• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Apple-exclusive Intel Core i9-10910 Rears its Head

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
42,851 (8.03/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
Intel is readying an Apple-exclusive Core i9-10910 desktop processor which will feature in an upcoming, unannounced iMac / iMac Pro product, according to a spot by _rogame. The i9-10910 sits between the i9-10900 and the unlocked i9-10900K that's available in the retail market. It has an interesting set of clock speeds. Its nominal clock speeds is significantly higher than the i9-10900, at 3.60 GHz, compared to 2.90 GHz of the i9-10900; however, its max Turbo Boost frequency is lower, at 4.70 GHz, according to Tom's Hardware, compared to 5.00 GHz on the i9-10900. Perhaps 4.70 GHz is the all-core TVB max frequency, a 100 MHz increase over the 4.60 GHz of the i9-10900. Also, its TDP is rated at 95 W (for a locked chip), higher than the 65 W of the i9-10900, but lower than the 125 W of the i9-10900K.

The i9-10910 is a 10-core/20-thread processor, just like the i9-10900, and features 20 MB of shared L3 cache, along with a Gen 9.5 UHD 630 integrated graphics. In related news, the unreleased iMac that was used in this Geekbench run also sports a Radeon RX 5300 discrete graphics solution, featuring 20 RDNA compute units (compared to 24 on the Radeon Pro 5500M), amounting to 1,280 stream processors; up to 1.65 GHz engine clocks, and 4 GB of an unknown memory type. It will be interesting to see if the i9-10910 remains Apple-exclusive after the Ryzen 9 3900XT launches next week.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Dec 10, 2015
Messages
545 (0.23/day)
Location
Here
System Name Skypas
Processor Intel Core i7-6700
Motherboard Asus H170 Pro Gaming
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper 212X Turbo
Memory Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1060 Gaming X 6GB
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 120GB + WD Blue 1TB
Display(s) LG 22EA63V
Case Corsair Carbide 400Q
Power Supply Seasonic SS-460FL2 w/ Deepcool XFan 120
Mouse Logitech B100
Keyboard Corsair Vengeance K70
Software Windows 10 Pro (to be replaced by 2025)
Most intriguing, I'm curious if this is Apple's x86 swan song
 
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
3,834 (0.79/day)
System Name Cyberline
Processor Intel Core i7 2600k -> 12600k
Motherboard Asus P8P67 LE Rev 3.0 -> Gigabyte Z690 Auros Elite DDR4
Cooling Tuniq Tower 120 -> Custom Watercoolingloop
Memory Corsair (4x2) 8gb 1600mhz -> Crucial (8x2) 16gb 3600mhz
Video Card(s) AMD RX480 -> ... nope still the same :'(
Storage Samsung 750 Evo 250gb SSD + WD 1tb x 2 + WD 2tb -> 2tb MVMe SSD
Display(s) Philips 32inch LPF5605H (television) -> Dell S3220DGF
Case antec 600 -> Thermaltake Tenor HTCP case
Audio Device(s) Focusrite 2i4 (USB)
Power Supply Seasonic 620watt 80+ Platinum
Mouse Elecom EX-G
Keyboard Rapoo V700
Software Windows 10 Pro 64bit
imagine making a special processor for your bae only to be dumped soon thereafter :(
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
1,240 (1.59/day)
imagine making a special processor for your bae only to be dumped soon thereafter :(

There is nothing special about this processor, unlike the custom Ice Lake processors that Intel supplies only to Apple. This is basically a same i9 10900 with a base clockspeed bump, which can easily be done since there are no hardware difference.

