Discussion Apple Silicon SoC thread

[Eug]

M1
5 nm
Unified memory architecture - LP-DDR4
16 billion transistors

8-core CPU

4 high-performance cores
192 KB instruction cache
128 KB data cache
Shared 12 MB L2 cache

4 high-efficiency cores
128 KB instruction cache
64 KB data cache
Shared 4 MB L2 cache
(Apple claims the 4 high-effiency cores alone perform like a dual-core Intel MacBook Air)

8-core iGPU (but there is a 7-core variant, likely with one inactive core)
128 execution units
Up to 24576 concurrent threads
2.6 Teraflops
82 Gigatexels/s
41 gigapixels/s

16-core neural engine
Secure Enclave
USB 4

Products:
$999 ($899 edu) 13" MacBook Air (fanless) - 18 hour video playback battery life
$699 Mac mini (with fan)
$1299 ($1199 edu) 13" MacBook Pro (with fan) - 20 hour video playback battery life

Memory options 8 GB and 16 GB. No 32 GB option (unless you go Intel).

It should be noted that the M1 chip in these three Macs is the same (aside from GPU core number). Basically, Apple is taking the same approach which these chips as they do the iPhones and iPads. Just one SKU (excluding the X variants), which is the same across all iDevices (aside from maybe slight clock speed differences occasionally).

EDIT:



M1 Pro 8-core CPU (6+2), 14-core GPU
M1 Pro 10-core CPU (8+2), 14-core GPU
M1 Pro 10-core CPU (8+2), 16-core GPU
M1 Max 10-core CPU (8+2), 24-core GPU
M1 Max 10-core CPU (8+2), 32-core GPU

M1 Pro and M1 Max discussion here:

Page 78 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 78 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

M1 Ultra discussion here:

Page 109 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 109 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

M2 discussion here:

Page 127 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 127 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

Second Generation 5 nm
Unified memory architecture - LPDDR5, up to 24 GB and 100 GB/s
20 billion transistors

8-core CPU

4 high-performance cores
192 KB instruction cache
128 KB data cache
Shared 16 MB L2 cache

4 high-efficiency cores
128 KB instruction cache
64 KB data cache
Shared 4 MB L2 cache

10-core iGPU (but there is an 8-core variant)
3.6 Teraflops

16-core neural engine
Secure Enclave
USB 4

Hardware acceleration for 8K h.264, h.264, ProRes

M3 Family discussion here:

Page 215 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 215 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

M4 Family discussion here:

Page 263 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 263 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

 

[Doug S]

My only concern with A class chips in low-end laptops is whether it has the needed I/O and display capabilities. For example can it drive an additional external monitor? Or support 2 USB ports (1 for power)? of course, Apple could decide not to support these ..

Why would they care about supporting a second monitor (i.e. mirroring only) on an entry level product? And they don't really need a second USB port if it supports magsafe as the "standard" way of power/charging.

They could use the Mx in it and still only support one USB-C and no second monitor just for marketing segmentation. Sort of like how the iPhone SE doesn't support mmwave 5G (though in that case they do save a bit of money not having antennas etc. for those bands, but its modem supports them)

 

[ashFTW]

Why would they care about supporting a second monitor (i.e. mirroring only) on an entry level product? And they don't really need a second USB port if it supports magsafe as the "standard" way of power/charging.

They could use the Mx in it and still only support one USB-C and no second monitor just for marketing segmentation. Sort of like how the iPhone SE doesn't support mmwave 5G (though in that case they do save a bit of money not having antennas etc. for those bands, but its modem supports them)

Yeah M1 to start with is a better choice since, like iPhone SE, it will probably only get updated every 2-3 years and has to remain enticing for that entire period. But they could go with an A chip with somewhat limited functionality, especially if they are targeting a much lower price point.

