Read more.Quote:
And it is working on GPUs "several times faster" than those used in current Mac desktops.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
And it is working on GPUs "several times faster" than those used in current Mac desktops.
When do you think we’ll see x86 become dead to the end user? (Either to ARM or RISCV) And what was the last similarly huge shift in personal computing?
Intel are seemingly taking a kicking on all sides this year, Apple are moving from Intel to their own silicon, so that could be a win for both them and Nvidia (Did that ARM deal go through), AMD are kicking them on the CPU front, they're sold off a few bits from their portfolio..
Are we starting to see the death of a giant here?
I really don't want Apple silicon to be wildly successful. Imagine a world where the entire ecosystem is in Apples control.
*shudder*
Could it be a good thing? It'll be worth moving off x86 to a more efficient ISA and with Apples push, more developers might start programming for ARM. Saying that I'm banking on other manufacturers with ARM architecture licenses to give users a non-apple choice because like yourself, I don't want to be stuck with Apple.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabbykatze
Lets be honest it already is.... they have a 'developer key' (that is paid for yearly) which makes it so a user needs to jump through hoops like on android to install apps from non 'authorised' sources and we all know how well that works on android. With the change to arm and their focus on 'services' I can see it becoming more restrictive sooner rather than later too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabbykatze
As to the 32core cpu, well if you ignore the naming conventions of the parts in the current m1 it's technically an 8 (processing) + 16 (neural engine) core cpu already so making a 32core cpu could just be adding another 8 cores to the processing side of things, which wouldn't be too hard.
Will there be more cores in the future, well seeing as there are already 100+ core arm cpu's well it's kind of a given..... not that this really makes any difference to me, none of my primary programs are even made for os-x, let alone anything non x86/x64. Although I would like to see better arm support on windows and ideally the neo come with a decent arm cpu instead of an intel one....
I doubt it. Intel needed a kick up the proverbial due to their smug complacency. I'm not a fanboy to any company although down the years I've generally gone with AMD for value and don't get carried away with the fastest tech obsession. As long as it does the job I want it to , a PC is a tool to me ( I game rarely ) so browsing , invoicing and using proggies is more my need. Their are a few companies I avoid on moral grounds as best I can ( my feelings ) due to abhorent business practises. Intel , Apple , Sony and Seagate spring to mind. Sooner or later Intel will make the strides needed to re-assert itself unless AMD can continue it's forward march at the rate they have been doing. On the R&D side Intel have slipped but have the financial clout to afford ( or poach ) the best out there and have more versatility in their product lines. In a perfect world it would be nice if all brands had the same performance at an equal price and left us just to pick what brand we fancied but the downfall would be less competition and development as we have now. We've come a long way in a realitively short time to my mind thinking back to 386-486 days , 1 - 4 MB memory and 1 MB Trident garaphic cards , Dial- Up internet. Advances amaze me at times , more power in todays grahics cards than Houston had in total with the moon landing , perhaps in the future your kitchen toaster will have more power than the PC you have now , mind boggles. Lol.
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabbykatze
However impressive Apple's CPUs are (and I for one do not pretend to deny that they aren't very impressive), the problem with Apple is that they want total control: no upgradeability, no repairability, just pay pay pay.
While it was largely a historical accident, PCs are still largely commodity parts (at least in the desktop market) which is a good thing for consumers and even ironically even for the environment (although a lot of people don't reuse PC parts as well as should).
So while I would welcome getting rid of x86, there is no way I would move to a closed garden like Apple or the Apple copy-cats who seem to be very keen on ARM.
I hate the people who seem to think that the M1 is such an amazing cpu. It's nowt special at all - competent but not special. Others are doing it as well if not better just Apple package it up and people go wow it's amazeballs...
It reduces competition and choice, makes it more expensive to own and really doesn't help the consumer at all...
Kudos to Apple, they understand that getting their mac line from 10% or even lower, from where it is now to 50% needs massive gains vs the competition to lure away people. If Apple makes a 16+4 Macbook that actually is 3-5x the performance of a comparable laptop, then many people will switch.
As for when x86 will be dead...it won't be dead. Remember Apple has a few advantages that makes them so good. First of all, process. 5nm TSMC is one heck of a process vs what the competition (Intel/less for AMD) has. Second, they have the integration advantage, software/hardware. They can design the chips for the software and use cases. And on this direction, third, Apple is adding lots of dedicated hardware to accelerate common scenarios. If you actually benchmark their CPU cores with no advantage from dedicated hw, the performance advantage is not that massive.
Also, keep in mind that while AMD is pushing their limits and doing their best now, Intel is...using Skylake, still, a 2015 product. No rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbish it gets beaten by Apple's latest design. Compare what Apple had in 2015 with Skylake and...it doesn't stand a chance. So in a way, Apple is today here because Intel stood still all these years. They have lost a lot of ground during these years and it'll be very hard for them to recoup that back. Alder Lake with its hybrid architecture looks to be a move in the right direction. If the high performance core is actually a sizeable increase over Tigelake (at least 25%) then performance wise at least, they stand a chance. Power wise, x86 laptops won't be really able to compete since first you are using these high performance chips and general purpose chips and second you have a rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbishty software, windows.
It's hard to benchmark mobile and until now comparing the various ARM implementations has meant phone or iPad benchmarks. And since Apple is totally a walled-in garden such comparisons weren't like-for-like.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3dcandy
However, with all those caveats, pretty much all the benches have had Apple outperforming all the other ARM implementations massively for years. Okay 5nm process, throwing transistors at the problem and now on-package memory help massively here, but what Apple did by buying PA Semi and throwing engineering resources at their chips is pretty amazing.
There are plenty of reason to dislike Apple and if closed-off proprietary stuff replaces the normal PC market I and most enthusiasts won't be happy, but that doesn't distract from what Apple have achieved.
never owned an apple product...never used an apple product...not thinking of getting an apple product...apple is a threat to no one.
Erm amazing - integrating dram on board been done before, got fairly decent cores and have custom hardware all been done before. Use AI to help - been done before. Just because Apple did it it's amazing. They control EVERYTHING and that's why they can get these results. Other chips out there that are just as good but people don't know about them. It's only because Apple effectively control the whole thing that these work - and they only did it because Intel dropped the ball(s) multiple times and couldn't produce chips good enough for Apple to use. Qualcomm have some great chips, but because they don't control the software and hardware side they can't get as good results. The DSP and AI functions in the Qualcomm chips are on a par if not better than Apples. But Android (for example) is a much broader OS with different goals. ARM Windows has a massive issue with trying to cover even more bases. But look at a Pi 4, with a low power chip (picked for cost reasons nothing else) and how it can now arguably run a decent desktop experience. Look at other SBC's that have 6 and 8 core chips off the shelf with dram etc. on and they are pretty close running a pretty standard OS like Debian without dedicated hardwareQuote:
Originally Posted by kompukare
More Apple disposable stuff,so expect even more soldiered parts,and little end user upgradeability or repairability. Apple boasts about how much recycled aluminium they used but made their latest iProducts even less easier to repair.
They and other companies are hypocritical when they go on about the environment. Yet,they continue to make products which are harder and harder to repair,with more and more soldiered and glued parts. I really hope the right to repair movements get more traction,and these companies get massively fined for computers which are on purpose made not to be repaired. Most of the broken electronics is shipped to poorer countries which end up paying the costs of all of this.
iphone 12 has all the different parts tied to the individual product. Almost impossible to even swap the screen nowadays if damagedQuote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
They need to be fined for all this nonsense. All you end up with is poorer countries being lumbered with tons of electronic waste.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3dcandy