Riding on the Success of the M1, Apple Readies 32-core Chip for High-end Macs

[erek]

“In addition, Apple is reportedly developing a 16-core "big" + 4 "small" core version of the M1, which could power more middle-of-the-market Macs, such as the iMac desktop, and the bulk of the MacBook Pro lineup. The 16B+4s core chip could debut as early as Spring 2021. Elsewhere, the company is reportedly stepping up efforts to develop its own high-end professional-visualization GPU that it can use in its iMac Pro and Mac Pro workstations, replacing the AMD Radeon Pro solutions found in the current generation. This graphics architecture will be built from the ground-up for the Metal 3D graphics API, as well as a parallel compute accelerator. Perhaps the 2022 debut of the Arm-powered Mac Pro could feature this GPU.”

https://www.techpowerup.com/275668/...-apple-readies-32-core-chip-for-high-end-macs

 

[Aurelius]

The sweet spot could be those mid-tier chips with 8/12/16 high-performance cores. Even an eight-core chip might outperform a lot of the speedier x86 laptop CPUs on the market, and the 12- or 16-core parts might just mop the floor with everyone else (at least in tasks where multithreading is important). I don't recall AMD or Intel roadmaps taking those companies to 12-plus cores in laptop chips in 2021.

 

[Nobu]

I'd be interested in a mac mini/imac with one of the mx chips for a linux box to futs around with, maybe use as a gaming/streaming box in the living room. But not for $2k+, which is probably what these will cost.

Maybe in 5 years when the price has come down and there are some used boxes on the market...

 

[Aurelius]

I'd be interested in a mac mini/imac with one of the mx chips for a linux box to futs around with, maybe use as a gaming/streaming box in the living room. But not for $2k+, which is probably what these will cost.

Maybe in 5 years when the price has come down and there are some used boxes on the market...

$2K? Maybe if you max it out, but even a 27-inch 5K iMac starts at $1,800. If there's a high-end Mac mini it'll likely cost well below that even with some upgrades.

 

[DukenukemX]

At this point Apple has painted a target on their back with the M1. Before the M1, Apple had Intel as a partner as well as AMD. Qualcomm was Apple's biggest competitor, as well as HP, Dell, Asus, and etc. With the M1 aiming to take large amounts of market share away from everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, Apples once allies are now their biggest enemies. Apple couldn't pick the best time to release the 5nm M1 with Intel still stuck on 14nm, and AMD using 7nm. While AMD did release Zen3, they have yet to implement it into their laptop chips. Their current laptop 4000 series chips are still stuck with 3 year old Vega graphics. AMD's Rembrandt Ryzen APUs will fix a lot of this but it won't be until Q2 of 2021.

Apple is sending a clear message to the industry and that's to get their act together or Apple an take away market share.

 

[Lakados]

At this point Apple has painted a target on their back with the M1. Before the M1, Apple had Intel as a partner as well as AMD. Qualcomm was Apple's biggest competitor, as well as HP, Dell, Asus, and etc. With the M1 aiming to take large amounts of market share away from everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, Apples once allies are now their biggest enemies. Apple couldn't pick the best time to release the 5nm M1 with Intel still stuck on 14nm, and AMD using 7nm. While AMD did release Zen3, they have yet to implement it into their laptop chips. Their current laptop 4000 series chips are still stuck with 3 year old Vega graphics. AMD's Rembrandt Ryzen APUs will fix a lot of this but it won't be until Q2 of 2021.

Apple is sending a clear message to the industry and that's to get their act together or Apple an take away market share.

It is certainly a shot across the bow of a lot of players. Now Apple just needs to start developing the Apple Arcade and score some larger titles in there.

 

[5150Joker]

Even if Apple’s cpu performs better, their absurd prices will keep their products niche.

 

[Aurelius]

Even if Apple’s cpu performs better, their absurd prices will keep their products niche.

I'm not so sure. Remember, a $999 Air is now more powerful than many Intel laptops where you previously needed to spring for a more expensive model to get adequate speed. The company dropped the Mac mini's price by $100 even with the speed upgrade. Apple won't win over the crowd hunting for the $400 Best Buy clearance special, but it may become the go-to brand in some broader categories.

 

[Silentbob343]

Seeing how apple has *dominated the phone and tablet arena I wouldn't be very surprised to see it happen with laptops as well.

As I recall their laptops have traditionally been a bit of a let down in terms of cost/performance due to using older gen intel chips compared to what the competition was offering. I can see that changing with this new M1 based laptop.

*North american market

 

[Lakados]

Even if Apple’s cpu performs better, their absurd prices will keep their products niche.

The problem is their prices aren't that absurd, yeah they aren't going to go after the sub $500 laptop market dominated by the likes of Acer, there is no money in that but if you put just about any of the Apple devices next to a similar performing PC then start comparing specs you quickly notice things like the keyboard, screen, touchpad, speakers, battery life, on said PC don't stack up against the Apple. So if you want those things you have to pony up and the next thing you see is that Apple is maybe $100 more. But now start tacking on the software incidentals, like Windows 10 Pro, I might not like OSX but I certainly despise Win10 Home, now you are only $50 out between the two, toss in a much better Apple support, security features, added privacy, and suddenly that price tag isn't so different. And if you are an enterprise user, OSX has better MDM solutions, has much of the same management functionality of Win10 Enterprise, and plays better with a larger library of user management systems granted there is a much smaller software compatibility footprint, so if you need Windows applications then you need to start looking at options from Parallels, Citrix, or nComputing which does even things back out a little. The point is depending on what you are using the devices for and how long you intend to use them before replacing them, the Apple devices have consistently shown to be the cheaper device over its intended lifespan.

 

[Deleted member 89018]

Yeah. “Absurd” prices are a pretty typical complaint thrown at Apple, and for anything Intel-based and upgraded I’d generally agree ($2000 for the top end upgraded Mini from last generation was a lot to ask, for instance).

But that $1000 air is punching above its weight in a lot of ways. It’s suddenly a more capable, better battery life alternative to things like the (more expensive) Dell XPS 13, for instance.

so for these first few ARM systems, I don’t know if high prices are really a valid complaint, unless you’re complaining about nice laptops in general.

 

[Lakados]

Seeing how apple has dominated the phone and tablet arena I wouldn't be very surprised to see it happen with laptops as well.

As I recall their laptops have always been a bit of a let down in terms of cost/performance due to using older gen intel chips compared to what the competition was offering.

Yes but, due to the amount of customization work that Apple does to their systems their software optimizations and firmware and such tend to allow them to punch above their Windows PC counterparts and tend to encroach on the more customized Linux variants but having a more accessible software library compared to said Linux counterpart. OSX may not be for me, do I enjoy my weekend gaming sessions with the guys, but I certainly won't write off Apple devices as being slouches. Besides it's not like Intels last decade of CPU's have been leaps and bounds better than the ones before, being a generation or 2 behind and optimizing the living hell out of it at a hardware & software level probably nets similar gains as to being on the newer series.

 

[Lakados]

Yeah. “Absurd” prices are a pretty typical complaint thrown at Apple, and for anything Intel-based and upgraded I’d generally agree ($2000 for the top end upgraded Mini from last generation was a lot to ask, for instance).

But that $1000 air is punching above its weight in a lot of ways. It’s suddenly a more capable, better battery life alternative to things like the (more expensive) Dell XPS 13, for instance.

so for these first few ARM systems, I don’t know if high prices are really a valid complaint, unless you’re complaining about nice laptops in general.

There is also the decoy effect going on there, Apple might spec an absurdly expensive model like the $2000 fully upgraded mini but they really don't expect to sell it, it's there for those people with the deep pockets who feel they need it what it exists for is to make the lower-cost variants seem much more attractive and reasonable in comparison.

 

[Twisted Kidney]

Even if Apple’s cpu performs better, their absurd prices will keep their products niche.

The Apple tax usually rides in the 10% range these days aside from stupid crap like wheels and monitor stands that are there to get people talking for free.

I'm far more concerned about the ever increasing height of the walls around their garden, Macs are teetering on become even more limited for their users.

 

[jeremyshaw]

There is also the decoy effect going on there, Apple might spec an absurdly expensive model like the $2000 fully upgraded mini but they really don't expect to sell it, it's there for those people with the deep pockets who feel they need it what it exists for is to make the lower-cost variants seem much more attractive and reasonable in comparison.

