> it might be possible that the A14 or A15 iteration actually surpasses Intel's chips at x86-64 code as well when run through a Rosetta-like compatibility layer
Extremely unlikely, if only because x86-64's memory model is much stronger than ARM's. Emulating that on ARM would be a performance disaster.
Apple could have the internals of A14 or A15 have x86's memory model, but that's non-trivial changes and may have too much impact on their ARM performance to justify it. Seems far more likely we'd just see a Macbook that's just straight ARM with x86 code just not supported at all.
> What if the high-end chip was ARM? It's not just about raw speed, it's about how much performance you can squeeze out of a particular thermal envelope, or compute per watt. If ARM offers 2x the performance per watt, doesn't matter what Intel's chips do with hypothetically unlimited power.
For workstations it's almost entirely about raw speed. The power cost is a rounding error compared to the salary of the person using it that's now spending more time waiting on things and less time getting work done.
Extremely unlikely, if only because x86-64's memory model is much stronger than ARM's. Emulating that on ARM would be a performance disaster.
Apple could have the internals of A14 or A15 have x86's memory model, but that's non-trivial changes and may have too much impact on their ARM performance to justify it. Seems far more likely we'd just see a Macbook that's just straight ARM with x86 code just not supported at all.
> What if the high-end chip was ARM? It's not just about raw speed, it's about how much performance you can squeeze out of a particular thermal envelope, or compute per watt. If ARM offers 2x the performance per watt, doesn't matter what Intel's chips do with hypothetically unlimited power.
For workstations it's almost entirely about raw speed. The power cost is a rounding error compared to the salary of the person using it that's now spending more time waiting on things and less time getting work done.