Question Apple Silicon M series thread

Page 126 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
3,303
4,537
136
Apple Silicon Macs are definitely expanding the quantity of Macs in the market (and doing more so since they are cheaper than comparable Intel Macs). The big question is how much of that's already replacing Intel Macs or rather on top of those.
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
11,218
5,033
136
I lost track of the multiple replies where people were speculating is mac sales going to go up as part of the marketshare of all computers. Well this post did not answer this but Apple just did its Q2 numbers just a few hours ago and this happened.
  • Mac revenue: $10.44 billion vs. $9.25 billion estimated, up 14.73% year-over-year
Aka in a non Holiday quarter we are now talking 10 billions in sales (not profits) for the macs.

Aka look at the long term trend of the Mac Revenue (graph below does not included the most recent numbers it is 3 months old.

Aka prior to the pandemic and prior to the M1 switch total sales were 5 billion to 7.5 billion per quarter with Q1 (aka the Holiday quarters) being in the low 7ish range. Now after the pandemic and after the M1 switch over we are seeing higher sales 10.85 billion in revenue 3 months ago and now 10.44 billion when last year we were dealing in the 8s to low 9s range all year and even lower than that in the 7s to 8s with 2020.

Something changed with sales even if I can't prove it is the M1.

Edit: we have m1 products in the last 6 quarters of the below image, and the most recent numbers make 7, but not ever type of product in the line has not had a m1 equivalent until now (still missing a Cheese grater though the Mac Studio is close to many of the use cases.)
Looks like buyers are finding more value in M1 Macs!
 

Doug S

Golden Member
Feb 8, 2020
1,110
1,655
106
According to CFO Luca Maestri during today's earnings call, half of all Mac buyers during the past quarter were new to the Mac.

So obviously this is more than just pent up demand for upgrades from x86 Mac users. Still, we have to put this in perspective - the Mac was about 7% of worldwide PC sales. If it grows by 50%, it is only 10.5%, so I doubt Intel and Microsoft are sweating bullets over this.
 

Roland00Address

Platinum Member
Dec 17, 2008
2,099
208
106
According to CFO Luca Maestri during today's earnings call, half of all Mac buyers during the past quarter were new to the Mac.

So obviously this is more than just pent up demand for upgrades from x86 Mac users. Still, we have to put this in perspective - the Mac was about 7% of worldwide PC sales. If it grows by 50%, it is only 10.5%, so I doubt Intel and Microsoft are sweating bullets over this.
Agreed I am not saying there is any form of panic or extreme anxiety from Intel or Microsoft. Their business will be fine even if they do not like the result and there is “discomfort” and low level of anxiety (which I see as healthy in a competitive business.)

If I were to project and guess who would be the most scarred it would be the laptop OEMs like HP and Dell. Higher ASP laptops is one of the ways they actually make money and losing any customers here, for any reason, is not good for their business.
 

guidryp

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2006
2,049
2,285
136
Microsoft will just shift with the wind. The Intel Panic will come with the Qualcomm Nuvia based PC chip.

During the call Amon provided an update on the integration of the Nuvia team, and progress in their goal of developing a big-leap-forward for Arm processors. Amon commented upon the timescale in which we should expect to see Nuvia powered Windows laptops on retail shelves, indicating things are currently on track for late 2023.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpudLobby

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,250
730
126
According to CFO Luca Maestri during today's earnings call, half of all Mac buyers during the past quarter were new to the Mac.

So obviously this is more than just pent up demand for upgrades from x86 Mac users. Still, we have to put this in perspective - the Mac was about 7% of worldwide PC sales. If it grows by 50%, it is only 10.5%, so I doubt Intel and Microsoft are sweating bullets over this.
Intel would be foolish not to be concerned. With the combination of Apple, Qualcomm, AMD, and TMSC firing on all cylinders, there is plenty for Intel to be concerned about.

Will Intel lose all their marketshare in 5 years? No, of course not, but Intel is starting to get the reputation of a company in decline, and for good reason.
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
11,218
5,033
136
According to CFO Luca Maestri during today's earnings call, half of all Mac buyers during the past quarter were new to the Mac.

So obviously this is more than just pent up demand for upgrades from x86 Mac users. Still, we have to put this in perspective - the Mac was about 7% of worldwide PC sales. If it grows by 50%, it is only 10.5%, so I doubt Intel and Microsoft are sweating bullets over this.
I don’t see an impediment to M1/2 Mac sales increasing once MS is freed from their exclusivity contract with Qualcomm. Windows on ARM will open the door to better performance on M series Macs and provide an opportunity to keep using the Windows Apps that they need. Also, going forward, more and more apps will become native on the M series Macs (as opposed to using Rosetta) and further increase their attractiveness. IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: therealmongo

Doug S

Golden Member
Feb 8, 2020
1,110
1,655
106
I don’t see an impediment to M1/2 Mac sales increasing once MS is freed from their exclusivity contract with Qualcomm. Windows on ARM will open the door to better performance on M series Macs and provide an opportunity to keep using the Windows Apps that they need. Also, going forward, more and more apps will become native on the M series Macs (as opposed to using Rosetta) and further increase their attractiveness. IMHO.