Eh, I would challenge anyone to make an Intel/AMD 6 core + 10GbE + 4 TB3 device with internal PSU, in that volume. Outside of the Mac Mini, it just doesn't exist. Dell, HP, Lenovo, ASRock, etc. None of them do anything like it. None of them even have more than 1GbE RJ45, 1 TB3 port (if they even offer it outside of an extremely top end model - IF they even offer it), and all have external PSUs.

There isn't a single laptop on the market that even hits those spec (ignore the internal PSU, since that's meaningless in the current laptop market). There aren't ITX boards with more than 1 TB3 header, so I don't feel any combination of the Velka or other unique SFF cases will even come close. In the end, if you want compute + IO density in a small, singular package, this is it.

 

[Lakados]

The Apple tax usually rides in the 10% range these days aside from stupid crap like wheels and monitor stands that are there to get people talking for free.

I'm far more concerned about the ever increasing height of the walls around their garden, Macs are teetering on become even more limited for their users.

What equally worries me is every time they make the wall higher another major software vendor says they want in. So it’s slowly working and the rest of the industry is trying to do the same thing because Apples model is too good at making and keeping money.

 

[Nobu]

$2K? Maybe if you max it out, but even a 27-inch 5K iMac starts at $1,800. If there's a high-end Mac mini it'll likely cost well below that even with some upgrades.

The 13" m1 is $1300, the mac mini m1 is less, can't remember how much off hand. I'd expect the mx version to be at least $200 more, thinking $1500-1800 for the base model laptop, $800-1200 for the base mac mini. It could be lower, but don't be surprised if it's not.

 

[Lakados]

Eh, I would challenge anyone to make an Intel/AMD 6 core + 10GbE + 4 TB3 device with internal PSU, in that volume. Outside of the Mac Mini, it just doesn't exist. Dell, HP, Lenovo, ASRock, etc. None of them do anything like it. None of them even have more than 1GbE RJ45, 1 TB3 port (if they even offer it outside of an extremely top end model - IF they even offer it), and all have external PSUs.

There isn't a single laptop on the market that even hits those spec (ignore the internal PSU, since that's meaningless in the current laptop market). There aren't ITX boards with more than 1 TB3 header, so I don't feel any combination of the Velka or other unique SFF cases will even come close. In the end, if you want compute + IO density in a small, singular package, this is it.

I’ll double check but I think Zotac does minus the internal PSU, but they cost 2-3x the Mac mini, so not a real comparison but they do exist but at that size you are generally paying for the form factor.

 

[ChadD]

At this point Apple has painted a target on their back with the M1. Before the M1, Apple had Intel as a partner as well as AMD. Qualcomm was Apple's biggest competitor, as well as HP, Dell, Asus, and etc. With the M1 aiming to take large amounts of market share away from everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, Apples once allies are now their biggest enemies. Apple couldn't pick the best time to release the 5nm M1 with Intel still stuck on 14nm, and AMD using 7nm. While AMD did release Zen3, they have yet to implement it into their laptop chips. Their current laptop 4000 series chips are still stuck with 3 year old Vega graphics. AMD's Rembrandt Ryzen APUs will fix a lot of this but it won't be until Q2 of 2021.

Apple is sending a clear message to the industry and that's to get their act together or Apple an take away market share.

Well..... Apple will be taking away market share. lol

It hurts to see it happening... but no one is getting their act together by the time Apple goes after the desktop market. The first salvo with the low end "cheap" macs was clearly a wake up call to the industry. Poor Intel they are well and truly fucked. Apple is using the M1 launch to SMOOTH out all the hiccups in their Rosetta2.... and giving software developers the kick in the ass required to get Native support ready for the real launch next year. I am sure many software developers didn't take Apple silicon any more serious then Intel and the other ARM players did. If there where any that where not really working on Apple ARM support (thinking of audio plug in developers ect) they are now working overtime to get things ready for the real roll out of Apple silicon.

These rumors seem a bit crazy with massive core counts. However I can for sure see Apple shooting for 16 ARM cores.... expecting to have to bin a ton down to 12 core parts for use in imacs ect.

