It doesn’t bring any urgently needed speed bump and Apple supports everything TB4 supports with TB3 chips already.
Originally, TB4 was a fake news Intel released with Tiger Lake at CES2020 because they were caught with their pants down shortly after AMD released their wildly successful Renoir notebook processors and didn’t have anything new to show.
Apple on Wednesday clarified its stance on future integration of Intel's Thunderbolt protocol, saying Macs powered by custom-designed Apple silicon ARM chips will continue to support the connectivity technology.
The tech giant in a statement to AppleInsider said Apple silicon Macs will support Thunderbolt's latest specifications. Thunderbolt's future on Mac was in question as Apple is in the beginning stages of transitioning away from Intel's x86 architecture in favor of its own ARM designs.
"Over a decade ago, Apple partnered with Intel to design and develop Thunderbolt, and today our customers enjoy the speed and flexibility it brings to every Mac," the company said. "We remain committed to the future of Thunderbolt and will support it in Macs with Apple silicon."
My interpretation.
Apple informed about future....
We (AI) put thunderbolt future in question... without asking first...
Yes. Apple maybe (I believe) even initiate technology as Wiki page states Thunderbolt supersede Firewire. and
Intel introduced Light Peak (original name) at the 2009 Intel Developer Forum (IDF), using a prototype Mac Pro logic board to run two 1080p video streams plus LAN and storage devices over a single 30-meter optical cable with modified USB ends.[15]
Apple did not want to develop own standard anymore and handed it to Intel I believe. So it would be strange it turns its back to it now.
Countless of "Apple is doomed" websites and iHaters that just KNEW thunderbolt would die with Intel are now quickly going back and removing comments and stories and pretending it never happened...
It doesn’t bring any urgently needed speed bump and Apple supports everything TB4 supports with TB3 chips already.
Originally, TB4 was a fake news Intel released with Tiger Lake at CES2020 because they were caught with their pants down shortly after AMD released their wildly successful Renoir notebook processors and didn’t have anything new to show.
Ignore it and wait for TB5.
That's incorrect. TB4 bring new features along with USB4. One it mandates a certain level of support and strengthens some of the features.
Double the minimum video and data requirements of Thunderbolt 3
Video: Support for two 4K displays or one 8K display.
Data: PCIe at 32 Gbps for storage speeds up to 3,000 MBps.
Accessories with four Thunderbolt 4 ports
Universal 40GB/s cables up to 2 meters in length
Required PC charging on at least one computer port.
Required PC wake from sleep when computer is connected to a Thunderbolt dock
Required Intel VT-d-based direct memory access (DMA) protection
Countless of "Apple is doomed" websites and iHaters that just KNEW thunderbolt would die with Intel are now quickly going back and removing comments and stories and pretending it never happened...
Over the last couple of weeks, since WWDC, I've seen more idiots on the web than I can ever remember. These are native English speakers too, so that is no excuse. [...]
Wait. Are you saying that people who don’t speak English as a first language are idiots?
Um, NOT a rumor. Apple themselves, in the keynote, told us they’d ship the first Mac with Apple Silicon near the end of the year. They didn’t say what machine it would be in, but they did say something would ship.
This was hardly a surprise. And I always thought that the introduction of Apple Silicon Macs and Thunderbolt 4 to coincide at the end of 2020 was not a coincidence. Apple has been the leading manufacturer and supporter of Thunderbolt so it made no sense to walk away from it, especially when every Mac has had it for years and the new Mac Pro is chocked full of it. So it wouldn't be a surprise that Apple may have been driving the main delivery date of TB4. I'll be curious to see if any Intel Macs will get TB4 in the transition.
As for TB4, I welcome 4 port docks and peripherals. Two ports isn't enough.
So the spec says support for monitors, hubs and monitors with hubs, but if you're running an 8k monitor with a hub, wouldn't the monitor be taking up all the bandwidth and making the hub pretty anemic at best?
Also, one can buy a USB C hub to work with your MBP USB 3/TB ports - is the difference that the hub is for the USB interface but not thunderbolt? (yet another post of confusion in this messed-up system)
So the spec says support for monitors, hubs and monitors with hubs, but if you're running an 8k monitor with a hub, wouldn't the monitor be taking up all the bandwidth and making the hub pretty anemic at best?
Also, one can buy a USB C hub to work with your MBP USB 3/TB ports - is the difference that the hub is for the USB interface but not thunderbolt? (yet another post of confusion in this messed-up system)
Yes, an 8K monitor will leave very little bandwidth for other devices. It's basically the same for the Pro Display XDR. I wouldn't expect anything more than USB2, maybe USB3, type ports from an 8k monitor. 8k at 30 Hz and 32 bit color is 31.9 gigabit per second. I don't think many people want 30 Hz monitors anymore, and probably won't happen except for some niche cases.
A USBC hub plugged into a TB port will remain a USBC hub. It should be able to support display protocols that USBC can carry, and drive 4K monitors. Definitely one of those things that have to be verified.
Countless of "Apple is doomed" websites and iHaters that just KNEW thunderbolt would die with Intel are now quickly going back and removing comments and stories and pretending it never happened...
Oh really? Sources...?
Right here on AppleInsider forums, MacRumors, 9to5Mac.
So the spec says support for monitors, hubs and monitors with hubs, but if you're running an 8k monitor with a hub, wouldn't the monitor be taking up all the bandwidth and making the hub pretty anemic at best?
Also, one can buy a USB C hub to work with your MBP USB 3/TB ports - is the difference that the hub is for the USB interface but not thunderbolt? (yet another post of confusion in this messed-up system)
Yes, an 8K monitor will leave very little bandwidth for other devices. It's basically the same for the Pro Display XDR. I wouldn't expect anything more than USB2, maybe USB3, type ports from an 8k monitor. 8k at 30 Hz and 32 bit color is 31.9 gigabit per second. I don't think many people want 30 Hz monitors anymore, and probably won't happen except for some niche cases.
Hence, why Apple provides multiple Thunderbolt ports on all its current Mac's; so you do have a great amount of available bandwidth.
eGPU's will be supported even as Apple not to offer AMD/nVidia discrete GPU's on the motherboard.
This is probably correct... But I'd think Apple would still offer a discrete GPU BTO option for Pro systems. Daughter cards for the Mac Book Pro and iMac Pro, and full cards for the Mac Pro.
People forget that Apple and Intel developed TB TOGETHER. It’s not like a PROTOCOL is depending on a specific CPU 🤦🏻♂️
See, this is interesting. Apple is saying that they developed it together. But shortly after the technology became out, Intel said that it wasn’t true. They said that Apple came to them with the idea of a fast port, but that Intel did all the work, and that Apple had nothing to do with the development. So this statement is interesting.
additionally, as far as TB 4 is concerned, VT-D is the reason I was concerned. While it’s true that TB is part of PCIE, VT-D is a technology inside Intel’s’ x86 chipsets. My concern was how Apple would implement an x86 technology. I guess we’ll find out.
VT-d is just IOMMU. It’s hardly proprietary, just something Apple hasn’t had to implement in their own chips because they have only ever provided PCIe (or equivalent) on-die. IOMMU cores exist for practically any popular processor architecture, and Apple can always design their own entirely in-house.
Just like the reason the DTK doesn’t have Thunderbolt. Like I guessed in another thread, it’s simply because the A12 never needed external PCIe, so the pins just don’t exist for a Thunderbolt controller to connect to.
People forget that Apple and Intel developed TB TOGETHER. It’s not like a PROTOCOL is depending on a specific CPU 🤦🏻♂️
See, this is interesting. Apple is saying that they developed it together. But shortly after the technology became out, Intel said that it wasn’t true. They said that Apple came to them with the idea of a fast port, but that Intel did all the work, and that Apple had nothing to do with the development. So this statement is interesting.
additionally, as far as TB 4 is concerned, VT-D is the reason I was concerned. While it’s true that TB is part of PCIE, VT-D is a technology inside Intel’s’ x86 chipsets. My concern was how Apple would implement an x86 technology. I guess we’ll find out.
