M5 Pro and Max unveiled

[Cmaier]

Trouble is, A- and base M- series still have the original E-cores which appear to be quite different from whatever these are and may do so going forwards as well. So I guess P, M, and E?

I refuse to let Apple dictate to me how to refer to these. What’s next, “Venti, Grande, and Tall” cores?

No, Apple! Bad Apple!

 

[RockRock8]

None of this is confusing to me lol. On the contrary, it's cool and exciting.

I’m going to keep calling them P- and E-, unless someone spills their codenames.

Why? That's even more confusing, unless this is a tongue in cheek type comment lmfao.

S cores, P cores, and E cores.

E cores will be used for products that need the highest P/w ratio, like iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, spatial computers, etc.

The combination of the brand new architecture plus new nm process allows to open up performance further. This is what led to new, faster path.

P cores are faster than E, slower than S but more efficient too. This is why the core config has changed.

M4 Max has 12 performance (now called super) cores, with 4 efficiency cores.

M5 Max has 6 super cores (previously known as performance), with 12 performance (previously known as the lower end, high P/w core).

Translation:

The core config has changed from 12/4 to 6/12. This yields a 15% increase in general performance for CPU while maintaining great thermal efficiency and battery life. If they purely just downgraded to 6/12 from 12/6, it would likely be the same overall performance multi threaded too. But it isn't. The new P core boosts performance overall to make up for 6 fewer S cores (previously known as performance)

When it changes again in 2nm, I suspect S cores will increase due to 2nm and these brand new P cores.

This will create breakthrough performance increases in general for the products that need the absolute most performance while not needing a brand new electrical circuit to run it (cough, NVIDIA).

 

[RockRock8]

They have brought MIE to the Mac now with the brand new chips too. I am really happy about that! It's so cool

 

[Cmaier]

None of this is confusing to me lol. On the contrary, it's cool and exciting.


Why? That's even more confusing, unless this is a tongue in cheek type comment lmfao.

Because, in industry, when there are two types of cores in a chip, one of them is P and the other is E. This is not because Apple decided to call them that for awhile - it’s industry-standard nomenclature. Moreover, in this case, the “S” core is apparently called a “P” core depending on which chip it’s in.

So, in the context of a particular chip, it’s a lot clearer to refer to performance or efficiency cores, as nobody will be confused as to which cores you are referring to.

Of course, when CPUs have 3 types of cores, things change.

 

[RockRock8]

Moreover, in this case, the “S” core is apparently called a “P” core depending on which chip it’s in.

This is untrue and I don't even know where you're getting this info from.

Let me make it clearer for you.

Highest performance core = super core, S core

Middle P/w core = performance core, P core

Highest efficiency core= efficiency core, E core

ALL products have been retroactively renamed according to this, including ALL M5 chip products. Apple said this in the news release.

So, in the context of a particular chip, it’s a lot clearer to refer to performance or efficiency cores, as nobody will be confused as to which cores you are referring to.

Of course, when CPUs have 3 types of cores, things change.

It's not. It will make it more confusing because of clinging to previous nomenclature. P core is completely different now lol

 

[dada_dave]

Because, in industry, when there are two types of cores in a chip, one of them is P and the other is E. This is not because Apple decided to call them that for awhile - it’s industry-standard nomenclature. Moreover, in this case, the “S” core is apparently called a “P” core depending on which chip it’s in.

So, in the context of a particular chip, it’s a lot clearer to refer to performance or efficiency cores, as nobody will be confused as to which cores you are referring to.

Of course, when CPUs have 3 types of cores, things change.

I think Apple is going to switch to always calling them super cores from now on and while we don't currently have three types of cores in the same CPU, we do have three types in the same CPU family. So S/P/E or P/M/E.

None of this is confusing to me lol. On the contrary, it's cool and exciting.

It's confusing 'cause they decided to rename things in the middle of the same generation - like if in the A19/M5 release they had started calling them super cores and efficiency cores, people probably would've wondered why they were doing this and tipped their hand that a new core type was coming, but new generation, new nomenclature is easier that switching in the middle and reusing the old name, performance core, for the new middle core doesn't help . I mean it's a trivially small point and we'll all get used to it pretty quickly.

