A few post-event thoughts on AS

[playtech1]

Overall I am very excited for AS Macs and am looking forward to receiving a top spec Air to replace my MBP.

But the event did raise in my mind a few possible bumps in the road to the full AS transition:

1. With all of the presentation's talk of 2x, 3x, Xx, performance gains, Apple has set speed expectations sky high. I fear reviewers will now not be kind if it does not meet those expectations. Tech reviewers on Youtube will be delighted, I'm sure, as video editing looks to be great and Apple is very good at getting them onside generally. Those with non-standard computing needs that don't take advantage of the custom CPU features might be less impressed.

2. On RAM, I still think it should have been 16GB all round. It would have been an obvious and objective upgrade from existing base models and should not cost Apple much. The $/£200 upgrade cost from 8 to 16GB seems greedy.

4. With greater CPU commonality I would now bet on an 'M1X' to power all of the high-end 13 and 16 inch MBPs and iMacs. No stretch to guess it will double the M1 in many respects, i.e. 16 cores (8+8), 16 core GPU, etc. I am a bit nervous about what the common CPU approach might mean for the Mac Pro. Perhaps talk of a 'mini' Mac Pro is to increase the sales volume to justify a new high performance chip 'M1Z', or maybe it's because the big Mac Pro will cease to exist?

5. The GPU looks great for integrated graphics, but that's not a very high bar. At this point I'm not sure if a 16 core GPU on an 'M1X' would beat a 2021 mid-range AMD laptop GPU. Seems like iPad apps will be the main source of native games.

6. Rosetta speed and compatibility outside of optimal use cases still seems unclear (e.g. a Metal-based game from the App store vs an older game on Steam), but overall I think this will be less painful than the 32-bit cull of Catalina.

7. Lack of any change at all to the chassis design was a missed opportunity. Even if a major change was off the cards, having a way to show off that you have the latest and greatest hardware seems like missing an open goal. Just a few new colours would have been enough.

8. No 1080p webcam? In the MBP at least? In a pandemic?!

Overall though I think Apple did what it needed to in order to kick things off. But it was a little closer to the bare minimum than I was hoping for.

Taking a step back really the only key benefit over existing models claimed for these AS machines is speed, so if those gains are not spectacular you have to ask whether the whole transition was worth it. Next week's benchmarks are going to be key.

 

[bobmans]

Great points!

In response to this:

5. The GPU looks great for integrated graphics, but that's not a very high bar. At this point I'm not sure if a 16 core GPU on an 'M1X' would beat a 2021 mid-range AMD laptop GPU. Seems like iPad apps will be the main source of native games.

Apple will most likely for their higher end chipsets (the M1 is considered as their low-end entry level chip) use their own "Apple Silicon" dGPU instead of an iGPU.
This would free up a lot of transistor budget that's spent on GPU cores in the M1 for extra CPU cores for the M10 (or M1X/Z or whatever naming scheme they'll go for).

I think the next Macs that they'll transition will tell us a lot about the road they're going to take as for now they have only transitioned their low-end entry level devices.

 

[leman]

Allow me just a few comments

1. With all of the presentation's talk of 2x, 3x, Xx, performance gains, Apple has set speed expectations sky high. I fear reviewers will now not be kind if it does not meet those expectations. Tech reviewers on Youtube will be delighted, I'm sure, as video editing looks to be great and Apple is very good at getting them onside generally. Those with non-standard computing needs that don't take advantage of the custom CPU features might be less impressed.

You are right, but then again, we have performance figures for the iPhone A14 are known. And they are in the ballpark of best desktop CPUs money can buy. I would be a huge surprise if M1 performance — with more cores, better thermals and faster RAM — will disappoint.

2. On RAM, I still think it should have been 16GB all round. It would have been an obvious and objective upgrade from existing base models and should not cost Apple much. The $/£200 upgrade cost from 8 to 16GB seems greedy.

I kind of agree. But we also need to keep in mind that these are entry-level machines, and are only meant like that. Also, we don't really know the specs of the RAM. It is possible that there are issues with chip availability if Apple is using LPDDR5 or some sort of overclocked LPDDR4

5. The GPU looks great for integrated graphics, but that's not a very high bar. At this point I'm not sure if a 16 core GPU on an 'M1X' would beat a 2021 mid-range AMD laptop GPU. Seems like iPad apps will be the main source of native games.

GPUs usually scale very well with the number of cores, assuming the memory subsystem can keep up. The reason for this is that GPUs are massively parallel processors that have to perform a huge numbers of tasks simultaneously. With this kind of distributed workload, increasing the number of processor by 2 will approximately increase the performance by 2 (give or take).

With faster RAM, more cache and 16 GPU Cores, Apple should be within the reach of an AMD Pro 5600M - at a significantly lower power consumption. With 32 GPU cores, they will be in the ballpark of a high-end desktop, on a chip that consumes less than 50 watts.

8. No 1080p webcam? In the MBP at least? In a pandemic?!

The problem is the sensor size. The display is too thin to fit a bigger camera. Alternatives would be an awkward camera placement or making the display thicker — neither of which is optimal. By the way, look around, and you will see that virtually all laptops in that market segment use 720p cameras.

 

[Saturn007]

Good write-up.

”Taking a step back really the only key benefit over existing models claimed for these AS machines is speed,”

And, battery life! That's a huge increase. Plus, no fan, another big advantage to many of us.

 

[leman]

Apple will most likely for their higher end chipsets (the M1 is considered as their low-end entry level chip) use their own "Apple Silicon" dGPU instead of an iGPU.
This would free up a lot of transistor budget that's spent on GPU cores in the M1 for extra CPU cores for the M10 (or M1X/Z or whatever naming scheme they'll go for).

Apple is not going back to a classical dGPU, since they are touting unified memory as one of their main features (and it is an absolutely significant achievement). What we might very well see is the GPU being on a separate chip (packaged together with the CPU cluster), but it won't be a "true dGPU" as it will share the RAM with the CPU and the rest of the processing units.

 

[playtech1]

Good write-up.

”Taking a step back really the only key benefit over existing models claimed for these AS machines is speed,”

And, battery life! That's a huge increase. Plus, no fan, another big advantage to many of us.

An excellent point and one I missed. I am sceptical battery life will be as good outside of Safari and Apple TV, but it should be a strong point even then.

 

[Dovahkiing]

This event didn't really make any sense to me.

Plus, no fan, another big advantage to many of us.

As long as the bottom case doesn't run at 65C, it's a benefit. We'll see next week.

 

[Shivetya]

Overall I am very excited for AS Macs and am looking forward to receiving a top spec Air to replace my MBP.

But the event did raise in my mind a few possible bumps in the road to the full AS transition:

9. The lack of software. Did anyone notice how few well known names were in their presentation? I bet most didn't even know half of the developers they mentioned nor remember the names today.

Seriously, there was a distinct lack of indication as to who is going to support the new platform outside of three recognizable names.

 

[theluggage]

Seriously, there was a distinct lack of indication as to who is going to support the new platform outside of three recognizable names.

Only start to worry if we don't see a flurry of announcements over the coming weeks.

Developers couldn't announce their ASi software before Apple announced the official ASi Macs, and Apple can't announce third-party software without collaboration with the developers.

Then, only a group of "elite" developers will have had access to the M1 chip and the new machines (and they'd have been under strict NDA until yesterday) - the majority of rank and file developers probably got the details yesterday along with everybody else. The developer system gave them a headstart but any rational developer would want to test on the "real thing" before releasing a product (...and any rational customer would want them to!)

 

[turbineseaplane]

The lack of software is the one that has me holding off (have canceled my pre-order)

I was very excited to dive in and be an early adopter but the more I thought about it the more it makes sense to let things shake out.

 

[ght56]

7. Lack of any change at all to the chassis design was a missed opportunity. Even if a major change was off the cards, having a way to show off that you have the latest and greatest hardware seems like missing an open goal. Just a few new colours would have been enough.

I can see several reasons for not changing the chassis quite yet.

Changing the chassis at this stage would potentially be a missed sales opportunity. The current level of media buzz is already tremendous because AS is so new, different, and fresh. With the current chassis, these are going to sell like hotcakes. People are ordering them like crazy even without any indication of how they actually perform in the real world, which shows how much excitement AS has already created even before its official release.

A new chassis for the second generation AS line will again strum up that buzz, offering something new, fresh, and different, even if the performance gains of the second generation are not as pronounced as the gains of the first gen AS over Intel. Those who might have been tempted to update the first time around but never followed through for whatever reason will again come across all of this buzz to draw attention and they might get hooked on this second go. Also, many of the buyers of the first gen AS products would potentially update to this new chassis design.

Then, going beyond the sales, Apple could also use the experience gained from these first generation products to dictate how they want to build the next form factor so that it is a chassis built to maximize what AS can do and deliver the best possible user experience. Design aspects that are liked and work well can be carried over. Design aspects that perform poorly can be modified.

 

[JPack]

I can see several reasons for not changing the chassis quite yet.

Changing the chassis at this stage would potentially be a missed sales opportunity. The current level of media buzz is already tremendous because AS is so new, different, and fresh. With the current chassis, these are going to sell like hotcakes. People are ordering them like crazy even without any indication of how they actually perform in the real world, which shows how much excitement AS has already created even before its official release.

A new chassis for the second generation AS line will again strum up that buzz, offering something new, fresh, and different, even if the performance gains of the second generation are not as pronounced as the gains of the first gen AS over Intel. Those who might have been tempted to update the first time around but never followed through for whatever reason will again come across all of this buzz to draw attention and they might get hooked on this second go. Also, many of the buyers of the first gen AS products would potentially update to this new chassis design.

Then, going beyond the sales, Apple could also use the experience gained from these first generation products to dictate how they want to build the next form factor so that it is a chassis built to maximize what AS can do and deliver the best possible user experience. Design aspects that are liked and work well can be carried over. Design aspects that perform poorly can be modified.

More likely, it’s an engineering decision. The more changes introduced at the same time, the higher the risk. It’s romantic to see everything change at the same time, but it’s not practical.

That’s why you see Tick Tock cadence in silicon engineering and why A9, A11, and A13 have more significant performance gains than processors in between.

 

[LonestarOne]

7. Lack of any change at all to the chassis design was a missed opportunity. Even if a major change was off the cards, having a way to show off that you have the latest and greatest hardware seems like missing an open goal. Just a few new colours would have been enough.

In the middle of a pandemic, we may not have the need for a purple tesseract osmium chassis to show around town.

 

[playtech1]

In the middle of a pandemic, we may not have the need for a purple tesseract osmium chassis to show around town.

I don't know what this would look like, but I want one!

 

[Yebubbleman]

Overall I am very excited for AS Macs and am looking forward to receiving a top spec Air to replace my MBP.

But the event did raise in my mind a few possible bumps in the road to the full AS transition:

1. With all of the presentation's talk of 2x, 3x, Xx, performance gains, Apple has set speed expectations sky high. I fear reviewers will now not be kind if it does not meet those expectations. Tech reviewers on Youtube will be delighted, I'm sure, as video editing looks to be great and Apple is very good at getting them onside generally. Those with non-standard computing needs that don't take advantage of the custom CPU features might be less impressed.

2. On RAM, I still think it should have been 16GB all round. It would have been an obvious and objective upgrade from existing base models and should not cost Apple much. The $/£200 upgrade cost from 8 to 16GB seems greedy.

4. With greater CPU commonality I would now bet on an 'M1X' to power all of the high-end 13 and 16 inch MBPs and iMacs. No stretch to guess it will double the M1 in many respects, i.e. 16 cores (8+8), 16 core GPU, etc. I am a bit nervous about what the common CPU approach might mean for the Mac Pro. Perhaps talk of a 'mini' Mac Pro is to increase the sales volume to justify a new high performance chip 'M1Z', or maybe it's because the big Mac Pro will cease to exist?

5. The GPU looks great for integrated graphics, but that's not a very high bar. At this point I'm not sure if a 16 core GPU on an 'M1X' would beat a 2021 mid-range AMD laptop GPU. Seems like iPad apps will be the main source of native games.

6. Rosetta speed and compatibility outside of optimal use cases still seems unclear (e.g. a Metal-based game from the App store vs an older game on Steam), but overall I think this will be less painful than the 32-bit cull of Catalina.

7. Lack of any change at all to the chassis design was a missed opportunity. Even if a major change was off the cards, having a way to show off that you have the latest and greatest hardware seems like missing an open goal. Just a few new colours would have been enough.

8. No 1080p webcam? In the MBP at least? In a pandemic?!

Overall though I think Apple did what it needed to in order to kick things off. But it was a little closer to the bare minimum than I was hoping for.

Taking a step back really the only key benefit over existing models claimed for these AS machines is speed, so if those gains are not spectacular you have to ask whether the whole transition was worth it. Next week's benchmarks are going to be key.

Regarding the RAM, I think you're missing the point. It's not that everything shouldn't just be 16GB standard (though, you're not wrong about that). It's that 16GB shouldn't be a maximum, especially on a Mac on which the Intel equivalent can support four times the RAM. They can get away with it on the MacBook Air and the 2-port 13" MacBook Pro (which both maxed out at 16GB of RAM), but not the Mac mini where 64GB of RAM is the maximum on the Intel version. Unified Memory doesn't make up for a lack of memory.

Also, not changing the chassis was a wise call. They need to show that the new machines are better for having the new chips. A new design for these would've distracted from that. They'll likely do that with the iMacs, but they will likely do so in ways that were never going to be possible with Intel. Remember, Apple Silicon is the main feature here. It should get the spotlight. Not a new chassis.

 

[Fomalhaut]

The lack of software is the one that has me holding off (have canceled my pre-order)

I was very excited to dive in and be an early adopter but the more I thought about it the more it makes sense to let things shake out.

It very much depends on what software you need of course. If you spend the vast majority of your time with MacOS and Apple-produced software, the experience is likely to be good. 3rd party software support has not been clearly advertised, although we can expect native versions of the big players within "a few months". This may or may not be an issue for you, but if you depend on say, Adobe Photoshop, I would wait for a firm statement of support followed by reviews.

Same story for Rosetta 2 - has your software been tested under Rosetta 2 and performance and stability found to be acceptable?

I suspect there will be a lot of common software and tools that are "not quite ready", or otherwise deficient. If you depend on these, then it could be a bad experience unless you have an existing machine that is known to work as a backup.

I certainly wouldn't be relying solely on a new M1 Mac for professional work or anything that is important to you. At least, not until they have been proven to work. Using sub-par software is a miserable experience....