In any case, whether they are getting dump soon, Intel is getting paid for the products they supply to Apple. While the switch from Intel to ARM is starting this year, it may take another couple of years for them to be able to fully move away from Intel, especially when you are looking at high end chips, where ARM processors are still not able to keep up at this point.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
18,850 (5.82/day)
Location
USA
While the switch from Intel to ARM is starting this year, it may take another couple of years for them to be able to fully move away from Intel, especially when you are looking at high end chips, where ARM processors are still not able to keep up at this point.
That's a good point. However, Apple could move very quickly on this.
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
2,584 (0.89/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900X ||| Intel Core i7-3930K
Motherboard ASUS ProArt B550-CREATOR ||| Asus P9X79 WS
Cooling Noctua NH-U14S ||| Be Quiet Pure Rock
Memory Crucial 2 x 16 GB 3200 MHz ||| Corsair 8 x 8 GB 1600 MHz
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1060 3GB ||| MSI GTX 680 4GB
Storage Samsung 970 PRO 512 GB + 1 TB ||| Intel 545s 512 GB + 256 GB
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG278QR 27" ||| Eizo EV2416W 24"
Case Fractal Design Define 7 XL x 2
Audio Device(s) Cambridge Audio DacMagic Plus
Power Supply Seasonic Focus PX-850 x 2
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard CM Storm QuickFire XT
Software Ubuntu
imagine making a special processor for your bae only to be dumped soon thereafter :(
It's a different bin, not a special die.

In any case, whether they are getting dump soon, Intel is getting paid for the products they supply to Apple. While the switch from Intel to ARM is starting this year, it may take another couple of years for them to be able to fully move away from Intel, especially when you are looking at high end chips, where ARM processors are still not able to keep up at this point.
And then a few of years of support/spare parts.

ARM will not be able to compete with x86 in generic performance for "normal" desktops or high-end desktops. Just like their mobile products, they will rely heavily on ASIC acceleration to do the heavy lifting. Power users using Macs have been slowly disappearing for years, but after this only the die hard fans will remain. Macs have gone from pricey professional computers to being underpowered expensive fashion choices.
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
6,245 (3.39/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
There is nothing special about this processor, unlike the custom Ice Lake processors that Intel supplies only to Apple. This is basically a same i9 10900 with a base clockspeed bump, which can easily be done since there are no hardware difference.

In any case, whether they are getting dump soon, Intel is getting paid for the products they supply to Apple. While the switch from Intel to ARM is starting this year, it may take another couple of years for them to be able to fully move away from Intel, especially when you are looking at high end chips, where ARM processors are still not able to keep up at this point.
Nothing particularly special about those Ice Lake chips either - just different bins of the same silicon. Back when Apple was the only one using Iris Pro/Plus chips there was an actual silicon difference, but no more.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2019
Messages
53 (0.05/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 3600
Motherboard MSI B450M Mortar MAX
Cooling AMD Wraith Prism
Memory 2x8GB 3200MHz CL16
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon RX580 GTS XXX 8GB
Storage Samsung Evo 500GB + 3x WD Green 1TB
Display(s) LG 29UM59-P
Case CoolerMaster NR400
Audio Device(s) ATH-M40FS + SMSL SD-793 II DAC
Power Supply Antec NewPower TP-650w 80%+
Mouse Logitech G500
Keyboard Krom Kernel TKL
Software Win10 x64
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
1,113 (0.35/day)
System Name boomer--->zoomer not your typical millenial build
Processor i5-760 @ 3.8ghz + turbo ~goes wayyyyyyyyy fast cuz turboooooz~
Motherboard P55-GD80 ~best motherboard ever designed~
Cooling NH-D15 ~double stack thot twerk all day~
Memory 16GB Crucial Ballistix LP ~memory gone AWOL~
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 970 ~*~GOLDEN EDITION~*~ RAWRRRRRR
Storage 500GB Samsung 850 Evo (OS X, *nix), 128GB Samsung 840 Pro (W10 Pro), 1TB SpinPoint F3 ~best in class
Display(s) ASUS VW246H ~best 24" you've seen *FULL HD* *1O80PP* *SLAPS*~
Case FT02-W ~the W stands for white but it's brushed aluminum except for the disgusting ODD bays; *cries*
Audio Device(s) A LOT
Power Supply 850W EVGA SuperNova G2 ~hot fire like champagne~
Mouse CM Spawn ~cmcz R c00l seth mcfarlane darawss~
Keyboard CM QF Rapid - Browns ~fastrrr kees for fstr teens~
Software integrated into the chassis
Benchmark Scores 9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
872 (0.17/day)
Location
Copenhagen, Denmark
System Name Ryzen/Laptop/htpc
Processor R9 3900X/i7 6700HQ/i7 2600
Motherboard AsRock X470 Taichi/Acer/ Gigabyte H77M
Cooling Corsair H115i pro with 2 Noctua NF-A14 chromax/OEM/Noctua NH-L12i
Memory G.Skill Trident Z 32GB @3200/16GB DDR4 2666 HyperX impact/24GB
Video Card(s) TUL Red Dragon Vega 56/Intel HD 530 - GTX 950m/ 970 GTX
Storage 970pro NVMe 512GB,Samsung 860evo 1TB, 3x4TB WD gold/Transcend 830s, 1TB Toshiba/Adata 256GB + 1TB WD
Display(s) Philips FTV 32 inch + Dell 2407WFP-HC/OEM/Sony KDL-42W828B
Case Phanteks Enthoo Luxe/Acer Barebone/Enermax
Audio Device(s) SoundBlasterX AE-5 (Dell A525)(HyperX Cloud Alpha)/mojo/soundblaster xfi gamer
Power Supply Seasonic focus+ 850 platinum (SSR-850PX)/165 Watt power brick/Enermax 650W
Mouse G502 Hero/M705 Marathon/G305 Hero Lightspeed
Keyboard G19/oem/Steelseries Apex 300
Software Win10 pro 64bit
the naming scheme... ridiculous. this doesn't look like anything special, as mentioned its just a different bin for the same CPU. it's very intriguing though the comparison that so many people make between arm and x86 as if things are in a vacuum, apple will, as it has done until now, optimize their software for arm making x86 basically irrelevant. they will have total control and the benefit of that is extreme optimization.
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
6,245 (3.39/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
the naming scheme... ridiculous. this doesn't look like anything special, as mentioned its just a different bin for the same CPU. it's very intriguing though the comparison that so many people make between arm and x86 as if things are in a vacuum, apple will, as it has done until now, optimize their software for arm making x86 basically irrelevant. they will have total control and the benefit of that is extreme optimization.
Why is the "naming scheme" (can you call it a scheme when it's a single CPU?) ridiculous? Giving a new bin with different clocks a new name is exactly how CPUs are named everywhere... Are you saying they should have called this the i9-10900 even though it doesn't match the specifications of that part?

