6 ms·

Expense is related to chip size. Apple isn’t going to release chips that benchmark slower than the Intel equivalents. To sell the transition they’ll need to sa

Expense is related to chip size. Apple isn’t going to release chips that benchmark slower than the Intel equivalents. To sell the transition they’ll need to say something simple like “2X faster” on the big screen. So I expect to see 8+ core chips as standard even if they don’t need that many to deliver a good product. The question is whether such a chip would be cheaper for Apple.

ben-schaaf 6y ago
They don't need to be 2x faster than any Intel chips, just the ones in products they're replacing. And as it so happens it's pretty easy to get 2x the performance over an essentially passively cooled and severely power limited Intel chip that's in the air.
- sjwright 6y ago
  Absolutely. And I don't think it will be difficult at all for Apple to crush Intel in benchmark performance per watt—let alone real world performance with their more targeted silicon. The interesting question is going to be how Apple's GPU stacks up to the competition. We know from the A13X that it is already quite good and I fully expect it to exceed Intel embedded graphics. But what about higher end machines? How long till Apple GPUs can take the fight to discrete graphics?
  - jasonlingx 6y ago
    > How long till Apple GPUs can take the fight to discrete graphics? I already play Fortnite, Call of Duty, PUBG, etc at 60fps on my iPhone.
    - arvinsim 6y ago
      Mobile equivalent of AAA games is hardly as demanding as their desktop counterparts
      - jasonlingx 6y ago
        Of course, but that was my (and presumed common) use case for discrete graphics.
        nix23 6y ago
        NO! StarCitizen i a good case for discrete graphics :-)
  - liuliu 6y ago
    Why Apple cannot use discrete graphics? We don't know that yet. NVIDIA already starts to have support for aarch64 so you can expect AMD not that far away.
    - xmodem 6y ago
      They might, but in this WWDC talk we get some pretty strong tea leaves that they wont. https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2020/10686/ https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2020/10686/ I'd be surprised to see discrete graphics in anything below an ARM iMac/iMac Pro.
      - littlecranky67 6y ago
        The video explicitly states that Apple Silicon based Macs will use a shared memory approach between CPU/GPU which is a strong indicator they will go all-in on a combined chip or at least on-die approach. My bet is that for the iMac & MacPro, Apple will use custom AMD on-die GPUs (like the now discontinued Kaby-Lake G). They just haven't announced it yet and AMD seems to be silent about it. I also bet the demo they showcased of Rise of the Tombraider was running on such an unannounced custom chip. I you think about it, it doesn't make much sense for Apple to enter the highend segment for GPUs and sink a significant amount of research cost into it. What they need is power-efficient GPUs for their mobile line (iPhone, iPad, Macbook Air & low end Macbook Pro) so that is where an all-Apple GPU design will be used. But for professional high end use, they will not be in the position to ship a GPU (no matter if on-die or discrete) that could compete with AMD or Nvidias performance hogs out of nowhere. Market share for high-end Macbooks + iMac + MacPro is just too little given their overall product portfolio (including mobile devices) and the research effort too high. Also, AMD would probably happily design them a custom GPU chip for on-die usage, just as they do for consoles and did for the Kaby Lake G. It wouldn't hurt AMDs business, even if Apple plans to replace AMsD with custom all-apple based GPUs in the long run (i doubt it), as it is very unlikely Apple will ever license it to other CPU vendors or even enter the market for discrete GPUs for Wintel machines.
        liamwestray 6y ago
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
greedo 6y ago
The A13 Bionic already has six cores, so expanding that to eight seems trivial in cost. The last time I read the BOM for iPhones, the ARM portion of the SoC was around $50. What are Intel laptop CPUs selling for?
- baskire 6y ago
  That BOM doesn’t include r&d either. Something which the intel chips baked in. Arguably the r&d costs would still exist for just their iPhone line. And I’m sure the cost to add a Mac line isn’t as much as the intel premium
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
stubish 6y ago
Apple are going to release chips? I think they are going to be releasing iPhones and iPads and laptops. To sell the transition, they'll call it iPhone N+1. "2x faster" is the sort of marketing their competitors are stuck with, right along with "cheaper" and using the Microsoft, Windows and Intel brand names rather than their own.
- sjwright 6y ago
  Apple has consistently used “2X faster” language whenever they can, and ALWAYS when justifying a major product change. For them to not do this would be strange.
willtim 6y ago
Performance is the least of my concerns owning an Intel laptop. Intel's obsession with it is why their laptops sound like jet engines, scorch laps and have lacklustre battery life. If I was Apple, I would advertise the the improved quality of life from using an iPad-like laptop.

