Discussion Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 259 - 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:

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Or perhaps internal IDs don't mean much.
They must have some meaning to Apple of course, but they have not always meant what we thought they meant, because we're just guessing. Educated guessing, but guessing nonetheless.

Anyhow, this ID thing has been discussed literally for months now on other forums and several ideas have been bandied about in the last few weeks:

1. T8132 is M4
2. T8132 is M3 variant
3. T8132 is M3 on N3E
4. T8132 isn't an accurate ID

However, it's all speculation.

In fact, that likely why Mark Gurman (and also 9to5mac) is now talking about it, because he's been reading those same forum posts. IOW, he has no new inside info.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ghostsonplanets

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,113
6,768
136
I'm looking to upgrade my iPad Pro and I'd love it if I could get an M4 even though it really wouldn't add anything for me and what I use it for.

However, unless Apple is just announcing a product that you can't yet buy, it would mean that the M4 would have come out a bit more than 7 months after the M3, which puts the release cadence all over the place.

If it weren't Gurman reporting this, I don't think I'd give it any stock at all given everything else. The more likely conclusion from this would be that what Apple would be calling the M4 would probably be something more akin to an M3.5 as opposed to a whole new M-series chip.

An M4 this soon raises a lot of interesting questions.
 

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,784
4,744
136
Also - the rumors of M4 being released much earlier explains why there is no UltraFusion in M3 Max. M3 series were effectively stop-gap solution before M4 series.


Which is what I've been saying for months, ever since the die photos showed no I/O pads. There were still a lot of people saying there's no way the M4 would come out in October only a year after the M3. Well I guess I got that part wrong too, but less wrong than the people pushing '18 months' based on two data points influenced by covid and TSMC process issues :tearsofjoy:

The question I have now is when do we see the M4's big brothers. I see no reason for Apple to wait until after the iPhone launch for new Macs, they may not be in any hurry to update the ones that got M3 but everything still on M2 like Mini, Studio and Pro are definite candidates for summer launch. Even the stuff like Macbook Pro might get in before iPhone, if their marketers still believe "back to school" launches will help their sales. Maybe in the future Mac launches are mostly in the summer, happening before iPhone. Something more Christmas oriented like Macbook Air might be late fall (having it updated later helps avoid cannibalizing MBP)
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikegg

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,205
2,802
106
It's a little odd that the A16 was T8120 and the M3 was T8122, despite the fact that the M3 pulled in the updated GPU cores from the A17 Pro.
The M3 is very similar to the A17 Pro than A16. The CPU, GPU and media engines being the same back this up.

But why not give the public identity the same as the A17 Pro which is xxx16,x. Instead, Apple gave xxx15,x for all M3 Macs.

There was a rumour that A16 GPU had been delayed. Could it be that M3 is actually a mix of A16 and A17.

So this upcoming chip may be a mix of whatever was missed on A17 and some new IP from A18.

Here’s the kicker, A18s ID is T8140 and its Mx ID is T8142. So who so knows?

Again, it’s a mystery till next week
 

repoman27

Senior member
Dec 17, 2018
381
536
136
M3 had the same CPU cores as A17P, not A16.
M3 had the same CPU cores as A17 Pro *and* A16—they all use Everest and Sawtooth. That's sort of the problem with inferring too much from the SoC identifier here. The A-series repeated CPU microarchitectures while the M-series appeared to skip over the A16 generation, so the SoC IDs aren't aligned anymore.
 

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,205
2,802
106
M3 had the same CPU cores as A17 Pro *and* A16—they all use Everest and Sawtooth. That's sort of the problem with inferring too much from the SoC identifier here. The A-series repeated CPU microarchitectures while the M-series appeared to skip over the A16 generation, so the SoC IDs aren't aligned anymore.
yep. One thing for sure. Whatever chip we get next week is not the same M3 we have now.
 

repoman27

Senior member
Dec 17, 2018
381
536
136
If you go even further down the codename rabbit hole, the A17 Pro was "Coll" and the M4 is supposedly "Donan"—both Scottish islands. So A17 Pro = Coll = T8130 and M4 = Donan = T8132. Now the codenames don't necessarily indicate that both SoCs share all of their IP blocks, but it does suggest that development started around the same time.

This makes me think that Apple will call this the M4 and that it will be Everest and Sawtooth yet again. It's most likely the M3 ported to N3E with a significantly larger / upgraded NPU and maybe an LPDDR5X-8533 memory interface.

N3 is obviously going to be a short node, so Apple does need to transition to the main N3E-based process family as soon as possible. I figured they would skip N3E entirely and go right to N3S, but perhaps not. I still think the A18 will be on N3S rather than N3E. We all knew that Apple was the lead / only customer for N3, but I don't recall anyone ever saying that Apple would also be the lead customer on N3E. I don't see how this didn't leak, as it would have directly impacted other TSMC customers. All of which makes me wonder if the M4 will still be on N3.

Gurman originally suggested that the new iPad Pros would launch in March, then revised that to April and finally to May, of course claiming delays rather than admitting that he might have gotten it wrong (textbook leaker 101). But Apple didn't wait until Q1'24 to decide whether they were shipping the new iPad Pros with an M3 or an M4; that design would have been locked nearly 12 months ago. Apple also knew what process they were targeting for the M4 several years ago, and it would have been undergoing qualification 12 months ago. So given that N3E didn't enter volume manufacturing until Q4 2024, and it takes at least 6 months to go from volume manufacturing to shipping a product, the idea of Apple planning to ship an N3E based product in March would have required TSMC to ramp N3E earlier than they did. TSMC did say that they thought they could pull volume production for N3E in a few months, but that didn't materialize. Then again, maybe TSMC was ready with the process but Apple had been guaranteed the lead spot and had to do a respin, thus delaying volume production by several months. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,205
2,802
106
If you go even further down the codename rabbit hole, the A17 Pro was "Coll" and the M4 is supposedly "Donan"—both Scottish islands. So A17 Pro = Coll = T8130 and M4 = Donan = T8132. Now the codenames don't necessarily indicate that both SoCs share all of their IP blocks, but it does suggest that development started around the same time.
The codenames names for M3 family are even more closely related. They are all Spanish islands.
While Coll is Scottish, Donan is Irish.
Both are Scottish, my bad.

Gurman originally suggested that the new iPad Pros would launch in March, then revised that to April and finally to May, of course claiming delays rather than admitting that he might have gotten it wrong (textbook leaker 101)
Gurman isn’t great at predicting events or releases months or even weeks from happening. The last event he didn’t even predict till Apple released an event invite.

My guess is Apple always intended to launch in May.
 
Last edited:

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,784
4,744
136
Gurman originally suggested that the new iPad Pros would launch in March, then revised that to April and finally to May, of course claiming delays rather than admitting that he might have gotten it wrong (textbook leaker 101). But Apple didn't wait until Q1'24 to decide whether they were shipping the new iPad Pros with an M3 or an M4; that design would have been locked nearly 12 months ago. Apple also knew what process they were targeting for the M4 several years ago, and it would have been undergoing qualification 12 months ago. So given that N3E didn't enter volume manufacturing until Q4 2024, and it takes at least 6 months to go from volume manufacturing to shipping a product, the idea of Apple planning to ship an N3E based product in March would have required TSMC to ramp N3E earlier than they did. TSMC did say that they thought they could pull volume production for N3E in a few months, but that didn't materialize. Then again, maybe TSMC was ready with the process but Apple had been guaranteed the lead spot and had to do a respin, thus delaying volume production by several months. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Six months from start of mass production to first shipments isn't set in stone. It is probably three months at the outside from start of mass production for first wafers exiting the line. You need to do testing, packaging, etc. and then of course assemble the products they go into but if the first wafers entered Dec. 15 it wouldn't be unreasonable for the first shipments of iPad Pro to happen in mid/late May. Until N3 TSMC used to enter mass production in Q2 every year, and Apple shipped 10-20 million iPhones containing those chips before the end of Q3. Apple/Foxconn has pretty good manufacturing scale so they can take Apple Silicon packages from TSMC and ship them out in the door in products in no time.

TSMC is also doing a year's worth of risk production, and it isn't like they have a big switch labeled "mass production" that they pull and everything changes in a single second. The wafers coming out risk production shortly before mass production officially starts are basically identical, so there is some leeway for using risk production wafers run before the official start of mass production. Heck Intel used to ship chips from what TSMC would term "risk production" out of their development fab all the time when launching chips off a new process. That's why they were so scarce at first. Doing M4 for a lower volume product like iPad Pro would allow Apple to use some risk production wafers whereas for a high volume product like iPhone that would be impossible, though I don't think it would be necessary even if mass production didn't start until Dec. 31st.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Six months from start of mass production to first shipments isn't set in stone. It is probably three months at the outside from start of mass production for first wafers exiting the line. You need to do testing, packaging, etc. and then of course assemble the products they go into but if the first wafers entered Dec. 15 it wouldn't be unreasonable for the first shipments of iPad Pro to happen in mid/late May. Until N3 TSMC used to enter mass production in Q2 every year, and Apple shipped 10-20 million iPhones containing those chips before the end of Q3. Apple/Foxconn has pretty good manufacturing scale so they can take Apple Silicon packages from TSMC and ship them out in the door in products in no time.

TSMC is also doing a year's worth of risk production, and it isn't like they have a big switch labeled "mass production" that they pull and everything changes in a single second. The wafers coming out risk production shortly before mass production officially starts are basically identical, so there is some leeway for using risk production wafers run before the official start of mass production. Heck Intel used to ship chips from what TSMC would term "risk production" out of their development fab all the time when launching chips off a new process. That's why they were so scarce at first. Doing M4 for a lower volume product like iPad Pro would allow Apple to use some risk production wafers whereas for a high volume product like iPhone that would be impossible, though I don't think it would be necessary even if mass production didn't start until Dec. 31st.
I read an article on manufacturing somewhere saying a realistic time frame from receipt of chips to laptop units on store shelves in volume is roughly 3 months with large Chinese manufacturers. (This was for laptops not iPad Pros, but I assume it would be similar.)

What volume of chips are you talking about during risk production? Apple may ship about 20 million iPad units in a busy quarter. I'm not sure how many of those are iPad Pros, 5 million?
 
Last edited:

repoman27

Senior member
Dec 17, 2018
381
536
136
Six months from start of mass production to first shipments isn't set in stone. It is probably three months at the outside from start of mass production for first wafers exiting the line. You need to do testing, packaging, etc. and then of course assemble the products they go into but if the first wafers entered Dec. 15 it wouldn't be unreasonable for the first shipments of iPad Pro to happen in mid/late May. Until N3 TSMC used to enter mass production in Q2 every year, and Apple shipped 10-20 million iPhones containing those chips before the end of Q3. Apple/Foxconn has pretty good manufacturing scale so they can take Apple Silicon packages from TSMC and ship them out in the door in products in no time.

TSMC is also doing a year's worth of risk production, and it isn't like they have a big switch labeled "mass production" that they pull and everything changes in a single second. The wafers coming out risk production shortly before mass production officially starts are basically identical, so there is some leeway for using risk production wafers run before the official start of mass production. Heck Intel used to ship chips from what TSMC would term "risk production" out of their development fab all the time when launching chips off a new process. That's why they were so scarce at first. Doing M4 for a lower volume product like iPad Pro would allow Apple to use some risk production wafers whereas for a high volume product like iPhone that would be impossible, though I don't think it would be necessary even if mass production didn't start until Dec. 31st.
You are correct, six months isn't set in stone. However, because EUV litho steps take significantly longer than DUV, the more EUV layers the process incorporates, the longer the cycle time. Cycle times for N3 are brutal. Some analysts were claiming 4 months. N3E is a bit better, but still probably at least 100 days and definitely in excess of 3 months. Apple probably needs around 2.5 million units of inventory for the launch quarter, which given the estimated die size, yield rates, and available capacity is probably at least two weeks worth of wafer starts.

After test, sort, and packaging, the SoCs need to be shipped to a contract manufacturer where they are integrated into the logic board assembly followed by more testing. Those assemblies are sent to other contract manufacturers for final device assembly. In an effort to reduce their reliance on any single contract manufacturer, and Chinese supply chains in general, device assembly is now taking place not just at Foxconn, but also Compal, Quanta, Pegatron, and Wistron facilities located in Vietnam, Thailand, India, and Brazil. After device assembly is completed, there is software loading and more testing, followed by packaging and then shipping to the various destination markets to fill the channel ahead of launch. And don't forget that Apple recently committed to shipping via ocean freight rather than air, which means that final leg of the journey can take 3 to 5 weeks all on its own.

So I think six months is a very reasonable estimate.

And TSMC does in fact have a big switch labeled "volume production" which exists due to their legal obligation to their shareholders. As soon as they start processing wafers for a customer order that will result in inventory that they can convert into revenue, they have an obligation to notify shareholders during the next quarterly earnings call. Apple's initial order for M4 chips for the iPad Pros is going to trigger nearly half a billion dollars worth of revenue. Making 2.5 million chips for your largest customer is the literal definition of volume production. Intel has PRQ which is similar and is even more clearly spelled out for shareholders. That is the point where risk production ends and qualified chips are converted on the balance sheet into inventory. Realize that Apple will ship more M4s in the launch quarter than Intel has shipped Meteor Lake SoCs to date. We are not talking about a low volume product. The iPhone is just in a category unto itself.
 

SpudLobby

Senior member
May 18, 2022
989
680
106
Nah I was skeptical but now I'm not, that is EXACTLY the kind of evidence I was looking for to believe that the new iPads will have M4. If they have M4 in iPad Pro now I don't think we will be waiting until the next iPhone launch to see M4 Macs either.
Eh I dunno I think we could see a fall October or winter event. But it is interesting how fast they’re moving. As you know, I pointed out N3B was inferior and Apple would look to move to N3E ASAP (or certainly there wouldn’t be any delay in doing so), but man an M4 iPad in May after M3 MacBook Airs earlier this year is interesting.
 

SpudLobby

Senior member
May 18, 2022
989
680
106
I read an article on manufacturing somewhere saying a realistic time frame from receipt of chips to laptop units on store shelves in volume is roughly 3 months with large Chinese manufacturers. (This was for laptops not iPad Pros, but I assume it would be similar.)

What volume of chips are you talking about during risk production? Apple may ship about 20 million iPad units in a busy quarter. I'm not sure how many of those are iPad Pros, 5 million?
I mean, TSMC’s risk production is very different from Intel and particularly the closer we get to mass production I could see this making sense.

But really look at it this way: 3 months for laptops with merchant chips, but this is iPads — and just one model — and Apple is very vertically integrated. If mass production started in Q4 and they’ve had 3-4 months of it for M4 and time to package and slot them in, it makes sense.
 

SpudLobby

Senior member
May 18, 2022
989
680
106
Also this is an announcement event, so release could be late May early June. Wouldn’t be like July because it’s Apple but it’s not unheard of for them to have some couple weeks to a month of delays.
 

SpudLobby

Senior member
May 18, 2022
989
680
106
Fwiw, I think M4 or M3 is a toss-up, but it would make sense that with volume production in Q4 they could slot them into new OLED iPad Pros with availability in May/June.

It also might make sense insofar as they want to avoid doing another update for the new OLED iPad Pros next year with M4, and throwing this in (a new neural engine upgrade too and iOS 18) with a new OLED iPad Pro lineup as the kickoff for M4 makes actually a lot of sense instead of the other way around with Macs first. They’ve certainly shown they don’t have major commitments to scheduling new M parts for different Macs or iPads. We got M1 and then iPads with M1, then Macbook pros with M1 Pro/Max, this time with M3 we got M3 and M3 Pro/Max at the same time but for MacBook Pros first, then MacBook Airs — and no iPads yet, etc.
 

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,205
2,802
106
Now that I think about it, Donan is likely the code name for the identifier T8132. Since Coll is A17P and its identifier is T8130.

The iPad Pro OLED is the only device leaked so far with that identifier attached to it.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,113
6,768
136
Also this is an announcement event, so release could be late May early June.

For a completely new product they'll announce early because they can't lose sales for something they don't have on the market, but for almost anything else they're typically taking orders for something that will ship in the next two to four weeks.

On the other hand, if it were going on sale the day of the event, someone somewhere should be receiving shipments already. Even if they're only sending to their own stores first, I'd be surprised that some hasn't leaked that yet. Apple isn't nearly as tight-lipped as they'd like to be.

I don't really see the announcing something that wouldn't ship by the end of the month. If it's longer, they'd just delay the announcement until they were closer to the ship date. Even with a May 30th release date, it would still make for an 8 month interval between M3 and M4.

Perhaps we get something like an M3X where it's not an M3 but is not an M4 either.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Perhaps we get something like an M3X where it's not an M3 but is not an M4 either.
Well, some might argue that M3 (8-core CPU, 8/10-core GPU) would already effectively be A17X, like A12X/Z (8-core CPU, 7/8-core GPU). M3X would be A17XX? ;)

BTW, I wonder how much it cost Apple to move A5 from 45 nm to 32 nm. I also wonder how much it cost Apple to split A9 between Samsung 14 nm and TSMC 16 nm.
 

SpudLobby

Senior member
May 18, 2022
989
680
106
RE: they’d wait: I agree they ideally would wait until June, you’re missing that we’re discussing May 7 because Gurman brought that date up. So for whatever reason they may well announce it, and if it’s the M4 in the iPads, it’s *possible* they have a slight bump until release due to TSMC node scheduling being tight. And as I explained, that isn’t totally unprecedented for Apple. It may be a bit weirder if they’re doing it as their own event to be fair, but we don’t know what else they may announce.
 

SpudLobby

Senior member
May 18, 2022
989
680
106
Perhaps we get something like an M3X where it's not an M3 but is not an M4 either.
This would be the most interesting but also terrible scenario. I get that business is business but muddying the lineup with an M3x that’s just an N3E port would be crazy annoying honestly. Hope this isn’t the case
 

SpudLobby

Senior member
May 18, 2022
989
680
106
By contrast an A17 non-pro chip that’s on N3E but is just the A17 Pro ported, or an A18 that is just the A17 Pro ported to N3E (largely anyway) is fine to me, the phones having more weird leeway especially now is nbd but the M lineup going to an x chip as a stopgap would be pretty annoying to me and ruin the clarity they have.
 

repoman27

Senior member
Dec 17, 2018
381
536
136
The M2 Air was unveiled at WWDC and launched a month later. People exaggerate how close to release Apple is sometimes, it varies. The key with them is when they do officially release, it isn’t a paper launch. Whereas with other vendors you’ll see “releases” sometimes and it’s a paper launch.

iPhones also have had delays before for the Pro or Max models.


“In fact, Apple isn't launching all four iPhone 12 models at the same time. Only the iPhone 12 and iPhone 12 Pro will be available to preorder on Friday, Oct. 16, with deliveries a week later on Oct. 23.The iPhone 12 Mini and iPhone 12 Pro Max will go on sale Nov. 6, and start shipping on Nov. 13.“

This isn’t rare for Apple. They might do 2-6 week delays for a real launch from announcement but when it releases, it *hits in volume*.
What you say is true, but WWDC is announced well in advance because people are traveling from all over the world to attend in person, and it's a multi-day event focused on developer relations, not new hardware launches. They just use the keynote for that purpose because so many people watch it.

You also cited the iPhones 12 which were released in the fall of 2020 during the height of the pandemic and the M2 MacBook Air which was badly delayed by COVID lockdowns in China. I'll also throw in the spring iPad event from 2021 and M1 iMac launch which also had long lead times until product availability and sketchy "beginning in the second half of May" launch dates.

This is a prerecorded event with no in-person component that was announced two weeks in advance. Apple can release a video like this whenever they want, so the new products they announce will probably be available to order online after the event airs or possibly the next day, and available in stores on one of the following Fridays in May.
 

SpudLobby

Senior member
May 18, 2022
989
680
106
What you say is true, but WWDC is announced well in advance because people are traveling from all over the world to attend in person, and it's a multi-day event focused on developer relations, not new hardware launches. They just use the keynote for that purpose because so many people watch it.
Sure. I agree it’s less weird to have a product that’s released a month or later after announcement when you have other purposes I guess. But we’re going off Gurman’s rumor here and at least in subsets of announcements this really isn’t that rare.

You also cited the iPhones 12 which were released in the fall of 2020 during the height of the pandemic and the M2 MacBook Air which was badly delayed by COVID lockdowns in China. I'll also throw in the spring iPad event from 2021 and M1 iMac launch which also had long lead times until product availability and sketchy "beginning in the second half of May" launch dates.
I cited part of the iPhone 12 lineup and mind you this does not necessarily have to do with COVID, because they’ve done this before in 2018 with the XR as well for a September 12th event:

“Pre-orders began on September 14, 2018, and the devices went on sale on September 21.”

But the XR:
“October 19, 2018, with the official release on October 26, 2018”

Come on guys.

I do agree for a single-purpose event to have a delay makes less sense but overanalyzing and overhonoring Apple’s commitment to corporate cleanliness in release cycles is silly. We do not have a very consistent dataset.