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

Chuckeee

macrumors 68040
Aug 18, 2023
3,060
8,721
Southern California
A crazy theory

The [yet to be seen] M3 Ultra chip is a bit more complex than previous Ultra chips. More than just two Max chips integrated into a single chip. Instead think of the M3 Ultra has 3 region:

A “right” side that can be die cut, the results in the current 4 memory channel “full capacity” M3 Max die.

A “left” side that can be die cut, the results in the current 3 memory channel “lower performance capacity” M3 Max die.

A “middle” piece, that includes an additional memory channel, some andd GPU’s and perhaps some other “surprises” (i.e.; AV1 video encoder?)

The total results in an 8 memory channel M3 Ultra chip that is MORE than just the sum of 2 Max chips. And explains why there are two different M3 Max chip configurations.
 

streetfunk

macrumors member
Feb 9, 2023
82
41
at 7:05, what i am seeing here ?
Thats ......well, i have problems with the names....so let me just post the picture:

apple chip.png
 

streetfunk

macrumors member
Feb 9, 2023
82
41
You mean M3 Ultra?
i meant the relation between the whole thing, and the Applesilicon visible on it.
What do we see ? The whole thing is what the machine creates ?......the die, or waver?

And on it the appleSilicon. That´s an ultra ?
My point was: that the big thing ( die ? waver? ) can "hold" only one ultra then, instead of several ?


i really lost all the names. But that´s not the point.
The point is the relation "the full production thing" vs. how many Babys it can carry, to say so. lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: Homy

name99

macrumors 68020
Jun 21, 2004
2,407
2,309
People may enjoy reading

The article makes the specific point that
"today's N3 has the same defect density (D0) as N5 did at this current stage of development and production, and TSMC states they have 'industry leading' yield in high volume production. They expect N3 defect rates to track with N5 as expected and reach parity in due course. Note that N5 defect rates run to around 0.07 per cm2 (or 40-45 per wafer)."

Of course why should I believe TSMC when I could believe some internet rando who has concocted an elaborate theory of how poorly N3B yields, and how that informs every aspect of the decisions Apple has made for the M3 SKUs and M3 products?
 

Confused-User

macrumors 6502a
Oct 14, 2014
850
984
i meant the relation between the whole thing, and the Applesilicon visible on it.
What do we see ? The whole thing is what the machine creates ?......the die, or waver?

And on it the appleSilicon. That´s an ultra ?
My point was: that the big thing ( die ? waver? ) can "hold" only one ultra then, instead of several ?


i really lost all the names. But that´s not the point.
The point is the relation "the full production thing" vs. how many Babys it can carry, to say so. lol
You're not seeing what you think you're seeing. If I'm understanding you, you think that that's a wafer, and there's only one chip on it?

No. What you're seeing looks like one side of a single "chip", which is really a single (probably, unless it's an ultra) Mx die, along with some RAM, on a carrier that fans out all the wires coming off the chip to points that can be soldered to a motherboard.
 

streetfunk

macrumors member
Feb 9, 2023
82
41
No. What you're seeing looks like one side of a single "chip", which is really a single (probably, unless it's an ultra) Mx die, along with some RAM, on a carrier that fans out all the wires coming off the chip to points that can be soldered to a motherboard.
yeah, i see the Mx chip. A max maybe ?

but what´s the surrounding ?
That´s normally not shown on these SoC pictures.
Is this chip - as we see it in this picture- finally what´s been soldered onto the "motherboard" on a mac. ( see picture 6 posts above) or do they cut there something off ?
 

Confused-User

macrumors 6502a
Oct 14, 2014
850
984
yeah, i see the Mx chip. A max maybe ?

but what´s the surrounding ?
That´s normally not shown on these SoC pictures.
Is this chip - as we see it in this picture- finally what´s been soldered onto the "motherboard" on a mac. ( see picture 6 posts above) or do they cut there something off ?
That's not the chip you're seeing. The chip is on the other side. What you're seeing is the thousands of bumps that are the connection points from the carrier to the motherboard.

When you see a picture of a finished M3 Max (say), what you're looking at isn't the actual silicon, generally. The silicon is underneath a thermal spreader (and in the Mx chips' case, maybe under, or more likely to the side of, some RAM), and it's MUCH smaller than the "chip". The reason the chip (SoC really) is so large is that you need that much area to place so many contacts, for connection to the motherboard.

Though come to think of it, the Mx SoCs require far fewer connections than (say) other processor chips, because a lot of those pins/bumps are devoted to the memory busses, and the Mx chips have all the RAM mounted directly on the SoC, eliminating all those off-chip connections. All you're left with are power/ground and I/O, which is still a lot, but it's a lot less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: streetfunk

mr_roboto

macrumors 6502a
Sep 30, 2020
856
1,866
That's not the chip you're seeing. The chip is on the other side. What you're seeing is the thousands of bumps that are the connection points from the carrier to the motherboard.

When you see a picture of a finished M3 Max (say), what you're looking at isn't the actual silicon, generally. The silicon is underneath a thermal spreader (and in the Mx chips' case, maybe under, or more likely to the side of, some RAM), and it's MUCH smaller than the "chip". The reason the chip (SoC really) is so large is that you need that much area to place so many contacts, for connection to the motherboard.
I have to quibble slightly with the terminology you're using here, only because using the correct words helps explain things a lot better.

What's visible in the picture is referred to as a "package" - not just a silicon chip (or chips plural) but an assembly of silicon into a package ready to be soldered to a PCB.

This style of package is a stackup which looks roughly like this in cross-section:

Code:
===========================   Metal Heatspreader
     -----------------        Apple Silicon SoC
     * * * * * * * * *        Microbumps
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   Organic Substrate
• • • • • • • • • • • • • •   Solder Balls

"Microbumps" are tiny solder balls, much finer pitch than can be used to connect directly to a main PCB. "Organic substrate" is basically a very advanced PCB whose materials are carefully chosen to match the coefficient of thermal expansion of silicon and which supports ultra high ball grid array density (for the microbumps on one side) and very fine wiring pitch (because there's a lot more connections between silicon and organic substrate than substrate to main PCB).

Since Apple Silicon SoC packages also include DRAM, some parts of the package cross-section substitute an entire DRAM package with its own solder balls for everything above the organic substrate. This is called Package-on-Package because Apple's buying DRAM already in its own package and soldering it to their SoC package.
 

name99

macrumors 68020
Jun 21, 2004
2,407
2,309
I have to quibble slightly with the terminology you're using here, only because using the correct words helps explain things a lot better.

What's visible in the picture is referred to as a "package" - not just a silicon chip (or chips plural) but an assembly of silicon into a package ready to be soldered to a PCB.

This style of package is a stackup which looks roughly like this in cross-section:

Code:
===========================   Metal Heatspreader
     -----------------        Apple Silicon SoC
     * * * * * * * * *        Microbumps
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   Organic Substrate
• • • • • • • • • • • • • •   Solder Balls

"Microbumps" are tiny solder balls, much finer pitch than can be used to connect directly to a main PCB. "Organic substrate" is basically a very advanced PCB whose materials are carefully chosen to match the coefficient of thermal expansion of silicon and which supports ultra high ball grid array density (for the microbumps on one side) and very fine wiring pitch (because there's a lot more connections between silicon and organic substrate than substrate to main PCB).

Since Apple Silicon SoC packages also include DRAM, some parts of the package cross-section substitute an entire DRAM package with its own solder balls for everything above the organic substrate. This is called Package-on-Package because Apple's buying DRAM already in its own package and soldering it to their SoC package.

Calling this PoP is confusing.
PoP tends to refer to a very specific design of a DRAM package (not chip) mounted on a SoC package
Package-on-Package-PoP-Assembly.jpg

This looks like one black "chip" stacked on another black "chip", like so:
9949828560_TIME_1448945837146.jpg


the significant points include:
- vertical stacking
- the memory is connected to the bumps below the memory chip using thin gold wires. It's amazing that using these thin wires (many of them, all tiny!) is still the cheapest way to connect the DRAM chip to external bumps, but that's the way it is!
- if you look at the bumps of the DRAM chip, they tend to form a ring around the edge of the chip. Usually the SoC chip can then fit into the "blank hole" space in the middle of that ring, with the DRAM chip bumps connecting contacts around the SoC package, as shown in the image above.

Apple used to make A chips (ie for iPhone) this way, but for A16 (and from the very limited data I've seen, also for A17) this changed. A16 has a double-sided thin substrate (think something like a microscope slide but much thinner), with the actual SoC chip on one side, and the DRAM chip on the other side. The connection is now chip to chip, not package to package. There are no tiny wires connecting DRAM to bumps; instead there are tiny copper-filled holes (so-called TSV's) through the substrate connecting the DRAM contacts on one side with the SoC contacts on the other side.
This is thinner and lower power (less capacitance and resistance in the various parts of the connection of wires and bumps from DRAM to SoC).
This is described here (in Japanese) https://eetimes.itmedia.co.jp/ee/articles/2210/25/news048.html and you can see it here when you know what you are looking at.
The upper section is molding (thick) then essentially the DRAM chips then DRAM bumps connecting to copper TSVs connecting to the SoC chip (the most complicated section) finally the bumps to the PCB. This is very low resolution so you see no details of the actual DRAM or SoC, you just see large thin copper power planes/redistribution layers.
apple-a16-bionic-system-on-chip_package-cross-section-dram-package-on-soc-package.jpg


It's unclear what the substrate is between the SoC and the DRAM, in part because of the Japanese translation.
The translation calls it glass, and that's certainly possible in theory; Intel is working on using glass for this sort of task.
Alternatively it could be silicon. Si is optimal for this because it has the same temperature expansion coefficient, so you don't get warping or cracking when the package heats or cools, the way you might if the substrate expands at a different rate from the SoC and DRAM.
Alternatively it could just be a fancy high quality (and very thin) "PCB board" so basically glass fiber embedded in epoxy resin, and that's how machine translation is picking up the word glass? All very unclear.

We won't do M series in this detail! But already you can see the point, that there are many different ways to do these things, and the differences matter in terms of z-height, area, power, etc.
For M series, instead of stacking DRAM above the SoC, either old PoP style or new A16/A17 style, we place the DRAM on the side. That involves a different set of technologies that move the power and signals "sideways" rather than vertically.
 

Guenter

macrumors member
Dec 10, 2023
54
45
The m3 pro got a Mixed Feedback when compared to the m2 pro. In my oppinion the binnen Version is a good deal compared to the m3. For 250 Euro (in Germany) you get 2 Gig ram, 1 performance core and 2 efficiency cores plus 4 gpu cores. For the same Money you can Upgrade to the full Version but you dont get extra ram and no extra efficiency core.
Some critics was die to reduced Numbers of Transistors of the m3 pro. I would not be surprised i we see the m3 pro in the iPad pro may be with reduced frequency and the air with the m3. This would be the First iPad Pro with a pro CPU and it would separate the pro more from the air. May be the reduction in size of the m3 pro is caused by the Option to use it in an iPad Pro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaniTheFox

DaniTheFox

macrumors regular
Nov 24, 2023
198
145
Switzerland
The m3 pro got a Mixed Feedback when compared to the m2 pro. In my oppinion the binnen Version is a good deal compared to the m3. For 250 Euro (in Germany) you get 2 Gig ram, 1 performance core and 2 efficiency cores plus 4 gpu cores. For the same Money you can Upgrade to the full Version but you dont get extra ram and no extra efficiency core.
Some critics was die to reduced Numbers of Transistors of the m3 pro. I would not be surprised i we see the m3 pro in the iPad pro may be with reduced frequency and the air with the m3. This would be the First iPad Pro with a pro CPU and it would separate the pro more from the air. May be the reduction in size of the m3 pro is caused by the Option to use it in an iPad Pro.
Oh, I thought so too when I saw the M3 Pro's specs. But I'm no expert.What is the M3 Pro's power envelope compared to the M3? Can the iPad Pro handle this. And maybe a MacBook Air in the future too (we can dream, can‘t we?). For the iMac the ship has already sailed.
 
Last edited:

mr_roboto

macrumors 6502a
Sep 30, 2020
856
1,866
I doubt we will see M3 Pro in iPad Pro. There wouldn't be any point, it's designed for systems with much more thermal headroom. In an iPad, it would just throttle a lot. Same applies to the 24" iMac - there's more chance of it working in that context since at least the iMac can have fans, but still, there's only so much you can do in such a thin enclosure.
 

Confused-User

macrumors 6502a
Oct 14, 2014
850
984
I doubt we will see M3 Pro in iPad Pro. There wouldn't be any point, it's designed for systems with much more thermal headroom. In an iPad, it would just throttle a lot. Same applies to the 24" iMac - there's more chance of it working in that context since at least the iMac can have fans, but still, there's only so much you can do in such a thin enclosure.
Oops, meant to respond to this a week ago.

While I agree with you, there's precedent of sorts for Apple doing this. Specifically, they spend transistors like water to get better thermals. (See the recent discussion about display controllers for an example. Or just look at their CPU design.) So depending on the curve for the M3, it could be reasonable to use a Pro running at a lower frequency. (In fact, IIRC, the curve leman showed us suggests that that would work).

The reason I don't see this happening is that there's not that much people do with iPads that calls for that sort of sustained oompf. But if that changes, it wouldn't be crazy for them to do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaniTheFox
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.