Discussion Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 89 - 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:

defferoo

Member
Sep 28, 2015
53
57
91
very strange that the scaling from Pro to Max is not 2x given the increase in memory bandwidth and cores, we need to see more benchmarks to see what's going on.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,114
6,770
136
I'll be so happy if mining is outlawed at some point. Not only is it a pyramid scheme (IMO) but it is terrible for the environment. If you're a miner you should be ashamed.

I've never found these arguments compelling. There's nothing that inherently makes mining inefficient, but any proof of work algorithm is going to create duplicate efforts. Most have realized that if they want something that's useful as a currency then alternatives like proof of stake are required in order to achieve a respectable transaction volume.

Cryptocurrency is also no more of a pyramid scheme than anything else. That it's a type of commodity only makes it susceptible to the same kinds of manipulations as the rest of the stock market. The phrase pump and dump existed long before BitCoin ever came around.

Further the biggest complaints are coming from gamers who want to use GPUs to crunch numbers to make pretty pixel arrangements for their own amusement. The computation resources going towards mining weren't being used for some more noble purpose prior to that point, so it's seriously difficult to make that argument either.

Your argument ultimately boils down to thing I don't like ought to be illegal because I don't like it. Never mind that your same reasoning would make other things that you do enjoy illegal. I don't even mine or have any cryptocurrency, but the sentiment against it is rather ridiculous.
 

Heartbreaker

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2006
4,340
5,464
136
I've never found these arguments compelling. There's nothing that inherently makes mining inefficient, but any proof of work algorithm is going to create duplicate efforts. Most have realized that if they want something that's useful as a currency then alternatives like proof of stake are required in order to achieve a respectable transaction volume.

Cryptocurrency is also no more of a pyramid scheme than anything else. That it's a type of commodity only makes it susceptible to the same kinds of manipulations as the rest of the stock market. The phrase pump and dump existed long before BitCoin ever came around.

Further the biggest complaints are coming from gamers who want to use GPUs to crunch numbers to make pretty pixel arrangements for their own amusement. The computation resources going towards mining weren't being used for some more noble purpose prior to that point, so it's seriously difficult to make that argument either.

Your argument ultimately boils down to thing I don't like ought to be illegal because I don't like it. Never mind that your same reasoning would make other things that you do enjoy illegal. I don't even mine or have any cryptocurrency, but the sentiment against it is rather ridiculous.

The arguments against crypt coins is very compelling to me.

Coin mining is unnecessary busy work, that now consumes more power and creates more emissions than a small to medium sized country. In a time, when the future environment is at grave risk from excess consumption and emissions.

Crypto coins are not an actual commodity. They have no real utility, or baseline value. So their value could easily evaporate to the nothing which they are based on.

It's an expensive virtual frenzy, tail chasing something with no inherent value, but causing real harm.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
15,223
5,768
136
Crypto coins are not an actual commodity. They have no real utility, or baseline value. So their value could easily evaporate to the nothing which they are based on.

It's an expensive virtual frenzy, tail chasing something with no inherent value, but causing real harm.

The endgame is crypto replacing the US dollar as the reserve currency due to US financial policy (ie: see the pumping, runaway inflation that's going on, etc).
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,114
6,770
136
The arguments against crypt coins is very compelling to me.

Coin mining is unnecessary busy work, that now consumes more power and creates more emissions than a small to medium sized country. In a time, when the future environment is at grave risk from excess consumption and emissions.

Crypto coins are not an actual commodity. They have no real utility, or baseline value. So their value could easily evaporate to the nothing which they are based on.

It's an expensive virtual frenzy, tail chasing something with no inherent value, but causing real harm.

Using GPUs for gaming is just unnecessary busy work though since the utility is entirely subjective to the person doing it. Should we outlaw high-end gaming because it's wasteful?

