Intel's first 10nm 'Cannon Lake' processor with 32GB LPDDR4 RAM support ships

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 54
    techridertechrider Posts: 102member
    Just consider what 10nm means for a moment. That’s the width of approximately 20 silicon ATOMs! Astounding...
    fastasleepwatto_cobra
  • Reply 42 of 54
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,927member
    Will Apple use the Radeon RX Vega M GH Graphics GPUs on the next generation MBPs I wonder?
    They should develop & use their own.
  • Reply 43 of 54
    bkkcanuckbkkcanuck Posts: 864member
    volcan said:
    dick applebaum said:
    Isn't the X86 emulator a legal (licensing) issue rather than a tech issue? 
    There are ways of getting around that as long as it is legally reverse engineered much like AMD did. With USB-C we really don't need Thunderbolt.
    Yeah, apparently there are problems with legally reverse engineered code too... I read that Intel was all over AMD -- and finally granted them a non-transferrable license to use the code.  I guess, if Apple did a legal reverse engineering of the code, they could include it in their chips as a fait accompli -- and let their lawyers earn their keep.
    If you are referring to AMD x86, I believe that dates back to the IBM PC days and a requirement by IBM that Intel license a second source.
  • Reply 44 of 54
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    brucemc said:
    tmay said:
    lkrupp said:
    tmay said:
    MacPro said:
    This explains why all the sudden massive discounts of Mac Book Pro  models reported on AI these last few days I suspect.  Well, I only want a MBP for casual use so I grabbed a MBP with touch bar from Adorama thanks to the AI advertorial and have no regrets, heck of a saving. 

    Will Apple use the Radeon RX Vega M GH Graphics GPUs on the next generation MBPs I wonder?
    It's been a long wait for many Mac Book Pro users to break the 16 GB memory barrier, and while I'm not the target audience, I expect a nice bump in sales when these are refreshed. Still, I have to wonder what additional niceties Apple will throw in.

    I'm guessing it's still a bit early for cellular, albeit Intel must be looking at providing that as an integrated feature in the near future.
    No bump in sales at all. The number of people who actually need that much RAM, especially on a laptop, is small indeed.
    There will be a bump at refresh is all I that I meant; not that it will be attributable to increased memory. I agree with you that the 32 GB barrier is overblown.
    Don't forget the inevitable complaints about the price of the future 32GB variant...and "what I really need is 64GB"...
    it’s hilarious how that always happens.
  • Reply 45 of 54
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,899administrator
    lkrupp said:
    brucemc said:
    tmay said:
    lkrupp said:
    tmay said:
    MacPro said:
    This explains why all the sudden massive discounts of Mac Book Pro  models reported on AI these last few days I suspect.  Well, I only want a MBP for casual use so I grabbed a MBP with touch bar from Adorama thanks to the AI advertorial and have no regrets, heck of a saving. 

    Will Apple use the Radeon RX Vega M GH Graphics GPUs on the next generation MBPs I wonder?
    It's been a long wait for many Mac Book Pro users to break the 16 GB memory barrier, and while I'm not the target audience, I expect a nice bump in sales when these are refreshed. Still, I have to wonder what additional niceties Apple will throw in.

    I'm guessing it's still a bit early for cellular, albeit Intel must be looking at providing that as an integrated feature in the near future.
    No bump in sales at all. The number of people who actually need that much RAM, especially on a laptop, is small indeed.
    There will be a bump at refresh is all I that I meant; not that it will be attributable to increased memory. I agree with you that the 32 GB barrier is overblown.
    Don't forget the inevitable complaints about the price of the future 32GB variant...and "what I really need is 64GB"...
    it’s hilarious how that always happens.
    Good news -- LPDDR4 can theoretically hit 128GB.
    chasmwatto_cobra
  • Reply 46 of 54
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,527member
    lkrupp said:
    brucemc said:
    tmay said:
    lkrupp said:
    tmay said:
    MacPro said:
    This explains why all the sudden massive discounts of Mac Book Pro  models reported on AI these last few days I suspect.  Well, I only want a MBP for casual use so I grabbed a MBP with touch bar from Adorama thanks to the AI advertorial and have no regrets, heck of a saving. 

