ARMacs prices?

[sublunar]

People keep talking about differentiating between Intel and Apple Silicon Macs, but that’s missing the (well at least one) point. Apple doesn’t want to differentiate. Apple’s intention here is for this to be utterly transparent to most of their target market. Average users don’t know or care what’s inside, just that it’s faster or whatever other functional change there’ll be just as with any “normal” purchase or upgrade.

The first Intel iMac looked almost identical to the G5 iMac it replaced. Likewise the rest of the range.

Maybe they’ll change the screen size of the 13” to 14” like they did for the 15 -> 16. But that had nothing to do with any architecture change. And even if the 13 -> 14 change includes an architecture change, it will be just timing and not in any way related.

These new Macs won’t be any more different on the outside compared with the Intel ones than any other cosmetic or design upgrades have ever been.

Don’t forget with superior thermal Performance and better iGPU Apple could easily design a 14” screen into something that is roughly the same size as the existing 13” model. I’d suggest that they might also wish to put a bigger battery into it too if they want to make a headline feature of a significantly improved battery life in what’s likely to the the big selling mac SKUs.

And the point I’m making here depends on how much Apple need to differentiate the intel model from ARM ones in store.

Ultimately it could be a moot point if intel CPUs in laptops are going away within 2 years but I’m just a bit concerned about buyer confusion in store. Giving Mac buyers a size upgrade to switch to ARM seems like a good move as we can expect no intel redesigns now.

 

[Detnator]

Don’t forget with superior thermal Performance and better iGPU Apple could easily design a 14” screen into something that is roughly the same size as the existing 13” model. I’d suggest that they might also wish to put a bigger battery into it too if they want to make a headline feature of a significantly improved battery life in what’s likely to the the big selling mac SKUs.

And the point I’m making here depends on how much Apple need to differentiate the intel model from ARM ones in store.

Ultimately it could be a moot point if intel CPUs in laptops are going away within 2 years but I’m just a bit concerned about buyer confusion in store. Giving Mac buyers a size upgrade to switch to ARM seems like a good move as we can expect no intel redesigns now.

Yes, people talk about this need for differentiation as if the Intel ones are staying and there’s going to be two product lines. But we know that’s not happening.

I’m confident the confusion in store will be minimal. The people who care about this kind of thing (eg. most people here) are going to research and inform themselves. No one else cares. It won’t be any different than explaining the difference between say an i3 and an i7 in an otherwise identical product.

To the average user an Apple Silicon Mac will just be faster. Perhaps it may have other features they may or may not care about - eg. being able to run iPad apps.

For the vast majority of Apple’s market, no special differentiation is needed. Intel or AS is irrelevant. It’s a Mac. That’s all that matters.

 

[Puonti]

These new Macs won’t be any more different on the outside compared with the Intel ones than any other cosmetic or design upgrades have ever been.

That's what's super interesting to me, though. In many instances a reasonable person can guess what Apple might do given two options, but I can't wait to see what they do here:

A) The last Intel iMacs use the old design. Makes sense not to waste resources on designing a new frame around outgoing tech that will fit in the old enclosure. If there is a new industrial design for the ARM iMacs it'll stand out that much more

B) The last Intel iMacs get a redesign that resembles the ARM iMacs (with thermal considerations). Makes sense because it'll add appeal to a product many would discount for the fact that it's outgoing tech. It won't look outdated for years to come, while Apple continues to sell both Intel and ARM iMacs. Since the last Intel iMac seems to be coming out before the first ARM iMac, for a while it'll be the only iMac option with a new design, too. Those customers you referred to - who don't care about the innards - will see it as a great new product

In the end Apple's choice won't matter to me either way - I'm expecting the ARM iMacs to look somehow different to pre-2020 Intel iMacs and that's where I'm skating - but I'm still curious to see which rationale Apple goes for here.

Option A is for the Apple that wants to drive ARM iMac sales.

