Live data from Hacker News

Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for future Macs

theverge.com

861–870 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for future Macs

#861
post #688

Does anyone know if Apple's processors have any anti-features resembling Intel's management engine coprocessor? If there isn't any, this may be a good route to a less backdoored PC for many users--not just Apple's existing customer base :)

Pretty much every SoC has cores equivalent to the management engine. Currently they have a handful of ARM cores on the southbridge that fulfill the same purpose. I imagine that won't change. "BridgeOS" is the term to search for if you want to learn more. The thought experiment is probably moot anyway though, as Apple probably won't allow any kernels that haven't been signed by them to be booted like on their iOS devi…

I ended up doing a bunch of research into and asking around about the T2 chip (which seems to be the closest thing to an IME Apple advertises) today and got a variety of responses.

The general picture I've gotten is that the T2 is probably significantly less capable of surveillance than, say, the IME. This talk [1] for example suggests (but doesn't rule out explicitly as far as I can tell) that the T2 is not connected to the PCIe interfaces for network cards, which significantly reduces the extent to which the T2 could autonomously phone home what it could learn through its direct storage access and connection to the CPU.

And yikes! No unsigned kernels would be pretty bad. I certainly wouldn't be buying if that's the case :(

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRnyasv1qbU

Re: Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for future Macs

#862
post #258

Apple ported many Pro Apps to ARM , especially their Logic Pro, Photoshop and they were showcasing Maya on ARM. That is about as Pro as it gets for Mac. That reads to me Apple isn't going to have Intel for some high end Pro machine. They intended to go all in with ARM. i.e There will be a Mac Pro with High TDP ARM Chip. I wonder what are the owner of Mac Pro feeling now having just spend a $5K+ Mac Pro with Intel. Qu…

Apple go down the Samsung route and license RDNA tech for their ARM GPUs - https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-rdna-exynos-samsung-so...

Re: Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for future Macs

#863
post #822

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, I’m predicting an MBP 13 - 16 range with an extra three hours of battery life+, and 20-30% faster. I'm predicting the opposite: you won't actually see any difference. Once you look closely at power profiles on modern machines you'll see that most energy is going into display and GPU. CPUs mostly run idle. Even if you had a theoretical CPU using zero energy, most people are not going to get 30% battery life gain…

> Apple is going to save $200-$800 cost per Mac shipped Does Apple actually have its own silicon fab now or are they outsourcing manufacture? If the former, those are /expensive/ and they'll still be paying it off.

No. Recent A-series chips are fabbed by TSMC.

Re: Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for future Macs

#864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, I’m predicting an MBP 13 - 16 range with an extra three hours of battery life+, and 20-30% faster. I'm predicting the opposite: you won't actually see any difference. Once you look closely at power profiles on modern machines you'll see that most energy is going into display and GPU. CPUs mostly run idle. Even if you had a theoretical CPU using zero energy, most people are not going to get 30% battery life gain…

I'm predicting a future where the os is completely locked down and all software for macs be purchased from the app store. Great revenue model for Apple.

Their pro/developers (influence) are too important to apple to do that.

Re: Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for future Macs

#865

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fully expect any reduction in costs for Apple will get sent to their shareholders, not the consumers.

> I fully expect any reduction in costs for Apple will get sent to their shareholders, not the consumers. Apple's margins are consistent, if their costs go down significantly, pricing comes down or features increase. The iPad is a perfect example, for years it was $500 and they just kept increasing the feature-set until eventually they could deliver the base product for significantly less. Shareholders benefit from i…

They have to pay back the investments in R+D first though, no?

Re: Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for future Macs

#866
One thing I haven’t seen mentioned that is extremely interesting with regards to performance is if all those demos were done on a developer test kit machine, which is itself based on the Mac mini form factor... then the fact that these systems were all driving that Pro XDR 6k display is notable.

For references in no configuration of the current Mac mini can you drive an XDR without the use of an eGPU thanks to the extremely limited integrated intel graphics.

Re: Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for future Macs

#867

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, I’m predicting an MBP 13 - 16 range with an extra three hours of battery life+, and 20-30% faster. I'm predicting the opposite: you won't actually see any difference. Once you look closely at power profiles on modern machines you'll see that most energy is going into display and GPU. CPUs mostly run idle. Even if you had a theoretical CPU using zero energy, most people are not going to get 30% battery life gain…

Apple can start leaning on their specialized ML cores and accelerators Thank you for mentioning this. I feel like many have missed it. I think Apple sees this sort of thing as the future, and their true competitive advantage. Most are focusing on Apple's potential edge over Intel when it comes to general compute performance/watt. Eventually Apple's likely to hit a wall there too though, like Intel. Where Apple can re…

#1, who can say. #2 might be side stepped by the compatibility they with iOS apps they will gain? (making it so all those iphone/ipad developers can ship their apps to macs, too.)

Re: Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for future Macs

#869

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed on all points. I saw speculation elsewhere that this change, along with AWS's addition of Graviton-based (their own ARM processors) instances at much more competitive price points relative to x86, are bound to spearhead the change to "ARM by default." If your devs are already using ARM, and ARM's notably cheaper in the cloud, that's a compelling case. If you're already using Kubernetes / Docker heavily, you're…

Does Docker work on ARM or does hypervisor have any Intel specific features?

Docker works on arm, using arm images.

Current hypervisor.framework is a very thin wrapper over Intel's virtualization extensions, so t'll have to change pretty heavily to accommodate ARM.

Re: Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for future Macs

#870

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple chips are fast mostly because they have a lot of cache to spare. Take for example the A12Z. It has 8MB of L2 (not L3, it's L2!) cache. An Intel Core i7-1068NG7 present in the latest Macbook Pros (that performs akin to the A12Z according to Geekbench) has only 2MB of L2 cache. No other ARM CPU has this level of L2 cache. Apple chips are not "magical", Apple just can afford packing up lots and lots of cache becau…

> Take for example the A12Z. It has 8MB of L2 (not L3, it's L2!) It's not really that clear cut. You could also argue that the A12Z has 8MB of L3 and 0MB of L2. The L2 in the A12Z is shared while the L2 in the Intel CPU is not. Similarly the latency of the A12Z's L2 is a lot higher than the latency of Intel's L2, but also then still lower than Intel's L3. https://images.anandtech.com/doci/13661/A12X-lat.png & https:/…

Latency increases as cache size increases. That's well a well known fact.
Post reply on HN