5 ms·
> I bet it would make a very formidable low power desktop Perhaps if Apple really transitions to ARM on the Mac Line, that might be a reality in a couple years
by TheCoreh 7y ago
> I bet it would make a very formidable low power desktop
Perhaps if Apple really transitions to ARM on the Mac Line, that might be a reality in a couple years. I'm not sure they would want to replace x86 for the 'Pro' Desktop machines, but I don't think an ARM Mac Mini is out of the question.
- Abishek_Muthian 7y agoARM for Mac depends upon the Software ecosystem. Though much of enthusiast tools are ARM compatible, in the Linux/ARM scene; professional software are long way from it. Unlike a dev board, Mac caters to professional audience. Apart from iOS apps, Several professional x86 software needs to be ported to ARM before ARM Mac becomes a reality.
- matwood 7y ago> Apart from iOS apps, Several professional x86 software needs to be ported to ARM before ARM Mac becomes a reality. While this is true, the iPad Pro is the key. If Apple can continue to get pro apps ported to the pro they will have many already moved to ARM by the time a full machine comes out. See many Adobe apps already out or in progress.
- philliphaydon 7y ago> professional audience Who?
- jakobegger 7y agoIf Apple decides to switch to ARM chips, they will have some form of virtualisation technology that'll allow unported apps to run. Sure, performance won't be as good as native, but it'll be good enough to introduce ARM Macs. If they don't have a way to emulate x86 chips, I don't see them introducing ARM Macs.
- Abishek_Muthian 7y agoYes, Mac ARM chips are likely to feature some x86 emulation. On a side note, I wonder about the patent dynamics regarding x86 & x86-64 emulation. When Microsoft & Qualcomm announced snapdragon powered Windows 10, intel gave a 'not-so-subtle' threat to Qualcomm regarding patents for x86 emulation[1]. MS, still released the model anyways. I guess, Apple has enough leverage to negotiate patents for x86(intel),x86_64(AMD) emulation.
- TazeTSchnitzel 7y agoBoth Intel and ARM will tell you that their patents are required. (Questionable if that's true.)
- judge2020 7y ago> x86 emulation[1] Did you mean to post a reference?
- hevi_jos 7y agoThe main points of Apple changing to ARM is: 1. They don't need to pay licenses per core, so they can put 48, 96 cores in a single machine. 2. Is ARM as powerful as Intel, of course not, but who cares? ARM is more efficient so just add more cores to it. 3.Apple already owns all development stack. They already created hardware emulators for previous chip changes. They will do it again.
- spectramax 7y ago> so they can put 48, 96 cores in a single machine. > so just add more cores to it. Oh my...thermals. I don't know where to begin. Scaling cores (even if they're efficient) poses many challenges - thermal, core-to-core bandwidth, interposer design issues and warpage, and most importantly, yield as the die size gets larger. Or you'd have to break up the core dice into many die and create fabric such as what AMD Epyc server chips are doing, etc...etc. A 96 core die with decent power envelope would be in the order of 300-500 watts.
- repolfx 7y agoIs (2) true still? I thought I'd read that Apple's ARM chips were now somewhat competitive performance wise with Intel's chips?
- imtringued 7y agoThere is no shortage of software to run on a sufficiently fast ARM processor. [0] The bigger problem is that (even without emulation) most ARM processors aren't powerful enough in comparison to x86 processors. Apples processors are the exception and they are only available with locked down operating systems. [0] https://youtu.be/T-pPkpIDNnM?t=388 https://youtu.be/T-pPkpIDNnM?t=388