Possible Mac Pro 'compute module' discovered in iOS 16.4 code

AppleInsider

Code reverencing a device referred to as "ComputeModule" in iOS 16.4 could be related to M-series Mac Pro components or something else entirely.

Mac Pro could use changeable modules after all

The Mac Pro with Apple Silicon processors is almost an inevitability at this point, though no one is exactly sure what form it will take. Recent rumors suggest Apple will continue to use the old Mac Pro casing despite likely lacking the ability to be expanded with PCI-E GPUs.

That doesn't mean Apple isn't trying to get some kind of expandability in its future pro desktop. Code discovered by 9to5Mac in iOS 16.4's developer disk image in the Xcode 16.4 beta suggests that a device called a "ComputeModule" exists.

A device class referred to as "ComputeModule" in iOS 16.4 could be anything. The original report speculates that it is a modular CPU component for the Mac Pro, but also admits it could be for Apple's Mixed Reality headset or even a Raspberry Pi-like device. If it is for the Mac Pro, it seems more likely to us that it is some kind of next-generation Afterburner card, or a video extension card.

Code references can uncover some hidden details, especially ones that might slip through into a beta. This particular discovery might hold some importance to the Mac Pro, but its location in iOS 16.4 leaves some doubt.

Perhaps Apple will allow developers to install specific computation modules to simulate environments on their Mac. Whatever it is, there are at least two distinct devices referred to as ComputeModule13,1 and ComputeModule13,3.

Apple's push to roll out Apple Silicon to every Mac halted at the Mac Pro -- causing the company to miss its two-year deadline. Interest in the potential Mac Pro is at an all-time high, despite it being for an incredibly niche audience.

Apple is expected to reveal the Mac Pro at any time in 2023. Perhaps it could arrive alongside Apple's rumored headset at WWDC in June, though at this point, it is anyone's guess.

Read on AppleInsider

9secondkox2

Next gen afterburner card? LOL

Not needed with Apple Silicon. 

The compute module finding sounds a lot like full SOC packaged in a module that can be plugged into a communications fabric as some of us have been posting. 

The evidence is mounting. 

If it keeps going and apple actually ships what we think they’ll ship, the world will freak. And it will be awesome. 

A great many people who could not justify a max pro in the past will surely be able to with the modular horsepower expansion opening up major possibilities. 

mattinoz

Why is PCIe unlikely? You are stating that but none of the rumoured information has been anything other than speculation that looks like it is trying to drive negative sentiment. Also the two year wasn't a deadline as the direct quote is "about 2 years" which makes this feel like an attempt to also drive such negative sentiment more than speculation based on the new information. Indeed a reference of a Compute Module does suggest Apple does have the ability to move the ASi SOC off the mainboard into a pluggable object which would kind of make sense to be Apples already designed MPX. Leading to more to the inclusion of PCIe not dissimilar to current intel MAC pro more than it supports "PCIe being unlikely" Make sense that Apple have been waiting for PCIe 5.0 CXL support in ARM so 3rd parties have a more attractive target.

robaba

Hmm, yeah not buying it.  Why would we find reference to a Mac Pro solution in iOS?  It might be a new compute core for future ASi, but nothing other than rampant speculation to suggest it has anything to do with a solution to Apples Mac Pro conundrum.

9secondkox2

It’s either a Mac Pro SOC module or…

new “Apple Arcade” gaming and entertainment console. 

Jives with the recent secret gaming conference that Apple hosted. 

Interesting. 

The mention in iOS doesn’t preclude the Mac as the studio display has an “iPhone chip” in it. Who knows what will be included in the Mac Pro or new XDR Pro Display. 

But a powerful gaming console running modified iOS sounds plausible. 

Either that, or it’s just a trying-to-be-more-stealthy reference to the mixed reality devices (or perhaps the last two items mentioned are the same thing - as in an iPhone is the compute module andcc ccc an iPhone pro is the other compute module. Kind of a let down if that’s the case. 

9secondkox2

robaba said:

Hmm, yeah not buying it.  Why would we find reference to a Mac Pro solution in iOS?  It might be a new compute core for future ASi, but nothing other than rampant speculation to suggest it has anything to do with a solution to Apples Mac Pro conundrum.

Communications between them. But it could just be an iOS device. 

keithw

If there was some code in the MacOS 13.3 Beta release, this may be a bit more believable.

tht

9to5mac says "ComputeModule13,1" and "ComputeModule13,3".

Hmm. Apple's model identifiers have become more generic recently, but perhaps the numbers are still significant. "13" could be a signifier for an M1 class hardware. Mac13,1 and Mac 13,2 are the model identifiers for the Mac Studio with Max and Ultra processors. The M2 class hardware seem to be "14". So perhaps a defunct set of M1 hardware that won't see the light of day?

Well, you never know anymore as Apple is obfuscating the model numbers now.

programmer

mattinoz said:

Why is PCIe unlikely? You are stating that but none of the rumoured information has been anything other than speculation that looks like it is trying to drive negative sentiment. Also the two year wasn't a deadline as the direct quote is "about 2 years" which makes this feel like an attempt to also drive such negative sentiment more than speculation based on the new information. Indeed a reference of a Compute Module does suggest Apple does have the ability to move the ASi SOC off the mainboard into a pluggable object which would kind of make sense to be Apples already designed MPX. Leading to more to the inclusion of PCIe not dissimilar to current intel MAC pro more than it supports "PCIe being unlikely" Make sense that Apple have been waiting for PCIe 5.0 CXL support in ARM so 3rd parties have a more attractive target.

Note that the article says "PCI-E GPUs", not any "PCI-E".  Plenty of discussion in other threads why GPU support (at least for the purposes of doing graphics) may be unlikely/complicated.  

That this was found in iOS seems to make it unlikely to be Mac Pro specific, but it does make me wonder if Apple is looking toward a future where there is a software fabric that allows connected devices (via network, PCI-E, whatever) to share compute.  There has been some work done in the past (grid computing), and existing product (xcode's distributed builds), and cloud services (some Siri compute is offloaded).  Or the Apple Watch and iPhone sharing workloads.  

If having such a generic mechanism available is something they are working on, then letting iOS devices make use of it does make a lot of sense.  And a headless compute device could run iOS instead of (or in addition to) macOS, especially if it can run workloads from either platform.  The result could be standalone devices (e.g. a Mac mini without anything connected except power and possibly Ethernet), or add-in boards for a Mac Pro chassis (e.g. M2 PCI-E cards).  Such a technology would be hard to make use of transparently and would require developer support in their applications... either directly or via APIs they are already using (e.g. the ML libraries Apple introduced in the past few years).  

Distributed computing has become much more feasible in the past decade or so because of the speed and ubiquity of networks and interconnects, and the existence of heavy compute workloads.  And if more small wearable devices (e.g. AR glasses) are on the way but keep their compute capability to a minimum for size/weight/battery reasons, then having a compute device to support them could make sense (e.g. much like a phone does for the watch but without the power draining display which might be redundant due to the other wearable(s)).

Plenty of room for speculation.