Solved! ARM Apple High-End CPU - Intel replacement

Page 57 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Richie Rich

Senior member
Jul 28, 2019
470
229
76
There is a first rumor about Intel replacement in Apple products:
  • ARM based high-end CPU
  • 8 cores, no SMT
  • IPC +30% over Cortex A77
  • desktop performance (Core i7/Ryzen R7) with much lower power consumption
  • introduction with new gen MacBook Air in mid 2020 (considering also MacBook PRO and iMac)
  • massive AI accelerator

Source Coreteks:
 
Reactions: vspalanki
Solution
What an understatement And it looks like it doesn't want to die. Yet.


Yes, A13 is competitive against Intel chips but the emulation tax is about 2x. So given that A13 ~= Intel, for emulated x86 programs you'd get half the speed of an equivalent x86 machine. This is one of the reasons they haven't yet switched.

Another reason is that it would prevent the use of Windows on their machines, something some say is very important.

The level of ignorance in this thread would be shocking if it weren't depressing.
Let's state some basics:

(a) History. Apple has never let backward compatibility limit what they do. They are not Intel, they are not Windows. They don't sell perpetual compatibility as a feature. Christ, the big...

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,686
3,785
136
I wonder what power consumption is like for both at those clocks.

For the A14 its probably pretty good. It's on a 5nm process which can be thought of similar to a 28nm to a 20nm transition where it brings small gains in performance but large gains in density.

865+ probably uses more power than 865 but you can see from Renoir the products based on TSMC 7nm are pretty efficient.
 

soresu

Platinum Member
Dec 19, 2014
2,960
2,184
136
For the A14 its probably pretty good. It's on a 5nm process which can be thought of similar to a 28nm to a 20nm transition where it brings small gains in performance but large gains in density.
Depends which version of the 5nm process.

N7+ (EUV) to base N5 isn't much to write home about.

N5P though is definitely a decent jump from N7+ on all fronts - it should definitely provide enough for a doubling of cores per socket in Zen4 Genoa and Raphael.

I wonder whether we are likely to see 256 core implementations of N2/Zeus on 5nm, if N2 is based on X1 it should be a serious jump in performance.
 
Reactions: Tlh97 and Saylick

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,686
3,785
136
N7+ (EUV) to base N5 isn't much to write home about.

Limitation on modern processors(have been true since ~2005)are power.

Also N5 doesn't quite give 2x gains in density, rather at 80%. Realized gains will be even less since analog doesn't scale as well. SRAM is also far less at <30% density gains.
 

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,486
4,050
136
Depends which version of the 5nm process.

N7+ (EUV) to base N5 isn't much to write home about.

N5P though is definitely a decent jump from N7+ on all fronts - it should definitely provide enough for a doubling of cores per socket in Zen4 Genoa and Raphael.

I wonder whether we are likely to see 256 core implementations of N2/Zeus on 5nm, if N2 is based on X1 it should be a serious jump in performance.

N5P won't be available until next year, so we know for sure Apple will be using N5. Also Apple is not coming from N7+, the A13 was made on N7P.

According to TSMC, N5 gives you a 15% performance boost at the same power when compared to N7 (i.e. based on Apple's A12 clock rate, not A13)
 

ThatBuzzkiller

Golden Member
Nov 14, 2014
1,120
260
136
Since you obviously don’t know anything about Apple, I have some news for you. they have been a hardware company since 1976. they may not have designed their own chips, but they’re through and through a hardware company. I don’t have insight into the inner workings of Apple, but my guess is the majority of their engineers actually write software and don’t design hardware. This mythical change you talk about doesn’t exist, stop trying to make it a thing.

They were initially a hardware retailer which is still a far cry from what Apple is doing today by designing their own components. What do you not understand about this ? I think it's you that doesn't know of Apple's history but I don't blame you since everybody had forgotten about them before they entered into a dark age ...

Also most of the software people have left Apple because opportunities were largely drying up. This is all the software that they've been reduced to supporting (they don't even try anymore with Final Cut Pro) plus iOS/macOS, WebKit and Metal ...

Their entire bundle of 'professional' apps costs $200 meanwhile Microsoft's Visual Studio Professional monthly subscription costs $45 and god knows how much cash people fork over an for Adobe software license ...

What bugs are you referring to exactly? I use iOS and macOS for 10+ hours a day and haven’t noticed anything obvious. You spew all this BS and don’t back it up with concrete examples. I can do the same thing.

macOS would be a gold standard in software quality compared to what Microsoft has been pumping out lately ...

what now?

Did you just forget that Catalina dropped x86-32 support ? There's no telling what else will break in the future either once kernel extensions and OpenGL gets removed too ...

It seems like year after year without any low level code refactorings, Apple developers are somehow liable for these apps breaking ...
 

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,486
4,050
136
Did you just forget that Catalina dropped x86-32 support ? There's no telling what else will break in the future either once kernel extensions and OpenGL gets removed too ...

It seems like year after year without any low level code refactorings, Apple developers are somehow liable for these apps breaking ...

