Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Portables (Apple) Apple

Apple Readies MacBook Pro, MacBook Air Revamps With Faster Chips (bloomberg.com) 189

Apple is preparing to release several new Mac laptops and desktops with faster processors, new designs and improved connectivity to external devices, accelerating the company's effort to replace Intel chips and leapfrog rival PC makers. From a report: The overhaul encompasses a broad range of Macs, including Apple's higher-end laptop, the MacBook Pro; the laptop aimed at the mass market, the MacBook Air; and its desktop computers, the Mac Pro, iMac and Mac mini, according to people familiar with the matter. Redesigned MacBook Pros are expected to debut as soon as early this summer, said the people, who requested anonymity to discuss an internal matter, followed by a revamped MacBook Air, a new low-end MacBook Pro and an all-new Mac Pro workstation.

The company is also working on a higher-end Mac mini desktop and larger iMac. The machines will feature processors designed in-house that will greatly outpace the performance and capabilities of the current M1 chips, the people said. Apple plans to launch the redesigned MacBook Pros in 14-inch (code name J314) and 16-inch screen (J316) sizes. They'll have a redesigned chassis, magnetic MagSafe charger and more ports for connecting external drives and devices. Apple is also bringing back the HDMI port and SD card slot, which it nixed in previous versions, sparking criticism from photographers and the like.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Readies MacBook Pro, MacBook Air Revamps With Faster Chips

Comments Filter:
  • They just released new desktops with their new chip. The chip was announced Nov 10, 2020. Product cycle still has another 6 months with M1.

    • The M1 Macs, despite being apparently pretty performant, are the low end ones. These will be the pro models, mainly having a place aside the current models.
    • They just released new desktops with their new chip. The chip was announced Nov 10, 2020. Product cycle still has another 6 months with M1.

      If you mean the new iMacs, they have the same M1 SoC as the current MacBook Air, MacBook Pro 13", and Mac mini.

      There are rumors of an imminent Mac Pro refresh; but that is supposed to use a previously-unreleased 10-core (Xeon?) CPU; not an Apple Silicon SoC.

    • This makes absolutely sense. They first produced the M1 chip, which is a "low end" chip slightly more powerful than an Intel 6-core chip, and put it into all the low-end devices up to a 24" iMac with 4.5k monitor.

      It was obvious that the next step would be a mid-range chip, and 8+2 cores should be about as powerful as Intel 12-core chips. And every model where having a low-end version and a mid-range version makes sense, will get another version with a mid-range chip. I suppose it makes sense for MacBook,
      • And every model where having a low-end version and a mid-range version makes sense, will get another version with a mid-range chip. I suppose it makes sense for MacBook, MacMini, 24" iMac and a replacement for the 27" iMac. Maybe not for the MacBook Air.

        I think the MBA (and maybe the iMac 24") will stay on the M1 for another year.

        I don't think the 27" iMac nor the 16" MacBook Pro are going to get a minor bump. Only having 2 High Efficiency cores means that there will be too much stealing of High Performance cores to do menial tasks. IMHO, 8 + 4 Cores are more likely for the "midrange chip", with maybe a 12 + 4 as an BTO option.

  • by ctilsie242 ( 4841247 ) on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @09:14AM (#61396008)

    I just hope that rumor of 64 gigs of RAM on the CPU silicon hold true. 16 gigs is OK for a desktop I might use with a Citrix or VMWare Horizon client, as well as some light web browsing, but that isn't going to cut it when I start working on code and using Vagrant for testing, or doing serious video or audio editing.

    • 16 gigs is OK for a desktop I might use with a Citrix or VMWare Horizon client, as well as some light web browsing

      The state of software these days really is sad.

      • On one hand, yeah, the waste of memory is unfortunate.

        On the other hand, RAM is not expensive. You can cram a lot of it into a PC. And even some macs, though not enough of them, because Apple is forcing market segmentation in order to sell higher-end product.

        There are some limited upsides to the mac world, but in general it's like it or lump it.

    • by amp001 ( 948513 ) on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @11:50AM (#61396686)
      Minor quibble: the M1 RAM isn't "on die", it's "on package". Meaning, the package is a multi-chip module, where one of those chips is the M1 SoC (with the processors, neural engine, GPU, and cache hierarchy, memory controller, IO, etc.) and two more chips are RAM. Currently, the highest density for that particular type of RAM is 12G per chip, for a maximum theoretical configuration of 24G (Apple only allows 8G and 16G configurations by using lower density parts). However, a larger package could support more than two RAM chips (with a different SoC, obviously, since it would need a different memory controller). But, it would still be challenging to get beyond 48G on-package (4 x 12G RAM chips). More likely is an approach Apple has already filed a patent for: using a smaller amount of on-package RAM as another level of cache, backed by a large amount of standard off-package RAM (either soldered to the board or socketed, depending on the system design; I would imagine a Mac Pro would use socketed, while a "big" Mac mini might use soldered). This would support very large amounts of total RAM without raising the costs of the SoC+package significantly.
      • Minor quibble: the M1 RAM isn't "on die", it's "on package". Meaning, the package is a multi-chip module, where one of those chips is the M1 SoC (with the processors, neural engine, GPU, and cache hierarchy, memory controller, IO, etc.) and two more chips are RAM. Currently, the highest density for that particular type of RAM is 12G per chip, for a maximum theoretical configuration of 24G (Apple only allows 8G and 16G configurations by using lower density parts). However, a larger package could support more than two RAM chips (with a different SoC, obviously, since it would need a different memory controller). But, it would still be challenging to get beyond 48G on-package (4 x 12G RAM chips). More likely is an approach Apple has already filed a patent for: using a smaller amount of on-package RAM as another level of cache, backed by a large amount of standard off-package RAM (either soldered to the board or socketed, depending on the system design; I would imagine a Mac Pro would use socketed, while a "big" Mac mini might use soldered). This would support very large amounts of total RAM without raising the costs of the SoC+package significantly.

        That's pretty much my thinking as well.

    • I just hope that rumor of 64 gigs of RAM on the CPU silicon hold true

      That would be amazing.

  • Mac pro level hardware? or ashtray 2.0? with no EXT video cards?

    The mac pro needs to have
    PCI-E slots
    SATA ports or m.2 slots (Non apple only)
    can use at least 1TB of ram
    Video power to drive at least 4 4k displays.

    • by NoMoreACs ( 6161580 ) on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @09:33AM (#61396088)

      Mac pro level hardware? or ashtray 2.0? with no EXT video cards?

      The mac pro needs to have
      PCI-E slots
      SATA ports or m.2 slots (Non apple only)
      can use at least 1TB of ram
      Video power to drive at least 4 4k displays.

      That's why they appear to be taking their time with the Mac Pro transition, as I have previously predicted.

      The Mac Pro will be the last model transitioned to Apple Silicon. They most certainly have it in development; but I would be very surprised to see an ASi Mac Pro this year.

      But next year is a pretty safe bet.

  • I need Apple to start fixing the bugs in its existing Mac software. They seem to have a policy of "We didn't fix that bug in the last release, so we're never going to fix it."

    • by Rumagent ( 86695 )

      I don't disagree with that statement. That said, the changes (magsafe, much needed ports and the removal of that god awful touchbar) are pretty much bugfixes of the hardware.

      It is clearly a good thing that the hack Ive is out. Now add some decent cooling and we may have a decent device again.
       

      • Let's not forget the fact that they finally dropped the butterfly keyboards. What works perfectly in a cleanroom doesn't always work in the real world.

    • I need a Mac with a decent keyboard. All other things are secondary. And I don't just mean the keys - the whole layout is just awful. I had a corporate issued Macbook Pro for the last 3 years and hated every minute with it.

    • Therefore it's not a problem for the seller.

  • Is this going to be a *new* Magsafe connector?

    We need another new Mac power connector like we need a hole in the head. USB-C finally allowed me to unify the modern gadget power in my house and travel gear around a single high-power USB-C/A power brick (-C for laptops, phones, etc, and -A for very low power gadgets like headphones and smartwatches). Magsafe 1/2 was nice enough but having to have two power bricks everywhere - one for magsafe, one for USB - really began to chafe.

    Having the old Magsafe connect

    • Having the old Magsafe connector back might not be too bad, at least I have the infrastructure left over for it still, but it's a pain. Being able to power a Macbook via either Magsafe or USB-C would be acceptable since then I can use USB-C and carry on with my current pleasant life.

      Just FWIW, the Microsoft Surface can charge using their proprietary magsafe-esque connector or a standard USB-C charger.

      I would hope for the same here.

    • I have very little liking for the idea of having to buy even more power adapters for new power connectors.

      Very little indeed.

      (Apple) "We do understand your hesitation. To offer you some re-assurance, we won't even include the power adapter with your new purchase, as we we want you to have that financial flexibility. For only $199 more, you too can charge your laptop three times faster with our new dedicated power port! What? Slow down USB-C charging? No, we would never think of such a thing..."

  • by rockmuelle ( 575982 ) on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @09:31AM (#61396082)

    Hopefully they'll fix that little oversight with the first gen M1 laptops.

    I was ready to buy one the other day. I had it in my cart and was just adding accessories and couldn't figure out which dongle to get to support two monitors. Turns out that the M1 MacBooks don't support dual monitor* setups (well, not easily - there's a software driver + dongle solution, but it's not as pretty as plugging in two cables).

    Seemed like a huge miss on Apple's part, will the new ones address this?

    *really tri-monitor - two external + the laptop screen, which I've been doing on a 2016 Intel MBP since 2016

    • by nicolaiplum ( 169077 ) on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @10:09AM (#61396236)

      This is another consequence of the M1 CPU in the Macs being really an overgrown ARM SOC, not a CPU with integrated peripherals. The design assumes some very fixed hardware limits for specific device applications and then takes advantage of these to design the system package down to a price, size, and thermal profile. This is why your phone or your tablet has some pretty amazing hardware capabilities for something with that size and power but has much less flexibility. It can't come with much more RAM than designed, or drive multi displays, or so on, outside the very fixed and finite design parameters of the SOC.

      The Intel Macs, and other Intel laptops, can both have extended RAM and graphics buses - so that's why you can get 32GB or 64GB RAM and dedicated, powerful graphics options to drive multiple screens in your Macbook Pro. Even the internal graphics are designed from a point of view of "how much graphics can we reasonably cram into this die with the CPU", not "what do we need to deliver to this customer and that's all we will put in here". Therefore even internal (on-CPU-die) graphics support multiple displays, because system flexibility is important in a general purpose computer.

      SOC design has "good enough" graphics and memory in a Package-On-Package layout (or equivalent next to each other), and are fixed like this early on in the design process. You can't swap out the memory for more, or graphics for more, and so on, without redesigning and re-integrating the entire System on the Chip.

      You may think of your Mac these days as a fixed non-flexible package (especially since the RAM and storage are soldered on now) but the Intel CPU, GPU, and buses are quite flexible despite Apple's packaging decisions. The M1 SOC is not at all flexible and here you see the problems, including that supporting dual monitors is not just a fairly simple interface wiring issue but a fundamental design decision (not to do that).

      Apple's design needs to mature away from that SOC "device" design paradigm to a more flexible "computer" design paradigm for the higher end equipment.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Apple's GPU is very much a mobile device too. It's cut down and doesn't fully support everything needed for OpenGL or similar higher level APIs, only Apple's own Metal. It's proving to be an issue for support in Linux: https://rosenzweig.io/blog/asa... [rosenzweig.io]

        They can get away with it on a laptop but will people be satisfied with that in a Pro desktop machine?

        Also LOL at "leapfrog rival PC makers", the M1 isn't even in the same league as Ryzen performance-wise. I really doubt that the GPU will overtake what AMD put

      • supporting dual monitors is not just a fairly simple interface wiring issue but a fundamental design decision

        It is, however, merely implementing DisplayPort correctly. Multistream Transport should allow that over a single connector. And supposedly that will come with a future firmware update.

        Apple's design needs to mature away from that SOC "device" design paradigm to a more flexible "computer" design paradigm for the higher end equipment.

        Computing in general is "maturing" in the SoC direction. If upgrades aren't truly needed as often as they used to be, then long-term reliability is going to be more important. At least for their own customers, you regularly see computers held by the same owner for nearly 10 years in a lot of cases. Even Intel Macs were us

      • Apple's design needs to mature away from that SOC "device" design paradigm to a more flexible "computer" design paradigm for the higher end equipment.

        Apple's design has just matured to a SOC "device" design paradigm :-) What you see as weakness because it's not what you are used to is a strength. There's one chip for ALL current M1 Macs, with RAM size being the only difference. And in the future there will be two chips for ALL current Silicone Macs. It doesn't have to be flexible. You buy the cheap powerful one, or the expensive _really_ powerful one.

      • by reiscw ( 2427662 )

        I agree with what you are saying here, but given that the Raspberry Pi 4 has dual monitor support (which works surprisingly well with Raspberry Pi OS and Xfce), I'm surprised that Apple wasn't willing to put it in. I work with two principals at my school who have Macs, and they are both running dual monitors off of their Macbook Pro. I think we'll see it come back even if it takes a generation or two. I'm reassured by the news that HDMI ports and SD card slots are coming back, that's the first time I've

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Apple's design decisions are... Well, take the new iMac. It's 11mm thick, very sleek, thinner than an Apple watch. But boy is it compromised to get it that thin.

          There's no Ethernet jack. The higher end models have one... On the power brick. Oh yeah, there's a power brick because they couldn't fit it into the care. The case with a giant chin under the screen where the motherboard goes, because it's so thin it can't fit behind the LCD panel.

          No USB A ports either. C only, and the base model has fewer of those.

      • Thanks for the insightful reply (no mod points since I posted the parent :) ).

        I didn't realize how much the SOC approach was used with the M1. The dual monitor limitation makes sense in the that. It's still annoying, but at least it makes sense technically.

        It'll be interesting to see where this goes for Apple and what other design limitations emerge if they stick with the wholistic approach. Another reply mentions incomplete OpenGL implementations as another casualty.

        From a dev perspective, I love the heter

Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.

Working...