Well... if it works and drivers aren't an issue... then good for them!

So is not X86-64 right? is something else. I wonder if it makes sense at all, seems like wine won't be usable out of the box.

Good on Apple for allowing users to run their programs that haven't been updated once these chips drops. Also I am curious to see how powerful these chips are and if they can do the stuff that the Intel chips did such as Video editing in Final Cut and if Apple can solve the thermal issues that plague their laptops with these new chips.

I imagine the first round of notebooks with those new chips will be the AIR and the non pro MacBook. They need to build momentum for the pro users to move away from the intel. If they are doing the mac Pro ( starting 5000$ ) with intel for the foreseeable future, they will have to support intel for very long time. Curious how the market and devs will react.

heffeque:

Well... if it works and drivers aren't an issue... then good for them!

Apple is probably going to be shocked how much their app store purchases will plummet, because of all the Hackintosh users who can't switch. Then there are the people who need to dual-boot with Windows and can't. ARM does have virtualization instructions, but lacks enough instructions where emulating x86 Windows will be far too slow. You could argue "what about the version of Windows 10 for ARM?" but that's "Windows for Snapdragon". It doesn't work on just any ARM platform.

asturur:

So is not X86-64 right? is something else. I wonder if it makes sense at all, seems like wine won't be usable out of the box.

It's ARM, but Apple's own flavor of it. Same kinda thing that's in iPhones and iPads. Depends on what you mean by "out of the box". There has been an ARM version of wine in the works for years, but, it's meant to run Windows ARM programs, not x86. However, due to Rosetta 2, you should still be able to run x86 wine.

Fender178:

Also I am curious to see how powerful these chips are and if they can do the stuff that the Intel chips did such as Video editing in Final Cut and if Apple can solve the thermal issues that plague their laptops with these new chips.

I'm pretty confident there won't be any thermal issues with the CPUs. Apple will probably be pushing the limits of ARM, but it's still ARM. Since Apple has so much control over their ecosystem, they can have everything optimized for dozens of cores while staying within a small power envelope. I wouldn't be surprised if the first ARM-based Mac Pro would have a 64-core CPU, maybe even higher (since ARM doesn't have SMT). lol I sound like an Apple fanboy but I swear I'm not; I've never bought an Apple product in my life. I just find this situation interesting.

schmidtbag:

Apple is probably going to be shocked how much their app store purchases will plummet, because of all the Hackintosh users who can't switch. Then there are the people who need to dual-boot with Windows and can't. ARM does have virtualization instructions, but lacks enough instructions where emulating x86 Windows will be far too slow. You could argue "what about the version of Windows 10 for ARM?" but that's "Windows for Snapdragon". It doesn't work on just any ARM platform. It's ARM, but Apple's own flavor of it. Same kinda thing that's in iPhones and iPads. Depends on what you mean by "out of the box". There has been an ARM version of wine in the works for years, but, it's meant to run Windows ARM programs, not x86. However, due to Rosetta 2, you should still be able to run x86 wine. I'm pretty confident there won't be any thermal issues with the CPUs. Apple will probably be pushing the limits of ARM, but it's still ARM. Since Apple has so much control over their ecosystem, they can have everything optimized for dozens of cores while staying within a small power envelope. I wouldn't be surprised if the first ARM-based Mac Pro would have a 64-core CPU, maybe even higher (since ARM doesn't have SMT). lol I sound like an Apple fanboy but I swear I'm not; I've never bought an Apple product in my life. I just find this situation interesting.

Not at all. That makes sense for the Macbook Air and Macbook non pros. Yeah with the Mac pros I can't see them switching to any other chip anytime soon considering the new updated Mac Pros were just released last year. Also that same thing applies to the Imac Pros as well they have to use Intel chips in those as well for a while at least. Yeah I could see both the Mac Pro and the Imac Pro have like a 64 or 128 core ARM chips in them. The only Apple device that I have ever purchased was an Ipod Touch 4th Generation. Yeah Apple will be shocked in MacOS market share decreasing a tad as well due to the fact that Hackintosh users can't switch. I am also confidant that Apple can improve thermals with their stuff with the new chips since they can control that.

It has to do everything with performance and TDP, and (of course), controlling everything on the device, from hardware to software. This is the end game from Apple, basically. I can't wait to see how their ARM CPUs perform when given a proper thermal headroom. I suspect they will cause quite a bit of stir. The main issue I see is with people needing x86 virtualisation, and people needing to use older applications that won't receive an update for ARM (mostly old games). Hackintosh users are completely irrelevant to Apple, and getting rid of them is surely a plus. A plus for the end users is that iOS and iPadOS applications will run on OS 11 natively. If the mouse/keyboard integration is good, then the Mac can turn from a niche to a mainstay in the applications front. Adobe stuff, Microsoft stuff, Apple stuff and open source stuff should all work natively from day 1, so it's only older apps that will have issues.

