And this is why Apple is switching to their own silicon.
Apple's switch to ARM is not related to this. They were going to do it regardless.
Apple Si and ARM are two completely different things.
Apple's Silicon is based on the ARM Instruction Set Architecture.
So now the geek army wants to argue about ARM vs Apple Silicon. Anything to try and diminish Apple’s achievement in this switch. The haters will insist on calling it Mac on ARM and Apple Silicon a cheap marketing trick to deceive users. Even though Apple’s SOCs will bear little resemblance to processors in other devices. But you go right ahead and bitch about it.
And this is why Apple is switching to their own silicon.
Apple's switch to ARM is not related to this. They were going to do it regardless.
Not true. Apple ditched Motorola for the very similar result.
Intel chip today is not much difference than 2 years ago. Just a little faster.
At the same time, look how much improvement in Apple A series and AMD cpu?
Nobody is denying that and that's besides the point. Apple's goal is control all the key technologies of their ecosystem and they were going to switch to their own custom processors regardless of how well, or poorly, Intel was going to do.
Largely because of crap like this...Intel has been a problem for Apple for many years, and that’s certainly a major part of why they looked into eliminating them. Had Intel been able to keep them happy of course they’d have stayed.
Disagree. The day the 64-bit A7 SoC launched is the day Apple decided they were going to do their own silicon for Macs. It was a matter of when, not if. People working in the silicon industry have known this for years. Apple was moving away from Intel no matter what. You and the rest can believe what you want.
My guess is that Apple has been running ARM macOS since their first custom silicon, the A4 (circa 2010). Going 64-bit was a major milestone that confirmed their decision but Apple had already charted this direction years earlier.
When the 64-bit iPhone SoC debuted, Apple's competitors were shocked into silence. The semiconductor industry knew the writing was on the wall.
Apple's lab prototypes have probably outperformed Intel's production hardware for a couple of years. Intel has missed all of their roadmap targets for years and Apple would be very aware of this. They would also be receiving and reviewing various engineering samples of the next generation Intel silicon and it would have been frightfully clear that Intel just couldn't deliver on their commitments.
Intel made this happen. But it certainly wasn't overnight. This is basically years of Intel ineptitude. Meanwhile AMD emerges as a credible competitor and Nvidia moves past Intel in market capitalization.
And this is why Apple is switching to their own silicon.
Apple's switch to ARM is not related to this. They were going to do it regardless.
Apple Si and ARM are two completely different things.
Apple's Silicon is based on the ARM Instruction Set Architecture.
So now the geek army wants to argue about ARM vs Apple Silicon. Anything to try and diminish Apple’s achievement in this switch. The haters will insist on calling it Mac on ARM and Apple Silicon a cheap marketing trick to deceive users. Even though Apple’s SOCs will bear little resemblance to processors in other devices. But you go right ahead and bitch about it.
Reminds me how iKnockoff morons made fun of the "Liquid Retina" name yet didn't know what it was.
I guess it’s good that they are being thoughtful by setting customer expectations. Preemptively announcing their failure to deliver will soften the blow for customers who’ve been eagerly anticipating their 7nm offerings. Customers can simply delay their new computer purchases by a few months.
Yeah, just kidding! Nobody in their right mind believed they had a chance to deliver on that pipe dream in the first place. But it sounded like a good story for those inclined to self delusion and anyone who hasn’t bought a new computer in the last decade or longer.
Intel chip today is not much difference than 2 years ago. Just a little faster.
You seem to forget all the Zero Day vunerabilities that are inherrent in the Intel design that need expensive (in terms of CPU performance) microcode patches to fix. Intel are on a hiding to nothing. If you own Intel stock, you should consider your position very carefully.
And this is why Apple is switching to their own silicon.
Apple's switch to ARM is not related to this. They were going to do it regardless.
Apple Si and ARM are two completely different things.
Apple's Silicon is based on the ARM Instruction Set Architecture.
So now the geek army wants to argue about ARM vs Apple Silicon. Anything to try and diminish Apple’s achievement in this switch. The haters will insist on calling it Mac on ARM and Apple Silicon a cheap marketing trick to deceive users. Even though Apple’s SOCs will bear little resemblance to processors in other devices. But you go right ahead and bitch about it.