 

[SpudLobby]

They wouldn't really use an A series SoC (which would also likely mean with a 64-bit bus). If they do anything for an entry-level MacBook, it will just be an N-1/2 year Mx chip. A fricking $600 iPad has an M chip in it. You guys have the costs and economies of scale in the wrong place - the fact that the MacBooks already drive so much volume for base M and upper M chips much of which will have overlap just means doing e.g. an M1 chip for an iPad or an older M chip for a cheap MacBook is easier than otherwise.

 

[Eug]

My only concern with A class chips in low-end laptops is whether it has the needed I/O and display capabilities. For example can it drive an additional external monitor? Or support 2 USB ports (1 for power)? of course, Apple could decide not to support these ..

That’s why I suggested iPhone class CPU, but not necessarily the exact same iPhone CPU, unless they already had upgraded I/O built-in that simply wasn’t used on iPhones.

Why would they care about supporting a second monitor (i.e. mirroring only) on an entry level product? And they don't really need a second USB port if it supports magsafe as the "standard" way of power/charging.

They could use the Mx in it and still only support one USB-C and no second monitor just for marketing segmentation. Sort of like how the iPhone SE doesn't support mmwave 5G (though in that case they do save a bit of money not having antennas etc. for those bands, but its modem supports them)

I think all Macs should have external monitor support with desktop spanning support, just because. Apple tried this with iBooks, allowing only mirroring for external screens, and one of the most popular hacks even with regular folk was to enable desktop spanning.

MagSafe plus one USB-C would work but 2 USB-C would be better.

BTW, my wife’s 14 Pro Max does not support mmWave 5G. mmWave is a USA thing. OTOH, she has a nanoSIM slot. Apple removed those in the US.

 

[Doug S]

I think all Macs should have external monitor support with desktop spanning support, just because. Apple tried this with iBooks, allowing only mirroring for external screens, and one of the most popular hacks even with regular folk was to enable desktop spanning.

MagSafe plus one USB-C would work but 2 USB-C would be better.

Sure they "would be better". So would a faster CPU/GPU, more RAM, more storage, better display, bigger battery... Market segmentation is a thing. If it matches the specs and capabilities of the current low end Macbook then effectively all they're doing is cutting the price of the current low end.

Now maybe that's the plan, but if they wanted to keep what is currently the low end model around after an even lower end model slots in below it there must be sufficient distinction in their specs and capabilities to justify the extra money customers are asked for to move up to the next model.

 

[Eug]

Sure they "would be better". So would a faster CPU/GPU, more RAM, more storage, better display, bigger battery... Market segmentation is a thing. If it matches the specs and capabilities of the current low end Macbook then effectively all they're doing is cutting the price of the current low end.

Now maybe that's the plan, but if they wanted to keep what is currently the low end model around after an even lower end model slots in below it there must be sufficient distinction in their specs and capabilities to justify the extra money customers are asked for to move up to the next model.

There are no Mac netbooks. The cheapest Mac laptops are US$1000 retail, and that's a machine sporting a 3 year-old CPU. Even if Apple were to revive the 12" MacBook, I think the cheapest it'd go for retail pricing would be $799, but perhaps it would be $899 or $999 and the M1 MacBook Air would be deleted. At those prices, 2 USB-C ports and desktop spanning support are not big asks. Furthermore, the $999 M1 MacBook Air already has 2 USB-C ports and desktop spanning.

You would NOT need a faster CPU/GPU, more RAM, more storage, better display, bigger battery, so those are irrelevant points. It would start at 256 GB / 8 GB, with M1 or even an iPhone class CPU/GPU.

Although I do like the 12" form factor overall, the #1 thing I hate the most about my 12" MacBook is its single USB-C port. Yes, it would be better if it had at least a separate charging port, but even then it still would be quite frustrating. Basically Apple tried that already with the 12" MacBook and many people just hated having just that single USB-C port.

If anything I think the superior way to cheap out here is to provide two USB-C ports and NO MagSafe. I wouldn't be surprised if it would actually be cheaper to add a second USB-C port (with one doubling as a charging port) than it is to add MagSafe. Not only might the port be cheaper, the charger would be cheaper too. They would only have to provide a 30 Watt single-port charger like they do with the M1 MacBook Air. No need to splurge on MagSafe with the choice of dual 35 Watt or single 70 Watt options. The market segmentation here comes from the smaller screen and a slower CPU/GPU, and slower charging without MagSafe, with a smaller battery too.

tl;dr:

1. The cheapest small MacBook I envision in the near term is a 12" $899 - $999 model and it would replace the $999 M1 MacBook Air.

2. At that price it should be standard to have 2 USB-C ports as well as support for desktop spanning to an external screen. Having just one USB-C port on a Mac can be really irritating.

3. There is no need to add MagSafe. I suspect 2 x USB-C is actually cheaper than MagSafe plus 1 x USB-C. The USB-C port itself is probably cheaper, and certainly the USB charger is cheaper, and that difference would serve to provide market segmentation from the other Mac laptops.

 

[SteinFG]

They would only have to provide a 30 Watt single-port charger

I can think of one thing apple might do to get cheaper macbooks - stop including chargers in a box 🤪

 

[jpiniero]

Amazon sells the base M1 Air right now for $749. I was thinking it is Open Box but it says new.

 

[SteinFG]

Amazon sells the base M1 Air right now for $749. I was thinking it is Open Box but it says new.

You sure it's not refurbished or sold by third party? can you provide a link

 

[jpiniero]

You sure it's not refurbished or sold by third party? can you provide a link

Amazon.com

Have to buy Gold though. Silver and Space Gray are $849. Says S&S by Amazon.

 

[Eug]

Amazon.com

Have to buy Gold though. Silver and Space Gray are $849. Says S&S by Amazon.

Nice price. But yes, this is how Apple discounts its older Macs. They keep retail pricing high, but allow places like Best Buy and Amazon sell for much cheaper from time to time.

However, my arguments here are always about retail pricing, not edu pricing or sale pricing.

 

[jpiniero]

Nice price. But yes, this is how Apple discounts its older Macs. They keep retail pricing high, but allow places like Best Buy and Amazon sell for much cheaper from time to time.

However, my arguments here are always about retail pricing, not edu pricing or sale pricing.

Fair enough. I was thinking that Apple could actually use cut down M1 dies for this low cost Mac... but I'm not sure what else they could cut. 1080p screen?

 

[Glo.]

Amazon sells the base M1 Air right now for $749. I was thinking it is Open Box but it says new.

I see 689$ for gold option.

 

[Eug]

I see 689$ for gold option.

I'm seeing $749 for Gold but $689 for "Used - Good" Gold.

 

[Mopetar]

I'd like to see a new 27" iMac. I've been hanging on to my older Intel one for a while now and it's starting to get a bit long in the tooth.

24" would feel like a step down, and I'd like to see better options to go beyond the base Mx chip as well.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Really would like to hear from someone who has tortured their M1 MBA with rigorous workloads on an almost daily basis. Interested to know if it has "worn out" in some way. The keys or display or the SSD. A big problem I've seen with Mac users (that I know of) is that they treat their Macbooks very delicately. No rough use.

 

[Doug S]

There are no Mac netbooks. The cheapest Mac laptops are US$1000 retail, and that's a machine sporting a 3 year-old CPU. Even if Apple were to revive the 12" MacBook, I think the cheapest it'd go for retail pricing would be $799, but perhaps it would be $899 or $999 and the M1 MacBook Air would be deleted. At those prices, 2 USB-C ports and desktop spanning support are not big asks. Furthermore, the $999 M1 MacBook Air already has 2 USB-C ports and desktop spanning.

You would NOT need a faster CPU/GPU, more RAM, more storage, better display, bigger battery, so those are irrelevant points. It would start at 256 GB / 8 GB, with M1 or even an iPhone class CPU/GPU.

Although I do like the 12" form factor overall, the #1 thing I hate the most about my 12" MacBook is its single USB-C port. Yes, it would be better if it had at least a separate charging port, but even then it still would be quite frustrating. Basically Apple tried that already with the 12" MacBook and many people just hated having just that single USB-C port.

