New MacBook Pro chips deliver desktop performance with better power efficiency



  • Reply 21 of 23
    thttht Posts: 4,196member
    mjtomlin said:
    mjtomlin said:
    Beats said:
    Windows is still better for gaming? Why can’t Apple tackle gaming??

    Creating a gaming platform around an TV XL ($399 with M2 Max) wouldn’t hurt either as those games would be instantly available on Macs as well. Does the world want a new gaming platform though? Probably not.

    I'd buy that ASAP.

    Unfortunately it's the chicken and egg scenario... A platform needs titles. You can't have one without the other. Microsoft had an advantage with the XBox, there was a huge library of Windows games that were easily ported over to it. (More like, moved to it, as the hardware was just a modified WIntel+nVidia computer.)

    I do think, eventually Apple will set its sights on games, but not until after the transition is over and there's large enough base of higher end Apple silicon based Macs out there. Then start releasing titles for those systems (maybe even in an Apple Arcade+ type package). Then bring out a "cheap" console that can play those titles; like I mentioned, a $399 TV "XL" with an M2 Max. This allows those who don't need a $2000+ computer to play those titles. And then just roll with it.

    The hardware is the easiest part and is basically already in place. The difficult part is the titles. Creating your gaming engine - they basically have the pieces for it already (SpriteKit, SceneKit, Metal, ARKit, etc), but would have to be scaled up. Then start developing your own titles or exclusively contract/finance 3rd party studios to develop them.
    They need to buy game studios too. It's not a coincidence that the Microsoft bought Bungie and Ensemble and all of a sudden a couple of premiere games weren't developed for Macs anymore. A nice two for one for Microsoft. Bungie developed the killer game for XBox and  removed two high profile game IP from Macs. I wouldn't be surprised if Minecraft will eventually stop being developed for non-Windows games either. The usual way is a slow deterioration of quality and features which slowly decrease playability until it is not worth it anymore. Funny how that happens so often.

    Apple needs to develop an entire gaming ecosystem running on Swift+Metal, essentially from zero. It's always "all of the above". The game studio talent is arguably more important then hardware. They have to throw hundreds of millions to iOS developers to make macOS games to spur new game development, then buy the promising talent and bring them inhouse. They should get classic games running, with modern polish, using native APIs.

    Still seem quite uncertain that Apple wants gaming. They know they need games, and that it's a big weakness for Macs, but they've never actually committed to paying for it. They are committed to Apple TV+ with billions invested per year. Games will require the same level of investment, and are more important as they reinforce the platform in a much more complete way than streaming.
  • Reply 22 of 23
    Forget about Mac gaming. The focus should be on VR gaming. 
  • Reply 23 of 23

    Is M1 Max chip physically larger than M1 Pro? 
    Yes, it has far more transistors.

    But, the chip itself doesn’t do more than be a partial determinant of the size of the package, which also includes the RAM, which are in separate chips on the same package.

    In theory, both M1 Pro and M1 Max chips could be put on silicon with the same size and shape, but defects would have a larger impact on yield and drive up costs of the M1 Pro. 

    For manufacturing, it’s likely easier and less expensive to make the exterior package with the chips be the same size and layout so only one motherboard is required, as well as simplifying cooling.
    Re: yield, that's ridiculous. If you wasted all that extra wafer area to make a pro the same size as a max, it would be dead area, and defects wouldn't exist there. It wouldn't cost more because of lower yield (that is, the percentage of chips that are good), it would cost more because you were making fewer chips per wafer.

    As for the package, it's not likely to matter for the motherboard - all that matters is the pin layout. That will be the same (RAM channels don't go off-package). Or almost the same? The Max might have more pins for power. Cooling is going to depend greatly on the specifics of the technology. Even if you made the Max and Pro the same package size, there would be hotspots in different places on the two packages. You may or may not want to cool them both the same way.
    Marvin said:
    Apple would either have to build that size of gaming audience (just now Mac gamers would be around 2 million and mostly involved with casual gaming like The Sims),
     Pretty good overall analysis of the Mac game market but your numbers here are *way* off. Apple will ship >17 million macbooks this year. There are almost certainly already 15m M1 Macs out there, and that number will continue to grow rapidly. Obviously many of those macs will never be used for gaming, but a lot more than 13% could be.
Sign In or Register to comment.