The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Apple to announce ARM chips for all Macs
Old 1st July 2020
  #541
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
First reports of the the Apple Developer Transition Kit have started leaking out. It is running an A12z ARM 4 core chip - the same used in a 2 year old iPad Pro. Geekbench'ing around 850 for single core, and just shy of 3000 for multicore performance running under emulation with Rosetta 2. That's somewhere around single core performance of a 2013 Trashcan running a 10 core 3Ghz CPU, and an i5 3ghz quad 2014 iMac for multicore performance.

Not entirely relevant, as the A12z probably won't feature in any new Mac. It has become open season on Microsoft though. Apparently the DTK setup with a two year old Apple ARM chip in it is running Windows 10 under emulation with far better performance than Microsoft's current Surface X tablets are running it natively.
The Apple A12 is is running Geekbench, not Windows 10.

Also, the scores are pretty close (764 vs 833, according to reports).

Since this was brought up for the A12z: The A12z was released in March of this year, in the current 2020 iPad Pro. The Microsoft SQ1 was released in October 2019. Both have predecessor processors that they are based on. Saying either one of them is "2 years old" is not being honest.

Folks also need to understand Arm cores. Most, including Apple's, split the cores between performance and efficiency cores. They are not like the cores folks are used to from the Intel/AMD world. Both the Microsoft SQ1 and the Apple A12z are 8 core chips, but four of those cores are efficiency and four are performance (which is why Rosetta was only using four of them). It's not comparing 8 cores to 4 cores. It's comparing 4 to 4.

If you want to understand the Arm big.LITTLE architecture, this is a reasonable primer:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_big.LITTLE

Quote:
ARM big.LITTLE is a heterogeneous computing architecture developed by ARM Holdings, coupling relatively battery-saving and slower processor cores (LITTLE) with relatively more powerful and power-hungry ones (big). Typically, only one "side" or the other will be active at once, but all cores have access to the same memory regions, so workloads can be swapped between Big and Little cores on the fly. The intention is to create a multi-core processor that can adjust better to dynamic computing needs and use less power than clock scaling alone. ARM's marketing material promises up to a 75% savings in power usage for some activities. Most commonly, ARM big.LITTLE architectures are used to create a multi-processor system-on-chip (MPSoC).
In any case, props to Apple on Rosetta and their chip design. Looks like it all performs really well!

Pete
Old 1st July 2020
  #542
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychlist1972 View Post
Since this was brought up for the A12z: The A12z was released in March of this year, in the current 2020 iPad Pro. The Microsoft SQ1 was released in October 2019. Both have predecessor processors that they are based on. Saying either one of them is "2 years old" is not being honest.


Sure, if you want to split hairs. The devil is in the details though, really. Apple is being criticised for how lacklustre an improvement the new iPad Pro is over the previous model. Instead of an A13 or new A14 variant, it is using nothing more than an A12x with one additional GPU Core enabled (8 vs 7). The Geekbench scores are essentially identical between the two. 1118 vs 1116 for single core, 4626 vs 4606 for multicore.

The bigger elephant in the room, if this test is anything to go by, is that the SQ1's performance cores are clocked 0.51gHz higher than the A12z's, yet the A12z still beat it even running under emulation.
Old 1st July 2020
  #543
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Style Guide View Post
?... I don't think there is a single Windows desktop that comes with built in Thunderbolt ports. .... Because Thunderbolt (compared to USB or PCIe cards) is the way to go for audio, IMO.
I am running an ASRock X570 Creator motherboard. It has two native Thunderbolt ports in the I/O panel.

The X570 Aqua is equivalent but is a water-cooled expensive limited edition, and the single-port X570 Phantom Gaming ITX/TB3 has some kind of special blessing from Intel for its Thunderbolt implementation.
Old 1st July 2020
  #544
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
First reports of the the Apple Developer Transition Kit have started leaking out. It is running an A12z ARM 4 core chip - the same used in a 2 year old iPad Pro. Geekbench'ing around 850 for single core, and just shy of 3000 for multicore performance running under emulation with Rosetta 2. That's somewhere around single core performance of a 2013 Trashcan running a 10 core 3Ghz CPU, and an i5 3ghz quad 2014 iMac for multicore performance.