 

[RockRock8]

I think Apple is going to switch to always calling them super cores from now on and while we don't currently have three types of cores in the same CPU, we do have three types in the same CPU family. So S/P/E or P/M/E.

It's not PME. It's SPE lol. But yes this is otherwise correct. You guys need to read the press release. Everything has been renamed in all products

It's confusing 'cause they decided to rename things in the middle of the same generation - like if in the A19/M5 release they had started calling them super cores and efficiency cores, people probably would've wondered why they were doing this and tipped their hand that a new core type was coming, but new generation, new nomenclature is easier that switching in the middle and reusing the old name, performance core, for the new middle core doesn't help . I mean it's a small point and we'll all get used to pretty quickly.

It's not confusing, to me anyways. It's new and something new to learn.

Otherwise yes, this is a secrecy thing. They didn't want to show where they were headed. No leaks detailed this.

 

[Cmaier]

This is untrue and I don't even know where you're getting this info from.

ALL products have been retroactively renamed according to this, including ALL M5 chip products. Apple said this in the news release.

This is where I get this from. Apple doesn’t get to retcon this.

 

[RockRock8]

This is where I get this from. Apple doesn’t get to retcon this.

? I don't know what you're saying lol. Are you joking or serious?

 

[Cmaier]

It's not confusing, to me anyways. It's new and something new to learn.

Not confusing to you, but I guarantee it’s confusing to many people. Even people here who follow it closely and who know a lot about CPUs (I mean, I designed some of the fastest ones in the world for 15 years), think it’s confusing.

So I will stick to terminology that is clear to anyone in the field, and stick with P and E when talking about a particular chip. To have conversations about these things we shouldn’t need to know what Apple has decided to call them this week - I mean, last week the M5’s P core was a P core, so if we are having a thread about it now we all have to start calling it S cores, and, in reading the historical record, figure out whether the post came before or after Mar 3, 2026 to figure out what core is being talked about?

 

[dada_dave]

It's not PME. It's SPE lol. But yes this is otherwise correct. You guys need to read the press release. Everything has been renamed in all products

It's not confusing, to me anyways. It's new and something new to learn.

Otherwise yes, this is a secrecy thing. They didn't want to show where they were headed. No leaks detailed this.

I read the press release. While I'll probably use S/P/E when just talking about Apple, I might use P/M/E when doing cross-architectural discussions to make it more obvious as each manufacturer uses a different system.

So for instance, Intel has P-cores, M cores (E-cores), and E-cores (LP-E). AMD ... huh ... AMD has P and M too though the C core is almost a P. Qualcomm and various ARM processors will be using P/M/E. This helps make it more obvious how each SOC is architected when doing comparisons rather than using each manufacturer own nomenclature. Then again might just drop nomenclature altogether and just report core counts in a -/-/- system. Not sure.

 

[dada_dave]

It might be a way to improve MT performance without raising the thermal ceiling. Apple got away with just using P-cores for a while, thanks to their superior power efficiency. While they still are have the most efficient core by far, they have also been steadily raising the frequency and the power consumption.

What's interesting is that previous designs (I think M3) already started using the six-core cluster. We had two P-clusters and 1 E-cluster. Now we likely have one P1-cluster and two P2-clusters. For prosumer stuff, it might make sense, if it helps maintain the same thermal envelope (or maybe even improve it).

I believe @Cmaier had previously postulated they would make a third tier of core, although I think Cliff had thought they'd graduate the E-core to an M-core and make a new super low power E-core. But I have to admit this caught me off guard, their P-core is so good I had assumed they wouldn't add a third core design for a long time. Because yeah their previous P/E SOC design was still more than competitive. But it may also give them die savings in addition to power savings under MT. Looking forward to deep dives into these new middle cores. Fingers crossed we get some good deep dives - I mean we should, this is a big change.

 

[RockRock8]

Not confusing to you, but I guarantee it’s confusing to many people. Even people here who follow it closely and who know a lot about CPUs (I mean, I designed some of the fastest ones in the world for 15 years), think it’s confusing.

So I will stick to terminology that is clear to anyone in the field, and stick with P and E when talking about a particular chip. To have conversations about these things we shouldn’t need to know what Apple has decided to call them this week - I mean, last week the M5’s P core was a P core, so if we are having a thread about it now we all have to start calling it S cores, and, in reading the historical record, figure out whether the post came before or after Mar 3, 2026 to figure out what core is being talked about?

I'm more confused about your reaction to this and to me than I am about the new cores. Doesn't Arm literally manufacture like... 4 tiers of cores at this point? Ultra, Premium, Pro, and Nano?

All M5 chips now have the renamed cores. M5 in all products has 4S/6E.

High end Mac's will have 6S/12P

Apple has two tiers of cores in all chips with M5, etc. But what those cores are are now different. As I said, and you snipped out of my comment, was this:

E cores will be used for products that need the highest P/w ratio, like iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, spatial computers, etc.

The combination of the brand new architecture plus new nm process allows to open up performance further. This is what led to new, faster path.

P cores are faster than E, slower than S but more efficient too. This is why the core config has changed.

M4 Max has 12 performance (now called super) cores, with 4 efficiency cores.

M5 Max has 6 super cores (previously known as performance), with 12 performance (previously known as the lower end, high P/w core).

The distinction will matter.

I read the press release. While I'll probably use S/P/E when just talking about Apple, I might use P/M/E when doing cross-architectural discussions to make it more obvious as each manufacturer uses a different system.

So for instance, Intel has P-cores, M cores (E-cores), and E-cores (LP-E). AMD ... huh ... AMD has P and M too though the C core is almost a P. Qualcomm and various ARM processors will be using P/M/E. This helps make it more obvious how each SOC is architected when doing comparisons rather than using each manufacturer own nomenclature. Then again might just drop nomenclature altogether and just report core counts in a -/-/- system. Not sure.

Arm has 4 tiers of cores, so PME doesn't even work anymore unfortunately. But do whatever you want lol.

I will use S, P, and E, because well, that's what they are and doing so makes it clear what I'm referring to when thinking about M chips. Who the hell knows what Intel and Arm and the rest will do. Probably introduce a 5th and 6th tier of core performance

 

[dada_dave]

I'm more confused about your reaction to this and to me than I am about the new cores. Doesn't Arm literally manufacture like... 4 tiers of cores at this point? Ultra, Premium, Pro, and Nano?

All M5 chips now have the renamed cores. M5 in all products has 4S/6E.

High end Mac's will have 6S/12P

Apple has two tiers of cores in all chips with M5, etc. But what those cores are are now different. As I said, and you snipped out of my comment, was this:



The distinction will matter.



Arm has 4 tiers of cores, so PME doesn't even work anymore unfortunately. But do whatever you want lol.

I will use S, P, and E, because well, that's what they are and doing so makes it clear what I'm referring to when thinking about M chips. Who the hell knows what Intel and Arm and the rest will do. Probably introduce a 5th and 6th tier of core performance

That's true I thought of including the wrinkle that sometimes ARM has 4 - though in fairness I really only care about flagship stuff and I've noticed most ARM designs at that level dropping the lowest tier. I know ARM loves the little in-order integer-heavy cores. I remember a former ARM engineer defending their design/use on the old Twitter back in the day, but again I've noticed a lot of ARM-based designs simply dropping them and sticking with 2 or 3 levels.

 

[Cmaier]

I believe @Cmaier had previously postulated they would make a third tier of core, although I think Cliff had thought they'd graduate the E-core to an M-core and make a new super low power E-core. But I have to admit this caught me off guard, their P-core is so good I had assumed they wouldn't add a third core design for a long time. Because yeah their previous P/E SOC design was still more than competitive. But it may also give them die savings in addition to power savings under MT. Looking forward to deep dives into these new middle cores. Fingers crossed we get some good deep dives - I mean we should, this is a big change.

I don’t remember what I thought!

I think there’s some conflation due to sometimes thinking about it from the point of view of a single chip in a computer, and other times thinking about it from the point of view from the product line:

I seem to recall a long time ago we were thinking about Ultra- and higher devices, and would it make sense for there to be E-cores, or would it make more sense for there to be only various grades of P-cores. (Which seems to be what they’ve done for the Max/Pro).

