The problem I foresee is lack of graphics option. Because there is no reasonable Mac desktop it will be difficult for the majority of people to add graphic card options to their Macs. Unless there is an option for thunderbolt 4 this will be a deterrent. But then again it's always slower using an external gpu option.
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.
The problem with new Mac based Arm
- Thread starter bigtomato
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How is that any different to current Macs? You are stuck with the GPU your machine came with. Unless you are talking about Mac Pro.
On the other hand, Apple GPUs are likely to be faster on the lower-end machines at least.
On the other hand, Apple GPUs are likely to be faster on the lower-end machines at least.
That’s not a problem if the integrated GPUs on Apple Silicon are as good as Apple claims. We will only know that when we get to see the real thing.
Its not as if there is a huge GPU choice in the existing range (without paying $$$ for a Mac Pro).
Also, although it sounds like Bug Sur won’t support dGPUs or eDGPUs on ARM, that doesn’t mean the idea is going away for ever - the first ARM Macs will likely be replacements for models that currently have iGPUs , and the by the time the “Pro” models go ARM it will be time for a new MacOS anyhow...
Its not as if there is a huge GPU choice in the existing range (without paying $$$ for a Mac Pro).
Also, although it sounds like Bug Sur won’t support dGPUs or eDGPUs on ARM, that doesn’t mean the idea is going away for ever - the first ARM Macs will likely be replacements for models that currently have iGPUs , and the by the time the “Pro” models go ARM it will be time for a new MacOS anyhow...
99.9995% of all users don't give a rat's *** about that.
I don't see this going away for the Mac Pro.
Likewise, I doubt that the models that currently use a dedicated gpu will no longer have one.
Well, if NVIDIA buys Arm, as some news are reporting, this may not be a concern in the future (https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveal...t-could-upend-the-chip-industry/#2f231ed35742).
We really don’t care about not having a dGPU. Apple’s SoC and highly optimized software with Metal will leverage freakingly more than any previous or current dGPU option from AMD. This has been extensively discussed in other threads.
What does Nvidia buying ARM has to do with Apple-designed chips?
First thing, people really need to stop using the acronym ARM like it is a CPU design or SOC design. It isn't - it is just an instruction set that Apple licenses (and adds a LOT of their own instructions to). EVERYTHING else about Apple Silicon is a completely Apple design. The cores are a completely Apple design, the cache is, everything is. If anything, the only microarchitecture Apple's A series resembles a bit is Intel's; specifically the Core 2 microarchitecture.
Second, as an SOC it inherently does not use dGPUs. Nor does it need to - Apple creates their own GPUs that already (even in the small thermal envelopes of iPhone and iPad) are high performance. Even if all they did was upscale their current iPad SOC to take advantage of the less restrictive thermals of a laptop it would perform very well - but per WWDC they have a separate SOC line specifically for Macs. So we need to see what that entails.
Second, as an SOC it inherently does not use dGPUs. Nor does it need to - Apple creates their own GPUs that already (even in the small thermal envelopes of iPhone and iPad) are high performance. Even if all they did was upscale their current iPad SOC to take advantage of the less restrictive thermals of a laptop it would perform very well - but per WWDC they have a separate SOC line specifically for Macs. So we need to see what that entails.
The ARM Mac hasn‘t even been released and already there is a problem.
ARM is only offering GPU performance that is comparable to the integrated GPU built in to intel and AMD CPU's. If you look at the geek bench Metal GPU results they are mediocre just like intel, AMD.
see Metal Benchmarks - GeekBenchmark
Example Apple A12X - 9015
Now look up that laptop or desktop Metal score, not even close.
Love this 2019 article - CPU Comparison: X86 vs ARM — Will Intel i9 9900K Stay Atop? - FossBytes
Actually the author of the article is in error - this has NOTHING to do with ARM, which is just an ISA and not a CPU, GPU or SOC design. The Apple A series SOCs use the ARM ISA (and a lot more instructions on top) and are a uniquely Apple design. If anything, the microarchitecture they somewhat resemble is not any known ARM one but actually Intel Core 2. And considering that Apple poached Intel's Core design team aggressively to build their in house team this is unsurprising.
You're comparing tiny chips running ~10W with no active cooling and barely a heatsink to ~200W+ monsters with their own fans and heatsinks like blocks of cheddar.
Apple will have something substantially better in the works for its Macs, don't worry about it.
Nothing per se, of course.
Still interesting - consider this: Apple an Nvidia are fighting a feud for reasons we do not know. As it seems Apple does not want to have anything to do with Nvidia (and maybe vice versa).
If Nvidia acquires Arm - good luck with that when negotiating licensing next round up
Last edited:
Admittedly I am a bit worried about this.
Thing is you can’t really scale up into a monolithic mega-SoC with a high transistor budget for both CPU and GPU. You run into yield issues and thus drive up costs substantially. Not really a problem for a laptop level of expected performance but for the bigger desktops I do wonder.
I’m speculating they either go the chiplet route where GPU is a separate piece of silicon glued together or, if they think this is a non-issue for anything but the mac pro specifically, let you slot in entire extra SoCs on cards to get extra performance.
Thing is you can’t really scale up into a monolithic mega-SoC with a high transistor budget for both CPU and GPU. You run into yield issues and thus drive up costs substantially. Not really a problem for a laptop level of expected performance but for the bigger desktops I do wonder.
I’m speculating they either go the chiplet route where GPU is a separate piece of silicon glued together or, if they think this is a non-issue for anything but the mac pro specifically, let you slot in entire extra SoCs on cards to get extra performance.
You won't get GPU options for anything except the high end Apple machines. Even then they won't be OEM units. They'll be Apple designed units that have non-standard connectors and huge markups. If you think the cost of Apple peripherals is expensive now then just wait until you see the prices of the Apple ARM universe coming.
I don’t see any reason why it would be pricier under Apple Silicon....
Majority of macs currently are running intel integrated graphics.
I doubt this will be a big deal for majority of the consumers. Considering how iPad Pros handle 4k video editing, I don't think it would be an issue for pros either.
They tend to bump up the prices at key points that are not just spec bumps. E.g. the MBA redesign, the 2018 Mac mini, etc. Always an upward trend to give more perceived value. Mentally, people don't take well to price reductions as they perceive cheaper is inferior. If right out of the gate an ARM iMac is cheaper than the Intel iMac then you're going to be on a loser. You need to say the increase in price is due to feature X. What X is is all about marketing. It's psychology.
