Apple Introduces M2 Processor: 8-Core CPU, 10-Core GPU, up to 18% More Performance (Updated)

M2
(Image credit: Apple)

Apple announced its Apple Silicon M2 processors today, saying that the new second-gen chips offer up to 18% more performance in unspecified multi-threaded CPU-focused tasks, while the revamped 10-core GPU offers up to 35% more performance in unspecified graphics workloads. Apple also bumped maximum memory capacity up to 24GB of LPDDR5, and the next-gen 16-core neural engine is 43% faster than its predecessor and can process up to 15.8 trillion operations per second.

The new M2 chips come fabbed on a second-generation 5nm process, presumably TSMCs N5P, and have 20 billion transistors. The first M2 processors will debut in the MacBook Air and the MacBook Pro, which will be available next month.

M2

(Image credit: Apple)
Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • shady28
    Eh, from the article :
    "Moving up to a 12-core Intel Core i7-1260P, Apple claims it delivers 87% of the peak performance while using 1/4th of the power. "

    The i7-1260P is one of the weaker Alder Lake laptop parts, specifically for ultralight laptops. According to notebookcheck, their performance rating (combined score from CB R15/R20/7-Zip/X265/Blender/3dM11 CPU) places the i7-1260P just below the i5-11320H and just above the 4800U. A i9-12900H by comparison is almost 50% faster.

    So, not really impressed with this 2nd generation Apple Silicon. I mean yes for its power usage it is impressive, so within its segment it's impressive, but it most definitely has not pushed any performance envelope outside that for ultralight devices.

    I suspect that TSMC missing its original schedule for 2nm (should have been this year for volume production) is hurting Apple. They are stuck on "enhanced 5nm" for another year and disrupted their normal cadence with process node then feature/arch enhancements (a plan they seem to have stolen from Intel). The interesting stuff, on 2nm, is probably not going to come out until 2H 2023.
    Reply
  • peachpuff
    Did they say if it was faster than the 4090 this time?
    Reply
  • sundragon
    So using 1/4 the power of a comparable Intel chip in an ultra light laptop with no fan isn't good enough... :unsure: Oh, if Intel could say they could provide the same performance without needing a fan and driving the battery life to 17 hours, you'd be singing in the streets but if it's Apple, you hear sour grapes: "So, not really impressed with this 2nd generation Apple Silicon. I mean yes for its power usage it is impressive, so within its segment it's impressive, but it most definitely has not pushed any performance envelope outside that for ultralight devices." The air is an ultra light device, what were you expecting it to be a gaming CPU/GPU in an ultra light? :ROFLMAO: Oh the commenters on Tom's... My MacBook Pro does 21 hours or so of full work days before I have to charge it. There isn't an intel chip in the universe that can do the same, my brand new 12th gen intel laptop sure has hell can't even touch that. Let's hear more sour grapes and sadness :LOL: Intel screwed the pooch with the 12th gen being hungry and hot just to perform better. Yay, it's 20% faster than 11th gen with 8 hours of battery life, woohoo
    Reply
  • valreesio
    sundragon said:
    My MacBook Pro does 21 hours or so of full work days before I have to charge it. There isn't an intel chip in the universe that can do the same, my brand new 12th gen intel laptop sure has hell can't even touch that. Let's hear more sour grapes and sadness :LOL: Intel screwed the pooch with the 12th gen being hungry and hot just to perform better. Yay, it's 20% faster than 11th gen with 8 hours of battery life, woohoo

