU and hope to get the AMD GPU in the next lineup of Macs.
What will be Apple's answer to the high-end GPU? I don't thing the Apple "M2" will be able to compete with the current high-end AMD / nVidia lineup.
• Loads of RAM
16 GB seems the current limit, and sure the "M2" will be able to increase the maximum RAM (maybe to 32 GB?), but... I wonder if > 100 GB will be a possibility soon with Apple Silicon.

Keeping those in mind, could it be that Apple doesn't have dedicated GPU and "loads of RAM-support" on the near-future roadmap?
And that there will be some need to deliver Intel / dedicated based GPU Macs for some time for high-end Macs?

Besides that, maybe Intel will get some kind of breakthrough coming up? As the iX-series development seem to have hit a wall for some time now... just a few % performance increase per series (feels like the Motorola issue with the G4 20 years ago...)
Maybe Apple could support x64 longer than we might think just to be safe.
Click to expand...
We don't have to far. AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 HBM2 is even way faster. So looking forward for 16' solution.
 
Yebubbleman said:
This makes no sense. The goal is to move away from Intel. The only way we'd be seeing more Intel notebooks is if Apple is seriously struggling to add 4 ports and more than 16GB of RAM to its SoCs (in the case of both remaining Intel MacBook Pros) and to make a GPU that can trounce the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M (in the case of the 16" MacBook Pro). But even then, they could also just not update those Macs until they're ready. It's not like there wasn't an awkwardly long gap between the final "Retina" body style MacBook Pros and the first butterfly-keyboard-laden Touch Bar MacBook Pros.

Then again, his tweets are always cryptic as hell. He might not necessarily mean what we think it means.

Has he ever been wrong about anything? (I'm legitimately asking.)
Click to expand...
Apple said 2 more years of intel machines so.
 
I seriously doubt that we will see an Intel redesign.

First, the tweet doesnt sufficiently clearly imply it.

Second, it would compromise Apples transition strategy to a certain extend. They need to clearly signal to developers and customers that Intel macs are a thing of the past. Intel macs will probably continue to get the major software updates for quite a long time, but thats it. Anyone relying on Intel machines can still get them in the second hand market, corporate customers may get a customised offer. There is no need to continue to make hardware updates to Intel machines. The added performance would probably be slim, the current thermal designs cant handle Intel chips properly anyway. Creating a new formfactor that accommodates Intel thermals would be costly from a design standpoint and communicate misleading priorities.

Third, Apple certainly wants to keep the timeframe in which naive customers have to second guess themselves as to which silicon they want to have in their machines to an absolute minimum. Continuing to offer Intel macs and updating them would unnecessarily extend this period of uncertainty.

Fourth, as said before, I think it became very clear in the interview that "intel macs still in the pipeline" was referred to as a thing of the past. To me, the interview strongly suggests that the pipeline of intel macs has now run dry.
 
Last edited:
I'm guessing the reason for this is that Apple failed to realize that many Mac purchases come from students who really need Bootcamp because at their universities/schools require to use Windows software that doesn't exist on the Mac. And no, they cannot wait until Microsoft pushes Windows on ARM and software houses port their apps to ARM, because students need the software *now*.

Yes, you can say that for example you can use ArchiCAD instead of Revit, but tell this to your professors... and at the end, you realize you really need to use the same software as the rest of classmates if you don't want to run into difficulties at some point in the semester.

And there are applications that have no Mac equivalent (think ANSYS for example).

So, yes, moving to ARM is nice, but... the market is the market, and you should really be confident that the software your users need is ported to your new system *before* you release your new system.

Otherwise, this is what happens: you still need to release Intel Macs because your customers need specific software.
 
Apple can stop producing Intel based Mac by the end of year. The Intel CPU and x86 architecture is not design for mobile device.
 
asiga said:
I'm guessing the reason for this is that Apple failed to realize that many Mac purchases come from students who really need Bootcamp because at their universities/schools require to use Windows software that doesn't exist on the Mac.
Click to expand...

Valid point, but the current Intel Mac laptop offerings (maybe with a speed bump or two) will be just fine for most use cases for years and years. I'll bet anyone $100 that there will be no new form factor Macs with Intel processors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back