The Arc of History Bends Towards Performance Per Watt
What it will take for Apple to move away from Arm
When Steve Jobs announced the transition of the Mac from PowerPC to Intel in 2005, he couldn't have been clearer about the rationale. “Performance per Watt” was key and PowerPC couldn't match Intel.
Fast forward fourteen years and Tim Cook announced the transition from Intel to ‘Apple Silicon’. This time Macs would run use Apple’s implementation of the Arm architecture.
Each time the new architecture could be built on a less power-hungry manufacturing process than its predecessor.
The second time, though, it also moved to the architecture that has long dominated the world of low-power, high-performance computing.
When Apple chose Arm for the first Newton in 1990, it was because they wanted a high-performance and low-power architecture. Apple has used Arm in its hand-held devices, from the Newton to the iPod to the iPhone, ever since.
So what does this mean about the future? Some have suggested that Apple will move to RISC-V in due course. The rationale? To save licensing fees and cast off any control that Arm might have over Apple’s use of the architecture.
It’s not going to happen. Why? Because “Performance per Watt” is still king.
To justify any move the new architecture will need to give a material “Performance per Watt” lead over the old. Until an architecture arrives that provides that, Apple will remain with Arm.
Further Watching
Steve Jobs making the announcement of the transition to Intel is still a masterclass in clarity and how to win over a, potentially sceptical, audience.