How is removing support for something a "bug"? It isn't like Apple does these things without letting developers know well in advance. Are we supposed to feel sorry for lazy developers who didn't want to recompile their code in x64? Pretty sure that all the issues related to dropping 32 bit x86 support was from old applications where the developer is no longer in business, or someone had an old version of an application where newer versions compiled for 64 bit were available but didn't want to pay for the upgrade. That's annoying, but it isn't a "bug".

Apple operates on a different model than Microsoft, which tries to support everything forever (well except if you got fooled into following them into MIPS, PPC, Alpha, IA64 or their first iteration of ARM support in Windows 8, where your code was orphaned. But so long as you do x86, you can keep selling the same DOS application you created 35 years ago, if there are people willing to pay for it.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,752
1,285
126
They were initially a hardware retailer which is still a far cry from what Apple is doing today by designing their own components. What do you not understand about this ? I think it's you that doesn't know of Apple's history but I don't blame you since everybody had forgotten about them before they entered into a dark age ...
Uh, you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

I guess you don’t realize that Apple essentially created the personal computer, designed by Steve Wozniak, and Apple was a founding member of ARM Holdings.
 

scannall

Golden Member
Jan 1, 2012
1,948
1,640
136
Uh, you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

I guess you don’t realize that Apple essentially created the personal computer, designed by Steve Wozniak, and Apple was a founding member of ARM Holdings.
He's just an anti-Apple troll. Best not to feed them. Or get them wet after midnight.
 
Reactions: Eug

soresu

Platinum Member
Dec 19, 2014
2,960
2,184
136
I guess you don’t realize that Apple essentially created the personal computer, designed by Steve Wozniak, and Apple was a founding member of ARM Holdings.
First off, Wozniak for all his immense contribution was all but marginalised to insignificance by Jobs - who acted as if all the wisdom and knowledge of the ages flowed from his own mind alone.

Second, Apple was 1 founding member among 3 of ARM - including the Acorn Computers from whom the original eponymous name of Acorn RISC Machines was derived before changing to Advanced RISC Machines.

Giving Apple undue credit for ARM is like giving the same credit to them for PowerPC when Apple were not their only customer or founder, and especially a pointless credit as they all but spurned ARM after Newton failed, which probably did as much damage to ARM then as Apple did to IMG Tec when they announced they were making their own gfx IP, which all but tanked the company leading to its present difficulties.

Had Intel not been so shortsighted over the sales possibilities in the smartphone market then ARM would probably not have reached where it is today, which is both a result of their being second choice to Intel, and also because of Samsung and the other Android smartphone vendors that followed close on Apple's heels after the iPhone launch.

A thing that people often do not grasp is that without competition you do not get great, sustained development of anything - this is just as true for business as it is in war (both cold and hot).

A lack of competition with the iPod led to it basically being abandoned despite advancements to the technology far surpassing the point of the final generation - and no the flash based iPods don't count, they took years to reach the same capacity as the final HDD based iPod Classic, calling the flash based products iPods despite their reduced capacity was all but insulting the intelligence of the consumer.

Without sufficient competition from AMD, Intel embraced hubris with their 10nm plans, leading to some of their current problems.

Without stiff competition to the iPhone from Android smartphone vendors Samsung, HTC etc etc Apple would probably not even have invested in a prolonged custom ARM core project for the Axx SoC, and likely we would not have the ultra high PPI displays used in modern VR headsets either, to say nothing of the various other technologies that benefited from the smartphone competition.
 
Reactions: KompuKare

ThatBuzzkiller

Golden Member
Nov 14, 2014
1,120
260
136
Uh, you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

I guess you don’t realize that Apple essentially created the personal computer, designed by Steve Wozniak, and Apple was a founding member of ARM Holdings.

They didn't create the "personal computer" that credit goes to Xerox's Alto system which went on to defining many of the features we see today in PCs ...

Apple was just another OEM for PCs ...
 

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
447
333
136
They didn't create the "personal computer" that credit goes to Xerox's Alto system which went on to defining many of the features we see today in PCs ...

Apple was just another OEM for PCs ...
Seriously?
Xerox? Not Altair? Not IBM? Not Apple (with the Apple II)? Not Commodore or Atari?
Not Zilog, or Intel, or Motorola, or MOS Technology?
Not Digital Research Inc?

I realize that it's an ill-posed question, and one can make an argument (a lousy argument, but an argument) that Xerox "created" the GUI; but claiming they invented the PC is a step way too far. Apple has a vastly better claim to that.

Hint: the personal computer began before 1984, and it even began before 1981.
 

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
447
333
136
Depends which version of the 5nm process.

N7+ (EUV) to base N5 isn't much to write home about.

N5P though is definitely a decent jump from N7+ on all fronts - it should definitely provide enough for a doubling of cores per socket in Zen4 Genoa and Raphael.

I wonder whether we are likely to see 256 core implementations of N2/Zeus on 5nm, if N2 is based on X1 it should be a serious jump in performance.

