Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Loa

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 5, 2003
1,725
76
Québec
Hello,

I know there's nothing concrete yet. Nevertheless, is there a rumors consensus on what we're expecting from Apple in terms of the big iMac GPU?

Can they make on-board GPUs that are competitive high-end discrete GPUs?
Is it possible that they'll include 3rd party discrete GPUs as an option in the bigger iMac?

Thanks.
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,678
I know there's nothing concrete yet. Nevertheless, is there a rumors consensus on what we're expecting from Apple in terms of the big iMac GPU?

I don’t think so.

Can they make on-board GPUs that are competitive high-end discrete GPUs?

I don’t see any reason why they couldn’t. Apple GPUs are very efficient and they don’t need fast VRAM to deliver good performance. A 32-core Apple GPU with hexa-channel DDR5 RAM at around 50 Watts should be competitive against 100-150Watt Nvidia and AMD GPUs.

Is it possible that they'll include 3rd party discrete GPUs as an option in the bigger iMac?

Technically, it’s possible, but I don’t see it happening. Using third-party GPUs would fragment Apple Silicon ecosystem and make it more difficult to write good software for the new Macs. Apple has heavily hinted that Apple Silicon will use Apple GPUs exclusively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ader42 and Loa

Apple Knowledge Navigator

macrumors 68040
Mar 28, 2010
3,692
12,912
Personally, I can’t see Apple using discrete GPUs from other manufacturers from here on out (for Apple Silicon, at least).

They’ve said a number of times now that the goal is to control the whole widget; and that factors in many things that customers don’t get to see, such as the wholesale cost/licensing of components, drivers, balancing thermal management (which affects the industrial design) and more. But this topic has been explored to death already.

I would expect any discrete Apple Silicon GPU - if arriving this year - to be a single variety and to be for the expected ‘M1X’ only. They won’t invest a lot into this first generation.

The reason for this is because M1 is essentially a beefed up A14 with modifications - but crucially, it uses a soon-to-be previous generation ARM instruction set.

The next instruction (launching later this year) will introduce a whole host of improvements, and it’s this framework that Apple will be working towards with both their CPU and GPU. Put simply; they used existing tech for M1 and ‘potentially’ a discrete GPU because the leap to the next ARM instruction set will appear even greater.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jerryk and Loa

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,678
The reason for this is because M1 is essentially a beefed up A14 with modifications - but crucially, it uses a soon-to-be previous generation ARM instruction set.

The next instruction (launching later this year) will introduce a whole host of improvements, and it’s this framework that Apple will be working towards with both their CPU and GPU. Put simply; they used existing tech for M1 and ‘potentially’ a discrete GPU because the leap to the next ARM instruction set will appear even greater.

I assume you are referring to ARMv9? If so, what does it have to do with GPUs? ARMv9 just introduces a bunch of new features (most of which are relevant to security or server computing) as well as makes some previously existing ARM extensions (like vector instructions) mandatory. I am not quite sure what improvements you mean, from where I stand there is not much win for Apple in adopting ARMv9 any time soon. Vector stuff, sure, but they can do it without the rest of the security features.
 

JohnnyGo

macrumors 6502a
Sep 9, 2009
957
620
I believe most are expecting a 30” iMac (and a smaller 24” version).

In relation to the GPU, either there will be a similar SOC internal GPU (with more cores) or a separate Apple dGPU based on the same technology but with massive increase of cores (4-8x the cores in M1 or M2 SOCs).

An Apple dGPU makes sense but it could happen next year together with the mini new Mac Pro (new cube)
 
  • Like
Reactions: catean and Loa

Significant1

macrumors 68000
Dec 20, 2014
1,686
780
Vector stuff, sure, but they can do it without the rest of the security features.
LOL, as a security responsible company, hardware security will be the single biggest reason for Apple to adobt armV9. Apple processors do a great deal of speculative execution and, if I am not mistaken, also vulnerable to Spectre type attacks.

Prediction are, they are first movers, as they were with armV8, but not this year, as ARM stated first armV9 processors will come next year, so likely armV9 support in m2 processors. Meaning m1x processors released this year, will not be armV9.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jerryk and Loa

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,678
LOL, as a security responsible company, hardware security will be the single biggest reason for Apple to adobt armV9.