Microsoft needs a REAL ARM partner.... Qcom is not going to get it done. I imagine somewhere Nvidia is giddy known they are going to be the maker of the Windows savior chip. Not suggesting x86 + high end GPUs are still not the best gaming machines.... however if Apple really does manage a 16 core chip with even middle of the road GPU performance, there going to hoover up a ton of creative types, and the hype will hoover up a ton of the standard non gamer market. MacOS marketshare is going to grow for a few years.... and if the rest of the industry doesn't execute the next few years they could be dealing with a Apple market share explosion.

 

[Twisted Kidney]

What equally worries me is every time they make the wall higher another major software vendor says they want in. So it’s slowly working and the rest of the industry is trying to do the same thing because Apples model is too good at making and keeping money.

I have noticed that other companies only seem to copy Apple's douchiest "innovations".

 

[idiomatic]

Yay I always wanted a $50k workstation that was as open as a console

 

[ND40oz]

I’ll double check but I think Zotac does minus the internal PSU, but they cost 2-3x the Mac mini, so not a real comparison but they do exist but at that size you are generally paying for the form factor.

Pretty much any vendor could build one with the Intel Compute Element if they wanted to. Razor uses it for the Tomahawk.

 

[Lakados]

Well..... Apple will be taking away market share. lol

It hurts to see it happening... but no one is getting their act together by the time Apple goes after the desktop market. The first salvo with the low end "cheap" macs was clearly a wake up call to the industry. Poor Intel they are well and truly fucked. Apple is using the M1 launch to SMOOTH out all the hiccups in their Rosetta2.... and giving software developers the kick in the ass required to get Native support ready for the real launch next year. I am sure many software developers didn't take Apple silicon any more serious then Intel and the other ARM players did. If there where any that where not really working on Apple ARM support (thinking of audio plug in developers ect) they are now working overtime to get things ready for the real roll out of Apple silicon.

These rumors seem a bit crazy with massive core counts. However I can for sure see Apple shooting for 16 ARM cores.... expecting to have to bin a ton down to 12 core parts for use in imacs ect.

Microsoft needs a REAL ARM partner.... Qcom is not going to get it done. I imagine somewhere Nvidia is giddy known they are going to be the maker of the Windows savior chip. Not suggesting x86 + high end GPUs are still not the best gaming machines.... however if Apple really does manage a 16 core chip with even middle of the road GPU performance, there going to hoover up a ton of creative types, and the hype will hoover up a ton of the standard non gamer market. MacOS marketshare is going to grow for a few years.... and if the rest of the industry doesn't execute the next few years they could be dealing with a Apple market share explosion.

I am just waiting for Microsoft to roll out their own Citrix like software suite, pair it with Hyper-V, so they can launch a proper ARM-based series of devices and leave that for the compatibility for older software that hasn't been moved to the new architecture. At some point, Microsoft is going to have to put its foot down because at the enterprise level Apple is encroaching more and more every year and it will not be long now before they have a problem on their hands that they will not have the funds to counter.

 

[Aurelius]

The 13" m1 is $1300, the mac mini m1 is less, can't remember how much off hand. I'd expect the mx version to be at least $200 more, thinking $1500-1800 for the base model laptop, $800-1200 for the base mac mini. It could be lower, but don't be surprised if it's not.

That sounds about right. I'd look to the remaining Intel Mac mini as a benchmark. Apple will certainly want to charge more than for M1 models, but I'm not expecting prices to be wildly out of line.

 

[Lakados]

Pretty much any vendor could build one with the Intel Compute Element if they wanted to. Razor uses it for the Tomahawk.

Sure but look at the flagship model in that lineup the NUC9i9QNB, costs twice the Apple M1 and gets trounced by it.

It's most compelling usage for me is in the Dell Optiplex Ultra Small Form Factor lineup where they have built the devices into the vertical part of the monitor stand that essentially lets you turn any of their Monitors into an AIO, Dell does make some half-decent screens, but there I would be paying for the form factor more than anything else so their direct comparison is against the Optiplex Micro series of devices but again the Mini M1 just walks all over them. I actually use a lot of the Micro's too so I am in the process of asking my rep what Dell is offering in the near future that would counter this. Citrix works on iOS and OSX already so they have already confirmed that it works fine on the M1 variants. Outside of my accounting offices I could honestly replace every desktop with the Mini and come out ahead in every measurable way.

 

[Rockenrooster]

Eh, I would challenge anyone to make an Intel/AMD 6 core + 10GbE + 4 TB3 device with internal PSU, in that volume. Outside of the Mac Mini, it just doesn't exist. Dell, HP, Lenovo, ASRock, etc. None of them do anything like it. None of them even have more than 1GbE RJ45, 1 TB3 port (if they even offer it outside of an extremely top end model - IF they even offer it), and all have external PSUs.

There isn't a single laptop on the market that even hits those spec (ignore the internal PSU, since that's meaningless in the current laptop market). There aren't ITX boards with more than 1 TB3 header, so I don't feel any combination of the Velka or other unique SFF cases will even come close. In the end, if you want compute + IO density in a small, singular package, this is it.

That's because its a niche market. No one really needs compute in a small form factor. People who need lots of compute and IO have separate devices for that

 

[GoodBoy]

At this point Apple has painted a target on their back with the M1. Before the M1, Apple had Intel as a partner as well as AMD. Qualcomm was Apple's biggest competitor, as well as HP, Dell, Asus, and etc. With the M1 aiming to take large amounts of market share away from everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, Apples once allies are now their biggest enemies. Apple couldn't pick the best time to release the 5nm M1 with Intel still stuck on 14nm, and AMD using 7nm. While AMD did release Zen3, they have yet to implement it into their laptop chips. Their current laptop 4000 series chips are still stuck with 3 year old Vega graphics. AMD's Rembrandt Ryzen APUs will fix a lot of this but it won't be until Q2 of 2021.

With Nvidia's purchase of ARM, they may become Apple's strongest competitor. We will see in a few years how this all turns out.

The problem is their prices aren't that absurd, yeah they aren't going to go after the sub $500 laptop market dominated by the likes of Acer, there is no money in that but if you put just about any of the Apple devices next to a similar performing PC then start comparing specs you quickly notice things like the keyboard, screen, touchpad, speakers, battery life, on said PC don't stack up against the Apple. So if you want those things you have to pony up and the next thing you see is that Apple is maybe $100 more. But now start tacking on the software incidentals, like Windows 10 Pro, I might not like OSX but I certainly despise Win10 Home, now you are only $50 out between the two, toss in a much better Apple support, security features, added privacy, and suddenly that price tag isn't so different. And if you are an enterprise user, OSX has better MDM solutions, has much of the same management functionality of Win10 Enterprise, and plays better with a larger library of user management systems granted there is a much smaller software compatibility footprint, so if you need Windows applications then you need to start looking at options from Parallels, Citrix, or nComputing which does even things back out a little. The point is depending on what you are using the devices for and how long you intend to use them before replacing them, the Apple devices have consistently shown to be the cheaper device over its intended lifespan.

Last comparison I made (granted it was about 5 years ago, helping a co-worker decide), between an Apple iMac and an HP all-in-one, identical specs (same Intel CPU exactly, same amount of RAM, same screen size, same SSD size) , the Apple was $1900 (or more), the HPE was $1100. $800 difference for the OS and Apple's mouse/keybd vs HP's. Pretty high cost for the Apple tax/logo/OS. Maybe it's less now, I don't know. Apple doesn't spend $ on upgraded MOSFET's or anything of the sort, so no excuse for that price difference there...

I know it is a business and the goal is making money, so I get that. But for me as a consumer choosing Apple gives me nothing for that price difference.

If Apple and Nvidia move their own CPU's into desktop markets of the future, which one will gamers be more likely to pick? (Hint: Trick question).

 

[sphinx99]

With Nvidia's purchase of ARM, they may become Apple's strongest competitor. We will see in a few years how this all turns out.

They are not a competitor; they are a Tier 1 supplier. To become a credible competitor, nVidia will need to develop an operating system and supporting ecosystem that takes advantage of its advantages in silicon.

 

[ND40oz]

Sure but look at the flagship model in that lineup the NUC9i9QNB, costs twice the Apple M1 and gets trounced by it.

It's most compelling usage for me is in the Dell Optiplex Ultra Small Form Factor lineup where they have built the devices into the vertical part of the monitor stand that essentially lets you turn any of their Monitors into an AIO, Dell does make some half-decent screens, but there I would be paying for the form factor more than anything else so their direct comparison is against the Optiplex Micro series of devices but again the Mini M1 just walks all over them. I actually use a lot of the Micro's too so I am in the process of asking my rep what Dell is offering in the near future that would counter this. Citrix works on iOS and OSX already so they have already confirmed that it works fine on the M1 variants. Outside of my accounting offices I could honestly replace every desktop with the Mini and come out ahead in every measurable way.

You don't have to buy the 8 core, you can go with the 6 which better competes with the Intel Mac Mini. NUC's have always been on the higher side when it comes to price, but considering you can drop a video card into the Intel kit, it's not a bad deal: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1542366-REG/intel_bxnuc9i7qnx_ghost_i7_nuc_board.html

If you're talking running Citrix or Horizon on them, why even bother with Apple and the M1, you can even use zero clients at that point depending on how you set things up. Then your users really can't mess anything up.

 

[Lakados]

With Nvidia's purchase of ARM, they may become Apple's strongest competitor. We will see in a few years how this all turns out.



Last comparison I made (granted it was about 5 years ago, helping a co-worker decide), between an Apple iMac and an HP all-in-one, identical specs (same Intel CPU exactly, same amount of RAM, same screen size, same SSD size) , the Apple was $1900 (or more), the HPE was $1100. $800 difference for the OS and Apple's mouse/keybd vs HP's. Pretty high cost for the Apple tax/logo/OS. Maybe it's less now, I don't know. Apple doesn't spend $ on upgraded MOSFET's or anything of the sort, so no excuse for that price difference there...

I know it is a business and the goal is making money, so I get that. But for me as a consumer choosing Apple gives me nothing for that price difference.

If Apple and Nvidia move their own CPU's into desktop markets of the future, which one will gamers be more likely to pick? (Hint: Trick question).

Same screen size perhaps but I doubt that any HPE from 2015 in the $1100 range was offering anything close to the Apple retina display at that time, the colour accuracy, refresh rate, and pixel density was well above what they were offering in those price classes.

 

[Lakados]

You don't have to buy the 8 core, you can go with the 6 which better competes with the Intel Mac Mini. NUC's have always been on the higher side when it comes to price, but considering you can drop a video card into the Intel kit, it's not a bad deal: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1542366-REG/intel_bxnuc9i7qnx_ghost_i7_nuc_board.html

If you're talking running Citrix or Horizon on them, why even bother with Apple and the M1, you can even use zero clients at that point depending on how you set things up. Then your users really can't mess anything up.

But in every benchmark going that 6 core doesn't hold a candle to the M1, the 8 core wasn't even keeping up. The 6 core is also still $400 more and doesn't come with either the storage or the ram. So you need those ontop of it, so you are looking at 2x the price of the Mini at a significant performance deficit.

Citrix just runs the legacy software that I really don't want on the physical desktops anymore, I was always having to fight updates and block certain driver or windows updates to keep it stable so off to Citrix it went, it was no longer worth the administrative or security overheads to keep those programs running natively on the machines.

 

[jdempsey]

Yeah. “Absurd” prices are a pretty typical complaint thrown at Apple, and for anything Intel-based and upgraded I’d generally agree ($2000 for the top end upgraded Mini from last generation was a lot to ask, for instance).

But that $1000 air is punching above its weight in a lot of ways. It’s suddenly a more capable, better battery life alternative to things like the (more expensive) Dell XPS 13, for instance.

so for these first few ARM systems, I don’t know if high prices are really a valid complaint, unless you’re complaining about nice laptops in general.

Apples products being highly curated, do usually offer good value bang-for-buck at release, but their extremely firm pricing schemes, which rarely offer meaningful sales, or reduce prices as the product iteration ages, usually means that they're a piss-poor value outside of the initial release year. Maybe this will change, we'll see. Apple still seems fixated on the "we'll figure everything out for you, trust us, pay us and we'll take care of you" market from what I can see, and that's fine, there's no shortage of people out there that are ok with feeling smug from spending money on the hype machine and clever-as-fuck marketing machine, without having to know anything other than "Apple is better". I remember back in the day when the *nix community, we had shirts printed with Gates' face and devil's horns, and he was so loathed, because he just wasn't charismatic or likeable, and obvious in his anti-consumer stance, but I honestly believe that it was Job's that made a deal with the devil after his ousting from Apple. It's amazing what the company, and he, became compared to how innovative and genuinely altruistic they were initially, yet he managed to make everyone love him, and the brand, for being exactly who Gates had been, and hated for. Genius level shit for sure.

Still, apple has had bespoke custom architecture before, and it gave up on it. They may be able to make a big run on laptop dominance, but it can't take over overall general computing market share with continued closed ethos proprietary hardware that you can't build a desktop, workstation, or server with, in legitimately custom configurations. That said, the vast majority of the laptop market is pretty "casual" performance even on the higher end regardless. Has Apple ever made any large, workstation alternative style laptops in the past, like the large, Quadro sporting x86 ones that utilize more performant CPU, higher tdp cpus than the standard laptops, etc? I know they've had some more powerful desktops, and AIOs catered to the graphics/photography/music (semi)professionals, but my impression is that they've rarely been high value for performance options, mostly catering to the mythos they've masterfully created where everyone that "thinks" they're a poweruser or pro, is convinced of that urban myth of "Apple is better for "x"-media" that's proliferated for so long.


All that said, I think this is a great competition motivator, and hopefully it's the extra kick-in-the-ass Intel, and many others need.

 

[DukenukemX]

Now Apple just needs to start developing the Apple Arcade and score some larger titles in there.

Apple is not focused on gaming. Unless Apple changes their relationship with gamers, the Apple Arcade will never grow enough beyond middle aged mom games.

Seeing how apple has *dominated the phone and tablet arena I wouldn't be very surprised to see it happen with laptops as well.

I wouldn't call 28% dominated.

Yeah. “Absurd” prices are a pretty typical complaint thrown at Apple, and for anything Intel-based and upgraded I’d generally agree ($2000 for the top end upgraded Mini from last generation was a lot to ask, for instance).

But that $1000 air is punching above its weight in a lot of ways. It’s suddenly a more capable, better battery life alternative to things like the (more expensive) Dell XPS 13, for instance.

so for these first few ARM systems, I don’t know if high prices are really a valid complaint, unless you’re complaining about nice laptops in general.

It used to be that Apple prices weren't bad when compared to similar spec machines. That's now impossible to do since nobody else has access to Apple's hardware. That means we're free to compare to them with AMD and Nvidia hardware. In that case, they're over priced. There are plenty of AMD Ryzen laptops with RTX 2060's that cost $1k that will destroy the M1. Of course they can't compete in battery life.

I'm far more concerned about the ever increasing height of the walls around their garden, Macs are teetering on become even more limited for their users.

Which ARM system have you seen that doesn't already have limitations around their walled garden? But yes, Apple's move to ARM means taller walled gardens. No more boot camp for M1's, and that maybe by design.

 

[Lakados]

Apple is not focused on gaming. Unless Apple changes their relationship with gamers, the Apple Arcade will never grow enough beyond middle aged mom games.

Certainly not yet, but given the inroads, they are making into the other entertainment platforms I could see this as something they could grow into.

 

[Nobu]

Apple is not focused on gaming. Unless Apple changes their relationship with gamers, the Apple Arcade will never grow enough beyond middle aged mom games.


I wouldn't call 28% dominated.

It used to be that Apple prices weren't bad when compared to similar spec machines. That's now impossible to do since nobody else has access to Apple's hardware. That means we're free to compare to them with AMD and Nvidia hardware. In that case, they're over priced. There are plenty of AMD Ryzen laptops with RTX 2060's that cost $1k that will destroy the M1. Of course they can't compete in battery life.


When ARM system have you seen that doesn't already have limitations around their walled garden? But yes, Apple's move to ARM means taller walled gardens. No more boot camp for M1's, and that maybe by design.

Compared to 20% from samsung (2019), they are doing pretty well, imo. https://marketrealist.com/2020/02/samsungs-earnings-smartphone-market-share-galaxy-fold/

 

[ND40oz]

But in every benchmark going that 6 core doesn't hold a candle to the M1, the 8 core wasn't even keeping up. The 6 core is also still $400 more and doesn't come with either the storage or the ram. So you need those ontop of it, so you are looking at 2x the price of the Mini at a significant performance deficit.