I'm definitely curious to see how this pans out for the 'heavy duty' mac-exclusive programs like Logic and Final Cut, and while not mac only, Adobe. Are they going to have to be reworked to make use of what ARM offers or are these ARM machines intended for lighter work? Adobe programs still tend towards favoring clock speed vs thread count. I realize this won't flip overnight, but I'm curious how professionals will react, what happens if you run a studio and need a new computer but your DAW isn't supported, do you switch software or ditch MacOS? Maybe I'm fundamentally misunderstanding how software compatibility would work in a switch to ARM.

Apple wants to be less dependent and design their own security. I think it's a good thing, will take a good chunk out of Intel business and force them to be more competitive and innovative. If Apple is dropping Intel it's because they think they can do better without them. That shows how low Intel has come in recent years, not being able to respond to Ryzen nor inventing new tech at affordable prices. Time will tell, but it's better to have more players in the field than less, let them compete!

It's about making money. If apple control it then they get to make more money. That's all the justification they need, they've done plenty of silly things moving them to their own proprietary format just so they could get more money from it. It's also Intel's fault - they haven't got the architectural or process node advantages they used too but still want the same profit margins. They are competing with ARM who exist on tiny margins in comparison, and don't lock down their chip design so other people can make their own variants. The moment ARM is even vaguely competitive switching to them becomes very appealing to both the bean counters and the system architects.

PrMinisterGR:

I can't wait to see how their ARM CPUs perform when given a proper thermal headroom. I suspect they will cause quite a bit of stir.

Thermal headroom is not ARM's shortcoming. It doesn't matter how much you cool them, they don't scale well with higher clock speeds. You could argue that unlike the SBCs available, Apple will actually provide good enough VRMs to boost the clocks, but there are some pretty high-end ARM servers out there and they still hang out around the 2GHz range. What I predict is Apple has a lot of custom instructions to help boost performance. Seeing as recent versions of Mac OS require a CPU with SSE4, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple actually added SSE4 instructions to their CPUs. That would make a considerable performance improvement, while also making it harder for anyone to port Mac OS to something else.

Hackintosh users are completely irrelevant to Apple, and getting rid of them is surely a plus.

That's entirely untrue. Hackintosh users are not an insignificant part of Apple's ecosystem. Apple's top money-makers are their digital stores, not the hardware. Mac OS is free. To get rid of hackintosh users means Apple will see a loss in app store sales.

schmidtbag:

Thermal headroom is not ARM's shortcoming. It doesn't matter how much you cool them, they don't scale well with higher clock speeds. You could argue that unlike the SBCs available, Apple will actually provide good enough VRMs to boost the clocks, but there are some pretty high-end ARM servers out there and they still hang out around the 2GHz range. What I predict is Apple has a lot of custom instructions to help boost performance. Seeing as recent versions of Mac OS require a CPU with SSE4, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple actually added SSE4 instructions to their CPUs. That would make a considerable performance improvement, while also making it harder for anyone to port Mac OS to something else.

They cannot add SSE4 (I think), as these instruction sets are part of deals between the x86 platform holders. They have zero reason to do so too, they can introduce whatever they want since they control the hardware, the compiler, the runtimes, and the OS itself. Apple will have custom silicone in, that's for certain. It's already obvious in the iPhone and also in the SSD controller and TPM used in Macs (which runs on their own silicon). I don't know how well or not they scale, the instruction set is almost irrelevant for modern CPUs anyway. It's just the frontend that the software understands, and nothing more. Our current x86 processors devote a good part of their silicon to translating x86 so that they can completely ignore it. Apple is making great mobile CPUs, a couple of generations at least ahead of Qualcomm et al. I want to see how that will scale with more thermal headroom.

schmidtbag:

That's entirely untrue. Hackintosh users are not an insignificant part of Apple's ecosystem. Apple's top money-makers are their digital stores, not the hardware. Mac OS is free. To get rid of hackintosh users means Apple will see a loss in app store sales.

The Mac is already a small portion of Apple's income (last quarter the iPad almost surpassed it). Trying to tell me that an Appstore with literally billions of customers will even feel the amount of people using a Hackintosh, is kind of weird. Linux is much easier to install and use and it struggles to go to 1% of the total marketplace, I cannot see how Hackintosh might even be noticeable in the unified Apple AppStore (which is what will happen with OS 11).

As much as I hate the corp/cartel Apple has become since... early 2000(?) I have but to wish them success on this particular enterprise, even if their motivation is probably just an increase in their profits an more control over their garden. Why? because x86 MUST die.... a single corp/cartel (intel) with only 2 licensees (amd, via) locking down any other company in the world from developing compatible CPUs is a really serious problem and has hindered advancement since ever (again, x86 is just a hardware API, not the wire/gate/etc designs to implement it, the licence holds no real value, it's like patenting the idea of a "means of transportation with 4 wheels and a fuel engine") If it takes killing x86 so we can have actual CPU competition for computers (like in ARM where we have 10 or more providers), then so be it....

PrMinisterGR:

They cannot add SSE4 (I think), as these instruction sets are part of deals between the x86 platform holders. They have zero reason to do so too, they can introduce whatever they want since they control the hardware, the compiler, the runtimes, and the OS itself.

