No insider info here, just looking to have some fun.
BLUF: Apple's product differentiation strategy is different than the Intel nickel and dime you to death for ever 100Mhz or feature. We're going to see a more unified product stack, consistent with their mobile strategy, that's differentiated by form factor and quantity of cores/RAM/storage. Optimizing their lineup, Apple will use SoCs for all mobile (M series) products and will be 100% integrated GPUs until die/power constraints force them to an architecture variant with discrete CPU/GPU (although multi-chip packaging is possible) for the top tier products like the Mac Pro. Assuming "traditional "naming convention, Apple will have three SoCs: e.g. M1, M1X, and M1Z; the "TDP" targets will be 25W, 50W, and 75+W respectively. To minimize design costs, these will likely not cross over in many products. Apple will tier their offerings by die harvesting core counts, but not any other features or clock speeds. Specifically, this means (or the updated equivalent of):
Discusison
Key assumptions include:
Form factors will need an update to bring new tech (e.g. possibly miniLED, faceID, etc) and to keep the look-at-me-I-have-the-newest-stuff fan boys satisfied. The 16" is on the thicker larger side of things for an Apple mobile product and I expect them to try and thin it out to hit a ~4lb weight target while being sleeker. Their traditional upper end TDP target has been an "official" ~45W CPU and ~50W GPU, but...we all know those TDPs are mostly a joke for Intel and there have been cooling/performance complaints with this product over the years. I expect Apple to target a more nominal 75W TDP with limited 100W peak TDP usage. I don't see Apple hitting their battery life targets with a capped 100W/hr battery capacity unless they reign in the peak power consumption a bit. I really think the current 16" is the chassis they needed to support Intel's products and it's not really the portable desktop chassis Apple wanted. GPU will be a huge factor in selling the 16" over the updated 14" as is possibly more 8k focused accelerators and double the RAM channels to support that many CPU/GPU cores. The only offering here is what I've notionally called the M1Z. The smaller M1X won't be offered because the SoC will nominally required a different motherboard design/integration due to power/RAM configurations.
The rumored 14" is needed to allow TDP to grow towards the 50W range and allow for new tech. I don't expect any new features over the M1 here, just more. Again, only the M1X will be offered to minimize the design/integration costs, at least for now. It remains to be seen how what has been the entry level 13" MBP works out in the long run vs the MBA. Designing and integrating both the M1 and M1X into the 13"/14" MBP might not be a problem though, since I expect them to be just a smaller/larger version of each other. Unlike the M1Z, which I think will necessitate more RAM channels, etc. to feed the beast.
Now, for anything larger/discrete, Apple will have a separate lineup. Let's call it the P1 and P1X/Z. Beyond ~250mm^2 yields on a bleeding edge process are just not ideal. Plus, for max performance, Apple will want to wait a year for TSMCs performance version of any node. It's not that you can't build these, but rather that it's quickly hurts margins and Apples not know for doing that! This likely puts Apple on a 2yr refresh cycle. New nodes bring updated M lineup, optimized nodes the following year bring top end P products. Since the GPU doesn't have to be on the monolithic die for both area and power constraints, the P lineup should easily see 2x core counts over the M lineup. It's reasonable for the very top tier Apple will have 3x core counts just based on die/power estimates. This would match the 32+4c CPU and 128c GPU rumors. Also, I would expect that the very top tier P1X/Z Mac Pros would allow for dual sockets with a very nice profit margin.
TSMC 3nm node in late 2022 should allow all M2 products to have 50% more CPU cores and 100% more GPU cores. Apples product requirements seem to suggest that they will prioritize the GPU over more CPU cores.
BLUF: Apple's product differentiation strategy is different than the Intel nickel and dime you to death for ever 100Mhz or feature. We're going to see a more unified product stack, consistent with their mobile strategy, that's differentiated by form factor and quantity of cores/RAM/storage. Optimizing their lineup, Apple will use SoCs for all mobile (M series) products and will be 100% integrated GPUs until die/power constraints force them to an architecture variant with discrete CPU/GPU (although multi-chip packaging is possible) for the top tier products like the Mac Pro. Assuming "traditional "naming convention, Apple will have three SoCs: e.g. M1, M1X, and M1Z; the "TDP" targets will be 25W, 50W, and 75+W respectively. To minimize design costs, these will likely not cross over in many products. Apple will tier their offerings by die harvesting core counts, but not any other features or clock speeds. Specifically, this means (or the updated equivalent of):
16" MBP (M1Z at 75+W): 12+4c CPU, 24c GPU, up to 64GB LPDDR4 with double the M1 channels and double the die stacks to meet this. Die harvesting for tiered product lineup would look something like 10+4c CPU and 16/20c GPU options. Yields will dictate where the line is drawn. Die size should be approx. 250mm^2.
14" MBP (M1X at 50W) 8+4c CPU, 16c GPU, up to 32GB LPDDR4 with the same channel width as M1. Die harvesting for a tired product lineup would look something like a 6+4c CPU and 12c GPU. Die size should be approx. 180mm^2.
13" MBP entry level is unlikely to be updated and may follow the iPhone SE approach of using old stock/designs. Will stick with the ~25W M1 at 4+4c/8c.
Discusison
Key assumptions include:
- Apple will remain consistent to their core strategy of focusing on efficient compute and differentiation by form factor and simple logical jumps in quantity (e.g. core counts). In a sense, this really is setting manufacturable die size mm^2 and power targets and selling the most that fits in that envelope. I'm guess those are:
- 100-120mm^2 / 25W
- 150-180mm^2 / 50W
- 200-250mm^2 / 75W+
- Apple will continue to be and pay for the bleeding edge of TSMC nodes necessitating a fair amount of die harvesting as die get larger.
- Apple will optimize their lineup by limiting the number of SoCs or discrete chips they need to manufacture.
- Apple will continue to "thin out" their form factors to optimize mobility.
Form factors will need an update to bring new tech (e.g. possibly miniLED, faceID, etc) and to keep the look-at-me-I-have-the-newest-stuff fan boys satisfied. The 16" is on the thicker larger side of things for an Apple mobile product and I expect them to try and thin it out to hit a ~4lb weight target while being sleeker. Their traditional upper end TDP target has been an "official" ~45W CPU and ~50W GPU, but...we all know those TDPs are mostly a joke for Intel and there have been cooling/performance complaints with this product over the years. I expect Apple to target a more nominal 75W TDP with limited 100W peak TDP usage. I don't see Apple hitting their battery life targets with a capped 100W/hr battery capacity unless they reign in the peak power consumption a bit. I really think the current 16" is the chassis they needed to support Intel's products and it's not really the portable desktop chassis Apple wanted. GPU will be a huge factor in selling the 16" over the updated 14" as is possibly more 8k focused accelerators and double the RAM channels to support that many CPU/GPU cores. The only offering here is what I've notionally called the M1Z. The smaller M1X won't be offered because the SoC will nominally required a different motherboard design/integration due to power/RAM configurations.
The rumored 14" is needed to allow TDP to grow towards the 50W range and allow for new tech. I don't expect any new features over the M1 here, just more. Again, only the M1X will be offered to minimize the design/integration costs, at least for now. It remains to be seen how what has been the entry level 13" MBP works out in the long run vs the MBA. Designing and integrating both the M1 and M1X into the 13"/14" MBP might not be a problem though, since I expect them to be just a smaller/larger version of each other. Unlike the M1Z, which I think will necessitate more RAM channels, etc. to feed the beast.
Now, for anything larger/discrete, Apple will have a separate lineup. Let's call it the P1 and P1X/Z. Beyond ~250mm^2 yields on a bleeding edge process are just not ideal. Plus, for max performance, Apple will want to wait a year for TSMCs performance version of any node. It's not that you can't build these, but rather that it's quickly hurts margins and Apples not know for doing that! This likely puts Apple on a 2yr refresh cycle. New nodes bring updated M lineup, optimized nodes the following year bring top end P products. Since the GPU doesn't have to be on the monolithic die for both area and power constraints, the P lineup should easily see 2x core counts over the M lineup. It's reasonable for the very top tier Apple will have 3x core counts just based on die/power estimates. This would match the 32+4c CPU and 128c GPU rumors. Also, I would expect that the very top tier P1X/Z Mac Pros would allow for dual sockets with a very nice profit margin.
TSMC 3nm node in late 2022 should allow all M2 products to have 50% more CPU cores and 100% more GPU cores. Apples product requirements seem to suggest that they will prioritize the GPU over more CPU cores.