Apple begins M2 production for 2H launch

[Jet_ski]

Summary

TAIPEI -- The next generation of Mac processors designed by Apple entered mass production this month, sources familiar with the matter told Nikkei Asia, bringing the U.S. tech giant one step closer to its goal of replacing Intel-designed central processing units with its own.

 

Apple and TSMC declined to comment for this story.

 

Quotes

Quote

Shipments of the new chipset -- tentatively known as the M2, after Apple's current M1 processor -- could begin as early as July for use in MacBooks that are scheduled to go on sale in the second half of this year, the people said.

 

My thoughts

I wasn't expecting the M2 until next year. Everyone was saying the new MacBooks will come with "M1X."

 

Sources

https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Tech/Semiconductors/Apple-s-follow-up-to-M1-chip-goes-into-mass-production-for-Mac

[NunoLava1998]

Hm, I wonder what the performance figures will be (especially on the iGPU, which is unbelievable already on the M1)

[PeterT]

So there's M2 and there's M.2  

[Laborant]

If M1X or M2 - both is just a naming. Surely, in an M1X chip, I would expect the same Firestorm and Icestorm cores as present in the M1 while in the M2 chip, I would expect a different CPU-Core architecture, but in the end, it's just a name.

I expect Apple to place such chips into maybe iMac Pros, the larger MacBook Pros and maybe a Mac Mini (Pro) in Space Grey?

10 minutes ago, PeterT said:

So there's M2 and there's M.2  

With Apple soldering on basically everything, a M2 Mac won't have M.2  

[SupaKomputa]

People with M1 : Fuuuuuuuckkkkkkk.....

[Commodus]

30 minutes ago, SupaKomputa said:

People with M1 : Fuuuuuuuckkkkkkk.....

Probably not unless you just bought an M1 Mac and had been holding out for something brawnier. They're all still very fast machines! The M2/M1X/whatever-it's-called will likely be reserved for higher-end machines at first.

[leadeater]

8 minutes ago, Commodus said:

Probably not unless you just bought an M1 Mac and had been holding out for something brawnier. They're all still very fast machines! The M2/M1X/whatever-it's-called will likely be reserved for higher-end machines at first.

If the M2, or w/e it'll be called, is significantly faster and higher power from that then I doubt it'll be an option for the MacBook Air product line so for those buyers it's got no real impact on them at all. Honestly for me the MacBook Air is the best of all the M1 product simple because of how much performance you get in that type of product. Yea active cooled products get slightly more performance but I'd rather have an actual different and faster SoC in a MacBook Pro compared to a tiny bit faster M1.

 

Some people have been bagging the MacBook Air this generation, we know who, but to me it's the best of everything so far. The rest just seem like missing potential to me.

[Commodus]

4 minutes ago, leadeater said:

If the M2, or w/e it'll be called, is significantly faster and higher power from that then I doubt it'll be an option for the MacBook Air product line so for those buyers it's got no real impact on them at all. Honestly for me the MacBook Air is the best of all the M1 product simple because of how much performance you get in that type of product. Yea active cooled products get slightly more performance but I'd rather have an actual different and faster SoC in a MacBook Pro compared to a tiny bit faster M1.

 

Some people have been bagging the MacBook Air this generation, we know who, but to me it's the best of everything so far. The rest just seem like missing potential to me.

Oh, you don't have to tell me twice. My fiancée has the Air and I'm a tad envious. It's basically everything she could hope for, and it'd probably serve me well.

[Laborant]

The product lines that have shipped with Apple Silicon by now are all historically in the lower end of the performance segment. All, the Mac Mini, the MacBook Air and the MacBook Pro 13" have been quite on the "low end" spec wise. To my knowledge, these always included just integrated graphics and never included really "Top of the line"-i9-Processors. Temporarily, Apple put their lineup upside down - as these chips perform THAT well. 

 

Just simply asking: How big has the performance difference between an MacBook Air and a MacBook Pro 16" been? I am not an Apple user - but I expect the (old Intel) MacBook Air to be on par with my Windows Ultrabook, while some Youtubers (iJustine?) actually cut their 4K videos on a MacBook Pro 16". The iPad Pro (non M1) already has been faster in some tasks than the MacBook Air. 
 

Maybe projecting the performance differences within the old lineup to the new (and future) lineup could help. I personally am heavily interested in how they manage to tackle discrete GPUs. At this point in time, I seriously doubt about Apple releasing any new x86-64 machine with AMD graphics. 

[NinJake]

I feel like Apple's move from x86 to ARM was a HUGE step forward. Now that they've had the M1 on ARM, I wouldn't be expecting any massive jumps in performance from M1 to M2. I actually picked up a M1 macbook to dip my toes in the macOS world and it's been a pleasure. I still primarily use Windows but the amount of battery life and what the M1 mac can accomplish is astounding. (And I got it at MSRP!)

[Commodus]

37 minutes ago, Laborant said:

The product lines that have shipped with Apple Silicon by now are all historically in the lower end of the performance segment. All, the Mac Mini, the MacBook Air and the MacBook Pro 13" have been quite on the "low end" spec wise. To my knowledge, these always included just integrated graphics and never included really "Top of the line"-i9-Processors. Temporarily, Apple put their lineup upside down - as these chips perform THAT well. 

 

Just simply asking: How big has the performance difference between an MacBook Air and a MacBook Pro 16" been? I am not an Apple user - but I expect the (old Intel) MacBook Air to be on par with my Windows Ultrabook, while some Youtubers (iJustine?) actually cut their 4K videos on a MacBook Pro 16". The iPad Pro (non M1) already has been faster in some tasks than the MacBook Air. 
 

Maybe projecting the performance differences within the old lineup to the new (and future) lineup could help. I personally am heavily interested in how they manage to tackle discrete GPUs. At this point in time, I seriously doubt about Apple releasing any new x86-64 machine with AMD graphics. 

There are areas where the 16-inch MacBook Pro will fare better. Anything that depends heavily on the GPU, of course, but a top-spec MBP might also win out in terms of sheer multi-core brawn. But the very fact that this larger, pricier MBP loses in key areas to an Air speaks volumes about how much Apple has done to advance computing power. I know ARM doesn't deliver as dramatic improvements as you scale up in power, but I could easily see an M2-based 16-inch MacBook Pro thrashing both its Intel predecessor and many competitors.

[LAwLz]

54 minutes ago, NinJake said:

I wouldn't be expecting any massive jumps in performance from M1 to M2

I do.

Single threaded performance might be roughly the same (depending on how much they increase clock speed) but they can easily double the amount of cores and get roughly double the performance in some heavily threaded applications. Same with the GPU. Double the cores, and get roughly double the performance.

[NinJake]

1 minute ago, LAwLz said:

I do.

Single threaded performance might be roughly the same (depending on how much they increase clock speed) but they can easily double the amount of cores and get roughly double the performance in some heavily threaded applications. Same with the GPU. Double the cores, and get roughly double the performance.

Would give the M2 name more oomph if they do! I don't think anyone would be upset if they double the cores.

[lostcattears]

Actually... I can't wait to see this new chip I wonder how far Apple can push their own chips every year

[ne0tic]

4 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I do.

Single threaded performance might be roughly the same (depending on how much they increase clock speed) but they can easily double the amount of cores and get roughly double the performance in some heavily threaded applications. Same with the GPU. Double the cores, and get roughly double the performance.

I'm actually not sure if the M2 chip will be the one with all the extra cores. I feel like it would be the replacement for the M1 chip, although potentially with 10 CPU cores, four little, six big, and 10 GPU cores. The one with like 12 CPU cores and 16 GPU cores would make more sense for a X-version, like M2X. For example, MBP 16'' starting with M2 with the upgrade option for M2X would be my best guess. I do however also believe that the M2 will be considerably better than the M1, even tho I don't think it will be a 12 CPU core chip. 

[leadeater]

5 hours ago, Commodus said:

I know ARM doesn't deliver as dramatic improvements as you scale up in power, but I could easily see an M2-based 16-inch MacBook Pro thrashing both its Intel predecessor and many competitors.

At least for the laptops it's still going to up until around 45W to 65W as that is about what the MacBook Pro can cool so Apple won't have to put in any/much power or thermal controls over the Firestorm cores. So take what 4 core can do and double it with 8 and that's still around 40W-45W for a memory and core intensive workload.

 

After 8 Firestorm cores in mobile products I suspect Apple is going to have to get a bit more thermal and power control conscious, but I doubt Apple is planning to go above 8 in those product lines anyway.

[Spindel]

Pleas not a to big performance jump generation over generation. I will feel forced to by a new mini then

 

That is what has been kind of nice during the Intel years post 2013, the performance increase has been so small so you really didn't feel a want to upgrade. And I remember my PC building days when it felt like a graphics card was ancient history within 6 months

[Distinctly Average]

19 hours ago, leadeater said:

If the M2, or w/e it'll be called, is significantly faster and higher power from that then I doubt it'll be an option for the MacBook Air product line so for those buyers it's got no real impact on them at all. Honestly for me the MacBook Air is the best of all the M1 product simple because of how much performance you get in that type of product. Yea active cooled products get slightly more performance but I'd rather have an actual different and faster SoC in a MacBook Pro compared to a tiny bit faster M1.

 

Some people have been bagging the MacBook Air this generation, we know who, but to me it's the best of everything so far. The rest just seem like missing potential to me.

I would guess that the next gen will probably have a slight increase in performance but a big increase in I/O capability. The current gen is fine for the current machines but for high end is a little lacking. That would be my guess, this is more of a boost in that direction. If that is the case current M1 users will be happy.

[Spindel]

Sorry for the risk of derailing this thread. 

 

A thing I've become interested in is if it would be possible to OC the M1. This would probably need a bit more old school hands on work than nowadays PC overclocking. 

 

I say this because my use case on my M1 Mini I've so far never seen a core temperature higher than 62°C the fan has never ramped up always sits at 1690-1710 rpm and I know the power supply can deliver around 150 W. Thermally there is head room in my machine. 

 

Normal operational CPU temp when I'm working is 26-35°C unless OneDrive is syncing where I see temps of up to 45°C (and OneDrive is one big piece of shit software both on MacOS (running under rosetta because MS CBA to release a universal binary) and under Windows it bring my windows laptop to full fan speed and unresponsiveness when syncing).

 

I just get a feeling that Apple is not binning their M1 (except for the 7 core GPU ones) and just has put the chip so far below the actual limits of the best chips so they can use it in all devices with no worries. 

 

Do I need the extra performance as it stands now? No. 

Would it be fun to fiddle with? Yes.

Do I have the skill to fiddle with this and figuring it out? Not in a long shot.  

[Parabola]

I would love to get one next year but prices will continue to be prohibitive around here (Brazil). 
 

I do think someday they will put this line in the iPhone like they did with the iPad and unify everything. 

[rcmaehl]

D1 production when?

 

[maartendc]

On 4/27/2021 at 3:19 PM, Commodus said:

Probably not unless you just bought an M1 Mac and had been holding out for something brawnier. They're all still very fast machines! The M2/M1X/whatever-it's-called will likely be reserved for higher-end machines at first.

Exactly. You can always have buyers remorse in the tech world, as there is always something faster just on the horizon...

 

Unless you know something is coming out in a couple of weeks / months, you just need to buy what you need to buy and use it. Your current machine did not just magically become slower.

 

Unless you always feel the need to have the absolute fastest thing out there. But that is another problem entirely.

[Guest willies leg]

Probably same chip just more RAM and a few more cores.

What a scam, zero upgrade path.

[JoseGuya]

24 minutes ago, willies leg said:

Probably same chip just more RAM and a few more cores.

What a scam, zero upgrade path.

MacBooks don't have an upgrade path since 2016 I think 

[suicidalfranco]

10 hours ago, JoseGuya said:

MacBooks don't have an upgrade path since 2016 I think 

more like 2012