Not entirely relevant, as the A12z probably won't feature in any new Mac. It has become open season on Microsoft though. Apparently the DTK setup with a two year old Apple ARM chip in it is running Windows 10 under emulation with far better performance than Microsoft's current Surface X tablets are running it natively.
Well as someone that runs a 2013 Trashcan I find that pretty impressive, I really love my Trashcan, so if that is the performance running Rosetta 2 then we can expect better than that with native software, and then by the time they release a higher end mac the performance will be improved a lot I'm sure, so I don't see why anyone is concerned at all, I think it's going to be a positive, The only question I have is if it can deliver low latency.
Old 1st July 2020
  #545
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
The bigger elephant in the room, if this test is anything to go by, is that the SQ1's performance cores are clocked 0.51gHz higher than the A12z's, yet the A12z still beat it even running under emulation.
Who cares about the performance of the SQ1...
Much more interesting is the fact that this iPad SoC, build for low power, running fanless and underclocked, can match an Intel i5 when executing x86 code via Rosetta 2.
Considering the native iOS Benchmark of the A12z that’s only a 25% performance hit for Rosetta 2.
That is really impressive and was not to be expected.
We could end up with an Apple Desktop SoC outperforming Intel CPUs when running x86 code...
Old 1st July 2020
  #546
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LDStudios View Post
Apparently the DTK setup with a two year old Apple ARM chip in it is running Windows 10 under emulation with far better performance than Microsoft's current Surface X tablets are running it natively.
Link ?
Old 1st July 2020
  #547
Lives for gear
 
kludgeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by signalpudding View Post
Sure but Ampex isn't adding new features anymore and if they did you'd expect to have to pay for it just like these third parties expect people to pay. And third parties can and do still write new software for old operating systems. People are still publishing games written in Basic for Commodore systems. What I am pointing to is the expectation of free upgrades many years down the line. Of course things like software security and bugs in the initial software are a concern and I believe it is reasonable to expect companies writing software to supply these kinds of updates for free for a period of time. That's different than expecting a company to provide you a free software update 5-10 years down the line so you can run a piece of software that wasn't even conceived until 5-10 years after the system you want to run it was released. My wife has a car from 2011 and I'd like to run Android Auto on it to listen to music and show navigation but Android Auto didn't exist then. Should I be mad that Subaru doesn't support this on the car and expect a free update for it?
That's a lot of it... I don't -want- a software update, I just want the existing system to keep operating as it has been. I know a lot of people who froze their systems at Pro Tools 9, and they aren't going to go any farther. What they need is to be able to maintain that hardware and software.

Most of the folks who are caught in the constant upgrade trap are doing so because they have to interoperate with customers that have newer versions of the software. In great part this is because there is no standard interchange format. It used to be you could take a 2" tape to any larger studio in the world and work on it. Now we have to convert everything to BWAV and back because our working file format is not the same as our interchange file format.
--scott
Old 1st July 2020
  #548
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by kludgeaudio View Post
"Fixes" like randomizing clock timing and randomizing cache lookups.

Either you give up deterministic timing, or you give up performance. Which do you want?

As an audio guy, I'm perfectly happy to give up performance for determinism but most general appliance computer users will feel quite the opposite.
--scott
Dropping cache that is not supposed to be used is far better than scrap a hole computer.
Old 1st July 2020
  #549
Lives for gear
 
Lady Gaia's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
Link ?
It's a misunderstanding of the article. Psychlist is quite correct that the comparison is between the Geekbench benchmark running natively on arm64 on the Surface Pro X, and the same benchmark being translated by Rosetta from x86-64 to run on the A12Z.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychlist1972 View Post
Since this was brought up for the A12z: The A12z was released in March of this year, in the current 2020 iPad Pro. The Microsoft SQ1 was released in October 2019. Both have predecessor processors that they are based on. Saying either one of them is "2 years old" is not being honest.
The A12Z CPU is indeed unchanged from the A12X that was launched in October 2018. I can only assume that the resources that normally go into specializing the latest silicon for iPad have been focused on the A14 derivatives that will power Macs toward the end of the year.

Quote:
If you want to understand the Arm big.LITTLE architecture, this is a reasonable primer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_big.LITTLE
Apple's design was certainly inspired by the big.LITTLE architecture work, but it's not the same. In the A12 family both the efficiency and performance cores can be active simultaneously, giving the operating system the freedom to schedule tasks on whatever cores suit their priority needs.
Old 1st July 2020
  #550
Lives for gear
 

With technology, a lot of times the last of the previous generation is better than the first of the new generation. If you get a powerful Mac with well-established today's technology, that should last you for years. During that time, Apple, developers and peripherals suppliers will have worked out the rough patches with the new technology.

