Yes...it wouldn't be very professional for a recipient under NDA to discuss this, even behind Internet anonymity.
My guess is that they borrowed the DTK from someone - if they have one at all that is
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac Mini DTK A12Z faster than MBP 16" i9 in native benchmarks.
- Thread starter Homy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes...it wouldn't be very professional for a recipient under NDA to discuss this, even behind Internet anonymity.
My guess is that they borrowed the DTK from someone - if they have one at all that is
Yes, however we are attempting to see why this individual in the forum with no apparent association with any of those companies would have to return it in October.
Sorry for the late response..we can talk somehow about it...not making benchmarks etc...but we can say in general what is working and what is not...again we cant say too much about the NDA agreements...those things are between developers and what you sign for terms and condition BY individual/company . You have some choices to choose from
People, like me, i will get the first consumer arm based mac for me personally (hope is an portable mac) , so knowing that i signed the right deal for me.
The 1 year is from the day you sign in - you received the kit/device but that is the general con sense
Again, sorry i cannot be more open for discussion about this...but we have some allowence to talk about what it works, and what doesnt. The real issues are send directly to Apple, under NDA. Remember , everything is subject to change...nothing is final. So if someone tells you that your preferred app doesn't run, or run very poorly under Rosetta2, doesnt mean at the end of the year will be the same. But again, the real thing that all of us are interesting are massive , its clear this will allow apple for even better PORTABLE devices...not saying that an imac, mac mini will not be better thanks to the future features....but the big difference we will be seen into those devices with battery, those where heat and fan noise are the "enemy" and so on
Hope this helps a bit
People, like me, i will get the first consumer arm based mac for me personally (hope is an portable mac) , so knowing that i signed the right deal for me.
The 1 year is from the day you sign in - you received the kit/device but that is the general con sense
Again, sorry i cannot be more open for discussion about this...but we have some allowence to talk about what it works, and what doesnt. The real issues are send directly to Apple, under NDA. Remember , everything is subject to change...nothing is final. So if someone tells you that your preferred app doesn't run, or run very poorly under Rosetta2, doesnt mean at the end of the year will be the same. But again, the real thing that all of us are interesting are massive , its clear this will allow apple for even better PORTABLE devices...not saying that an imac, mac mini will not be better thanks to the future features....but the big difference we will be seen into those devices with battery, those where heat and fan noise are the "enemy" and so on
Hope this helps a bit
Last edited:
Errr....OK....thanks for the rather cryptic response. Pulling it apart, I gather that:
1) If you have to return the DTK next month and the agreement was for one year, that you received it roughly October last year, under a specific NDA. Presumably, you can't say who you work for, but I would see it as a positive sign that developers may have been working to create or adapt software with the DTK for nearly a year. I am surprised that no-one saw any leaks about this between October 2019 and the June WWDC.
2) Part of the NDA includes you being given (presumably free?) an Apple Silicon Mac when it is released.
3) Development is ongoing (as expected) and Rosetta 2 software compatibility will probably improve prior to release.
4) The main benefits of Apple Silicon will be seen in laptops initially. I take this to mean good performance, while running cool, and with good battery life.
Am I close?
I was only suggesting one, out of many scenarios.
It is not out of the realm of possibility that Apple sent out DTKs to certain select developers. How do you think that Microsoft had an ARM native Version of Office at WWDC? Could have the Microsoft Office developers been at Apple? Yes. Could they run their development software by remoting into an Apple AS system? Yes, they could. But just as likely as the above two scenarios is that Apple supplied some major developers with DTK units early. MAybe it was limited to large developers, maybe not. I can't say either way, but I don't think it is out of the realm of possibility that some developers got DTK kits early, and were not permitted to say anything through a strict NDA, just like Microsoft and Adobe didn't say anything.
