Live data from Hacker News

Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

appleinsider.com

81–90 of 148 posts

Re: Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

#81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's Geekbench. The differences in Geekbench for ARM devices and Geekbench for x86 are laughable. Why not compare them in a real life workload like a render on Blender or a kernel compile?

How is running the same code in two different machines and reporting the results objectively "laughable"?

Because the way the code is compiled or hand optimized even, which kind of extensions are used for ARM vs x86 (SSE, AVX and so on). Many of the worloads used in Geekbench are straight up directly accelerated, which is fine if the only thing that's requiring CPU power on your machine is Javascript, but not so otherwise.

Other synthetic benchmarks of memory bandwidth and so on use all acceleration features of the plafortm on ARM but don't support AVX2 or AVX512, although some other workloads in the benchmark do. And of course you would have to choose exactly which instruction is used in which scenario in which processor(Intel vs Zen 1 vs Zen 2) in order to have the same kind of optimization as for ARM processors. Then comes the issue that vector operations are "hand-tuned", which is not realistic and depending on the skill of the programmer and their affinity with a given uArch can yield vastly different results. Which is why they should either use the fastest library for each processor, or leave all the optimization to the compiler.

The only way to do a proper comparison between two uArch is with an open source benchmark compiled specifically for the processor.

Re: Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

#82
post #39

Always a year away. I remain deeply sceptical that Apple will move the Mac to ARM, and given their bungling of the MacBook lineup over the last 5 years I have doubts they understand what their users need from a laptop. I don't think they could pull it off without a great deal of pain for their users and developers. I don't think their OS engineers need the burden.

> Always a year away. Citation needed. We’re not talking about Year of the Linux Desktop here. I’ve been hearing rumblings and speculations about ARM Macs since at least five years ago, but IFAICR never heard a concrete timeline attached to it, let alone “a year away”. And 2021 would be fairly consistent with speculations.

e.g., "Intel reportedly expects Apple to start the Mac’s transition to ARM next year" -- Feb 2019

https://9to5mac.com/2019/02/21/mac-marzipan-arm-next-year-ma...

Re: Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

#83
post #8

The question is as users should we care? If this is cheaper for Apple will they actually lower product prices or just enhance their own margins. Will this result in any superior performance on a cost-adjusted basis?

Of course, we should care. We are talking about losing the standard x86 platform support (which allows for Windows/Linux support if not total OOB support) to a custom Apple platform that may be more locked down to the point that Linux may not even care to add any support for it (T2-Macs have been difficult to add support in Linux). This drops the value a lot if you're not an exclusive macOS user. 1. We don't know wha…

Since Apple effectively stopped innovating OSX a decade ago (unless you really need each new iteration of emojis) just get a Windows machine if Windows software is essential to your workflow. I have used macs a long time but got a supplemental Windows machine for my office to not bother with fiddly virtualization issues. Windows has largely caught up with OSX as OSX has stagnated or outright decayed.

It makes me sad to say that given the Apple fanboy I once was but reality is reality.

Re: Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

#84
post #74
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is Apple we're talking about -- and Apple is what other OEMs want to be when they grow up. Not only will the Apple-designed ARM CPUs perform at or above the level of a similarly-specced Intel machine, but the ISA transition will be seamless , with a nearly-invisible Intel binary compatibility layer that does on-the-fly JITing. Otherwise, they simply won't release it at all.

Yeah, other OEMs want to grow up to have butterfly keyboards, don't they?

Other OEMs want to grow up to be able to make mistakes and still retain a loyal following.

Re: Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

#85
Get ready to not have root access on your laptop. The writing is on the wall:

  * signed software restrictions 
  * no kernel extensions
  * SIP
Dropping x86 compatibility will be the last nail in the coffin. Buy the x86 platform if you value your freedom, buy arm if you want a larger form factor smartphone

Re: Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

#86
post #21

I wonder if they'll use that as an excuse for complete lockdown of macOS and only allow AppStore reviewed software.

They can't do this unless they are okay with never selling machines again to anyone who needs to write code. There's no feasible way for all programming tools to be distributed through MAS. IPython isn't going to suddenly go through the marathon of crap you need to get into the store. If absolutely nothing else, native developers: you can't have more than one version of a MAS app installed. Nearly every iOS developer…

That’s not true. Many people write code on Mac despite kernel extensions being disabled and SIP. What will be considered root will be a superficial emulation convincing enough to fool most Unix software

Re: Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

#87

I'm curious what Parallels going to do. Running Windows and Linux applications with almost native integration into OSX ecosystem worth a lot, especially with all benefits of hardware virtualization. In theory PC could be virtualized on ARM, however software virtualization only. Going to watch the process. In general, Windows and Linux support ARM as well, not sure if hardware virtualization for ARM exist though

> not sure if hardware virtualization for ARM exist though

Virtualization extensions have been available since the Cortex A15 or thereabouts.

Linux supports normal KVM on both ARM32 and ARM64 although there are mutterings about dropping support for ARM32.

In practice, the hypervisor is usually already grabbed by the platform (e.g. on Android/Snapdragon it's taken by the TrustZone driver and can't be used yourself, even if you rebuild the kernel with CONFIG_KVM).

Re: Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

#88

The only reason I could come to care about architecture, as a consumer, is if it provides a freakishly long battery life.

Does anyone have a rough figure for what fraction of the power load on a macbook is going to the CPU? In other words, what's the limit in battery life for a laptop whose CPU consumes no power at all, but still has to power the display, refresh RAM, etc?

Re: Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

#89
post #62
post #32

I am torn, whenever I hear the rumors about the ARM Macs. On the one side, I am terribly excited from a technology perspective. I grew up with homecomputers in the 80ies, and in the 90ies, all Unix-workstations had several different, non-x86 architectures. So any disruption of the x86-monoculture is interesting. Also, looking at the performance of the iPhone and iPad, I think Apple has the potential to create some gr…

They could make an x86 daughterboard for the Mac Pro. Plenty of space for that and it’s been done decades ago. Or a third party could. I wonder whether they’ve got any special killer apps in mind for the desktop and MacBook ARM machines. They could theoretically customize them greatly since they’re designing the architecture. Also wonder whether they view keeping the unix developer pipeline.

Battery life

Re: Apple to debut multiple ARM MacBook, desktop models in 2021

#90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's Geekbench. The differences in Geekbench for ARM devices and Geekbench for x86 are laughable. Why not compare them in a real life workload like a render on Blender or a kernel compile?

People have (Jonathan Morrison for an example) , the 4k exports from iMovie or other video/image editor has been proven to be vastly faster on iPad Pro than the fastest Macbook Pro. Intel CPUs are not customized by Apple for their own APIs, they're for general purpose use. yes, they have ISA extensions that Apple could use like QuickSync but it's not enough for Apple. Apple customize their A series with the same APIs…

All of these tasks are "accelerated" by skimping on quality or using silicon dedicated to a specific program. It doesn't matter in real life unless literally the only thing you do is use a browser and nothing else, and even then only JS, not wasm. In which case, I don't know why you would even have a CPU with more than two cores, and an i3 would be more than enough anyways. JS acceleration really only matters if you want to maximize battery life and the only thing you're doing with your computer is contained in a traditional webview. That is to say, it matters little for laptops, as they already have 7-8 hour battery life, and literally not at all for desktops.

So, for example, my computer can encode 4 4K videos in real time simultaneously. Why don't I use this feature? Because the encode quality is subpar. So unless you give me a benchmark of the iPad Pro on ffmpeg or any other open source, non-hardware accelerated video encode software, comparison is completely moot. And the benchmarks that have been done on ffmpeg on x265 or x264 show that the iPad Pro is multiple times slower than an Intel laptop. Now obviously x265 is optimized for x86, but not on the order of multiple times slower. Unless it is the case, and that means that your benchmarks don't apply either.

Herein lies the issue, for many many workloads hardware acceleration while faster offers results that are not comparable to the CPU in terms of quality. So the only way to compare is by disabling hardware acceleration, and x86 processors tend to win.

Metal is a trash API that no one uses in the real world. It offers literally nothing better than Vulkan. And the fact that the chip is "customized for the API" is vacuous. All GPUs are optimized for OpenGL, DirectX or Vulkan. Same for a lot of the "Core" APIs. They will not succeed outside of the mobile market.

The T2 chip is simply a glorified security processor. There is absolutely nothing the T2 chip does that a traditional security processor in say a Zen chip can't do. x86 CPUs can already do AES at speeds so high you would need something like 4 RAID-0 NVMe SSDs to have a performance bottleneck, and even then the limitation isn't the CPU but RAM speed. There is no real world scenario where you would need to "accelerate" disk encryption or other kinds of cryptography beyond what an x86 CPU can do. Cryptography isn't some kind of magic you can't implement without some specialized chip, literally everything the T2 chip does can be done using a trusty old x86 processor and TPM. The only use of the T2 chip is for Apple to have more control over your hardware, and literally nothing else.

Post reply on HN