Apple Dropping NVIDIA for Future Macs?

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/01/apple-dropping-nvidia-for-future-macs/)

SemiAccurate claims (http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/06/26/apple-nvidia-dont-let-door-hit-your-ss-way-out/) that Apple will be dropping NVIDIA-based designs in their next iMacs and laptops for at least the next few years. They claim the reason is due to the recent NVIDIA manufacturing defects (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/01/apple-extends-nvidia-macbook-pro-warranty-to-3-years/) which affected a number of MacBook Pros.

The shift back to Intel-based chipsets was not entirely unexpected, however, as Intel and NVIDIA have been under a licensing battle (http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2009/02/intel-sues-nvidia-over-chipset-license-agreement.ars) over whether or not NVIDIA can even produce Nehalem-based chipsets in the future. Apple currently uses the Nehalem processors for their Mac Pro line, and is expected to adopt the mobile Nehalem processors for its mobile line later this year (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/02/11/core-i7-nehalem-based-macbook-pros-possible-in-q4-2009/).


Article Link: Apple Dropping NVIDIA for Future Macs? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/01/apple-dropping-nvidia-for-future-macs/)

[xDeathReaperx]

That's ridiculous!!

~xDRx

[celticpride678]

That would stink. I don't want Intel again.:(

[ProwlingTiger]

I hope a better agreement can be reached. Yeah, there were a significant amount of defects. Use that as a bargaining chip.

[Mykbibby]

SemiAccurate is an interesting name for a website... in this case I think they're NotatallAccurate.

I'm pretty sure Apple will be sticking with nVIDIA.

[Sun Baked]

The Nvidia chipsets were likely in the pipe when the GPU defect were coming to light. And the broken promises of the defect being fixed probably raised Apple's ire.

It isn't unusual for Apple to do everything they can to punish a vendor when there are pissed at them. Likely walking away from them for a couple years, and dropping their inclusion in halo products like Macs is the fitting punishment.

---

I think there was probably more to it, and it was the behind the door discussions about how much Nvidia and the insurance company would be picking up from the fiasco that finally broke the straw (edit: or the next mobile Intel CPU and the FSB issues.)

[meli]

I'd bet that this rumor is the "semi" half of "semi-accurate".

[11800506]

I don't really see this as being accurate, at least for the reasons they said because surely Apple knew about the graphics card defects affecting the Macbook Pro when they adopted the Nvidia chipsets. It just doesn't make any sense seeing as it was quite public knowledge even before Apple switched to the chipsets.

The Intel/Nvidia issue does seem more legitimate though - let's hope they can get that sorted out before the Nehalem chips are released.

[Tallest Skil]

Let's see here...

If they wanted to drop nVidia, THEY WOULD HAVE DONE IT AFTER THE FAULTS OF THE 8600M GT. NOT THREE REVISIONS LATER AFTER HAVING INCLUDED EVEN MORE NVIDIA CHIPS IN THEIR COMPUTERS. :D:rolleyes:

SemiAccurate?! No. NO. CanNeverBeTrustedAgain is more appropriate. :p

[Spanky Deluxe]

Since Apple is unlikely to replace their low end machines with inferior graphics capabilities, its far more likely that when Core i7 laptop parts become available Apple will simply hold the low end MacBooks, iMacs and Mac Minis and keep them using Core 2 Duo chips - just with (possible) speed boosts.

My guess is that the MacBook Pro and iMac lines will get dedicated graphics cards across the board come i7 (although with a low end chip at the bottom end of course) while the MacBook, Mac Mini and MacBook Air remain largely as they are but with possibly faster processors. Who knows, maybe Intel will give them some custom Core 2 Duo parts to keep those lines going a little longer.

Edit: Ah, I see Tallest Skil says the rumour's a lie. That probably means it'll turn out to be 100% accurate.

[iAlexG]

I'm happy with my NVidia 9400M. Mostly because my HP from last year only had a ATI Radeon 64mb graphics card!!!!! almost 10 year old tech!!! I couldnt play any games with my friends. Now I can play most games happily on Medium settings.

I remember the Intel chip in the 2007 Macbooks were poor as my friend had one. STICK WITH NVIDIA

[zedsdead]

The only good news that could come out of this is that it might force Apple to put dedicated graphics back into the low end iMacs...unless of course that recent price drop rumor is for the Intel Integrated model.

I agree with Tallest Skil, Apple would have dropped them long ago because of the failures. If true, it is due to the lawsuit between Intel and NVIDIA.

[neiltc13]

I'm happy with my NVidia 9400M. Mostly because my HP from last year only had a ATI Radeon 64mb graphics card!!!!! almost 10 year old tech!!! I couldnt play any games with my friends. Now I can play most games happily on Medium settings.

