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

Waiting for Skylake MBP thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
PTLove said:
And how do you handle the different OSX software stack, and all the third party binaries?

People always gloss over that part when discussing ARM macs.
Click to expand...

Not to get too technical, but

How do you handle all that context switching between tasks.
How do you handle modern MMU operations.
How do you handle high external interrupt rates from devices / ports.

There are some very valid reasons why ARM based devices don't run full OSes.
It does work, but the performance might be very limited.
I know ARM can do all of that, but not at a performance level you'd like to see.
 
Last edited:
Uni Grad said:
iOS and OSX share multiple bundle structures. I'm sure its doable. And lets not forget iOS is based off of OS X, I'm sure the talented developers at Apple can create an ARM based OSX - though its processing power will be limited.

And tbh, if I knew how to, I wouldn't be here.:D

Also clearly this person sees it as a possibility:

www.cultofmac.com/289773/ex-apple-exec-says-macs-run-arm-processors-2016/
Click to expand...
There was a video I saw a while back comparing ARM CPUs in iPhone devices to the X86 CPUs in the Macs, and I think the information in it explains why Apple may not move to ARM. It said that ARM processors use an instruction set called RISC and X86 ones use CISC. RISC means that the processor uses small and simple instruction sets while CISC uses more advanced, complex, and larger instruction sets. I may be wrong and Apple could move to ARM, but I hope not, and if they do, I think they should keep it on the 12" MacBook.
 
PTLove said:
And how do you handle the different OSX software stack, and all the third party binaries?

People always gloss over that part when discussing ARM macs.
Click to expand...

Emulation initially. It'll suck, just as it did when we moved from PowerPC to x86. I'm not saying I'd want it (actually would be against it), but I could see Apple doing it as a way to increase profit margins on the OS X line equipment.
 
Aditya_S said:
There was a video I saw a while back comparing ARM CPUs in iPhone devices to the X86 CPUs in the Macs, and I think the information in it explains why Apple may not move to ARM. It said that ARM processors use an instruction set called RISC and X86 ones use CISC. RISC means that the processor uses small and simple instruction sets while CISC uses more advanced, complex, and larger instruction sets. I may be wrong and Apple could move to ARM, but I hope not, and if they do, I think they should keep it on the 12" MacBook.
Click to expand...

No, RISC and CISC aren't the barriers here. In fact RISC is more efficient than CISC, enabling faster clock speeds and quicker completion of tasks.

Putting ARM on MBP would jeapordize that product line. It SHOULD only be for rMB, if it ever does happen.

But its a great undertaking, that Im not sure Apple would want to take.
Even with the current Intel Core M processors, great differentiation exists between the rMB and rMBP. So Im sure Apple will stick with Intel Core M to maximize profitability.
 
Last edited:
shareef777 said:
Emulation initially. It'll suck, just as it did when we moved from PowerPC to x86. I'm not saying I'd want it (actually would be against it), but I could see Apple doing it as a way to increase profit margins on the OS X line equipment.
Click to expand...

They were able to get away with emulation because the x86 came with much more basic power, particularly on the portables which were stuck on the G4. That's unlikely to be the case if moving to ARM.
 
Aditya_S said:
There was a video I saw a while back comparing ARM CPUs in iPhone devices to the X86 CPUs in the Macs, and I think the information in it explains why Apple may not move to ARM. It said that ARM processors use an instruction set called RISC and X86 ones use CISC. RISC means that the processor uses small and simple instruction sets while CISC uses more advanced, complex, and larger instruction sets. I may be wrong and Apple could move to ARM, but I hope not, and if they do, I think they should keep it on the 12" MacBook.
Click to expand...

Apple used the PowerPC, a RISC based processor architecture, for a decade. For a good portion of that time, Apple put out computers that were faster than their Wintel equivalents when comparing clock speeds. RISC vs CISC would not prevent a transition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uni Grad
Brad9893 said:
Apple used the PowerPC, a RISC based processor architecture, for a decade. For a good portion of that time, Apple put out computers that were faster than their Wintel equivalents when comparing clock speeds. RISC vs CISC would not prevent a transition.
Click to expand...
Oh, never mind then, but I still would not like for them to switch to ARM as Windows wouldn't be supported anymore. I don't know if ARM supports dGPUs from Nvidia or AMD because the current fastest iOS device processor, the A9X has about the same GPU power as an Xbox 360 from 2005 stated directly by Apple which is definitely not enough to power the retina displays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cberge, Dydegu, archi_130w1 and 1 other person
Aditya_S said:
Oh, never mind then, but I still would not like for them to switch to ARM as Windows wouldn't be supported anymore. I don't know if ARM supports dGPUs from Nvidia or AMD because the current fastest iOS device processor, the A9X has about the same GPU power as an Xbox 360 from 2005 stated directly by Apple which is definitely not enough to power the retina displays.
Click to expand...
No you would be incorrect in saying that. Currently the iPad Pro, powered by the A9X processor, powers a 12.9" 264 ppi (2372 X 2048) Retina display, which is both higher in pixel density and population than the Intel powered 12" Macbook 226 ppi (2304 X 1440) Retina display.

ARM based GPUs are offered by Nvidia, however AMD does not produce them, of what I am aware.

You would be partly correct in saying that Windows does not support ARM devices. Windows 10 does not, however is expected soon. Previous version of Windows are, however, compatible w/ ARM devices.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Brad9893
GioFerrara said:
That's fine, but it's still a product the company offers. It's also the product that made them relevant in the first place. Not one mention? Not a hint? Nothing? That is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

YEAH. There would be no iPhone, iPad, Watch, heck iOS, without Mac and MacOS.

Give the old guy some respect will you Apple!:mad:
 
Heinz92 said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10281/intel-adds-crystal-well-skylake-processors-65w-edram

Could these be in new mbp's? I mean 65W isn't that much and it is said they are made for all-in-one machines. Of course all-in-one would rather be a desktop mac. But there is also a mobile Version called Crystal Well that runs on 45W.

C'mon Apple hurry up!
Click to expand...

65W is too hot as the 15" rMBP has always used 45W CPUs. But as you said, there are 45W parts with Iris graphics as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: utilitas
Hellhammer said:
65W is too hot as the 15" rMBP has always used 45W CPUs. But as you said, there are 45W parts with Iris graphics as well.
Click to expand...

Ah okay, did not know that the 15" used 45W. But for the 13" or maybe 14" in the old 13" size case, 45W would probably be too much then.
 
Heinz92 said:
Ah okay, did not know that the 15" used 45W. But for the 13" or maybe 14" in the old 13" size case, 45W would probably be too much then.
Click to expand...

28 W is what we've seen in previous for 13". 15 W is speculated this time. So no 45W.
knassar said:
Speculated by our forum members, not analysts, i may add ^^
Click to expand...

And you think we're less than any analyst? o_O
 
  • Like
Reactions: WRONG and utilitas
and my analysis is : if it is good enough i will buy, othernwise not
and current macs are not
 
  • Like
Reactions: WRONG
killawat said:
if you mean Optical Audio, All Macbook Pros had optical audio. This article is just referred to the higher output capabilities of the newer Macs.
Click to expand...

Yep, thank you for the clarification.

ThisBougieLife said:
Ah damn it. Now I have to admit to the fact that I owned a MacBook Pro for three and a half years and never once realized it had optical out. I don't know if I would've used it, as I tend to prefer a USB DAC, but wow...I feel really stupid right now. -_-

Any other secret capabilities the MBP was hiding from me? -_-
Click to expand...

Yeah, a lot of people don't know of this feature. I didn't know for a long time until I read about it somewhere.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back