Discussion Apple Silicon SoC thread

Page 67 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,583
996
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:

 
Last edited:

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,203
3,407
136
Also putting the M1 into an iPad Pro. They are certainly getting a lot of mileage out of it.

It is identical to what an A14X would have been - they used A12Z (which was an A12X with the 8th GPU core enabled) in the developer Macs so it seems pretty obvious the 'X' series has long had everything needed for a Mac, with older 'X' versions running in Macs inside Apple HQ for the better part of a decade.

Interestingly, iOS 14.5 beta releases include references to an A14X, so that may be what it is still called internally when installed in an iPad Pro. However, since the M1 Macs have got a lot of positive press in the past months for their performance and battery life, it makes a lot of sense for Apple to publicly refer to the chip in the iPad Pro as 'M1' instead of 'A14X'. Helps their story that the iPad Pro is as powerful as a PC when it is using an SoC that wins performance battles against almost every PC laptop.
 

uzzi38

Platinum Member
Oct 16, 2019
2,566
5,575
146
Last edited:

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
5,208
1,580
136
This is several hours later, but it is like the 2018 and 2019 iPad Pros where you get more ram for free when you put an insane amount of SSD in it. Thus the cheapest model with 16gbs is $1500 and that is before accessories.

View attachment 43404

This image says all thats wrong with Apple. What if I want 16gb of ram but don't need 1Tb of storage?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and Mopetar

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
7,797
5,899
136
One would almost have to assume they'd do the same for the iMac. Right now the 3 different models that they have listed only have 8 GB of RAM, which feels pathetically low, even for an entry-level consumer product that will mainly do a lot of web browsing. The tech specs page does indicate that it supports up to 16 GB of RAM and 2 TB of storage.

I almost wonder to what extent the boards and other components are the same on the new iMac and iPad pro. Really the iMac is just a larger screen that lacks touch capabilities. Beyond that they're basically just using the same hardware. Perhaps it's a different board, but at the same time I wouldn't be too surprised if Apple went with a design that can be used across multiple product lines. It's basically unheard of, but it would make their supply chain far, far easier to manage.
 

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
9,206
6,799
136
This image says all thats wrong with Apple. What if I want 16gb of ram but don't need 1Tb of storage?

If you're the sort who needs 16GB of RAM in an iPad Pro in 2021... you probably need and can afford 1TB of storage! Considering that the previous models topped out at 6GB (as I recall), that's a huge leap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ajay

LightningZ71

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2017
1,627
1,898
136
I was mainly considering the iMac. With what people are seeing in their M1 macbooks, the 8GB of ram does tend to lead to a lot of swapping to the SSD, which people are demonstrating eats up the life expectancy of the NAND memory in them. It's not just so you can run more programs at once, or work with larger datasets, it's also to reduce the need for swapping to SSD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scannall

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
7,797
5,899
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.
 

B-Riz

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2011
1,482
612
136
It is the smaller iMac. Current 21" Intel model came with Coffee Lake with up to 8700. They claim 85% faster CPU performance.

Also putting the M1 into an iPad Pro. They are certainly getting a lot of mileage out of it.

The M1 looks like the good enough CPU that can be thermally modified for a wide range of products. I imagine Apple is paying pennies on the dollar for these things compared to what Intel was charging them, so this is a good business decision for Apple, but muddies the software landscape for the end users.

I am guessing a minor refresh after a year of initial release to public and a 10% to 20% perf increase after 2 years. Kinda like AMD and Intel do with their x86 chips.
 

B-Riz

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2011
1,482
612
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
14,511
5,159
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
1,482
612
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
4,222
5,224
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
4,222
5,224
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.