Intel has not been shy at criticizing Apple Silicon for the past 18 months. Have they said anything about the M1 Ultra?
Are we going to get the Alder Lake Ultra?
Are we going to get the Alder Lake Ultra?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Any comments from Intel on the M1 Ultra?
- Thread starter pshufd
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Intel will probably release something in the near future to challenge the M1 Ultra, just like they did with the M1 Max (but at a much higher power consumption ofcourse).
So instead of a 14-core intel CPU (that beat the M1 Max), they will then come with a 28-core version I suppose to try beat the M1 Ultra.
So instead of a 14-core intel CPU (that beat the M1 Max), they will then come with a 28-core version I suppose to try beat the M1 Ultra.
I don't think Intel will be able to pull this off on their current Alder lake chips. They are simply too power hungry to be able to stuff enough cores into one chip to compete. That being said, I've been watching "Intel 4" - and it will be interesting to see what happens when they enter production. I have a feeling we will be seeing chips with more cores than we see now. Intel is still a long way away from being able to truly compete with Apple Silicon, but they've made some very impressive headway over the past two years.
If I were Intel, I'd be focusing primarily on the efficiency cores for multithreaded performance. They are significantly more efficient, so they could stuff a huge number of them onto one chip without blowing the TDP into the 300-400+ watt range. A chip with 16 performance cores and 48 efficiency cores would be a screamer on multicore workloads, but the marketing team would have to find a way to sell a high-performance chip with more efficiency cores than performance cores.
If I were Intel, I'd be focusing primarily on the efficiency cores for multithreaded performance. They are significantly more efficient, so they could stuff a huge number of them onto one chip without blowing the TDP into the 300-400+ watt range. A chip with 16 performance cores and 48 efficiency cores would be a screamer on multicore workloads, but the marketing team would have to find a way to sell a high-performance chip with more efficiency cores than performance cores.
Why wouldn't it be possible? They just need to combine 2 of those i9 chips that beat the M1 Max and then they have it. There are power supplies that can handle such power draws.
But the real answer will come next year when Intel switches to 3nm. Then it will be interesting to see if they can offer the same performance at the same power consumption as Apple.
But the real answer will come next year when Intel switches to 3nm. Then it will be interesting to see if they can offer the same performance at the same power consumption as Apple.
The problem isn't the power supply. It's the cooling systems. Dissipating 400 watts of power requires massive cooling capacity, much more than could easily fit inside a small form factor (such as a laptop or a Mac Studio).
“Just” is doing a lot of work in that statement.
I assumed we were talking about desktops since the M1 Ultra is targeted also for desktops. But in laptops, not a chance 2 x i9 will work ofcourse.
Enterprise systems often have to dissipate this level of heat, but they usually have two CPU systems and each CPU is using ~200 watts or so. The cooling systems are massive, and at this point most non-enterprise consumers running chips with 200-300+ watt TDPs just make the switch to water cooling (not an impractical solution either, honestly).
But in terms of ultra-high-TDP processors, what's downright scary is that Apple could easily do the same thing. If they were to scale an M1 up to the 200-300+ watt range, the sheer multithreaded performance would be jaw-dropping.
Are server farms going to give the M1 Ultra or whatever the four and eight times Max chips?
Yes indeed, the 40-core Mac Pro is going to be a beast. And you can probably get the 40-core version for only $8000 probably?
$4,000. You pay another $4,000 to get from 64 GB of RAM and to get 8 TB SSD.
We have pci-e 4.0 and 5.0 with stranded m.2 slots with apple you pay at least $150+ markup per 1TB of storage
I'm sure they will soon come with something that is slightly faster (using 8 times the power with a fire extinguisher as a cooler).
Yes, they will come out with something using more cores and more power to edge out the M1 Ultra, which will mean absolutely nothing to anyone.
There is this. Not specifically about Ultra but I would think the Ultra would garner the same response. Nothing said publicly but internally Intel would want to beat it.
appleinsider.com
Leaked plan shows Intel will try to be more efficient than M1 Max by late 2023 | AppleInsider
A presentation slide claiming to show Intel's projected future roadmap includes plan for Arrow Lake processor to outperform Apple's M1 Max by late 2023 or early 2024.
appleinsider.com
Intel needs to stay focused and demonstrate that they are capable of executing their roadmap. This is easier for Apple because while there are lots of rumors, Apple doesn't usually disclose something until they release it.
Alder Lake is a good first step, but they need to take a few more before casting aspersions toward others.
Alder Lake is a good first step, but they need to take a few more before casting aspersions toward others.
Give it a day or 2, there will be something about price I’m sure and that gaming on macs sucks…
I think it’s very telling that the most volume, seemingly 55-60%?, in the Studio is used to cool the system. And that’s to cool an M1 x, think about what Intel would need to cool their “equivalent”.
3 leave blowers that are water cooled themselves?
Talk is cheap, and Intel has been doing a lot of talking with no substance to back it up. There have been rumblings about their plans to release a vanilla M1 competitor............years from now. I'll believe it when I see it, and by then M1 and all its variants will seem primitive compared to M3 or M4 or whatever else.
If I were a professional short seller or something like that, I'd be looking pretty hard at Intel. They're really starting to behave like RIM or Microsoft, where they think their user base is too loyal to ever think of moving to anything else. Eventually a competitor is going to disrupt you. If you weren't already planning for it, you get caught flat footed.
The reason things like this don't often happen to Apple is because they bet big on technologies they know are going to be great, even if it's YEARS too early to make them mainstream. In other words, the time to start working on an M1 competitor was 10 years ago, not 2022.
If I were a professional short seller or something like that, I'd be looking pretty hard at Intel. They're really starting to behave like RIM or Microsoft, where they think their user base is too loyal to ever think of moving to anything else. Eventually a competitor is going to disrupt you. If you weren't already planning for it, you get caught flat footed.
The reason things like this don't often happen to Apple is because they bet big on technologies they know are going to be great, even if it's YEARS too early to make them mainstream. In other words, the time to start working on an M1 competitor was 10 years ago, not 2022.
Honestly... Who cares?
Intel would be a lot better of these days (well at least less insufferable) if like Apple and AMD they actually just shut up and let their chips do the talking.
Was Alder Lake surprisingly decent (given how their marketing team likes to hype up mediocre products)? Sure. Doesn't change the fact that a decade of overpromising and underdelivering let AMD get back in the CPU game (and actually get ahead for two generations!) and convinced Apple they needed to design their own Mac chips (that turned out to be faster/more power efficient than Intel's.)
Also, let's take a moment to appreciate that in that same decade Intel talked constantly about building their own high performance GPUs, and while they're finally on the verge of delivering (something) Apple beat them to it by 6-18 months depending on how you count, and the M1 Ultra is likely to be a faster workstation chip than whatever Intel releases (and Apple's not even done this year, just wait until the M2/whatever goes into the Mac Pro.)
At the end of the day, Intel's gonna to Intel (occasionally brilliant products + over the top marketing + a healthy dose of anti-competitive ****.) Maybe they finally start executing well/consistently again, maybe they don't, either way the cats out of the bag and they'll face fierce competition from Apple, AMD and probably even ARM.
IMHO the far more interesting piece is the TDP divergence we're likely to see this year. On both the CPU and GPU side Intel, AMD, and Nvidia appear poised to make 2022 the year the average productivity/gaming PC's TDP doubles while Apple's chips sip power in comparison.
Intel would be a lot better of these days (well at least less insufferable) if like Apple and AMD they actually just shut up and let their chips do the talking.
Was Alder Lake surprisingly decent (given how their marketing team likes to hype up mediocre products)? Sure. Doesn't change the fact that a decade of overpromising and underdelivering let AMD get back in the CPU game (and actually get ahead for two generations!) and convinced Apple they needed to design their own Mac chips (that turned out to be faster/more power efficient than Intel's.)
Also, let's take a moment to appreciate that in that same decade Intel talked constantly about building their own high performance GPUs, and while they're finally on the verge of delivering (something) Apple beat them to it by 6-18 months depending on how you count, and the M1 Ultra is likely to be a faster workstation chip than whatever Intel releases (and Apple's not even done this year, just wait until the M2/whatever goes into the Mac Pro.)
At the end of the day, Intel's gonna to Intel (occasionally brilliant products + over the top marketing + a healthy dose of anti-competitive ****.) Maybe they finally start executing well/consistently again, maybe they don't, either way the cats out of the bag and they'll face fierce competition from Apple, AMD and probably even ARM.
IMHO the far more interesting piece is the TDP divergence we're likely to see this year. On both the CPU and GPU side Intel, AMD, and Nvidia appear poised to make 2022 the year the average productivity/gaming PC's TDP doubles while Apple's chips sip power in comparison.
They’re working on obscure chess benchmarks right now.