Discussion Apple Silicon SoC thread

[Eug]

M1
5 nm
Unified memory architecture - LP-DDR4
16 billion transistors

8-core CPU

4 high-performance cores
192 KB instruction cache
128 KB data cache
Shared 12 MB L2 cache

4 high-efficiency cores
128 KB instruction cache
64 KB data cache
Shared 4 MB L2 cache
(Apple claims the 4 high-effiency cores alone perform like a dual-core Intel MacBook Air)

8-core iGPU (but there is a 7-core variant, likely with one inactive core)
128 execution units
Up to 24576 concurrent threads
2.6 Teraflops
82 Gigatexels/s
41 gigapixels/s

16-core neural engine
Secure Enclave
USB 4

Products:
$999 ($899 edu) 13" MacBook Air (fanless) - 18 hour video playback battery life
$699 Mac mini (with fan)
$1299 ($1199 edu) 13" MacBook Pro (with fan) - 20 hour video playback battery life

Memory options 8 GB and 16 GB. No 32 GB option (unless you go Intel).

It should be noted that the M1 chip in these three Macs is the same (aside from GPU core number). Basically, Apple is taking the same approach which these chips as they do the iPhones and iPads. Just one SKU (excluding the X variants), which is the same across all iDevices (aside from maybe slight clock speed differences occasionally).

EDIT:



M1 Pro 8-core CPU (6+2), 14-core GPU
M1 Pro 10-core CPU (8+2), 14-core GPU
M1 Pro 10-core CPU (8+2), 16-core GPU
M1 Max 10-core CPU (8+2), 24-core GPU
M1 Max 10-core CPU (8+2), 32-core GPU

M1 Pro and M1 Max discussion here:

Page 78 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 78 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

M1 Ultra discussion here:

Page 109 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 109 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

M2 discussion here:

Page 127 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 127 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

Second Generation 5 nm
Unified memory architecture - LPDDR5, up to 24 GB and 100 GB/s
20 billion transistors

8-core CPU

4 high-performance cores
192 KB instruction cache
128 KB data cache
Shared 16 MB L2 cache

4 high-efficiency cores
128 KB instruction cache
64 KB data cache
Shared 4 MB L2 cache

10-core iGPU (but there is an 8-core variant)
3.6 Teraflops

16-core neural engine
Secure Enclave
USB 4

Hardware acceleration for 8K h.264, h.264, ProRes

M3 Family discussion here:

Page 215 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 215 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

M4 Family discussion here:

Page 263 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 263 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

 

[Doug S]

They do not. That is just made up nonsense from the internet. It's reported that Apple took out it's architecture license in 2008, after they purchased PA Semi back in 2008. This is years after Apple sold all their ARM stock.

In the real world when you sell your stake in a company, you aren't entitled to free access to all future tech that company ever develops.

People with close ties to the industry claim otherwise - it is not just "nonsense from the internet". I trust their word over yours. Anyway it is not "free access to all future tech", it is reportedly an architectural license that has no end date so the terms cannot be changed. They are paying royalties, it is not a free ride.

If there was a chance that Apple would be affected by what is going on at ARM they wouldn't be sitting on the sidelines and ignoring this.

 

[Heartbreaker]

People with close ties to the industry claim otherwise - it is not just "nonsense from the internet". I trust their word over yours. Anyway it is not "free access to all future tech", it is reportedly an architectural license that has no end date so the terms cannot be changed. They are paying royalties, it is not a free ride.

If there was a chance that Apple would be affected by what is going on at ARM they wouldn't be sitting on the sidelines and ignoring this.

Naturally you can back that up with a link to statements from these "People"?

As I wrote, Apple apparently took out a standard Architecture License in 2008, after they bought PA Semi and started having ARM design aspirations.

Apple seen as likely new ARM licensee

Chipmaker says "a leading handset OEM" has signed up for a far-reaching architectural license to the company's mobile-chip designs, following Apple's acquisition of P.A. Semi.

www.cnet.com

(From 2008):
ARM Chief Executive Warren East revealed on an earnings conference call on Wednesday that "a leading handset OEM," or original equipment manufacturer, has signed an architectural license with the company, forming ARM's most far-reaching license for its processor cores.