If I understand it correctly, ARMv9 security is mostly about securely running containers or virtual machines. If that is the case, it's probably less interesting to them than to ARM who is targeting the server market (although I can see Apple using containerization for their sandbox). Please do correct me if I misunderstood it.

Apple processors do a great deal of speculative execution and, if I am not mistaken, also vulnerable to Spectre type attacks.

We will have to wait for more information on how ARMv9 intends to mitigate these issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jdb8167 and Loa

ader42

macrumors 6502
Jun 30, 2012
436
390
The only valid expectation is that the new iMac will be better than the current offering by some margin in both CPU and GPU. There have bene no rumors as such afaik, just speculation and extrapulation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Loa

Loa

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 5, 2003
1,725
76
Québec
The only valid expectation is that the new iMac will be better than the current offering by some margin in both CPU and GPU. There have bene no rumors as such afaik, just speculation and extrapulation.
Ineteresting argument. Right now, for the top intel Macs, is there a big performance difference between a maxed out MBP 16" and a maxed out 27" iMac?
 

ader42

macrumors 6502
Jun 30, 2012
436
390
From Geekbench:

MBP 6,851 multi-core (8 core Intel i9)
iMac 9,009 multi-core (10 cores Intel i9)
iMac Pro 13,327 multi-core (18 cores Intel Xeon)

MBA 7,372 multi-core (M1 8 core)
iMac 14,000 Multi-core (M1X 12 core?) = guess and speculation due to weighting for performance cores, and what if we get a 16 core option...

For GPU we can but hope for the best... I would also expect the GPU cores to double from the M1 To M1X.
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,678
From Geekbench:

MBP 6,851 multi-core (8 core Intel i9)
iMac 9,009 multi-core (10 cores Intel i9)
iMac Pro 13,327 multi-core (18 cores Intel Xeon)

MBA 7,372 multi-core (M1 8 core)
iMac 14,000 Multi-core (M1X 12 core?) = guess and speculation due to weighting for performance cores, and what if we get a 16 core option...

For GPU we can but hope for the best... I would also expect the GPU cores to double from the M1 To M1X.

The big question is how conservative the M1 CPU/GPU clocks are. If the hardware can actually sustain higher clocks (at the expense of power usage obviously), the iMac can end up being much faster than expected. The M1 GPU in particular seems to have a rather low clock… wouldn’t be surprised if it can go much higher..
 

xraydoc

Contributor
Oct 9, 2005
11,027
5,488
192.168.1.1
Given that Apple has given themselves two years to make the transition, I suspect anything coming out this first year won't be competitive (in the GPU department) with high-end discrete GPUs from nVidia/ATI. Certainly outperforming the low-end. Likely competitive in the midrange. I suspect we'll have to wait for gen 2 or even gen 3 (not the M1X or whatever it'll be called) for a GPU that even approaches the higher-end discrete PC cards.

We probably won't know what the M-series is capable of until the Apple Silicon-based Mac Pro comes out.
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,678
I suspect we'll have to wait for gen 2 or even gen 3 (not the M1X or whatever it'll be called) for a GPU that even approaches the higher-end discrete PC cards.

We probably won't know what the M-series is capable of until the Apple Silicon-based Mac Pro comes out.

Assuming Apple is even interested in building an enthusiast-level GPU... the primary target of high-performance GPUs is still ultra-high-end gaming, and that's just not the segment Apple is into. I do believe that they are very interested in gaming, but it makes much more sense for them to offer decent mid-range GPUs with predictable performance and a good development ecosystem. After all, high end GPUs are first and foremost about bragging rights... those GPUs are rare and expensive. With their tight vertical integration Apple could offer a console-like experience for Mac gaming, and you don't need super-fast GPUs for that.

As far as other uses of GPUs go... content creation will benefit a lot from custom processors and unified memory on Apple Silicon (already the meager M1 seems to do very well here), and things like machine learning are better delegated to the AMX coprocessor and the NPU, which are much more efficient at these tasks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neinjohn

xraydoc

Contributor
Oct 9, 2005
11,027
5,488
192.168.1.1
Assuming Apple is even interested in building an enthusiast-level GPU... the primary target of high-performance GPUs is still ultra-high-end gaming, and that's just not the segment Apple is into. I do believe that they are very interested in gaming, but it makes much more sense for them to offer decent mid-range GPUs with predictable performance and a good development ecosystem. After all, high end GPUs are first and foremost about bragging rights... those GPUs are rare and expensive. With their tight vertical integration Apple could offer a console-like experience for Mac gaming, and you don't need super-fast GPUs for that.

As far as other uses of GPUs go... content creation will benefit a lot from custom processors and unified memory on Apple Silicon (already the meager M1 seems to do very well here), and things like machine learning are better delegated to the AMX coprocessor and the NPU, which are much more efficient at these tasks.
True, Apple's target isn't gaming. But a lot of app use the GPU to accelerate video editing, effects rendering, animation, etc. They'll want performance that can approach the Vega II Duos that they offer for the current Mac Pro when they're ready to release the Apple Silicon-based Mac Pro.
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,678
True, Apple's target isn't gaming. But a lot of app use the GPU to accelerate video editing, effects rendering, animation, etc. They'll want performance that can approach the Vega II Duos that they offer for the current Mac Pro when they're ready to release the Apple Silicon-based Mac Pro.

That’s my point. Apple can probably easily surpass the performance of those GPUs for these tasks if you count in their coprocessors and unified memory...
 

xraydoc

Contributor
Oct 9, 2005
11,027
5,488
192.168.1.1
That’s my point. Apple can probably easily surpass the performance of those GPUs for these tasks if you count in their coprocessors and unified memory...
Oh I have no doubt they eventually will. But I think it'll be another 18 months before we see it get there.
 

neinjohn

macrumors regular
Nov 9, 2020
107
70
My expectation is that Apple will just streamline all the way from mobile. Expect the newest iMacs this year with the same order of things we have on the A14, A14X, M1 adding "just" more cores, higher clocks. On the same note I think they will release smaller, more affordable Mac Pro and on iPhone 13 presentation we will more or less reveal 90% of what to expect of it hardware wise.

Imagination, the company behind the PowerVR GPU design, has a mobile-first priorization of deployment of their Ray Tracing solutions which according to them is way broader than NVIDIA solution. Their IP may be a big help on the actual A14 GPUs so Apple is satisfied customer and I'd expect the A15 to bring RT to iPhones and beyond.

I expect more qualitative changes to come from the software side. From APIs that take the workload provided and more effectively coordinate and distribute it to CPU/GPU/NE or other coprocessors and lower the overhead. I would like to see stuff like the huge gains from software targeting the GPU for rendering (here) made easier on Apple platform.

I don't expect dedicated 300W GPUs from Apple but if the actual Mac Pro will exist maybe it can have further speciality hardware as the Afterburner Card, MPX modules and justify it existence through those very expensive add-ons.
 

quarkysg

macrumors 65816
Oct 12, 2019
1,247
841
Oh I have no doubt they eventually will. But I think it'll be another 18 months before we see it get there.
I’m a little optimistic here. I think the transition will be complete in another 12 months, i.e. by first quarter 2022. And I think all Macs will be on the M1 architecture, with more cores of everything for the higher end Macs, as it’ll have been battle tested. Using M2 this year on higher end Macs will probably be too risky.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ader42

Homy

macrumors 68030
Jan 14, 2006
2,510
2,461
Sweden
The latest rumors is from Bloomberg saying that Apple is working on CPUs with 8-32 high-performance cores and GPUs with 16-128 cores for MBP, iMac and Mac Pro.


TFLOPS is not everything but the rumored 128-core GPU would be crazy fast. It would be faster than any GPU on the market, including GF 3090!!

M1 8 GPU cores 2.6 TFLOPS
M? 16 GPU cores 5.2 TFLOPS
M? 32 GPU cores 10.4 TFLOPS
M? 64 GPU cores 20.8 TFLOPS
M? 128 GPU cores 41.6 TFLOPS

Radeon Pro 5700 6.2 TFLOPS
Radeon Pro 5700 XT 7.7 TFLOPS
Radeon RX 6700 XT 13.2 TFLOPS
Radeon Pro Vega II 14.06 TFLOPS
GF RTX 3060 14.2 TFLOPS
GF RTX 3060 Ti 16.2 TFLOPS
Radeon RX 6800 16.2 TFLOPS
GF RTX 3070 20.3 TFLOPS
Radeon RX 6800 XT 20.7 TFLOPS
Radeon RX 6900 XT 23 TFLOPS
GF RTX 3080 29.8 TFLOPS
GF RTX 3090 35.6 TFLOPS
 

quarkysg

macrumors 65816
Oct 12, 2019
1,247
841
TFLOPS is not everything but the rumored 128-core GPU would be crazy fast. It would be faster than any GPU on the market, including GF 3090!!