Then I think we were talking about lower end devices where battery life is important, and there was conjecture about going even more power efficient than E.

To me, though, what’s actually most interesting is how they divided the die (not really known yet), because as I pointed out a long time ago, if they do it right then they can come out with all sorts of interesting variations by combining different CPU and GPU die. If they are using a true bus (and not point-to-point) between the die, they can do all sorts of interesting variations on CPU/GPU core counts, depending on the product.

It also occurs to me that the reason Apple renamed the cores may be to hide the fact that, for example, an M4 Max had 12 P-cores and 4 E-cores, while the M5 Max has 6 P-cores and 12 E-cores. That’s fewer P-cores! Why would I buy that! Instead it’s now 6 S-cores and 12 P-cores. So I get all my delicious P-cores, plus new S-cores! Even though they’re being pretty transparent about all this, many consumers won’t get the message.

You may laugh, but at AMD we had a problem for many years that people would blindly compare clock rates and not pay any attention to IPC.

 

[RockRock8]

Bringing attention to the cool engineering and features.

Here's some stuff unmentioned in this post that they did:

1. Introduce MIE to the Mac. This is massive.

2. The Neural Engine has been upgraded and now tied directly to memory bandwidth for much increased performance and efficiency.

3. 4X the prompt processing (TTFT) of M4 Max. This is big for transformer model inference. Likely 5X compared to M3 Max

4. Increased bandwidth to 307 and 614 GB/s.

5. Thunderbolt 5 ports on all Pro and Max chips have their own dedicated controller now for the M5.

 

[dada_dave]

M5 Pro and Max Specs Leaked

M4 Pro performance cores 4.51GHz，efficiency cores 2.59GHz ，M5 Pro super cores 4.61GHz, performance cores 4.38GHz

forums.macrumors.com

Some potentially cool info here if accurate

 

[RockRock8]

It also occurs to me that the reason Apple renamed the cores may be to hide the fact that, for example, an M4 Max had 12 P-cores and 4 E-cores, while the M5 Max has 6 P-cores and 12 E-cores. That’s fewer P-cores! Why would I buy that! Instead it’s now 6 S-cores and 12 P-cores. So I get all my delicious P-cores, plus new S-cores! Even though they’re being pretty transparent about all this, many consumers won’t get the message.

I mentioned this exact thing in the quoted message of mine you snipped out lol.

Translation:

The core config has changed from 12/4 to 6/12. This yields a 15% increase in general performance for CPU while maintaining great thermal efficiency and battery life. If they purely just downgraded to 6/12 from 12/6, it would likely be the same overall performance multi threaded too. But it isn't. The new P core boosts performance overall to make up for 6 fewer S cores (previously known as performance)

When it changes again in 2nm, I suspect S cores will increase due to 2nm and these brand new P cores.

This will create breakthrough performance increases in general for the products that need the absolute most performance while not needing a brand new electrical circuit to run it (cough, NVIDIA).

I'd love to hear your personal thoughts about this

 

[Cmaier]

Bringing attention to the cool engineering and features.

Here's some stuff unmentioned in this post that they did:

1. Introduce MIE to the Mac. This is massive.

2. The Neural Engine has been upgraded and now tied directly to memory bandwidth for much increased performance and efficiency.

3. 4X the prompt processing (TTFT) of M4 Max. This is big for transformer model inference. Likely 5X compared to M3 Max

4. Increased bandwidth to 307 and 614 GB/s.

5. Thunderbolt 5 ports on all Pro and Max chips have their own dedicated controller now for the M5.

I still don’t care about any AI stuff, but I’m glad they are improving general compute with #’s 4 and 5.

 

[Cmaier]

M5 Pro and Max Specs Leaked

M4 Pro performance cores 4.51GHz，efficiency cores 2.59GHz ，M5 Pro super cores 4.61GHz, performance cores 4.38GHz

forums.macrumors.com

Some potentially cool info here if accurate

7-wide decoding always tickles me. (And makes me glad I didn’t have to design that scheduler)