Discussion Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 69 - 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:

B-Riz

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2011
1,595
761
136
Was that the cause of the problem? I mean it definitely sounds plausible, but I never really heard about any conclusion to why that had happened.

Even with the reports of seemingly expedited drive wear, napkin math still suggested those computers would last over a decade before expected failure.

Almost any M1 Mac will be replaced by then and those that don't will probably see greatly diminished usage. Perhaps further memory requirements from future programs (JavaScript on most websites isn't getting any less bloated) offsets that and it all balances out, but to me the additional lag created from swapping to drive is far worse than the wear on it.

Apple likes to advertise on the snappiness of their new Macs (just like they used to really focus on boot time or how fast they could wake from sleep) and 8 GB of RAM severely limits that once you get a few Chrome tabs opened up.

Yeah, the weakness is the 8GB in the base Mini, that is why I have not bought one; it is too much for a 16GB model. They went too intergrated in this adventure and will miss sales to the computer enthusiasts who at least want to be able to upgrade RAM and SSD / NVME.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
15,223
5,768
136
Yeah, the weakness is the 8GB in the base Mini, that is why I have not bought one; it is too much for a 16GB model. They went too intergrated in this adventure and will miss sales to the computer enthusiasts who at least want to be able to upgrade RAM and SSD / NVME.

That's the appeal to Apple. People don't really upgrade and for those who do, it's done at purchase time to avoid paying the OEM prices for the upgrades. I'm sure the money Apple gets from upgrades more than makes up for anyone turned off by the lack of upgradability.
 

B-Riz

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2011
1,595
761
136
That's the appeal to Apple. People don't really upgrade and for those who do, it's done at purchase time to avoid paying the OEM prices for the upgrades. I'm sure the money Apple gets from upgrades more than makes up for anyone turned off by the lack of upgradability.

Eh, informed consumers are still out there and Apple still sells the 6 core Intel 2018 Mini which you can upgrade the RAM on; the $1099 for that with a diy 8GB ram upgrade vs locked down new stuff...


Or get a refurb 2018 Mini and skip M1.
 

Heartbreaker

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2006
4,340
5,464
136
Yeah, the weakness is the 8GB in the base Mini, that is why I have not bought one; it is too much for a 16GB model. They went too intergrated in this adventure and will miss sales to the computer enthusiasts who at least want to be able to upgrade RAM and SSD / NVME.

Would you feel better if they raised the base price by $100 and dropped the 16GB RAM price by $100. Then the RAM upgrade would only be $100.

In the end you have margin targets. They way Apple does it extracts more margin from higher end buyers and less from low end buyers.

I have no issue with them doing it that way, as it lets them offer a lower entry price for those that can live with the lower specs (and really that's most people).
 

Heartbreaker

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2006
4,340
5,464
136
Eh, informed consumers are still out there and Apple still sells the 6 core Intel 2018 Mini which you can upgrade the RAM on; the $1099 for that with a diy 8GB ram upgrade vs locked down new stuff...


Or get a refurb 2018 Mini and skip M1.


Doesn't seem all that informed to me.

899 gets you an M1 Mini with 16GB RAM (but only 256GB SSD), so 1099 gets you to 16GB RAM, and 512GB SSD.

1099 gets you a 6 core Intel Mini with 8GB RAM and 512GB SSD. But you can upgrade RAM yourself. If your goal is 16GB, it's actually more expensive to do this.

That and from what I have seen the M1 will smoke the base 6 core Intel Mini at everything.

Only get the the Intel one if you MUST have More than 16GB RAM, because you aren't saving anything, and the Intel machine is slower.
 

B-Riz

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2011
1,595
761
136
Doesn't seem all that informed to me.

899 gets you an M1 Mini with 16GB RAM (but only 256GB SSD), so 1099 gets you to 16GB RAM, and 512GB SSD.

