Apple Announces "3rd Transition" for macOS: From Intel CPUs to Apple Silicon

[DradisX86]

it looks and feels the same as iOS in every single bit and I won't be surprise to see iMac becomes a gigantic iPad with 27" touch screen few years later.

I personally don't think that Apple intends to stick us permanently with the "mobile device experience." I realize that it looks that way (especially as mobile has become the core of their profit margin) but, as computer users themselves, I think they realize that there will always be a need for the "desktop experience" (power/big screen real estate/easy to use input/etc). I don't have a crystal ball but I predict that, in a decade, what we will have is one powerful device (whether that be a tablet or a wearable is yet tbd) and something in the vein of the following:
1 (less likely - but it seems to me that Apple is interested in this) Augmented Reality hardware that virtually recreates the "desktop experience"

2. A desktop "dock" - that you plop your mobile device into when you sit down at your desk - plugging you in to your keyboard, mouse, monitors, and whatever other futuristic input device we haven't dreamt up yet.

 

[animalflynn]

If you are basing this on mhz, then your point is moot. Mhz is not equivalent because of IPC. Just go ask intel how it's doing against AMD right now. AMD products are clocked almost 1Ghz lower in some SKUs than competing intel chips, and yet intel can barely be competitive (exception is games).
The iPad Pro is running on significantly less power and heat envelope than your MBP. The MBP has a larger heatsink and power delivery. I don't have the specs in front of me, but let's say for argument that the iPad Pro A12Z operates on 7w(I'm basing this assumption on the fact at 15w+ requires active cooling as evidenced by AMD's X570 mobos). Let's say your intel MBP operates on 35w(depending on model, most mobile chips tend to shoot for 35-45w). That's 5x-6.5x the amount of power and heat draw to what you claim is equivalent performance. Consider what A12Z could perform at if it was given a larger power envelope work within? And as far the claim it's the equivalent to your 6 year old MBP - consider the 2018 A12X was within "spitting distance of a 2018 MBP", for that claim to be true, that implies intel has made almost zero improvements to their chips, if your numbers and their numbers are identical years later. Apple's reasoning on this is pretty sound - they have YoY power/efficiency double digit % improvements on their own designs, but every intel recycle offers single digit % improvements, at some point A-series starts look more and more promising.



Any bets that the A-Series Macs will feature a quasi-chiplet design like AMD does currently? That could help with scaling the product stack (from MBA to MP).

MHz? Performance per watt or single-core speeds are the least of my concerns. I only care about multicore performance and how fast it runs Metal. I run an overclocked 14 core CPU on water with a Vega Frontier Air in my desktop system. It's connected to a 1150w UPS because it throws the breaker without it. Its the least power-efficient machine I think I've ever had but its faster than an iPad Pro by a wide margin.

Like I said, and you just echoed. They boasted performance per watt. That's different than touting flat out performance. They never said it would be "faster" than current Macs. They said it would be "more efficient". Huge difference and not a big surprise when you stuff an iPhone CPU in something the size of a MacBook or iMac.

If they had real numbers to show I would believe in this brave new world, but they don't. When they announced the Mac Pro they had solid numbers for how much faster it was than other models. This year was all vaporware. I'm not saying it won't happen, but I will have to see it to believe it. More than anything it feels like a big headache for those of us that rely heavily on third-party developers for paid work.

 

[Lotlorien]

Like I said, and you just echoed. They boasted performance per watt. That's different than touting flat out performance. They never said it would be "faster" than current Macs. They said it would be "more efficient". Huge difference and not a big surprise when you stuff an iPhone CPU in something the size of a MacBook or iMac.

Exactly. We only heard "fast", "fluent", but zero hard data. And all they ship now is an iPad processor and you are forbidden to publish benchmarks. If the new Apple Silicon is so much better, why not ship and benchmark it? Furthermore, the new ARM iMacs will probably hit the market only next year. So they will not compete with Intel 10th generation nor with Ryzen 3950X etc. They will have to compete with Zen3 at 5nm. I expect to see 32 core threadrippers with < 200W. I see the race between AMD and Intel accelerating, pushing the raw performance and performance per watt in the x86 world. Of course Apple may surprise everyone with Silicon that will crush x86, when I see it I will believe it.

 

[pastrychef]

MHz? Performance per watt or single-core speeds are the least of my concerns. I only care about multicore performance and how fast it runs Metal. I run an overclocked 14 core CPU on water with a Vega Frontier Air in my desktop system. It's connected to a 1150w UPS because it throws the breaker without it. Its the least power-efficient machine I think I've ever had but its faster than an iPad Pro by a wide margin.

Like I said, and you just echoed. They boasted performance per watt. That's different than touting flat out performance. They never said it would be "faster" than current Macs. They said it would be "more efficient". Huge difference and not a big surprise when you stuff an iPhone CPU in something the size of a MacBook or iMac.

If they had real numbers to show I would believe in this brave new world, but they don't. When they announced the Mac Pro they had solid numbers for how much faster it was than other models. This year was all vaporware. I'm not saying it won't happen, but I will have to see it to believe it. More than anything it feels like a big headache for those of us that rely heavily on third-party developers for paid work.

You seem to be under the impression that all ARM CPUs are all like those found in the iPhones or iPads or Raspberry Pis and are limited to 8 cores. Amazon uses custom 64 core ARM based CPUs in their servers and they compare quite favorable when compared to AMD EPYC and Intel Xeon Platinums.

Source:https://www.anandtech.com/show/15578/cloud-clash-amazon-graviton2-arm-against-intel-and-amd

And, yes, these custom Amazon SOCs consume about half the power of the Xeon Platinums. Personally, I don't find requiring an 1150W power supply or the circuit breaker pops to be something to be proud of.