Do we know when the Qualcomm exclusivity ends, and that it won't be renewed?

Qualcomm might wish to keep it in place, wanting to maintain a monopoly on Windows/ARM to help the launch of their Nuvia based PCs in late 2023/early 2024. Not because they are worried about Apple, but to prevent the creation of a real Windows/ARM market, only to have Chinese competitors come in and take the entire lower end of a market before they can become established as the new "Intel inside".

If they are paid enough Microsoft would be willing to continue it, and if it leaves Macs on an island unable to legally run Windows apps they certainly won't mind. Having someone paying all their costs for maintaining Windows/ARM removes all the risk on their part, and probably helps their relations with Intel and AMD who are eyeing the potential devaluation of their x86 duopoly a bit nervously.
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
11,218
5,033
136
Do we know when the Qualcomm exclusivity ends, and that it won't be renewed?
I can't find anything about the actual end date. I had read that it was a 3 year deal, but can't find and article supporting that.

Qualcomm might wish to keep it in place, wanting to maintain a monopoly on Windows/ARM to help the launch of their Nuvia based PCs in late 2023/early 2024. Not because they are worried about Apple, but to prevent the creation of a real Windows/ARM market, only to have Chinese competitors come in and take the entire lower end of a market before they can become established as the new "Intel inside".

If they are paid enough Microsoft would be willing to continue it, and if it leaves Macs on an island unable to legally run Windows apps they certainly won't mind. Having someone paying all their costs for maintaining Windows/ARM removes all the risk on their part, and probably helps their relations with Intel and AMD who are eyeing the potential devaluation of their x86 duopoly a bit nervously.
Fair assessment. I'm pretty sure that MS would have a strong preference for expanding their Windows ARM ecosystem. I suppose that Qualcomm could make them an offer that they can't refuse, but it's hard for me to see this MS going for that. Microsoft has always been about expanding their reach of their OS (going back to MSDOS).
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
19,163
7,920
136

Roland00Address

Platinum Member
Dec 17, 2008
2,099
208
106
Do we know when the Qualcomm exclusivity ends, and that it won't be renewed?

Qualcomm might wish to keep it in place, wanting to maintain a monopoly on Windows/ARM to help the launch of their Nuvia based PCs in late 2023/early 2024. Not because they are worried about Apple, but to prevent the creation of a real Windows/ARM market, only to have Chinese competitors come in and take the entire lower end of a market before they can become established as the new "Intel inside".

If they are paid enough Microsoft would be willing to continue it, and if it leaves Macs on an island unable to legally run Windows apps they certainly won't mind. Having someone paying all their costs for maintaining Windows/ARM removes all the risk on their part, and probably helps their relations with Intel and AMD who are eyeing the potential devaluation of their x86 duopoly a bit nervously.
We know it was for 5 years and we can infer when it started, but we can not infer when it ends for there may be other agreements that overlap and extended / change future agreement details.

How we know it is 5 years is via some leaks / absent minded comments. I am sorry I am not linking the specific evidence from Paul Thurrott 's website, and Mary Jo Foley's ZDNet page.

I am sorry this post is almost useless for the caveats mean we can not be sure of anything.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick and Ajay

soresu

Golden Member
Dec 19, 2014
1,805
961
136
Intel would be foolish not to be concerned. With the combination of Apple, Qualcomm, AMD, and TMSC firing on all cylinders, there is plenty for Intel to be concerned about.

Will Intel lose all their marketshare in 5 years? No, of course not, but Intel is starting to get the reputation of a company in decline, and for good reason.
TSMC works in Intel's favor rather than against.

They can constrain their competitors fab allotment even as they increase their own output if they made the right bid early enough.

Given Intel's history of pouring money down the drain as a strategy (cantra revenue) I would not put it past them to buy out TSMC capacity just to stick it to AMD, nVidia and Qualcomm all at once.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
3,303
4,537
136
Given Intel's history of pouring money down the drain as a strategy (cantra revenue) I would not put it past them to buy out TSMC capacity just to stick it to AMD, nVidia and Qualcomm all at once.
The outcome of that approach seems to be funny though, Intel finances N3 whereas everybody else gets to choose from the superior improved N3E and N3X (and whatever other variants are there, N3B?). Intel essentially outsourced its node troubles to TSMC, its other customers likely are thankful for Intel to cover that for them.
 

lobz

Golden Member
Feb 10, 2017
1,945
2,593
136
TSMC works in Intel's favor rather than against.