As for the legal requirements, they too are unknown. The current DTK terms call for 12 months of use. The early DTK units could have had different terms (4 months, 6 months, 9 months, etc.) That it could have been 12 months is also possible, with Apple giving different terms to different developers as well. If, and I present this as only a possibility, not as a probability, Apple released the early DTKs in October of last year, then they would have needed to be returned in October of this year (assuming the current 12 month term was used for the early DTK units). It is likely that the AS Macs were supposed to be released this October, but, due to Covid-19, that the release date for the production AS Macs has slipped by a month or possibly more. While this slippage is understandable given the circumstances, the return date as originally specified in the early DTK agreement did not. So, the DTK units are still scheduled to be returned on the date of the agreement, it is only the production AS Macs that have slipped.
It is not out of the realm of possibility that Apple sent out DTKs to certain select developers. How do you think that Microsoft had an ARM native Version of Office at WWDC? Could have the Microsoft Office developers been at Apple? Yes. Could they run their development software by remoting into an Apple AS system? Yes, they could. But just as likely as the above two scenarios is that Apple supplied some major developers with DTK units early. MAybe it was limited to large developers, maybe not. I can't say either way, but I don't think it is out of the realm of possibility that some developers got DTK kits early, and were not permitted to say anything through a strict NDA, just like Microsoft and Adobe didn't say anything.
As for the legal requirements, they too are unknown. The current DTK terms call for 12 months of use. The early DTK units could have had different terms (4 months, 6 months, 9 months, etc.) That it could have been 12 months is also possible, with Apple giving different terms to different developers as well. If, and I present this as only a possibility, not as a probability, Apple released the early DTKs in October of last year, then they would have needed to be returned in October of this year (assuming the current 12 month term was used for the early DTK units). It is likely that the AS Macs were supposed to be released this October, but, due to Covid-19, that the release date for the production AS Macs has slipped by a month or possibly more. While this slippage is understandable given the circumstances, the return date as originally specified in the early DTK agreement did not. So, the DTK units are still scheduled to be returned on the date of the agreement, it is only the production AS Macs that have slipped.
Errr....OK....thanks for the rather cryptic response. Pulling it apart, I gather that:
1) If you have to return the DTK next month and the agreement was for one year, that you received it roughly October last year, under a specific NDA. Presumably, you can't say who you work for, but I would see it as a positive sign that developers may have been working to create or adapt software with the DTK for nearly a year. I am surprised that no-one saw any leaks about this between October 2019 and the June WWDC.
2) Part of the NDA includes you being given (presumably free?) an Apple Silicon Mac when it is released.
3) Development is ongoing (as expected) and Rosetta 2 software compatibility will probably improve prior to release.
4) The main benefits of Apple Silicon will be seen in laptops initially. I take this to mean good performance, while running cool, and with good battery life.
Am I close?
The response you’re replying to is the most non-response response I have read in awhile. I’m of the belief they do not have a DTK in their position. But to each their own.
It wasn't hard to get a DTK if you are a developer. There is no reason to doubt that they have the DTK.
Yes, it was certainly somewhat rambling, and there is certainly a possibility that the whole story is a fabrication. I don't particularly care...but I am curious to know whether 3rd party developers had access to the DTK before WWDC, and if so, when. I suspect that certain companies may well have had early access, particularly those who are traditionally strong on MacOS, such as Adobe and Microsoft. They need to have their software optimized for ASi and available on day one of the launch.
But it would be quite unusual for them to get access to one in October 2019, which is the implication given a one-year usage term and having to return it next month.
The one year license period is the standard agreement. Not all developers and companies have to have signed the standard agreement. There could be many reasons for the discrepancy but getting access to a DTK wasn't likely to be a problem.
So we don't really have any idea who got access to DTKs and when
It does seem highly probable that some software vendors had access prior to WWDC in order to prepare the apps that were demo'd - e.g. Microsoft and Adobe were mentioned as having already having native apps "up and running", and I expect even developers running under Rosetta 2 would have had access to DTKs to make sure their x86 apps can run (e.g. Parallels that ran the Linux VM in the demo).
My initial thought was that it would really odd for Apple to insist on the return of a DTK before the production machines are launched, but if a developer has already had a year to prepare, they may have finished internal dev & test and have no further need of the DTK.
It's all a bit academic really - hopefully, developers have had enough time to prepare their apps, and are happy with the performance they can achieve on Apple Silicon.
Well even developers with access to a DTK have no real idea of the performance of Apple Silicon. But the DTK would be a credible low to mid range machine by itself so I don‘t think there is anything to worry about there.