    Not that 21 hours isn't impressive, but what is it that you do that requires you to be away from a power source for so long? I believe they say my laptop gets about 8 hours of life before it needs charged, but I'm never not far from a power outlet when I have my laptop anyway, not from necessity, but just in general.
    Reply
  • sundragon
    peachpuff said:
    Did they say if it was faster than the 4090 this time?
    valreesio said:
    Not that 21 hours isn't impressive, but what is it that you do that requires you to be away from a power source for so long? I believe they say my laptop gets about 8 hours of life before it needs charged, but I'm never not far from a power outlet when I have my laptop anyway, not from necessity, but just in general.
    The point is over time your 8 hours will become 5 with repeated use and battery degradation. Also if you travel for work, you don't always have the option to power up. Finally, Why not give credit where it's due, they made a chip that does the work for a lot less heat and power drain? Considering Intel hasn't been able to make a chip like that even in their ultra portables for a decade now, regardless of how much money they have.
    Reply
  • shady28
    sundragon said:
    So using 1/4 the power of a comparable Intel chip in an ultra light laptop with no fan isn't good enough... :unsure: Oh, if Intel could say they could provide the same performance without needing a fan and driving the battery life to 17 hours, you'd be singing in the streets but if it's Apple, you hear sour grapes: "So, not really impressed with this 2nd generation Apple Silicon. I mean yes for its power usage it is impressive, so within its segment it's impressive, but it most definitely has not pushed any performance envelope outside that for ultralight devices." The air is an ultra light device, what were you expecting it to be a gaming CPU/GPU in an ultra light? :ROFLMAO: Oh the commenters on Tom's... My MacBook Pro does 21 hours or so of full work days before I have to charge it. There isn't an intel chip in the universe that can do the same, my brand new 12th gen intel laptop sure has hell can't even touch that. Let's hear more sour grapes and sadness :LOL: Intel screwed the pooch with the 12th gen being hungry and hot just to perform better. Yay, it's 20% faster than 11th gen with 8 hours of battery life, woohoo

    Maybe 5+ years ago when laptops typically didn't last more than 3 or 4 hours, battery life was a big deal. A lot of people think it's still 2016 or something.

    There's a point where more battery life doesn't matter much anymore and more performance still does. For me, that's around 8-9 hours. I think that is true of most people.

    There are plenty of Intel and AMD laptops with 8+ hours that will eat this M2 up and spit it out in raw performance terms. I prefer those types of laptops.
    Reply
  • hotaru.hino
    shady28 said:
    The i7-1260P is one of the weaker Alder Lake laptop parts, specifically for ultralight laptops. According to notebookcheck, their performance rating (combined score from CB R15/R20/7-Zip/X265/Blender/3dM11 CPU) places the i7-1260P just below the i5-11320H and just above the 4800U. A i9-12900H by comparison is almost 50% faster.

    So, not really impressed with this 2nd generation Apple Silicon. I mean yes for its power usage it is impressive, so within its segment it's impressive, but it most definitely has not pushed any performance envelope outside that for ultralight devices.
    Putting a performance class laptop CPU against an ultrabook class one of course isn't going make the ultrabook class one impressive. And trying to pin the entire microarchitecture on how a particular SKU performs doesn't work like that either. Otherwise I may as well look at a Celeron and go "meh, Lake sucks"

    Let's wait until the higher performant M2 SKUs come out before we start writing M2 off or comparing it to Intel's performant SKUs.
    Reply
  • joytech22
    shady28 said:
    There are plenty of Intel and AMD laptops with 8+ hours that will eat this M2 up and spit it out in raw performance terms. I prefer those types of laptops.

    Let's be honest, if you use that performance you will probably see a more realistic 1h40m battery life. In my job, my M1 MBP under significant, consistent load will still see roughly 5hrs if I'm doing generally heavy work.

    I have other laptops for what I like to do, I have my gaming laptop (R5 5800H, RTX3060) and media/secondary laptop (R9 5900HX/w OLED) - under normal load and sensible power settings they both might see between 6-10 hrs of real-world use but if you NEED to use that available horsepower I doubt either would last even 2hrs.

    The M1 gave me the ability to make my professional workload AND my hobbies completely portable, literally no battery anxiety. If I want to go out for a day and do some photography/video stuff, I can do that literally from dawn to dusk.

    Sure, the performance is not class-leading but given the device dimensions/perks I can live with that lol
    Reply
  • escksu
    If Apple claims are indeed true (which should be very close), it will be mighty impressive and eats any intel/amd cpus for all meals!!

    The chart shows that its peak power is just 15W. This is the same as U-series CPUs (P series are rated 28W).
    Reply
  • escksu
    valreesio said:
    Not that 21 hours isn't impressive, but what is it that you do that requires you to be away from a power source for so long? I believe they say my laptop gets about 8 hours of life before it needs charged, but I'm never not far from a power outlet when I have my laptop anyway, not from necessity, but just in general.

    Having long battery life means you don't need to charge all the time. Great esp. when you are on the move and forgiving when you simply forogtten to charge your laptop. ITs just like phones back then when battery could last a few days before charging.

    IF you are in office all day, then it doesn't make a difference to you.
    Reply