Apple M1 SoC

[Ailuros]

I was mostly referring to the laptop/desktop space. For smartphones apple is ahead but not by much, for the tablet space apple is about the only player indeed.

Indirect competition to anything Apple might equip with Mx type of SoCs will mostly come from QCOM and hopefully Samsung eventually. QCOM has slated to announce its first laptop SoC next year if memory serves well. Other than that Intel/AMD might do an outstanding job, but the higher bets for future laptops might be rather directed in longer battery lifetimes/increased power efficiency.

 

[pjbliverpool]

How do we know what price they'd need to sell them at?

I assume the BoM for the M1 Ultra is much higher given it uses a bleeding edge process and several times more transistors than an i9 12900K and RTX 3090Ti combined!

 

[Ailuros]

I assume the BoM for the M1 Ultra is much higher given it uses a bleeding edge process and several times more transistors than an i9 12900K and RTX 3090Ti combined!

While probably true, I wouldn't suggest that Apple doesn't make a dime profit from any M1 Ultra powered devices either

 

[PSman1700]

While probably true, I wouldn't suggest that Apple doesn't make a dime profit from any M1 Ultra powered devices either

Not a good outlook if they would try to compete in the general pc market.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Not a good outlook if they would try to compete in the general pc market.

They don't, that should be evident from the products they do chose to design and sell. Apple absolutely could make a cheap no frills box, and they did that for a while with the MacMini, but they pivoted that product into a different price tier.

For twenty years, Apple has been living in high-margin, low-volume computer market and making more profit on computers (ignoring iDevices) than most other PC vendors so why would they they chase the low-margin, high-volume market? It's a fuck ton more work for very little gain.

Are you really trying to give business advice to one of the most profitable companies in the world?

 

[PSman1700]

They don't, that should be evident from the products they do chose to design and sell. Apple absolutely could make a cheap no frills box, and they did that for a while with the MacMini, but they pivoted that product into a different price tier.

For twenty years, Apple has been living in high-margin, low-volume computer market and making more profit on computers (ignoring iDevices) than most other PC vendors so why would they they chase the low-margin, high-volume market? It's a fuck ton more work for very little gain.

Are you really trying to give business advice to one of the most profitable companies in the world?

Intel/NV/AMD are also one of the largest most profitable companies in the world. I do not think Apple is doing its things wrong in their businuess, neither do the other vendors.

 

[techuse]

I assume the BoM for the M1 Ultra is much higher given it uses a bleeding edge process and several times more transistors than an i9 12900K and RTX 3090Ti combined!

We dont know how many of those transistors would be required for the CPU in isolation. Also what is the transistor count for a 12900k?

 

[iroboto]

They don't, that should be evident from the products they do chose to design and sell. Apple absolutely could make a cheap no frills box, and they did that for a while with the MacMini, but they pivoted that product into a different price tier.

For twenty years, Apple has been living in high-margin, low-volume computer market and making more profit on computers (ignoring iDevices) than most other PC vendors so why would they they chase the low-margin, high-volume market? It's a fuck ton more work for very little gain.

Are you really trying to give business advice to one of the most profitable companies in the world?

Agreed: Low margin high volume would make Apple flop. No margin for recession, and no longer catering to the customer base who wants to pay the high prices for a uniquely different product.

 

[iroboto]

And not at that performance either. Its not like others are lagging behind in that area.

I would disagree with this; the most important factor for a mobile device is how mobile it is. Battery life and weight are absolutely critical criteria there is in these particular areas; I don’t want to be feeling like I’m carrying a ton on my back or need to be tethered to the wall to use my device. The assumption with laptops is that we travel with them.

At the end of the day, if I can use the laptop on an airplane arrive at a client site and go into a long board meeting without needing to plug in while you are pitching, that to me is critically better than needing to arrive early and competing for plugs.

 

[pjbliverpool]

They don't, that should be evident from the products they do chose to design and sell. Apple absolutely could make a cheap no frills box, and they did that for a while with the MacMini, but they pivoted that product into a different price tier.

For twenty years, Apple has been living in high-margin, low-volume computer market and making more profit on computers (ignoring iDevices) than most other PC vendors so why would they they chase the low-margin, high-volume market? It's a fuck ton more work for very little gain.

Are you really trying to give business advice to one of the most profitable companies in the world?

Someone said earlier in the thread that Apple would compete well in the PC market. The context of that statement was earlier comparisons to the 12900k. I think that was the basis of @PSman1700 statement.

At lower power, Apple is clearly well ahead. In raw unconstrained performance, it trails a little as far as we can see. In cost/performance, it would probably trail a fair bit with it's current products.

 

[Ailuros]

The higher efficiency/battery lifetime is what I am as a consumer after for future low end laptops. Right now if I buy a low end laptop with any Intel or AMD SoC, I get what I pay for when it comes to performance; the question remains why do I have to tolerate as low battery life at the same time because Intel/AMD and the likes can't be bothered to adjust their hw accordingly or because sophisticated DVFS hasn't been "invented" yet there? If QCOM step by step starts moving upwards in performance with its SoCs and also makes a bolder move to also address the server market eventually, competitive pressure will be mostly in the power efficiency direction IMHO.

 

[techuse]

Someone said earlier in the thread that Apple would compete well in the PC market. The context of that statement was earlier comparisons to the 12900k. I think that was the basis of @PSman1700 statement.

At lower power, Apple is clearly well ahead. In raw unconstrained performance, it trails a little as far as we can see. In cost/performance, it would probably trail a fair bit with it's current products.

12900k is 10~% faster while consuming 300+% more power.

 

[PSman1700]

Seeing the replies, it doesnt seem Apple will ever compete or even try to. Their just not intrested in it and probably not up to it either.

 

[Subtlesnake]

Seeing the replies, it doesnt seem Apple will ever compete or even try to. Their just not intrested in it and probably not up to it either.

For the form factors they are targeting, they are competing fine.

 

[Ailuros]

Apple is shoveling crap loads of profits for years now, why should they break a successful business model? It's not a secret either that they research internally for different other markets from time to time, which might lead to something or not. If it should lead to anything it'll still be another high margin/low volume product.

 

[Diamond.G]

We dont know how many of those transistors would be required for the CPU in isolation. Also what is the transistor count for a 12900k?

Supposedly 12.5 billion. But I am unsure where they got the number from as techpowerup says it is unknown on their site. According to Wikipedia GA102 has 28 billion transistors.