    Will Apple use the Radeon RX Vega M GH Graphics GPUs on the next generation MBPs I wonder?
    It's been a long wait for many Mac Book Pro users to break the 16 GB memory barrier, and while I'm not the target audience, I expect a nice bump in sales when these are refreshed. Still, I have to wonder what additional niceties Apple will throw in.

    I'm guessing it's still a bit early for cellular, albeit Intel must be looking at providing that as an integrated feature in the near future.
    No bump in sales at all. The number of people who actually need that much RAM, especially on a laptop, is small indeed.
    There will be a bump at refresh is all I that I meant; not that it will be attributable to increased memory. I agree with you that the 32 GB barrier is overblown.
    Don't forget the inevitable complaints about the price of the future 32GB variant...and "what I really need is 64GB"...
    it’s hilarious how that always happens.
    Good news -- LPDDR4 can theoretically hit 128GB.
    Yeah, but I see your 2 ^ n and raise you a 2 ^ n+1
    edited May 2018 chasmwatto_cobrabrucemc
  • Reply 47 of 54
    Soli said:
    tipoo said:
    It appears the first models can't compete on base and boost clocks, there's the problem with milking things to 14nm+++, suddenly the newer node can't compare. 

    Looks like the first parts will be pipe cleaners for 10nm, alas. 

    Wonder if Apple will just wait it out, or else has Kaby Lake G parts planned for WWDC. 
    Based on the complaints on forums about the lack of 32GiB RAM it sounds like there's an interim market to get people to buy new Mac notebooks.
    Most of the complainers don’t even own a MacBook Pro, let alone need 32GB of RAM. It’s just an easy knock against Apple, equivalent to the “dongle hell” TB3-only port complaints. Even if you assume all the forum complaints are legit, it’s still a very small number of users, though representative of a larger group. 

    My completely unscientific guess, with no data to support it, is that maybe 5-10% of MB/MBP users are actually constrained by the 16GB limit. Maybe 25-50% of those could also benefit from 64GB, the max Intel currently supports (only when DDR4 is used) for any mobile processor, including Xeon. Maybe another 10% might buy 32GB for future proofing.

    But the actual number of customers lost due to a lack of >16GB Mac laptops is very small I think, since most who want/require 32GB or more will either get by with 16 or buy an iMac. (There is also a group waiting on the sidelines for a Mac laptop with >16GB, deferring any purchase until it’s available.) So there’s little motivation for a stop-gap solution. 

    The reality is that laptops require certain compromises, and if you need a desktop/workstation, a laptop isn’t going to satisfy your requirements. But certainly a 32/64GB option for Mac laptops will be welcome when it arrives next year (?!?), and will make a real difference for those that are memory constrained. Similarly the 6-core processors that will soon be available for the 15” MBP. 
    edited May 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 48 of 54
    lkrupp said:
    brucemc said:
    tmay said:
    lkrupp said:
    tmay said:
    MacPro said:
    This explains why all the sudden massive discounts of Mac Book Pro  models reported on AI these last few days I suspect.  Well, I only want a MBP for casual use so I grabbed a MBP with touch bar from Adorama thanks to the AI advertorial and have no regrets, heck of a saving. 

    Will Apple use the Radeon RX Vega M GH Graphics GPUs on the next generation MBPs I wonder?
    It's been a long wait for many Mac Book Pro users to break the 16 GB memory barrier, and while I'm not the target audience, I expect a nice bump in sales when these are refreshed. Still, I have to wonder what additional niceties Apple will throw in.

    I'm guessing it's still a bit early for cellular, albeit Intel must be looking at providing that as an integrated feature in the near future.
    No bump in sales at all. The number of people who actually need that much RAM, especially on a laptop, is small indeed.
    There will be a bump at refresh is all I that I meant; not that it will be attributable to increased memory. I agree with you that the 32 GB barrier is overblown.
    Don't forget the inevitable complaints about the price of the future 32GB variant...and "what I really need is 64GB"...
    it’s hilarious how that always happens.
    Good news -- LPDDR4 can theoretically hit 128GB.
    But the max will be dictated by what’s supported by Intel’s memory controller. For Ice Lake timeframe (2019/2020) I’d expect the continuation of 64GB max. I could see 128GB possibly appearing in the next generation of Xeon mobile, before its subsequent appearance in other 45W parts. 
    edited May 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 49 of 54
    Soli said:
    tmay said:
    volcan said:
    blastdoor said:
    The rationale to stick with Intel in Macs is getting weaker. 
    Probably getting close. Apple's A11 Bionic already has nearly twice as many transistors as the Intel quad core i7. Once they can get an X86 emulator to run Windows with minimal performance hit there should be no reason not to switch to ARM.
    Isn't the X86 emulator a legal (licensing) issue rather than a tech issue?  If so, Apple is in a pretty good negotiating position:
    • Macs are a small percent of the total computers that use Intel chips
    • iDevices provide a very large percentage of mobile devices using modems -- potentially Intel modem chips
    Is it possible that lower volumes of A11s could be used in MacBooks and iPads soon -- earlier than the expected new iPhones in the Fall-Winter?
    At this point in time, I wonder how many MacBook users even care about Windows. Seems like it would be easy to bifurcate the line such that an ARM MacBook analog running iOS Plus (for lack of a better term) would be the way to go for both cost and performance reasons.
    I have to assume Apple has fairly solid numbers for how many users use Boot Camp or VMs. My guess is that it's not as large as many here believe, and if my guess is correct about an ARM-based Mac coming in at the low-end of the product line, I'd wager that running Windows on a low-end Mac becomes an even less likely scenario.

    On top of that, we need to consider how important that is to Apple. Apple wasn't the first to offer a dual boot solution, and today I think that need is even less important for Apple's success than it was a decade ago.


    PS: Why not call it macOS since it's the same OS, just as it was still macOS hen they added support for x86 along with PPC.
    I think we could see an Apple CPU replace Intel for MacBook, where CPU is approx 5W and I/O doesn’t require TB3. Maybe 12”/14” models for $999/1399. Obviously no Intel compatibility, but running macOS X. I think we’ll see Intel in MBP and iMac for many years to come. 
    Solisphericwatto_cobra
  • Reply 50 of 54
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,038member
    Soli said:
    tmay said:
    volcan said:
    blastdoor said:
    The rationale to stick with Intel in Macs is getting weaker. 
    Probably getting close. Apple's A11 Bionic already has nearly twice as many transistors as the Intel quad core i7. Once they can get an X86 emulator to run Windows with minimal performance hit there should be no reason not to switch to ARM.
    Isn't the X86 emulator a legal (licensing) issue rather than a tech issue?  If so, Apple is in a pretty good negotiating position:
    • Macs are a small percent of the total computers that use Intel chips
    • iDevices provide a very large percentage of mobile devices using modems -- potentially Intel modem chips
    Is it possible that lower volumes of A11s could be used in MacBooks and iPads soon -- earlier than the expected new iPhones in the Fall-Winter?
    At this point in time, I wonder how many MacBook users even care about Windows. Seems like it would be easy to bifurcate the line such that an ARM MacBook analog running iOS Plus (for lack of a better term) would be the way to go for both cost and performance reasons.
    I have to assume Apple has fairly solid numbers for how many users use Boot Camp or VMs. My guess is that it's not as large as many here believe, and if my guess is correct about an ARM-based Mac coming in at the low-end of the product line, I'd wager that running Windows on a low-end Mac becomes an even less likely scenario.

    On top of that, we need to consider how important that is to Apple. Apple wasn't the first to offer a dual boot solution, and today I think that need is even less important for Apple's success than it was a decade ago.


