Apple VPs talk new M1 Mac development, Intel relationship, and more

AppleInsider

A pair of Apple vice presidents offered more details about the development and performance of the company's M1 Apple Silicon chip in a new interview.

Credit: The Tech Chap

Apple VP of Platform Architecture Tim Millet and Apple VP of Worldwide Marketing Bob Borchers sat down via video call with YouTube channel The Tech Chap to discuss some of the intricacies of the M1 and the new Apple Silicon lineup.

"M1 is a huge step forward in terms of performance for Macs," said Borchers. "And in very real ways, whether's it battery life, graphics performance, or just CPU. We are talking multiples increase over previous generations."

Millet, a part of the team who works on Apple Silicon, explained how the gains made with M1 stemmed from the Platform Architecture team's work on Apple A-series chips.

"What we knew going in when we started building chips for the phone was these were incredibly thin and light beautiful works of art that our industrial design team creates," Millet said. "We don't get to tell them to increase the size of the product, increase the battery to deliver better performance."

The job of Millet's team then was to "figure out how to deliver that performance within the constraints of the system," adding that performance that doesn't translate to the real world within those constraints "doesn't matter."

When asked about the potential confusion for consumers about the differences between Apple Silicon and Mac chips, Borchers said the first step with M1 was to bring the proprietary chip design to some of Apple's most popular models.

"It is a transition that will take time, so there are places where we wanted to continue to offer Intel processors and additional choice," said Borchers.

Some of that additional choice could be users who need four ports on their Mac portables, or users who want to upgrade internal memory up to 32GB.

When asked about whether the M1 would be a 10W or 15W chip, Millet said "I think you'll see across the different array of machines that we announced yesterday, you're gonna see M1 at its best in every one of those enclosures."

As an example, the M1 is able to fit in the enclosure of the MacBook Air. But with the addition of a fan in the 13-inch MacBook Pro and Mac mini models, users will see "a different level of performance," Millet added.

At another point in the interview, Millet also expanded on how the M1 chip's unified memory carries a number of benefits over traditional RAM.

"The CPU gets a much wider memory system to allow multi-threaded applications across our eight cores. They're going to be unconstrained by memory bandwidth," Millet added. "And the GPU has a high-capacity memory system getting its high bandwidth."

When asked about whether Apple is still "friends with Intel," Borcher said that the two companies still have a "great relationship" and that Apple still plans to ship "amazing Intel systems."

The full interview is about half an hour and is worth a watch for anyone interested in some of the more technical details about the M1.

chadbag

The comments kind of confirm what I was suspecting.  The fan models will be able to either clock higher or run without throttling (or at least longer without throttling) or both compared to the fanless models.  

I’d like to see a fabless 16” “Air” type MacBook.  I like the thin and light without the extra bells and whistles but need a larger screen.  

Beats

More info with Rene Ritchie!

frantisek

Interesting to hear them but was there any real new information that we did not know or guessed?

jdb8167

frantisek said:

Interesting to hear them but was there any real new information that we did not know or guessed?

We guessed but it is nice to get confirmation. For example, this clarified to me that even though I love the Air’s form factor, I’m unwilling to give up a lot of performance to get it. Given that the chips are the same silicon, it was unclear how different the speed was between the Pro and the Air. Now there is little doubt that the Pro will seriously out perform the Air. To the point that it might even look like a different CPU. No doubt now that I’m buying the Pro. 

This video was extremely helpful to me. I could have guessed this information but having it spelled out is much better. 

CheeseFreeze

They may have a “great relationship with Intel” still, but nobody wants to buy an Intel Mac anymore, unless they are forced to buy it for very specific reasons. More likely people who want higher-end power, will wait for the new releases of Mac Pro, MacBook Pro 16” and the iMac range.

wizard69

jdb8167 said:

frantisek said:

Interesting to hear them but was there any real new information that we did not know or guessed?

We guessed but it is nice to get confirmation. For example, this clarified to me that even though I love the Air’s form factor, I’m unwilling to give up a lot of performance to get it. Given that the chips are the same silicon, it was unclear how different the speed was between the Pro and the Air. Now there is little doubt that the Pro will seriously out perform the Air. To the point that it might even look like a different CPU. No doubt now that I’m buying the Pro. 

This video was extremely helpful to me. I could have guessed this information but having it spelled out is much better. 

