Will Apple offer fewer processor performance tiers in its Apple Silicon Macs?

[dmccloud]

The current configuration does give some RAM flexibility. While the RAM in the M1 is part of the overall package, it is on a separate die from that of the SoC chip (https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...o.2267256/page-31?post=29220991#post-29220991). This allows them to offer variable amounts of RAM without having to produce a new chip. It also has yield benefits, since failed RAM doesn't mean a failed SoC.

But perhaps by extensible you mean a 2nd tier of RAM that is off-package?

My guess is that the M2 (or whatever Apple names the SOC that goes into the Pro Macs) will have a larger die size, which will accommodate more RAM as well as more USB 4.0/Thunderbolt controllers to get those systems above the 2-port limit the M1 has. That processor could also have more CPU and GPU cores, it just depends on how large they make the overall die size for the SOC. Looking at iFixit's M1 teardowns for both the Air and Pro, there is a lot of room already on the logic boards to expand the SoCs footprint without compromising other components.

 

[theorist9]

My guess is that the M2 (or whatever Apple names the SOC that goes into the Pro Macs) will have a larger die size, which will accommodate more RAM as well as more USB 4.0/Thunderbolt controllers to get those systems above the 2-port limit the M1 has. That processor could also have more CPU and GPU cores, it just depends on how large they make the overall die size for the SOC. Looking at iFixit's M1 teardowns for both the Air and Pro, there is a lot of room already on the logic boards to expand the SoCs footprint without compromising other components.

Sure, and what you describe is just what I'd expect to see in the 16" MBP and iMac. [Though note that the "M2" SoC wouldn't need to accommodate more RAM, just more RAM channels since, again, the RAM is not on the SoC.]

But what JMacHack and I were discussing is how Apple might build a modular/upgradable Mac Pro with Apple Silicon, which requires a qualitatively different approach from that.

 

[pshufd]

I think we would see minimal fragmentation within the same product configuration:

​

	iPad Air	iPad Pro	MacBook Air	MacBook Pro 14"	MacBook Pro 16"
CPU	2P + 4E	4P + 4E	4P + 4E	8P + 4E	8P + 4E
GPU	4-Core	8-Core	8-Core	16-Core	24-Core
RAM	4 GB	8 GB (Hopefully)	8 GB / 16 GB	16 GB / 32 GB	16 GB / 32 GB / ...
Authentication	TouchID	FaceID	TouchID	FaceID	FaceID

Therefore:

• MacBook Air would basically have the iPad Pro SOC so that the device could be fanless as it should be, which would already be a performance level the current model cannot compare to.
• 14" & 16" MacBook Pro would have similar CPU performance with 16" having higher GPU option, thus providing small device option for those who do not need higher graphical performance.
• Assuming iPad Pro is already comparable to the likes of MacBook Pro 16", MacBook Pro with 8P+4E CPU will have no trouble providing higher performance than the current model. Graphics is still a mystery, though.
• I assumed Neural Engine would have the same number of cores across the same architecture. If it could be higher for higher end SOC, nobody's gonna say no, of course.
• I think the configuration option for each product would be much simpler to the point of only RAM & SSD being configurable.
• iMac Line up could simply get MacBook Pro options with thinner chassis, maybe slightly higher clocks, thus, Apple talking about saving the planet by reducing the power consumption while keeping the performance.

I'm all for the one on the right. I'd even pay for it right now for delivery by May 2021.

 

[aeronatis]

I'm all for the one on the right. I'd even pay for it right now for delivery by May 2021.

My earlier prediction could be a little wishful thinking though. It may be 14” getting 12 core GPU and 16” getting 16 core now that we see the performance of 8-core GPU on M1. ?

 

[Bearxor]

It’s a long thread so I might have missed it, I’m just expecting Apple to go multi-proc in their higher end config. Two M1 chips gets you 16 cores and 32GB of RAM and would be able to be done in a laptop even.

I’m not expecting this until M2 actually, but it seems like the best way for them to scale.

 

[pshufd]

It’s a long thread so I might have missed it, I’m just expecting Apple to go multi-proc in their higher end config. Two M1 chips gets you 16 cores and 32GB of RAM and would be able to be done in a laptop even.

I’m not expecting this until M2 actually, but it seems like the best way for them to scale.

I don't think that they have the crossbar support to do this but I could be wrong. The issue you have in multi-cpu systems is cache coherence and you need a high-speed interconnect between CPUs to manage this. This is why you need to go with Xeons in multi-CPU systems from Intel.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I still think it’s more likely that they will add cores. Even though that means the number of chips per wafer will be fewer, and, when you take inevitable failures into account, each chip will be more expensive, it’s not like they have to have millions upon millions of these. Out of the 18 million Macs sold every year, the MOST we’d be talking about 1,620,000. That’s if 9% of folks buying Macs bought them and my guess is that it’s far lower in the single percents than that.

 

[pshufd]

I still think it’s more likely that they will add cores. Even though that means the number of chips per wafer will be fewer, and, when you take inevitable failures into account, each chip will be more expensive, it’s not like they have to have millions upon millions of these. Out of the 18 million Macs sold every year, the MOST we’d be talking about 1,620,000. That’s if 9% of folks buying Macs bought them and my guess is that it’s far lower in the single percents than that.

Makes a lot more sense than multiple CPUs. It's the way AMD and Intel have gone outside of server systems.

 

[Bearxor]

I don't think that they have the crossbar support to do this but I could be wrong. The issue you have in multi-cpu systems is cache coherence and you need a high-speed interconnect between CPUs to manage this. This is why you need to go with Xeons in multi-CPU systems from Intel.

I don’t think any of us know enough about Apple’s architecture and future plans to really say for sure which, honestly, is the way Apple probably prefers it.

you’re not wrong about anything here and any multi-cup setup would likely suffer some performance hit when going between SoC’s, but given the early results from the M1 even if it was a 10% performance hit no one would really feel it.

Still not expecting this until at least WWDC though.

 

[pshufd]

I don’t think any of us know enough about Apple’s architecture and future plans to really say for sure which, honestly, is the way Apple probably prefers it.

you’re not wrong about anything here and any multi-cup setup would likely suffer some performance hit when going between SoC’s, but given the early results from the M1 even if it was a 10% performance hit no one would really feel it.

Still not expecting this until at least WWDC though.

I would expect that they already have the next chip done and may be waiting to see how well the M1 does. I am hoping that it blows away their expectations and they start making them in Q1 but it would take a while to build inventory and then do a launch. As I wrote earlier, promise me something by May and I'll pay for it right now. I'm sure that there are plenty of folks here that would buy their next big thing sight unseen.