    PS: Why not call it macOS since it's the same OS, just as it was still macOS hen they added support for x86 along with PPC.
    I think we could see an Apple CPU replace Intel for MacBook, where CPU is approx 5W and I/O doesn’t require TB3. Maybe 12”/14” models for $999/1399. Obviously no Intel compatibility, but running macOS X. I think we’ll see Intel in MBP and iMac for many years to come. 
    That's exactly how I've been envisioning the most likely course of action for Apple. Those buying entry-level Macs running Apple silicon likely don't need the TB, or x86_64 virtualization offered in Intel chips, which is just a cost that can be removed for the user. I know Anker offers a USB-C-to-HDMI adapter that can do 4K@60Hz, which I'd think is adequate for what I assume are a small number of people that will want to connect an external monitor to an entry-level notebook.

    I have to say, I'm glad that things have shifted; that many people can now see that an ARM-based Mac could be a viable option for Apple. When I first brought it up several years ago there's a lot of push back about how it could never happen. We could still be years off, depending on when Apple feels the time is right, but it still feels inevitable to me.
  • Reply 51 of 54
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,427member
    With the increasing speed of SSD, I'm not sure 32GB is as important as it was a few years ago (though it will continue to be faster than SSD for a while yet, and thus very important for a few).

    I know I was using the latest Photoshop CC on a Mac with "only" 16GB of RAM with no material slowdowns or delays I could attribute to the lack of RAM, but then I wasn't working with 50GB RAW images either (to be fair). But for the vast majority of even the MBP market, 16GB is in point of fact more than sufficient for their usual needs, and the VM of PCI-E SSDs is hiding any "suffering" when RAM is short way better than it ever has before.

    I think Apple will eventually bring out an ARM-based Mac at the low end, as PickUrPoison and Soli have speculated -- hopefully lowering the entry-level costs. As they said, it might run macOS *only* and wouldn't have more than 16GB RAM and no TB, but again that's still more than what the vast majority of users require for typical (and even most) use. Storage space and seamless cloud management are the areas these sorts of buyers would probably like Apple to focus on, alongside lower prices.

    The (sad?) reality is that high-end uses for computers are getting more rare and specialised, and I think companies like Apple in particular -- and the rest of the industry in general -- will go forward looking to create a single very high-end machine with a high-end price tag to address that niche, with the main lines being machines that do FaceBook, Office-like software, photo-management and editing and other consumer-level creation and consumption apps very well. The only thing that might change that is if VR ever really takes off, but I don't think it will (at least, not compared to AR -- which needs far fewer resources).
    edited May 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 52 of 54
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    They shouldn't bother migrating Mac to ARM. Just make iOS supprt keyboard and mouse, and then start selling iOS computers. I would more happily move from a Mac laptop to an iOS laptop than from a Mac laptop to a Windows laptop.
  • Reply 53 of 54
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,626member
    ascii said:
    They shouldn't bother migrating Mac to ARM. Just make iOS supprt keyboard and mouse, and then start selling iOS computers. I would more happily move from a Mac laptop to an iOS laptop than from a Mac laptop to a Windows laptop.
    That is the definition of migrating the Mac to ARM. 

    The Mac is a mouse-pointer-based OS, iOS is not. 

    Also, iOS has supported external keyboards since the first iPad. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 54 of 54
    bkkcanuckbkkcanuck Posts: 864member
    spheric said:
    ascii said:
    They shouldn't bother migrating Mac to ARM. Just make iOS supprt keyboard and mouse, and then start selling iOS computers. I would more happily move from a Mac laptop to an iOS laptop than from a Mac laptop to a Windows laptop.
    That is the definition of migrating the Mac to ARM. 

    The Mac is a mouse-pointer-based OS, iOS is not. 

    Also, iOS has supported external keyboards since the first iPad. 
    No, that is not the definition of migrating Mac to ARM.  The MacOS is not iOS (the UI is different).  It is a fully windowing, fully pre-emptive multitasking OS, iOS is still not full windowing, and it allows limited multitasking for 3rd party apps.
Sign In or Register to comment.