1099 gets you a 6 core Intel Mini with 8GB RAM and 512GB SSD. But you can upgrade RAM yourself. If your goal is 16GB, it's actually more expensive to do this.

That and from what I have seen the M1 will smoke the base 6 core Intel Mini at everything.

Only get the the Intel one if you MUST have More than 16GB RAM, because you aren't saving anything, and the Intel machine is slower.

Eh, who cares if it is slower if a refurb / fleabay 2018 Intel Mini is a better deal with better compatibility?

I bought an open box 2018 Mini in 2019 and still cannot find a compelling reason to buy an M1 Mini, even at a refurbished discount from Apple at $589.

M1 is neat, but still a gimmick with bells n whistles and "look, better numbers" with a now bifurcated software ecosystem.

Just Apple doing Apple things really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tarkin77

Heartbreaker

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2006
4,340
5,464
136
Eh, who cares if it is slower if a refurb / fleabay 2018 Intel Mini is a better deal with better compatibility?

I bought an open box 2018 Mini in 2019 and still cannot find a compelling reason to buy an M1 Mini, even at a refurbished discount from Apple at $589.

M1 is neat, but still a gimmick with bells n whistles and "look, better numbers" with a now bifurcated software ecosystem.

Just Apple doing Apple things really.

Where is the better deal? It costs more for the Intel one to get to 16GB, even if you upgrade it yourself and it's slower.

Refurbs and used will exist for both.

So Intel is more money and slower. Yeah, great deal. ;)
 

B-Riz

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2011
1,595
761
136
Where is the better deal? It costs more for the Intel one to get to 16GB, even if you upgrade it yourself and it's slower.

Refurbs and used will exist for both.

So Intel is more money and slower. Yeah, great deal. ;)

Jfc, I am talking about buying a refurb, Intel is a way better deal.

New, it is a wash IMO, new and shiny and an effed up software eco-system or older and no software issues.

But I forgot that everyone is bench-marking there Mini's in here all day and bragging about bigger numbers. o_O
 

Muadib

Lifer
May 30, 2000
17,988
866
126

B-Riz

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2011
1,595
761
136
They have refurb M1 minis. I passed because they only have 256GB SSD drives, but they have them.

There was a good mix last week of the refurb M1, but it was still knocking close to $1k for 16GB and a bigger SSD in it, that is just nuts for what it is.
 

Heartbreaker

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2006
4,340
5,464
136
My questions...

Is there a packaging or even a die difference that makes certain skews 8 or 16gb?

Are memory and SSD tied together?

Nope.

Someone desoldered the 8GB of RAM and soldered in 16GB. You need much better than average skills to do this, and you risk screwing it up.

 

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,784
4,744
136
M1 is neat, but still a gimmick with bells n whistles and "look, better numbers" with a now bifurcated software ecosystem.

You expected them to upgrade the entire line to ARM at once, dropping all x86 models the same day? Of course it is bifurcated for a while, there has to be a transition period.

All they've done so far is stick the M1 in entry level systems, they haven't even dropped the "higher end" x86 SKU (higher end in quotes since it is slower) for their cheapest products like the Air and Mini.

They will support larger memory configurations in non-entry level systems that will get whatever follows M1 - we'll probably see something later this year based on the A15 cores. Some will likely still have soldered RAM depending on the model, but they won't be able to use LPDDR4/5 outside the entry level due to its inherent capacity limit.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
5,064
8,032
136
The transition period of 2 years may seem long, but I really wonder if and when Apple is going to replace the actually higher end SKUs. That may end up being much closer to the end of that transition period.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
15,223
5,768
136
The transition period of 2 years may seem long, but I really wonder if and when Apple is going to replace the actually higher end SKUs. That may end up being much closer to the end of that transition period.

What's left is the 16" MBP and 27+" iMac, as well as whatever they do with the Mac Pro. The former should be released this year and both probally use the same SoC.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
5,064
8,032
136
What's left is the 16" MBP and 27+" iMac, as well as whatever they do with the Mac Pro. The former should be released this year and both probally use the same SoC.
Yeah, a hypothetical M1X may be sufficient for 16" MBP and 27+" iMac. What they do with Mac Pro (and when) is the big question.
 

