Caporegime
Rumour confirmed. Intel are in a dark place right now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53142989
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53142989
Apple to replace Intel and move to ARM - *** Confirmed as "Apple Silicon" ***
- Thread starter UberTiger
- Start date
Don
Will be interesting to finally see how ARM compares to x86 in a variety of different apps (rather than just the synthetic bench normally show on iPads)
I wonder whether this means that new Macs won't run Windows under Bootcamp? Or if they will then surely there would be a performance hit in Windows. I appreciate most people don't buy a Mac for Windows but it can be a factor in some people's decision such as running it for games.
The Surface Pro X windows Windows on ARM so hopefully not a problem.
Soldato
They can convert their Macbooks to ARM,and make them even less repairable(just look at YouTube channel such as Louis Rossman's channel),since existing tools can't be used. Then they will control integration even more,meaning unlike older MacBooks which could last years,which were upgradeable,and repairable,these will be essentially tablets with keyboards,so within 5 years updates will disappear,and new software won't work on the old OS. Also after seeing the Power PC to X86 transition,you are going to have fun if you want backwards compatibility,and have a joint Windows/Linux/MacOS environment. So if you had licenses which covered X86/Windows,instead of using a dual boot on your Mac,you will have to buy additional Mac specific licenses. You could try running a VM,but hard to say whether Apple will invest effort into it. At least they will look OK and have better battery life - maybe they will overheat less now? 
Soldato
I predict that they will limit it to iMacs at the low end, and laptops at the low end e.g. Macbook and Air, and maybe a MacBook Pro if it works well in a couple of years. Not a hope in hell's chance of them replacing a 'proper' Mac Pro with ARM, they simply don't have the volume of sales to make it worthwhile developing a CPU dedicated to this task.
Perhaps it will go the way of the Power PC era, last 5-6 years, and then disappear again.
Perhaps it will go the way of the Power PC era, last 5-6 years, and then disappear again.
Don
What realistically needs to be upgradable (outside of the obvious storage and ram)? The Mac users I know don't typically know anything about the CPU model, let alone go around swapping it out.
Soldato
Which you notice with tablets you can't change. The MacBooks are getting less and less upgradeable. They are getting harder to repair too,as Apple is restricting specific tools. They actively try and prevent sale of repair tools(so 3rd parties can't repair them),and their own Genius Bars try to push people towards new purchases. One example,is that there is one poorly cooled voltage regulation chip in newer MacBooks which can actually easily overheat and burn out,causing a voltage spike to the CPU,hence destroying it.
The problem is they now solder the SSDs directly to the motherboard,and in past models,they had an additional data port onboard. However,they restricted sale of the tool for that port,but if you had the tool you could pull any user data off the non-functional motherboard. Now,they removed the data port on the latest MacBooks to save a bit of money. So if the motherboard goes kaput,then you have lost all your data.
The issue Apple starts the ball rolling,and everyone starts copying them.
It's about saving money. They will just probably use a version of the iPad SOC,with more cores and a higher TDP so it will boost higher,and use a common set of parts. Then they will merge iOS and OS together,and then eventually even "desktop" Macs will use a curated store such as the iOS app store,as Apple will make a direct cut out of each sale,and make sure tools are restricted to "official developers". So think of iPads with a bigger screen and a physical keyboard.
Last edited:
Soldato
I think that it is really interesting what Apple are choosing to do. At least it is an attempt at innovating and shaking up the status quo. The financial prize for them if they get it right will be enormous.
Some of the performance on show tonight was mightily impressive, but also carefully stage-managed and curated. I'd like to see some real world performance before I consider it, but I will consider it. I don't give two hoots about synthetic benchmarks, more real world performance in applications that I use, such as Lightroom and FCPX.
Some of the performance on show tonight was mightily impressive, but also carefully stage-managed and curated. I'd like to see some real world performance before I consider it, but I will consider it. I don't give two hoots about synthetic benchmarks, more real world performance in applications that I use, such as Lightroom and FCPX.
Soldato
They will probably merge iOS and OS X together in a few years time,and force any software to be sold though a joint app store,so they can take a cut. If you look at Apple's investor calls,they are talking about becoming a "services company". I like to see how easy it is to repair the new ARM based MacBooks and how long they will keep upgrades going. If they are repairable,and actually have longer than 5 years support for the OS,then I might be more confident in what they are doing. As much as Windows has its flaws,the support period is quite long,unlike most of these OSes running on ARM based CPUs(although it shouldn't be that hard to have longer support if you look at Linux/BSD).
Likewise. Really keen to see some head-to-head benchmarks and tests comparing a new ARM MacBook against the current Intel models.
Given it'll basically be an iPad pro on steroids I'm expecting CPU performance slightly lower than the current 13" MacBook Pro but GPU performance far in advance of what Intel's integrated chips can deliver.
Plus I think we can expect much improved battery life and/or a thinner device.