ben-schaaf 6y ago

They don't need to be 2x faster than any Intel chips, just the ones in products they're replacing. And as it so happens it's pretty easy to get 2x the performance over an essentially passively cooled and severely power limited Intel chip that's in the air.

sjwright 6y ago
Absolutely. And I don't think it will be difficult at all for Apple to crush Intel in benchmark performance per watt—let alone real world performance with their more targeted silicon. The interesting question is going to be how Apple's GPU stacks up to the competition. We know from the A13X that it is already quite good and I fully expect it to exceed Intel embedded graphics. But what about higher end machines? How long till Apple GPUs can take the fight to discrete graphics?
- jasonlingx 6y ago
  > How long till Apple GPUs can take the fight to discrete graphics? I already play Fortnite, Call of Duty, PUBG, etc at 60fps on my iPhone.
  - arvinsim 6y ago
    Mobile equivalent of AAA games is hardly as demanding as their desktop counterparts
    - jasonlingx 6y ago
      Of course, but that was my (and presumed common) use case for discrete graphics.
      - nix23 6y ago
        NO! StarCitizen i a good case for discrete graphics :-)
- liuliu 6y ago
  Why Apple cannot use discrete graphics? We don't know that yet. NVIDIA already starts to have support for aarch64 so you can expect AMD not that far away.
  - xmodem 6y ago
    They might, but in this WWDC talk we get some pretty strong tea leaves that they wont. https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2020/10686/ https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2020/10686/ I'd be surprised to see discrete graphics in anything below an ARM iMac/iMac Pro.
    - littlecranky67 6y ago
      The video explicitly states that Apple Silicon based Macs will use a shared memory approach between CPU/GPU which is a strong indicator they will go all-in on a combined chip or at least on-die approach. My bet is that for the iMac & MacPro, Apple will use custom AMD on-die GPUs (like the now discontinued Kaby-Lake G). They just haven't announced it yet and AMD seems to be silent about it. I also bet the demo they showcased of Rise of the Tombraider was running on such an unannounced custom chip. I you think about it, it doesn't make much sense for Apple to enter the highend segment for GPUs and sink a significant amount of research cost into it. What they need is power-efficient GPUs for their mobile line (iPhone, iPad, Macbook Air & low end Macbook Pro) so that is where an all-Apple GPU design will be used. But for professional high end use, they will not be in the position to ship a GPU (no matter if on-die or discrete) that could compete with AMD or Nvidias performance hogs out of nowhere. Market share for high-end Macbooks + iMac + MacPro is just too little given their overall product portfolio (including mobile devices) and the research effort too high. Also, AMD would probably happily design them a custom GPU chip for on-die usage, just as they do for consoles and did for the Kaby Lake G. It wouldn't hurt AMDs business, even if Apple plans to replace AMsD with custom all-apple based GPUs in the long run (i doubt it), as it is very unlikely Apple will ever license it to other CPU vendors or even enter the market for discrete GPUs for Wintel machines.
      - liamwestray 6y ago
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

greedo 6y ago

The A13 Bionic already has six cores, so expanding that to eight seems trivial in cost. The last time I read the BOM for iPhones, the ARM portion of the SoC was around $50. What are Intel laptop CPUs selling for?

baskire 6y ago
That BOM doesn’t include r&d either. Something which the intel chips baked in. Arguably the r&d costs would still exist for just their iPhone line. And I’m sure the cost to add a Mac line isn’t as much as the intel premium
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

stubish 6y ago

Apple are going to release chips? I think they are going to be releasing iPhones and iPads and laptops. To sell the transition, they'll call it iPhone N+1. "2x faster" is the sort of marketing their competitors are stuck with, right along with "cheaper" and using the Microsoft, Windows and Intel brand names rather than their own.

sjwright 6y ago
Apple has consistently used “2X faster” language whenever they can, and ALWAYS when justifying a major product change. For them to not do this would be strange.

willtim 6y ago

Performance is the least of my concerns owning an Intel laptop. Intel's obsession with it is why their laptops sound like jet engines, scorch laps and have lacklustre battery life. If I was Apple, I would advertise the the improved quality of life from using an iPad-like laptop.