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

MP 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)

koyoot said:
If you want to know how Apple is capable of silicon design: http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showpost.php?p=278368&postcount=14

I think the nick should tell you who this guys is(motley fool analyst).

Clock for clock A10 is faster than desktop Skylake architecture.
Click to expand...

a bit biased and non-accurated, but if you want the best clock-by-clock performance the winner by long shot are nVidia's Pascal P100 and the 1024 core Adapteva Epiphany V.

to fairly compare two cpu you need they both run the same OS, iOS is not a full OS, does not have all the cpu consuming background tasks you find on general purpose kernels as Linux.
 
Mago said:
AMD's vega 10 is being tested and the ONLY mac with enough TDP to host it is the TrashCan Mac Pro (or an really ugly-thick iMac).
Click to expand...

Sure, Apple could release an iMac with Vega 10 and Xeon processors, but Ive would kill that monstrosity before it got out the door. :)
 
There is no point to have an ipad pro with A10 and a mac with the same cpu...Apple will never do this...more maybe a device with an A10 and have dual macOS and iOS
 
fokmik said:
There is no point to have an ipad pro with A10 and a mac with the same cpu...Apple will never do this...more maybe a device with an A10 and have dual macOS and iOS
Click to expand...
I don’t buy that.
Why buy processors in from somebody else when your own are good enough? I’m asking if their own are good enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slughead
I think they would just simply create a new line of Apple processors for notebooks and desktops. Maybe Nx and Dx? Curious to see the N1... Given Apple's late strategy and know-how, I think they would start from notebooks, with their experience on energy saving on iPads.
 
The odd thing is, iPad sales are declining, so even though the iPhone remains the gold standard, the iPad as an isolated business seems like a losing proposition.

I really wonder whether Microsoft may turn out to have the right idea with their one-OS-for-all approach.

The Surface Studio really could be a better workflow if applications are optimized for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hank Carter
zephonic said:
The odd thing is, iPad sales are declining, so even though the iPhone remains the gold standard, the iPad as an isolated business seems like a losing proposition.

I really wonder whether Microsoft may turn out to have the right idea with their one-OS-for-all approach.

The Surface Studio really could be a better workflow if applications are optimized for it.
Click to expand...

I've heard the iPad business is stable, not exceptional, but not tanking like it did after the first few saturated the market.
 
There isn't a good reason to switch to ARM on the Mac. The A series doesn't have enough PCIe lanes, not enough USB controllers, no Thunderbolt controllers... Intel's schedule has been a little off but not that bad, and even the benchmarks from the people pushing for ARM don't show that much of an improvement. The A series would need a big clock and core boost to compete with anything besides Intel's low end too.

No one so far has offered a good reason Apple should go ARM on the Mac.

Windows on ARM at least wants to go after all the cheap tablets and internet of things devices that are ARM based, which isn't something Apple cares about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan, Hank Carter, Mago and 3 others
Jaho101 said:
I've heard the iPad business is stable, not exceptional, but not tanking like it did after the first few saturated the market.
Click to expand...
iPad business is stable but not as big as the mac business..ipad was already lower than the mac last quarter. If apple will update the rest of the line mac mini/imac and mac pro the mac will surpass for sure the ipads, even if the ipads will get an update too
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hank Carter and Mago
For those with nMP what is the throttling like with 3d rendering like? Might be grabbing a Mac next year september for someone in the family mainly for FCP.
 
H2SO4 said:
So why isn’t the A10 in an Apple desktop?
Click to expand...
Because according to David Kanter, who talked with Apple silicon engineers they cannot design circuit for ARM CPU that would have high enough amperage, to maintain high core clocks. They are simply not capable of doing this with current design of michroarchitecture, and the architecture itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hank Carter
koyoot said:
Because according to David Kanter, who talked with Apple silicon engineers they cannot design circuit for ARM CPU that would have high enough amperage, to maintain high core clocks. They are simply not capable of doing this with current design of michroarchitecture, and the architecture itself.
Click to expand...

Then it isn't desktop class. If it can't do what the desktops are expected to do why talk rubbish about it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PortableLover
H2SO4 said:
No doubt. The most innovative part of Apple by quite some margin has for a number of years been its marketing department.
Click to expand...
Its not so simple. Depends on the Thermal target for the CPUs.

Microarchitecture that Apple designed at this very moment is more robust, and more complex than anything Intel offers. In single threaded applications, clock for clock Apple CPU will be faster than latest and greatest offering from Intel: "Skylake".
The problem comes with complexity of multithreaded applications, and thermal designs. A10 can have at best 5W TDP, for 2C/2T design. Apple can expand it indefinitely, however, that would require designing particular internal connection between cores, to not get diminishing returns from multi-core CPU design. Also key factor here is that Intel CPUs would scale better with clocks, on higher TDPs.

For Apple, the only way they could use AX chips in their computers is when Intel or AMD is in a situation where they cannot use high-amperage power circuit in their CPU design(they are for example reduced by power governor to reduce the power consumption of the CPUs), and are allowed for example to build only 25W designs, to control the energy grids.

Again: clock for clock, Apple chips are currently faster in Single core performance than anything Intel has. It is more and more apparent that actually shifting from x86 CPU vendors, to Apple custom designed hardware can be extremely beneficial in some cases. So far, it works only in ultra mobile world, where Apple is just years ahead of any competition. Years. But it can, eventually, scale in the world of desktop. Not because Desktop shrinked to ARM hardware. But because the ARM hardware evolved so much that is at least as good as what desktop can offer.
 
koyoot said:
Its not so simple. Depends on the Thermal target for the CPUs.

Microarchitecture that Apple designed at this very moment is more robust, and more complex than anything Intel offers. In single threaded applications, clock for clock Apple CPU will be faster than latest and greatest offering from Intel: "Skylake".
The problem comes with complexity of multithreaded applications, and thermal designs. A10 can have at best 5W TDP, for 2C/2T design. Apple can expand it indefinitely, however, that would require designing particular internal connection between cores, to not get diminishing returns from multi-core CPU design. Also key factor here is that Intel CPUs would scale better with clocks, on higher TDPs.

For Apple, the only way they could use AX chips in their computers is when Intel or AMD is in a situation where they cannot use high-amperage power circuit in their CPU design(they are for example reduced by power governor to reduce the power consumption of the CPUs), and are allowed for example to build only 25W designs, to control the energy grids.

Again: clock for clock, Apple chips are currently faster in Single core performance than anything Intel has. It is more and more apparent that actually shifting from x86 CPU vendors, to Apple custom designed hardware can be extremely beneficial in some cases. So far, it works only in ultra mobile world, where Apple is just years ahead of any competition. Years. But it can, eventually, scale in the world of desktop. Not because Desktop shrinked to ARM hardware. But because the ARM hardware evolved so much that is at least as good as what desktop can offer.
Click to expand...
Who cares. You can’t say you have a vehicle is rated to traverse desert terrain but it overheats easily. It either is or isn’t. It’s either desktop class or it isn’t.
That’s like saying that intel processors are mobile class because they’ve been down clocked to burn less power, but they can only run at half the speed of the ARM.

If Apple had their own processors to properly rival what Intel has we’d see them in Macs. As it is, Apple are talking more hot air than the intel chips are producing. They may be where they want in the future, but they aren't right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan and Hank Carter
H2SO4 said:
Who cares. You can’t say you have a vehicle is rated to traverse desert terrain but it overheats easily. It either is or isn’t. It’s either desktop class or it isn’t.
That’s like saying that intel processors are mobile class because they’ve been down clocked to burn less power, but they can only run at half the speed of the ARM.

If Apple had their own processors to properly rival what Intel has we’d see them in Macs. As it is, Apple are talking more hot air than the intel chips are producing. They may be where they want in the future, but they aren't right now.
Click to expand...
It is not about overheating. The CPU IPC would not scale with higher core clocks, and higher thermal envelopes. In other words, clock for clock, you would see regression of performance, in higher clocks for Apple CPUs.

Second factor that is not allowing Apple to use different designs of the CPU in desktop is the scalability of the CPU. There is a very good reason why Apple is adamant of not using for now Hyper Threading/SMT technology in their CPUs.

People are resisting the truth that ARM is going to replace 90% of x86. Unless Intel will decide to get rid of some SIMD's from their CPU designs and leave 100% backwards compatibility in the thrash, that is the reality.
 
koyoot said:
People are resisting the truth that ARM is going to replace 90% of x86. Unless Intel will decide to get rid of some SIMD's from their CPU designs and leave 100% backwards compatibility in the thrash, that is the reality.
Click to expand...
Instruction emulation is a pretty well-known technology, I would expect that those innovators at Intel could figure out a way to get reasonable emulation performance.
 
Hmm..if Apple has been suffering quality control as of late, I doubt Apple is capable to produce high quality processor compared to intel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back