If anything I think the superior way to cheap out here is to provide two USB-C ports and NO MagSafe. I wouldn't be surprised if it would actually be cheaper to add a second USB-C port (with one doubling as a charging port) than it is to add MagSafe. Not only might the port be cheaper, the charger would be cheaper too. They would only have to provide a 30 Watt single-port charger like they do with the M1 MacBook Air. No need to splurge on MagSafe with the choice of dual 35 Watt or single 70 Watt options. The market segmentation here comes from the smaller screen and a slower CPU/GPU, and slower charging without MagSafe, with a smaller battery too.

tl;dr:

1. The cheapest small MacBook I envision in the near term is a 12" $899 - $999 model and it would replace the $999 M1 MacBook Air.

2. At that price it should be standard to have 2 USB-C ports as well as support for desktop spanning to an external screen. Having just one USB-C port on a Mac can be really irritating.

3. There is no need to add MagSafe. I suspect 2 x USB-C is actually cheaper than MagSafe plus 1 x USB-C. The USB-C port itself is probably cheaper, and certainly the USB charger is cheaper, and that difference would serve to provide market segmentation from the other Mac laptops.

My replies regarding making a cheap Mac were assuming that the rumors were true that one is coming. I have no idea if those rumors are actually true, of course. I think if Apple did do it they'd want to shoot for $699, which seems attainable given the price point for iPad Air. Even that wouldn't be as big of a step down in price as iPhone SE, though the iPhone is different from the Mac in that there is value to Apple not only in getting people into the ecosystem but also potential for post sale revenue from the App Store and associated services like Apple Music.

If they wanted to do a second USB port using an SoC that had only one they could use a USB hub chip to split them. Of course people would complain about that even though it would affect almost no one, because they always complain about stuff like that. I think leaving out Magsafe would be a mistake even if a second USB port was cheaper, because that's sort of an Apple marque / differentiation since they also use a magnetic type charging system for the iPhone and Watch. I haven't ever used it but I have tripped over a laptop charging cable a few times over the years and while fortunately I reacted quickly enough to prevent any damage anyone who has ever done it or come close would see the virtue in a system where they (or their child or pet) tripping over a cord doesn't hurt either themselves or the laptop.

 

[Eug]

If they wanted to do a second USB port using an SoC that had only one they could use a USB hub chip to split them. Of course people would complain about that even though it would affect almost no one, because they always complain about stuff like that. I think leaving out Magsafe would be a mistake even if a second USB port was cheaper, because that's sort of an Apple marque / differentiation since they also use a magnetic type charging system for the iPhone and Watch. I haven't ever used it but I have tripped over a laptop charging cable a few times over the years and while fortunately I reacted quickly enough to prevent any damage anyone who has ever done it or come close would see the virtue in a system where they (or their child or pet) tripping over a cord doesn't hurt either themselves or the laptop.

It should be noted that the M1 MacBook Air does not have MagSafe, and it sells like hotcakes.

MagSafe is indeed great IMO (and we have several MagSafe Mac laptops in this house), but that just provides a good reason to keep it only for the higher end models.

 

[Thibsie]

I had a magsafe MacBook and it was nice but if I had to have a MacBook now : USB-C everywhere, thank you !

 

[FlameTail]

Hey guys.

Any rumours you got about upcoming M3. M3 Pro and M3 Max?

I cam across someone claiming the M3 Max had 16 CPU cores but they did not cite any sources.

 

[Eug]

Hey guys.

Any rumours you got about upcoming M3. M3 Pro and M3 Max?

I cam across someone claiming the M3 Max had 16 CPU cores but they did not cite any sources.

