Looks like Apple is on a 2-year update cycle for AS Macs. If so, I think Intel will fly past them.

[Bug-Creator]

If this is the case, I absolutely see Intel flying right past Apple sooner rather than later.

There will still be yearly updates for the A-series, question is wether they will bother growing out each generation to a full set of M chips. Something they didn't do for iPadPro chips, so nothing really new here.

If thats true:

M2 == bigger A16 released around the same time
M2Pro/Max == bigger M2 released shortly after A17
M3 == bigger A18 released around the same time
.....

As for Intel flying by, law of physics apply.
- x86 is far inferior to a modern ISA (has been true eversince 8086/88 vs. 68000)
- AMD-64 is only slightly better and both Intel and AMD will be forced to drag 32Bit around for the time being

-> If the Intel chips has a much higher TDP, Intel uses a smaller process or has much better engineers they might be able to pull somewhat ahead, but with all those being more or less equal the will lag behind by quite a margin.

 

[AppleFan735]

Rumor is the M2 won’t be released until possibly late next year. With the M2 Pro/Max in 2023.

If this is the case, I absolutely see Intel flying right past Apple sooner rather than later.

Intel’s generational improvement will be less, but they will be updating chips twice as often.

I think the M2 will arrive in Q1/Q2 of 2022 in the new iPad Pros. They might release redesigned MacBook Airs alongside giving roughly 18 months upgrade period between M1 and M2 in Airs and 12 months in iPads.

 

[hefeglass]

lol..the OP abandoned this thread after every single reply disagreed with him

 

[zarathu]

This is wrong and not indicative of Apple's market share strategy.

In terms of market share, iPhones are 55%+ in the US. Tablets 56%+. Smart Watch 52%+.

Macs, 15%.

See the outlier?

It wasn’t very long ago that the mac share was under 5%. A rising market share is not a good thing for leaders.

 

[Serban55]

Rumor is the M2 won’t be released until possibly late next year. With the M2 Pro/Max in 2023.

If this is the case, I absolutely see Intel flying right past Apple sooner rather than later.

Intel’s generational improvement will be less, but they will be updating chips twice as often.

good one....Intel that always had issues brining what they promised to the market?...Intel was always late even post covid era...
Again, Intel will not have competition this year or next year to the Apple silicon..lets not forget intel makes the chip only...so the overall product is in an envelope...Apple latest generation of devices are ROCK solid in terms of performance/quality/battery/price ratio..from latest ipads pro to the 13 iphone pros
Intel will have nothing at least at half performance in late 2022 when the Mac Pro will be on the market..

 

[Serban55]

lol..the OP abandoned this thread after every single reply disagreed with him

yes, these users always creates threads like these just for attention
This topic should be closed until some kind of real proof

 

[zarathu]

I do not think Apple has the resources to update everything on a yearly cadence so we will see less frequent updates of things like the mini or iMac.

Intel’s market cap is 144 billion. Apple’s market cap is 2.1 trillion. Apple has a market cap that is bigger that the GDP of all but 7 countries on the planet.

 

[Falhófnir]

Intel’s market cap is 144 billion. Apple’s market cap is 2.1 trillion. Apple has a market cap that is bigger that the GDP of all but 7 countries on the planet.

Well market cap isn't the right metric to use in this case, but yes it would be interesting to know the details of what Apple's chip design R&D budget is vs what Intel spends. Apple's total R&D for 2020 (so for everything not just chips) is $18.75 Bn while Intel spent $13.56 Bn. But then Apple is only developing a handful of SKUs while Intel has fingers in all sorts of pies.

 

[CarbonCycles]

Your thought process is somewhat flawed. Apple is more than a chip design company...it is a vertically integrated hardware/software company. They design+manufacture chips to satisfy the needs of their products (e.g., smaller chip dies to satisfy smaller form factors). Yes, they have speed bumps generation to generation, but it doesn't seem to be their highest priority. Also, getting into a processor clock-speed war starts to become a bit silly especially if the other components on the system are the bottle neck (e.g., local or integrated memory bus)

Also, I don't understand these threads...I've never met anyone who upgraded their CPU at every refresh cycle just because it was "marginally" faster.

 

[Slartibart]

This is wrong.

In terms of marketshare, iPhones are 56%+ in the US. Tablets 50%+. Smart Watch 50%+. Macs, 15%. See the outlier?

first of all you mentioned “Today, more Windows laptops dwarf the marketshare of Macs.”
My argument still stands in relation to that - Apple will not compete in any area where their offer doesn’t fit. “Fit” referring to revenue, mind/market share growth, etc.. For sure not in the low end of any of this.

Even if you only look at the hardware price per unit sold in the U.S. per segment - while in 2020 the average per unit price across all segments lay at 105$; the laptop segment almost 800$; Desktop PCs 680$ - there are A LOT of units in the lower price bracket. At least “historically” Apple has little, if any interest in that segment, because it doesn’t “fit” (see above). Not much to “disrupt” here, I guess. ?

nota bene: there is so much more out there besides the U.S., please have a look. ? And while at it, yes, there is a constant increase in the number of computers at home over the years, but somehow people tend prefer to own mobile devices.
Given actual costs and resulting revenue for them, do you really think that Apple will try to corner a big chunk of the <=200$ mobile (or <=400$ laptop) segment?

