[ksec]

Yes that is why I also wrote in another reply [1] it doesn't make much sense financially. And I dont quite see how it make any sense technically either. Even if Apple refuse to use AMD CPU for whatever reason Intel's investor roadmap ( Which tends to be more accurate then what they shared to consumers ) shows they are finally back on track. ( It will still take a year or two to catch up though )

Software is expensive, writing, testing , QA.

On the hand, they are spending billions on stupid Apple TV Dramas, I guess they might as well make their own CPU for high end Mac.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23465728

[ogre_codes]

> it doesn't make much sense financially.

This I disagree with. The Intel premium here is likely somewhere in the ballpark of $100-200 per CPU. Spread across 16-20 million Macs sold per year, we're looking at conservatively $2 billion/ year they can invest in CPU design.

More important, Apple will control what features get added to their CPUs and can integrate other functionality into the CPU the way they have with the A-series chips.

[ksec]

Yes if you look at it from all of Mac perspective and selling it at the same price ( Which I hope they dont ) But per unit, it would be MacBook funding development of higher TDP CPU from 50W to 250W. Those are low volume, require new Node tuned for Higher Power, and possibly some design changes. If they follow the same Chiplet design as AMD, that could be $500M budget. If they are making the same monolithic die that could go up to $1B+.

And this is a recurring long term investment.