Discussion Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 101 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
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:

Screen-Shot-2021-10-18-at-1.20.47-PM.jpg

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:


M1 Ultra discussion here:


M2 discussion here:


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:


M4 Family discussion here:

 
Last edited:

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
5,233
1,610
136
There is no question of "if AMD can make a comparable" APU/SOC to what Apple has with the M1 pro and max. The question is, "are enough laptop makers interested enough to purchase sufficient quantities of them to make the project make financial sense?"

Exactly so much this. And AMD with it's semi-custom will surley make such a chip for say Asus or HP or dell if they ask for it. But as I wrote previously the market for >$2000 PC laptops is probably tiny.

4K ProRes RAW to ProRes 422 export:
67 seconds on M1 Pro 8-core
107 seconds on Mac Pro 12-core W-3235 + Afterburner card
165 seconds on Mac Pro 12-core W-3235, no Afterburner card
600 seconds* on 13" Intel MBP

*Reviewer gave up on the Intel MBP half way through after 5 minutes, so he estimated the encode at about 10 minutes.

Yeah well obviously the only chip with a dedicated transcoder will be faster and more power efficient. What a great surprise! /s
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and Ranulf

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,785
4,750
136
Given the M1 Air is itself already a very capable computer in its own right, perhaps more potential customers should be realistic about what they really need instead of splashing $2k+ for huge performance in the Pros that will never be used.

If I was in the market for a Mac laptop I'd be wishing for a Macbook Air with a larger screen. I've always had laptops with a 17" screen, because I like a lot of real estate, but performance (especially GPU) isn't all that much of a consideration for me, nor is battery life since I hardly ever go more than a few hours without plugging it in. I care more about max memory config since I'd be running Linux on it with a Windows VM or two. I have zero interest in the DTR or gamer bricks, so usually there isn't much choice.

The one I have now is about 4.5 lbs with an i5 and integrated graphics. If I was buying one right now I'd be looking hard at the 16" LG Gram which gives up an inch of screen but halves the weight of what I have, though since I'm not carrying it through airports every week I'd probably not pay the premium to shave off two pounds I definitely would have back in the day.

Now I'm not sure exactly how much market there is for "big screen, super light weight", which LG pretty much has to themselves right now, but a bigger Macbook Air with the same non-Pro M1 (to avoid duplication of the Macbook Pro 16) with a 15 or 16 inch screen would probably be interesting to some people. It would be interesting to see a teardown comparison of the Air and the Gram to see what LG is doing differently to manage being slightly lighter than the Air despite the much larger screen.
 
Jul 27, 2020
20,040
13,740
146
I've always had laptops with a 17" screen, because I like a lot of real estate, but performance (especially GPU) isn't all that much of a consideration for me, nor is battery life since I hardly ever go more than a few hours without plugging it in. I care more about max memory config since I'd be running Linux on it with a Windows VM or two. I have zero interest in the DTR or gamer bricks, so usually there isn't much choice.

If this had DDR5, I would buy it right away coz then I could enjoy 128GB ram, even if it was slower than DDR4.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Yeah well obviously the only chip with a dedicated transcoder will be faster and more power efficient. What a great surprise! /s
This is exactly what I was commenting on earlier --> People saying "It doesn't count because it's a hardware encoder add-on."

Well, for this target market it makes a ginormous difference. That's why these guys are testing this after all - they use this functionality on a daily basis.

Previously, Apple had to resort to creating a dedicated Afterburner card for Mac Pros in order to get this done on Macs. Not anymore. Now mere mortals without $15000 to spend can do it on a base model 8-core 14" MacBook Pro at 10X the speed of the prior Intel solution it replaces.

The point here is Apple has a specific group of tasks it wants to target, and builds its silicon to accomplish those tasks. This represents a huge shift in the whole Apple Mac hardware paradigm.

I also present you the example of h.265 acceleration. Apple had 10-bit HEVC decode acceleration in its iPhones way back at A9 in 2015. (Even the A8 in 2014 had limited h.265 HEVC hardware encode/decode support.) It didn't get it in the iMac until 2017, because Intel didn't implement it in hardware until Kaby Lake in 2017. So because of this, Apple delayed its rollout on both iOS and macOS until after Kaby Lake Macs appeared.

It is rather embarrassing when an iPhone 6S can play back video files without breaking a sweat that a Core i7-6700K cannot even play cleanly at 100% CPU utilization. I suspect Apple would have wanted Intel to have implemented hardware acceleration in its iGPUs at least 3 years earlier but Apple didn't get much say in the matter.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
22,065
11,695
136
This is exactly what I was commenting on earlier --> People saying "It doesn't count because it's a hardware encoder add-on."

Well, for this target market it makes a ginormous difference. That's why these guys are testing this after all - they use this functionality on a daily basis.

It's great until you need an unsupported algo.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
It's great until you need an unsupported algo.
That's just it. Nobody can support everything in hardware.

Apple has its own priorities. Intel has its own priorities. Often they do not match. Now Apple doesn't care what Intel's priorities are, because Apple just rolls its own chips.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
5,064
8,032
136
Well, for this target market it makes a ginormous difference. That's why these guys are testing this after all - they use this functionality on a daily basis.
I'd like to expand on that: People like to point to that target market being small. But that's only the current state. Apple already has a huge audience with its phones, a whole audience that is used to specific features working smoothly on their iPhones thanks to hardware acceleration. With Macs now also being based on the same hardware Apple and other developers will be able to introduce more software that makes use of hardware acceleration, and the iPhones essentially turn into entry drugs for use cases that only work smoothly on Apple Silicon Mac thanks to the same hardware acceleration.

I mentioned universal apps before in the context of games, in this context it is worth repeating: I think apple will push that more and more. The end result will be having the same use cases in the same app one is already familiar with across all possible computer form factors: phone, tablet, laptop, desktop and TV (edit: and in cars? Have no idea about CarPlay).
 

Ranulf

Platinum Member
Jul 18, 2001
2,530
1,616
136
The thickness complaints are funny, in light of how often I've seen someone whining about how Apple cares more than about making things thin than it does about usability. So Apple releases a laptop with a 99.9 Wh battery, the largest FAA regulations will permit, and revives missing ports people complained about losing, and then we have people complaining it is too thick?

I guess they could have used a battery half the size and still come out just fine in battery life and decided against the port revival, and been thinner and a lot lighter. Just goes to show that someone is going to be pissed off no matter what you do!

This is what has interested me the most with these chips. That Apple has finally woken up, stopped blaming Intel and their hot 14nm derivatives and actually designed laptops that can cool properly and be perhaps robust and easily repairable, at least somewhat. Maybe if Apple had not been firmly in the cult of Thin above all for even Pro machines (let alone TrashCan Pro workstations) they wouldn't have had the problems they did with Intel or at least offered their loyal customers a good product.

These ARM chips are them finally trying to hold or win back their main customers, the content creators.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BorisTheBlade82

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,785
4,750
136
This is what has interested me the most with these chips. That Apple has finally woken up, stopped blaming Intel and their hot 14nm derivatives and actually designed laptops that can cool properly and be perhaps robust and easily repairable, at least somewhat. Maybe if Apple had not been firmly in the cult of Thin above all for even Pro machines (let alone TrashCan Pro workstations) they wouldn't have had the problems they did with Intel or at least offered their loyal customers a good product.

These ARM chips are them finally trying to hold or win back their main customers, the content creators.


The Cult of Thin above all was Jony Ive. I subscribe to those who believe that Steve Jobs kept Ive from going overboard, but when Jobs became seriously ill and eventually died there was no one with the power to say "no" to Ive. Hence the introduction of Macs with a single port, the butterfly keyboard, and other things that compromised usefulness at the altar of Thin. And I suppose the compromises that forced as far as ability to easily access the parts within - if you have a dictator telling you you need to shave another 0.5mm of thickness from a laptop that's going to make it harder to do the sorts of things that lead to a higher iFixit repairability score and maybe it becomes necessary to drop a port or two due to less available total volume inside.

The fact that both iPhone and Mac have been getting thicker as a result of improvements in battery life or bringing back enough ports so you don't need a dongle/hub is IMHO a result of Ive leaving Apple to found his own firm. Rumors have it that the iPhone may gain yet a bit more thickness in the next iteration, which along with a periscope lens, will allow them to eliminate the camera bump. Likewise we see the Mac dropping the "wedge" shape that played a similar game of "thinner in part of it fools the eye into thinking all of it is thinner".

Hopefully there are enough Ive devotees left on Apple's design team won't let the pendulum swing too far in the other direction.
 

