![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 October 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Beccabubu.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 17:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Apple now has two series of processors designated as "M" series: this one being the first of its desktop SOCs, and their motion coprocessors. Both these articles should make it clear that the other exists and has its own article.
– Ben Leggiero ( talk) 17:21, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
For example, cacheline size is useful for high-speed application development. Does anyone have that data yet? Thanks. -- Rsjaffe ( talk) 19:08, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
You're best off going to WikiChip for that sort of data, and that sort of data is best off kept there. Wikipedia is not for data science results. There are many other similar statistics that would be beneficial to developing the chip that need a home. Having said that I am removing the AMX entry in the main document for the same reason and would appreciate if someone would ratify my unlogged-in edit 86.21.8.98 ( talk) 18:14, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
The Apple M1 is the first ARM-based system on a chip (SoC) designed by Apple Inc. for its line of Macintosh computers.
As far as I'm aware, the T1 and T2 chips are ARM-based SoCs powering a separate iBridge device inside Macs, which runs bridgeOS. These pre-date the M1 SoC by just over 4 years. I'll place a {{ Dubious}} on that line until/unless we agree on the accuracy of this statement. – Ben Leggiero ( talk) 17:55, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
What is the purpose of the Neural Engine and what is the significance of the trillions of operations it can allegedly, but uncitedly, perform each second? 87.75.117.183 ( talk) 04:03, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
(sorry it isn't indented - couldn't figure out how :/ ) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Synt4x 3rr0r at Line 420 (
talk •
contribs)
03:14, 6 December 2020 (UTC) EDIT: SineBot, I think it's obvious that I wrote that.
The Neural Engine was designed to accelerate machine learning & AI tasks. AFAIK, the chip (or part of the chip, I guess) is an ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) which means that it is very fast and efficient, though only at the task that it is meant to do (AI and machine learning.) Synt4x 3rr0r at Line 420 ( talk) 03:12, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
Is the M1 chip 64 bit? 32 bit? N0w8st8s ( talk) 01:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)n0w8st8s
I agree that there are some malware for M1 Mac:s. But, reporting on it in this article goes against Wikipedia's strife to keep articles balanced, fair and neutral. Reporting on malware targeting M1 Macs, while quite true, is more of a novelty, a headline grabber, and it is not reported on any other platform, so fairness, neutrality and balance goes right out the window. Malware is not a defining point of M1 processors (yet). I think such segments should be left out until the criterion for fairness, balance and neutrality is met. -- Henriok ( talk) 13:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
@ Henriok and Guy Harris: Can you guys look at this contributiona nd let me know your thoughts? See here [ [1]]. Kolma8 ( talk) 21:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
On my Pixel, both USB Type-C ports stopped responding immediately. Neither would charge or act as a host when I plugged in a USB device such as an ethernet adapter. Upon rebooting my Pixel, the system came up in recovery mode because it could not verify the Embedded Controller on the system. No amount of software recovery could revive the EC. Upon closer analysis, serious damage has been done to components related to charging and managing the USB Type-C port's capabilities.
This block of text was removed in recent edits.
The benchmarking methodology for single thread synthetic benchmarks was criticized as being flawed when comparing to simultaneous multithreading enabled x86 CPUs. [1] [2]
References
The reasoning given in the comments was:
I am not going to reinstate the text without talk and mostly wanted to point out what I see as a potential misunderstanding of the referenced sources. The second source (extremetech) was an independent article building upon the first one and included independent benchmark scores (that the author says are marked in red) that confirm the initial "flaw". Secondly neither source claims that single-threaded applications run faster when HT is enabled. They are both pointing out however that "Single-Core" benchmarks may be misleading when comparing architectures designed with SMT in mind vs others that are designed without, because SMT based architectures don't extract full performance from a given physical CPU core when running only a single thread on them. Benchmarks are always going to be less-than scientific though and I am unsure if there is any widely accepted concensus on how to use them for harware related articles.
Perhaps we should reword the claim?
--
Ujwal.Xankill3r (
talk)
05:14, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
I've been trying to tone down puffery in this page. Yes, the M1 is fast. No, it isn't a magically instant physics-defying monster of a machine.
This motivated https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Apple_M1&diff=prev&oldid=1031412944 as well as a recent change revert (@ Invenio:).
The neutral claims speak for themselves. No need to distract from the raw data with marketing speak 🙂 Arzg ( talk) 13:24, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
I have seen references pointing out to the m1 reveal(Especially, graphs provided by Apple) rather than an actual real world benchmark.Please add a real world source to justify your statements. -Sakura
Who designed the GPU in the M1 ? Many people assume it is Apple, but this is actually unverified. Are there primary sources from Apple (as opposed to Anantech or other third parties) making statements on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.169.127.128 ( talk • contribs) 17:49, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Executing MRS [register], S3_3_C2_C4_0 returns invalid instruction on Apple M1 devices, including macmini m1 and mbp m1. Also, wikichip [2] lists it as v4. Stormj ( talk) 21:59, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
A merge/split discussion involving this article is in progress at Talk:Apple M1 Pro and M1 Max#Split again?. BLAIXX 16:23, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi, It says on the first paragraph "The new chip also brought Apple's third change to the instruction set architecture used by Macintosh computers, 14 years after they were switched from PowerPC to Intel. " This should be the fourth. It went to IBM fleetingly also. Or is this considered a bump in the road? Stripy42 ( talk) 10:52, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
I made an edit to change the introduction from "The Apple M1 is" to "Apple M1 is a series". Is it ok to start working on merging these articles piece by piece? I don't want to step on anyone's toes or duplicate work if they are preparing large scale changes rather than incremental. —DIYeditor ( talk) 11:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
I went ahead and did it. I believe I have transferred everything from the other article to this one. —DIYeditor ( talk) 13:04, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Seems like NPOV would refer more generally to security concerns in line with articles on other chip families. -- \/\/slack ( talk) 23:05, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
This entire wiki is written like an advertisement generated by Apple's marketing team. Will there ever be any neutrality on this website or will Wikipedia continue to allow the site to be used by corporations as a free source of marketing to sell products, downplay any negatives or criticism, all paid for by people giving Wikipedia donations? If so, the site may as well stop asking for donations, start displaying adverts as a source of revenue and only allow corporate employees to edit relevant pages. The future is not looking bright for this morally and intellectually bankrupt Wikimedia organization. 115.166.21.96 ( talk) 08:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 October 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Beccabubu.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 17:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Apple now has two series of processors designated as "M" series: this one being the first of its desktop SOCs, and their motion coprocessors. Both these articles should make it clear that the other exists and has its own article.
– Ben Leggiero ( talk) 17:21, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
For example, cacheline size is useful for high-speed application development. Does anyone have that data yet? Thanks. -- Rsjaffe ( talk) 19:08, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
You're best off going to WikiChip for that sort of data, and that sort of data is best off kept there. Wikipedia is not for data science results. There are many other similar statistics that would be beneficial to developing the chip that need a home. Having said that I am removing the AMX entry in the main document for the same reason and would appreciate if someone would ratify my unlogged-in edit 86.21.8.98 ( talk) 18:14, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
The Apple M1 is the first ARM-based system on a chip (SoC) designed by Apple Inc. for its line of Macintosh computers.
As far as I'm aware, the T1 and T2 chips are ARM-based SoCs powering a separate iBridge device inside Macs, which runs bridgeOS. These pre-date the M1 SoC by just over 4 years. I'll place a {{ Dubious}} on that line until/unless we agree on the accuracy of this statement. – Ben Leggiero ( talk) 17:55, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
What is the purpose of the Neural Engine and what is the significance of the trillions of operations it can allegedly, but uncitedly, perform each second? 87.75.117.183 ( talk) 04:03, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
(sorry it isn't indented - couldn't figure out how :/ ) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Synt4x 3rr0r at Line 420 (
talk •
contribs)
03:14, 6 December 2020 (UTC) EDIT: SineBot, I think it's obvious that I wrote that.
The Neural Engine was designed to accelerate machine learning & AI tasks. AFAIK, the chip (or part of the chip, I guess) is an ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) which means that it is very fast and efficient, though only at the task that it is meant to do (AI and machine learning.) Synt4x 3rr0r at Line 420 ( talk) 03:12, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
Is the M1 chip 64 bit? 32 bit? N0w8st8s ( talk) 01:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)n0w8st8s
I agree that there are some malware for M1 Mac:s. But, reporting on it in this article goes against Wikipedia's strife to keep articles balanced, fair and neutral. Reporting on malware targeting M1 Macs, while quite true, is more of a novelty, a headline grabber, and it is not reported on any other platform, so fairness, neutrality and balance goes right out the window. Malware is not a defining point of M1 processors (yet). I think such segments should be left out until the criterion for fairness, balance and neutrality is met. -- Henriok ( talk) 13:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
@ Henriok and Guy Harris: Can you guys look at this contributiona nd let me know your thoughts? See here [ [1]]. Kolma8 ( talk) 21:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
On my Pixel, both USB Type-C ports stopped responding immediately. Neither would charge or act as a host when I plugged in a USB device such as an ethernet adapter. Upon rebooting my Pixel, the system came up in recovery mode because it could not verify the Embedded Controller on the system. No amount of software recovery could revive the EC. Upon closer analysis, serious damage has been done to components related to charging and managing the USB Type-C port's capabilities.
This block of text was removed in recent edits.
The benchmarking methodology for single thread synthetic benchmarks was criticized as being flawed when comparing to simultaneous multithreading enabled x86 CPUs. [1] [2]
References
The reasoning given in the comments was:
I am not going to reinstate the text without talk and mostly wanted to point out what I see as a potential misunderstanding of the referenced sources. The second source (extremetech) was an independent article building upon the first one and included independent benchmark scores (that the author says are marked in red) that confirm the initial "flaw". Secondly neither source claims that single-threaded applications run faster when HT is enabled. They are both pointing out however that "Single-Core" benchmarks may be misleading when comparing architectures designed with SMT in mind vs others that are designed without, because SMT based architectures don't extract full performance from a given physical CPU core when running only a single thread on them. Benchmarks are always going to be less-than scientific though and I am unsure if there is any widely accepted concensus on how to use them for harware related articles.
Perhaps we should reword the claim?
--
Ujwal.Xankill3r (
talk)
05:14, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
I've been trying to tone down puffery in this page. Yes, the M1 is fast. No, it isn't a magically instant physics-defying monster of a machine.
This motivated https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Apple_M1&diff=prev&oldid=1031412944 as well as a recent change revert (@ Invenio:).
The neutral claims speak for themselves. No need to distract from the raw data with marketing speak 🙂 Arzg ( talk) 13:24, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
I have seen references pointing out to the m1 reveal(Especially, graphs provided by Apple) rather than an actual real world benchmark.Please add a real world source to justify your statements. -Sakura
Who designed the GPU in the M1 ? Many people assume it is Apple, but this is actually unverified. Are there primary sources from Apple (as opposed to Anantech or other third parties) making statements on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.169.127.128 ( talk • contribs) 17:49, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Executing MRS [register], S3_3_C2_C4_0 returns invalid instruction on Apple M1 devices, including macmini m1 and mbp m1. Also, wikichip [2] lists it as v4. Stormj ( talk) 21:59, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
A merge/split discussion involving this article is in progress at Talk:Apple M1 Pro and M1 Max#Split again?. BLAIXX 16:23, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi, It says on the first paragraph "The new chip also brought Apple's third change to the instruction set architecture used by Macintosh computers, 14 years after they were switched from PowerPC to Intel. " This should be the fourth. It went to IBM fleetingly also. Or is this considered a bump in the road? Stripy42 ( talk) 10:52, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
I made an edit to change the introduction from "The Apple M1 is" to "Apple M1 is a series". Is it ok to start working on merging these articles piece by piece? I don't want to step on anyone's toes or duplicate work if they are preparing large scale changes rather than incremental. —DIYeditor ( talk) 11:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
I went ahead and did it. I believe I have transferred everything from the other article to this one. —DIYeditor ( talk) 13:04, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Seems like NPOV would refer more generally to security concerns in line with articles on other chip families. -- \/\/slack ( talk) 23:05, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
This entire wiki is written like an advertisement generated by Apple's marketing team. Will there ever be any neutrality on this website or will Wikipedia continue to allow the site to be used by corporations as a free source of marketing to sell products, downplay any negatives or criticism, all paid for by people giving Wikipedia donations? If so, the site may as well stop asking for donations, start displaying adverts as a source of revenue and only allow corporate employees to edit relevant pages. The future is not looking bright for this morally and intellectually bankrupt Wikimedia organization. 115.166.21.96 ( talk) 08:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC)