• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Discussion Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 470 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Eug

Eug

Lifer
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:

Page 78 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 78 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
forums.anandtech.com forums.anandtech.com

M1 Ultra discussion here:

Page 109 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 109 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
forums.anandtech.com forums.anandtech.com

M2 discussion here:

Page 127 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 127 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
forums.anandtech.com forums.anandtech.com

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:

Page 215 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 215 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
forums.anandtech.com forums.anandtech.com

M4 Family discussion here:

Page 263 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 263 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
forums.anandtech.com forums.anandtech.com

M5 Family discussion here:

Page 431 - Discussion - Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 431 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
forums.anandtech.com forums.anandtech.com
 
Last edited:
jdubs03 said:
Following up on my post earlier. Here are the relative performance/core count curve comparisons between the new core config vs the old (M4s).

Maybe they came to the conclusion that most workloads require less than 6 tier-1 threads/cores?
It’s an interesting trade-off once you get past 6 threads. Must be that they can save a bit of power but get similar performance with more parallelized workloads.
View attachment 139294
Click to expand...
Yes, but additionally the M5 would be 10-15% faster at 1T and (from Apple's marketing) 20-30% faster at nT. I bet that the performance tuning is so that the M5s just overtake their M4 equivalents at the M4s' knee points.
 
MerryCherry said:
Did they reverse engineer it, or are they also going off rumours?
Click to expand...
They microbenchmarked the base M5 and the A19s. Don’t know if they have access to the Pro and Max yet. Geekerwan had in the past included latency graphs. I noticed with disappointment that his recent videos didn’t show them, but I figured he was still doing them. He missed an opportunity to break some news.

I wish Ian and Andrei were still doing them. I avoid subscriptions like the plague, but I would have paid one to any site that could have kept them going.
 
.
The Hardcard said:
I’m not convinced the M5 has private L2. I believe it has the same version the A19s have, which would have been seen in the die shots and shown up in latency graphs.

I also still believe the new cache hierarchy is for the chiplets, why use unnecessary space on monolithic M5. I think the chart isn’t accounting for core differences in the same generation.
Click to expand...
its obvious the new cache hierarchy is for SoCs that Apple calls super cores. The A19 and A19 Pro big cores are not called super cores like the base M5.

You can go to that Chinese website and check which only reference shared L2 for A19 and also on Apples tech page on the iPhone 17.
 
Doug S said:
Its not clear from that what's going on here. Is that saying the super cores each have 1M private L2 and ALSO a 16M shared "L2"? If that's the case then I would consider the shared 16M an L3.

Or does calling it an L2 imply 16M L2 total, with six 1M partitions dedicated to each core and the remaining 10M shared by all?
Click to expand...
Yeah it’s meant to say shared L3. L2 is 1MB per core
 
poke01 said:
.

its obvious the new cache hierarchy is for SoCs that Apple calls super cores. The A19 and A19 Pro big cores are not called super cores like the base M5.

You can go to that Chinese website and check which only reference shared L2 for A19 and also on Apples tech page on the iPhone 17.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah. My point was that Geekerwan and a couple other Chinese microbenchers did the A19s in September and then Geekerwan did the M5 on October 21. Why didn’t he reveal the new cache hierarchy then? Did he miss it? Or did he just not do a latency graph? The video was out fast, he may have rushed.

The fact that they microbenchmarked and uploaded videos on the M5 was the basis of my doubt about it being in the M5. We should have known 4 1/2 months ago about a private L2 cache in the M5. He (and the others) really dropped the ball there.

EDIT: I knew the A19s didn’t have it. We have reasonably good die shot of both A19s. That was the other reason I doubted about the M5, because Apple had laid out the core without (at least) the private L2 for the iPhones.
 
Last edited:
mvprod123 said:
www.macrumors.com

Mac Studio 512GB RAM Option Disappears Amid Global DRAM Shortage

Apple quietly updated Mac Studio configuration options this week, removing the 512GB memory upgrade. As of yesterday, there is no option to purchase a Mac Studio with 512GB RAM, with the machine now maxing out at 256GB. The Mac Studio starts with 36GB RAM, but there were upgrades ranging from...
www.macrumors.com www.macrumors.com
Click to expand...
Normally the community would take that as proof that a new Ultra chip release was imminent.
 
The Hardcard said:
Vs X2 Elite Extreme early result.

The multicore gap is bigger than single core, despite 2 Prime clusters versus one Super cluster.
Click to expand...
Yeah. There are plenty base M5 ST results over 4300, so tbh I was expecting over 4400 since there’d be better cooling (also comparing the M4 Max vs M4 delta, iso-freq, and M5 vs M4). I was also hoping for 31K in MT. But alas, no dice.

Based on just that result vs M4 Max:
ST - could be as low as 6% uplift (with 4% IPC, seems low), id imagine the average will probably be around 4300 but TBD.
MT - 14% uplift
GPU wise, 24-25% uplift
 
jdubs03 said:
Yeah. There are plenty base M5 ST results over 4300, so tbh I was expecting over 4400 since there’d be better cooling (also comparing the M4 Max vs M4 delta, iso-freq, and M5 vs M4). I was also hoping for 31K in MT. But alas, no dice.

Based on just that result vs M4 Max:
ST - could be as low as 6% uplift (with 4% IPC, seems low), id imagine the average will probably be around 4300 but TBD.
MT - 14% uplift
GPU wise, 24-25% uplift
Click to expand...
The first results are always worse, as background tasks performed after the first start-up may have an impact.
 
jdubs03 said:
Yeah. There are plenty base M5 ST results over 4300, so tbh I was expecting over 4400 since there’d be better cooling (also comparing the M4 Max vs M4 delta, iso-freq, and M5 vs M4). I was also hoping for 31K in MT. But alas, no dice.

Based on just that result vs M4 Max:
ST - could be as low as 6% uplift (with 4% IPC, seems low), id imagine the average will probably be around 4300 but TBD.
MT - 14% uplift
GPU wise, 24-25% uplift
Click to expand...
Think I'll be waiting for the M6 Max. See if I can get an oled display out of it since I spend half of my compute time outside. Was hoping for a bit more ST.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top