This news is a nothingburger for Apple? No new functionality in TB4 for Apple devices as far as I can tell:
So, it essentially brings TB capability for PC to Apple Mac levels, almost? 5K monitor support is spotty in the PC world.
It’s right there in the spec
Required Intel VT-d based DMA protection.
In the Audio world Thunderbolt is in all professional Audio Interface hardware, as well as Ethernet via Dante spec in the likes of Apogee Digital, Universal Audio, Focusrite Red, etc. TB 2 & 3 are big for low latency DMA over PCIe and critical as USB doesn’t have that, period.
The PCIe 32GB/s means PCIe 4.0 as a minimum. No problem as by the time Apple Silicon on Mac Pro arrives they’ll be PCIe 5.0 based motherboards.
When It Is Available: Later this year, Intel expects to deliver the new Thunderbolt 4 controller 8000 series, including:
JHL8540 and JHL8340 host controllers for computer makers.
JHL8440 device controller for accessory makers.
The first computers and accessories with Thunderbolt 4 ports are also expected to be available this year, including laptops based on Intel’s innovation program code-named “Project Athena.”
Apple will include one of those host controllers on their Apple Silicon based Mac motherboards just like AMD OEMs will do to offer TB4 on their motherboards.
It's 32 gigabit per second, not gigabyte. All they are doing for "TB4" certification is to have minimum support of 32 gigabit/sec data bandwidth. In TB3, it was a 16 gigabit/sec minimum. Apple already supports 32 gigabit per second on all of their TB3 Macs. They already support Intel's DMA virtualization. They already support 2 4K monitors or 1 5K or 6K monitor per TB3 bus. The PC speed bandwidth is the same at 40 gigabit per second for both TB3 and TB4. This only requires x4 lanes of PCIe 3.
As far as I can tell, the only new thing is accessories can have 4 TB ports.
Right. My error in bit vs. byte, and yes the minimum requirement is PCIe 3.0 bandwidth. In practical application, that means PCIe 4.0 as no Vendor will be producing PCIe 3.0 motherboards any longer, including Apple with Apple Silicon.
Virtually all Intel board makers will be connecting these 8000 series TB4 controllers with PCIe 3 from the PCH, if they use them. Comet Lake is PCIe 3 all the way. Rocket Lake, the successor, will have 20 lanes of PCIe 4 directly from the CPU for GPUs and SSDs, but these TB3 controllers will likely be connected with PCIe 3 off the PCH. It's right there in Intel's Rocket Lake platform diagram.
I assume Tiger Lake will be like Ice Lake. It doesn't need a TB3 host/bus controller because it is already on-chip. It's just going to have a clock or signal generator of some kind for the port.
For Apple's Apple Silicon Mac, who knows. My bet is it is going to be a superset of USB4/TB3/TB4 so 8K monitors can be supported. The controller will be directly on-chip connected to a switched fabric of some kind. If they don't want to do that, it's going to be a USB4/TB3/TB4 controller chip connected with PCIe 4.
People REALLY need to stop assuming the Dev Kit mini is what the new Apple Silicon based Macs will be like.
I could not agree more. The Dev Kit Mini is a software test bed - end of story.
The other caveat that I'd add is that even the first round of Apple Silicon Macs (ASMs) will (likely) not fully represent Apple's premier implementation of what they are capable of doing with their own silicon at a system level, e.g., native GPU only versus the option for a tightly integrated 3rd party GPU, large core counts, memory architecture improvements, new IO and connectivity support, etc.
The real question for me will be - how much will Apple divulge, or implicitly telegraph, about their longer term roadmap for Apple Silicon based Macs with their first round of shipping ASM products? Will I want to jump on a ASM 1.0 product or hang in there with a latest & greatest Intel based Mac for a couple of years and wait until ASM 2.0 to make the leap to ASM?
Once Apple previews or publicly leaks a couple of ASM products we'll get a better idea of what the roadmap looks like. If the first round is targeting MacBook, MacBook Air, and lower end MacBook Pros then customers who are thinking about a new iMac, Mac Mini, or (obviously) Mac Pro upgrade in the same time frame may be well served to opt for one of the latest hot Intel based Macs and jump on the ASM train at a later stop.
In my opinion, Apple should signal its intentions for the ASM 1.0 products sooner rather than later, especially with the prospect of new Intel iMacs coming later this year. When I first saw the ASM announcement at WWDC I initially thought I'd never buy another Intel Mac. But now I'm not quite so sure and I'm hoping Apple can help me and everyone else manage our expectations. The last thing they'd want to do is to introduce FUD that causes a big pause in the demand for their current products. The tone in expectations for some of the optimists is shaping up as a huge rabbit that Apple is magically going to pull from a huge hat. We need realistic expectations - directly from Apple.
Intel deciding not to support Apple Silicon would basically mean that Intel decided to kill Thunderbolt : the reason Thunderbolt still exist is because of Apple. Without Apple, Thunderbolt would have been dead long ago.
If so, why not add it to the T2's firmware? It seems like the bandwidth of Thunderbolt 3 and 4 are identical, and the physical connectors are identical.
Those above complaining that TB4 is not faster than TB3 **for data** are correct about that, but seem to be guilty of ignoring the bigger picture: the mandatory support for two 4K monitors is huge, the support for longer cables is huge, and the doubling of the PCIe spec is also going to make a real-world and very noticeable difference on future machines, even for data.
Those of us who have (and have been using) TB3 need to think of ourselves as having been living in the future for a while, with the rest of the computing world only just starting to catch up with us. Outside our little power-user bubble, USB 3.1 is still a new fast novelty. The idea of a uniform, cross-compatible port form factor is just catching on, and is a HUGE deal.
TB4 seems to have clearly been designed with only professionals in mind, whereas USB4/TB3 will become (6-10 years from now) a consumer standard. I think it will remain a "pro/workstation" only type port. I'm hopeful that USB4/TB3 will be the standard across all the new Apple Macs, while only the Pro class of Intel Macs get either TB3/USB-C or USB4/TB3.
As a standard, Thunderbolt in all its iterations is an abject failure for two reasons: No affordable devices supported it and the selection was extremely limited. Thunderbolt was only found on external SSD drives that cost about twice as much as the USB 3 versions and often offered little additional performance. USB on the other hand has been a staggering success. When people purchase a new computer, the first thing they often look for is how many USB C 3.2 ports they offer. It works with everything (including Thunderbolt) and is frequently updated with additional speed/features. The only thing you have to watch out for are shady cables on Amazon (pay a bit extra and buy from a reputable brand). If you really want Thunderbolt, buy an add in card for your Mac Pro.
"As a standard, Thunderbolt in all its iterations is an abject failure for two reasons" The number of available Thunderbolt devices per generation has continued to increase; abject failures don't fall up.
"Thunderbolt was only found on external SSD drives that cost about twice as much as the USB 3 versions and often offered little additional performance." • Visit thunderbolttechnology.net to get an idea of the array of available Thunderbolt 3 devices; external SSDs are a very small fraction of the mix. • USB 3.2 Gen 2 drives top out around 1,000 MB/s read, whereas Thunderbolt 3 drives achieve up to 2,750 MB/s performance. That's little additional performance?
"It works with everything (including Thunderbolt) and is frequently updated with additional speed/features." • USB C 3.2 ports ≠ Thunderbolt 3 ports. Thunderbolt 3 uses USB-C ports and connectors, and supports most USB devices connected via a USB-C or Thunderbolt 3 cable. USB-only ports support only USB devices. However, there is a small subset of accessory devices that work with both USB and Thunderbolt 3 computer ports. • Like Thunderbolt with Thunderbolt 4, USB will be updated (USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, USB 4). That said, USB 3.2 Gen 2 = USB 3.1 Gen 2, and USB 3.2 Gen 1 = USB 3.1 Gen 1 = USB 3.0.
"The only thing you have to watch out for are shady cables on Amazon (pay a bit extra and buy from a reputable brand)." Good advice. USB cables don't have to go through a certification process. Thunderbolt cables have to go through a certification process; only Thunderbolt-certified cables may be sold with the Thunderbolt logo.
"If you really want Thunderbolt, buy an add in card for your Mac Pro." All current Apple computers include Thunderbolt 3. No add-in Thunderbolt cards are available for Mac.
Why would Apple not support it? On WWDC Videos we could already see the 6K monitors which people assumed was due to USB4 support - as USB-C + Thunderbolt makes little sense going forward and would not explain why they are missing in the Dev Kits. However Thunderbolt 4 is just USB 4 with a few options being forced. No new speed, nothing and honestly not deserving the name but good for us, weight get thinderbolt „4“ without the license fee
i feel more like since thunderbolt was a joint venture with intel holding the license we now understand why it became free into USB 4 I bet that’s Apples doing.
Comments
I assume Tiger Lake will be like Ice Lake. It doesn't need a TB3 host/bus controller because it is already on-chip. It's just going to have a clock or signal generator of some kind for the port.
For Apple's Apple Silicon Mac, who knows. My bet is it is going to be a superset of USB4/TB3/TB4 so 8K monitors can be supported. The controller will be directly on-chip connected to a switched fabric of some kind. If they don't want to do that, it's going to be a USB4/TB3/TB4 controller chip connected with PCIe 4.
The other caveat that I'd add is that even the first round of Apple Silicon Macs (ASMs) will (likely) not fully represent Apple's premier implementation of what they are capable of doing with their own silicon at a system level, e.g., native GPU only versus the option for a tightly integrated 3rd party GPU, large core counts, memory architecture improvements, new IO and connectivity support, etc.
The real question for me will be - how much will Apple divulge, or implicitly telegraph, about their longer term roadmap for Apple Silicon based Macs with their first round of shipping ASM products? Will I want to jump on a ASM 1.0 product or hang in there with a latest & greatest Intel based Mac for a couple of years and wait until ASM 2.0 to make the leap to ASM?
Once Apple previews or publicly leaks a couple of ASM products we'll get a better idea of what the roadmap looks like. If the first round is targeting MacBook, MacBook Air, and lower end MacBook Pros then customers who are thinking about a new iMac, Mac Mini, or (obviously) Mac Pro upgrade in the same time frame may be well served to opt for one of the latest hot Intel based Macs and jump on the ASM train at a later stop.
In my opinion, Apple should signal its intentions for the ASM 1.0 products sooner rather than later, especially with the prospect of new Intel iMacs coming later this year. When I first saw the ASM announcement at WWDC I initially thought I'd never buy another Intel Mac. But now I'm not quite so sure and I'm hoping Apple can help me and everyone else manage our expectations. The last thing they'd want to do is to introduce FUD that causes a big pause in the demand for their current products. The tone in expectations for some of the optimists is shaping up as a huge rabbit that Apple is magically going to pull from a huge hat. We need realistic expectations - directly from Apple.
If so, why not add it to the T2's firmware? It seems like the bandwidth of Thunderbolt 3 and 4 are identical, and the physical connectors are identical.
The number of available Thunderbolt devices per generation has continued to increase; abject failures don't fall up.
"Thunderbolt was only found on external SSD drives that cost about twice as much as the USB 3 versions and often offered little additional performance."
• Visit thunderbolttechnology.net to get an idea of the array of available Thunderbolt 3 devices; external SSDs are a very small fraction of the mix.
• USB 3.2 Gen 2 drives top out around 1,000 MB/s read, whereas Thunderbolt 3 drives achieve up to 2,750 MB/s performance. That's little additional performance?
"It works with everything (including Thunderbolt) and is frequently updated with additional speed/features."
• USB C 3.2 ports ≠ Thunderbolt 3 ports. Thunderbolt 3 uses USB-C ports and connectors, and supports most USB devices connected via a USB-C or Thunderbolt 3 cable. USB-only ports support only USB devices. However, there is a small subset of accessory devices that work with both USB and Thunderbolt 3 computer ports.
• Like Thunderbolt with Thunderbolt 4, USB will be updated (USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, USB 4). That said, USB 3.2 Gen 2 = USB 3.1 Gen 2, and USB 3.2 Gen 1 = USB 3.1 Gen 1 = USB 3.0.
"The only thing you have to watch out for are shady cables on Amazon (pay a bit extra and buy from a reputable brand)."
Good advice. USB cables don't have to go through a certification process. Thunderbolt cables have to go through a certification process; only Thunderbolt-certified cables may be sold with the Thunderbolt logo.
"If you really want Thunderbolt, buy an add in card for your Mac Pro."
All current Apple computers include Thunderbolt 3. No add-in Thunderbolt cards are available for Mac.
i feel more like since thunderbolt was a joint venture with intel holding the license we now understand why it became free into USB 4 I bet that’s Apples doing.
Yes, whole article should be retracted.