East declined to elaborate on ARM's new partner, but EETimes' Peter Clarke could think of only one smartphone maker who would be that interested in shaping and controlling the direction of the silicon inside its phones: Apple.

That makes a heck of lot more sense than some internet myth of the Newton era license.

Back when the 2008 license was being discussed, I never saw any Tech journalist mention the Internet Myth that Apple already had a license from back in the 90's when they worked on Newton.

 

[poke01]

Apple is not at all affected by what happens to ARM. Qualcomm will be.

 

[Ajay]

Naturally you can back that up with a link to statements from these "People"?

As I wrote, Apple apparently took out a standard Architecture License in 2008, after they bought PA Semi and started having ARM design aspirations.

Apple seen as likely new ARM licensee

Chipmaker says "a leading handset OEM" has signed up for a far-reaching architectural license to the company's mobile-chip designs, following Apple's acquisition of P.A. Semi.

www.cnet.com

That makes a heck of lot more sense than some internet myth of the Newton era license.

Back when the 2008 license was being discussed, I never saw any Tech journalist mention the Internet Myth that Apple already had a license from back in the 90's when they worked on Newton.

Unless I’ve gone blind, Doug didn’t say anything about an Apple license from the 90s.

 

[jpiniero]

If there was a chance that Apple would be affected by what is going on at ARM they wouldn't be sitting on the sidelines and ignoring this.

Definately possible that they were already going down the road of dumping ARM because of the nVidia deal.

 

[Heartbreaker]

Unless I’ve gone blind, Doug didn’t say anything about an Apple license from the 90s.

This is an often repeated Internet Myth. Almost every time the topic of Apple ARM license comes up, someone will chime in that they "heard" (but no one can ever provide an actual reference) Apple had a special "founders" license. The "founders" part refers to the time Apple worked with ARM (even had a part in spinning it out as an independent company in 1990) to build the Newton, and he clearly referred to that.

Apple has a permanent "founders" architectural license.

If the "founders" part refers do something other than those early ARM days in the 90's, I'm not sure what it could be...

The funny thing is I don't think anyone ever mentioned this "Founders" license until after Apple started designing it's own CPU cores, after 2012.

It's just a retconned internet myth that seemed like an interesting idea to someone (who really doesn't understand product licensing) and then it got repeated with no real sourcing.

Which is why when you ask people to provide a source, they have nothing, because most likely, they just read some other random person on a forum say something similar...

There is every indication that Apple took out a standard Architecture License in 2008, long after many other ARM players already did the same, and delivered its first custom chip (A6) based on that license in 2012.

 

[smalM]

What is a standard Architecture License?
No, not that "you can design your own CPU core" stuff.
What are the terms?

 

[Heartbreaker]

What is a standard Architecture License?
No, not that "you can design your own CPU core" stuff.
What are the terms?

The actual contracts are going to be private. The best detail of ARM licensing I have seen was in this old AT story:

The ARM Diaries, Part 1: How ARM’s Business Model Works

www.anandtech.com

 

[smalM]

So you're all discussing something we do know nothing about?

 

[oak8292]

This is an often repeated Internet Myth. Almost every time the topic of Apple ARM license comes up, someone will chime in that they "heard" (but no one can ever provide an actual reference) Apple had a special "founders" license. The "founders" part refers to the time Apple worked with ARM (even had a part in spinning it out as an independent company in 1990) to build the Newton, and he clearly referred to that.



If the "founders" part refers do something other than those early ARM days in the 90's, I'm not sure what it could be...

The funny thing is I don't think anyone ever mentioned this "Founders" license until after Apple started designing it's own CPU cores, after 2012.

It's just a retconned internet myth that seemed like an interesting idea to someone (who really doesn't understand product licensing) and then it got repeated with no real sourcing.

Which is why when you ask people to provide a source, they have nothing, because most likely, they just read some other random person on a forum say something similar...