Soldato
New architecture so it would be emulation, or maybe Binary Translated but that would be a massive headache for an OS i'd have thought, and there will be a performance hit.
Unless you plan on running the ARM variant of windows, if MS make a compatible version, but then you'll be limited on what you can run.
As above, Windows ARM variant which isn't the typical "vanilla" x86/x64 version the average Joe uses.
But Apple did produce some actual workhorses whilst using the PowerPC for 12 years, where as i'm (currently) not entirely convinced how Apple will do that with ARM other than using it for portable (/basic/low-end iMac's) systems for heat and battery performance (and the obvious ultimate control of the ecosystem).
AMD moving (?) to the same TSMC 7nm process also raises a few questions.
I guess one key thing is to remember that an A12Z which is already pretty powerful is running passively in an iPad.
Put a heat sink and fan on it and I imagine an even bigger chip it will be able to turbo up way higher.
The other thing is that Apple has the option to build unique SOCs with dedicated hardware for specialised jobs which isn’t really possible using intel.
Put a heat sink and fan on it and I imagine an even bigger chip it will be able to turbo up way higher.
The other thing is that Apple has the option to build unique SOCs with dedicated hardware for specialised jobs which isn’t really possible using intel.
Commissario
They said the transition will be complete in two years. I expect that by mid to late 2022, you won’t be able to buy an Intel based Mac.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 4,084
What is going to happen with the mac pro's? Will they just drop that line?
Current Macbooks aren't especially repairable so I'm not sure why you'd expect ARM ones to be.
And merging iOS with OSX would be odd given that they've just split iPad OS out from iOS. Why would you have phones and laptops on one OS and tablets on another?
Soldato
Current MacBooks are more repairable due to the fact they share some basic bits and processes with existing X86 laptops,so 3rd party repair companies still can do stuff which Apples refuses to do. Move to ARM,and Apple has even more control over the "repair process" which means they become even worse,as it means even more proprietary stuff.
They are the same basic OS underneath,just because the UI looks a bit different does not mean much. The whole point of moving away from Intel,is so they can have one basic underlying OS for ALL their devices,hence saving them money. They can leverage designs for laptops from their tablets. Apple sells far more tablets and smartphones than laptops,and desktops. So think of maintaining a separate OS X ecosystem and hardware design as an additional cost for them. Their margins are dropping,so its all about cutting costs. Using an ARM CPU,they can leverage the same design teams for their phones and tablets,and the same OS,means the same software optimisation and development teams. They can cut out Intel and AMD,and make the same amount on cheaper ARM based hardware.
Apple has a history of driving down costs. They tried to scupper the UK based Imagination Technologies,who supplied most of the IP for their GPUs. They first all of a sudden stopped licensing it,then opened a new development centre nearby in Cambridge and started hiring away their engineers.....all to save a few million USD a year in licensing. All it lead to was a Chinese back consortium buying up the company,Apple obviously not getting as much headway,and then again licensing their IP. All they did is just cause Imagination to become foreign owned,people to be fired,and I doubt they saved much if any money.
They make a ton of money selling smartphone and tablet apps through their appstore. As long as the hardware works fine,the current Apple laptops and desktops will have a longer lifespan than an iPad,ie,just like most laptops. This is bad news for companies such as Apple,as it means less repeat sales,so they are doing everything to go against this.
Better to sell tarted up tablets,as they can lock you into the smartphone/tablet ecosystem which means generally shorter lifespans,ie,for the most part tablets and smartphones are more disposable.
Plus Apple has said they want to be seen as a "services company" as they see growth in "services". So what do you think will happen longterm to "OS X" then? It will eventually become an offshoot of iOS/iPad OS. Think of the MacBooks as simply being an iPad with a keyboard eventually and that is the future. They will increasingly push for software to be purchased exclusively through a dedicated app store. They will slowly ease it in,so people don't get annoyed,but it will be what you will see in a few years. If Apple is making billions from their iOS app store,then OFC why wouldn't want their "desktops" and "laptops" to do the same?? They want a cut of all software sales on their platform. They can sell the move as being for "security" and needed for "optimisation" for the new ARM based platform.
I am sure some of the people really into the "high end" Mac Pros are going to complain,but Apple has been updating those far less frequently and bumped the price up,with less than fantastic hardware. They are interested more in the casual crowd,who are better and quicker repeat customers.
Last edited:
A very different era but running Windows emulated on the old ARM powered RISC OS based machines would take around 2/3rds performance hit compared to running Windows natively on a CISC CPU which gave comparable benchmark results for applications that existed natively on both platforms.
Soldato
Intel based mac. Very specific. I'll repeat myself, it is highly unlikely going to make a Mac Pro (desktop) that can compete using ARM vs. the huge multi core CPUs they put in them presently. Unless of course they buy one in from someone else, or develop it in conjunction with someone else and hope to sell the chips to other people. They don't sell enough of them to make it financially viable, and we all know Apples main concern is how much margin they can wring out of a product.