As for performance comparisons with Arm and optimizations: you have far too much faith in what can be achieved with software optimizations. Apple still needs to come up with an Arm CPU that can compete in raw performance overall, which thus far doesn't exist from any vendor in any market segment beyond mobile. Having control over the software stack doesn't make the CPU dramatically faster, and if their Arm chips don't perform well one could still build a Hackintosh with the current MacOS and get more performance for less, as X86 MacOS will still be supported for years to come. Heck, going by the current mobile market one could make the opposite argument: Apple has complete control of software and hardware, have significantly faster hardware than the competition, yet in real world use cases their phones are no more responsive or faster than the competition.
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
872 (0.17/day)
Location
Copenhagen, Denmark
System Name Ryzen/Laptop/htpc
Processor R9 3900X/i7 6700HQ/i7 2600
Motherboard AsRock X470 Taichi/Acer/ Gigabyte H77M
Cooling Corsair H115i pro with 2 Noctua NF-A14 chromax/OEM/Noctua NH-L12i
Memory G.Skill Trident Z 32GB @3200/16GB DDR4 2666 HyperX impact/24GB
Video Card(s) TUL Red Dragon Vega 56/Intel HD 530 - GTX 950m/ 970 GTX
Storage 970pro NVMe 512GB,Samsung 860evo 1TB, 3x4TB WD gold/Transcend 830s, 1TB Toshiba/Adata 256GB + 1TB WD
Display(s) Philips FTV 32 inch + Dell 2407WFP-HC/OEM/Sony KDL-42W828B
Case Phanteks Enthoo Luxe/Acer Barebone/Enermax
Audio Device(s) SoundBlasterX AE-5 (Dell A525)(HyperX Cloud Alpha)/mojo/soundblaster xfi gamer
Power Supply Seasonic focus+ 850 platinum (SSR-850PX)/165 Watt power brick/Enermax 650W
Mouse G502 Hero/M705 Marathon/G305 Hero Lightspeed
Keyboard G19/oem/Steelseries Apex 300
Software Win10 pro 64bit
Why is the "naming scheme" (can you call it a scheme when it's a single CPU?) ridiculous? Giving a new bin with different clocks a new name is exactly how CPUs are named everywhere... Are you saying they should have called this the i9-10900 even though it doesn't match the specifications of that part?

