Detnator

tht said:

flyway said:

GPUs such as the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M use GDDR6 and the 5600M uses HBM2 in the 16" MacBook Pro.
Is DDR5 mainly for the CPU and how does it compare to GDDR6 and HBM2?

It depends on how many channels of each memory.

2 channels of DDR4: 50 GB/s
2 channels of DDR5: 100 GB/s
2 channels of GDDR6: 250 GB/s
2 channels of HBM2: 1000 GB/s

DDR5 is for system or main memory for PCs, servers and such, but it usually comes down to cost. If HBM was cheap, there would be systems using it for main memory, but it is two expensive to be used as system memory for a regular PC. It will be interesting if Apple uses it as main memory for high end Apple Silicon Macs though. I'm almost half expecting it.

There are latency differences that can sway usage of one type of RAM over the other depending on primary application as well.

Just looking at that last stat — 1 Terabyte per second. That’s just... wow.  Imagine a Mac Pro with 1.5 TB of that and a TB of it as a RAM disk. Lol. Of course not practical.** But yeah... 

jonahlee said:

Beats said:

jonahlee said:

If they come up with some new port it instead of PCI it will likely only mean Apple cards work with it, and it will mean the expansion is a joke. And while an Apple GPU might be decent, it is not going to compete with AMD and NVIDIA mainly because of driver support, because of the smaller market share unless Apple can magically beat the GPU giants at their own game without making something super hot and without a huge power draw, that is also so much easier to program for.

Oh goody this again. Happens every time.

"Apple is not going to beat out market leaders."

Instead of just trolling the posters, how about comment on the substance. So you think Apple can beat high end GPU's from NVIDIA and AMD? What makes you think so? I would love for it to happen. Seems to me that supporting 3rd party graphics at least in the short term would be smart as Apple works to make some of it's own GPU hardware, but the chart does not make that seem likely.

He’s not trolling. He’s got a great point. And he doesn’t really need to elaborate because we’ve been down this road before. But I’ll elaborate for him.  He’s just saying in two lines what I’ll now say in a load of paragraphs. 

keithw said:

I'm finding it extraordinary difficult to believe that Apple could replace the existing Xeon-based Mac Pro (or even iMac Pro) with comparable performance & expandability in only two years.  Low end, no problem at all. 

I’ll bet donuts to dollars they already have working prototypes of these in their labs and those prototypes are already wiping the floor with today’s Macs. There’s no way they’d be announcing this before that. 

Sidtech said:

JinTech said:

Or you could read it as that this is what the Apple Silicon processor is directly compatible with. It doesn't say they will not support third-party. I could see Apple using their own GPU for primary tasks but third-party for more beefy tasks. Do we really think that Apple could compete with a GPU like the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II for professionals?

Well this is Apple we are talking about, one whose ego knows no bounds. After all Apple did convince themselves that real pros as they are would be perfectly content with the abysmal disaster that was their butterfly keyboard(s) or how they made a bet in 2013 with the trash can Mac Pro with GPU options. 

It would seem that, excluding the Mac Pro, in the future  all their Macs would come equipped with integrated graphics on Apple Silicon SOC. While not a bad thing at all, as devices like the XBox and PS4 are perfect functional examples of SOCs working fine, these comehcome equipped with fast GDDR6 memory, and  my question is howohow Apple handles fast bandwidth memory on their Macs

Yeah... I’m sure they have no idea what they’re doing, and they’re going to release these Macs with really slow memory, effectively wasting all the rest of the performance capabilities. 

micabe2006 said:

narwhal said:

rain22 said:

Mac users will be stuck using dumbed down iOS software for a long time I feel.  

Here's news for you, Rain. Very few new apps are written for macOS (or Windows). Apps today are developed for the web, iOS and Android.

 @narwhal: It may look that way but ALOT more programs are X86/64 The rest of the world decided to settle on x86. See that console gaming industry. Most LOB (Line of business) is x86. Real gaming on the mac is dead. Steam will not run on new ARM macs. So all those games that people bought on steam will be worthless for those who own these new ARM macs. Also when it comes to programs, There is Photoshop for ipad which is what your ARM mac will run and then there is REAL Photoshop with all of the x86/64 plugins that people have made. I wonder if they will port their plugins to the new ARM photoshop. Will the ARM photoshop even run plugins. The same is true for office will you get ipad office on ARM or REAL office that you do now? Also this is after Apple throws you out in the cold by stripping roseta2  away from you as they did is mac OS 10.7 i believe. Lets also not forget that wonderful smooth transition from 32-64 bit only apps that nearly killed Steam on the mac. Also how nice will apple play with developers and users once they have hegemony. Apple silicon is the ultimate lock in. I can see apple using gatekeeper to make their platforms only use the mac app store. That means you new $899-$10,000 mac is a glorified locked in ipad with a keyboard and mouse. At least with intel macs you can run crossover to get older 32-bit versions of windows apps and wine. Will you get that on your ARM mac. Lets not forget this is the same company that will not let you change your default web browser, or maps app in iOS because they want total control of the user experience. I bet you this will be coming to a mac near you, in mac OS 11.3 or whatever they are going to call it. This is a sad day for the computing industry indeed, if the market falls for Apple and their lock in scam.

Yeah... you just showed how completely you don't get it.  Perhaps it's a sad day for the small portion of Apple's target market that care about all the crap you just spouted, but the vast majority of Apple's target market don't care about all that and do care about the stuff that Apple prioritizes over all that - the stuff that they're now going to be able to do better than they could before. One person's "lock-in" is another person's safe haven.  Apple's not throwing us out in the cold, they're moving us from one vaguely warm place with a bunch of issues, to a warmer safer place. 

Apple sells countless millions and millions and millions of iOS devices (or is it billions?) and certainly millions of Macs.  99% of those iOS device users don't give a rip that they can only get their apps from the App Store.  In fact most of them prefer it that way and rather like that they don't have to rely on developers coming up with user friendly distribution systems (when so many don't) because Apple's done all that work for them.  The vast majority of apps on the Mac App Store being so successful speaks to that too.  Even MS has made Office downloadable from the Mac App Store and it's still the full version with a license that's fully compatible even in enterprise environments.

And updates. Some of us like that there's only ONE update service running on our iOS devices, and only one update service running on our Macs for most of our services.  And those apps that refuse to go through the Mac App Store are infuriating in the way they handle their updating services.

And this is the same story with people who want Apple to allow them to upgrade their own hardware.  Despite the fact that you can't crack your iPhone or iPad open and "upgrade" its RAM or storage, Apple still sells countless millions of them - so many more of them than they sell computers.

The old ways of computing are dying.  The vast majority of today's users care about the stuff you mentioned about as much as they care that they can't run an iPad with a 1970's text based OS. Everyone complaining about these changes today are the same types of people that thought GUIs would never take off because serious computer users couldn't do as much with them. It was true - there was -and still is - plenty a text based UI can do on a computer that a GUI can't or doesn't.  But apart from a very small minority (in the consumer world, excluding sysadmins and what have you) who cares?  Meanwhile the rest of us were doing creative stuff with MacPaint, which was the very beginning of what paved the way for stuff like Photoshop today.

Apple's target market has always been "the rest of us".  The people that the rest of the computer market doesn't cater to.  Perhaps that market will always be the minority - if the Mac market is anything to go by it's only 10% or so (though iOS's market share says it's a lot more than that in the mobile space), but they key here is: Apple caters to that small market EXCEEDINGLY well - better than anyone else by far, and DOESN'T WANT to or care to cater to the rest at all.  By doing a few things well they do it exceedingly well, instead of the mass nightmare that Windows and Android are (for the people who Apple is targeting). 

With these upcoming changes, Apple is simply doing more of the same. They've always wanted control because they can deliver a better experience for THEIR TARGET MARKET - the people that care about the experience more than anything else - than anyone else, including the users themselves, can deliver.  The vast majority of Apple users don't know about, don't want to know about, nor care in the slightest about Steam, or Crossover, or Wine, or Windows apps, or 32 vs 64 bit, or Terminal, or any web browser other than the built in one (that works just fine for their needs and is faster and safer anyway), or any of the other crap you're spouting.  

Don't get me wrong, I'm not ignorant.  I know what all that stuff is, and I do happen to care about some of it, but I don't delude myself that I'm in anything other than a tiny minority, and I handle my expectations accordingly.

By the way, not only do your comments show you don't get it, they also show you're completely ignorant.  They showed in the keynote the new Apple Silicon Mac running REAL Photoshop and REAL MS Word, natively.  You should pay attention and get your facts straight before you spout all your uninformed Apple-bashing conspiracy theories.  

As I said: One person's "lock-in" is another person's safe haven.  Just because you're one of the "one person" people in that statement doesn't negate the preferences and desires of the "another person" people.  Call it a prison, keeping you "locked in" if you want (except you're not locked in - you can go to Windows/Android/Linux/etc. any time you want).  Some of us call it a garden, with walls keeping the bad stuff out.  And we much prefer it that way.