Apple Silicon Thoughts That I Haven't Seen Mentioned

[Gudi]

Apple seems to be drawing a line between the low product and higher end version with Pro.

They do and with iPhone this line is separated by camera quality. The image signal processor (ISP) in the new A-series chip needs to be more powerful every year to enable even better camera features.

But Apple can’t save money by creating two chips with two different ISP's. Instead cheaper iPhone variants are created by the number of camera modules and stabilizers.

The X-variant of a chip exists, only because without so many GPU cores the chip area is actually a bit smaller and the chip therefore cheaper to produce.

 

[jdb8167]

Apple transitioned from PPC to Intel ahead of schedule, but unless we get some serious announcements soon, I don't see the entire Mac lineup as AS before June 2022.

I think Apple is thinking November 2022 as the 2 year anniversary. Two years after introducing the first Apple silicon Macs. But I doubt they will be ahead of schedule like they were for the Intel transition.

 

[nquinn]

So, is far better having a 2TB TLC than a 256 MLC.

I love that Apple uses high-end parts, but their expensive SSD usage is definitely one of the least consumer friendly approaches. For like 95% of users more space on a slower SSD would be way better for them than PCIE 4.0 NVME stuff.

It's also pretty hilarious that they had standards around storage before where 512gb-1tb was considered the minimum, but once it came to SSD's all of a sudden the new minimum baseline even 5-6 years later is 1/2 that.

It kills me that to bump a 16" MBP from baseline to 1tb/32gb it adds $600 (or $1000 for 2tb!!!!). Technically it's even more expensive than that since you also lose the baseline components.

 

[Homy]

I've actually just noticed that we are coming up to 1 year from the announcement of the shift to AS, supposedly as a 2-year transition. And so far we have... the M1, in four basically identical configurations (I think the iMac M1 is exactly the same as the other M1 machines?).

Apple transitioned from PPC to Intel ahead of schedule, but unless we get some serious announcements soon, I don't see the entire Mac lineup as AS before June 2022.

Year 1 - M1
Year 2 - M2

 

[MacCheetah3]

@nquinn

Most PC manufacturers/builders charge a significant premium for upgrades. However, I agree, Apple’s margins on increasing the capacity of RAM and storage has become very steep. With that said, you’re not making a completely fair gripe.

It kills me that to bump a 16" MBP from baseline to 1tb/32gb it adds $600 (or $1000 for 2tb!!!!). Technically it's even more expensive than that since you also lose the baseline components.

Your focus is on SSDs yet your price complaint example includes a RAM upgrade, which is $400 of that $600. Nevertheless, your complaint isn’t unjustified. Breaking things down further:

• 500GB Samsung 980 Pro M.2 NVMe PCIe 4.0 SSD is ~$120
• 1TB Samsung 980 Pro M.2 NVMe PCIe 4.0 SSD is ~$200
• 16GB (2x8) Crucial Ballistix PC4-21300 (DDR4-2666) SO-DIMM kit is ~$80
• 32GB (2x16) Crucial Ballistix PC4-21300 (DDR4-2666) SO-DIMM kit is ~$160

Prices are general retail, not MSR or wholesale.

Unintentionally, my samples/examples are both an $80 difference, however, Apple charges $200 for the SSD upgrade and $400 for the RAM. So, you should be more upset about the RAM upgrade margins. ?

It kills me that to bump a 16" MBP from baseline to 1tb/32gb it adds $600 (or $1000 for 2tb!!!!). Technically it's even more expensive than that since you also lose the baseline components.

in fairness, this goes for the entire industry. A little surprising but SSDs are still in the process of reaching a desirable price per gigabyte ratio. Other computer manufacturers/builders are compensating with configurations including a 128GB, 256GB, 500GB, or 512GB SSD as an “OS”/“boot” drive and a 1TB or 2TB HDD as a “storage” drive — a setup I’m not a fan of.

 

[AAP8]

I also would add/I think that Apple will do the Mac Pro replacement and iMac Pro replacement near the end of the cycle because it allows all of the software shops to update and optimize their software before the bigger computer users are jumping on.

At some level, a lot of the "Macbook Pros" aren't used by people who need a lot of power or use their computers professionally - a lot of Apple "Pro" products are used by normal everything people who do not need that much power - so it gives the creators of the software that the power users have need for time to update their software. I think its true of M1 and how it was targeted at the lower end of the price point - Apple was able to get a lot of 'regular' people to update to Apple Silicon just as they replace their computers, also get the architecture into the hands of devs at scale, and now with the next laptops/devices likely coming in the fall - companies liek Adobe/Microsoft/Video Graphics Companies - have had ~18 months to prep for their bread and butter user who would use a 16inch MBP or better.

