Talk:Apple silicon

Clean up table columns

The A, M, and S-series tables all show a list of devices that use the SoC. This seems a bit backwards since the SoC is a property of the device, not the other way around. The tables further include which OS is supported on each device it runs on. The OS that run on the devices these chips are used in are however not a property of the SoC either. The M-series table goes even further and lists connectivity, which again isn't a property of the SoC. Furthermore, these columns are all responsible for greatly enlarging these tables beyond readability. Should we remove these columns? YannickFran (talk) 14:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

To address this further; some of these cells even contain enough data that would almost warrant a table within the cell itself. This is ridiculous. One of the subcolumns in "Ports" is labeled "Max". What does that even mean? I know what it is trying to convey, but most readers won't. Either way, this column then proceeds to duplicate the information from the previous 2.

This comment was made by 67.84.203.109:

"the connectivity and devices section of the M series are essential to the table, just like it is for the A series and what others have filled in other Apple SoC series, although I do like the compact way you put the table by omitting those sections you're not giving enough info for people who want to know what devices and what ports those devices have related to the SoC"

The connectivity and devices sections are not essential to these tables, and you just point out the problem: "info for people who want to know what devices and what ports those devices have". Exactly. These are specs related to the devices, these are listed on their respective articles and the articles about these SoCs specifically also indicate which devices use them. The device specs have nothing to do with the SoCs themselves, they do not belong here. We don't do this on any other list of SoCs/CPUs/etc. either for a reason. Nobody is going to look up "Apple Silicon" to check if their MacBook has Thunderbolt. And given that the table doesn't even specify which devices are actually being referred to with every "or" in it, this is pointless either way.

I've made a simple attempt at removing this information from the A-series table, but simply deleting these columns breaks the entire table right now. The markup of that table seems to be completely broken. So when I find the time to clean that up, I will.

I've restored to cleaned-up table with all changes made to it afterwards re-applied. --YannickFran (talk) 11:16, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

And even more on the nose: even the articles specifically about the processors don't mention this, because this information simply doesn't belong in these articles. It having been there for years is not an argument to keep it.--YannickFran (talk) 13:30, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

that's your opinion, if it was such an issue you'd be hearing about it from countless editors, the tables as it was written throughout the years shows the devices and connectivity sections, who are you to change how the table is written when those sections on the table were there long before I started editing them, having a difference of opinion is one thing but undoing work thats been there probably before you started editing that article, is wrong, you're diminishing the countless hours and effort put on by me and other editors just because you think your version of the article is superior to the ones people have invested on on improving and btw what exactly specifically are the "ISSUES" you supposedly fix, can you point them out exactly so I can compare it with my revision and other editors' revisions...point them out, tell me EXACTLY the issues that you found 67.84.203.109 (talk) 03:26, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't take "countless hours" (much less the 8 you claimed) to add a summary that was basically a copy-paste of what it said one cell over that in its turn could simply be found on the comparison tables of these devices themselves. Note how you aren't actually arguing on the merits of the subject, but rather are claiming "seniority" over an article on Wikipedia, this is not your personal article, just because someone else started editing this later then you doesn't mean you have ownership.

These cells do not include information that is related to these processors. The connectivity of the laptops, desktops, or whatever they are used in has nothing to do with the SoCs themselves, which is perfectly showcased by the fact that each cell contains a table worth of data all on its own. Unsourced, I might add. The OS version that runs on them, again, has nothing to do with the SoC, perfectly showcased in the A series-table that has to list various versions for the same SoC. Further more, this table is already to large on a big desktop monitor, it's downright unreadable on smaller screens, that was already the case when we were just 2 generations in. And that's the point of this discussion: why is this information relevant here? What relation does it have to the SoC itself other then it happens to be in the same device? The answer is "none".

As for all the issues I fixed, if you want to see those changes, you can just use the comparison tool for the article. As a matter of fact, when you tried to undo these changes, Wikipedia has explicitly shown you every single one of these changes. YannickFran (talk) 07:13, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

The connectivity of the laptops, desktops, or whatever they are used in has nothing to do with the SoCs themselves, which is perfectly showcased by the fact that each cell contains a table worth of data all on its own. Agree 100% on that. Guy Harris (talk) 13:12, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I've now restored the section "Comparison of M series processors" to the last agreed upon version by C.Fred [1], this includes the "Comparison of device specs" section. Should it be removed? YannickFran (talk) 08:48, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

M3 / M3 Pro / M3 Max missing from processor table.

The table still hasn't been updated with the M3 series released 30 Oct 2023. Pkirvan (talk) 00:58, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Redirect from EOS 1 needs to be removed

Currently "EOS 1" redirects here, instead of pointing to the page about the EOS 1 camera. Since the string "EOS 1" isn't even present in this article (in fact, just the string "EOS" isn't), this is obviously erroneous and unhelpful. Okto8 (talk) 16:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 May 2024

the M4 is listed as having the same 3.533 TFLOPS as the M3. I have seen that the M4 is around 4.1 TFLOPS Daniebello (talk) 09:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that number? Would be great to add it. YannickFran (talk) 14:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)