Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

asia.nikkei.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 661 posts

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#261

Post by raghavtoshniwal »

bredren wrote: post #203
Pulcinella wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I imagine the Radeon support was for the Pro and the existing Intel Macs (though I don’t know if those Radeon GPUs are really supported via eGPU. Are there enclosures where they fit?) Still I can’t see Apple only developing one integrated GPU per year unless they somehow figure out how to magically make them somewhat approach Nvidia and AMDs modern chips. What would the ARM Mac Pro use? It seems that Apple has p…

>It seems that Apple has put in a lot of development resources into getting Octane to support Metal...and I can’t just imagine that happening just to support the the Apple Silicon GPUs. At the start there will still be a lot more Mac Pros running AMD hardware that must be supported. It may not be obvious, but Apple has repair work to do in the pro community. Four years ago this month, Apple unusually disclosed that i…

Nit: Afterburner is built on FPGAs, they are architecturally different from the M-series chips and GPUs.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#262

Post by greedo »

mjhagen wrote: post #148
niels_bom wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What, in your opinion, is the drawback of the M1 product series? I haven’t read many negative reviews.

In the case of CPU architecture switches, Apple's gone with the same strategy every time so far: switch out the guts, keep the outside design. So maybe not negative reviews regarding the CPU, just a bit boring design. I disagree with OP though, not second, but third generations have been the one to get for me: iPod 3rd gen, iPhone 4, Apple Watch Series 3. OK, iPad 3 was a bit of a failure, but still, first retina.

The new iMac diverges dramatically from this model. It's a complete new design, one that could only have been done after a switch off Intel.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#263

Post by lostgame »

dcchambers wrote: post #258

I haven't yet used an M1 mac but based on what I've read about it I have fully bought into the hype train. Hoping my next laptop will be a M2-powered MBP, assuming they can increase the maximum RAM to at least 32GB.

There are rumours of a supposed M1X that may hit before the M2, so you may be waiting a little longer than you’d think. :)

Of course, the Apple rumour mill; grain of salt, etc - but I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw an M1X that could, for instance - support 32GB of RAM by the end of the year - (which is the only blocker from me buying an M1) - and pop out the M2 next year maybe with an Apple-CPU-powered Mac Pro?

Food for thought. :)

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#264

Post by mumblemumble »

gpm wrote: post #48
jfb wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's in it for Apple? I'm not trying to be glib, here, but unless there were some Mac only server functionality, nobody would buy an Apple ARM powered datacentre machine.

Eh, the Asahi linux people already have linux running on this chip. What's in it for Apple is money and better economies of scale for chips. But I don't really think it fits Apple's MO so I doubt they'll do it.

MO is my thought, too. Getting back into server hardware would require supporting a vastly different kind of client, and possibly require them to start doing some things that they, as a company, might find distasteful. Supporting equipment they stopped making a long time ago, for example. Including maintaining stockpiles of replacement parts.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#265

Post by canuckintime »

herrkanin wrote: post #214
canuckintime wrote: post #204

Edit: double posted https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26957269

People can be both legitimately impressed by the power and efficiency of Apple's first desktop-class processor, while also understand that certain more niche features were out of scope of a first version. I'm certainly expecting this to be fixed by the second generation, and if it's still missing I won't be quite as understanding.

> People can be both legitimately impressed by the power and efficiency of Apple's first desktop-class processor, while also understand that certain more niche features were out of scope of a first version. I'm certainly expecting this to be fixed by the second generation, and if it's still missing I won't be quite as understanding.

I’m responding to a HN commenter who was not just impressed about the power of the M1 but hyperbolically asserts that it is better than everything else yet the next top voted HN comment demonstrates otherwise with a demand for downgraded feature. The tenor of those reactions are opposed and my aim is to reflect the nuance

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#266

Post by clairity »

apetrovic wrote: post #190
dijit wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The early prognosticators thought the M1 was more a proof of concept (shove it into existing designs to get it out there). Which is a weird take when you consider the thermal issues that Intel macs were plagued with. It's almost like the chassis was designed with 10w of dissipation in mind which Intel couldn't operate within, but the M1 could easily. I had assumed that Apple designed for the M1 and then fit Intel c…

My private conspiracy theory (supported by nothing) is that Intel promised to Apple good 10w processors back in 2014-ish, and Apple designed 2016 MBP based on that promise. And when Intel didn't delivered, they shipped Macs anyway, and either started working on M1 or cleared any doubt about should they continue working on it.

that’s not just your (conspiracy) theory, it’s exactly what happened (something i’ve also noted before). intel screwed apple years ago and apple decided to move on. it just took many years of chip development to get to this point.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#267

Post by ayewo »

solarkraft wrote: post #89
bhouston wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would prefer just one 6K or 8K monitor personally at a size of say 55" with a wide ratio. Simpler setup. No post in the middle. Something like this but bigger with higher resolution, and maybe a bit more height vertically (this one is a bit too wide for its height in my opinion): https://www.samsung.com/ca/monitors/gaming/super-ultra-wide-... I think that dual 4K is the old way, single 6K/8K ultra wides are the fut…

I use a 55" 4K Samsung TV as a monitor. It cold boots quickly and has no latency or subsampling issues in the right mode. I can recommend it as a more cost effective alternative to multiple monitors. The amount of available screen space at 1:1 is refreshing (not as crazy as imagined though), but it makes me realize how grainy "normal" monitors are. In some years 8K TVs might be cheap enough for an upgrade, but on tha…

Mind linking to the exact model you use?

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#268

Post by dcchambers »

lostgame wrote: post #263
dcchambers wrote: post #258

I haven't yet used an M1 mac but based on what I've read about it I have fully bought into the hype train. Hoping my next laptop will be a M2-powered MBP, assuming they can increase the maximum RAM to at least 32GB.

There are rumours of a supposed M1X that may hit before the M2, so you may be waiting a little longer than you’d think. :) Of course, the Apple rumour mill; grain of salt, etc - but I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw an M1X that could, for instance - support 32GB of RAM by the end of the year - (which is the only blocker from me buying an M1) - and pop out the M2 next year maybe with an Apple-CPU-powered Mac Pro? Food…

Yeah I guess 'M1X' vs 'M2' doesn't matter so much. As long as they've had time to work out any kinks from the first gen and increase the RAM, I'm all in.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#269

Post by thysultan »

partiallypro wrote: post #176
kumarvvr wrote: post #156

Somewhere, the collective whos who of the silicon chip world is shitting their pants. Apple just showed to the world how powerful and efficient processors can be. All that with good design. Customers are going to demand more from Intel and the likes. Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. edit: a word.

If we're honest most customers aren't going to notice the performance differences, it will mostly be people with heavy work loads.

They will notice the battery. Which is performance.

Re: Apple's follow-up to M1 chip goes into mass production for Mac

#270

Post by lostgame »

partiallypro wrote: post #176
kumarvvr wrote: post #156

Somewhere, the collective whos who of the silicon chip world is shitting their pants. Apple just showed to the world how powerful and efficient processors can be. All that with good design. Customers are going to demand more from Intel and the likes. Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. edit: a word.

If we're honest most customers aren't going to notice the performance differences, it will mostly be people with heavy work loads.

Anecdotally; I’ll say this is equivocally not the case. I’ve had a half dozen of my friends upgrade and some of the aspects are absolutely surreal.

The instant turn-on. No fans. Safari alone feels like a completely different beast and a friend and I spent about two hours running through some of the most demanding web sites, side by side against my 2018 15” MBP.

Holy crap. Just...all the subtleties.

I’d actually say it’s easier to notice the immense general speed-up than I notice the difference between a 4min and 2min render time in Final Cut.

Dragging 4K clips around in FCP was infinitely smooth; and it made you immediately be able tell the UI/UX itself was dropping frames and needing to catch up to itself sometimes.

These are things you don’t notice until you’ve tried the M1 for the first time.

It truly is an undeniably insane piece of engineering. They killed it.

Post reply on HN