DRC_40

Junior Member
Sep 25, 2012
18
14
81
I know the site is coding/gaming/performance centric but an area I haven’t seen mentioned here is the music industry. From the performance bench’s and the few reviews of Logic these new Macs are a game changer for many. Running 200 tracks of audio with effects and no crashes or fan/heat issues is mind boggling. I’ve never owned an Apple computer but I bit the bullet and ordered one of the new MBP’s. The audio industry is obviously smaller than the gaming industry (computer wise) but it’s no slouch as it relates to overall size. There’s a huge amount of commercial music being created outside of big production studios these days. Many on the audio front are going to try these Macs regardless of price. In the big scheme of things the cost of your studio PC is minuscule in comparison to what you’ve got invested in gear. If this works out I’ll retire my studio PC‘s forever.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Well, this is cool.

We knew the HDR 1600 nit display profile on the MBPs is content dependent. That’s fine, but it also follows the content around the screen. If you have one regular website open and one HDR YouTube video open, the regular website is displayed as a normal page with up to 500 nits but the HDR video will go up to 1600 nits. And if you move the video, that 1600 nit profile follows the video around, while everything else on screen remains in the 500 nit profile.

Is this even currently possible on other OSes? Honestly, this impresses me just as much as those monstrously fast chips.
 

TheStu

Moderator<br>Mobile Devices & Gadgets
Moderator
Sep 15, 2004
12,089
45
91
Well, this is cool.

We knew the HDR 1600 nit display profile on the MBPs is content dependent. That’s fine, but it also follows the content around the screen. If you have one regular website open and one HDR YouTube video open, the regular website is displayed as a normal page with up to 500 nits but the HDR video will go up to 1600 nits. And if you move the video, that 1600 nit profile follows the video around, while everything else on screen remains in the 500 nit profile.

Is this even currently possible on other OSes? Honestly, this impresses me just as much as those monstrously fast chips.
With regard to OS support, I have no idea. But i'm pretty sure it would only be possible on an OLED or mini-LED backlit display. With a standard backlight you can't selectively make some areas normal and other areas super bright.
 
Jul 27, 2020
20,040
13,740
146
Well, this is cool.

We knew the HDR 1600 nit display profile on the MBPs is content dependent. That’s fine, but it also follows the content around the screen. If you have one regular website open and one HDR YouTube video open, the regular website is displayed as a normal page with up to 500 nits but the HDR video will go up to 1600 nits. And if you move the video, that 1600 nit profile follows the video around, while everything else on screen remains in the 500 nit profile.

Is this even currently possible on other OSes? Honestly, this impresses me just as much as those monstrously fast chips.
That's fine in a bright room during the day but 500 nits might be a bit too much for reading in a dim environment like a bedroom. Also, the 1600 nits in the video would only be for the highlights like light sources. The other content in the video shouldn't exceed 500 nits. I hope the guys at Rtings decide to test the display. By the way, the MacOS doesn't do AutoHDR for SDR sources like Windows 11, right?
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,114
6,770
136
It's great until you need an unsupported algo.

The fast and efficient M1 cores can handle that just as well as anything else on the market in those cases.

Complaining about having a faster option when available is silly. No one admonishes Intel for offer AVX-512 support and that allowing for superior performance in some applications.

If you don't need it the inclusion hurts nothing since those circuits can be power-gated and won't consume extra power or make other performance worse.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
With regard to OS support, I have no idea. But i'm pretty sure it would only be possible on an OLED or mini-LED backlit display. With a standard backlight you can't selectively make some areas normal and other areas super bright.
Yes, AFAIK this would be impossible without mini-LED or OLED. However, I was just wondering if it was possible on other OSes if you had the right hardware.

That's fine in a bright room during the day but 500 nits might be a bit too much for reading in a dim environment like a bedroom. Also, the 1600 nits in the video would only be for the highlights like light sources. The other content in the video shouldn't exceed 500 nits. I hope the guys at Rtings decide to test the display. By the way, the MacOS doesn't do AutoHDR for SDR sources like Windows 11, right?
Those are just the maximum brightness values for those profiles, but you can turn down the brightness of course. And yes, the HDR video's 1600 nits max is just for specular highlights, etc.

Dunno about auto HDR. What is the point of auto HDR though? Seems like a great way to screw up the image.

---

The Verge just put out their review:


Screen Shot 2021-10-29 at 11.54.04 AM.png

Premiere Pro with After Effects does extremely well on M1 Max, and pretty well on M1 Pro.

Screen Shot 2021-10-29 at 11.54.46 AM.png

They said that for Pugetbench, these machines are amongst the best laptops in existence. The scores they found on the Windows side that beat the Macs were all desktops.