I remember the Intel chip in the 2007 Macbooks were poor as my friend had one. STICK WITH NVIDIA

Your HP had more vRAM than your MacBook.

[vexingv]

no one has seemed to mention ATI/AMD, which has been doing quite well against nvidia in the pc (desktop) graphics arena. they also have several mobile gpu's based on those desktop variants. and apple has used their GPU's across their range of products in the past.

[Dwalls90]

Your HP had more vRAM than your MacBook.

If you knew enough about GPU 'stats' - you should know VRAM is not directly related to performance .. nearly at all.

That said, the 9400M can use up to 256mb .. 4x that of his previous "GPU"

[Willis]

Your HP had more vRAM than your MacBook.

How? My GMA950 has 64mb same as that HP...

[kornyboy]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A341 Safari/528.16)

It doesn't seem like this would be a smart move. Nvidia is pretty much the standard in high end graphics cards. I hope this proves to be false.

[Spanky Deluxe]

Your HP had more vRAM than your MacBook.

Not really. Yes it had more dedicated vRAM but the MacBook has 128/256MB of RAM dedicated to it from the total system RAM depending on whether it has 1GB/2GB+. This RAM is DDR3 and is a fair bit faster than the old 64MB of RAM in his Radeon card.

[chowmein]

How? My GMA950 has 64mb same as that HP...

I think he means dedicated vRAM as opposed to shared system memory.

EDIT: Spanky Deluxe beat me to it... :(

[Chundles]

How? My GMA950 has 64mb same as that HP...

Nope, it has 0MB of VRAM. It uses system RAM. Same as the 9400M though the 9400M kicks seven colours of crap out of the X3100 and especially the GMA950.

[vaderhater245]

I want a Mobility 3870 in a 13" MBP...

[yetanotherdave]

Yep. Anyone else who claims that my predictions are the opposite of fact gets paradoxes shoved in their face. :mad:

There will be absolutely no macbook/pro updates at wwdc 09. There can't be, there's nothing new to update. :P :D

[Sky Blue]

Edit: Ah, I see Tallest Skil says the rumour's a lie. That probably means it'll turn out to be 100% accurate.

my thoughts exactly!

[Morod]

In my 2007 Al iMac, it has the ATI/Radeon HD2600. Is this graphic card outdated already? :confused:
Will Apple turn to ATI over Nvidia?

[Outsider]

Edit: Ah, I see Tallest Skil says the rumour's a lie. That probably means it'll turn out to be 100% accurate.

Yeah, exactly. It's usually my rumor barometer.

[QCassidy352]

I don't buy this. It would be a disaster to go back to intel integrated after people had a taste of a decent gpu in the current low end.

[NinjaHERO]

Interesting. I wonder if a defective NVIDIA chip could have caused the failure of my new MBP. If so, I approve the switch back.

[nagromme]

Let's see here...

If they wanted to drop nVidia, THEY WOULD HAVE DONE IT AFTER THE FAULTS OF THE 8600M GT. NOT THREE REVISIONS LATER AFTER HAVING INCLUDED EVEN MORE NVIDIA CHIPS IN THEIR COMPUTERS. :D:rolleyes:

SemiAccurate?! No. NO. CanNeverBeTrustedAgain is more appropriate. :p

I don't think it's that clear-cut. The design of those tree revisions began long before they hit shelves. And the design of new nVidia-free revisions takes time too. In addition, the scope of nVidia's problems may have become more clear over time, eventually contributing to a decision.

[TuffLuffJimmy]

Edit: Ah, I see Tallest Skil says the rumour's a lie. That probably means it'll turn out to be 100% accurate.

Too true, which is too bad because I would rather Apple pick the best parts rather than letting politics decide.

[Outsider]

...

I agree with Tallest Skil, Apple would have dropped them long ago because of the failures. If true, it is due to the lawsuit between Intel and NVIDIA.

Not necessarily true. Apple had these designs in the pipeline for a while. It would have set them even further behind if they had to start from scratch design wise.

[guzhogi]

no one has seemed to mention ATI/AMD, which has been doing quite well against nvidia in the pc (desktop) graphics arena. they also have several mobile gpu's based on those desktop variants. and apple has used their GPU's across their range of products in the past.

I want a Mobility 3870 in a 13" MBP...

In my 2007 Al iMac, it has the ATI/Radeon HD2600. Is this graphic card outdated already? :confused:
Will Apple turn to ATI over Nvidia?

I was going to bring up ATI/AMD if no one did. My only concern is that since AMD & Intel are rivals, not sure how that would affect the Apple/Intel relationship. NVidia, AFAIK, only does graphics cards & motherboard chipsets, not procs.

[fpnc]

We've been talking about the likely dropping of NVIDIA from MacBooks for several weeks over in the MacBook Pro/PowerBook thread here on MacRumors. Here is the link (last several pages have information about problems in using the 9400M or ANY NVIDIA chipset in Intel's Arrandale mobile processor).

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=668803

This post does a fairly good summary of the problem:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7938678&postcount=376

[AidenShaw]

Too true, which is too bad because I would rather Apple pick the best parts rather than letting politics decide.

Isn't it clear that Apple will pick the cheapest parts to keep their profits margins so obscenely high? (LCD panels, 1394 chipsets, Macbook plastics, ....)

[Eriamjh1138@DAN]

Intel may make great CPUs, but their GPUs are horrendous and set Macs back 2-3 years.

I call BS on this rumor. Only the latest NVIDIA chips (and an ATI or two) support CoreCL. Unless they switch to ATI, which has been hit and miss for years, GPUs would set us back to 2006 again!

Intel GPUs are total garbage. Apple must know that. Intel probably knows it, too.

Apple, just say NO to Intel GPUs!

Edit: The SemiAccurate article says NOTHING about going to Intel chips. Is MacRumors embellishing a bit?

[toxic]

Will Apple turn to ATI over Nvidia?

Doubt it. Intel would probably throw fits. So I doubt this rumor is true, unless Apple really likes Intel's crap.

[Tallest Skil]

Apple, just say NO to Intel GPUs!

I think they have, starting in October of last year. ;)

To which the reply rings, "No! Apple will go back to Intel GPUs! This nVidia thing was just a fad because [I] said it was."

[IrishSniper87]

Intel may make great CPUs, but their GPUs are horrendous and set Macs back 2-3 years.

I call BS on this rumor. Only the latest NVIDIA chips (and an ATI or two) support CoreCL. Unless they switch to ATI, which has been hit and miss for years, GPUs would set us back to 2006 again!

Intel GPUs are total garbage. Apple must know that. Intel probably knows it, too.

Apple, just say NO to Intel GPUs!

Agreed. Glad I nabbed the MacBook Pro with the NVidia 9600m GT. At least that is a decent (if even only unimpressive GPU).

It plays Eve Online fine.

[Outsider]

All righty, what say you about this:

I reported on my e-mail from Steve Jobs saying that the 8600M was perfectly fine, even though I believed along with everyone else that they were failing. Now, since I believed they were failing, you should believe that they're all fine; but if you believe that Jobs was lying, which he was, you should believe that they're all...

Yep. Anyone else who claims that my predictions are the opposite of fact gets paradoxes shoved in their face. :mad:

Please, how arrogant. It's clear you imagine yourself as some authority on Apple's future plans, but that is totally undeserved. Take for example your "legendary" Nehalem Mac Pro thread. Not only were you wrong on most of your key points, the stuff you were right about was pretty much derived from key features of the Nehalem platform anyway.

At least that thread spurred some pretty good discussion.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I don't buy this. It would be a disaster to go back to intel integrated after people had a taste of a decent gpu in the current low end.

IIRC, the G4 mini had a discrete GPU.

I was going to bring up ATI/AMD if no one did. My only concern is that since AMD & Intel are rivals, not sure how that would affect the Apple/Intel relationship. NVidia, AFAIK, only does graphics cards & motherboard chipsets, not procs.

Apple had been using ATi and nVidia for a while after the transition and still are. Intel, as far as I'm aware, haven't expressed any dissent.

[alanlindsay]

Unless this licensing thing is sorted out there will be no Nvidia chips for arrandale. Also, there's no way Apple is going back to Intel IGP unless Larrabee is amazing and supports openCL (?) etc. I think it's more likely they'll put a G210M in place of the 9400 and a G260M in place of the 9600GT if they have to go back to Intel chipsets.

[8CoreWhore]

Do we really want to get "info" from a place called semi accurate? Just sayin'.:rolleyes:

[Master Chief]

Apple needs NVIDIA (well sort of) for Snow Leopard (Cuda/OpenCL) and thus this is not going to happen any time soon. Maybe in 2010 when Intel can help to reduce the hardware prices – putting pressure on NVIDIA might help to lower prices earlier, possibly in Q4 2009 already.

[AidenShaw]

Intel may make great CPUs, but their GPUs are horrendous and set Macs back 2-3 years.

Larrabee....

Look it up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larrabee_(GPU)), and factor in OpenCL.

Apple are crazy like fox.

[some12b]

Ahhh! And I was hoping to see some of those mobile graphics 200 series Nvidia chips soon.

Surely Apple, with the OpenCL in Snow Leopard, will want the best GPU out there in the market?

