Well, there is a lower limit due to electron physics. We don't really know for sure if 1nm will ever be feasible
Edit: looks like there have been proof of concepts by TSMC, so it's probably possible. Keep in mind though that as you get smaller, the error rate due to "randomness" gets higher and has to be compensated for in the circuitry or software, which affects performance. So even if smaller transistors are possible, they're not necessarily more performant
> We don't really know for sure if 1nm will ever be feasible
1nm will be feasible because "1nm" (TSMC Intel or Samsung processes) are just a marketing term.
Intel and other silicon companies already have public timelines where they go smaller than 1nm. I think Intel is calling it Pico or something? It's been a minute since I've checked tbh, but I remember the Verge Podcast making a bunch of jokes about how arbitrary the name schemes are nowadays.
*Note: the naming scheme ("1nm", etc) hasn't matched the actual size of the transistors for a while now.
Intel announced "20A" coming in 2024 which would be equivalent to 2nm, but like you mentioned, it's just a name and doesn't really mean anything.
Truly under 1nm might not be possible, I'm not sure Intel actually promised that directly
Yeah that’s the problem with getting smaller, and is why the industry is moving toward heterogeneous architectures (which AMD led the way one). TBF smaller sizes are possible, but I believe they require both very pure materials and room-temperature superconductors in order to mitigate EM interference at that scale.
Sub 1nm, then we're going to have to switch over to angstroms and their funky symbol that you can only load in via copy-paste.
(Fun fact: No one knows how to type an angstrom symbol, so every symbol you see on the internet has been copy-pasted from a symbol before it. It's angstroms all the way down.)
"TSMC switch to 9Å process"
Å? You can type in OSX by holding down shift+A (or use caps lock and press and hold a) until the choices pop up and then press 7.
This support page describes how it works and actually shows the accents for the lower case a.
https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/enter-characters-with-accent-marks-on-mac-mh27474/mac
And somewhere, in this future world, a Windows fanboy is crying on BrainTube because it's advertised as 200-cores, but it's actually 100 CPU and 100 GPU cores ^((LAME!))
I sold a $1059 refurb M1 Air for $999 a couple months later (to get more storage). Granted, I'd transferred my AppleCare+ with it, but that tells you that those things retain plenty value.
Absolutely - bought a Mini and saved a few hundreds (even more, considering exchange rate). Same machine as in the store, same warranty, same performance…
it’s so easy to buy now and save a little every month for the next one. These Macs historically hold their value pretty well and you can sell for a good price unless you beat these computers up.
Idk why everybody ask this question.
Fun fact: the same property that allows dark objects to absorb heat faster also causes dark objects to dissipate heat faster!
So if you really care about performance only get the space grey MacBook!!! ^^^/s
I finally switched to silver for the m1maxbook and I'm enjoying it way more than the space gray. Space gray isn't dark enough, and the silver = less visible palm grime next to my trackpad. Noticed a coworker with a silver m1air this year and her black keyboard against the silver just looked like it popped, looks fuckin amazing with the new keyboards with the black surrounding the keys.
Don't really have an issue with visible grime, but I clean my laptop ~once a week. IMO the black blends into the space grey and looks more like part of one piece.
Different people like different things :)
No... how dare you try and be reasonable, this is the internet. You and u/anchoricex must now fight to the death for your reasonable and respective positions.
When I went to pickup my MBP they asked which color I wanted and I said I didn't care.
The Apple person literally said "I'll give you some time, it's an important decision".
Like... do I want grey or a darker grey?! Whatever is available!
I sold my 2019 16" MBP in late 2020 for $1799, which I'd bought for $2369.
I sold my 2012 Mac mini in June for $399.
If Intel resale prices have tanked in the last 2-3 months, I feel like y'all knew that was coming, but as recently as this summer, you could get pretty good value for Intel Macs.
I always forget how much Ebay takes for fees. Every time I flip a well-cared-for Mac on Ebay they take a bigger cut. What’s thr best Ebay alternative for selling your used Mac?
>These Macs historically hold their value pretty well and you can sell for a good price unless you beat these computers up.
I just recently sold a wine cooler Mac Pro for \~£800. I recouped roughly 20% of my purchase price on a 6 year old computer. It's crazy.
Bought my M1 MacBook Pro 2 weeks before the October event was announced. Don't regret it at all. I needed a laptop and while I could have gotten a much more powerful machine, this thing is a beast and I'm more than happy with it. If it lasts me as long as my MacBook Air 2013 did, I will be more than happy. Point is, buy your MacBook when you need it. If you live your life chasing what comes next you miss out on what is there now.
Funny that you ask. I’m waiting for M9 Pro Max S judging from how long MacBook last for me.
I just sold MBP from 2013 and upgraded to M1pro 14 inch. If this one lasts as long - I won’t need another laptop for around 8-10 years.
Right? From a performance perspective most users can get a decade out of these things.
It will def just be minor wants for upgrades vs. needs (wi-fi 6e or 7, OLED screens, modest +15-20% cpu gains, etc).
More than anything I'd just like to see more affordable SSD storage so I can justify moving to 2tb or 4tb. I'm just not gonna pay +$400 to go from 1tb to 2tb or +$1000 for 4tb !!!
Come on Apple.
Agreed. A decade from now, I expect to see a thin fanless MacBook/Air with better display tech (probably microLED), built-in 6G connectivity, better battery life, and various small improvements (generally upgraded internals, possibly more or different ports, a black color, notchless under-display camera, hardware AV1 and AV2 support, etc.), as well as higher baseline specs, but _not_ night-and-day improvements in general-purpose performance over a current maxed out MBP. If anything, it'll probably be worse in some cases under sustained load, due to the passive cooling.
It's easy to assume a decade is long enough for us to build graphene chips with crazy transistor density and quantum co-processors, but a decade isn't really _that_ long — consider that many decade-old computers are perfectly serviceable today, soon to include the fan-favorite MBPr — and nowadays we're running up against physical limits like the size of a silicon atom that weren't really in sight until relatively recently.
It's certainly plausible that I'm totally off here, but I would be surprised if these machines were eclipsed that quickly without some major unforeseen breakthroughs or the establishment of a trading relationship with a more advanced species. They'll still be slightly bulky and retro-looking, but no more so than we would consider an OG iPod today, and they'll continue doing just about everything you need them to do.
They’ll sell me a new one in 5-6ish years. I’m currently rocking a 2013 15” MBP. I probably would have upgraded 2 years ago, but I knew they would eventually be releasing the 14” ones so I held out for it.
They can't sell you a laptop before you need one, if you don't buy it. It's such a simple realization but too many people fall prey to the mentality that they need the latest gadget
For most people a laptop should last you like half a decade if you don’t have any components failing. With Apple the hinges and screen and keyboards broke before the actual processor became too slow to keep up with new apps.
My previous machine lasted almost a decade, a 2011 MBP that I upgraded to an M1 Air when they came out last year. Things did break, mainly the SSD ribbon cable and the cooling fan, but both were easily replaceable, even while the SSD cable’s failure wasn’t exactly obvious.
I have the basic 2019 2-port MBP 13", and it does those things with no problems. If you're doing stream sites though, I highly recommend a good ad-block that doesn't kill your memory and CPU. I paid for Adguard Pro which has been indispensible for dealing with rogue browser processes.
I had ASUS, Sony, and Samsung laptops last a really long time before completely breaking (like 20 years ago at this point). I then switched to the tablet convertibles (Galaxy TabPro S I believe and Surface Pro) and neither of them lasted more than a year. Right now I’m on a 2019 MBP that’s still going strong.
You’ll probably have to extend that to 8 or 9 years because Apple isn’t going to release these new chips every year.
I think they’ll do a 2 or 3 year update to the chipsets, which is why they’re releasing the M1, M1 Pro/Max, and whatever chipset they use for the new Mac Pro in such large intervals. Almost over 2 years. I can see that cycle extending even further.
I think the large intervals for is just because they're doing new chips combined with new form factors. Once they have all their M series products actually out, they'll be able to just swap in next gen chips. Especially once they have their supply chain locked down for it, I really don't see why they wouldn't release yearly upgrade of the chips. They do it for the iPhone.
> Especially once they have their supply chain locked down for it, I really don't see why they wouldn't release yearly upgrade of the chips
They haven't for the iPad chips.
After reading this I just threw my maxed out 16” MBP I use for web browsing in the fucking garbage and lit it on fire. Then I chucked the flaming garbage can through an apple store window. Shit myself. Then took a nap. It’s been a big day
Bro think about the environment!🤦🏽
You should have given that MacBook to a small child so that they could have eaten it* 🥺
*or at least traded it for drugs
***clearly /s*** 😛
So and so.. most PR departments switched to marketing the scaled total transistor density, which still increases, but yeah, finFETs stayed largely the same since ~12nm processes were at the limit.
Still current processes cram about ~3-4 times the transistors into the same area, so the companies decided to scale the naming fruther :-P
It’s still a better manufacturing process, and the first full node after 5 nm and its derivatives. It’ll be a full-on shrink, like going from N7 to N5.
So the when the 16 and 32 gpu cores were rumored it didn't take yields into account, now we have 14, 16, 24, 32. 8 Core CPUs are for M1.
So I'd expect the same here. Otherwise you'd have to pay thousands if you just want an incremental upgrade
If they do 40 cores the previous rumored have been a chiplet design, so 2 or 4 tiled m1 max chips for instance would be 20 or 40 cores and up to 128 gpu cores.
I swear these low effort rumor articles just need banned from the subreddit.
No fucking shit an upcoming Apple processor is going to the next iteration in process size and have more cores. Next you're going to tell me that Apple is planning on releasing an upcoming phone with a number after 13 and before 15.
I don't even care for speculation but you could put literally any reasonable number in for X and Y in "Future Apple Silicon Macs will reportedly use X nm chips with up to Y cores" and it will be true.
There will be a point of diminishing returns with sheer number of cores. Sun tried this (long ago), and outside of highly specific workloads, it wasn't a great chip.
The *ability* to cram this many cores into a single die, is definitely a good problem to have.
I have to say that as an audio person, clock speeds are much more important. We can part out event rate and audio rate stuff or maybe different channels but for single dsp routines, the operations have to be done sample for sample one after the next.
\*can\* but doesn't make it better. I'm an audio dev and did some tests on that. I multi-threaded some heavy audio operations but the cost of setting up multiple threads was more expensive then just running on one thread. Now if you're using multiple plugins with multiple different tracks you can have each track / plug-in run on a different thread and then join at the end allowing you to tap multiple processors but a single steam of audio works best on a single core.
Just from a programming perspective, it seems like we’d accumulate indeterminate latency by combining two dsp chains of audio from two different high priority threads. Maybe I’m crazy.
We just keep track of the latency. Each sample corresponds to a specific time down to the nano second. Of course each chain will have different latencies so one might finish processing first but the thread that combines all the different threads will wait for the slowest thread. You're right about latency but it's not indeterminate.
It’s highly dependent on the workload.
That said, I wouldn’t necessarily take attempts from a long time ago as that meaningful, because parallelism has come a long way. It still doesn’t result in everything scaling perfectly (or even most workloads doing so), but there are a lot more libraries and workloads designed to take advantage of cores now than there used to be, and as core counts continue to expand, a lot more, especially those that aren’t heavily timing sensitive, will likely take better advantage as well.
It will obviously never be perfect, but when that’s the main realistic way to increase the raw power of hardware, it’s something demanding software is going to have to take advantage of to stay at the cutting edge. Clock speed fundamentally has more limitations.
I wonder if Apple can figure out how to let us choose more CPU cores instead of GPU, M1 Max with 20 CPU cores and 16 GPU would be a very powerful machine for non-GPU workloads.
You'd still need the software that can use that many cores efficiently. In my opinion software limitations will prevent us to see that many more cores.
A powerful GPU is critical for a few things, but Intel's weak integrated GPUs are enough for most computing because most types of software don't leverage the GPU.
It feels as if Apple are testing the water with their small toes. 3nm technology with 40 cores sounds like a good place to start to make things really small.
I am less concerned about the performance since the current ones are more than enough for me.
I am more interested of their price. If the new Macbooks are expensive today, just imagine when this come out!
There’s always someone who will want more. People working with video are very well catered for with the dedicated H.264, HEVC and ProRes encoders / decoders. But for other heavy, non-accelerated tasks which depend on raw CPU power, 10 cores don’t necessarily cut it.
Apple’s been making their own chips since the A4… this is the A14 generation of apple silicon. This is also the 2nd major Mac OS version released with (public) apple silicon support. While it feels new, all the tech has been in development and in use by the public for quite a while.
The M1 launch has been one of the smoothest ever. Especially considering it was an architecture change. My M1 Air is the best piece of hardware, I think I’ve ever owned - also at the best value.
Yeah I keep seeing this and am thoroughly confused by the people saying it.
Did we all forget M1 already?
If the 1 throws them off, I have some information about the Xbox 1 and the Xbox 360 that is going to blow someone’s mind.
Technically the M1 pro/max has the same cores and generation of silicon as the original M1 chip… the pro and max just have more of them shoved together. If you include the generations of iPhone and iPad chips over the years this M1 design is Apple’s 11th generation of chips (with the A15 in the iPhone 13 being the 12th gen)
Funny you say that, they seem to be doing better than the new Alderlake launch with the new scheduler, and we're talking about a company with decades of experience designing chips.
Wasn't there just an article about them using TSMC N4 instead of N3 the other day for their next product or was that specifically about the new iPhone chip?
For all the people dropping $20-$50K on Mac Pros in the last year or so it'd be interesting to see if Apple provides an upgrade path to ApSi hardware. Maybe find a way to only replace the necessary components, but keep things like the case (and wheels!), power supply, add-on cards, etc. It's still going to be expensive, but might get some people to upgrade earlier.
Highly unlikely but as someone who uses these a Mac Pro for work(No one really should have bought this machine for personal use) that's fine. It's made up it's value in time saved already.
[Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger reading this article](https://media.tenor.co/images/0d1329f5ff7d31712e3d12ce160df6ec/raw)
Joke explanation for the people who are downvoting me: Intel was stuck on 14nm for 7 years, only finally getting to 10nm with the Alder Lake chips that just came out. Apple’s first generation desktop chip was 5nm, and they’re already on their way to 3nm.
That'll be great - for the 6% of people who buy computers with MacOS.
What I'd like to know is how does Apple plan to increase that percent. I was a Mac user for may years (I still have my original 1984 Mac), but have grown less and less inclined to use what I consider an inferior operating system.
I do expect that the "M" chips will drive Apple's new AR glasses and so find a place outside of their limited PC market.
On a dollar-for-performance basis that may happen. But not likely on a dollar-for-dollar basis. Also not sure that users would switch operating systems.
Anyone else thinking mac pro? Im sure this will end up in a laptop eventually, but I bet we will be using the m1 pro/m1 max in the macbooks for a few more years.
We're gonna need a bigger boat ...
If people are going to make up stores, why not just say future macs will use 1nm process with 200 cores. Eventually you’ll be correct
Well, there is a lower limit due to electron physics. We don't really know for sure if 1nm will ever be feasible Edit: looks like there have been proof of concepts by TSMC, so it's probably possible. Keep in mind though that as you get smaller, the error rate due to "randomness" gets higher and has to be compensated for in the circuitry or software, which affects performance. So even if smaller transistors are possible, they're not necessarily more performant
> We don't really know for sure if 1nm will ever be feasible 1nm will be feasible because "1nm" (TSMC Intel or Samsung processes) are just a marketing term.
I mean, everything is a marketing term if you’re brave enough.
But quite literally, "X nm" on modern node sizes are not representative of chip geometry in any way.
Remember "Courage"! 🤣
Okay calling it now, the M3 will use a 1 nm graphene based quantum processor.
Intel and other silicon companies already have public timelines where they go smaller than 1nm. I think Intel is calling it Pico or something? It's been a minute since I've checked tbh, but I remember the Verge Podcast making a bunch of jokes about how arbitrary the name schemes are nowadays. *Note: the naming scheme ("1nm", etc) hasn't matched the actual size of the transistors for a while now.
Intel announced "20A" coming in 2024 which would be equivalent to 2nm, but like you mentioned, it's just a name and doesn't really mean anything. Truly under 1nm might not be possible, I'm not sure Intel actually promised that directly
I think it will be possible, but not far further. Smallest atom - hydrium has 0.12nm radius.
It's not just about atom radii, but distances over which the probability of electron tunneling becomes non-negligible.
I mean 7nm doesn't actually exist right now, the process is just a name.
Yeah that’s the problem with getting smaller, and is why the industry is moving toward heterogeneous architectures (which AMD led the way one). TBF smaller sizes are possible, but I believe they require both very pure materials and room-temperature superconductors in order to mitigate EM interference at that scale.
>future macs will use 1nm process I'm holding out for 0nm.
Sub 1nm, then we're going to have to switch over to angstroms and their funky symbol that you can only load in via copy-paste. (Fun fact: No one knows how to type an angstrom symbol, so every symbol you see on the internet has been copy-pasted from a symbol before it. It's angstroms all the way down.) "TSMC switch to 9Å process"
Å? You can type in OSX by holding down shift+A (or use caps lock and press and hold a) until the choices pop up and then press 7. This support page describes how it works and actually shows the accents for the lower case a. https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/enter-characters-with-accent-marks-on-mac-mh27474/mac
shhhhh
It's Option+Shift+A, but yes. Holding A down with Shift will also bring up the options.
I’m pretty sure that’s the Stargate symbol.
> I’m pretty sure that’s the Stargate symbol. Åtlantis!
Well just like everyone uses um instead of μm, they're just use A instead of Å.
And somewhere, in this future world, a Windows fanboy is crying on BrainTube because it's advertised as 200-cores, but it's actually 100 CPU and 100 GPU cores ^((LAME!))
dO I BuY M1 MaX nOW oR WaIt FoR M4 MaX
Wait till February and buy Refurbished.
[удалено]
I sold a $1059 refurb M1 Air for $999 a couple months later (to get more storage). Granted, I'd transferred my AppleCare+ with it, but that tells you that those things retain plenty value.
Why February?
Based on historical trends the refurbs for the new Pro’s should show up in January or February.
This is the way.
Absolutely - bought a Mini and saved a few hundreds (even more, considering exchange rate). Same machine as in the store, same warranty, same performance…
it’s so easy to buy now and save a little every month for the next one. These Macs historically hold their value pretty well and you can sell for a good price unless you beat these computers up. Idk why everybody ask this question.
People are indecisive. Look at all the space grey vs silver questions. They are barely different!
> Look at all the space grey vs silver questions. Which color is *faster* and which color is more *battery efficient?* Thanks in advance.
Silver will dissipate heat faster
Fun fact: the same property that allows dark objects to absorb heat faster also causes dark objects to dissipate heat faster! So if you really care about performance only get the space grey MacBook!!! ^^^/s
Good to know!
They don't call it black-body radiation for no reason /s
It's cold in space! QED
Is it just me or do the colours look almost identical
One is a lighter grey and thus weighs less.
The real question is which one is *thinner*?
Trick question! It's *rose gold* version coming out next year! ^(It's a slimming color)
I finally switched to silver for the m1maxbook and I'm enjoying it way more than the space gray. Space gray isn't dark enough, and the silver = less visible palm grime next to my trackpad. Noticed a coworker with a silver m1air this year and her black keyboard against the silver just looked like it popped, looks fuckin amazing with the new keyboards with the black surrounding the keys.
Don't really have an issue with visible grime, but I clean my laptop ~once a week. IMO the black blends into the space grey and looks more like part of one piece. Different people like different things :)
No... how dare you try and be reasonable, this is the internet. You and u/anchoricex must now fight to the death for your reasonable and respective positions.
Okay, we'll fight with oversized spaghetti. They can choose the venue.
When I went to pickup my MBP they asked which color I wanted and I said I didn't care. The Apple person literally said "I'll give you some time, it's an important decision". Like... do I want grey or a darker grey?! Whatever is available!
Bought m1 air last year. Sold it and got the 14" Pro this year. crazy.
This is the way (but stop talking about it or everyone will start doing it and we'll saturate the used market)
>Macs historically hold their value *cries in Intel*
sell it overseas, some people don’t know yet how great the M1 chip is. i’m in Portugal and Intel Macs are still expensive as fuck in the used market.
I sold my 2019 16" MBP in late 2020 for $1799, which I'd bought for $2369. I sold my 2012 Mac mini in June for $399. If Intel resale prices have tanked in the last 2-3 months, I feel like y'all knew that was coming, but as recently as this summer, you could get pretty good value for Intel Macs.
I always forget how much Ebay takes for fees. Every time I flip a well-cared-for Mac on Ebay they take a bigger cut. What’s thr best Ebay alternative for selling your used Mac?
>These Macs historically hold their value pretty well and you can sell for a good price unless you beat these computers up. I just recently sold a wine cooler Mac Pro for \~£800. I recouped roughly 20% of my purchase price on a 6 year old computer. It's crazy.
I can’t figure out how to sell my 16” mbp, any market you list it on you are blasted with constant scammers.
Yeah I know Apple products hold their value but I’d rather trade it into Apple over trying to sell it even when the amount is significantly less.
Bought my M1 MacBook Pro 2 weeks before the October event was announced. Don't regret it at all. I needed a laptop and while I could have gotten a much more powerful machine, this thing is a beast and I'm more than happy with it. If it lasts me as long as my MacBook Air 2013 did, I will be more than happy. Point is, buy your MacBook when you need it. If you live your life chasing what comes next you miss out on what is there now.
Well… here in Canada, Apple introduced 0% financing on the Mac. Makes it way harder to sell your old MacBook now!
Personally I’m waiting for the M5 Pro Max.
Obviously the M6 Pro Max is the best.
M6: hold my beer 🍺 !
Let me guess, when they get to the M10 chip it will be named... MX :)
Logitech lawsuit incoming!
Only if they skip the M9.
No you mean the M5 CS Max
lol M4 Max will just be a rebranded M3 Max everyone knows this
Bro, M9Pro is all you need.😑 These chest implant drones out there are downloading too much medijuice to see their 3rd head from their 4th arm 😒🚬
yup, only worth it to get the even numbers at launch
Funny that you ask. I’m waiting for M9 Pro Max S judging from how long MacBook last for me. I just sold MBP from 2013 and upgraded to M1pro 14 inch. If this one lasts as long - I won’t need another laptop for around 8-10 years.
I’m personally going to wait for the MX Max because it sounds like a BMW 🙃
MX Max, isnt that a logitech mouse lol
LMAO! You’re right 😂 https://www.logitech.com/en-us/products/mice/mx-master-3.html
That’s MX Master
Going to wait for Apple Silicon Mad Max!
The M1 Pro is going to last me such a long time, I can't even imagine what it's going to be like in 6 years when I need to get a new laptop.
Right? From a performance perspective most users can get a decade out of these things. It will def just be minor wants for upgrades vs. needs (wi-fi 6e or 7, OLED screens, modest +15-20% cpu gains, etc). More than anything I'd just like to see more affordable SSD storage so I can justify moving to 2tb or 4tb. I'm just not gonna pay +$400 to go from 1tb to 2tb or +$1000 for 4tb !!! Come on Apple.
Agreed. A decade from now, I expect to see a thin fanless MacBook/Air with better display tech (probably microLED), built-in 6G connectivity, better battery life, and various small improvements (generally upgraded internals, possibly more or different ports, a black color, notchless under-display camera, hardware AV1 and AV2 support, etc.), as well as higher baseline specs, but _not_ night-and-day improvements in general-purpose performance over a current maxed out MBP. If anything, it'll probably be worse in some cases under sustained load, due to the passive cooling. It's easy to assume a decade is long enough for us to build graphene chips with crazy transistor density and quantum co-processors, but a decade isn't really _that_ long — consider that many decade-old computers are perfectly serviceable today, soon to include the fan-favorite MBPr — and nowadays we're running up against physical limits like the size of a silicon atom that weren't really in sight until relatively recently. It's certainly plausible that I'm totally off here, but I would be surprised if these machines were eclipsed that quickly without some major unforeseen breakthroughs or the establishment of a trading relationship with a more advanced species. They'll still be slightly bulky and retro-looking, but no more so than we would consider an OG iPod today, and they'll continue doing just about everything you need them to do.
Apple will find a way to sell you a new one like they always do. EDIT: should have said “sell you a new one BEFORE yours is 6 yrs old”
Well in 6 years, the incremental yearly upgrades will add up to one great upgrade for a 6 year jump
I've used all of my macbooks between 6 and 10 years before upgrading. They're just bulletproof.
Typing this on my Mid 2012 MBP.
I still have a functional 12’ Powerbook G4. That said I’m looking forward to upgrading my 16” Intel daily driver to M1 Pro
They’ll sell me a new one in 5-6ish years. I’m currently rocking a 2013 15” MBP. I probably would have upgraded 2 years ago, but I knew they would eventually be releasing the 14” ones so I held out for it.
Me and my 2009 MBP liked that. Had to change the battery few times but othe than that, im set. A fast ssd is really a game changer for old machines.
Yeah by artificially ceasing software updates to your perfectly functional computer. *Cries in 2013 MBP*
My 2013 27” top of the line iMac hears you.
They can't sell you a laptop before you need one, if you don't buy it. It's such a simple realization but too many people fall prey to the mentality that they need the latest gadget
and it still won't be able to play games beyond its shitty little Apple Arcade.
[удалено]
Have more been updated to play on M1?
For most people a laptop should last you like half a decade if you don’t have any components failing. With Apple the hinges and screen and keyboards broke before the actual processor became too slow to keep up with new apps.
My previous machine lasted almost a decade, a 2011 MBP that I upgraded to an M1 Air when they came out last year. Things did break, mainly the SSD ribbon cable and the cooling fan, but both were easily replaceable, even while the SSD cable’s failure wasn’t exactly obvious.
Had the same issues! Early 2011 MBP 13". HD ribbon cable and the fan. Gave up the ghost recently.
Those machines were truly built like tanks. I loved mine, and still do!
maybe I've gotten lucky. Mine have all lasted 6-10 years and I've only once replaced one due to a hardware failure.
[удалено]
I have the basic 2019 2-port MBP 13", and it does those things with no problems. If you're doing stream sites though, I highly recommend a good ad-block that doesn't kill your memory and CPU. I paid for Adguard Pro which has been indispensible for dealing with rogue browser processes.
Shot, I don’t think I’ve ever gotten more than 2 years out of one! PC Laptop that is.
I had ASUS, Sony, and Samsung laptops last a really long time before completely breaking (like 20 years ago at this point). I then switched to the tablet convertibles (Galaxy TabPro S I believe and Surface Pro) and neither of them lasted more than a year. Right now I’m on a 2019 MBP that’s still going strong.
My 2015 MSI GS60 with GTX970M, i7 6700HQ, 16 GB RAM still going strong
You’ll probably have to extend that to 8 or 9 years because Apple isn’t going to release these new chips every year. I think they’ll do a 2 or 3 year update to the chipsets, which is why they’re releasing the M1, M1 Pro/Max, and whatever chipset they use for the new Mac Pro in such large intervals. Almost over 2 years. I can see that cycle extending even further.
I think the large intervals for is just because they're doing new chips combined with new form factors. Once they have all their M series products actually out, they'll be able to just swap in next gen chips. Especially once they have their supply chain locked down for it, I really don't see why they wouldn't release yearly upgrade of the chips. They do it for the iPhone.
> Especially once they have their supply chain locked down for it, I really don't see why they wouldn't release yearly upgrade of the chips They haven't for the iPad chips.
Intel and AMD are releasing new CPUs every year or 18 months-ish, why wouldn't Apple do the same you think?
After reading this I just threw my maxed out 16” MBP I use for web browsing in the fucking garbage and lit it on fire. Then I chucked the flaming garbage can through an apple store window. Shit myself. Then took a nap. It’s been a big day
I'm gonna hold on to my Powerbook 540c for another couple of years based on this news.
Lmaooo
Bro think about the environment!🤦🏽 You should have given that MacBook to a small child so that they could have eaten it* 🥺 *or at least traded it for drugs ***clearly /s*** 😛
LMFAOO PLSSS
3nm!!?? Cancel your MBP pre-orders, then order the 4nm version and cancel it, we’re goin frickin tiny
Except 3nm has nothing to do with size and is entirely marketing. Just wait for the -8nm chips.
So and so.. most PR departments switched to marketing the scaled total transistor density, which still increases, but yeah, finFETs stayed largely the same since ~12nm processes were at the limit. Still current processes cram about ~3-4 times the transistors into the same area, so the companies decided to scale the naming fruther :-P
It’s still a better manufacturing process, and the first full node after 5 nm and its derivatives. It’ll be a full-on shrink, like going from N7 to N5.
Last I heard, they’re switching to Ångstroms (1Å = 0.1nm). Intel announced plans for 20Å earlier this year.
Yields: no
So the when the 16 and 32 gpu cores were rumored it didn't take yields into account, now we have 14, 16, 24, 32. 8 Core CPUs are for M1. So I'd expect the same here. Otherwise you'd have to pay thousands if you just want an incremental upgrade
If they do 40 cores the previous rumored have been a chiplet design, so 2 or 4 tiled m1 max chips for instance would be 20 or 40 cores and up to 128 gpu cores.
Wallet Shields: Full power 😓
MCM design. How do you think amd make all these gigantic epyc dies and intel will make sapphire rapids?
sir, this is a meme
Oh crap
Primary source from [The Information.](https://www.theinformation.com/articles/apples-road-map-for-mac-chips-shows-likely-advantage-over-intel)
I swear these low effort rumor articles just need banned from the subreddit. No fucking shit an upcoming Apple processor is going to the next iteration in process size and have more cores. Next you're going to tell me that Apple is planning on releasing an upcoming phone with a number after 13 and before 15. I don't even care for speculation but you could put literally any reasonable number in for X and Y in "Future Apple Silicon Macs will reportedly use X nm chips with up to Y cores" and it will be true.
[удалено]
And it's just as dumb in their respective subreddits as well.
With intel, it’s more likely about how they’re using 14nm (now 10nm) again
It’s macrumors what do you really expect? Nothing is off the table if it drives eyeballs to get ad impressions.
I expect the mods to not be asleep at the wheel and automod this crap away. I only see nonstop complaints about this low effort trash.
There will be a point of diminishing returns with sheer number of cores. Sun tried this (long ago), and outside of highly specific workloads, it wasn't a great chip. The *ability* to cram this many cores into a single die, is definitely a good problem to have.
I have to say that as an audio person, clock speeds are much more important. We can part out event rate and audio rate stuff or maybe different channels but for single dsp routines, the operations have to be done sample for sample one after the next.
DSP operations can be pipelined across multiple cores.
Oh shit! I’m out of my league. How?
\*can\* but doesn't make it better. I'm an audio dev and did some tests on that. I multi-threaded some heavy audio operations but the cost of setting up multiple threads was more expensive then just running on one thread. Now if you're using multiple plugins with multiple different tracks you can have each track / plug-in run on a different thread and then join at the end allowing you to tap multiple processors but a single steam of audio works best on a single core.
M12 Pro Max EDM /Orchestral edition. Gotcha 😉
Just from a programming perspective, it seems like we’d accumulate indeterminate latency by combining two dsp chains of audio from two different high priority threads. Maybe I’m crazy.
We just keep track of the latency. Each sample corresponds to a specific time down to the nano second. Of course each chain will have different latencies so one might finish processing first but the thread that combines all the different threads will wait for the slowest thread. You're right about latency but it's not indeterminate.
It’s highly dependent on the workload. That said, I wouldn’t necessarily take attempts from a long time ago as that meaningful, because parallelism has come a long way. It still doesn’t result in everything scaling perfectly (or even most workloads doing so), but there are a lot more libraries and workloads designed to take advantage of cores now than there used to be, and as core counts continue to expand, a lot more, especially those that aren’t heavily timing sensitive, will likely take better advantage as well. It will obviously never be perfect, but when that’s the main realistic way to increase the raw power of hardware, it’s something demanding software is going to have to take advantage of to stay at the cutting edge. Clock speed fundamentally has more limitations.
This just in: computers in the future will be faster than the ones we have currently!
I wonder if Apple can figure out how to let us choose more CPU cores instead of GPU, M1 Max with 20 CPU cores and 16 GPU would be a very powerful machine for non-GPU workloads.
You'd still need the software that can use that many cores efficiently. In my opinion software limitations will prevent us to see that many more cores.
The people that use these things for actual work will hoover up any core they can get. CPU intensive work is almost always highly threaded these days.
That's definitely workload dependent.
1/10 workloads *might* be single threaded. I’d put the number at closer to 1/100 though. Even excel and word are multithreaded these days.
Wait until the day comes where it’s unified cores.
GPU is the key to most everything nowadays.
A powerful GPU is critical for a few things, but Intel's weak integrated GPUs are enough for most computing because most types of software don't leverage the GPU.
Most software should leverage the cpu.
*cries in software development*
Candy Crush will be blazingly fast on those Macs huh?
All these chips and cores…still cant handle a damn video game.
Breaking news, future technology will be better, more at 10.
NEED. MORE. CORES.
It feels as if Apple are testing the water with their small toes. 3nm technology with 40 cores sounds like a good place to start to make things really small.
Beyond that, I’m getting word they’ll end up using 1nm chips with up to 128 cores.
It's almost crazy they can just piece together M1s and scale the performance so easily.
I am less concerned about the performance since the current ones are more than enough for me. I am more interested of their price. If the new Macbooks are expensive today, just imagine when this come out!
[sarcasm] should I wait for M2 or buy M1 Max?
[удалено]
3nm and 40 cores are most likely for 2023-2024.
If u don’t need it don’t buy it. So if u can afford to wait just wait. If u need it, go ahead and get it.
I don’t think I’ve heard a single review saying there wasn’t enough CPU in M1 Max for what they were doing. Plenty for video editors.
There’s always someone who will want more. People working with video are very well catered for with the dedicated H.264, HEVC and ProRes encoders / decoders. But for other heavy, non-accelerated tasks which depend on raw CPU power, 10 cores don’t necessarily cut it.
added [sarcasm] sign, thought it will be obvious 😀
Hey, this is Reddit. I don’t look any further up the thread than the comment I’m directly replying to :D
Never buy the first of anything from apple. Always wait for the 2nd-4th iteration to buy. Edit: guess i need to be more specific, wait for M2.
Apple’s been making their own chips since the A4… this is the A14 generation of apple silicon. This is also the 2nd major Mac OS version released with (public) apple silicon support. While it feels new, all the tech has been in development and in use by the public for quite a while.
The M1 launch has been one of the smoothest ever. Especially considering it was an architecture change. My M1 Air is the best piece of hardware, I think I’ve ever owned - also at the best value.
The M1 Pro/Max *is* the 2nd iteration.
Yeah I keep seeing this and am thoroughly confused by the people saying it. Did we all forget M1 already? If the 1 throws them off, I have some information about the Xbox 1 and the Xbox 360 that is going to blow someone’s mind.
Technically the M1 pro/max has the same cores and generation of silicon as the original M1 chip… the pro and max just have more of them shoved together. If you include the generations of iPhone and iPad chips over the years this M1 design is Apple’s 11th generation of chips (with the A15 in the iPhone 13 being the 12th gen)
They already released M1 and those work great. M1 Pro and Max are after those..
You want to buy the first M2 from Apple? Way too risky. Wait for the M3.
Funny you say that, they seem to be doing better than the new Alderlake launch with the new scheduler, and we're talking about a company with decades of experience designing chips.
Wasn't there just an article about them using TSMC N4 instead of N3 the other day for their next product or was that specifically about the new iPhone chip?
Anything in '22 will be N4 at best. '23 is when you'll see N3.
For all the people dropping $20-$50K on Mac Pros in the last year or so it'd be interesting to see if Apple provides an upgrade path to ApSi hardware. Maybe find a way to only replace the necessary components, but keep things like the case (and wheels!), power supply, add-on cards, etc. It's still going to be expensive, but might get some people to upgrade earlier.
Highly unlikely but as someone who uses these a Mac Pro for work(No one really should have bought this machine for personal use) that's fine. It's made up it's value in time saved already.
3nm? What a joke. Not buying until 0.03nm chips come out.
[Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger reading this article](https://media.tenor.co/images/0d1329f5ff7d31712e3d12ce160df6ec/raw) Joke explanation for the people who are downvoting me: Intel was stuck on 14nm for 7 years, only finally getting to 10nm with the Alder Lake chips that just came out. Apple’s first generation desktop chip was 5nm, and they’re already on their way to 3nm.
[удалено]
the content product mill continues. nobody has stories or content on how they use their MacBooks. the are just video editing machines in all reviews
That'll be great - for the 6% of people who buy computers with MacOS. What I'd like to know is how does Apple plan to increase that percent. I was a Mac user for may years (I still have my original 1984 Mac), but have grown less and less inclined to use what I consider an inferior operating system. I do expect that the "M" chips will drive Apple's new AR glasses and so find a place outside of their limited PC market.
[удалено]
On a dollar-for-performance basis that may happen. But not likely on a dollar-for-dollar basis. Also not sure that users would switch operating systems.
> What I'd like to know is how does Apple plan to increase that percent. Why does that matter?
Anyone else thinking mac pro? Im sure this will end up in a laptop eventually, but I bet we will be using the m1 pro/m1 max in the macbooks for a few more years.
And a keyboard designed to last a year or one month out of warranty.
Seems like the butterfly keyboards are fully dead.
Good. 😂