I'm not sure what to mean by cryptocurrency not being an actual commodity. It's a limited good that's bought and sold. It's by definition a commodity with the only difference from traditional commodities being that it's digital. Non-tangible property has been around for a long time and people buy and sell rights that have no more real existence than a BitCoin.

Similarly it's value arises as a secure means of exchange which is the inherent value of all currency. A US dollar isn't worth any particular value by decree, but is instead valuable because it enables exchanges of goods and services, can be used to pay taxes, and because there's a massive economy behind it. Stop the economic activity and the dollar becomes worthless because there's nothing to buy with it. Plenty of countries have discovered that the value of a dollar isn't its mere existence.

Cryptocurrency is doing nothing new outside of offering a decentralized system for exchanges that replace what we use banks for. Almost all of the fraud or examples of Ponzi schemes come from people that intentionally move transactions off of the blockchain and into something akin to a centralized bank which has absolutely no regulations unlike traditional banks.

It's neither a great evil that must be destroyed or some kind of savior of humanity that will usher in a new area. A lot of the value from BitCoin is just simply due to it having a limited supply that grows less slowly than other currencies/commodities and that if you live under a totalitarian government you can use a cryptocurrency to get your wealth out from under the control of that government.

Frankly it's not much different than TOR in a certain way. It's just a tool and people can use it for good or ill. Treating it like it's some kind of never before seen dark sorcery is just a fundamental misunderstanding of how it's not conceptually different from what we've already been doing or have already had for decades or even centuries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lobz

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,114
6,770
136
Do M1max and M1pro share the same TDPs? If so, it could be a result of hitting power limits with the larger chip.

Since you can put any of the configurations in the 14" model of the new MacBook Pro the cooling system must be build for the whatever the 32-core GPU variant of the Max can put out.

I doubt Apple has configured the Pro or cut down Max chips to take advantage of the extra headroom and boost clocks above the other configuration. At least not as far as the CPU is concerned since it would mean that the less expensive product could perform better in some way than the more expensive product. Apple doesn't want that. With the GPU this could occur to some extent because they're selling different number of cores and it's less efficient to just double the clock speed of a 16-core part to match performance of a 32-core part.

I imagine Apple has the chips locked down. If we do get any desktops using these expect higher clocks, just like we saw with the M1 that went into the Mac Mini.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
I imagine Apple has the chips locked down. If we do get any desktops using these expect higher clocks, just like we saw with the M1 that went into the Mac Mini.
???

The M1 Mac mini has the same clock speed as the M1 MacBook Pro and even M1 MacBook Air. Same goes for the 24" iMac.

All are 3.2 GHz. In fact, even the iPad Pro M1 is 3.2 GHz.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
22,065
11,693
136
I'll be so happy if mining is outlawed at some point. Not only is it a pyramid scheme (IMO) but it is terrible for the environment. If you're a miner you should be ashamed.


Here you go! Prepare to bow to your crypto-mining overlords.

(don't worry, ETH mining stops in June at the latest so, lighten up a little. Nobody in their right mind will be buying up M1X Macbook Pros when they could never achieve RoI)
 

LightningZ71

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2017
1,798
2,156
136

Here you go! Prepare to bow to your crypto-mining overlords.

(don't worry, ETH mining stops in June at the latest so, lighten up a little. Nobody in their right mind will be buying up M1X Macbook Pros when they could never achieve RoI)

Eth went POS years ago... right? They swore it was coming "real soon now!" Any second...

There's no need to worry about recovering the original purchase price as used MACS still go for near new prices. Of someone actually builds optimized libraries and hashes, it's over.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
22,065
11,693
136
Eth went POS years ago... right? They swore it was coming "real soon now!" Any second...

It's finally here. May 2022 is the latest "go live" date for the merge, with mining supposedly ending in June 2022. Not sure that Macbook Pros used for mining would hold all of their value, but you never know!
 

Red_m

Junior Member
Aug 29, 2021
6
23
36
I'm still slightly dissapointed at 0% ST gains compared to M1 though.
Apple likely did not want to push clocks as that more heat and more power draw for minimal speed increase.
The 16-core score corresponds to what's expected from M1 results. The 32-core score seems too low.

The M1 Pro score is twice the M1, which is more expected.
Keep in mind thats OpenCL. OpenCL had been depreciated in macOS and is rotting.

Metal benchmarks are the ones we need to look out for.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
Apple likely did not want to push clocks as that more heat and more power draw for minimal speed increase.

Keep in mind thats OpenCL. OpenCL had been depreciated in macOS and is rotting.

Metal benchmarks are the ones we need to look out for.
OK, I found one M1 Max Metal score. There are no others, so I don't know how representative this is:


Screen Shot 2021-10-20 at 11.14.21 PM.png

M1 non-Pro Mac mini gets around 21000-22000.
 
Last edited:

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,784
4,749
136
Apple likely did not want to push clocks as that more heat and more power draw for minimal speed increase.


Plus they didn't need the extra speed to reach their launch goal, which was to beat all the PC laptop competition and blow away the existing x86 Macbook Pro models.

Apple has always highly valued power efficiency. They switched from PPC to x86 over it, when PPC became more workstation focused once IBM was the only serious chipmaker in that market. They had to pressure Intel at the CEO level for a line of lower TDP laptop CPUs to allow them to develop Macbook Air.

Squeezing out a bit more performance at the cost of a louder fan, hotter lap and shorter battery life isn't worth it to them. For what, so it could beat that 10 pound DTR that requires two power supplies some dork was whining about being a little faster in the comments on Andrei's M1 Pro/Max article?
 

Roland00Address

Platinum Member
Dec 17, 2008
2,196
260
126
Apple is in a truly unique position to launch a Nintendo Switch killer with 20 hours battery life.

The Nvidia chip in the Nintendo switch is 118 mm² on TSMC 20nm (it has since gotten a die shrink to 16nm) with only 2 billion transistors.

The Apple M1, not the M1Pro or M1Max is 119 mm² on TSMC 5nm EUV process with 33.7 billion transistors. I hope Apple with 16x the transistor budget and 5 years plus 10 months of process shrinks can make a much better chip.

Regardless with 5nm process and this die size, even with 100% yields (which the yields will not be this high) Apple will not be wanting to ship a $200 dollar device. Maybe in a few years but not now. When Nintendo was finally shipping Nintendo Switches (2017, the chip came out in 2015) Apple was shifting from 16nm to 10nm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and xpea

insertcarehere

Senior member
Jan 17, 2013
639
607
136
New GFX bench scores: Aztec Ruins High Tier off screen 310 fps! closed to 3080 mobile!

View attachment 51689

I do wonder what Apple's motivation is for integratimg such a powerful GPU in the SoC. It's clear that gaming isn't a market they care a lot about, so presumably any GPU would be for acceleration purposes in applications. A lot of the same applications could also (theroetically) be served well with smaller dedicated fixed-function units.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
I do wonder what Apple's motivation is for integratimg such a powerful GPU in the SoC. It's clear that gaming isn't a market they care a lot about, so presumably any GPU would be for acceleration purposes in applications. A lot of the same applications could also (theroetically) be served well with smaller dedicated fixed-function units.
For example, After Effects runs natively on M1 now. Same with Premiere Pro. Same with Blender. Etc. These support Metal.


And of course there are Apple's own applications like Final Cut.
 
Jul 27, 2020
20,040
13,738
146

Seems to me that Jobs gathered up like minded people at Apple, or at least, Tim Cook has enough of Jobs in him to disregard gaming as important. Maybe the only reason they have a potent GPU is so it looks good in benchmarks and avoids the embarrassment of an Apple product being at the bottom of a chart comparing it with other devices. I really wish Carmack would get obsessed with creating something groundbreaking that really works well on the M1. That would get other major developers on the bandwagon.