[Tallest Skil]

Not only were you wrong on most of your key points, the stuff you were right about was pretty much derived from key features of the Nehalem platform anyway.

That's... the point, I thought. Apple isn't deviating from standardization to create their own platforms (thank heavens, all PA Semi aside). Had they followed their past trends, I would have been closer (okay, SSD in a Mac Pro? THAT was a sham) Had they kept to their pricing, I would have been right on with those numbers.

Did any one of you say that we'd be hit with the Apple Tax on the Mac Pros? I don't think so.

TOPIC: Any nVidia drop wouldn't be based on defects; it would be based on the newfound licensing issue with Arrandale.

Senseless rambling: 'Course, they could drop Arrandale for a chip they made themselves! Perfect timing!

...

Er, there's no self-facepalm emoticion, so just imagine one after that last bit.

[Saladinos]

The only way Apple would go back to Intel is if Larrabee kicked ass.

It's scheduled for a release in H1 2010, so inclusion in the Mac line is possible. However, nobody's sure what form factors will be available - it's possible (likely even) that there won't be a portable version at launch (probably coming in Q3 or Q4 2010).

EDIT: Actually, it's earlier than that. Intel now says "2009/2010" and gave details at a mobility conference, indicating that LB may launch with a portable GPU component. See: http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2009/04/intel-talks-moorestown-new-atoms-larrabee-in-late-2009.ars

[bruinsrme]

Intel may make great CPUs, but their GPUs are horrendous and set Macs back 2-3 years.

I call BS on this rumor. Only the latest NVIDIA chips (and an ATI or two) support CoreCL. Unless they switch to ATI, which has been hit and miss for years, GPUs would set us back to 2006 again!

Intel GPUs are total garbage. Apple must know that. Intel probably knows it, too.

Apple, just say NO to Intel GPUs!

Edit: The SemiAccurate article says NOTHING about going to Intel chips. Is MacRumors embellishing a bit?

PCers seem to get a lot more of out of their video cards through a more aggressive drivers.

[alanlindsay]

The only way Apple would go back to Intel is if Larrabee kicked ass.

It's scheduled for a release in H1 2010, so inclusion in the Mac line is possible. However, nobody's sure what form factors will be available - it's possible (likely even) that there won't be a portable version at launch (probably coming in Q3 or Q4 2010).

I think Intel was unhappy about losing Apples' business to Nvidia and vowed to get it back. Apple got Nehalem server CPUs early for the Mac Pro, maybe they will get Larrabee early... Q1 2010 perhaps

[techfreak85]

so hows SL supposed to do some of its magic stuff without the 9400m?:eek: I guess more Vidcards need to be supported.:D(good cause i have the orignal al. iMac)

[BJB Productions]

Looks like I'll be hangin' onto my late 2008 Macbook Pro. :D

[Tallest Skil]

PCers seem to get a lot more of out of their video cards through a more aggressive drivers.

If nVidia made their own drivers for OS X instead of making Apple write them, we might just have some decent drivers from the OpenCL/CUDA side... :(

[Master Chief]

I don't see Apple using Larrabee before next years Mac Pro. It's not going to be introduced in the next iMac or Mac Mini. No way.

[johnparjr]

Intel has been working very hard on a better Video card and should be ready by end of year or 2010 as far as spec's it's just as good or better as what we have now. You won't be disappointed and thats as far as I can go with this info.

[TuffLuffJimmy]

If nVidia made their own drivers for OS X instead of making Apple write them, we might just have some decent drivers from the OpenCL/CUDA side... :(

:rolleyes: If Apple would open up a little and share their OS X secrets like Microsoft does with Windows I'm sure they would.

[kockgunner]

I was going to bring up ATI/AMD if no one did. My only concern is that since AMD & Intel are rivals, not sure how that would affect the Apple/Intel relationship. NVidia, AFAIK, only does graphics cards & motherboard chipsets, not procs.

Can't it be said that Nvidia with their CUDA thing or whatever and the upcomign Grand Central Dispatch mean that Nvidia is competing with Intel as well? I don't think Intel would get mad because Apple is using competitor's chips in their computers. Apple doesn't ship their computers with Intel SSDs either.

[robeddie]

Let's see here...

If they wanted to drop nVidia, THEY WOULD HAVE DONE IT AFTER THE FAULTS OF THE 8600M GT. NOT THREE REVISIONS LATER AFTER HAVING INCLUDED EVEN MORE NVIDIA CHIPS IN THEIR COMPUTERS. :D:rolleyes:

SemiAccurate?! No. NO. CanNeverBeTrustedAgain is more appropriate. :p

The reason they probably didn't drop them right away was that Apple initially believed Nvidia, that the problem only affected a very limited number of laptops.

