Discussion Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 167 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,423
831
126
My drive is definitely not full, but OS files may have been fragmented. What is the best way to "clean" it?
You don't defragment SSDs.

I think the first step is to check in System Report how much storage is being used in various parts of your drive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scineram

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
4,176
6,253
136
However, I know HDCP 2.2 is supported by the monitor, because 4K Disney+ streaming works fine on the monitor when I plug in my Apple TV.
That may well be a software issue. I can't really imagine Apple TV using an older A gen having HDCP 2.2 support in hardware and not M1/2. It's a curious discrepancy in any case.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,859
180
106
Do you think other cloud providers are better? Or do you think Apple in particular is evil?
You put your valuable, hard work out there in someone else's care? Be my guest. Im never surprised when kids raid a cookie jar. Leave things in reach, they get grabbed.
 

Nothingness

Platinum Member
Jul 3, 2013
2,196
458
136
You put your valuable, hard work out there in someone else's care? Be my guest. Im never surprised when kids raid a cookie jar. Leave things in reach, they get grabbed.
So you consider cloud in general to be a danger. I will let my company know about that, we develop projects worth dozens millions of dollars using cloud (two of the largest ones) for massive validation and testing.
 

Doug S

Golden Member
Feb 8, 2020
1,495
2,183
106
Why would anyone that spends $10,000+ on a workstation for conceivably projects worth 10x-1000x the value of the workstation, want their data to touch Apple's cloud? That is ludicrous. Apple would be in position to spy on their information and possibly perform espionage. Anyone that believes Apple would not, I have a line of premium bridges to sell you.
Who says you have to use a cloud? And if you do, why in the heck would you trust Microsoft, Google or Amazon more than Apple?
 
  • Like
Reactions: scannall and Ajay

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
4,176
6,253
136

oak8292

Member
Sep 14, 2016
67
50
91
A engineering blunder isn't too hard to imagine but it could be combination of factors. The iPhone 14 PRO has a new processor with a larger die on N5, which is more expensive to manufacture than last years processor. One scenario is that when it was being designed the plan was to use N3, which was also going to be expensive and might have been in limited supply due to high demands on EUV leading to the plan to split processors on PRO and non-PRO. N3 would have made a more transistor intensive GPU feasible. It will be interesting to see how they use the added transistor budget when the new N3 based processors are released.
 

richardskrad

Member
Jun 28, 2022
33
28
51
The M1 was such a groundbreaking chip and it gave Apple a few years of brain drain and missed deadlines. I don’t expect Apple to wow us again until the M4 or M5. This is a good time for Apple to pause, look at what Qualcomm, AMD and Intel are doing and see how they can attract the same class of talent that gave birth to the M1 again.
 
Last edited:

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
7,096
4,540
136
"The article also says Apple has tried to reduce the amount of brain drain in the unit, by showing presentations to engineers that highlight the riskiness of chip startups and warning that most fail. A job at Apple is positioned as the safer choice in the face of economic downturn."

That's hilarious if true. That's seriously all Apple got?
Should have shown them a fat suitcase full of money. Put $100 million dollar general in a big pile and tell me bonus season could be mighty profitable this year and suddenly a startup with a chance of a similarly big payout doesn't seems so alluring.

If the long hours and grind start to wear people down, just let them take 10 minutes to have a money fight in the pool where it's all being kept and that should rejuvenate even the weariest of worker.

But good for the engineers getting paid.
 

Doug S

Golden Member
Feb 8, 2020
1,495
2,183
106
Should have shown them a fat suitcase full of money. Put $100 million dollar general in a big pile and tell me bonus season could be mighty profitable this year and suddenly a startup with a chance of a similarly big payout doesn't seems so alluring.

If the long hours and grind start to wear people down, just let them take 10 minutes to have a money fight in the pool where it's all being kept and that should rejuvenate even the weariest of worker.

But good for the engineers getting paid.

It is impossible for companies to compete with the IPO stock option slot machine. For those engineers willing to take the risk their startup succeeds when most don't (leaving the options worthless and their total pay during that time a lot lower than they would otherwise get) there is nothing that can be done to keep them. That's always been the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: guidryp

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
4,176
6,253
136
Should have shown them a fat suitcase full of money. Put $100 million dollar general in a big pile and tell me bonus season could be mighty profitable this year and suddenly a startup with a chance of a similarly big payout doesn't seems so alluring.

If the long hours and grind start to wear people down, just let them take 10 minutes to have a money fight in the pool where it's all being kept and that should rejuvenate even the weariest of worker.

But good for the engineers getting paid.
Money is not the issue, at least not the way you seem to think. If it's lots of money you can't compete with IPOs anyway as @Doug S rightly points out. But what I quoted is downright insulting if it indeed happened: Engineers should be paid well already anyway, framing start ups as risky (Homer "duh", that's the point!) and "Apple (...) as the safer choice in the face of economic downturn" is patronizing and may work with cleaning workers with low self esteem. The messaging is hilariously off with that one.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,423
831
126
TSMC is celebrating its start of commercial N3 production this week. I guess it feels the need to brag (to investors?) about its accomplishment this time.

This timing works for N3 M2 Pro + Max + 2xMax/Ultra + ?4xMax in spring...


Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) said on Saturday (Dec. 24) it will hold a ceremony on Dec. 29 to mark the start of the commercial production phase of its newest 3nm process technology in Tainan.

CNA noted that it is rare for TSMC to hold ceremonies to signal the beginning of commercial production for new chips, but that the move was likely in response to concerns by some that Taiwan could lose its semiconductor edge in response to the chipmaker’s recent international expansion plans, particularly those in the U.S.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,423
831
126
Semianalysis has some comments on N3 (aka N3B) and N3E.


I didn't quite understand the pricing summary. He said N3 is priced 40% per wafer higher than N5, but later said that N3E is cheaper than N3/N3B, and that N3E is priced 40% higher per wafer than N5. So, it sounds like he may be saying N3E is 40% more than N5, while N3/N3B is priced even higher than N3E.

The total spend per wafer starts per month increases from 38% to 55%. This ties nicely with the other rumors we have heard for N3 pricing being ~40% more than N5. Contrary to the DigiTimes rumors, the wafer prices are not $20,000. Also N3B is a decent bit more expensive than N3E.

---

The density improvements are, at best, slightly better than the wafer cost increases. With the FinFlex 2-1 implementation, density improvements are 56%, with a 40% cost increase. This results in an 11% cost per transistor improvement, the weakest ever scaling for a major process technology in 50+ years.
 
Last edited:

Doug S

Golden Member
Feb 8, 2020
1,495
2,183
106
The density improvements are, at best, slightly better than the wafer cost increases. With the FinFlex 2-1 implementation, density improvements are 56%, with a 40% cost increase. This results in an 11% cost per transistor improvement, the weakest ever scaling for a major process technology in 50+ years.
Didn't the last generation or two of planar transistors see increasingly poor scaling as well, which was one of the main reasons behind the migration to FinFET?
 

FlameTail

Senior member
Dec 15, 2021
210
54
61
Apple Silicon is frankly incredible.

If we compare the Apple M2 to a 6-core Ryzen such as R5 6600H (this is reasonable because M2 is 4P+4E, while a 6600H has 6P) in Geekbench (the best benchmark for this kind of comparison):

M2 - 1900/9000

6600H - 1500/8000

The M2 outperforms the 6600H, particularly by a large margin in single core, while consuming around half the power the 6600H does.

This is crazy, and can't all be chalked down to the M2's superior process node...The M2 certainly has a significant architectural advantage.
 

BorisTheBlade82

Senior member
May 1, 2020
381
543
106
@FlameTail
Indeed. And this essentially is nothing new. Just take a look at this thread and see how the M1 still dominates ST Performance Efficiency by a large margin:

But still there are a lot of people outright denying this or searching for strawman arguments. And one thing is admittedly true: While Apple further increases performance, they also decrease their efficiency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nothingness

Doug S

Golden Member
Feb 8, 2020
1,495
2,183
106
Apple Silicon is frankly incredible.

If we compare the Apple M2 to a 6-core Ryzen such as R5 6600H (this is reasonable because M2 is 4P+4E, while a 6600H has 6P) in Geekbench (the best benchmark for this kind of comparison):

M2 - 1900/9000

6600H - 1500/8000

The M2 outperforms the 6600H, particularly by a large margin in single core, while consuming around half the power the 6600H does.

This is crazy, and can't all be chalked down to the M2's superior process node...The M2 certainly has a significant architectural advantage.

Intel and AMD market segment their CPUs, and don't allow cheaper versions with fewer cores to scale up their frequency as high as more expensive parts. The 6600H's single thread score would be higher if it weren't for those limits, though it has other limits (like less cache) compared to AMD's more expensive CPUs.
 

BorisTheBlade82

Senior member
May 1, 2020
381
543
106
Could you elaborate on this point?
Well, for once the M1 Pro/Max/Ultra have a much higher consumption in CBR23 ST than the original M1, which significantly decreases efficiency.
See here
and here

And from what I gathered, M2 is also a slight regression in terms of efficiency - but ATM I am too lazy to back up that claim with links.
 
  • Like
Reactions: moinmoin

FlameTail

Senior member
Dec 15, 2021
210
54
61
Question- Why do base M chips have less SLC (System Level Cache) than the A series chips they are based on?

Example:

A14 -> 16 MB SLC
M1 -> 8 MB SLC

A15 -> 32 MB SLC
M2 -> 8MB SLC.


The M chips have more CPU cores and GPU cores, and the SLC is shared by all the components including the CPU and GPU. So logically, the M chips should have more SLC but they don't. Why?

Also bizarrely, going from M1 to M2, the SLC stays the same size at 8 MB.

 

Doug S

Golden Member
Feb 8, 2020
1,495
2,183
106
Question- Why do base M chips have less SLC (System Level Cache) than the A series chips they are based on?

Example:

A14 -> 16 MB SLC
M1 -> 8 MB SLC

A15 -> 32 MB SLC
M2 -> 8MB SLC.


The M chips have more CPU cores and GPU cores, and the SLC is shared by all the components including the CPU and GPU. So logically, the M chips should have more SLC but they don't. Why?

Also bizarrely, going from M1 to M2, the SLC stays the same size at 8 MB.


Apple uses the SLC more for power savings than performance improvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BorisTheBlade82

ASK THE COMMUNITY