Multi-track audio is quite demanding on a computer, and requires careful coordination of software and hardware. Let office workers, general consumers, and photoshop artists be the first out of the gate with the new technology. If you need some extra DSP during the transition period, drop $1000 on a UAD satellite. You should be fine.

Last edited by gearstudent; 1st July 2020 at 07:40 PM..
Old 1st July 2020
  #551
Lives for gear
 
kludgeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by machinesworking View Post
I don't for a minute think that it will be easy for developers. We all have weird areas we balk in. Native Instruments come to mind, OS 9 to OS X was hard on them, I had Komplete Care™ their subscription model they tried for one year, when they could not meet their own deadlines for Intel ready they ended up having to extend bonuses to all of us. Codewarrior was used instead of getting Apples overt hints to switch to Xcode etc. I don't think they will be as caught this time, but you can bet some critical company or another will be. I use dozens of manufacturers plug ins and expect a long wait from a few.
This is VERY different than the move from OS 9 to OS X. The move to OS 9 blew away a huge number of boneheaded programming tricks and people who had been doing crazy things to improve performance suddenly were out in a lurch discovering that they can't just disable all the interrupts and take over the CPU for a moment anymore. I have a little sympathy for those people (even though a lot of their tricks didn't behave so well with other code running on the same machine).

If it works on one architecture under OS X, it's not going to be that much of a change to another architecture. It IS possible to do really stupid programming tricks that will make it harder, but I have no sympathy for people who make assumptions that everything is going to be x86-like inside. You have to work really hard to screw your code up enough to make this port difficult. The people who have I have zero sympathy for.

I am sure that some people will manage it. No matter how easy and fast the hardware guys can make things, the software guys can make them clumsy and slow.
--scott
Old 1st July 2020
  #552
Lives for gear
 
kludgeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anon View Post
Well as someone that runs a 2013 Trashcan I find that pretty impressive...
It took me a moment to realize you were talking about an Apple desktop and not a Tascam recorder.
--scott
Old 1st July 2020
  #553
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Gaia View Post
It's a misunderstanding of the article. Psychlist is quite correct that the comparison is between the Geekbench benchmark running natively on arm64 on the Surface Pro X, and the same benchmark being translated by Rosetta from x86-64 to run on the A12Z.
Cool, thanks for the clarification.

Personally I don't hold much weight or sway in any of the synthetic benchmarks, as anything we can use to correlate how it translates to DAW performance. I assign them to the territory for those that practice one arm recitals, and no I am not directing that at you :-)

As I noted in a previous post, we need to wait for the rubber to hit the road before we can get some quantifiable comparative performance that is application specific for our community.

Looking forward to some peer tested qualified and quantifiable data, till then, it'll be fun watching the arm chair experts whipping themselves into a froth :-)

Quote:
Apple's design was certainly inspired by the big.LITTLE architecture work, but it's not the same. In the A12 family both the efficiency and performance cores can be active simultaneously, giving the operating system the freedom to schedule tasks on whatever cores suit their priority needs.
That in itself is interesting, but regards DAW usage where processing demands would be focused on the performance cores, where do the efficiency cores come into play or bring an advantage ?
Old 1st July 2020
  #554
Gear Head
 

If your top priority right now was a mac desktop running quietly without the fan turning on, would you go with the newly-rumored 2020 iMac with the 10th-gen Core i9 Comet Lake-S chip or would you go with the (expensive!) iMac Pro? My 2015 iMac has served me well but that fan is starting to come on more often so I think it is time to replace it. I am concerned with how hot the new Intel chips will run in the 2020 iMac. Do the iMac Pros run quiet? I was imagining the 3.0 GHz 10-core was the best option there.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #555
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post