Option B is for the Apple that wants to update the Intel iMac and still have it sell despite it being the end of the line.

There is an option C, too - no redesign for either Intel or ARM iMac. That's the one I hope we won't see - and doubt we will, because Apple does want ARM to look like a great move in all ways - but it would not be uncharacteristic of Apple. As you said, they want most of their customers to just look at a Mac and say "that's a Mac - I want a Mac. I guess I'll get this one because it does what I need to get done".

 

[UBS28]

Will it cost an arm and a leg?

 

[glenthompson]

Who knows? My guess is similar to current models but with slightly higher specs. Looks like processor will be 8 performance cores and 4 lower power cores. Hopefully higher RAM and SSD in the base models.

 

[Boil]

Laptops / US$999.00 - US$2,749.00

Desktops / US$749.00 - US$5,499.00

Displays / US$349.00 - US$749.00

 

[jetjaguar]

Laptops / US$999.00 - US$2,749.00

Desktops / US$749.00 - US$5,499.00

Displays / US$349.00 - US$749.00

You think displays are going to be that cheap?

 

[Boil]

You think displays are going to be that cheap?

No, I changed that...

US$799.00 / US$1,299.00 / US$1,799.00 (24" 4K / 27" 5K / 32" 6K)

And that is still probably too cheap for Apple...

 

[Kostask]

Everybody talks anout adding in the R&D for the AS Macs. nobody is taking note that the R&D is almost non-existant for the AS Macs, as it is being mostly paid for by the iPhone and its 150M units a year. There will some incremental costs for the AS Macs for unique accelerators ( like the hypervisor accelerator), but by and large, the core CPUs, GPUs, camera controllers, and other essentials like the Secure Enclave have been, by and large, paid for. This is what Apple is targeting, is amortizing R&D over more products. The AS Macs will use a few new accelerators, but the majority of the "blocks" (cores, GPUs, most of the accelerators) will be common. They will just add blocks as needed to achieve the performance target. Similar to the way they do it on the iPad or A12Z; the cores are common between the A12 on the iPhone and the iPAd Soc, they just add CPU blocks, GPU blocks, and a different display controller (for the iPad Pro"s variable frequency display refresh). They will do the same for the AS Macs SoCs, just a different mix of blocks, and a couple of new blocks. The only new R&D will be for the non-common blocks.

Apple is paying #228 for an Intel i5 CPU, with added costs for the chip set. It is useless to compare the retail price of an i5 with what Apple is paying, because Apple's i5s, like all the CPUs that Apple gets from Intel, are not off the shelf Intel commodity parts. At the very least, they are binned for power consumption and clock speed, as are the chip sets. So saying that a core i5 costs $300 retail, and Apple pays 60% less is invalid.

I am pretty sure that the A12Z part is less than $80. and I think that the suspected AS Mac Soc will end up below $100, even with all R&D costs included. Simply because there is no need for Apple to make a profit on the SoCs, where as Intel needs to make a profit on every CPU and chip set they ship. Intel is also not able to take any advantage of reduced process technology, because simply enough, they are on the same size process technology they have been since 2016 (14nm), whereas the AS Macs will be built on the newest, smallest process technology currentoy available (5nm).

 

[TheFluffyDuck]

Well, we are already double the cost of a similarly specced windows laptop so let's just add an extra $500 this generation, and another $500 a year later.

 

[rezwits]

I would think they will offer, like a poster said ealier, "Faster Speed, etc, etc, SAME PRICE"
But in the years to come this will give them room to lower and lower and REALLY lower the prices in the 3 years after these first 2 years (5 year plan), and still be able to make a profit. I really think they want to hit ChromeBook (over-hyped) Prices in the end but be able to say, oh but yeah we offer Safari and a REAL OS.

If they just went really lowball right now, they would get killed in the end...

 

[Harvey Zoltan]

I'm expecting the price to remain the same or possibly even rise due to an upgrade of some components like the screen or base level ram.

 

[LeeW]

Honestly, I think the prices will be cheaper, Apple need to change the Intel to ARM ratio in favour of ARM as quickly as possible. They will get people to adopt by making it financially sensible, even if you have no real need to switch. The price will gradually rise over time but early on, the incentives will be there to get people adopting.

 

[MrGunnyPT]

I do believe prices will decrease a bit for the consumer grade one while the professional ones (mostly desktop) will increase a bit due to the use of Afterburner cards

 

[LeeW]

I do believe prices will decrease a bit for the consumer grade one while the professional ones (mostly desktop) will increase a bit due to the use of Afterburner cards

ARM make most sense for the majority of us in MacBooks, probably the Mac Mini, that is where you will see the initial savings, unlikely they will be cheaper on anything else. Will be interesting to see what they do.

 

[MrGunnyPT]

ARM make most sense for the majority of us in MacBooks, probably the Mac Mini, that is where you will see the initial savings, unlikely they will be cheaper on anything else. Will be interesting to see what they do.

I can see a Macbook (12") or Air with some price decrease for sure.

 

[LeeW]

I can see a Macbook (12") or Air with some price decrease for sure.

12 & 13" I suspect, if rumours are true and the 13" MBP is coming sooner on ARM than later then I suspect it will be a good price.

 

[cool11]

Price estimations for 16'' model?

 

[thenewperson]

Price estimations for 16'' model?

No change. I'm assuming if anything will go downwards, it's just the less powerful products (MBA, Mac mini).

 

[Spock]

I hope that we can see the return of the $499 Mac mini. I think that is totally doable, they can make the iPhone SE with the latest A series chips for $399 why not a Mac mini? Since the Mac mini wont need cellular modems, a screen and everything else that makes an iPhone. I want a Mac mini the same size as the Apple TV, that would be a game changer for the Mac. I would just mount it to the back of my old 2012 iMac and use target display mode and I’d have a nice Apple silicon iMac. ?

 

[LeeW]

I hope that we can see the return of the $499 Mac mini.

That is never happening

 

[Spock]

That is never happening

I wouldn’t be so sure

 

[Waragainstsleep]

A) The last Intel iMacs use the old design. Makes sense not to waste resources on designing a new frame around outgoing tech that will fit in the old enclosure. If there is a new industrial design for the ARM iMacs it'll stand out that much more

B) The last Intel iMacs get a redesign that resembles the ARM iMacs (with thermal considerations). Makes sense because it'll add appeal to a product many would discount for the fact that it's outgoing tech. It won't look outdated for years to come, while Apple continues to sell both Intel and ARM iMacs. Since the last Intel iMac seems to be coming out before the first ARM iMac, for a while it'll be the only iMac option with a new design, too. Those customers you referred to - who don't care about the innards - will see it as a great new product

My money is on A. The redesign takes advantage of the lower cooling requirements of the Apple Silicon SoCs which is what allows them to be thinner, sexier, quieter, cooler. As well as faster. If the redesign could accommodate another round of Intel chips there would be little point redesigning them.

Hopefully higher RAM and SSD in the base models.

I wouldn't hold your breath for that.


I actually think Apple is going to start chasing market share so we'll see prices come down. Possibly some very compelling budget options indeed.

 

[Spock]

I actually think Apple is going to start chasing market share so we'll see prices come down. Possibly some very compelling budget options indeed.

I see no reason why Apple can’t charge much lower prices for the Mac when they will essentially be running with iPad hardware and the iPad can be found as low as $329.

 

[Kostask]

Because it isn't iPad hardware in any way. The closest that the similarity is, is the CPU cores and the some of the accelerators. The iPad doesn't use the same screen, backlit keyboard, touchpad, Multiple USB ports, TB ports, DP port, HDMI port, case, RAM or SSD. The GPUs may or may not be the same.

I still think the entry level laptop will have a $50-$100 price drop.