6 ms·

This is why Apple will soon abandon Intel entirely, which is why Apple abandoned the PowerPC as well. Either you progress forwards or you get run over.

s_kilk 10y ago
If Intel can't do it, who can?
legodt 10y ago
Apple makes a damned good mobile chip, but it's still just a mobile chip and it plays by mobile rules. Do you think apple has the expertise to switch to desktop class chip design?
- scarface74 10y ago
  Apple has made three processor transitions 68K -> PPC -> Intel. During each transition, the processor they were moving to was much faster than the previous processor. That's not the case for ARM vs Intel. A lot of the appeal of the Intel based Macs is the ability to run Windows at native speeds. That wouldn't be possible with ARM. Finally, Apple only sells 16-20 million Macs a year. I can't see it being worth the investment to switch to ARM and creating all of the auxiliary supporting hardware it gets to use by using standard PC hardware.
- jsz0 10y ago
  PA Semi was developing workstation/server class POWER processors before they were purchased by Apple.
tossedaway334 10y ago
Nobody is even close to touching intel in its niche of high single chip preformance at reasonable power usage. PPC was way way behind when it got replaced.
- bluthru 10y ago
  Sure, but I think we'll see MacBooks using Apple SoC's in the future: http://www.macrumors.com/2016/09/15/iphone-7-faster-than-macbook-air/ http://www.macrumors.com/2016/09/15/iphone-7-faster-than-mac...
- Bud 10y ago
  Not true; Apple's own A-series silicon is starting to be a serious threat. For instance, the A10 in the iPhone 7 now beats all Intel chips ever shipped in MacBook Airs in single-core CPU benchmarks. Right now, today. And it's less than 3 years behind vs. Intel CPUs in the MacBook Pro. It also beats the Mac Pro's 12-core Xeon (from 2013) in single-core. This despite the A10 running on FAR less power. Apple's definitely within shouting distance and is a serious threat to just replace Intel entirely, at least for its own needs.
  - pier25 10y ago
    Achieving the same level of performance with ARM is only half the story. Apple has to surpass the Core i series to make any sense to switch. And then there's the whole clusterfuck that would be porting all the x86 software to ARM. When Apple switched to Intel emulation of Power PC was usable via Rosetta but AFAIK emulation of x86 with ARM is extremely slow.
    - skykooler 10y ago
      I wonder whether it could be possible for Apple to build in a hardware accelerator for the x86 emulator into the chip? ...Though at that point I suppose they'd basically be building an x86 co-processor into it. No idea if that would actually help performance or not.
  - Thaxll 10y ago
    I have really hard time believing those benchmarks claiming a mobile processor beating a recent desktop CPU. It all came from a few tweets without real numbers. Show us a real benchmark.
ajross 10y ago
Apple already abandoned the market this review is talking about. They don't ship desktops any more. As the article makes clear (not in the headline, obviously) Kaby Lake actually does have a bunch of improvements for mobile applications.
- rl3 10y ago
  >Kaby Lake actually does have a bunch of improvements for mobile applications. If only getting a hold of their mobile processors wasn't so difficult because they're OEM parts. Perfect for things like fanless mini-ITX media center builds. Then again, Intel will be refreshing its NUC line soon, and those tend to use mobile processors.
supernovae 10y ago
And if they switch, i'd switch away from Apple.. No escape key and no X86? pshawww
- isaac_is_goat 10y ago
  You know AMD exists right? And with Ryzen coming up, it's looking pretty alright for them on the desktop front.
  - legodt 10y ago
    I don't think any consumer has known that AMD exists for over half a decade now
Apocryphon 10y ago
What alternatives to Intel are there, even?
- mrmondo 10y ago
  ARM, seriously - ok while many apps need to have an interpreter / to be compiled for the architecture - god damn for the the money and the power it shits all over x86 processors, ARM based chips are so damn cheap you /could/ chuck 6 full chips for less than the price of once x86 and of course it comes down to execution but if properly done - per watt god damn RISC based processors really do well these days, look at the latest iPhone / iPad ARM CPU - it's faster than the MacBook with the latest (one older now) intel CPU but costs less and uses 1/6th the power.
  - tossedaway334 10y ago
    you are overstating things significantly, ARM is still way behind (an order of magnitude or more) on single thread preformance. Nobody cares about preformance per watt if it means everything lags a massive amount.
    - mrmondo 10y ago
      Totally depends on the workload, well threaded workloads with a desktop ARM clock speed of 3Ghz~ or so could perform quite well for say PostgreSQL if properly deployed, but yes - for an interpreted language with a strict GIL like Python it may not perform so well; having said that, Xeon professors are dropping in clock speed each iteration, where we used to see 3+Ghz perform, it's now common to see those processors replaces with 2.2Gjz max clock speed - yes the cache can be larger, there might be more cores etc but with languages such as python you quickly run into the single core maxed out problem pretty quickly regardless. *edit: would be interesting to see an elasticsearch cluster running on a high clock speed arm cluster... I wonder how it'd run... (and yes I know it's not that simple)
    - pcwalton 10y ago
      > Nobody cares about preformance per watt if it means everything lags a massive amount. As evidenced by the fact that Intel has failed to compete in mobile, this is obviously false. We've been hearing nonstop from message board enthusiasts that Intel is going to kill ARM for years and years now. In reality there's absolutely no sign of that happening, and in fact their recent deep cuts to the Atom line suggest the opposite.
ksec 10y ago
No idea why everything automatically points to ARM. Switching away from Intel could also means to AMD. If recent leaked benchmarks are true, AMD's Ryzen shows CPU performance similar to Intel at similar power usage. That means Apple could offer an 8 core CPU on iMac with the same price.

