Bad Intel Quality Assurance Responsible for Apple-Intel Split?

[R-T-B]

No? Then you're not thinking very far. With a discrete part, you can swap it out. Apple's new Macs will force you to buy a new one to get support for new technology. In all fairness, I guess that's notebooks in general, but an x86/x64 system is still often able to do things using software decoders etc. which the new Macs can't.

Oh, I agree with that. But that's just typical apple. I thought you meant it was because the ARM design itself was somehow technologically inferior. I was saying they could do discrete, but we both know they won't.

 

[Valantar]

It can also be a political decision since we have obvious environmental problems and our climate targets are set.
x86 can't work normally in low power envelopes up to 2-3 watts, which greatly reduce the carbon footprint in the companies who would like to implement so aggressively high energy efficient components.

You are speaking of high performance from x86 but the cost is systems with a single CPU of over 150 watts, up to 400 watts and more.

Even the SoC in an iPad Pro has a TDP of ~10W, so your numbers are way off. IPhones run at 4-5W under sustained loads. As a laptop needs to be more powerful than a phone (and ideally also a high end tablet) they will need to draw more power. As such, your image of replacing 150W x86 CPUs with 2-3W SoCs isn't just faulty, it's a fundamentally misunderstood view of reality. The upcoming macs and their SoCs will be scaling power UP from the mobile parts, not going down in TDP to match them. As to the environmental impact, the production of even just the SoC, let alone the entire device, likely pollutes more and creates more CO2 than all the power consumed by the device throughout its lifetime for any laptop or lower power part. They wouldn't be impacting that whatsoever.

 

[ARF]

Even the SoC in an iPad Pro has a TDP of ~10W, so your numbers are way off. IPhones run at 4-5W under sustained loads. As a laptop needs to be more powerful than a phone (and ideally also a high end tablet) they will need to draw more power. As such, your image of replacing 150W x86 CPUs with 2-3W SoCs isn't just faulty, it's a fundamentally misunderstood view of reality.

You are wrong.
2-3-watts is a performance target which is independent of your current "reality".

As to the environmental impact, the production of even just the SoC, let alone the entire device, likely pollutes more and creates more CO2 than all the power consumed by the device throughout its lifetime for any laptop or lower power part. They wouldn't be impacting that whatsoever.

You are wrong here as well.
If you produce smaller boxes with sizes of a smartphone, that for sure will be energy saving compared to if you produce full-sized PC cases that are gigantic and take so much space.
How much material will you process for a box of, let's say, 10 cm x 6 cm x 1 cm, compared to a box 40 cm x 30 cm x 40 cm ?

 

[Valantar]

You are wrong.
2-3-watts is a performance target which is independent of your current "reality".

"2-3 watts" isnt a performance target at all. Watts do not indicate performance of an SoC, only power draw. It might be a future/theoretical power draw target, but ... well, it doesn't seem to be. Apple seems comfortable in the 4-5W range for their phones, and they do not seem to have any desire to lower this (power draw went up for the current generation) - their focus is on maximizing burst performance to improve race to idle scenarios, which ultimately improves power efficiency for smartphone use cases. And given that, they wouldn't go lower for a laptop or desktop, as that would after all make it slower than their phones ...

You are wrong here as well.
If you produce smaller boxes with sizes of a smartphone, that for sure will be energy saving compared to if you produce full-sized PC cases that are gigantic and take so much space.
How much material will you process for a box of, let's say, 10 cm x 6 cm x 1 cm, compared to a box 40 cm x 30 cm x 40 cm ?

Are you honestly suggesting that future, Arm-based Apple laptops (or desktops!) will be smartphone sized? Are you joking? Obviously using less materials means less energy use and waste generated in production. But they are operating within relatively fixed product categories (phones, laptops, tablets, UCFF desktops, HEDT workstations) where size and shape are unlikely to change dramatically, so materials used in production are also unlikely to vary all that much.

 

[yeeeeman]

These kinds of news turn techpowerup into a scandal newspaper for stupid people. Be aware of that.
If the editors of this site would be knowledgeable, they would know every piece of silicon has bugs, kinks and especially when you sell them to so many people there is bound to be something like this.
Heck, AMD even had them in Zen 1, Zen 2 and nobody complained, AMD has a very high defect rate and bad/non working drivers for Navi cards 1 year after release, but I didn't see any article stating this. Still we are suddenly getting a lot of coverage about an intel product which supposedly had bad QA. How hypocrites tech sites have become these days...
I hope you all eat your own words in 1-2 years time, when tables will turn again.
As for the topic, Apple moved to their own cpus to have bigger margins on their products and make more money.

 

[ARF]

These kinds of news turn techpowerup into a scandal newspaper for stupid people. Be aware of that.
If the editors of this site would be knowledgeable, they would know every piece of silicon has bugs, kinks and especially when you sell them to so many people there is bound to be something like this.
Heck, AMD even had them in Zen 1, Zen 2 and nobody complained, AMD has a very high defect rate and bad/non working drivers for Navi cards 1 year after release, but I didn't see any article stating this. Still we are suddenly getting a lot of coverage about an intel product which supposedly had bad QA. How hypocrites tech sites have become these days...
I hope you all eat your own words in 1-2 years time, when tables will turn again.
As for the topic, Apple moved to their own cpus to have bigger margins on their products and make more money.

AMD has never had so serious security related issues in their CPUs

Intel is still struggling with the truth about its processor security flaws

Intel is still struggling with the truth about its processor security flaws

Intel claimed issues were fixed, but they weren’t

www.theverge.com

intel security issues - Google Search

 

[Valantar]

These kinds of news turn techpowerup into a scandal newspaper for stupid people. Be aware of that.
If the editors of this site would be knowledgeable, they would know every piece of silicon has bugs, kinks and especially when you sell them to so many people there is bound to be something like this.
Heck, AMD even had them in Zen 1, Zen 2 and nobody complained, AMD has a very high defect rate and bad/non working drivers for Navi cards 1 year after release, but I didn't see any article stating this. Still we are suddenly getting a lot of coverage about an intel product which supposedly had bad QA. How hypocrites tech sites have become these days...
I hope you all eat your own words in 1-2 years time, when tables will turn again.
As for the topic, Apple moved to their own cpus to have bigger margins on their products and make more money.

I think you're seeing this in a far too black-and-white manner - this isn't a case of making a big deal out of the fact that a CPU has bugs (which they all do) but reporting on one that had an unusually high amount of bugs, that many of them were discovered by a major customer rather than the chipmaker themselves, and that this might have played into Apple's desire to go completely vertically integrated. That isn't scandal or gossip, but relevant insight in the processes that inform strategic decision making for major players in the tech industry. If you can't tell the difference between that and tabloid-esque gossip columns, that's down to your reading comprehension and not the contents of nor basis for the report.

AMD has never had so serious security related issues in their CPUs

Intel is still struggling with the truth about its processor security flaws

Intel is still struggling with the truth about its processor security flaws

Intel claimed issues were fixed, but they weren’t

www.theverge.com

intel security issues - Google Search

That isn't what this case is about whatsoever. Also, do you seriously think anyone interested in tech has so thoroughly missed out on the series of Intel securities flaws that a Google search link will be of any help to them? This is a tech forum after all. And making irrelevant non-arguments in huge bold letters doesn't make them any more relevant.