But now, the installed base of hundreds of thousands of macbook pros with the 8600m have been aging, and Apple is probably getting a huge and growing wave of users who are having the problem (since it reportedly takes some time to develop in most cases).

Apple would not have known just how extensive this problem was until time passed and tens of thousands of macbook pros showed up with the problem.

Therefore, it makes perfect sense that Apple would have not decided until now to drop Nvidia.

[techfreak85]

so intel graphics....are these going to be integrated like the GMA950s and such or good graphics cards?

[Saladinos]

I don't see Apple using Larrabee before next years Mac Pro. It's not going to be introduced in the next iMac or Mac Mini. No way.

I updated my post after I found an Ars article that suggests Intel will launch Larrabee earlier and with a mobile GPU component. The computers that will benefit the most from this are the underpowered machines such as the Mini - with Grand Central and OpenCL, their machines will be screamers. Mac Pros have exchangeable GPUs, so Apple only needs to add a BTO option for the PCIe card for the Mac Pro.

The greatest thing about Larrabee is the software pipeline. You can upgrade to DirectX 11 or 12 or support OpenCL or Shader Model 6.0 through a software update. You can also delegate OS processes such as Spotlight to one of those cores when you're not in a graphics-intensive app.

[gkarris]

Intel IGA is only going to get better as time goes on. Maybe never quite as good as nVidia or ATI, but they may be giving Apple a sweet deal on the chips to help lower the costs of the computers.

[iMacmatician]

Since Apple is unlikely to replace their low end machines with inferior graphics capabilities, its far more likely that when Core i7 laptop parts become available Apple will simply hold the low end MacBooks, iMacs and Mac Minis and keep them using Core 2 Duo chips - just with (possible) speed boosts.

My guess is that the MacBook Pro and iMac lines will get dedicated graphics cards across the board come i7 (although with a low end chip at the bottom end of course) while the MacBook, Mac Mini and MacBook Air remain largely as they are but with possibly faster processors. Who knows, maybe Intel will give them some custom Core 2 Duo parts to keep those lines going a little longer.I agree. Just like with the special speed bump + faster bus on the 2008 iMacs, maybe we may see another speed bump + faster bus for 2010 Apple Penryns?

The only way Apple would go back to Intel is if Larrabee kicked ass.

It's scheduled for a release in H1 2010, so inclusion in the Mac line is possible. However, nobody's sure what form factors will be available - it's possible (likely even) that there won't be a portable version at launch (probably coming in Q3 or Q4 2010).

EDIT: Actually, it's earlier than that. Intel now says "2009/2010" and gave details at a mobility conference, indicating that LB may launch with a portable GPU component. See: http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2009/04/intel-talks-moorestown-new-atoms-larrabee-in-late-2009.arsI've read somewhere that a variant of Larrabee will replace the integrated GPUs for low-end Sandy Bridge CPUs (or something like that).

[gzfelix]

Cell ... I know this is not even possible. But I would like to see Cell in Macs.

[bruinsrme]

Intel IGA is only going to get better as time goes on. Maybe never quite as good as nVidia or ATI, but they may be giving Apple a sweet deal on the chips to help lower the costs of the computers.

or maintain their profit margins

[Tallest Skil]

Apple would not have known just how extensive this problem was until time passed and tens of thousands of macbook pros showed up with the problem.

Therefore, it makes perfect sense that Apple would have not decided until now to drop Nvidia.

I do agree with you, but nVidia knew very early on how extensive the problem was. They set aside 200 million dollars to deal with potential recalls!

The current crop of chips aren't affected by a defect; the 9xxx, 1xx, and 2xx series' are fine, and we'd have seen something by now if there was such a defect as the 8xxx family. This makes me doubt Apple's dropping nVidia for any reason associated with the 8600M failures.

Not to say they wouldn't for this licensing nonsense, but with three newer families of chips that work fine, the defect as the reason just doesn't seem right.

Cell ... I know this is not even possible. But I would like to see Cell in Macs.

Cell is Power-based. We can all agree they won't go back there... :p

[ltldrummerboy]

:rolleyes: If Apple would open up a little and share their OS X secrets like Microsoft does with Windows I'm sure they would.

I was under the impression that ATI wrote the OS X drivers for Nvidia GPUs. Am I completely off-base?

[Tallest Skil]

I was under the impression that ATI wrote the OS X drivers for Nvidia GPUs. Am I completely off-base?

Apple writes nVidia's drivers, ATI writes their own.

[charlituna]

There will be absolutely no macbook/pro updates at wwdc 09. There can't be, there's nothing new to update. :P :D

we already had WWDC 09 and at least the better part of them were updated. I think the white macbook and the 17 inch were not. however there's always WWDC '10 which will be a year after the last update.

[Shadow%20Mac]

I've also heard this from a source inside apple.

Too bad, cause the X3100 in my MacBook is terrible :(

[gkarris]

^^^ The X4500 series is tons better...

or maintain their profit margins

Yes, but to maintain their sales momentum, especially with the release of Windows 7 (which is a great system, btw), Apple will have to further drop prices.

The only way to do this and still maintain their profit margins is to use cheaper chips.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

we already had WWDC 09 and at least the better part of them were updated. I think the white macbook and the 17 inch were not. however there's always WWDC '10 which will be a year after the last update.

Someone doesn't know what sarcasm is. :rolleyes:

[Peace]

This is pure bunk. Here's why.

OpenCL only works on nVidia chips.

There..

You guys will find out later.

[chowmein]

This is pure bunk. Here's why.

OpenCL only works on nVidia chips.

There..

You guys will find out later.

AMD does support OpenCL.
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Desktops-and-Notebooks/AMD-Backing-OpenCL-and-Microsoft-DirectX-11/

[Saladinos]

This is pure bunk. Here's why.

OpenCL only works on nVidia chips.

There..

You guys will find out later.

ROFL. Did you notice the first 4 letters of OpenCL spell another word?

[Peace]

AMD does support OpenCL.
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Desktops-and-Notebooks/AMD-Backing-OpenCL-and-Microsoft-DirectX-11/

I was referring to Snow Leopard.

[chowmein]

I was referring to Snow Leopard.

ATI cards are in the hardware requirements list.

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/10/snow-leopard-h-264-hardware-acceleration-and-opencl-requirements/

[philamac]

I don't care if Apple drops NVIDIA as long as it picks up ATI. But Intel? Noooooo! If Apple really does drop NVIDIA for INTEL, then I may have to drop Apple.

[Lokheed]

The reason they probably didn't drop them right away was that Apple initially believed Nvidia, that the problem only affected a very limited number of laptops.

But now, the installed base of hundreds of thousands of macbook pros with the 8600m have been aging, and Apple is probably getting a huge and growing wave of users who are having the problem (since it reportedly takes some time to develop in most cases).

Apple would not have known just how extensive this problem was until time passed and tens of thousands of macbook pros showed up with the problem.

Therefore, it makes perfect sense that Apple would have not decided until now to drop Nvidia.


No, not quite. The answer is far simpler than that: Time. It takes time to make changes. You think a company the size of Apple can dream up a new piece of hardware and change-over in a couple of weeks? It takes times to iron out the legals and then finally change the production line. Anyone who thinks it's as easy as ordering a few thousands crates of new components and then slapping them in is deluded or pleasantly naive... or a pleasant naive ;)

[gkarris]

I don't care if Apple drops NVIDIA as long as it picks up ATI. But Intel? Noooooo! If Apple really does drop NVIDIA for INTEL, then I may have to drop Apple.

That's what a bunch of people were saying when Apple dropped PPC... :rolleyes:

[fuziwuzi]

dell has alot of ati gpus in their lappies. nvidia has really done themselves an injustice by producing so many sub par gpus for most of the major laptop producers. it's not surprising they are ditching them.

[typeoserv]

yea.. please go back to intel or go to ati.

the only reason i havent bought a new macbook is because of nvidia
(bad reason i know, but id had nothing but probs with their chipsets & cards)

[krye]

Booooo!

I'd take a potentially defective Nvidia chip over an Intel chip any day.

[Edensuko]

If Apple drops Nvidia i Hope it is because ATI has better options for them. I do hope Arrandale Chips do well but I rather have an actuall gpu. I know this chip is supposed to "learn" how to handle graphics and new tecnologies by software, thats something that has me worried, will it tax itself with its own software therefore it may limit its own capabilities.

Dunno, ill play safe and wait for a bit.

[Warbrain]

I just don't see Apple doing this. They invested time and money into switching to nVidia to switch so quickly. Look how long we suffered with IBM making the G5 processors before the switch to Intel.

This, like others said, has to be because of the lawsuit. Apple wants to use the best they can get and if nVidia limits what they can get then they'll switch back to Intel or, like they have before, manufacture their own logic boards and offer different video cards.

[gkarris]

If Apple drops Nvidia i Hope it is because ATI has better options for them. I do hope Arrandale Chips do well but I rather have an actuall gpu. I know this chip is supposed to "learn" how to handle graphics and new tecnologies by software, thats something that has me worried, will it tax itself with its own software therefore it may limit its own capabilities.

Dunno, ill play safe and wait for a bit.

Yes, but ATI is owned by AMD and Apple uses Intel...

[OceanView]

If this is true, I'm glad I bought the current MBP.
Hopefully they will get it all worked out in the next year.

[Warbrain]

Yes, but ATI is owned by AMD and Apple uses Intel...

Doesn't mean anything. ATI still makes things for Intel motherboards, processors, etc. because AMD/ATI knows that they can't survive and compete against Intel if they were to establish their own ecosystem.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I doesn't make sense for Apple to drop nVidia now for a few reasons:

1. All Macs come standard with an nVidia GPU and many of them only have nVidia GPU options.

2. Open CL mostly supports nVidia GPUs.

3. ATi is an AMD brand and Apple uses Intel chips.

4. Intel integrated GPUs (if you can call them that) suck, though Apple has switched to them before.

[ddTaylor]

Isn't it clear that Apple will pick the cheapest parts to keep their profits margins so obscenely high? (LCD panels, 1394 chipsets, Macbook plastics, ....)

I could not agree more...well said.

D

[parapup]

People seem to be equating Nvidia to GPU - while that is generally true, in Apple's case they are using complete NVidia solution - the IO and memory controllers, Ethernet, GPU and what not. So Apple could still show them the door for chipset and keep their options open for the GPU part as Nvidia seems to be doing OK and historically they have had the fastest GPUs for longer times. Also all of the OpenCL investments would mean that Apple is better off at least offering an Nvidia GPU as an option.

But on the other hand, the current situation is that however much you want Apple to provide high end NVidia GPUs in the cramped laptop and iMacs that has not worked out too well. There were far too many issues with the Nvidia chipsets and GPUs as we know from the 8600 fiasco. On the chipset side even today people upgrading to 1.7 firmware are finding that lots of perfectly fine SATA-II hard disk upgrades are screwing up with data errors. Nvidia is not exactly known for stable chipsets as much as Intel is. As the article mentions - Dell and HP both have reduced Nvidia presence - all of HP's business laptops are having ATI GPUs and Intel chipsets.

People also seem to forget that Intel's next gen GPU is going to be a GPU-in-CPU design which is supposed to be better - not only that, it includes provision for having a discrete GPU with option to switch back and forth at run time.

But if those weren't compelling enough reasons - Nvidia still has no license to design and manufacture a Nehalem compatible chipset and Apple would have to have a pretty good reason to stick with current chipset (there isn't one as far as I can see) or Nvidia would have to be offering x86 compatible CPU-on-GPU that is at least as good as or better than Intel's offerings. Very unlikely.

Based on this I think it is safe to say we will see Intel based chipset in Apple offerings and I for one welcome it. One can guess that ATI GPUs will make a come back in the laptops (45nm 4xxx series comes to mind) but Nvidia GPUs will be offered as an option in desktops and Mac Pro given that Intel is unlikely to have an GPU offering that beats ATI or Nvidia in the near future at least.

"Can of Whoop Ass" - back to Nvidia!

[pcorajr]

With all the technology being built into SL to take advantage of the GPU i find this to be not likely to happen.

My personal opinion.. Apple would be stupid to go back to producing machines with inferior GPU's, ATI has crap available now.... makes this very very unlikely... end of story.

[badNameErr]

Wow. First Dell, now Apple?

NVIDIA is being spanked hard if this is true.

[MikhailT]

I just don't see Apple doing this. They invested time and money into switching to nVidia to switch so quickly. Look how long we suffered with IBM making the G5 processors before the switch to Intel.

This, like others said, has to be because of the lawsuit. Apple wants to use the best they can get and if nVidia limits what they can get then they'll switch back to Intel or, like they have before, manufacture their own logic boards and offer different video cards.

It is not just that simple. Apple probably have more than enough reasons to justify dropping nVidia. The lawsuits, the crappy gpus, the huge lie that nVidia told Apple about the failure rate and the fact that newer mobile gpus as well as their desktop gpus are rehashed from previous generations.

Repairing thousands if not hundreds of thousands of MBP by replacing the GPUs costs a lot of money for Apple, it is not just the cost of mobile GPU, the money has to be spent for labor, workers and as well as harming their reputation for quality hardware parts. All of that is not going to be fixed or paid by nVidia. Most of it comes out of Apple's pocket.

As for OpenCL, nobody realizes that OpenCL is an open standard, ATi can easily write the drivers for SL without any reduction of benefits that nVidia would provide.

ATI has been improving a lot lately with their integrated and discrete graphics, I don't see any major loss by switching to ATi graphics except that it all depends on what Apple does with the next logic board. Are they going to switch to Intel or make their own logic boards?

I would think since Apple has enough of the engineering team to do their own stuff (PA Semi doesn't hurt either), they might want to do their own logic boards and implement more innovate features that none others have done. Imagine Apple along with PA Semi, building in h.264 de/encode accelerator onto the logic board that would be much faster than using the onboard graphics but it might be pointless if OpenCL can be used instead with the GPU. All depends on whether or not dedicated h.264 card is faster than a GPU.