I don't think measuring a year back from October is likely to be correct.
I'm sure there is a clause somewhere in there saying Apple can recall the units earlier.
If you get a DTK to use from June to October and then a shipping AS Mac to use from then onwards, Apple will certainly have fulfilled the spirit of the one-year lease for $500.
I'm sure there is a clause somewhere in there saying Apple can recall the units earlier.
If you get a DTK to use from June to October and then a shipping AS Mac to use from then onwards, Apple will certainly have fulfilled the spirit of the one-year lease for $500.
Been away for a bit and my how times flies, but my oh my - I spotted maybe the first record of prototype Arm equipped Mac Minis as far back as 2016, looks like this topic has come full circle! Awesome.
forums.macrumors.com
You are welcome
Mac Minis with ARM Prototype chips.
Are these the most important Mac's you have never heard of until now? Nestled among one fascinating insight after the next is a passing observation. Is this a glimpse of the next major silicon pivot in the Apple story? In case it's not clear. This article focused primarily on the development...
forums.macrumors.com
You are welcome
Last edited:
Well, the profile picture of folkmik certainly raises some questions. She/He always uses pictures of Erin Olash who describes herself on different social media channels as "I have terrible taste in everything. Twitch streamer, Content creator, Youtuber, a host and model, who loves games, movies, and anime. You can expect a lot of good times and fun videos. Highlighting some of my adventures on Twitch, cooking, reacting to trailers, and talks with my sister Meg. It's all meant for laughs so feel free to watch a few videos".
I don't know if it's the real Erin or an obsessive fan that keeps using her pictures all the time, but I wonder how a streamer and Youtuber that makes videos just for fun can get a DTK.
I think you’re missing my point in that they basically stated they have had it for a year.
The Metal Score of A14 is impressive. It's 137% higher than A12 and 72% higher than A13 according to Geekbench results. It's lot more than 30% higher GPU performance that Apple stated at WWDC.
A12 5307, A13 7308, A14 12571
It can mean that A14X and A14Z can also be much faster?
A12X 10860, A14X 25725
A12Z 11665, A14Z 27632
A12 with 4 GPU cores scores 5307. A12Z with 8 GPU cores scores 11665. 4 extra cores means 120% performance increase. An A14Z Mac SoC with 24 GPU cores could score 87876 in Metal. That's between Radeon Pro W5700XT and Radeon Pro Vega II.
A12 5307, A13 7308, A14 12571
It can mean that A14X and A14Z can also be much faster?
A12X 10860, A14X 25725
A12Z 11665, A14Z 27632
A12 with 4 GPU cores scores 5307. A12Z with 8 GPU cores scores 11665. 4 extra cores means 120% performance increase. An A14Z Mac SoC with 24 GPU cores could score 87876 in Metal. That's between Radeon Pro W5700XT and Radeon Pro Vega II.
I'm pretty sure that the performance won't scale linearly like this....but I do hope that the first ASi Macs have a decent Geekbench Metal score > 20,000.
In most of computing you are generally correct to have temperate expectations about scaling. GPUs are a bit of an outlier and scale well because their whole architecture and purpose is to do highly parallel work.
Last edited:
Indeed !
I am in the camp of AS multi core expansion. CPU and GPU cores will double or triple. Apple will not use an A14X or A14Z in its Mac lineup
Apple still needs to run all the CPU and GPU cores inside the defined TDP though. Of course, we don't know what this will be, but I expect an initial "MacBook variant" will be aiming at 10-15W in order to compete with Intel Tiger Lake and still offer excellent battery life.
We also don't have TDP specifications for the A14 or A12Z SoC - but I have seen 6-9W mentioned a few times, with at least one source quoting a peak of 15W.
So there may not be huge "TDP budget" to play with. Maybe an "A14Z based" Mac SoC could have 8+4 (big/little) CPU cores and 8 GPU cores, but I think this would be close to the limit for an ultrabook competitor. If the first ASi Mac is a replacement for the MacBook Air or low-end MBP13, then I suspect it may have fewer cores and a lower TDP target to increase battery life.