Do you honestly believe that when Apple releases their ARM based Macs, they will be out-benched by the Intel based models they will be replacing??? C'mon, man!! Use a little logic!!

 

[CaseySJ]

This thread is about the 3rd Transition, but a little walk down memory lane might be appropriate.

From my Museum of Ancient Technology (MoAT), not to be confused with the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA), here are the 1st and 2nd Transitions...

Original CPU Family:

• Motorola 68000-series. Here we have a Quadra 700 running System Software 7.5 Update 2.
• Surprising, it is still works. Pictures taken today.

Transition 1:

• 68000-series to PowerPC
• Apple may also refer to this as the transition from OS 8/9 to macOS X
  • MacOS 8/9 was developed entirely within Apple
  • macOS X is based on UNIX (NeXT OS)
• Here we have a PowerBook G4 that shipped with Panther

Transition 2:

• PowerPC to Intel
• Here we have a 2012 MacBook Air, although the transition occurred earlier than that in 2005 (my 2008 Mac Pro is not pictured, but still functional)
• Next to it might be the last Intel-based Mac I will own: the 2020 13" MacBook Pro

 

[scottkendall]

The average user you know the ones that do not upgrade every time something new comes out could get to the end of the decade with their current hack. However, Lenovo released a snapdragon Arm based Laptop so starting this year someone can already start Hackintoshing an arm based laptop.

For those of you questioning ARM based power currently the fastest computer in the world is an ARM based supercomputer.

Also I do not remember what it was called but long ago their was an emulator that was installed like a boot loader (before the system booted) and worked on the assembly level that ran MacOS on intel hardware long long before the switch to intel. It was very hardware restrictive and the experience was less then desirable, but there was not hack community like there is today in fact AOL was still king with Earthspring following right behind. With intel not really making any advances in recent history all upgrades till they do are just more cores, but more cores are a waste If the software is not optimized for them. I see very little if any improvement from 6 cores to 8 cores with any of my software in VM or anything running natively on Mac OS. Mainly I use Revit in a windows VM, but I also use Unreal Studio and Twin motion that are Mac native for rendering purposes.

 

[Lotlorien]

After some thought, I've come to the conclusion that it would be foolish for me to invest in another build. It makes more sense for me to start saving for an ARM based Mac.

I don't know what to invest in right now... All the stocks I track are pricy now... I'm just glad I made a few good calls and my portfolio is up ~50% so far in 2020.

I agree. If you want to stay with macOS, start saving money today.

When do you think you are likely to buy an ARM Mac? My thinking is: The next two years will be messy, everyone is busy with transition, hardware and software, Rosetta 2, Universal 2, etc. while maintaining the Intel hardware and code. In the two to three years thereafter things will cool down, no Intel Macs anymore, there is time to clean and optimize ARM code, no Rosetta anymore. Furthermore, I am reluctant to invest into a first generation ARM Mac. If you do and there are any issues, you are guaranteed to have them. In about 4 years I expect the second generation to ship. Therefore my plan: Lean back for the next 4 years, enjoy the show, and then go for a second generation ARM Mac - given what I know today. This also ensures that if the transition failed (unlikely, but in the end the customers decide with their money), no money wasted.

By the way, if I may ask, how do you monitor your stocks? Discretionary or by some algorithms? Singe names or Indices?

 

[pastrychef]

I agree. If you want to stay with macOS, start saving money today.

When do you think you are likely to buy an ARM Mac? My thinking is: The next two years will be messy, everyone is busy with transition, hardware and software, Rosetta 2, Universal 2, etc. while maintaining the Intel hardware and code. In the two to three years thereafter things will cool down, no Intel Macs anymore, there is time to clean and optimize ARM code, no Rosetta anymore. Furthermore, I am reluctant to invest into a first generation ARM Mac. If you do and there are any issues, you are guaranteed to have them. In about 4 years I expect the second generation to ship. Therefore my plan: Lean back for the next 4 years, enjoy the show, and then go for a second generation ARM Mac - given what I know today. This also ensures that if the transition failed (unlikely, but in the end the customers decide with their money), no money wasted.

By the way, if I may ask, how do you monitor your stocks? Discretionary or by some algorithms? Singe names or Indices?

My guesstimation is that Apple will continue to release new Intel compatible versions of macOS for 3-5 years. I plan on using my Z390 build until which time where Apple no longer releases new versions of macOS for Intel. Then I will see what Apple has available at that time. Hopefully, by then, they will be on second gen ARM based Macs. Like you, I want to avoid first gen if possible.

I use the Interactive Broker site or app. No algorithms. I monitor individual stocks, charts, etc., and rely on my gut more than I should.

 

[UtterDisbelief]

This thread is about the 3rd Transition, but a little walk down memory lane might be appropriate.

Here are the 1st and 2nd Transitions...

Original CPU Family:

• Motorola 68000-series. Here we have a Quadra 700 running System Software 7.5 Update 2.
• Surprising, it is still works. Pictures taken today.

View attachment 477846 View attachment 477845 View attachment 477849 View attachment 477850 View attachment 477851 View attachment 477852 View attachment 477853

Transition 1:

• 68000-series to PowerPC
• Here we have a PowerBook G4 that shipped with Panther

View attachment 477840 View attachment 477839 View attachment 477841

Transition 2:

• PowerPC to Intel
• Here we have a 2012 MacBook Air, although the transition occurred earlier than that
• Next to it might be the last Intel-based Mac I will buy: the 2020 13" MacBook Pro

View attachment 477838 View attachment 477842

Lovely collection

People are getting so upset about the present shift, but this post highlights a history that a lot weren't aware of or a part of.

 

[trs96]

Lovely collection

Hats off to CaseySJ for really taking good care of his computers. Amazing condition.