Gurman is predicting:

M3: 8 (4P/4E)
M3 Pro: 12 (6P/6E) or 14 (8P/6E)
M3 Max: 16 (12P/4E)
M3 Ultra: 32 (24P/8E)

 

[FlameTail]

Gurman is predicting:

M3: 8 (4P/4E)
M3 Pro: 12 (6P/6E) or 14 (8P/6E)
M3 Max: 16 (12P/4E)
M3 Ultra: 32 (24P/8E)

o_0

Very interesting. So the Pro no longer has the same CPU power as the Max.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I feel like Apple missed a big opportunity in that they should have split the processing block of the Vision Pro into an external box like they did the battery. It would enable lower cost of the headset (with people being able to use Apple devices they already have that meet the minimum processing requirements to save some money) or can purchase the processing block at time of purchase (where it'd be cheaper, so it could've still been $3500 combined, but maybe buy the headset standalone and it'd be like $3299 with the processing block being $399 on its own with higher end options possible), reduce weight on the face, enable higher performance, and they could have made it their first M3 device which I think makes a lot of sense. Its a flagship device (more expensive than all but the highest end versions of their other devices), it would actually need the horsepower more, and due to the lower volume it would let them not worry too much if they didn't have enough production capacity.

Basically make a Mac Mini Mini (or just make that the new Mini).

I had a magsafe MacBook and it was nice but if I had to have a MacBook now : USB-C everywhere, thank you !

I don't know why Apple doesn't integrate Magsafe into the USB-C port (or rather lip around it). At least then they could justify their cable costs.

But then, if I were Apple I'd go crazy with MagSafe and turn it a data port as well, but go beyond. Stuff like turning the camera bump into an entirely separate device that attaches to devices via MagSafe (where it gets power and transfers data). Cuts cost per device, while enabling more camera capability. Put 2-3 MagSafe spots on the back of an iPhone (and then however many more you can fit on other devices like iPades have 2-3 times as many spots as iPhone), enabling a mix of cameras (one huge sensor that could have some lens options or dual cameras for Vision Pro 3D), or other capabilities (game controls, audio, secure mounting on things like arms and the like).

Heck do the same with batteries (would let them meet the new EU requirements of easy user replacement) and processors. It would also enable the people that don't mind a chonky phone to have that. They could even win some favors by making expandale SSD blocks (that would still be proprietary but at least would allow you to change/add storage vs the current setup, plus it would let them get by with small base amount integrated near to the SoC that would be soldered on for OS and could be sandboxed even further).

I'm wondering if MagSafe could even be used to cool a device, where the magnets lock 2 polished heat conductive surfaces with a TIM material in the center (heck would that be a way to deal with liquid metal TIM, surround it with magnets that keep it in place? Could you make liquid metal that you could circulate without a pump using magnets? Maybe a ferromagnetic fluid). Basically treat that polished Apple logo as a polished heatspreader that can be exposed outward.

 

[Doug S]

I feel like Apple missed a big opportunity in that they should have split the processing block of the Vision Pro into an external box like they did the battery.

That would require a really really high data rate between the "processing block" and the headset. They couldn't use fiber due to durability concerns so it would have to be electrical but that's a tremendous data rate to be carrying - basically equivalent to HDMI 2.1's max rate. Notice how stiff and thick a good HDMI cable is due to the shielding to avoid interference. You could make it thinner but that increases the chances of data drop outs which ruins the user experience.

I don't think doing this would be at all practical. This is Apple, they don't want an external box AT ALL but they had no choice based on the power needs and current battery technology. If they could spend $300 for a battery that's 1/10th of the size and weight so it could be integrated into the headset you better believe they'd do it even if it meant raising the price of the already expensive Vision Pro.

 

[igor_kavinski]

If they could spend $300 for a battery that's 1/10th of the size and weight so it could be integrated into the headset you better believe they'd do it even if it meant raising the price of the already expensive Vision Pro.

Hang a flexible cable from the ceiling or a tall enough stand and let it plug into the top of the Vision headset. Problem solved. It's not like people go outside with the headset. They are limited to free movement within their "VR room" so having a battery for that purpose just sounds dumb to me.

Oh wait. It's the Pro headset so maybe they expect people to roam around in the building of their workplace wearing the headset. OK, then the battery makes sense. Though still weird that someone would want to walk around a big office space or building wearing that.