What does Linus and Dave mean that M1 will 100% be replaced next year?

[kazmac]

So will the 10th Gen Intel chips and all of those high-end PC GPUs that Linus likes to drop on the floor.

Linus has just decided that the clickbait for today is Apple-bashing (which, admittedly, is a great sport and often well-deserved, but maybe not in this case).

Also, what he doesn't seem to "get" (along with a lot of people on this forum) is that the 3 machines launched on Tuesday are the Apple's entry level offerings, and the replacement for their real "Pro" machines have yet to be announced. (Insofar as "pro" means anything, the 2-port 13" MBP is only called that because Apple used plain "MacBook" for something else).

So, yeah, in 6 months time there will probably be a 14" or 16" MacBook Pro with a M2/M1X/M1 Pro/whatever chip that stomps all over the M1 Air just like the 16" Intel MacBook Pro stomps all over the Intel MacBook Air. That's hardly a reflection on the MacBook Air though - if you want a "pro" Mac why would you buy an Air?

Now, it may be that we're going to see some radically re-designed Macs over the next year - I suspect that's going to be more about the switch to mini-LED and/or micro-LED displays than processor changes. I don't think there's any particular reason to believe that we'll see anything more powerful than the M1 in a $900-$1300 Laptop for at least a year.

Also, Linus made some silly comments about the new Macs just being iPads in a laptop form running MacOS. (a) That's not technically true and (b) if it was true, what's not to like about that? Even Linus has previously done a video in which he was impressed about what you could do on an iPad Pro.

The reason I won't be buying the new MacBook Air is because I don't want/need a MacBook Air.

To be fair, Apple set themselves up for this a bit by over-selling the "pro" credentials of the new Macs - and their ridiculous information-free performance graphs and speed comparisons deserve every bit of ridicule they've got from Linus, Snazzylabs etc. But, heck, Tuesday's video was always going to be an advert and not something to be watched without a sick bucket to hand.

Some very good points here. Still pretty surprised that many people miss that these are the low tier models and the beefier M chips for the more powerful Macs are still being tested and developed. I thought the two year transition phase was quite clear at WWDC, and after this event when you looked in the online store. It's pretty clear these M1 chips have a 16gb RAM ceiling and they are meant to replace machines with 16gb max.

I LOL'd at your last paragraph (You nailed it: The extra super duper jargon was piled quite high during event. I chuckled more than once.)

That said, I ordered an M1 MBA as I need a Laptop now and am fine with a low tier model for my needs and current wants. I intend to purchase an M chip desktop to replace my aging 2013 27" iMac when those more powerful systems are released next year or in 2022.

One thing this transition did for me is make me super excited to use Macs again and expand upon my creativity. I want some oomph in the Air, I can wait for the massive oomph later.

Big whoop my Air will be replaced in 12-18 months. Something better always comes along. I'll enjoy my Air now, and not worry about what's next for the Macbook Air.

Linus is Linus. Doesn't effect my purchases or enjoyment. While I like and respect Dave, I will just enjoy what I have to the fullest.

 

[Falhófnir]

If they mean the next Air/Pro/mini models will be 'twice as fast' as was common in the early days of iOS chips, I have my doubts. I think it's far more likely they will continue the current roughly linear increase they've had going for a while (indicated by the diminishing %age increase each year). Performance is still improving at a faster pace than Intel or AMD, but it's no longer an obsolete everything that's gone before on a yearly basis pace of improvement.

 

[Tafkaeken]

I am not really as certain that the M1 is "just an entry level chip". I think Apple isn't really planning to use the CPU as the big differing factor like it is with intel, specially not for single core.

Of course they plan more cores and "after burner" type of GPU boost for their Pro models but other than that I think that we already see much of the speed that is going to be in the 16 inch already. They can add some jumps in CPU power every year and still stay on top.

The big jump in the A-chips was some years ago, the A11 is still a very capable processor and I think that the future for M1 is looking pretty good.