VT-d is just IOMMU. It’s hardly proprietary, just something Apple hasn’t had to implement in their own chips because they have only ever provided PCIe (or equivalent) on-die. IOMMU cores exist for practically any popular processor architecture, and Apple can always design their own entirely in-house.
Just like the reason the DTK doesn’t have Thunderbolt. Like I guessed in another thread, it’s simply because the A12 never needed external PCIe, so the pins just don’t exist for a Thunderbolt controller to connect to.
You’re wrong. It is proprietary.
VT-d as branding is proprietary. The specific implementation may be proprietary, though the VT-d specification (PDF) has been published since 2007. Sure, a published specification doesn't make something non-proprietary, but it is a strong indicator the owning entity is open to interoperability. You don't publish something you don't want other people to learn from.
IOMMU as a technology is not proprietary. VT-d is one implementation, but IBM's mainframes have had their own since before the POWER4 architecture. I haven't looked into it in detail, but I'm pretty sure at least some variants of the System/370 had it back in the 70s. That's the only way I could see some features of their hypervisor working.
ARM has an IOMMU implementation called SMMU. No telling if Apple would just use that directly or if they would want to make their own implementation.
People forget that Apple and Intel developed TB TOGETHER. It’s not like a PROTOCOL is depending on a specific CPU 🤦🏻♂️
See, this is interesting. Apple is saying that they developed it together. But shortly after the technology became out, Intel said that it wasn’t true. They said that Apple came to them with the idea of a fast port, but that Intel did all the work, and that Apple had nothing to do with the development. So this statement is interesting.
If a business analyst approaches me for a new feature idea in my app, and provides needed operating parameters for it, and then I implement it...did I do all the work? Or did we work on it together? Both could be considered fairly accurate. Don’t know the particulars, of course, but just a thought.
Comments
It doesn’t bring any urgently needed speed bump and Apple supports everything TB4 supports with TB3 chips already.
Originally, TB4 was a fake news Intel released with Tiger Lake at CES2020 because they were caught with their pants down shortly after AMD released their wildly successful Renoir notebook processors and didn’t have anything new to show.
Ignore it and wait for TB5.
Apple did not want to develop own standard anymore and handed it to Intel I believe. So it would be strange it turns its back to it now.
Um, NOT a rumor. Apple themselves, in the keynote, told us they’d ship the first Mac with Apple Silicon near the end of the year. They didn’t say what machine it would be in, but they did say something would ship.
As for TB4, I welcome 4 port docks and peripherals. Two ports isn't enough.
Also, one can buy a USB C hub to work with your MBP USB 3/TB ports - is the difference that the hub is for the USB interface but not thunderbolt? (yet another post of confusion in this messed-up system)
A USBC hub plugged into a TB port will remain a USBC hub. It should be able to support display protocols that USBC can carry, and drive 4K monitors. Definitely one of those things that have to be verified.
eGPU's will be supported even as Apple not to offer AMD/nVidia discrete GPU's on the motherboard.
This is probably correct... But I'd think Apple would still offer a discrete GPU BTO option for Pro systems. Daughter cards for the Mac Book Pro and iMac Pro, and full cards for the Mac Pro.
IOMMU as a technology is not proprietary. VT-d is one implementation, but IBM's mainframes have had their own since before the POWER4 architecture. I haven't looked into it in detail, but I'm pretty sure at least some variants of the System/370 had it back in the 70s. That's the only way I could see some features of their hypervisor working.
ARM has an IOMMU implementation called SMMU. No telling if Apple would just use that directly or if they would want to make their own implementation.
Remember also that USB4 basically merges in an option for 40 gbps Thunderbolt 3 compatibility.