They could implement something functionally similar to it; NEON is basically the ARM equivalent of the SSE series, though I don't know how extensive it gets. They very much DO have a reason to add it, since a lot of the software built for Mac requires it. That's not just software made by Apple, either.

I don't know how well or not they scale, the instruction set is almost irrelevant for modern CPUs anyway. It's just the frontend that the software understands, and nothing more.

Fair point, it is "ARM-based", meaning, it is binary compatible with aarch64 but likely has enough adjustments to be architecturally very different. But for just about every other ARM CPU available, 3GHz is considered fast. Benchmarks of other ARM platforms show that the performance-per-watt just tanks whenever you overclock. The architecture was built with efficiency over performance. That's why it won the mobile market. With iOS devices, Apple has remained very much in-line with the rest of the ARM market, except with a few tweaks here and there to their benefit. So, I find it highly unlikely we're going to see something at 4GHz+ with an IPC comparable to Intel chips. It's more likely we're going to see dozen(s) of ~2GHz cores. Apple has enough control over their OS that they can really push for multi-threading. That way, you get all the performance you really need while keeping the architecture within it's efficiency "sweet spot".

The Mac is already a small portion of Apple's income (last quarter the iPad almost surpassed it). Trying to tell me that an Appstore with literally billions of customers will even feel the amount of people using a Hackintosh, is kind of weird.

We're not comparing to all of Apple's ecosystem here, only the Mac ecosystem. I know Mac users who don't buy anything from the app store, but almost everyone who builds a hackintosh (who isn't a hobbyist) is deliberately seeking Mac OS because they need Mac-compatible software. This is usually not cheap stuff either, like Final Cut Pro.

Linux is much easier to install and use and it struggles to go to 1% of the total marketplace, I cannot see how Hackintosh might even be noticeable in the unified Apple AppStore (which is what will happen with OS 11).

That's an apples to oranges comparison (EDIT: pun not intended, seriously). Linux has 1% of consumer/workstation market, but it wasn't really built for that; it commands great control in server and industrial markets. Mac OS was built almost entirely for consumers and content creators and failed as a server. They're basically opposite OSes. Hackintosh users exist because they want to be apart of the Apple ecosystem without buying the hardware. There are 2 big reasons they don't buy the hardware: 1. Apple's isn't good enough. Maybe you want to go AMD and get more cores. Maybe you want to use Nvidia (yes, you can still use Nvidia on modern Mac OS). Maybe you want something that doesn't thermal throttle so easily. You're not going to get that from Apple. These people most certainly spend good money on Apple's ecosystem. 2. Apple's is too expensive. Apple's upgrade prices are steep. You can save a lot of money if you build your own Mac. Money that could be spent on the app store.

PrMinisterGR:

The Mac is already a small portion of Apple's income (last quarter the iPad almost surpassed it).

Kind off weird since in most countries the iPad has been on it's way out from K12, which is a rather large portion of their market.

Well.... if a single smart person like us here knows very well that today Intel is complete out of competition talking about cost x performance... image the biggest company of the world?!?!?! If the blue side not awake soon... will be very hard to get out of this blackhole....

Just today: "ARM-based Japanese supercomputer is now the fastest in the world": https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/23/21300097/fugaku-supercomputer-worlds-fastest-top500-riken-fujitsu-arm Not saying that Apple's ARM-based CPUs will be the faster than x86-64 ones... just saying that it IS possible to extract excellent power from ARM-based CPUs (in certain scenarios that might or might not apply to certain applications).

heffeque:

Just today: "ARM-based Japanese supercomputer is now the fastest in the world": https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/23/21300097/fugaku-supercomputer-worlds-fastest-top500-riken-fujitsu-arm Not saying that Apple's ARM-based CPUs will be the faster than x86-64 ones... just saying that it IS possible to extract excellent power from ARM-based CPUs (in certain scenarios that might or might not apply to certain applications).

Very much so - Amazon's AWS servers have ARM offerings with weirdly very good performance. But in the case of Fugaku, that has nearly 160K nodes and each CPU is 48 cores. It's no surprise that thing topped the list, that's an absurd amount of compute power. The great thing about ARM is you can pack a lot of performance in a very small package. Since it runs pretty efficiently, you don't need beefy cooling either, which allows you to cram even more systems in a single U1 rack slot.

I didn't expect this since its really a 10 year outlook. The R&D and low volumes of macs sold I bet Apple doesn't even break even after 5 years. However they can now have one consistent ARM architecture from watches, phones to laptops. I suspect Apple will make ARM perform just fine for laptop needs. Since they control they OS they can bake a few special instructions into the silicon. As long as they can stick with it a decade this is almost certain to pay off in the long game.

@Borys there is no blackhole for intel. they have billions in their pocket, and even if amd took over all consumer stuff, all r stuff like oems/servers etc will still make them billions/year. i guess they could easily survive not selling a consumer cpu for 5y, financially speaking.