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,784
4,744
136
The transition period of 2 years may seem long, but I really wonder if and when Apple is going to replace the actually higher end SKUs. That may end up being much closer to the end of that transition period.

The "high end" for a Mini or Air might be the entry level for MBP 16". That's what the rumored 8+4 core would presumably be. I don't see them waiting until next year for that, whether it falls closer to the beginning or end of the transition period depends on when the new Mac Pro comes out.
 

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,784
4,744
136
Yeah, a hypothetical M1X may be sufficient for 16" MBP and 27+" iMac. What they do with Mac Pro (and when) is the big question.

Yeah I'm still putting my money the Mac Pro using the chips that go in the lower end Macs able to work alone or as chiplets. You get up to 32 big cores, 4x the GPU, and 4x the memory channels. If they really wanted to go insane they could even release an 8 chip version of that later.

Rumors are all over the place though, some are claiming Apple is designing monolithic chips for this, some claim it will be based on N4 instead of N3 as I believe which means it could come out as early as Q1 next year. So who knows.

The other open question is if they will use TSMC's high performance process for the Mac Pro. They could get 10-20% more performance over the low power process that M1 uses. I think that's a guarantee if they go monolithic, if they go chiplet using the HP process would mean using that process for the chips going in the MBP 16" which would cost some battery life. They could really put up some blowout performance numbers though and make Intel look silly.
 

Heartbreaker

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2006
4,340
5,464
136
The "high end" for a Mini or Air might be the entry level for MBP 16". That's what the rumored 8+4 core would presumably be. I don't see them waiting until next year for that, whether it falls closer to the beginning or end of the transition period depends on when the new Mac Pro comes out.

Yeah Mid range chip will eventually power the 16" MBP, Big Screen iMac, and Mac Mini. In descending order of priority. Unless they are very chip constrained, I expect this will be announced and rolled out together. Though highest priority to laptop if supply is tight. The Mac business is mostly a laptop business.

I don't see the Mac Pro influencing the Mini rollout at all.
 

thunng8

Member
Jan 8, 2013
167
72
101
Eh, who cares if it is slower if a refurb / fleabay 2018 Intel Mini is a better deal with better compatibility?

I bought an open box 2018 Mini in 2019 and still cannot find a compelling reason to buy an M1 Mini, even at a refurbished discount from Apple at $589.

M1 is neat, but still a gimmick with bells n whistles and "look, better numbers" with a now bifurcated software ecosystem.

Just Apple doing Apple things really.
It was compelling for me. I had a mac mini i5 6 core (2018) with 32GB RAM (installed it myself - it was easy). The M1 with 16GB runs circle around the Intel. General usage is significantly faster (browsing, app launch, scrolling). Photo editing is a lot faster. A large photomerge in photoshop (15 42MP RAW files) was almost 2X faster. Even Lightroom CC classic running under Rosetta was about 20% faster. I also dabble in video editing - but my cursory usage reveals it is at least 3X faster or more.

Note: I've been a big fan of the mini. I had the 2012 quad core i7 model previously. Upgrading to the 2018 model. never gave me a "wow, that was fast moment". It was an incremental speedup. The upgrade to the M1 definitely changed that. There were several times I thought, "wow, that was fast!".

I don't regret the upgrade to M1 at all. Unless you really need to run x86/x64 virtualization - upgrading to an M1 IMO is a no-brainer.
 
Last edited:

smalM

Member
Sep 9, 2019
72
77
91
some claim it will be based on N4 instead of N3 as I believe which means it could come out as early as Q1 next year.
N4 will enter risk production in the second half of this year and HVM next year (and I'm pretty sure it will be after Chinese New Year).
Apple does not use risk production.