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

591–600 of 661 posts

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

#591

Post by hajile »

floatboth wrote: post #552
hajile wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TSMC advertises 5nm as +15% performance OR -30% power consumption. Either one of these won’t be enough to bridge the gap in mobile. Even throwing in another massive 20% IPC improvement wouldn’t do the trick. On the flip side, once you go bigger the game changes. If you increase the M1 power consumption to amount for interconnects, more memory lanes, more IO, etc the M1 seems to offer worse power to performance that s…

Laptop Zen 3 is already equal in multicore perf to the M1 for the same wattage IIRC. While being on 7nm still. Don't underestimate AMD.

Apple ships a 30w charger with the M1 air. I can't find any zen 3 shipping with less than a 65w charger.

Mac mini uses like 25-27w at the wall. 15-25w TDP for the 5800u doesn't include RAM (it's LPDDR4 at 1.1v will use a lot more power than M1 LPDDR4x at 0.6v). 5800u also has a chipset that consumes a few watts.

5800u has some features that the M1 does not (these would likely increase M1 power usage), but still doesn't seem close in power consumption.

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

#592

Post by sitkack »

r00fus wrote: post #402
google234123 wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ARM also has some decades of cruft attached to it.

ARMv8, ie, AArch64 is a redesign/new, and entirely 64 bit with legacy (32bit) support mode tacked on. The design was done to be able to remove legacy without another redesign. To my understanding, this is quite unlike AMD64 (ie, Intel's current 64 bit ISA licensed from AMD) - which extended x86.

AMD64 is a really beautiful design for the constraints it was operating under.

Does anyone know who(mses) designed the instruction set?

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

#593

Post by emodendroket »

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.

Well the problem there is you can't really have the traditional mix and match part selection and get that kind of performance, right?

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

#594

Post by kalleboo »

_carbyau_ wrote: post #575
crazygringo wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But there's no M1 chip equivalent for PC's. It's fine to have an ARM version of Windows but there's no equivalently high-performance ARM chip to run it on. Unless you're talking about Bootcamp on Macs.

Any reason why Intel and AMD can't do an ARM chip? I have a vague tickle in my memory that both Intel and AMD have dabbled in ARM before. Even if they don't assign large production volumes to it now, they could still have a design team working on it for a contingency plan.

AMD was developing an ARM core "K12" in parallel with the Zen core. K12 was delayed in order to prioritize Zen, Zen turned out to be a massive hit, so K12 got delayed indefinitely.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_K12

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_(first_generation_microarc...

Once Apple released M1, rumors of AMD ARM development started again https://www.techspot.com/news/87851-amd-rumored-working-arm-...

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

#595

Post by nightowl_games »

nexuist wrote: post #383
amelius wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. As a developer, I'm sweating bullets. Imagine a future where Apple is the only serious platform left on mobile, server and desktop, then developers can forget about starting that next disruptive startup and instead they will become just second-class Apple "employees" with contracts similar to Uber drivers.

Apple isn't harnessing magic here. The opportunity for competition exists, but everyone else is just sitting on their asses while Apple's chip team puts in the work. If you want to beat Mx, you have to think outside the box, just like how Apple thought outside of x86. That being said, I do enjoy the shift to ARM as the dominant arch. x86 has far too many decades of cruft behind it. I don't think Apple will take over…

This is a really cute pep talk. "Think outside the box. Just like apple did." But it is completely devoid of meaning.

On what grounds do you suggest you know anything about how apple accomplished M1?

Or are you just intuiting that it was some sort of "outside the box" thinking?

Maybe it was raw engineering and management mastery combined with elite head hunting and millions of dollars poured into research and design over the course of a decade?

Nah. Apple's too cool for that. Probably some eureka moment during meditation class, right?

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

#596

Post by jjeaff »

hajile wrote: post #591
floatboth wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laptop Zen 3 is already equal in multicore perf to the M1 for the same wattage IIRC. While being on 7nm still. Don't underestimate AMD.

Apple ships a 30w charger with the M1 air. I can't find any zen 3 shipping with less than a 65w charger. Mac mini uses like 25-27w at the wall. 15-25w TDP for the 5800u doesn't include RAM (it's LPDDR4 at 1.1v will use a lot more power than M1 LPDDR4x at 0.6v). 5800u also has a chipset that consumes a few watts. 5800u has some features that the M1 does not (these would likely increase M1 power usage), but still doesn…

Does the charger wattage mean anything? Couldn't it be that they are including a larger supply in order to charge faster?

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

#597

Post by arghnoname »

gwking wrote: post #106
meepmorp wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have periodic weirdness on the thunderbolt monitor? Every so often, my m1 mini wakes or boots so that there’s a vertical misalignment by a pixel or two about halfway across. It’s like the desktop was cut in half and taped back together slightly crooked.

I haev this problem! For me it's a strip about 2 inches wide, down the middle, one pixel higher than the rest of the image. I am using an LG 5k monitor, and I have been unsure if it's a problem with the monitor or the machine. I'd love to know what kind of monitor you are using; this gives me hope that it might be an apple bug that will get fixed eventually.

I also have this problem--also an LG 5K. Disconnecting and reconnecting seems to fix it for now.

No idea if it's the monitor of the laptop, but it's the exact same problem and hopefully hardware doesn't glitch in such a consistent way and it can be fixed in software.

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

#598

Post by spfzero »

amelius wrote: post #377
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.

> Just imagine Apple releasing the Mx chips for server infrastructure. Intel ought to be sweating bullets now. As a developer, I'm sweating bullets. Imagine a future where Apple is the only serious platform left on mobile, server and desktop, then developers can forget about starting that next disruptive startup and instead they will become just second-class Apple "employees" with contracts similar to Uber drivers.

As a developer, I’m hyperventilating with anticipation of a tool that significantly advances past the previous generation. Finally, something more than an incremental bump.

Nothing gets me thinking about disruption more, than new, faster, cheaper platforms. We’ve had to accept 10% better per generation for way too long.

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

#599

Post by spfzero »

nightowl_games wrote: post #595
nexuist wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple isn't harnessing magic here. The opportunity for competition exists, but everyone else is just sitting on their asses while Apple's chip team puts in the work. If you want to beat Mx, you have to think outside the box, just like how Apple thought outside of x86. That being said, I do enjoy the shift to ARM as the dominant arch. x86 has far too many decades of cruft behind it. I don't think Apple will take over…

This is a really cute pep talk. "Think outside the box. Just like apple did." But it is completely devoid of meaning. On what grounds do you suggest you know anything about how apple accomplished M1? Or are you just intuiting that it was some sort of "outside the box" thinking? Maybe it was raw engineering and management mastery combined with elite head hunting and millions of dollars poured into research and design…

Engineering mastery is pretty cool all by itself, right?

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

#600

Post by jjeaff »

hugi wrote: post #403
TameAntelope wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With all the respect in the world, I think the complete lack of that happening at all this century should make you pause and reflect on why you think it's even remotely possible. I'm happy to be wrong, but I think you're buying too much into the SV/media fearmongering on a handful of companies whose main business is actually just attention economics.

Indeed. It's interesting to see how people like to label Apple a monopoly - a company with a 19% market share in smartphones and an 8% share on the desktop.

Is that market share based on total revenue or based on device count?

I'm pretty sure it's device count. Which means we are comparing $90 smart phones to $1200 iphones that will result in thousands of dollars spent through the apple ecosystem.

Post reply on HN