They can constrain their competitors fab allotment even as they increase their own output if they made the right bid early enough.

Given Intel's history of pouring money down the drain as a strategy (cantra revenue) I would not put it past them to buy out TSMC capacity just to stick it to AMD, nVidia and Qualcomm all at once.
Not plausible in 2022 anymore. TSMC is not dependent on anyone's designs for sure, and even though Intel's money is always shiny, I'm like 99,99% sure TSMC would really like to maintain a healthy, therefore very diverse set of big customers, rather than help screwing over multiple long time and stable buyers for a one-off financial benefit. Not happening, at least not to the magnitude many of you here think.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
19,163
7,920
136
Given Intel's history of pouring money down the drain as a strategy (cantra revenue) I would not put it past them to buy out TSMC capacity just to stick it to AMD, nVidia and Qualcomm all at once.
Most insiders seem to agree that TSMC doesn't operate that way. Intel has been pouring money into TSMC, and TSMC has responded by increasing capacity at Intel's expense. They allegedly began conversion of a research fab to a production fab to handle the second half of Intel's N3 order.
 

oak8292

Member
Sep 14, 2016
65
44
91
Most insiders seem to agree that TSMC doesn't operate that way. Intel has been pouring money into TSMC, and TSMC has responded by increasing capacity at Intel's expense. They allegedly began conversion of a research fab to a production fab to handle the second half of Intel's N3 order.
The fact that they are converting a research fab to a 'production' fab suggests to me that TSMC purchased additional equipment to handle Intel's contract/demand. The Intel demand was added to the production schedule too late to build a 'production fab' specifically for Intel but the demand could be handled in a converted R&D fab. My own speculation is that this is populated in part with the two EUV machines that Intel sold back to ASML in early 2021.

Peter Wennink
"Due to the delay in one of our customer's roadmaps, we jointly decided to buy back two of their new systems and ship these to another customer this year."


A detail that many, myself included, seem to miss is the very long lead times in both production of EUV machines and then the installation and alignment of EUV equipment.

Peter Wennink
"you need to realize that the integral lead time between the installation of EUV tool and the start of a module production is 20 months."


In mid 2020 both TSMC and Intel discussed delaying delivery of EUV machines due to the loss of Huawei as a customer, the delayed transition to Intel 7nm and the pandemic. TSMC changed their minds by the fourth quarter of 2020 but the delay of component delivery for EUV equipment assembly had already started. Intel did not reverse their decision and apparently sold back at least two of their machines in early 2021. TSMC has been buying every EUV machine available for conversion of N7 to N6, expansion of N5 and start up of N3 production. TSMC has at least two of Intel's contracted machines if not more.
 

Doug S

Golden Member
Feb 8, 2020
1,110
1,655
106
The fact that they are converting a research fab to a 'production' fab suggests to me that TSMC purchased additional equipment to handle Intel's contract/demand. The Intel demand was added to the production schedule too late to build a 'production fab' specifically for Intel but the demand could be handled in a converted R&D fab. My own speculation is that this is populated in part with the two EUV machines that Intel sold back to ASML in early 2021.

Peter Wennink
"Due to the delay in one of our customer's roadmaps, we jointly decided to buy back two of their new systems and ship these to another customer this year."


A detail that many, myself included, seem to miss is the very long lead times in both production of EUV machines and then the installation and alignment of EUV equipment.

Peter Wennink
"you need to realize that the integral lead time between the installation of EUV tool and the start of a module production is 20 months."


In mid 2020 both TSMC and Intel discussed delaying delivery of EUV machines due to the loss of Huawei as a customer, the delayed transition to Intel 7nm and the pandemic. TSMC changed their minds by the fourth quarter of 2020 but the delay of component delivery for EUV equipment assembly had already started. Intel did not reverse their decision and apparently sold back at least two of their machines in early 2021. TSMC has been buying every EUV machine available for conversion of N7 to N6, expansion of N5 and start up of N3 production. TSMC has at least two of Intel's contracted machines if not more.

At the time the Intel deal was first announced I wondered where they would get the EUV machines to expand capacity, and speculated that since Intel EUV mass production was years behind the original schedule, TSMC would need Intel to give up some of their orders.

I don't know if that idea has ever moved beyond the "rumor" stage, but I don't see how hoarding EUV machines would benefit Intel especially if they were seeking additional capacity from a company able to use all the EUV machines they can get. The best deals are made when both sides get something they want and either give up nothing or give up something they don't need, so such a deal would make sense for both sides.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY