PDA

View Full Version : Intel CPU VS AMD




zulkiflim
Aug 8, 2011, 06:56 AM
Heya

I sincerely hope that Apple will not fall into an old trap it has faced before.

Mac's were using IBM CPU despite its lackluster performance in comparison to the INTEL/AMD offering at the time.

And now we are still stuck with Intel offering of sandy Bridge ( which is amazing for a laptop with discrete graphics) but not for the AIR.
The Llano chips provide better battery and INSANE graphics for an ultra portable.

In short Apple should not be shortsighted and actually make use of AMD LLano chips for the AIR , or any other CPU (don't think A5 or A6 ).



DustinT
Aug 8, 2011, 07:26 AM
Ya, I hear you... And there's some truth to what your saying... But, Llano's power consumption isn't quite competitive enough and I suspect battery life will suffer. And the graphics performance is better but that's not the focus of the Air.

Perhaps after AMD has had another revision it will be ready for an Air sized product. But, that would leave the problem of marketing. Namely, Intel's considered the name to beat. If the less educated technically know anything, its that Intel = good. Now, whether thats true or not is a different story. However, Apple isn't going to go with an underdog in the minds of the masses. Its contrary to their mandate.

It's not always fair, but I'm afraid thats how business works sometimes. Again, perhaps after AMD has another revision or two of the Llano technology it will beat Intel's ppw figures. In that case, Apple would be well advised to consider using their technology.

accessoriesguy
Aug 9, 2011, 03:04 PM
you might be surprised to hear this, but apple try's a LOT of CPU and GPU combos. As processor efficiency and battery technology increase, Apple has to constantly re-evaluate every product. They have a general guide line of how much battery life they want or expect, clock everything appropriately then test end results, as well as a couple of other benchmarks.

Although some AMD processors are powerful they are not always optimal for some platforms. Another thing that apple takes into consideration is of course the pricing and cost of products and production. Its a lot of testing before we get the end result. :apple:

PaulWog
Aug 9, 2011, 03:08 PM
Heya

I sincerely hope that Apple will not fall into an old trap it has faced before.

Mac's were using IBM CPU despite its lackluster performance in comparison to the INTEL/AMD offering at the time.

And now we are still stuck with Intel offering of sandy Bridge ( which is amazing for a laptop with discrete graphics) but not for the AIR.
The Llano chips provide better battery and INSANE graphics for an ultra portable.

In short Apple should not be shortsighted and actually make use of AMD LLano chips for the AIR , or any other CPU (don't think A5 or A6 ).

I don't think Apple will limit themselves completely. However, they are a business, and business deals have to be made to ensure the end-user purchase price is reasonable. They have to sign contracts and make deals. So there is some commitment from one year to another, and one product line to another.

I think they made the right decision with the current line of Macbook Airs. It's not 100% ideal, as there are some very evident drawbacks to the SB processors in the Air, however I think they made the best choice for the offerings that are out there right now. And they really were in a position where there was a huge demand for a refresh of Macbook Airs.

When it comes to graphics, though, Apple seems to really not care too much. I mean, look at their highest-end Mac Pro offering. The best you can get with it is a 5870 graphics card. With the iMac 21.5-inch, the best you can get is a 6770 (and that's rather pitiful to be honest at a nearly $1500 price-point, when the 6770 is a $120 value card). The list really goes on... they force Mac users to pay through the nose for any sort of notable graphics power. When it comes to anything else, they provide great price-to-performance; but when it comes to graphics... it's like it's an afterthought and primarily a money-grab for Apple. That's my one main and practically only criticism of Apple as a company (and the main reason I haven't 100% switched to Apple for my desktop needs as well). How this applies to Llano is simple: Apple focuses on everything else first, and graphics last. I don't know how Llano would perform on an Air though... it might not be feasible when it comes to other things (battery life, heat, idk).