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

iPad Pro iPad Pro using M4?

X

xxray

macrumors 68040
Jul 27, 2013
3,115
9,412
Just for fun, this is my written proof that I do believe the iPad Pros will come with the M4 chip. Then on Tuesday, I can refer back to this post to see if I’m right. 😜

But, of course, if I am right, @Jamie I will be the real MVP who discovered this on their own weeks ago. We’ll need to buy them a drink.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThatsMeRight
T

ThatsMeRight

macrumors 68020
Sep 12, 2009
2,377
410
Jamie I said:
M2 - T8112
M3 - T8122
T8132 - M4?
Click to expand...
prime17569 said:
I said this in another thread, but I'll repeat it here.



The M3's chip ID also supports this. Generally, for a given A chip, the corresponding base M chip has a chip ID number that is increased by two. For example:
A14: T8101 -> M1: T8103
A15: T8110 -> M2: T8112
A16: T8120 -> M3: T8122

A17 is T8130, so a base M-series chip based on it would be expected to be T8132. However, M3 is T8122, suggesting that it is based (at least in part) on A16, which is T8120.
Click to expand...

If we're indeed getting the 'T8132', it certainly looks like the M4 chip (or wahtever it will be called) will at least get the same ML/AI-cores that the A17 Pro has. Good news!
 
  • Like
Reactions: xxray
T

Torty

macrumors 65816
Oct 16, 2013
1,239
944
ThatsMeRight said:
If we're indeed getting the 'T8132', it certainly looks like the M4 chip (or wahtever it will be called) will at least get the same ML/AI-cores that the A17 Pro has. Good news!
Click to expand...
If it's possible I would still wait for the 32Core NPU. Don't see it coming with the N3E M4.
 
T

ThatsMeRight

macrumors 68020
Sep 12, 2009
2,377
410
Torty said:
If it's possible I would still wait for the 32Core NPU. Don't see it coming with the N3E M4.
Click to expand...
Honestly, if they adopt the A17 Pro architecture than that isn't necessary!

The A17 Pro's 16-core NPU's performance is equal to nearly two M3 chips.

In other words: a theoretical 32-core NPU M3 roughly matches a 16-core NPU A17 Pro.
 
T

Torty

macrumors 65816
Oct 16, 2013
1,239
944
Meanwhile I think they will show some generative AI designer app which shows the capabilities of the new iPad Pro (iPad AI?) with the new “M3.AI” and next gen pencil. Perhaps those “let loose” logos were designed with this app and AI.
Target group: Pro designer, so it comes with a good price increase.

For normal users there will be the new iPad Air which is priced as today’s iPad Pro.
 
V

Velli

macrumors 65816
Feb 1, 2013
1,315
1,654
xxray said:
Just for fun, this is my written proof that I do believe the iPad Pros will come with the M4 chip. Then on Tuesday, I can refer back to this post to see if I’m right. 😜

But, of course, if I am right, @Jamie I will be the real MVP who discovered this on their own weeks ago. We’ll need to buy them a drink.
Click to expand...
Then this is my written proof that I think this chip will not be an M4, but also not an M3. No guess to naming though :)

I always found it odd for Apple to simpy re-use the Mac chip for iPad. One of the major benefits of designing their own chips, is the ability to customize the chip for the particular purpose. I think the M1 and M2 in iPads were a stop-gap solution, until they were ready with a chip designed specifically for iPad. Like others have pointed out, iPad sells in higher numbers than Macs. It doesn't make sense to have the iPad be compromised to piggy-back off the Mac chips.

It could even be the hint behind the "let loose" moniker. The iPad is finally ready to cut the leash, and be it's own thing rather than being tethered to either the iPhone or the Mac. The first step was iPadOS, now it's time for the CPU.

I don't have enough insight to make an educated guess as to exactly which chip layout makes more sense for the iPad, in terms of core counts etc. I do believe it will be M3 technology though, and not the premiere for M4.

Curveball: They might even release it in two variants (Pro and non-Pro obviously), to differentiate the Air and the Pro. Which would explain the alignment to release them together.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: ANDJOE, Crow_Servo and Chuckeee
Elusi

Elusi

macrumors regular
Oct 26, 2023
241
488
Velli said:
Then this is my written proof that I think this chip will not be an M4, but also not an M3. No guess to naming though :)

I always found it odd for Apple to simpy re-use the Mac chip for iPad. One of the major benefits of designing their own chips, is the ability to customize the chip for the particular purpose. I think the M1 and M2 in iPads were a stop-gap solution, until they were ready with a chip designed specifically for iPad. Like others have pointed out, iPad sells in higher numbers than Macs. It doesn't make sense to have the iPad be compromised to piggy-back off the Mac chips.

It could even be the hint behind the "let loose" moniker. The iPad is finally ready to cut the leash, and be it's own thing rather than being tethered to either the iPhone or the Mac. The first step was iPadOS, now it's time for the CPU.

I don't have enough insight to make an educated guess as to exactly which chip layout makes more sense for the iPad, in terms of core counts etc. I do believe it will be M3 technology though, and not the premiere for M4.

Curveball: They might even release it in two variants (Pro and non-Pro obviously), to differentiate the Air and the Pro. Which would explain the alignment to release them together.
Click to expand...
It was the Macs that received the iPad chip, granted some adjustments made for the platform and Rosetta. Marketing changed the naming scheme.

This is why it was wholly unimpressive to see Tim Cook do a mission:impossible skit (other than the skit itself being funny) and drop the M1 into the iPad. Of course it would go there. It was the A14X.

There are significant savings in having multiple devices using the same design.

Also, hard to imagine that the Pros and Airs are what's holding high sales numbers for iPads.
 
V

Velli

macrumors 65816
Feb 1, 2013
1,315
1,654
Elusi said:
It was the Macs that received the iPad chip, granted some adjustments made for the platform and Rosetta. Marketing changed the naming scheme.
Click to expand...
If you want to use that argument, they both received the iPhone chip. Doesn't change that there are legitimate reasons to differentiate the balance between CPU, GPU, Neutral Engine and power consumption in an iPad vs an iMac. Give them two different variations of the iPhone chip then - my points still apply.
Elusi said:
There are significant savings in having multiple devices using the same design.

Also, hard to imagine that the Pros and Airs are what's holding high sales numbers for iPads.
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, until M1 was introduced, they developed chip variants specifically for iPad Pro, while the standard iPad always just used an iPhone CPU. It is not at all unimaginable to create a version specific for iPad Air and/or Pro.

That said, I would not be particularly surprised to see an M3. More likely than M4, in my opinion, but there is usually a reason for the leaked code names. I could be wrong, I just don't see them releasing M4 yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
Elusi

Elusi

macrumors regular
Oct 26, 2023
241
488
Velli said:
If you want to use that argument, they both received the iPhone chip. Doesn't change that there are legitimate reasons to differentiate the balance between CPU, GPU, Neutral Engine and power consumption in an iPad vs an iMac. Give them two different variations of the iPhone chip then - my points still apply.

Nevertheless, until M1 was introduced, they developed chip variants specifically for iPad Pro, while the standard iPad always just used an iPhone CPU. It is not at all unimaginable to create a version specific for iPad Air and/or Pro.

That said, I would not be particularly surprised to see an M3. More likely than M4, in my opinion, but there is usually a reason for the leaked code names. I could be wrong, I just don't see them releasing M4 yet.
Click to expand...
The point is that it makes economic sense to use the same chip for multiple devices. Given that we have had an AS transition for the Mac now and that's the current situation: what's so special about the iPad that they would still need to spend engineering resources to have a wholly unique chip for it? Just include what needs to be included and have it go into the Macs as well.

Whatever we see being put into the iPad tomorrow, expect it to go into other things later on as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iPadified
M

MayaUser

macrumors 68040
Nov 22, 2021
3,177
7,194
M4, well done, in that thin chassis. Hope we will not get another bend-gate with that recycling aluminum
 
ericwn

ericwn

macrumors G5
Apr 24, 2016
12,114
10,906
CPmav said:
Things that didn’t age well for $400, Alex
Click to expand...

I share your opinion, speaking in absolutes will do wonders to one’s credibility in forums as well as the real world.

End of story good upgrade Apple team!
 
V

Velli

macrumors 65816
Feb 1, 2013
1,315
1,654
Elusi said:
The point is that it makes economic sense to use the same chip for multiple devices. Given that we have had an AS transition for the Mac now and that's the current situation: what's so special about the iPad that they would still need to spend engineering resources to have a wholly unique chip for it? Just include what needs to be included and have it go into the Macs as well.

Whatever we see being put into the iPad tomorrow, expect it to go into other things later on as well.
Click to expand...
I hereby grant you five being right points 😁
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Elusi
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom