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.
name "silicon" is so stupid
- Thread starter Macbookprodude
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Given the $500 to turn it sideways, $700 for wheels and the $1000 display stand, a $100 paint job option doesn't seem so bad.
Just call it RISC on steroids or PPC derivative II on steroids. Silicon is a chip material, shouldn't be the name of the chip.
Maybe someone has already asked this in the thread, but I'm interested to see what will happen when they're no longer using Silicon. Apple Graphene? Apple Quantum? Seems odd to name your new product line after something that is likely going away this decade.
Apple has not named anything "Apple Silicon"...
If you go back to the original press release, every mention has it as "Apple silicon", so Apple has yet to say what the real marketing naming scheme may be...
If you go back to the original press release, every mention has it as "Apple silicon", so Apple has yet to say what the real marketing naming scheme may be...
It's a generic descriptor, not the actual/official name of the chips. It means nothing more than silicon (chips) designed by Apple.
So is it safe to say PowerPC was also an Apple Silicon though with IBM's name on it ? I hope ARM will be just as great as PPC was - think different II which will bring intel's destruction. I so much want to see the end of x86.
I don't think so. Apple Silicon is Apple-designed, PowerPC was not (as far as I'm aware). It'd be IBM Silicon if they went that route.
Or Motorola.
[automerge]1598798817[/automerge]
or silicon-germanium.
This is correct, IBM/Motorola made them. Just that Apple was their main vendor for actual computers after a while, so most associate PPC with Apple and not the other devices it was in (Xbox 360 and Wii for example).
Silicon is what the chips are made of. And, it is less than half of the syllables of PowerPC ARM V2 (3 vs 7). Also, the new silicon doesn't actually have arms (or legs) while it does have silicon. It is also not the second version of an ARM processor, nor is it a German missile from WWII so the V2 is inaccurate (and might trigger some PTSD in 90 year-olds living in England). Apple Silicon makes much more sense.
Hopefully Apple will one day mobe to industrially made/grade diamond.
Diamond can replace silicon for computer chips for faster, lighter and simpler devices | NextBigFuture.com
Diamond can run 5 times hotter than Silicon without degrading in performance and is more easily cooled (with 22 times the heat transfer efficiency of
www.nextbigfuture.com
No. Arm already has the "A" and "M" used. The Cortex-A is the application chips that run an operating system like ISO, Linux or Andriod. The Cortex-M series are all microcontrollers like the STM32F103 or one like it from Ti. These are for embedded computing.
That clearly doesn't matter to Apple. More importantly is the fact that Apple already has used M-prefixed parts in their SoCs (th emotion coprocessors). Will they repurpose these (since the M-series parts aren't even mentioned any more) or will they use something else?
Which is turn comes from the fact that, you know, actual silicon is the bedrock element of building chips
. Calling chips "silicon" colloquially is incredibly common in the industry and beyond. The OP for this thread is way off mark by trying to claim irrelevance
Im still confused how people don’t understand they are not naming these chips Apple Silicon.
They have used the term Apple Silicon for all of their products that use.... Apple Silicon. The actual chip name is A13 or T2 or S5 or whatever. Apple silicon is just another way to say “chips made by Apple” or “Apple designed processors”. It’s not the name of any single chip. It’s the name collectively referred to all of their chips that are made using silicon. Sure they may need a new collective name for a new breed of chips that use a different material, but that probably won’t effect the actual series names like A14, S6, T2, etc.
The chips going inside the macs will most likely get their own series name. Like A13, but something like C13 or whatever their marketing team comes up with. They haven’t actually announced what their Mac chips will be called and we won’t know until the first Mac that has apple designed processors.
See this for context:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple-designed_processors
Last edited:
Silicon isn’t going anywhere. Quantum is a fantasy and the infrastructure is just not there to shift away from silicon this decade, specially when we haven’t even even come close to hitting the limits of silicon from a physics perspective.
And I think people are making way too big a deal of the name, if you can even call it that. The chips will not be called “Apple Silicon a14M 1700” or whatever. It’s just a generic term for their custom designed chips in general. They used to run Intel Silicon and now they run Apple Silicon. It not the name of the product.
It's almost like this has been stated previously in this thread. But some people (not saying you @thingstoponder but the poster you're replying to) just don't bother reading through the thread.
Looks like you guessed right.
EDIT: Haha, I just noticed you posted this right before me.
Sarcasm? I really want to believe this was sarcasm. Because, the "elemental silicon used in semiconductor electronics… is essential to the metal–oxide–semiconductor (MOS) transistors and integrated circuit chips used in most modern technology (such as computers and cell phones, for example)." Read more at Wikipedia.
Last edited: