Friday, November 2nd 2018
Apple's A12X Shows Us How The ARM MacBook Is Closer Than Ever
The shadow of a ARM-based MacBook has been there for years. Rumors have been adding up, and the performance of their own mobile processors is more and more convincing with each new generation of devices. The recent launch of the iPad Pro has reinforced those signs after knowing its Apple A12X Bionic' Geekbench 4 results. According to this benchmark, the new iPad Pro isn't that far in raw performance from what we have with a Core i9-8950HK-based MacBook Pro (2018). We have a Single-Core/Multi-Core score of 5020/18217 in the iPad Pro vs the 5627/21571 on the MacBook Pro. If this seems nuts it's because it really is.
This comparison is pretty absurd in itself: TDPs are quite different on both (7 W vs 45 W) but there are also important distinctions in areas such as the memory used in those devices (most Apple laptops still use DDR-2133 modules) and, of course, the operating system on which they are based. Those numbers are just a tiny reference, but if we pay attention to Apple's recent keynote, that Photoshop CC demo can really speak for itself. And again, comparisons are hateful, but let's look for a slightly fairer comparison.
That's in fact not that difficult, and Apple has given us a perfect candidate. If we don't want to compare such different processors we can make a more compelling comparison between that A12X and the Core i5-8210Y that Apple has used for the new MacBook Air. TDPs match, and there's a clear indication of how those Apple processors could be the heart of their laptops in the not-too-distant future. The scores (again, different OS, LPDDR3 RAM): 4248/7828 in GeekBench 4. As Joel Hruska has explained at ExtremeTech, Geekbench 4 "is designed to capture an overall picture of SoC performance rather than highlighting just one metric", and we can explore those numbers to discover that there are certain big differences in some of the tests.
That's important, sure, but the question arises anyway: will Apple launch an ARM-based MacBook? This question begs another: what will be the operating system in that machine? It certainly seems that iOS is the spoiled kid at Apple with poor macOS long overshadowed by its mobile cousin. But iOS has no mouse support, for example, and it's an OS which focuses on making us work with one and only one application in the foreground. There is also certain conventional macOS apps not available there (but they're coming, and Photoshop CC is a good example), so some people see that this ARM-Apple-latptop-and-desktop-world is not only possible, but inevitable.
If that change occurs there should be a transitional period, but we've experienced that before. When Steve Jobs announced the jump to Intel processors in their Macs he told the audience how an Intel-compiled OS X version had been running for five years in a secret lab at Cupertino. The same could be happening right now, but with an ARM-based MacBook based on iOS. Or maybe an ARM-compiled version of macOS, for that matter.
Interesting times, for sure.
Source:
ExtremeTech
This comparison is pretty absurd in itself: TDPs are quite different on both (7 W vs 45 W) but there are also important distinctions in areas such as the memory used in those devices (most Apple laptops still use DDR-2133 modules) and, of course, the operating system on which they are based. Those numbers are just a tiny reference, but if we pay attention to Apple's recent keynote, that Photoshop CC demo can really speak for itself. And again, comparisons are hateful, but let's look for a slightly fairer comparison.
That's important, sure, but the question arises anyway: will Apple launch an ARM-based MacBook? This question begs another: what will be the operating system in that machine? It certainly seems that iOS is the spoiled kid at Apple with poor macOS long overshadowed by its mobile cousin. But iOS has no mouse support, for example, and it's an OS which focuses on making us work with one and only one application in the foreground. There is also certain conventional macOS apps not available there (but they're coming, and Photoshop CC is a good example), so some people see that this ARM-Apple-latptop-and-desktop-world is not only possible, but inevitable.
If that change occurs there should be a transitional period, but we've experienced that before. When Steve Jobs announced the jump to Intel processors in their Macs he told the audience how an Intel-compiled OS X version had been running for five years in a secret lab at Cupertino. The same could be happening right now, but with an ARM-based MacBook based on iOS. Or maybe an ARM-compiled version of macOS, for that matter.
Interesting times, for sure.
72 Comments on Apple's A12X Shows Us How The ARM MacBook Is Closer Than Ever
I'm just saying IBM has released chips regularly that remain competitive.. and they probably could have done it eventually with their consumer oriented PPCs too. They had problems competing in the gigahertz wars at first, but I don't doubt they would have been fine.. it's just that they lacked the incentive when Apple threw in the towel (edit: and Motorola left before Apple, as well).
I'm more convinced than ever that Apple are easily capable of making a CPU/GPU architecture capable of beating Intel right now, and probably have these running in their labs. I think that Apple are waiting until they can announce something which is several times faster than Intel, so the crowd can be wowed, and just telling people that this shiny new CPU/GPU is 30% more powerful than Intel is not enough. They will want to SHOW the difference, so that it cannot be denied. They will want to make people say wow, I want that, and another 10FPS in a game already running at 60 is not going to truly wow the buying public.
edit - still waiting for those fake Apple results :ohwell:
Over the years Apple have become more and more a "fashion choice", while locking down their ecosystem, reducing quality and stagnating performance. 10-15 years ago Macbook Pros used to be the primary choice for laptops among developers, but recent models have become overpriced junk, and for any developer not using Xcode Linux have become the logical choice. Content creators seem to move more and more to Windows. Their once mighty Mac Pro line have been completely neglected, and the "trashcan" Mac Pro and more recent iMac Pro is failing at nearly every aspect that matters to professional users.
It should be clear to anyone that their long term plan is to completely abandon the pro segment and focus on high-volume cheaply made consumer electronics, but sold at a premium based solely on their brand name. As as you say, their focus on iOS and moving away from Intel chips is all about getting complete control over the hardware as a step to control the complete ecosystem. Their push to move Macbooks to custom ARM designs have been known for years, and while Apple's ARM implementation is among the best, this far they have invested billions into these designs without any economical benefits so far. But all of this is for the long term goal of a completely locked down platform with their own unique features and benefits.
Also, what you're saying is technically true. But Apple's return to success was iTunes. That's where they started getting a cut out of everything.
Let me make sure I understand the question you are asking. You want to know why someone would choose to use programs that are as powerful as what's running on a laptop, on a tablet that weighs 25% of what a laptop weighs, uses 10% of the electricity a laptop uses (I can compute all day on a tablet, laptops die in 4 hours), and costs 50% of the price of a laptop (comparing a 10.5" iPad Pro to a MBP).
Is that REALLY what you're asking? I mean I only replaced my laptop with a tablet 3 or 4 years ago. I only do everything my job requires (Information Security) and put together training videos (edit 4K video and quality audio) on my iPad Pro.
What is it you think I'm missing while I get a quality job done in a timely manner, cheaper, and without being tethered to power every 4 hours?
On topic: looking at the specs of the A12X compared to the i7 and knowing that A12X (being RISC) needs at least two clocks for virtually every operation (load-store), I think it's safe to say that Geekbench is not a credible reference point to base any comparison between the two.
For giggles, I checked if I could install Geekbench 4 via BlueStacks and to my surprise, it says it is not compatible, yet, so many other apps are. Primate Labs went out of their way to forbid installing it through an emulator. Gee I wonder why.
What the cult of Apple misses out on was on prominent display when Mac changed from PowerPC to x86. Prior to the change, they were boasting how fast their computers were then after the change, they were boasting how fast Intel is compared to IBM without acknowledging how Apple mislead them for decades on relativistic performance.
That's the thing about a cult: they can see no fault. They'll keep buying Apple products simply because of the brand.
With that said, I personally wouldn't buy an OS X device. I'm just saying that there are businesses that do it for whatever reason they ascribe. Mind you, the two companies I mentioned are EdTech companies and these businesses get discounts on Apple products (...and being an employee, so do I, but that's still not enough to convince me to buy one.) They looked into getting Dells with the business warranty and everything that they get with Apple and you would be surprised at how the cost isn't a whole lot different. The bare hardware alone is definitely cheaper, but Dell's business warranty plans make it practically as expensive as a Mac... because a business buying a lot of hardware without a good warranty is just asking for trouble.
So, while I agree (partially,) with your point, I don't completely agree that its a matter of being part of the cult. I definitely agree that's the case for individuals, but not always for businesses.
Apple may actually be losing that now because kids are getting laptops in grade school now and I don't think they're Apple. Might be partly why Mac OS X's market share is falling.
You're right that non-Apple is the opposite: they hammer the businesses (especially servers) while giving individuals a discount. They don't have a cult to get conversions off of and the direct competition (Lenovo, HP, Dell, Acer, etc.) is fierce.
With that said, the dynamics for all of these companies are very different when you're looking at buying or leasing say, 50 laptops as opposed to a single one for personal use. It's literally not comparable.
Honestly, I would rather have a Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition laptop with Ubuntu than the Macbook Pro I have now, but unfortunately it's not my decision.