M1 8 GPU cores 2.6 TFLOPS
M? 16 GPU cores 5.2 TFLOPS
M? 32 GPU cores 10.4 TFLOPS
M? 64 GPU cores 20.8 TFLOPS
M? 128 GPU cores 41.6 TFLOPS
Somehow I doubt Apple will go to 128 GPU cores.

From Anandtech's article on the M1, the GPU is apparently clocked at 1.2 GHz. Likely Apple will go with higher GPU clocks, wider memory bus, and maybe stopped at 32/64, with maybe tweaked GPU cores for better efficiency for their M1X this year.
 
Last edited:

Jorbanead

macrumors 65816
Aug 31, 2018
1,209
1,438
The latest rumors is from Bloomberg saying that Apple is working on CPUs with 8-32 high-performance cores and GPUs with 16-128 cores for MBP, iMac and Mac Pro.


TFLOPS is not everything but the rumored 128-core GPU would be crazy fast. It would be faster than any GPU on the market, including GF 3090!!

M1 8 GPU cores 2.6 TFLOPS
M? 16 GPU cores 5.2 TFLOPS
M? 32 GPU cores 10.4 TFLOPS
M? 64 GPU cores 20.8 TFLOPS
M? 128 GPU cores 41.6 TFLOPS

Radeon Pro 5700 6.2 TFLOPS
Radeon Pro 5700 XT 7.7 TFLOPS
Radeon RX 6700 XT 13.2 TFLOPS
Radeon Pro Vega II 14.06 TFLOPS
GF RTX 3060 14.2 TFLOPS
GF RTX 3060 Ti 16.2 TFLOPS
Radeon RX 6800 16.2 TFLOPS
GF RTX 3070 20.3 TFLOPS
Radeon RX 6800 XT 20.7 TFLOPS
Radeon RX 6900 XT 23 TFLOPS
GF RTX 3080 29.8 TFLOPS
GF RTX 3090 35.6 TFLOPS

Processing power doesn’t scale like that. A 128 core wouldn’t just be twice as much as a 64 core. It would still be very powerful, but closer to a RTX 3080 (super rough guess). That being said, we likely won’t see the top-end gpu until 2022 as that is when the Mac Pro is likely going to get is Apple silicon upgrade. By then they will be using a more advanced 5nm process and probably on arm v9 as well, so that should help boost performance a bit too.
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,521
19,678
Processing power doesn’t scale like that. A 128 core wouldn’t just be twice as much as a 64 core. It would still be very powerful, but closer to a RTX 3080 (super rough guess). That being said, we likely won’t see the top-end gpu until 2022 as that is when the Mac Pro is likely going to get is Apple silicon upgrade. By then they will be using a more advanced 5nm process and probably on arm v9 as well, so that should help boost performance a bit too.

It could though. Apple GPUs are ridiculously power-efficient, the M1 GPU draws just 10watts. With 128 cores and the same clock it would be 160-200 watt, still less than any high-end dGPU.

At the same time, Apple GPU cores can likely be clocked much higher. They appear to be fairly simple devices. So I too am sceptical about the 128-core behemoth. A 64-core GPU with faster clocks might already be sufficient for Apples purposes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Homy and Jorbanead

Homy

macrumors 68030
Jan 14, 2006
2,510
2,461
Sweden
Processing power doesn’t scale like that. A 128 core wouldn’t just be twice as much as a 64 core. It would still be very powerful, but closer to a RTX 3080 (super rough guess). That being said, we likely won’t see the top-end gpu until 2022 as that is when the Mac Pro is likely going to get is Apple silicon upgrade. By then they will be using a more advanced 5nm process and probably on arm v9 as well, so that should help boost performance a bit too.

Your statement is true about CPUs, but not GPUs as I have learned from several sources. GPU cores can actually scale lineary like that or almost. Twice the cores - twice the performance. Regarding ARMv9 Apple already uses many features of it as many have stated so there won't be much performance increase from that. It's ARM who is catching up to Apple with ARMv9. :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.