It still isn't clear to me that the Air will give up too much for what I might want it for.   For one thing I'm thinking the Air is a better solution than an iPad for travel, that mainly because of the keyboard.    On the other hand iPad has GPS and cell communications built in.    I may have to wait a bit longer.

mdriftmeyer

wizard69 said:

jdb8167 said:

frantisek said:

Interesting to hear them but was there any real new information that we did not know or guessed?

We guessed but it is nice to get confirmation. For example, this clarified to me that even though I love the Air’s form factor, I’m unwilling to give up a lot of performance to get it. Given that the chips are the same silicon, it was unclear how different the speed was between the Pro and the Air. Now there is little doubt that the Pro will seriously out perform the Air. To the point that it might even look like a different CPU. No doubt now that I’m buying the Pro. 

This video was extremely helpful to me. I could have guessed this information but having it spelled out is much better. 

It still isn't clear to me that the Air will give up too much for what I might want it for.   For one thing I'm thinking the Air is a better solution than an iPad for travel, that mainly because of the keyboard.    On the other hand iPad has GPS and cell communications built in.    I may have to wait a bit longer.

The following Security expert released this yesterday and it bothers me more than greatly. 

https://sneak.berlin/20201112/your-computer-isnt-yours/

wizard69

CheeseFreeze said:

They may have a “great relationship with Intel” still, but nobody wants to buy an Intel Mac anymore, unless they are forced to buy it for very specific reasons. More likely people who want higher-end power, will wait for the new releases of Mac Pro, MacBook Pro 16” and the iMac range.

I didn't want to buy an Intel Mac at the beginning of the year as rumors started getting louder.   Then WWDC came and also A14.    A14 made it obvious beyond any doubt that a Mac built on this technology would rock.   With this debut Apple has delivered in M1 close to what I was expecting from a low end processor with better than expected performance.   

So at this point it would be absolutely nuts for most people to buy an Intel based Mac.   By the way one of the reasons I see M1 or Apple Silicon based Macs, as mandatory isn't so much the ARM cores but the fact that Neural Engine is in there.    Neural Engine is already making an impact on recently released third party software.   The reality is that M1 is pretty well balanced as far as the many subsections of the SoC goes.   The only thing that would have been nice is more performance out of the GPU but even that is pretty much industry leading.

cornchip

Bet transition won’t take 2y. Excepting MacPro perhaps. 

I’d also hazard a guess that that smaller MacPro that was recently rumored is in fact the ARM MacPro. 

canukstorm

wizard69 said:

jdb8167 said:

frantisek said:

Interesting to hear them but was there any real new information that we did not know or guessed?

We guessed but it is nice to get confirmation. For example, this clarified to me that even though I love the Air’s form factor, I’m unwilling to give up a lot of performance to get it. Given that the chips are the same silicon, it was unclear how different the speed was between the Pro and the Air. Now there is little doubt that the Pro will seriously out perform the Air. To the point that it might even look like a different CPU. No doubt now that I’m buying the Pro. 

This video was extremely helpful to me. I could have guessed this information but having it spelled out is much better. 

It still isn't clear to me that the Air will give up too much for what I might want it for.   For one thing I'm thinking the Air is a better solution than an iPad for travel, that mainly because of the keyboard.    On the other hand iPad has GPS and cell communications built in.    I may have to wait a bit longer.

Vast majority of users are carrying around smartphones these days so I don't think this will be a concern.

cornchip

mdriftmeyer said:

The following Security expert released this yesterday and it bothers me more than greatly. 

https://sneak.berlin/20201112/your-computer-isnt-yours/

Very interesting, thanks.

eriamjh

I think that the M1 will not be used in the forthcoming iMac, unless an even bigger heat sink and fan will allow them to clock it even higher.   

It will be some even more jacked up processor.  M1X, if you will.    

I can’t imagine an iMac without a 32 or 64 GB RAM ceiling.  

mjtomlin

eriamjh said:

I think that the M1 will not be used in the forthcoming iMac, unless an even bigger heat sink and fan will allow them to clock it even higher.   

It will be some even more jacked up processor.  M1X, if you will.    

I can’t imagine an iMac without a 32 or 64 GB RAM ceiling.  

Current entry level 21.5" iMac is limited to 16GB RAM, so this SoC could eventually make its way into that model, but I don't think we'll see an iMac with Apple Silicon until there's more than a single configuration.

I suspect that an M1X will come out in early Spring with 6/4 core CPU, 12 core GPU, 16/32 RAM. This SoC will be an upgrade option for the mini and 13" MacBook Pro (at which time, the Intel models will be dropped). It will also be used in the entry level 16" MacBook Pro. Both the M1 and M1X will be used in 21.5" iMac models.

eriamjh

Yeah.   I forget about the small iMac.   Been running 27” since 2009 and I would love to see a 30” or bigger.  

I was surprised to see three new Macs announced with the M1.   I remember that the PPC-Intel transition was over quicker than Apple announced.   The first Intel Mac came out in Jan 2006 and I think the last, the Mac Pro, launched in august 2006.   All hardware transitioned in less than 8 months.   

The real “transition” was completed when OSX snow leopard was released in August 2009 and all PPC support was dropped.  So anyone buying a G5 Mac in August 2006 got three years of support.

I don’t see Apple dropping the new Mac Pro for at least 2-3 years from launch, but they might if a crazy Apple Silicon model offers bonkers performance at a higher margin for Apple and if there is developer support. 

  

rotateleftbyte

I guess that we are back to the 'good old days' (sic) of shared memory. 

From the descriptions given in the video, it seems that

Unified Memory == Shared Memory.

At least the CPU/memory bandwidth is an awful lot higher than the old days when it was really slow.

mcdave

mjtomlin said:

eriamjh said:

I think that the M1 will not be used in the forthcoming iMac, unless an even bigger heat sink and fan will allow them to clock it even higher.   

It will be some even more jacked up processor.  M1X, if you will.    

I can’t imagine an iMac without a 32 or 64 GB RAM ceiling.  

Current entry level 21.5" iMac is limited to 16GB RAM, so this SoC could eventually make its way into that model, but I don't think we'll see an iMac with Apple Silicon until there's more than a single configuration.

I suspect that an M1X will come out in early Spring with 6/4 core CPU, 12 core GPU, 16/32 RAM. This SoC will be an upgrade option for the mini and 13" MacBook Pro (at which time, the Intel models will be dropped). It will also be used in the entry level 16" MacBook Pro. Both the M1 and M1X will be used in 21.5" iMac models.

An M1X would easily outperform any current 16” MBP in CPU and all but the 5600M in graphics so would make sense in the larger models.

I also think an M2 will be released mid-year which could cover off the iMac Pro (if my extrapolations are correct).
That would leave the Mac Pro as an expensive example of how we used to do PCs. Which, I think, was Apple’s plan all along.

sevenfeet

eriamjh said:

Yeah.   I forget about the small iMac.   Been running 27” since 2009 and I would love to see a 30” or bigger.  

I was surprised to see three new Macs announced with the M1.   I remember that the PPC-Intel transition was over quicker than Apple announced.   The first Intel Mac came out in Jan 2006 and I think the last, the Mac Pro, launched in august 2006.   All hardware transitioned in less than 8 months.   

The real “transition” was completed when OSX snow leopard was released in August 2009 and all PPC support was dropped.  So anyone buying a G5 Mac in August 2006 got three years of support.

I don’t see Apple dropping the new Mac Pro for at least 2-3 years from launch, but they might if a crazy Apple Silicon model offers bonkers performance at a higher margin for Apple and if there is developer support. 

  

First, even with a "M1X" model to slot in the higher end MacBook Pro, Mac Mini and maybe iMac models, I see Apple keeping the Intel versions around a little longer for corporate customers who need them.  There are a lot of big companies using Macs as primary laptops for employees and it will take some time for the new ASi machines to be certified for many of them.  And certifying "Big Sur" may be the bigger problem than M1 chips since the new machines can only run Big Sur.  The same goes for the eventual ASi Mac Pro & iMac Pro, whenever that arrives by 2021/2022.  The older Intel version will probably stick around for some months to allow corporate customers who want it last dibs on it before they are retired, despite the fact that whatever Apple comes up with will likely kick the living crap out of the Intel version.

I also think that support for the Intel machines will be a lot longer than what the PPC transition did.  Most Macs these days get OS upgrades out 5-7 years and 8 years for Mac Pros desktops.

mjtomlin

mcdave said:

mjtomlin said:

eriamjh said:

I think that the M1 will not be used in the forthcoming iMac, unless an even bigger heat sink and fan will allow them to clock it even higher.   

It will be some even more jacked up processor.  M1X, if you will.    

I can’t imagine an iMac without a 32 or 64 GB RAM ceiling.  

Current entry level 21.5" iMac is limited to 16GB RAM, so this SoC could eventually make its way into that model, but I don't think we'll see an iMac with Apple Silicon until there's more than a single configuration.

I suspect that an M1X will come out in early Spring with 6/4 core CPU, 12 core GPU, 16/32 RAM. This SoC will be an upgrade option for the mini and 13" MacBook Pro (at which time, the Intel models will be dropped). It will also be used in the entry level 16" MacBook Pro. Both the M1 and M1X will be used in 21.5" iMac models.

An M1X would easily outperform any current 16” MBP in CPU and all but the 5600M in graphics so would make sense in the larger models.

I also think an M2 will be released mid-year which could cover off the iMac Pro (if my extrapolations are correct).
That would leave the Mac Pro as an expensive example of how we used to do PCs. Which, I think, was Apple’s plan all along.

Obviously, we don't know know where or how Apple is taking this naming scheme, but I'd have to believe - based off the A-series - that each number, M1, M2, M3, etc., is a generation marker. So just as with the A13 to the A14, the jump in specs isn't going to be as great. What we'll see is updated IP blocks, CPU, GPU, ISP, I/O controllers, etc. The performance differences will come within SoC variants of each generation. M1, M1A, M1B, M1C, etc. (Although probably not that many in the first generation.)

So something along the lines of...
M1; 4/4 CPU, 8 GPU, 8/16 RAM, 8x PCIe
M1A; 6/4 CPU, 12 GPU, 16/32 RAM, 16x PCIe
M1B; 8/4 CPU, 16 GPU, 32/64 RAM, 16x PCIe
M1C; 10/4 CPU, 20 GPU, 64/128 RAM, 32x PCIe

And there might be [binning] variations within each of those just as we have 7/8 GPU in the M1. There also would not be a need to differentiate mobile from desktop because these SoCs are designed to be extremely efficient when they need to be; perform based on thermals (and power supply).

I also think that the SoCs for the iMac Pro and Mac Pro, could be an entirely different series; P1, P2, P3, etc. That are designed to support discreet RAM and GPUs. And of course, have extremely high performance; 32/48/64 CPU cores.

mdriftmeyer

I would hope Apple offers this in the 2019 Mac Pro

https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/amd-cdna-whitepaper.pdf

https://www.amd.com/en/products/server-accelerators/instinct-mi100

Anyone complaining about Nvidia should just stop. The MI100 Radeon Instinct is Passively Cooled to boot. I would love to see a Dual Radeon Instinct on a single Card option by Apple allowing 4 of these connected [Infinity Fabric 3.0 on these allow up to 8 connected] but on the Mac you could have a Dual in on slot and the regulard GPU in the other slot, each with Apple's TB3 quad on-board outputs. The W6900X would support a series of the 6K Displays and the CDNA 1.0 dual card with 64 GB and a pure compute monster offers an extremely long term value proposition for the Mac Pro market.

The white paper explains it all.

tht

mjtomlin said:

So something along the lines of...
M1; 4/4 CPU, 8 GPU, 8/16 RAM, 8x PCIe
M1A; 6/4 CPU, 12 GPU, 16/32 RAM, 16x PCIe
M1B; 8/4 CPU, 16 GPU, 32/64 RAM, 16x PCIe
M1C; 10/4 CPU, 20 GPU, 64/128 RAM, 32x PCIe
...
I also think that the SoCs for the iMac Pro and Mac Pro, could be an entirely different series; P1, P2, P3, etc. That are designed to support discreet RAM and GPUs. And of course, have extremely high performance; 32/48/64 CPU cores.

When I was thinking about this, I did not think they would incrementally, linearly increase core counts. They are not going to be designing chips where they are just adding 2 perf CPU cores at a time or 4 GPU cores at a time. It a waste of their resources and it wouldn't scale up to the product line. The core counts really should be going up by factors of two, for it to properly scale from iPhone to Mac Pro. Eg, in a CPU perf core + CPU eff core + GPU core format, it could go something like this:

2+4+4 :  phone and lower end tablets
4+4+8 :  pro tablets and lower end PCs
8+4+16 : midrange desktops and laptops
16+8+32 : high end laptops and desktops, Pro desktops
32+8+64 : Pro desktops

If they want to have 6+4+12 SKU, they can bin the 8+4+16 chip. If they want to have a 12+8+24 SKU, they can bin the 16+8+32 chip. It would be a very poor use of resources to have a SoCs that are only different in 2 CPU cores or 4 GPU scores.

Lastly, who knows really. If the GPU cores end up capable of doing 64 bit FP math, this could mean they won't be growing CPU core counts. Then, the NPU occupies a rather large part of the SoC chip. They could have added another 4 perf CPU or 4 GPU cores in place of it, yet they included the NPU. If applications can really take advantage of the NPU, they could devote the transistors to NPU instead of the GPU or CPU.