Since no-one has shipped a 5nm device, dismissing it out of hand seems somewhat premature...
 

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
447
333
136
I've seen you on twitter before and you have a long history of being an Apple apologist so I wonder if it's even worth continuing this discussion ...

You asked how I imagine Parallels could support a virtualized x86 OS on new macs. I told you. Your response is, rather than engaging with my answer, to attack me.
That seems like behavior that will not have many other people engaging with you when you ask for technical details. Seems like my first impulse, where I said I couldn't be bothered to give details because you wouldn't understand or appreciate them was correct.
 

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
447
333
136
The Apple A14 is also supposed to break the 3GHz mark. Actually, its the same as 865+ with 3.1GHz clocks.

Reference for "The Apple A14 is also supposed to break the 3GHz mark"?

This strikes me as a dubious claim. I'd expect something closer to 2.85GHz.
The desktop versions of the A14 might go over 3GHz, but I don't see the performance/power tradeoff as worth it for Apple's design philosophy and mobile targets.
 

raystriker

Junior Member
Jun 8, 2019
4
0
11
Is there good reason to assume A14 will be the next big thing on the macbooks? Couldn't apple go with something much more larger with reasonable clockspeeds given that laptops have much more thermal headroom?
 

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
447
333
136
They were initially a hardware retailer which is still a far cry from what Apple is doing today by designing their own components. What do you not understand about this ? I think it's you that doesn't know of Apple's history but I don't blame you since everybody had forgotten about them before they entered into a dark age ...

Uh, I'm sorry, wot?
WTF are you claiming? Apple was initially a hardware retailer? Reselling what?
Are you seriously not aware of the various stories around the Apple 1 and Apple II? The design of the floppy drive? The hack to create color on alternate pixels?

At every stage of the game Apple has done HW their own way, not "the standard" way.
NuBus. Open firmware. Apple Hydra. Geoport. AppleTalk (the original hardware).
A whole lot of internal stuff you'll never have heard of because it was never released, like High Sparkle.
Ever heard of this guy:
(and guess who wrote that QuickTime MPEG Extension that replaced it...)
The list goes on and on.
 

JasonLD

Senior member
Aug 22, 2017
486
447
136
Is there good reason to assume A14 will be the next big thing on the macbooks? Couldn't apple go with something much more larger with reasonable clockspeeds given that laptops have much more thermal headroom?

If Apple Silicon for Macs are fabricated on 5nm, it is very likely that it will be based on A14 cores. Most assume it will feature more cores + higher clockspeed.
I think top configuration Macbook will have 8+4 with clockspeed of 3Ghz+.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,752
1,285
126
If Apple Silicon for Macs are fabricated on 5nm, it is very likely that it will be based on A14 cores. Most assume it will feature more cores + higher clockspeed.
I still suspect that the entry level MacBooks/MacBook Airs could have the same number of cores as iPhones, although they could be a bit higher clocked (or not).

If say A14 has a similar design to A13 with approximately a 15% performance boost, then 2+4 would work just fine. In that context, I just don't see the need to put more performance cores in a MacBook or MacBook Air. A non-X A14 chip in a MacBook even at stock iPhone clock speed would still beat most laptops out there in CPU performance, and could do it fanless, no less.

Remember, these are often student / mom / writer / exec laptops, running Safari + Chrome + Mail + iMessage + Calendar + iWork or MS Office, etc. You don't need workstation performance. Even A12 is fast enough for this. Hell, I'm using an A10X iPad Pro every day and the only time I notice a slowdown is when I'm editing native 4K h.265 HEVC video.

And you wouldn't need a discrete GPU either. The iGPU would work just fine.

I think top configuration Macbook will have 8+4 with clockspeed of 3Ghz+.
I assume you are talking about MacBook Pros here, not MacBooks.

That sounds more like a high end iMac part to me. I'd wonder if it's too hot for a 16" MacBook Pro... unless Apple decides to release yet another MacBook Pro vacuum cleaner.
 
Last edited:

JasonLD

Senior member
Aug 22, 2017
486
447
136
I assume you are talking about MacBook Pros here, not MacBooks.

That sounds more like a high end iMac part to me. I'd wonder if it's too hot for a 16" MacBook Pro... unless Apple decides to release yet another MacBook Pro vacuum cleaner.

Yes, Macbook Pros (Or whatever name they come up for Apple Silicon laptops). I expect next Apple Silicon 16" laptop will have something like 65W SoC instead of CPU + dGPU. With reasonable clockspeed, 8+4 seems possible on 5nm with 4~5 times higher TDP than iPad SoC.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,752
1,285
126
Yes, Macbook Pros (Or whatever name they come up for Apple Silicon laptops). I expect next Apple Silicon 16" laptop will have something like 65W SoC instead of CPU + dGPU. With reasonable clockspeed, 8+4 seems possible on 5nm with 4~5 times higher TDP than iPad SoC.
Apple's current fastest laptop uses a 45 W chip. And it's loud.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |