The new 14 and 16” models should jump to A16 architecture next year… right?

[terminator-jq]

We are still very much in the middle of the Apple silicon transition cycle. Until that cycle ends, we won’t know Apples update routine. However, IMO I think Apple will put Macs on a similar update cycle as the iPad Pro.

It makes sense from a sales and business perspective to update the iPhone every year because the average person typically gets a new phone every 1-2 years. When it comes to computers and tablets, the average person keeps their devices a lot longer (3+ years). My guess is this:

- Spring 2022: New Mac Mini and iMac Pro
- Fall 2022: Big Mac event with New MacBook Air, Low cost MacBook Pro, Mac Mini and new Mac Pro. This ends the M1 generation, starts the M2 generation and completes the Apple silicon transition.

- Spring 2023: M2 iMac and M2 iPad Pro

- Fall 2023: New MacBook Pros with M2 Pro and M2 Max

And the cycle continues. Long story short, I’m thinking we see a new M generation every other year (which makes sense for computers). 1 year for the base models and 1 year for the Pro models. Then a new generation is introduced.

 

[Krevnik]

why did u got for the 10c may i ask ? especially on such small body

The M1 Pro/Max CPU complex with all 10 cores is rated for 30W peak usage. That's in the same ballpark as the previous Intel CPU the 13" MBP used. And that's only the TDP, not peak usage with turbo boost enabled. The 14" MBP has improved cooling over the 13" to handle the beefier GPU.

In practice though? I'm honestly impressed at how low power the M1 Max is under most loads. It's shedding less heat than the Intel CPUs it replaced pretty easily even comparing the whole M1 Max SoC to just the Intel CPU (I don't have good numbers for the 5300M).

 

[Melbourne Park]

....

It makes sense from a sales and business perspective to update the iPhone every year because the average person typically gets a new phone every 1-2 years. When it comes to computers and tablets, the average person keeps their devices a lot longer (3+ years). My guess is this:

- Spring 2022: New Mac Mini and iMac Pro
- Fall 2022: Big Mac event with New MacBook Air, Low cost MacBook Pro, Mac Mini and new Mac Pro. This ends the M1 generation, starts the M2 generation and completes the Apple silicon transition.
....

If they don't differentiate the iMac 27 (30) from the iMac Pro, then we'll water down most Macs - they'll all be "Pros". I assume they'll introduce a new iMac, and also an iMac "Pro". If they don't it's going to cost Apple a lot of those costly black Apple labels.

 

[nquinn]

Would be nice, IMO A15 cores would be a pretty lame upgrade for a macbook. iPhone 13 was mostly an improvement vs the 12 because of the better camera and battery life.

The M1 Pro macbooks already have amazing battery life, so eeking out +5% single core performance next year or whatever on them using A15 cores would be incredibly boring.

Also depends on the cycle, but I suspect it's going to be quite a while before it's worth anyone upgrading their macbook. Maybe when they get to M1 Pro's based on A16 or A17 if they use armv9, 3nm, etc and maybe hit +20-25% bumps.

The A15 doesn't do much for macbooks imo.

 

[Jorbanead]

If they don't differentiate the iMac 27 (30) from the iMac Pro, then we'll water down most Macs - they'll all be "Pros". I assume they'll introduce a new iMac, and also an iMac "Pro". If they don't it's going to cost Apple a lot of those costly black Apple labels.

What if the larger iMac just becomes the pro? So iMac is only 24” and iMac Pro is the larger option.

 

[Melbourne Park]

What if the larger iMac just becomes the pro? So iMac is only 24” and iMac Pro is the larger option.

It's certainly possible. However I imagine there is a link between an iMac "Pro" form factor and the stand alone Mac Pro. All that black differentiation, and the GPUs, the Xeons, were about establishing that link, and also, providing some real grunt.

The iMac Pro also cost a lot of money. If Apple puts an iMac "Pro" label on a single CPU iMac Pro Max - such a machine will not cost a lot of money. It'll cost what a high end iMac costs right now. Doing so would hurt those who bought iMac Pros as well, because those users spent a lot of money.

I think it would be crazy to up the clock rate of a Macbook Pro Max and put its innards into an iMac 27", and label it an iMac "Pro". The desktop Pro label is iconic. It's performance needs to be as well. A "Pro" - make it a 30" with two higher clock speed Pro Max processors - they are cool enough to take that form factor. It would still have only 128 GB Ram. Such a machine would deserve the label though.

Just IMO of course!!!

 

[thenewperson]

Would be nice, IMO A15 cores would be a pretty lame upgrade for a macbook. iPhone 13 was mostly an improvement vs the 12 because of the better camera and battery life.

The M1 Pro macbooks already have amazing battery life, so eeking out +5% single core performance next year or whatever on them using A15 cores would be incredibly boring.

Also depends on the cycle, but I suspect it's going to be quite a while before it's worth anyone upgrading their macbook. Maybe when they get to M1 Pro's based on A16 or A17 if they use armv9, 3nm, etc and maybe hit +20-25% bumps.

The A15 doesn't do much for macbooks imo.

The M2 cores will probably be clocked higher than their A15 counterparts, so there'd likely be a meaningful speed increase. Also they have a noticeable improvement in graphics and the neural engine, which would have been nice. And of course everything is more efficient on those across the board.