 

[leman]

I am not really as certain that the M1 is "just an entry level chip". I think Apple isn't really planning to use the CPU as the big differing factor like it is with intel, specially not for single core.

I doubt that the bigger chips will be much faster in single core, but they will have more CPU and GU cores, more cache and faster RAM. That should be differentiating factor enough.

 

[Gerdi]

I doubt that the bigger chips will be much faster in single core, but they will have more CPU and GU cores, more cache and faster RAM. That should be differentiating factor enough.

Of course not. Apple would be stupid to not use the increased power headroom for more cores and instead increasing frequency - which has diminishing returns given the cubic power increase. In addition the contrary could be the case as we see with high performance server grade CPUs like XEONs and AMD EPYC - they are rather mediocre as far as single core is concerned.
And yet bigger chips will not replace the M1 ...as they go into different Mac models. A 25W SoC will not replace a 15W SoC...how could it?

 

[Ocnetgeek]

Its from Linus´s livestream where he talked with Dave Lee about the M1 and all the media around it.

They agreed that the M1 will defniately be smashed to the ground by something else next year, that the m1 will be obselete then. Can they be right about that? Linus compared it to the Apple Watch which apparently the first version got smashed by the second version by far.

But isnt it always like this? Every year comes a better mac, why are they so "defensive" about that or use it as critisism? Dont all companies do this? Strive to make something better every year?

Linus also ment that people who buy the new macs with the M1 will basically be beta-testers for apple.

Thoughts?

It more than likely will be surpassed by something even more powerful for the next class of users. The M1 is in the entry level devices. We are likely to see something more capable for power users next year but it will probably cost more as well. The M1 won't be obsolete but it won't be the newest/fastest Apple processor anymore

 

[EPO75]

There will be a m2 then a m3 and then a m4. Linus is trash, can’t believe people like watching him.

 

[Henk van Ess]

featherweight

we’ll see..

 

[ascender]

The M1 certainly won't become obsolete, but its a fair assumption that the Mx they put in the higher-end MacBook Pros and Mac Pro, will be way faster than the M1.

Remember, the machines based on the M1 chip are more powerful than any of the current lineup of MacBook Pros. That's utterly incredible. Assuming all of your software runs OK, your M1 machine is going to be good for a very long time.

 

[jdb8167]

I am not really as certain that the M1 is "just an entry level chip". I think Apple isn't really planning to use the CPU as the big differing factor like it is with intel, specially not for single core.

Of course they plan more cores and "after burner" type of GPU boost for their Pro models but other than that I think that we already see much of the speed that is going to be in the 16 inch already. They can add some jumps in CPU power every year and still stay on top.

The big jump in the A-chips was some years ago, the A11 is still a very capable processor and I think that the future for M1 is looking pretty good.

The M1 is low-end in IO. Only a single external display for the Air and Pro and only a second display for the mini with HDMI. Only up to 16 GB. Only 2 TB3/USB4 ports. These are a new type of low-end where the performance is top notch but the other features are somewhat lacking. Neither Intel nor AMD do this. Their low-end CPUs and SoCs also have less performance. It will be interesting to see if Apple changes the industry (again).

 

[RobbieTT]

Don't forget that 2TB ports can be a lot more than 2 peripherals. They chain for a reason and have a very impressive bandwidth to play with. A MacBook Air, with a powerful SoC and 2 full bandwidth TB3 ports - a blinking Air!

 

[LeeW]

If you don't buy a computer because next year's model will be better you will never buy one.

Which applies to most of the users on this site, they are always disappointed with any new releases and always going to wait until next year..

 

[Tafkaeken]

The M1 is low-end in IO. Only a single external display for the Air and Pro and only a second display for the mini with HDMI. Only up to 16 GB. Only 2 TB3/USB4 ports. These are a new type of low-end where the performance is top notch but the other features are somewhat lacking. Neither Intel nor AMD do this. Their low-end CPUs and SoCs also have less performance. It will be interesting to see if Apple changes the industry (again).

Yeah, I mean the discussions on this forum before the release of ARM Macs was about how they differentiate between the entry, mid and pro models and the consensus was that it would be A14-A14X-Low end Mac-high end Mac. Maybe Touch bar and better screens m.

The removal of ports, support for two external monitors and the fan as a possible moves wasn’t really discussed but it quite clear that the iPhone line up is what Apple have in mind for their Apple Silicon Macs. The CPU will not be the differentiator, they are going to more subtle things than that. They are going to do SEs and they are going to keep old models around as they do with iPhones keeping big range of Macs with storage and ram upgrades in between them encouraging up sales.

And we, we are gonna(learn to) love it.

 

[firewood]

The M1 is simply the 8086 from Apple..

The 8086 was Intel’s first 16-bit general purpose CPU. The A7 was Apple’s first in-house 64-bit design. The M1 and A14 are more like a 486 or P5 from Apple. Still lots of headroom between there and an i9.

 

[StellarVixen]

If you don't buy a computer because next year's model will be better you will never buy one.

I don’t see anything wrong in refusing to pay to beta test things for Apple.

 

[Realityck]

Its from Linus´s livestream where he talked with Dave Lee about the M1 and all the media around it.
They agreed that the M1 will defniately be smashed to the ground by something else next year, that the m1 will be obselete then.

Doesn't he tend to do that anyway (break things) on his shows to get more clicks? He smashes phones all the time.

 

[mr_roboto]

It is worth viewing some of the M1 developer videos before coming to that conclusion. There are a number of complex tasks, including rendering complex frames, that can be performed without the traditional push into and then out of system memory. M1 capabilities such as Memoryless Render Targets means we are going to have to re-learn what we think about system memory.

Remember, system RAM is just an expensive way of doing precisely nothing with a chunk of data - it is not something we should crave. The ideal RAM model, with the highest bandwidth (ie infinite) and the lowest latency (ie zero) is the RAM that is not needed in order to complete a complex CPU/GPU/NE task. The M1 gets us closer to that point.

Tech Talks - Videos - Apple Developer

developer.apple.com

I've ordered a Mac mini with 8GB of memory - it will provide considerable headroom. It has been many years since I could last say that. I also don't fully understand the M1 either and it has been quite a while since I said something like that too.

I do not recommend basing purchasing decisions on the assumption that M1 Macs need substantially less RAM than before. The reason M1 Macs have only 8GB and 16GB configs is not because Apple thinks 16GB is enough for anyone. It's because, no matter how fast it is, M1 is the new low-end Mac chip.

Apple has conspicuously avoided discontinuing Intel Minis and Intel MBP 13" models for now, because they're still needed. Anybody who needs more I/O or memory cannot get by with a M1 Mac.

Does M1 provide developers some opportunities to reduce system memory use? Sure. But nothing I've heard so far suggests it's the kind of revolutionary change which could mean that someone who needed 16GB before could get by with an 8GB M1 Mac.

You brought up memoryless render targets. You've misunderstood the focus: they're mostly about reducing the amount of memory bandwidth consumed during rendering. Sure, you also get a small reduction in system memory use, but the savings are modest. The buffers you don't have to allocate are on the order of tens of megabytes, not gigabytes. (The kind of buffer they're talking about is typically per-pixel data of some sort - color, alpha, stencil, etc. On a M1 Air or MBP Pro, a fullscreen pixel buffer is 2560x1600 pixels, which is about 4MP. It only takes 16MB to store a 4MP 32-bit RGBA frame buffer.)

TL,DR version: If you actually needed 16GB before M1, you are not likely to be happy with just 8 on M1.

 

[boss.king]

Linus is an Apple hater.

There’s no reason to think M1 will suddenly become obsolete. The M2 will probably be what, 20% faster in single core? If that makes the M1 obsolete then nearly every computer in existence is obsolete.