It really depends on what you're planning on doing with it, if macOS is all you need, then the M1 is great replacement for it. But if you need either the additional connectivity, things like eGPU or the ability to run other x86 OS's the speed of the M1 based system doesn't do you any good at all.

Citrix just runs the legacy software that I really don't want on the physical desktops anymore, I was always having to fight updates and block certain driver or windows updates to keep it stable so off to Citrix it went, it was no longer worth the administrative or security overheads to keep those programs running natively on the machines.

If you're investing in the infrastructure to run legacy software, depending on your needs, it's not a big leap to have that infrastructure run everything.

 

[Lakados]

It really depends on what you're planning on doing with it, if macOS is all you need, then the M1 is great replacement for it. But if you need either the additional connectivity, things like eGPU or the ability to run other x86 OS's the speed of the M1 based system doesn't do you any good at all.



If you're investing in the infrastructure to run legacy software, depending on your needs, it's not a big leap to have that infrastructure run everything.

Yeah, the backend I have now wouldn't handle the uptick in volume if I were to move to have it run the remainder of the software, and my internet speeds to my remote buildings couldn't handle it. We really did think about doing it though, and if the local ISP's get off their butts and get us the Fibre they promised us 3 years ago installed we can have that conversation again but until then it would be a nightmare to try and implement. In regards to OSX, it doesn't give us anything that Win10 doesn't offer but for the majority of our systems (i3's 4gb ram, 64gb ssd) the users are happy with what they are using them for. But the systems we are using are the Dell Micro's and they are all attached to the VESA mounts on the backs of the monitors.

If you look at pricing the current Optiplex 5080 is what I would be looking to replace them with if I had to do that today, compare that to the base model Apple M1 mac mini. Granted I wouldn't be buying either of them at MSRP but depending on little things like shipping there isn't that big of a price difference between them ~$20 Canadian at this point and that is with Dell marking down the Optiplex's $728.66 at their current sale price.

 

[ChadD]

I am just waiting for Microsoft to roll out their own Citrix like software suite, pair it with Hyper-V, so they can launch a proper ARM-based series of devices and leave that for the compatibility for older software that hasn't been moved to the new architecture. At some point, Microsoft is going to have to put its foot down because at the enterprise level Apple is encroaching more and more every year and it will not be long now before they have a problem on their hands that they will not have the funds to counter.

I would suggest they may already be at that point. The M1 is 10x better then I thought it would be. I really thought it would be a cluster fuck as much as I like to cheer ARM in general. I expected to see x86 software crashing out all over or run at 50% performance levels. Apple seems to have mostly nailed that.... and M1 is such a strong performer that clearly any company that was dragging their heals conforming to Apples ARM binary formats is on board now. Clearly they can smell where the profits will be coming from. If Apples desktop macs really have 16 core arm chips with single core that approximately competes with AMD and Intel... things for x86 are going to get interesting and complicated a lot sooner then I expected. (and I am pretty sure I have could be quoted here saying x86 has less then a decade on the outside) lol

 

[ChadD]

On apples future in gaming..... I don't know I think massive changes are coming to that industry over the next 3-4 years.

I expect in the next year or two we are going to hear about Nvidias plans for ARM. My guess.... Nvidia ARM CPUs that will compete directly with Apple silicon. Microsoft will be more then happy to get a good ARM chip supplier going. Nvidia has always wanted to be a CPU player.... and if we are very lucky Nvidia will build actual ARM mother board chipsets, and offer a full line of ARM chips. They have the will and the money to push the gaming industry to ARM. Frankly it wouldn't that hard at this point 90% of games these days are developed using 2 or 3 major game engines. Get them on board to compile out for ARM and your golden.

If Nvidia leads that charge it seems to me it makes it pretty easy for developers to release ARM MacOS versions. I agree with DukenukemX I don't see Apple going to far out of their way to woo AAA developers themselves. I think Apple support will come simply due changes in the industry. The tools to support other platforms these days are pretty easy to deal with.

 

[idiomatic]

Big decision looming for pro software vendors, give 30% of their revenue to Apple or move to Windows/Linux.

Or go the Black Magic route and give software away for free with hardware. Basically sell dongles again that look like cameras or control interfaces.