What kind of improvements on performance might happen each year?

[mclld]

I am going to replace my aging desktop I suppose. I don't really even use it anymore, usually just use my ipad and Chromebook but these m1 mac's really have my interests piqued. Even if I was to buy one now I have no doubt I would be more than happy but I am in no rush so I am considering maybe waiting until gen 2. What kind of realistic increases should we expect in a gen 2 v gen 1?


I am leaving towards the mini but might consider the air due to portability.

 

[Einz]

Probably about the same as the iPhone A-series chips from year to year.

 

[Pressure]

This is the improvements made in single threaded performance over time for the Apple A-series chips used in iPhones and iPads. The M1 gets 69 in the same test. It's overlaid with Intels, ehm, improvements over the last 6 years.

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

I think the only main reason at this point to wait for a generation 2 (Or the forthcomming Pro machines), is if you need to drive more than one external display, or that you need a much beefier GPU. The M1 is more than sufficient in all other tasks. This is not like the old days, where one could always use more speed, because we already have that for most tasks.

 

[alexjholland]

This is the improvements made in single threaded performance over time for the Apple A-series chips used in iPhones and iPads. The M1 gets 69 in the same test. It's overlaid with Intels, ehm, improvements over the last 6 years.

That's a hell of an answer.

I love it when someone delivers the objective goods.

Aside from 'faster', the sheer consistently of Apple stands out.

If I was looking for a chip vendor, then - obviously - Apple would be the reliable choice.

How ironic that Apple don't even sell their chips!

 

[alexjholland]

And the point seems to be that the M1 isn't actually that 'new', right?

We're dealing with a proven processor.

In that sense, a lot of the benefits should be related to vendors transitioning their software over from X86 to Apple Silicon. And that's a benefit that M1 users can enjoy for years to come?

 

[ArPe]

This is the improvements made in single threaded performance over time for the Apple A-series chips used in iPhones and iPads. The M1 gets 69 in the same test. It's overlaid with Intels, ehm, improvements over the last 6 years.

Ah but those K series chips were designed to be overclocked by another +/- 300 Mhz and give an extra 10 percent performance boost overall. Power consumption obviously rises.

 

[Yebubbleman]

I am going to replace my aging desktop I suppose. I don't really even use it anymore, usually just use my ipad and Chromebook but these m1 mac's really have my interests piqued. Even if I was to buy one now I have no doubt I would be more than happy but I am in no rush so I am considering maybe waiting until gen 2. What kind of realistic increases should we expect in a gen 2 v gen 1?


I am leaving towards the mini but might consider the air due to portability.

Nothing Earth-shattering compared to M1. Apple's 2021 SoCs will still be on 5nm. It'll likely be more noticeable than the difference between a 2016 MacBook Pro and a 2017 MacBook Pro, but it still won't be as crazy as the jump from 8th Gen Intel to M1 (in the case of the 2-port 13" MacBook Pro and the Mac mini) or the one from 10th Gen Intel Y series processors to the M1 (in the case of the Air). But I'd look to previous Apple SoC advances (on the iPhone and iPads) as your indication of their level of advancement. Certainly, they're moving at a much faster pace than Intel is.

That's a hell of an answer.

I love it when someone delivers the objective goods.

Aside from 'faster', the sheer consistently of Apple stands out.

If I was looking for a chip vendor, then - obviously - Apple would be the reliable choice.

How ironic that Apple don't even sell their chips!

The reason why you think Apple is a good chip vendor is ironically the same reason that they won't sell their chips outside of their products. The vertical integration between their chips and their OSes are what makes their chips truly performant. That's not to say that they don't currently have an edge over Qualcomm, because they do, but that gap is only as wide as it is because Apple is optimizing their chips for their OSes.

That said, as appealing as the fantasy is of Apple becoming a dominant player in ARM SoCs, know that the fantasy would quickly fall apart in practice.

And the point seems to be that the M1 isn't actually that 'new', right?

We're dealing with a proven processor.

No. Just because Apple Silicon isn't new doesn't mean that M1 also isn't new. M1 is VERY new. You could make the case that it's related to the 4th Generation iPad Air and the iPhone 12 series of iPhones, but that's about its closest set of relatives. Otherwise, it's VERY new and hasn't been proven outside of the Macs that currently ship with it.

In that sense, a lot of the benefits should be related to vendors transitioning their software over from X86 to Apple Silicon. And that's a benefit that M1 users can enjoy for years to come?

If you're looking at macOS as being the same as iOS and iPadOS, then, sure. But macOS has been architecture independent since Mac OS X 10.0 (hence how Apple was able to make iOS in the first place). So, I don't see how M1 changes anything there. AT BEST, you can make the case that it will be easier for developers to leverage catalyst to make decent Mac apps from their iOS and iPadOS apps, but M1 doesn't change anything there either.

It's too easy to get lost in the marketing hype about M1. Right now, it's speed and power efficiency are impressive. But that's it.