 

[nquinn]

@nquinn

Your focus is on SSDs yet your price complaint example includes a RAM upgrade, which is $400 of that $600. Nevertheless, your complaint isn’t unjustified. Breaking things down further:

Agree. SSD's have some gouging, but RAM is outrageous.

 

[MacCheetah3]

Agree. SSD's have some gouging, but RAM is outrageous.

It could be somewhat reasonable if a person disregards the default component is being replaced. ☺️

 

[nquinn]

It could be somewhat reasonable if a person disregards the default component is being replaced. ☺️

Yup, I mentioned that above too. It's like tacking another $100+ on the true cost.

 

[Krevnik]

I feel you on that. A lot of Professionals (Pros) can do absolutely everything they need on M1 well. And it will only get better. The Pro Moniker on iPhone bothers me even more. I mean, seriously, iPhone Pro, it doesn't have much to do with being a pro or not, it's just an iPhone with more features for more money. Period. Lol. The Plus moniker made more sense, but plus is only being used in branding for services, not hardware. Rant over lol.

I’ll be honest, the only reason I’m really waiting on a 16” MBP is RAM + screen. 16GB is doable, but it’s a bit too easy to be stuck relying on swap space with what I do from time to time. But it’s really more difficult to get used to a 13” screen for me.

 

[nquinn]

I’ll be honest, the only reason I’m really waiting on a 16” MBP is RAM + screen. 16GB is doable, but it’s a bit too easy to be stuck relying on swap space with what I do from time to time. But it’s really more difficult to get used to a 13” screen for me.

Same. Switching from a 16 to a 13.3" is pretty bad. Maybe the 14" will be a little more tolerable but I don't think so.

 

[4sallypat]

Same. Switching from a 16 to a 13.3" is pretty bad. Maybe the 14" will be a little more tolerable but I don't think so.

I'm getting old and 13" Macbook does not cut it for me.

I have the 16" Intel MBP and has a decent screen but for all day long use, I prefer 24" and 27" Apple displays...

 

[Aggedor]

I think Apple is thinking November 2022 as the 2 year anniversary. Two years after introducing the first Apple silicon Macs. But I doubt they will be ahead of schedule like they were for the Intel transition.

Huh, I guess that makes sense. Still slower than I would like - I want an AS iMac bigger than 24"!

 

[cocoua]

Agree. SSD's have some gouging, but RAM is outrageous.

But ey!! Soldered RAM is not for Apple making more money, they do only for you! You can have a macbook 0.0001 inch thinner and what is even better!!! A 0.0001 inch thinner iMac!! All we know how important is from the desktop POV to save those microns... (please dont argue about the shorter and faster soldered connection as it is impossible to prove the benefits vs regular PCIe..)

 

[jdb8167]

But ey!! Soldered RAM is not for Apple making more money, they do only for you! You can have a macbook 0.0001 inch thinner and what is even better!!! A 0.0001 inch thinner iMac!! All we know how important is from the desktop POV to save those microns... (please dont argue about the shorter and faster soldered connection as it is impossible to prove the benefits vs regular PCIe..)

You aren’t trying to argue that something other than LPDDR4X would be suitable for the M1 MacBooks are you? Currently LPDDR4X is the fastest low power RAM you can buy. The bad thing about it is that it doesn’t come as installable DIMMs on any platform. It is always soldered. So your choice is to use slower or more battery hungry RAM if you want user replaceable DIMMs. No thanks from me, I like the performance and the long battery life.

 

[cocoua]

You aren’t trying to argue that something other than LPDDR4X would be suitable for the M1 MacBooks are you? Currently LPDDR4X is the fastest low power RAM you can buy. The bad thing about it is that it doesn’t come as installable DIMMs on any platform. It is always soldered. So your choice is to use slower or more battery hungry RAM if you want user replaceable DIMMs. No thanks from me, I like the performance and the long battery life.

well, soldered RAM has been in macbook pros since 2012 (and some iMacs since 2014), I thought it was always soldered DDR3 and was beyond the rMBP16" when it came in LPDDR flavour …

 

[Anarchy99]

My biggest issue is the Pro market is very GPU heavy. ML, Metal, OpenCL, Video Rendering, Color Grading, 3D rendering, ML/AI all require the latest and greatest in GPUs and will always want more power.

The latest MacPro with Vega Pro Duo level GPUs was the first MacPro to compete on the higher end in quite a while.

I have a brand new M1 MacBook Pro and I love it, I’m about to buy some M1 iMacs as well. The cpu and wattage and overall MacOS experience is phenomenal, but for GPU intensive tasks I still have to use my eGPUs on Intel for rendering. I did some tests and it’s 1/5 to 1/3 my Vega Frontier in and eGPU. My 20min GPU render is now over an hour.

Apple needs to figure out a way to compete in high end cutting edge graphics aiming for 3090ti++ level or it can’t really create a Modern Pro workstation.

iMacs, MacBook Pros, MacMini will be more than adequate, but high Pro level workstations will need high end graphics.

Apple might have something to compete, like Metal specific render pucks or tb3 render modules, who knows, but there is nothing projected at the moment.

I really want eGPU/GPU support to come back.

even if the pro Apple Silicon cpu's get better it will basically be the decision the chooses whether I am spending 5-6k on a Mac this fall or 3-5k on a PC hackintoshing while Intel is supported and buying a Mac mini for anything Apple Silicon specific if needed.

I was hoping WWDC would shed some light on GPU support given the audience unfortunaltely it gives me the feeling apple doesn't want my money again.

they really need to quit crapping on pro's I dont want trashcan 2.0 for half a decade.

 

[Tyler O'Bannon]

The way Apple uses the word PRO makes a ton more sense than the way members here use the word PRO. Separating product lines makes sense to use the word PRO for the upper scale line. Members here act like a "Pro" is some superhuman above all others who requires a computer made of the highest end hardware that's more powerful than a stack of MAC trucks. The comedy is when called out to explain what a Pro is these same people go hide and won't reply because they can't describe what a Pro is.

The truth is the word Pro around here is being used for no good reason other than to bash Apple saying they need to make products for "PROS". A professional is a person who makes money from the work they do, period. A simple M1 MacBook Air can be used by a "professional" to run their business. There are way too many professionals to quantify what type of computer they need. From CAD and graphic designers to video and photo editors to lab technicians to book writers to bookkeepers. Even professionals who use computers simply for their POS systems or even CPA's who use computers to run tax software. That's why I get sick of how people throw the word Pro around here as if it applies to one big person.

Excellent point and well said

 

[leman]

But, given AS is all system-on-a-chip, I also suspect it'll all be integrated GPU cores, etc... unless they create an AS GPU card themselves. Integrated means you would never be able to upgrade it, like you can with a regular graphics card. Apple have produced card-like modules before (the Afterburner card, for example).

The only Mac with an upgradable GPU today is the Mac Pro, so GPU upgradeability is not really a concern. For the upcoming Mac Pro, Apple could introduce modular compute boards, or they could drop the modularity altogether. Time will tell.

I hope that leak is wrong for sure! It's not one of the better ones - sometimes we'll see multiple geekbench leaks closer to release that are more reliable.

There was never a leak. Some joker just took M1 scores, literally multiplied them by two and posted the result, and an army of naive fools has blown it out of the proportion.

 

[leman]

I really want eGPU/GPU support to come back.

even if the pro Apple Silicon cpu's get better it will basically be the decision the chooses whether I am spending 5-6k on a Mac this fall or 3-5k on a PC hackintoshing while Intel is supported and buying a Mac mini for anything Apple Silicon specific if needed.

I was hoping WWDC would shed some light on GPU support given the audience unfortunaltely it gives me the feeling apple doesn't want my money again.

they really need to quit crapping on pro's I dont want trashcan 2.0 for half a decade.

WWDC was fairly clear - no third-party GPUs on Apple Silicon Macs. If you need more configuratibility, I’m afraid Apple is not the brand for you. Then again, upcoming Macs will likely offer a value proposition that you can’t get anywhere else.

 

[nquinn]

The only Mac with an upgradable GPU today is the Mac Pro, so GPU upgradeability is not really a concern. For the upcoming Mac Pro, Apple could introduce modular compute boards, or they could drop the modularity altogether. Time will tell.



There was never a leak. Some joker just took M1 scores, literally multiplied them by two and posted the result, and an army of naive fools has blown it out of the proportion.

This does look like the most fake benchmark leak. Typically when we see real ones they are closer to release and multiple start appearing in geekbench.

 

[Tyler O'Bannon]

Well, even though the Pro series didn’t get the “X” moniker for the A15, it did get the X treatment. Up to this point, we’ve only seen RAM differentiation. And now, we get the biggest distinguishing factor by far, an increased GPU on the pro series.

I believe that over time, apple will have to do even more than that to distinguish the regular series versus the pro series. But, this is a very tangible start.