As for performance comparisons with Arm and optimizations: you have far too much faith in what can be achieved with software optimizations. Apple still needs to come up with an Arm CPU that can compete in raw performance overall, which thus far doesn't exist from any vendor in any market segment beyond mobile. Having control over the software stack doesn't make the CPU dramatically faster, and if their Arm chips don't perform well one could still build a Hackintosh with the current MacOS and get more performance for less, as X86 MacOS will still be supported for years to come. Heck, going by the current mobile market one could make the opposite argument: Apple has complete control of software and hardware, have significantly faster hardware than the competition, yet in real world use cases their phones are no more responsive or faster than the competition.
I was talking about the Intel naming scheme in general, and I think we can all agree that, in general, is a tad ridiculous. As for software optimization, I don't have "faith",I just judge from what we can see, Apple, although I despise it as a company, has one of the most optimized OS s in the industry and possibly the best "experience" smartphones and PC's in the industry due to the whole ecosystem and the extreme level of optimization. So when they pull a move like this one I trust that they will make something out of it. Time will tell if I'm right or wrong, I don't know the future, I'm just judging from accuired knowledge.
Btw, even the 400$ iPhone can match much more expensive Android phones in the responsiveness department. And I will reiterate that I despise Apple.
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
6,245 (3.39/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
I was talking about the Intel naming scheme in general, and I think we can all agree that, in general, is a tad ridiculous. As for software optimization, I don't have "faith",I just judge from what we can see, Apple, although I despise it as a company, has one of the most optimized OS s in the industry and possibly the best "experience" smartphones and PC's in the industry due to the whole ecosystem and the extreme level of optimization. So when they pull a move like this one I trust that they will make something out of it. Time will tell if I'm right or wrong, I don't know the future, I'm just judging from accuired knowledge.
Btw, even the 400$ iPhone can match much more expensive Android phones in the responsiveness department. And I will reiterate that I despise Apple.
I think we all agree that the Intel naming scheme is a mess, but I don't see how this is the thread for discussing that - it was discussed aplenty back when Ice Lake and Comet Lake launched.

As for optimizations... well, the ecosystem has nothing to do with optimized software, just having a broad hardware portfolio with self-made software (from OS to a lot of the apps) and making the effort to have it all work together. They're very good at that, but it's proprietary nature makes it impossible to discuss whether it's well optimized - it's not like we can run it on Windows or Android to compare the performance after all.

You seem to either mean something else than software optimization (which generally means improving the code base of software to make it run as optimally as possible on the intended device(s), typically meaning increased performance), or to be conflating other advantages and strengths of Apple with this. Nothing I said goes against the quality of Apple's software or user experience, I am only saying that your line of reasoning presented here - "discussing comparisons between X86 and Arm is meaningless as Apple's software will be highly optimized" - makes no sense. The performance comparisons in question are also typically well optimized on every relevant platform - but that is down to the software vendor (say, UL for 3DMark, etc.) and not Apple - Apple doesn't make cross-platform benchmarking software, after all, nor do they optimize 3rd party software (though they might tweak the OS to improve performance running certain apps, but the effect of this is relatively small).
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
872 (0.17/day)
Location
Copenhagen, Denmark
System Name Ryzen/Laptop/htpc
Processor R9 3900X/i7 6700HQ/i7 2600
Motherboard AsRock X470 Taichi/Acer/ Gigabyte H77M
Cooling Corsair H115i pro with 2 Noctua NF-A14 chromax/OEM/Noctua NH-L12i
Memory G.Skill Trident Z 32GB @3200/16GB DDR4 2666 HyperX impact/24GB
Video Card(s) TUL Red Dragon Vega 56/Intel HD 530 - GTX 950m/ 970 GTX
Storage 970pro NVMe 512GB,Samsung 860evo 1TB, 3x4TB WD gold/Transcend 830s, 1TB Toshiba/Adata 256GB + 1TB WD
Display(s) Philips FTV 32 inch + Dell 2407WFP-HC/OEM/Sony KDL-42W828B
Case Phanteks Enthoo Luxe/Acer Barebone/Enermax
Audio Device(s) SoundBlasterX AE-5 (Dell A525)(HyperX Cloud Alpha)/mojo/soundblaster xfi gamer
Power Supply Seasonic focus+ 850 platinum (SSR-850PX)/165 Watt power brick/Enermax 650W
Mouse G502 Hero/M705 Marathon/G305 Hero Lightspeed
Keyboard G19/oem/Steelseries Apex 300
Software Win10 pro 64bit
I think we all agree that the Intel naming scheme is a mess, but I don't see how this is the thread for discussing that - it was discussed aplenty back when Ice Lake and Comet Lake launched.