What you are impliying is basically the same as saying that AMD Ryzen got nothing to do with x86 because it doesn't use Intel design. No matter how you want to turn the truth around, Apple design are using the ARM instruction set. Yes, their design is the best among all ARM chips, but they are still following the ARM instruction set.
Using that ARM instruction set doesn't mean that you using the ARM chipset design.
Intrustruction set doesn't equal internal design if that's the part that's confusing you. It just means that apple chip and other arm chip are speaking a language that is very similar, but apple chip are more fluent when it comes to speak in that language.
Saying that doesn't take away any of Apple credits, geez.
The article contains a factual error.. The 16” MacBook Pro is a Coffee Lake (9th generation Core i9) processor, not a 10th generation (Ice Lake) processor as asserted in the article.
Apple Silicon is using arm64 instruction set. Period.
Yup. We know.
If everybody knew Canukstorm and I would not have to state the obvious. That’s why I wanted to clarify this once for all with a link to Apple’s website stating it is arm64. You said “Yes we know” but you were excluding those that wrote stupid things here thinking it is not. 😉
And this is why Apple is switching to their own silicon.
Apple's switch to ARM is not related to this. They were going to do it regardless.
Apple Si and ARM are two completely different things.
Apple was going to switch precisely because Intel couldn't deliver. I'm sure Apple knew Intel was failing at least five years ago, and had to make transition plans.
And this is why Apple is switching to their own silicon.
Apple's switch to ARM is not related to this. They were going to do it regardless.
Not true. Apple ditched Motorola for the very similar result.
Intel chip today is not much difference than 2 years ago. Just a little faster.
At the same time, look how much improvement in Apple A series and AMD cpu?
Nobody is denying that and that's besides the point. Apple's goal is control all the key technologies of their ecosystem and they were going to switch to their own custom processors regardless of how well, or poorly, Intel was going to do.
Largely because of crap like this...Intel has been a problem for Apple for many years, and that’s certainly a major part of why they looked into eliminating them. Had Intel been able to keep them happy of course they’d have stayed.
Disagree. The day the 64-bit A7 SoC launched is the day Apple decided they were going to do their own silicon for Macs. It was a matter of when, not if. People working in the silicon industry have known this for years. Apple was moving away from Intel no matter what. You and the rest can believe what you want.
I'm sure Apple didn't make that decision until Intel proved they couldn't hack it. If Intel had upgraded their manufacturing infrastructure, Apple would not have pushed Intel aside.
And this is why Apple is switching to their own silicon.
Apple's switch to ARM is not related to this. They were going to do it regardless.
Not true. Apple ditched Motorola for the very similar result.
Intel chip today is not much difference than 2 years ago. Just a little faster.
At the same time, look how much improvement in Apple A series and AMD cpu?
Nobody is denying that and that's besides the point. Apple's goal is control all the key technologies of their ecosystem and they were going to switch to their own custom processors regardless of how well, or poorly, Intel was going to do.
Largely because of crap like this...Intel has been a problem for Apple for many years, and that’s certainly a major part of why they looked into eliminating them. Had Intel been able to keep them happy of course they’d have stayed.
Disagree. The day the 64-bit A7 SoC launched is the day Apple decided they were going to do their own silicon for Macs. It was a matter of when, not if. People working in the silicon industry have known this for years. Apple was moving away from Intel no matter what. You and the rest can believe what you want.
My guess is that Apple has been running ARM macOS since their first custom silicon, the A4 (circa 2010). Going 64-bit was a major milestone that confirmed their decision but Apple had already charted this direction years earlier.
When the 64-bit iPhone SoC debuted, Apple's competitors were shocked into silence. The semiconductor industry knew the writing was on the wall.
Apple's lab prototypes have probably outperformed Intel's production hardware for a couple of years. Intel has missed all of their roadmap targets for years and Apple would be very aware of this. They would also be receiving and reviewing various engineering samples of the next generation Intel silicon and it would have been frightfully clear that Intel just couldn't deliver on their commitments.
Intel made this happen. But it certainly wasn't overnight. This is basically years of Intel ineptitude. Meanwhile AMD emerges as a credible competitor and Nvidia moves past Intel in market capitalization.
This seems plausible - Apple knew they could compete (based on A7), but the timeline to switch over was fuzzy.
And this is why Apple is switching to their own silicon.
Apple's switch to ARM is not related to this. They were going to do it regardless.
Apple Si and ARM are two completely different things.
Apple's Silicon is based on the ARM Instruction Set Architecture.
So now the geek army wants to argue about ARM vs Apple Silicon. Anything to try and diminish Apple’s achievement in this switch. The haters will insist on calling it Mac on ARM and Apple Silicon a cheap marketing trick to deceive users. Even though Apple’s SOCs will bear little resemblance to processors in other devices. But you go right ahead and bitch about it.
Dude, chill out. You’re fighting with your own kind. Some people think it is worth mentioning the CPU architecture, since, yeah, Apple’s stuff is ARM-based. That doesn’t mean anyone is acting like Apple aren’t doing a lot of work here in producing their own chips.
Why is Intel failing to fabricate these 7nm chips at acceptable volume while other chips makers are? Is there something inherently different about Intel’s CPUs that makes yield worse? I also remember reading that 7nm isn’t always actually 7nm (some parts of the chip are and other parts aren’t??).
Eventually there won’t be anything smaller to make (because physics), and eventually the increase in clock speeds will stop (and that already has almost stopped). We’ve been at the edge of this impending end of CPU “progress” for a while now. I don’t see how switching to another design will put it off more than another few years. Only so many things can be made faster with parallel processing, too.
Will developers be forced to be write better software, finally? Will “faster” finally plateau, once and for all?
Apple highlighted a series of features of its custom silicon SoCs that will enhance future Macs. Simply moving to an ARM CPU core itself wasn't even one of them. Most of the advantages Apple emphasized in the move to its own silicon referred to unique, custom-developed features of its SoCs.
Comments
When the 64-bit iPhone SoC debuted, Apple's competitors were shocked into silence. The semiconductor industry knew the writing was on the wall.
Apple's lab prototypes have probably outperformed Intel's production hardware for a couple of years. Intel has missed all of their roadmap targets for years and Apple would be very aware of this. They would also be receiving and reviewing various engineering samples of the next generation Intel silicon and it would have been frightfully clear that Intel just couldn't deliver on their commitments.
Intel made this happen. But it certainly wasn't overnight. This is basically years of Intel ineptitude. Meanwhile AMD emerges as a credible competitor and Nvidia moves past Intel in market capitalization.
Reminds me how iKnockoff morons made fun of the "Liquid Retina" name yet didn't know what it was.
Using that ARM instruction set doesn't mean that you using the ARM chipset design.
Intrustruction set doesn't equal internal design if that's the part that's confusing you. It just means that apple chip and other arm chip are speaking a language that is very similar, but apple chip are more fluent when it comes to speak in that language.
Saying that doesn't take away any of Apple credits, geez.
If Intel wasn't causing them grief, they may not have switched. Intel hasn't delivered what Apple needed, when they needed it for years.
I'm sure Apple didn't make that decision until Intel proved they couldn't hack it. If Intel had upgraded their manufacturing infrastructure, Apple would not have pushed Intel aside.
The 16” MBP most certainly, does NOT have a 10th-gen processor.
The 13” MacBook Pro does.The MacBook Air does.
Eventually there won’t be anything smaller to make (because physics), and eventually the increase in clock speeds will stop (and that already has almost stopped). We’ve been at the edge of this impending end of CPU “progress” for a while now. I don’t see how switching to another design will put it off more than another few years. Only so many things can be made faster with parallel processing, too.
Will developers be forced to be write better software, finally? Will “faster” finally plateau, once and for all?
Apple Si is the collective name for SoC and SiP processors designed by Apple Inc. using ARM architecture.
ARM != Apple Si.
https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/06/23/why-the-macs-migration-to-apple-silicon-is-bigger-than-arm
Apple highlighted a series of features of its custom silicon SoCs that will enhance future Macs. Simply moving to an ARM CPU core itself wasn't even one of them. Most of the advantages Apple emphasized in the move to its own silicon referred to unique, custom-developed features of its SoCs.