[Thread] A look at Apple's history with CPUs, from PowerPC to x86 to A-series to M1, and how its vertical integration helped beat Intel, Qualcomm, and others
Apple's M1 Pro/Max is the second step in a major change in computing. What might be seen as an evolution from iPhone/ARM is really part of an Apple story that began in 1991 with PowerPC. And what a story of innovation 💡 1/ [Quick thoughts] https://twitter.com/...
@stevesiSteven Sinofsky
Context & Ripple Effects
The M1 Pro/Max is the second beat of a transition that began with the November 2020 M1 announcement — the first Apple-designed SoC for Macs — and was validated by third-party testing: the fan-cooled Mac mini's M1 benchmarked as outstandingly good, beating Intel's chips and landing near AMD's Zen 3. AnandTech's A14 analysis had already flagged the trajectory, showing nearly 3x single-thread gains in five years.
Steve Si's thread reframes that transition not as an iPhone/ARM spin-off but as the latest chapter in a story running from PowerPC in 1991 through x86 to A-series — arguing that Apple's vertical integration of chip, OS, and device is what let it overtake Intel and Qualcomm rather than any single process-node win.
First-order effects
Apple's professional MacBook lines now run on its own high-end silicon (M1 Pro/Max), removing the remaining premium Mac sockets from Intel and ending those customers' dependence on x86 incumbent roadmaps.
Intel and Qualcomm are directly confronted with evidence that an ARM-based, vertically integrated design beats their chips on both performance and efficiency — a competitive benchmark set publicly by Apple's own hardware.
Second-order effects
Merchant chipmakers must now compete against a rival whose GPU, neural engine, and unified memory ship as one system rather than components, pressuring them toward deeper SoC integration and tighter co-design with device makers.
The PC market's pricing and positioning logic shifts: Apple can price pro laptops around system-level capability that Intel-based rivals can only match by accepting lower margins or higher power budgets.
Third-order effects
If the pattern holds, computing competition consolidates around vertically integrated systems companies designing workload-specific silicon — including the neural engines Apple has shipped since the A-series — while merchant CPU vendors are pushed toward serving only the markets Apple does not integrate.
The historical arc Si traces (PowerPC to x86 to A-series to M1) suggests ISA choice itself matters less than control of the full stack, weakening x86's long-standing moat and inviting other device makers to pursue custom silicon.
The trend: Personal computing is shifting from merchant-CPU assembly toward vertically integrated systems competition, with Apple's PowerPC-to-M1 arc as the template and Intel and Qualcomm forced to answer it.
11/ To ease transition, power of PowerPC was used for 68k emulation. This allowed lagging apps (Photoshop) to at least run on new hardware, but performance was marginal at best. BUT Apple learned a great deal in this transition—tooling (like Universal), emulation, and compilers. …
6/ This is really key in terms of understanding the present. Apple was essentially left hanging by a partner for chips, when their core deliverable to customers was a computer. That seemed an impossible situation.
24/ The M1 chip was a realization of all the iPad and iPhone work (sensors, OS port, security, power management, graphics, and more). The M1 not only aimed at fixing what ailed Intel, but also PPC. It was learning from the past decade+.
21/ In 2008, proving it could innovate and even do with with Intel, Apple introduced the MacBook Air. It was the first laptop on a new Intel chipset (though everyone would eventually have this for Windows, no one built a MacBook Air-like PC). Until Ultrabooks there was no PC. htt…
23/ As Apple progressed with ARM it became clear that the breadth of the ecosystem was a benefit for ARM but was holding Apple back in terms of innovating. iPhone success gave Apple the resources to realize its chipset dream. Thus the System on Chip from Apple began.
15/ In the meantime, Apple began to use ARM processors for the iPod. ARM was a RISC design, but had only achieved success in small devices and peripherals. Intel and many other companies were all ARM architecture licencees. This is how Apple got into chips. No one worried.
14/ Of course first came the most famous PowerPC Macintosh of all time. By focusing on consumers and the internet, the weakness of PowerPC could be ignored. The industrial design was a hit too. The G3 then G4. https://twitter.com/...
28/ That's why this transition to M1 is so fascinating. Back when Apple went on its own with the A-series chips, one could easily be concerned that they would end up in the same place as PPC—not enough volume to win against Qualcomm/Samsung doing their ARM designs.
9/ This led to a bet on PowerPC and the release of the first Power Macintosh 6100 in *March 1994*. The project was a very bumpy ride with IBM but also an enormously difficult software project. https://twitter.com/...
29/ Apple, by virtue of being vertically integrated, raced ahead. Because of their units and revenue/R&D investment they are in a globally unique perspective. Today, Qualcomm is closer to Intel than it is to Apple Si/Ax/Mx.