He really isn’t though. He’s laid on heavy praise for the original iPad Pro and apples shift to high refresh rates, he wears an Apple Watch, he uses AirPod Pros, he’s been very positive about many iPhones, and has repeatedly said that the MacBook Pro 16” and the Air are great machines.

There’s a difference between being a hater and simply criticising a company’s practices or its products very real flaws.

 

[LonestarOne]

@LonestarOne is using the normal definition of Pro. I think that is what Apple uses too. The notion that "Pro" means developers and power gamers is the unusual one actually

I’m pretty sure thenewperson was joking.

 

[LonestarOne]

I don't disagree that "pro" is a pretty meaningless marketing term but generally in the Mac world it refers to graphical/video/audio content creation.

I have no idea who Linus is or what he’s created other than angry YouTube videos. If I had to guess, I’d probably go with “not very much”.

You can create a talking-head video with a machine that is *much* less powerful than an M1 MacBook Pro. It might take you a bit longer, but it’s perfectly doable. If that’s the way he defines “pro”...

 

[LonestarOne]

There’s a difference between being a hater and simply criticising a company’s practices or its products very real flaws.

And there’s a difference between criticizing a product and acting like a bearded version of Bruce Banner on a bad day.

 

[raknor]

The removal of ports, support for two external monitors and the fan as a possible moves wasn’t really discussed but it quite clear that the iPhone line up is what Apple have in mind for their Apple Silicon Macs. The CPU will not be the differentiator, they are going to more subtle things than that. They are going to do SEs and they are going to keep old models around as they do with iPhones keeping big range of Macs with storage and ram upgrades in between them encouraging up sales.

And we, we are gonna(learn to) love it.

What ports were removed?

 

[raknor]

There’s a difference between being a hater and simply criticising a company’s practices or its products very real flaws.

If those criticisms make sense. I watched the video in question and he continued to make false statements and kept repeating them.

He makes a claim that Apple just mentioned i3 without a model number or even the system they went into in the foot notes. Repeats it as the reason for his angry video and how he doesn’t tolerate BS.

1. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2020 using preproduction Mac mini systems with Apple M1 chip, and production 3.6GHz quad-core Intel Core i3-based Mac mini systems, all configured with 16GB of RAM and 2TB SSD. Prerelease Final Cut Pro 10.5 tested using a 55-second clip with 4K Apple ProRes RAW media, at 4096x2160 resolution and 59.94 frames per second, transcoded to Apple ProRes 422. Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of Mac mini

1. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2020 using a preproduction Mac mini with Apple M1 chip, 8GB of memory, 256GB SSD and LG UltraFine 5K Display, and a shipping Mac mini with a quad‑core Intel Core i3 processor, 8GB of memory, 256GB SSD, and LG UltraFine 5K Display. Energy consumption was measured during wireless browsing of top websites.

All I can conclude is Linus is an idiot and illiterate or deliberately misleading to double down his false claims by trying to paint Apple as being dishonest. It is very clear what systems were compared. The only one being dishonest here is Linus in both his videos.

 

[dogslobber]

You gotta understand that Apple is a marketing company that uses that expertise to generate sales. Apple will always hobble the current gen in some ways to make the next model look even better. That's the rational about holding back some of the alleged tech gains from these ARM chips. Apple has a number of years to milk the ARM strategy to generate revenues as folks chase the bus. It's the similar strategy to how iPhone users are conditioned to upgrade on regular cycles. The new ARM Macs bring such conditioning to the Macs too and it's something which they couldn't enforce with Intel Macs.

 

[LonestarOne]

You gotta understand that Apple is a marketing company that uses that expertise to generate sales. Apple will always hobble the current gen in some ways to make the next model look even better.

To paraphrase Will Rogers, it’s not what you don’t understand that hurts you, it’s all the things you do understand that ain’t so.

Engineering is all about making choices. There is never enough time and money to do everything engineers would like to do. If they don’t give you everything your heart desires, it’s not because of some evil conspiracy. It’s because they decided (correctly or not) that it was more important to spend the resources on something else.