1. The transition will be smooth for the most part. I've done it a few times in the past already without any major hassles.
Past Apple transitions have always been to faster CPUs with faster RAM, faster hard-disks, faster I/O so any inefficient code issues would have been largely masked. Their only saving grace here is high end Apples are on server class IA64 CPUs so single core performance isn't that great to begin with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post
2. It will be easy for any developers to port their software from Intel to Arm. Some developers already have iOS versions of their software, so developers have been doing this for many years already. Current iOS apps will be compatible with the new architecture.
Easy? Really? Tell that to Amazon who have spent billions on AWD graviton (their Arm platform) and still have huge issues with bugs and crashes running Arm builds of various generic micro-services.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post
3. Apple Silicon will eventually surpass the most powerful Intel chips and will be killer for doing Audio.
Just like that - magic! Intel and AMD must be lousy engineers eh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post
4. I enjoy using Logic today on my current hardware and I will still enjoy using it in a few years time from now on future hardware.
You hope. What percentage of Apple's user base are professional DAW users? 0.1%? 0.2%? If there are issues I doubt if Apple will break a sweat fixing it for a piddly little user base.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #556
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by bace View Post
At least some of this types of problem can be changed with fixes in the microcode, But microcode is a CISC thing.
No it's not - commercial IBM Power systems have microcode in abundance. It's got nothing to do with CISC vs RISC. Arm may or may not have microcode but that has nothing to do with the type of CPU architecture - it's an implementation thing. And you do realise of course that IA64 is RISC core executing a x86/A64 decoder - it's been that way for over a decade - taking a leaf out of the IBM mainframe book. So "intel" isn't really CISC in the traditional sense.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #557
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scragend View Post
Easy? Really? Tell that to Amazon who have spent billions on AWD graviton (their Arm platform) and still have huge issues with bugs and crashes running Arm builds of various generic micro-services.
What Amazon is capable of or not capable of is not a concern of mine as I don't use any of their devices. It's also not any indicator of what Apple is capable of. I also remember Amazon having some ridiculous 3d phone a while back that flopped. Amazon is not Apple and Apple is not Amazon. I don't look to Amazon as any leader in making computer devices. When I need to order some instant noodles and have it delivered quickly, I rely on Amazon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scragend View Post
Just like that - magic! Intel and AMD must be lousy engineers eh?
Apple is taking a different approach than Intel and AMD. RISC VS CISC.

Results also speak for themselves. I have seen the rate of progression on Apple's own chips VS the rate of the progression on Intel's chips these past years. Apple has been progressing at a far more rapid rate, while Intel has run into multiple issues and problems with being able to deliver what they promised.

But we shall see what happens in the future. I think that Apple can definitely give them a run for their money. If others disagree, then fine, we'll see who turns out being correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scragend View Post
You hope. What percentage of Apple's user base are professional DAW users? 0.1%? 0.2%? If there are issues I doubt if Apple will break a sweat fixing it for a piddly little user base.
No, I don't hope, because I know for a fact that I will still enjoy using Logic in the future no matter what will happen, because I never get rid of any of my systems.

Apple recently released a huge, massive, biggest in history update to Logic, so I'm not worried about Apple abandoning or not caring about it anytime soon. For years and years, some people have constantly been saying that Apple is abandoning pros, they will never release a new Mac Pro etc., and all of those claims are being shown to be completely made up nonsense and false garbage, one after another.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #558
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post
What Amazon is capable of or not capable of is not a concern of mine as I don't use any of their devices. It's also not any indicator of what Apple is capable of. I also remember Amazon having some ridiculous 3d phone a while back that flopped. Amazon is not Apple and Apple is not Amazon. I don't look to Amazon as any leader in making computer devices. When I need to order some instant noodles and have it delivered quickly, I rely on Amazon.
Amazon easily outspend Apple on hardware R&D and have some of the best engineers in the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post


Apple is taking a different approach than Intel and AMD. RISC VS CISC.
Not as different as you think, AMD and Intel are essentially RISC cores running a CISC x86/A64 decoders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post
Results also speak for themselves. I have seen the rate of progression on Apple's own chips VS the rate of the progression on Intel's chips these past years. Apple has been progressing at a far more rapid rate, while Intel has run into multiple issues and problems with being able to deliver what they promised.

But we shall see what happens in the future. I think that Apple can definitely give them a run for their money. If others disagree, then fine, we'll see who turns out being correct.
Arm was originally designed to be a low-power-state processor and the applications for it have leant in that direction - the fairly recent development to create server and desktop Arms has given an impression of rapid development - they will soon hit the same thermal/energy walls everyone else has hit. The hardest thing in the IT world is actually compiler design and efficiency - strangely that task becomes more difficult with simpler instruction sets as the compiler has to "work harder" to produce good threadsafe code.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #559
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scragend View Post
Amazon easily outspend Apple on hardware R&D and have some of the best engineers in the world.
According to this which I found, it's mostly spent on AWS, Alexa and Amazon Go.

According to Recode, Amazon’s spending has gone to boost its cloud computing business Amazon Web Services (AWS) as well as to beef up Alexa, its voice-activated digital assistant, and to support futuristic projects like its Amazon Go cashierless store, which it rolled out earlier this year. (See also: Amazon Web Services at $60B In Five Years: Analyst.)

https://www.investopedia.com/news/am...record-recode/

Besides Kindle and other cheaply priced tablets made for poor people, what hardware do they really have?

I don't see myself doing any music on Amazon hardware either today or in the future, but if other people have that dream, then they are allowed to have it.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #560
Lives for gear
 
Kronos147's Avatar
I ordered an iMac 27" 3.6 GHz 8 core i9 Monday. For Pro Tools HDX (2020.5). Ordered the Sonnet chassis for the Pro Tools card, and the adapters to plug into my converters.

I think I'll be set for 5-10 years.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #561
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post
What Amazon is capable of or not capable of is not a concern of mine as I don't use any of their devices. It's also not any indicator of what Apple is capable of. I also remember Amazon having some ridiculous 3d phone a while back that flopped. Amazon is not Apple and Apple is not Amazon. I don't look to Amazon as any leader in making computer devices. When I need to order some instant noodles and have it delivered quickly, I rely on Amazon.
I don't want to alarm you but have you heard of Amazon Web Services? Netflix, Twitch, Facebook, BBC, Adobe, Twitter, all running on Amazon servers. Plus Amazon.com itself. 34% of all cloud services are supplied by Amazon. They do a little bit more than just delivering your instant noodles.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #562
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by signalpudding View Post
I don't want to alarm you but have you heard of Amazon Web Services? Netflix, Twitch, Facebook, BBC, Adobe, Twitter, all running on Amazon servers. Plus Amazon.com itself. 34% of all cloud services are hosted by Amazon. They do a little bit more than just delivering your instant noodles.
I am very aware of AWS and yes, it is widely used. Even Apple uses it for certain things.

That is not consumer hardware though, which is what my comments were mostly about.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #563
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post
Besides Kindle and other cheaply priced tablets made for poor people, what hardware do they really have?
You've got to be kidding with the "made for poor people" line, right?

And what type of hardware do they have? They have all of the hardware that runs AWS. They're not just sticking a bunch of Dells in there.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #564
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by signalpudding View Post
You've got to be kidding with the "made for poor people" line, right?

And what type of hardware do they have? They have all of the hardware that runs AWS. They're not just sticking a bunch of Dells in there.
No, I wasn't joking.

I can't see any other reason for anybody to be buying tablets for 50 bucks or around that range.

But to each his own I suppose.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #565
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post
I am very aware of AWS and yes, it is widely used. Even Apple uses it for certain things.

That is not consumer hardware though, which is what my comments were mostly about.
No, your comments were about how Amazon not having much luck coding for Arm processors relates to Apple's future attempts at doing the same. You said Amazon have no hardware experience and thus their efforts weren't worth considering. Except they do have hardware experience, and that's what was being pointed out.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #566
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by signalpudding View Post
No, your comments were about how Amazon not having much luck coding for Arm processors relates to Apple's future attempts at doing the same. You said Amazon have no hardware experience and thus their efforts weren't worth considering. Except they do have hardware experience, and that's what was being pointed out.
They have experience with AWS, their cloud stuff, I do not deny that, but they don't have much hardware experience in making consumer devices.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #567
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by SBX-80 View Post
They have experience with AWS, their cloud stuff, I do not deny that, but they don't have much hardware experience in making consumer devices.
We are talking about the complexity of running existing code flawlessly on Arm, AWS have their own Arm servers (to compete with their existing IA64 estate) - they've spent more money in this area than Apple - for the same reason - they don't like chucking billions of dollars at Intel and AMD. Deployment of microservices originally compiled to IA64 onto Arm has been a nightmare - the very thing you seem to think is simple. This is why they charge peanuts for you as a customer to deploy to Graviton - because you will spend twice as long trying to get your code working.

You also seem to conveniently forget that an Apple Mac is largely a PC with hundreds of thousands of people working globally on the platform to improve it - once Apple are 100% on their own hardware they've got to do all the heavy lifting themselves. Apple still rely on Samsung heavily for certain things as Apple aren't the hardware demi-gods you seem to think they are.

I still think Arm will be a success for Apple because most of their power users care about lots of cores chugging through defined compartmentalised processes that can be massively multithreaded:- rendering, CAD, video editing etc. DAW real-time audio is an entirely different kettle of fish in processing terms due to the lack of thread-safety within the processing - ie contention for resources. This is a big problem for one company to crack AND catch up with an already mature platform with billions of hours worth of optimisation poured into it.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #568
Lives for gear
 
Lady Gaia's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
Personally I don't hold much weight or sway in any of the synthetic benchmarks, as anything we can use to correlate how it translates to DAW performance.
These aren't just micro-benchmarks so they're a better mix than some synthetic tests. The compiler tests, for example, exercise a pretty hefty code base. I'll grant that DAW performance is definitely a different beast, and I am also quite curious how it does. Given that they made a point of showing off both Logic and Final Cut for Apple Silicon, I expect they'll fare quite well in benchmarks in whatever segment they decide to roll out hardware for.

I'm very curious what that will prove to be. The low end of the market with a new Mac Mini and a 12" MacBook successor? The midrange with a MacBook Pro and an iMac? Some mix of these two? The one thing I wouldn't expect is to see anything replace the Mac Pro or iMac Pro in the short term.

Quote:
That in itself is interesting, but regards DAW usage where processing demands would be focused on the performance cores, where do the efficiency cores come into play or bring an advantage ?
The main benefit is that all the low-priority background work an operating system does is going to wind up on efficiency cores so your urgent real-time tasks don't wind up competing for time on the performance cores, and your L1 caches aren't getting thrashed by unrelated work. It also means the system runs that much cooler when it's not under load, which I'll be thankful of both for lap usage and fan noise.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #569
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scragend View Post
We are talking about the complexity of running existing code flawlessly on Arm, AWS have their own Arm servers (to compete with their existing IA64 estate) - they've spent more money in this area than Apple - for the same reason - they don't like chucking billions of dollars at Intel and AMD. Deployment of microservices originally compiled to IA64 onto Arm has been a nightmare - the very thing you seem to think is simple. This is why they charge peanuts for you as a customer to deploy to Graviton - because you will spend twice as long trying to get your code working.

You also seem to conveniently forget that an Apple Mac is largely a PC with hundreds of thousands of people working globally on the platform to improve it - once Apple are 100% on their own hardware they've got to do all the heavy lifting themselves. Apple still rely on Samsung heavily for certain things as Apple aren't the hardware demi-gods you seem to think they are.

I still think Arm will be a success for Apple because most of their power users care about lots of cores chugging through defined compartmentalised processes that can be massively multithreaded:- rendering, CAD, video editing etc. DAW real-time audio is an entirely different kettle of fish in processing terms due to the lack of thread-safety within the processing - ie contention for resources. This is a big problem for one company to crack AND catch up with an already mature platform with billions of hours worth of optimisation poured into it.
Haven't they already been doing the heavy lifting for many years now with iOS?

What about all of the countless apps that exist on iOS that have been ported over from Intel x64? It doesn't seem like that has been any huge issue.

I don't know much about Amazon cloud services or what sort of issues they've been having, but I'm still not sure how that is comparable to Apple and their transition, because while both might be using arm chips, they each have their own custom chips, so is it directly comparable?

What I do know is that Apple's arm chips smokes the generic arm chips used in other tablets and phones.
Old 2nd July 2020
  #570
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Gaia View Post
I'm very curious what that will prove to be. The low end of the market with a new Mac Mini and a 12" MacBook successor? The midrange with a MacBook Pro and an iMac? Some mix of these two? The one thing I wouldn't expect is to see anything replace the Mac Pro or iMac Pro in the short term.
The MacBook Pro segment has some decent horsepower with the 10 Series i7/i9, and the iMac segment with the socket 1151 9 Series and soon to be 1200 10 Series isn't going to be an easy nut to crack. I am talking purely performance wise, not power / thermals.

iMac Pro/Mac Pro is another level again.

The desktop platforms on the Windows side are very easily managed regards thermals/noise levels, so they won't be only competing with existing Apple hardware alone.

Quote:
The main benefit is that all the low-priority background work an operating system does is going to wind up on efficiency cores so your urgent real-time tasks don't wind up competing for time on the performance cores, and your L1 caches aren't getting thrashed by unrelated work.
Sounds tangible. The quantifiable level of that benefit still remains to be seen in our given application. Also, it needs to be noted that the number of cores to compete with the current will need to be comparatively higher when only 1/2 are performance orientated.

Quote:
It also means the system runs that much cooler when it's not under load, which I'll be thankful of both for lap usage and fan noise.
Sure, but even on current laptop designs on both sides of the fence, noise/temps at idle are not overly a problem. Not dismissing the advantage the ARM have in that department of course, but idle/low resource usage isn't really going to be a focus here I suspect.
📝 Reply
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump