The M1 does one thing: run MacOS and MacOS apps. They can control the vast majority of the compiled code that will be run on the chip - unlike an x86 platform where the exact same architecture is used for desktops, servers and everything in between - including Linux, windows, and Mac.
Specifically there is a reference counting optimization on the M1 that dramatically helps performance of compiled Swift apps - something only worthwhile if you know the majority of what the chip will ever do is run swift apps.
It also does that for, basically, one device (the three models available so far are almost identical. Fan/no fan, and some binning on the GPU)
That’s one further reason their system is faster: they designed a system, and the design of their CPU, GPU, etc. was driven by what the final system needed.
Other system manufacturers buy individual parts, where the manufacturer of each part extends/optimizes it with only a vague knowledge of what the system it will be used in will look like (and they don’t want to focus on one specific system, as that would mean they can sell it to fewer device manufacturers)
> The M1 does one thing: run MacOS and MacOS apps. They can control the vast majority of the compiled code that will be run on the chip - unlike an x86 platform where the exact same architecture is used for desktops, servers and everything in between
The M1 is strongly related to their A14, which runs phones and tablets.
Also: what's between a server and a desktop machine?
Could there also be hardware acceleration or built-in support for Objective-C's message-passing? I've always wondered how Apple gets decent performance with Objective-C in-spite of MP given it its complexity compared to vtables (and vtables have the advantage of being easily cachable in L1/L2).
Specifically there is a reference counting optimization on the M1 that dramatically helps performance of compiled Swift apps - something only worthwhile if you know the majority of what the chip will ever do is run swift apps.