As for optimizations... well, the ecosystem has nothing to do with optimized software, just having a broad hardware portfolio with self-made software (from OS to a lot of the apps) and making the effort to have it all work together. They're very good at that, but it's proprietary nature makes it impossible to discuss whether it's well optimized - it's not like we can run it on Windows or Android to compare the performance after all.

You seem to either mean something else than software optimization (which generally means improving the code base of software to make it run as optimally as possible on the intended device(s), typically meaning increased performance), or to be conflating other advantages and strengths of Apple with this. Nothing I said goes against the quality of Apple's software or user experience, I am only saying that your line of reasoning presented here - "discussing comparisons between X86 and Arm is meaningless as Apple's software will be highly optimized" - makes no sense. The performance comparisons in question are also typically well optimized on every relevant platform - but that is down to the software vendor (say, UL for 3DMark, etc.) and not Apple - Apple doesn't make cross-platform benchmarking software, after all, nor do they optimize 3rd party software (though they might tweak the OS to improve performance running certain apps, but the effect of this is relatively small).
I just made a comment, it wasn't my intention to start a conversation exactly because that horse have been beaten to death.
Now,as for the topic, my point is that they have absolute control over everything so it's much easier to optimize to such a point that the hardware differences will not matter. You know how people say "the computer that took us to the moon is slower than a game boy"? It is, but it doesn't matter because it's made specifically for one job with custom software. I hope this clarifies my train of thought. Of course until they release the product all this is purely theoretical so, just friendly conversation.
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
6,245 (3.39/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
I just made a comment, it wasn't my intention to start a conversation exactly because that horse have been beaten to death.
No problem :)
Now,as for the topic, my point is that they have absolute control over everything so it's much easier to optimize to such a point that the hardware differences will not matter. You know how people say "the computer that took us to the moon is slower than a game boy"? It is, but it doesn't matter because it's made specifically for one job with custom software. I hope this clarifies my train of thought. Of course until they release the product all this is purely theoretical so, just friendly conversation.
That is exactly where I believe you have a bit too much faith in the power of optimized software. The Apollo computer is as such a good analogy: it did its job, but due to its lack of power it did so with what would today be seen as entirely unacceptable margins of error.
(This is largely due to changing attitudes towards risk and death in the line of such endeavors - today there is a general imperative in most if not all levels of society to keep people alive no matter the cost, while at the time of the Apollo missions the relatively high risk of death for astronauts was well known and broadly accepted, as it was for the test pilots for experimental aircraft that were the predecessors of early astronauts (and what many of them were before they became astronauts). Largely thanks to developments in medicine, the 20th and 21st centuries has seen a radical evolution from seeing death as an inevitable and relatively common part of life to something almost preventable and worth nearly any effort to avoid. But that's enough of a sociological tangent for today!)
It also had very specific tasks, and ones that were ultimately rather straightforward (if complex) mathematical calculations. This is of course a radical difference from the essentially unknown workloads the general-purpose computers of today must be capable of completing. As the total capabilities of the system become broader and more diverse, the opportunities for radical optimization will inevitably shrink. In such a scenario Apple is still situated optimally, with control over hardware (though not entirely on the architectural side, with it being licensed from Arm even if Apple does have the right and ability to modify the base architecture heavily), firmware (to a large part), OS and application software. But this nonetheless limits the effects of optimizations in the vast majority of scenarios to "make things work slightly better" rather than "increase performance by an order of magnitude" (which is entirely possible in simpler systems). So, as I have said all along, they still need to deliver hardware that is significantly more powerful than what they have today if they are to deliver a performance increase over their current, Intel-based solutions. Their mobile chips are great, but real-life application testing doesn't show that necessarily translating into perceptible performance advantages in iOS when compared to Android (though it does in some cases). Similarly, Apple has for years managed to make Final Cut Pro on Intel-based Macs outperform all competitors in Prores format handling, playback and editing, despite this being a general purpose compute platform - but no other application shows anything near that level of performance optimization, indicating that Apple (as the creator and owner of the codec) likely knows of something that third parties don't when it comes to efficient decoding. Expecting that kind of advantage to be more broadly applicable is unrealistic IMO.
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
872 (0.17/day)
Location
Copenhagen, Denmark
System Name Ryzen/Laptop/htpc
Processor R9 3900X/i7 6700HQ/i7 2600
Motherboard AsRock X470 Taichi/Acer/ Gigabyte H77M
Cooling Corsair H115i pro with 2 Noctua NF-A14 chromax/OEM/Noctua NH-L12i
Memory G.Skill Trident Z 32GB @3200/16GB DDR4 2666 HyperX impact/24GB
Video Card(s) TUL Red Dragon Vega 56/Intel HD 530 - GTX 950m/ 970 GTX
Storage 970pro NVMe 512GB,Samsung 860evo 1TB, 3x4TB WD gold/Transcend 830s, 1TB Toshiba/Adata 256GB + 1TB WD
Display(s) Philips FTV 32 inch + Dell 2407WFP-HC/OEM/Sony KDL-42W828B
Case Phanteks Enthoo Luxe/Acer Barebone/Enermax
Audio Device(s) SoundBlasterX AE-5 (Dell A525)(HyperX Cloud Alpha)/mojo/soundblaster xfi gamer
Power Supply Seasonic focus+ 850 platinum (SSR-850PX)/165 Watt power brick/Enermax 650W
Mouse G502 Hero/M705 Marathon/G305 Hero Lightspeed
Keyboard G19/oem/Steelseries Apex 300
Software Win10 pro 64bit
No problem :)

That is exactly where I believe you have a bit too much faith in the power of optimized software. The Apollo computer is as such a good analogy: it did its job, but due to its lack of power it did so with what would today be seen as entirely unacceptable margins of error.
(This is largely due to changing attitudes towards risk and death in the line of such endeavors - today there is a general imperative in most if not all levels of society to keep people alive no matter the cost, while at the time of the Apollo missions the relatively high risk of death for astronauts was well known and broadly accepted, as it was for the test pilots for experimental aircraft that were the predecessors of early astronauts (and what many of them were before they became astronauts). Largely thanks to developments in medicine, the 20th and 21st centuries has seen a radical evolution from seeing death as an inevitable and relatively common part of life to something almost preventable and worth nearly any effort to avoid. But that's enough of a sociological tangent for today!)
It also had very specific tasks, and ones that were ultimately rather straightforward (if complex) mathematical calculations. This is of course a radical difference from the essentially unknown workloads the general-purpose computers of today must be capable of completing. As the total capabilities of the system become broader and more diverse, the opportunities for radical optimization will inevitably shrink. In such a scenario Apple is still situated optimally, with control over hardware (though not entirely on the architectural side, with it being licensed from Arm even if Apple does have the right and ability to modify the base architecture heavily), firmware (to a large part), OS and application software. But this nonetheless limits the effects of optimizations in the vast majority of scenarios to "make things work slightly better" rather than "increase performance by an order of magnitude" (which is entirely possible in simpler systems). So, as I have said all along, they still need to deliver hardware that is significantly more powerful than what they have today if they are to deliver a performance increase over their current, Intel-based solutions. Their mobile chips are great, but real-life application testing doesn't show that necessarily translating into perceptible performance advantages in iOS when compared to Android (though it does in some cases). Similarly, Apple has for years managed to make Final Cut Pro on Intel-based Macs outperform all competitors in Prores format handling, playback and editing, despite this being a general purpose compute platform - but no other application shows anything near that level of performance optimization, indicating that Apple (as the creator and owner of the codec) likely knows of something that third parties don't when it comes to efficient decoding. Expecting that kind of advantage to be more broadly applicable is unrealistic IMO.
Fair enough. I don't think we disagree anywhere, but written communication has it's limits. Anyway, we will see what they can deliver and we can continue the conversation then.
 
Top