Screen Shot 2021-10-29 at 11.58.16 AM.png

Gaming still is bad overall, but it is less bad on the Max than the Pro obviously.

Screen Shot 2021-10-29 at 12.01.32 PM.png

She said the overall feel of editing in Premiere Pro was somewhat similar between the M1 Pro and her usual 27" iMac Core i9-9900K with Radeon Pro 575X, but the M1 Max had a huge advantage in smoothness and overall feel compared to both the M1 Pro and Intel iMac. However, both the M1 Pro and M1 Max had way, way better export times than the Intel iMac.

Screen Shot 2021-10-29 at 12.03.52 PM.png

Obviously, working in ProRes in Final Cut was on another level, and the export times were absurdly short. She said she's an Adobe person, but these performance differences were enough to make her consider the possibility of switching to Final Cut.

Screen Shot 2021-10-29 at 12.04.39 PM.png

However, Adobe is improving their optimizations dramatically too. Compare these two versions of After Effects. The red version just came out. The blue is older. However, in After Effects the Mac Pro 16-core with 2 x Vega II still beat the M1 Pro/Max MacBook Pros. OTOH, those MacBook Pros were awfully close.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jeanlain

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,114
6,770
136
The only complaints I've seen are that it uses a lot of power, but no one considers the power per watt when using AVX-512 which is what's missing from that analysis. But people seem to not even point that out and instead engage in faulty arguments about power itself.

And you can't have dedicated hardware for every single possible use case. Pick the important ones and go with what you can. It's still good when you have a better alternative than relying on the general purpose CPU cores for everything.
 

The Hardcard

Senior member
Oct 19, 2021
218
309
106
Not nearly as well as can dedicated hardware.

The dedicated hardware is huge, but there are already several hours on Youtube of both new chips crushing software codecs. These machines would have dominated the video editing market without the dedicated hardware. They are easily handling Canon, Blackmagic, and RED RAW footage on the CPU cores.

The ProRes hardware are just nails in the coffin. I’ll bet the Afterburner card was the result of working on the IP blocks for the M1s.
 

ashFTW

Senior member
Sep 21, 2020
312
235
126
If I was in the market for a Mac laptop I'd be wishing for a Macbook Air with a larger screen. I've always had laptops with a 17" screen, because I like a lot of real estate, but performance (especially GPU) isn't all that much of a consideration for me, nor is battery life since I hardly ever go more than a few hours without plugging it in. I care more about max memory config since I'd be running Linux on it with a Windows VM or two. I have zero interest in the DTR or gamer bricks, so usually there isn't much choice.

My ideal Macbook Pro given the power budget would have been 16 + 4 cores, and 8 GPU cores. CPU, large memory, and fast SSDs are much more important to me than GPU. That’s the reason I love my Threadripper workstation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arkaign

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
iFixit full teardown:


SSD, HDMI, SD reader are soldered.

Headphone jack, USB-C, MagSafe are replaceable. However, since they are screwed into the chassis underneath the motherboard, you have to remove the motherboard first before you can access the screws for those ports.

As mentioned previously, the batteries are not glued on, but attached with iPhone-style pull tab adhesive tape. However, for two of the six battery segments you have to remove the trackpad to access their pull tabs.

Speakers are glued on, presumably because they are in constant motion, but you don't need to remove them to access the other components.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
5,064
8,032
136
No one admonishes Intel for offer AVX-512 support
*coughs*
I don't admonish Intel for the speed up AVX-512 can offer. I totally admonish Intel for the crap instruction set AVX-512 itself is, reinventing many parts of existing instructions, only to again stopping short of future proofing it for eventual further extensions where the whole spiel repeats once again.

Apple by standardizing hardware support (something Intel irritatingly doesn't manage with AVX-512 even in its very own products) does it in a sane way, making hardware acceleration easily usable through system libraries.
 

LightningZ71

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2017
1,798
2,156
136
While I completely expected the SSD to be soldered, it's a hard kill for our organization. I have had to replace multiple SSDs for power users both for filling them up and for actually hitting endurance limits with them. These were perfectly serviceable laptops that didn't warrant replacing. Now, and for the last several models, Apple wants me to dispose of or gut and pay a fortune to service perfectly otherwise usable equipment because they couldn't find it in their pocketbook to allow the use of M.2 drives? The marginal improvement they are possibly realizing from soldering is definitely not worth the cost it represents us.

No thank you!