There is every indication that Apple took out a standard Architecture License in 2008, long after many other ARM players already did the same, and delivered its first custom chip (A6) based on that license in 2012.

I am pretty certain they do have a ‘founders‘ IP agreement. How much it is worth and what ‘rights’ it gives them in licensing is a separate issue.

Arm was founded with 1.5 million pounds in cash from Apple, 250 thousand pounds in cash from VLSI and ARM brought only the IP valued at 1.5 million pounds from Acorn. The business was set up from day one to license IP. Would Apple put up cash to set up the business without getting a license for the IP and would they have put an end date on access to the IP? Obviously the IP has grown and changed a lot since the early days ARM but that just affects the terms of the license and that will continue to get renegotiated. All we can do is speculate on what is in contracts that we will never see but my bet is that Apple does have a ‘perpetual’ license at least for the base IP.

 

[Heartbreaker]

I am pretty certain they do have a ‘founders‘ IP agreement.

You shouldn't have certainty based on ZERO evidence.

There were investors in ARM. Investing in a company doesn't give you any rights to their IP, let alone rights that last forever.

 

[Mopetar]

I don't think Apple has any kind of special deal. I recall some articles around when they first got into making their own chips about them getting a different kind of license in order to do a custom silicon design as opposed to just licensing the stock ARM cores.

It would also be weird for them to get any kind of special rights to an ISA version released decades after the founding of the company at a point when Apple had divested and sold off any of their ownership.

Even if they still owned a lot of ARM they'd just license under the same standard terms that ARM would give anyone else. It wouldn't matter since Apple would effectively just be paying themselves at that point. Never mind the legal complications surrounding special licensing deals.

 

[soresu]

Not Apple, but ARM related.....

Found this while trolling Google for hints on ARM's future Neoverse roadmap:


I'm assuming "built on Poseidon" means that V4/Aphrodite is based on the same µArchitecture design team lineage (likely Sophia Antipolis).

Here's the link if you can do better than Google Translate for the text.

 

[soresu]

Found another nugget of information from the same website about Cortex X5, which apparently is codenamed Logan (and not Chaberton-ELP) according to their information:


This seems to imply that unlike X1 -> X4 it will not just be the Chaberton/Cortex A730 µArch with more resources, but another CPU µArch designed from the ground up primarily for performance.

A true divergence between the mid and high end of ARM CPU design.

Here's the link for the website again.

 

[soresu]

If this information is correct then the delays of the new ground up µArch work from Sophia Antipolis makes a lot more sense as it sounds like possibly 2 new ground up µArchs at once, possibly from different teams.

Hunter/A720 might be Sophia, and Logan/X5 might be Austin once more.

Excited to see how this plays out 🤘🏼😎

Edlt: Less confident now that Poseidon is X4 based 🤔

X5 makes a lot more sense as Demeter/V2 seems to be X3 based, likely giving a low improvement from V2 -> V3 relative to V1 -> V2 if V3 is only X4 based.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Apple suspended M2 chip production for two months over weak Mac sales

South Korean publication The Elec reports that Apple froze production of its M2 series of SoCs in January and February due to lower than anticipated MacBook demand....

www.techspot.com

Weak sales? Nothing to do with paltry entry level specs of 8GB/256GB for the pretty high price, right, Apple? Or is the cheaper M1 MBA making people choose wisely?

 

[igor_kavinski]

Interesting read for the technically inclined: https://dougallj.wordpress.com/2022/11/09/why-is-rosetta-2-fast/

 

[A///]

Apple suspended M2 chip production for two months over weak Mac sales

South Korean publication The Elec reports that Apple froze production of its M2 series of SoCs in January and February due to lower than anticipated MacBook demand....

www.techspot.com

Weak sales? Nothing to do with paltry entry level specs of 8GB/256GB for the pretty high price, right, Apple? Or is the cheaper M1 MBA making people choose wisely?