 

[PlainBelliedSneetch]

Your thought process is somewhat flawed. Apple is more than a chip design company...it is a vertically integrated hardware/software company. They design+manufacture chips to satisfy the needs of their products (e.g., smaller chip dies to satisfy smaller form factors). Yes, they have speed bumps generation to generation, but it doesn't seem to be their highest priority. Also, getting into a processor clock-speed war starts to become a bit silly especially if the other components on the system are the bottle neck (e.g., local or integrated memory bus)

Also, I don't understand these threads...I've never met anyone who upgraded their CPU at every refresh cycle just because it was "marginally" faster.

Everyone is on a different schedule. Each person makes their decision based on the situation at that time. If Apple is on a four year schedule, they are at a competitive disadvantage.

 

[PlainBelliedSneetch]

Well market cap isn't the right metric to use in this case, but yes it would be interesting to know the details of what Apple's chip design R&D budget is vs what Intel spends. Apple's total R&D for 2020 (so for everything not just chips) is $18.75 Bn while Intel spent $13.56 Bn. But then Apple is only developing a handful of SKUs while Intel has fingers in all sorts of pies.

Apple has the high market cap partly because they are smart with their money. If they end up on a two year cadence, it won’t be because they can’t afford the resources.

 

[PlainBelliedSneetch]

.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Exactly, I don't think MacOS users need to concern themselves with what Intel/AMD are doing anymore as we'll likely never see a transition back in this decade. With proven poor TDP on Intel chips, especially in Macs, I'm not sure who is still wanting an Intel chip running MacOS especially when Rosetta2 can outperform some native x86 programs. So for now Intel/AMD will stay exclusive to the Windows world and I think a lot of people are okay with that. Personally, even though I'm not a power user it stunk waiting 2+yrs for an updated Intel chip in a Mac which when released was already outdated and vastly underperformed yet I still paid top dollar.

Additionally, consider that Apple’s adding MORE value to their solution every year. Such that, even IF Intel is one day ever able to beat Apple in performance per watt, whatever their general purpose solution is won’t include the custom hardware features specific to Apple’s SoC like hardware ProRes processing and that Apple’s OS will be assuming is there.

 

[GSWForever8]

Rumor is the M2 won’t be released until possibly late next year. With the M2 Pro/Max in 2023.

If this is the case, I absolutely see Intel flying right past Apple sooner rather than later.

Intel’s generational improvement will be less, but they will be updating chips twice as often.

Let’s see if they can get off 14nm first.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

i think it’s too early to know exactly what Apple’s update strategy is for the M1 Macs. But remember, they wouldn’t go down this path if they didn’t think they had a competitive roadmap.

 

[thenewperson]

lol..the OP abandoned this thread after every single reply disagreed with him

Every. Single. Time.

 

[TopToffee]

*checks OP’s posting history*

*closes thread*

 

[Bodhitree]

Let’s see if they can get off 14nm first.

Seems they bought a lot of capacity at TSMC’s 3nm node in 2022, according to TechRadar, likely for a GPU and server chips. It would be the smart thing to do, for just a few products that would really benefit and net a high margin.

 

[SeenJeen]

Apple just leap frogged the whole industry in performance per watt in one year.
This board sure has some hot takes!

 

[Bandaman]

Intel hasn't flown past anyone in years. I don't seem that changing anytime soon.

 

[killramos]

Devils advocate. What’s the downside of intel doing well?

If they somehow manage to outperform internal silicon there isn’t much stopping apple from going back?

It’s not about intel or AS… Competition is a good thing, everyone wins.

 

[Fomalhaut]

Of course it matters. If it didn’t, Apple wouldn’t have switched to Intel in the first place.

That is strange "logic". It *did* matter, when Apple used Intel chips, and was obviously frustrated at being dependent on Intel's progress and release schedules.

Unless new Macs have a dependency on Intel somewhere else (modems?), then what Intel does *no longer matters* to Apple, because they don't use Intel products.

 

[navaira]

Devils advocate. What’s the downside of intel doing well?

If they somehow manage to outperform internal silicon there isn’t much stopping apple from going back?

It’s not about intel or AS… Competition is a good thing, everyone wins.

None whatsoever! It's just that I have a woodburner AND underfloor heating, so I don't need new Intel CPUs in anything I buy from now on.

(Intel can get twice as fast as M1 if they like and my maxed-out Lenovo Yoga C930 will still work as a… fingertip-burner if this is something you need in your life)

 

[Fomalhaut]

Agree in regards to delays. I think the plan is to roll A-series, closely followed by base M-series update, and then the professional M-series the following spring. I am sure they will smooth the roadmap down over the next few years.

So the *normal* cadence would be to have an M2 at the end of this year and a refreshed M2 Pro/Max before next June? That sounds fast.

Apple may be OK with having "last year's" A-series architecture in the current M-Pro/Max in a similar way that Intel Xeon always lagged the core-i chips with the same core-architecture.