s_kilk 10y ago

If Intel can't do it, who can?

legodt 10y ago

Apple makes a damned good mobile chip, but it's still just a mobile chip and it plays by mobile rules. Do you think apple has the expertise to switch to desktop class chip design?

scarface74 10y ago
Apple has made three processor transitions 68K -> PPC -> Intel. During each transition, the processor they were moving to was much faster than the previous processor. That's not the case for ARM vs Intel. A lot of the appeal of the Intel based Macs is the ability to run Windows at native speeds. That wouldn't be possible with ARM. Finally, Apple only sells 16-20 million Macs a year. I can't see it being worth the investment to switch to ARM and creating all of the auxiliary supporting hardware it gets to use by using standard PC hardware.
jsz0 10y ago
PA Semi was developing workstation/server class POWER processors before they were purchased by Apple.

tossedaway334 10y ago

Nobody is even close to touching intel in its niche of high single chip preformance at reasonable power usage. PPC was way way behind when it got replaced.

bluthru 10y ago
Sure, but I think we'll see MacBooks using Apple SoC's in the future: http://www.macrumors.com/2016/09/15/iphone-7-faster-than-macbook-air/ http://www.macrumors.com/2016/09/15/iphone-7-faster-than-mac...
Bud 10y ago
Not true; Apple's own A-series silicon is starting to be a serious threat. For instance, the A10 in the iPhone 7 now beats all Intel chips ever shipped in MacBook Airs in single-core CPU benchmarks. Right now, today. And it's less than 3 years behind vs. Intel CPUs in the MacBook Pro. It also beats the Mac Pro's 12-core Xeon (from 2013) in single-core. This despite the A10 running on FAR less power. Apple's definitely within shouting distance and is a serious threat to just replace Intel entirely, at least for its own needs.
- pier25 10y ago
  Achieving the same level of performance with ARM is only half the story. Apple has to surpass the Core i series to make any sense to switch. And then there's the whole clusterfuck that would be porting all the x86 software to ARM. When Apple switched to Intel emulation of Power PC was usable via Rosetta but AFAIK emulation of x86 with ARM is extremely slow.
  - skykooler 10y ago
    I wonder whether it could be possible for Apple to build in a hardware accelerator for the x86 emulator into the chip? ...Though at that point I suppose they'd basically be building an x86 co-processor into it. No idea if that would actually help performance or not.
- Thaxll 10y ago
  I have really hard time believing those benchmarks claiming a mobile processor beating a recent desktop CPU. It all came from a few tweets without real numbers. Show us a real benchmark.

ajross 10y ago

Apple already abandoned the market this review is talking about. They don't ship desktops any more. As the article makes clear (not in the headline, obviously) Kaby Lake actually does have a bunch of improvements for mobile applications.

rl3 10y ago
>Kaby Lake actually does have a bunch of improvements for mobile applications. If only getting a hold of their mobile processors wasn't so difficult because they're OEM parts. Perfect for things like fanless mini-ITX media center builds. Then again, Intel will be refreshing its NUC line soon, and those tend to use mobile processors.

supernovae 10y ago

And if they switch, i'd switch away from Apple.. No escape key and no X86? pshawww

isaac_is_goat 10y ago
You know AMD exists right? And with Ryzen coming up, it's looking pretty alright for them on the desktop front.
- legodt 10y ago
  I don't think any consumer has known that AMD exists for over half a decade now

Apocryphon 10y ago

What alternatives to Intel are there, even?

mrmondo 10y ago
ARM, seriously - ok while many apps need to have an interpreter / to be compiled for the architecture - god damn for the the money and the power it shits all over x86 processors, ARM based chips are so damn cheap you /could/ chuck 6 full chips for less than the price of once x86 and of course it comes down to execution but if properly done - per watt god damn RISC based processors really do well these days, look at the latest iPhone / iPad ARM CPU - it's faster than the MacBook with the latest (one older now) intel CPU but costs less and uses 1/6th the power.
- tossedaway334 10y ago
  you are overstating things significantly, ARM is still way behind (an order of magnitude or more) on single thread preformance. Nobody cares about preformance per watt if it means everything lags a massive amount.
  - mrmondo 10y ago
    Totally depends on the workload, well threaded workloads with a desktop ARM clock speed of 3Ghz~ or so could perform quite well for say PostgreSQL if properly deployed, but yes - for an interpreted language with a strict GIL like Python it may not perform so well; having said that, Xeon professors are dropping in clock speed each iteration, where we used to see 3+Ghz perform, it's now common to see those processors replaces with 2.2Gjz max clock speed - yes the cache can be larger, there might be more cores etc but with languages such as python you quickly run into the single core maxed out problem pretty quickly regardless. *edit: would be interesting to see an elasticsearch cluster running on a high clock speed arm cluster... I wonder how it'd run... (and yes I know it's not that simple)
  - pcwalton 10y ago
    > Nobody cares about preformance per watt if it means everything lags a massive amount. As evidenced by the fact that Intel has failed to compete in mobile, this is obviously false. We've been hearing nonstop from message board enthusiasts that Intel is going to kill ARM for years and years now. In reality there's absolutely no sign of that happening, and in fact their recent deep cuts to the Atom line suggest the opposite.

ksec 10y ago

No idea why everything automatically points to ARM. Switching away from Intel could also means to AMD. If recent leaked benchmarks are true, AMD's Ryzen shows CPU performance similar to Intel at similar power usage. That means Apple could offer an 8 core CPU on iMac with the same price.