Nah apple's been cheap with specs forever since jobs made a comeback. their loyal customers are accustomed to being shafted. them cutting back also means they can s upport a higher asp. Sales are low because everyone got a new computer over the last 2-3 years. Even apple can't pull their usual bs to convince people to buy the new hardware. The m2 is middling upgrade over the m1. you don't miss out on anything substantial by opting for an older model right now unless you need something only available on m2 equipped units. the m3 should be a lot more substantial and have a bite to it to keep the x86 world on its toes even though they apple don't matter anymore to most consumers if they don't have an interest in using apple products and because apple doesn't sell its soc to third parties.

 

[soresu]

Nah apple's been cheap with specs forever since jobs made a comeback. their loyal customers are accustomed to being shafted. them cutting back also means they can s upport a higher asp. Sales are low because everyone got a new computer over the last 2-3 years. Even apple can't pull their usual bs to convince people to buy the new hardware. The m2 is middling upgrade over the m1. you don't miss out on anything substantial by opting for an older model right now unless you need something only available on m2 equipped units. the m3 should be a lot more substantial and have a bite to it to keep the x86 world on its toes even though they apple don't matter anymore to most consumers if they don't have an interest in using apple products and because apple doesn't sell its soc to third parties.

I think that the average PC owning crowd doesn't upgrade as often as people were upgrading smartphones in the early 2010s.

They may have overestimated the demand hoping for early smartphone era annual repeat sales

 

[A///]

I think that the average PC owning crowd doesn't upgrade as often as people were upgrading smartphones in the early 2010s.

They may have overestimated the demand hoping for early smartphone era annual repeat sales

apple? Possibly but even apple was feeling the brunt of people not wanting to upgrade going back as the iphone 6s. It became less compelling to do an upgrade every year or two years. IDK how long Apple can sustain their own designs that give them a competitive edge. It's very hard to say on the pc side of things. The decade of intel slipping a finger in their customers and fooling around came to end with Ryzen as it matured. x86 development isn't as rapid as it once was, I'm not sure it'll get there again or if it does or if it beats those days.

I won't be like certain members spelling the death of Intel or AMD now or ever in the future.You don't want to be a codger and saying stuff like that. you're only inviting one or the other to keep upping the price and ripping you off.

 

[Mopetar]

Apple just needs to slowly grow their base as people stretch out upgrades over longer time periods. Make and support a product that people can use for 8 years and in a decade when they finally need a new one they'll be happy to buy from you again.

 

[A///]

as people stretch out upgrades over longer time periods.

can use for 8 years and in a decade when they finally need a new one they'll be happy to buy from you again.

Did you forget who Apple were?

edit: because I may find myself busy today at the watering hole the reason I said this was apple's typical support window is roughly 5 years, after which you need a new device to keep getting macos or ios updates including new versons. furthermore ever since apple debuted the m1 and son on much of he computer has been allocated to a single area. People can stretch what they want but they'll find themselves at risk.

 

[Doug S]

Did you forget who Apple were?

edit: because I may find myself busy today at the watering hole the reason I said this was apple's typical support window is roughly 5 years, after which you need a new device to keep getting macos or ios updates including new versons. furthermore ever since apple debuted the m1 and son on much of he computer has been allocated to a single area. People can stretch what they want but they'll find themselves at risk.

They do it with phones, why not with Macs? The 9 1/2 year old 5S got an iOS security patch a couple months ago.

 

[A///]

They do it with phones, why not with Macs? The 9 1/2 year old 5S got an iOS security patch a couple months ago.

They did, but a security update isn't the same as bringing new features and abilities like you would an os upgrade. Microsoft still pushes msrts to outdated unsupported system.

 

[Eug]

Did you forget who Apple were?

edit: because I may find myself busy today at the watering hole the reason I said this was apple's typical support window is roughly 5 years, after which you need a new device to keep getting macos or ios updates including new versons. furthermore ever since apple debuted the m1 and son on much of he computer has been allocated to a single area. People can stretch what they want but they'll find themselves at risk.

Apple provides security and browser updates for 2 years after macOS feature updates stop. So, there is a minimum support period of seven years before the Macs are at risk in terms of security, but sometimes it is longer.