Anything is possible with Apple, they are used to switching platforms. They did well with Intel and nVidia. why not?

[rufwork]

No, not quite. The answer is far simpler than that: Time. It takes time to make changes.

Chicken dinner.

Wonder if this is why there's such a limited set of cards (one? the 9400M?) supported by Snow Leopard's featureset.

[Warbrain]

I would think since Apple has enough of the engineering team to do their own stuff (PA Semi doesn't hurt either), they might want to do their own logic boards and implement more innovate features that none others have done. Imagine Apple along with PA Semi, building in h.264 de/encode accelerator onto the logic board that would be much faster than using the onboard graphics but it might be pointless if OpenCL can be used instead with the GPU. All depends on whether or not dedicated h.264 card is faster than a GPU.

Anything is possible with Apple, they are used to switching platforms. They did well with Intel and nVidia. why not?

This isn't as great of a platform change as was going from the 680x0 to the PPC or the PPC to Intel. This is an architecture change that can be performed with relative ease unlike a major architecture change requiring FAT or Universal binaries. I believe they'll move to their own logic board designs - they've done this in the past - while using Intel chips and offering ATI and nVidia GPUs. As for integrated graphics - maybe we'll see the end of that. Integrated graphics are getting better with each revision but by making their own boards Apple would most likely not use them.

[munkees]

OpenCL currently runs on

NVIDIA Geforce 8600M GT, GeForce 8800 GT, GeForce 8800 GTS, Geforce 9400M, GeForce 9600M GT, GeForce GT 120, GeForce GT 130.

ATI Radeon 4850, Radeon 4870

I cannot see Apple dropping NVIDIA at the moment, unless they are moving to newer ATI, as for intel, Apple will not take that step backwards. Does not make sense to make nearly all mobile platforms have common parts to ditch them, Apple choice to make MacBooks into MacBook pros is cost savings, due to large quantities of chip that will be used, also better performance than the integrated intel. MacBooks pros now share more common parts can be manufactured with out too much tool changes, this equal better production to market, major saving. current Macbook pros carry GeForce 9400M and GeForce 9600M. Also the MacBook carries an GeForce 9400M

Another reason why Apple has moved all iMacs and mac minis to graphic chips that support OpenCL for when Snow Leopard is released. Apple been building it product range for Snow Leopard.

I on the other hand will have a 2 year old iMac when snow leopard is released, me thinks time to upgrade :) to a new max pimped out iMac, hopefully will have quad cores, and 1GB mem for graphics (OpenCL and quicktime really wants 1GB video memory for max performance, don't have link of hand but did read about it with OpenCL).

[MikhailT]

OpenCL currently runs on

NVIDIA Geforce 8600M GT, GeForce 8800 GT, GeForce 8800 GTS, Geforce 9400M, GeForce 9600M GT, GeForce GT 120, GeForce GT 130.

ATI Radeon 4850, Radeon 4870

I cannot see Apple dropping NVIDIA at the moment, unless they are moving to newer ATI, as for intel, Apple will not take that step backwards. Does not make sense to make nearly all mobile platforms have common parts to ditch them, Apple choice to make MacBooks into MacBook pros is cost savings, due to large quantities of chip that will be used, also better performance than the integrated intel. MacBooks pros now share more common parts can be manufactured with out too much tool changes, this equal better production to market, major saving. current Macbook pros carry GeForce 9400M and GeForce 9600M. Also the MacBook carries an GeForce 9400M

Another reason why Apple has moved all iMacs and mac minis to graphic chips that support OpenCL for when Snow Leopard is released. Apple been building it product range for Snow Leopard.

I on the other hand will have a 2 year old iMac when snow leopard is released, me thinks time to upgrade :) to a new max pimped out iMac, hopefully will have quad cores, and 1GB mem for graphics (OpenCL and quicktime really wants 1GB video memory for max performance, don't have link of hand but did read about it with OpenCL).

Why is everybody fixated on the OpenCL thing? It is a non-issue, the drivers can be delivered via software update for any new cards that Apple might consider using in the next hardware refresh. It is an open standard that can be written by any manufacturer that can build the cards for Apple.

Dropping nVidia does not mean Apple is going to drop support for all of the previous nVidia cards in their OS.

Stop worrying about OpenCL, it has nothing to do with preventing Apple from dropping nVidia.

[ezekielrage_99]

It wouldn't surprise me if we saw Intel chipsets but using nVidia graphics cards. Unless Apple is using this as a hollow threat to ensure nVidia picks up its game...

[Wotan31]

No way they're going to release new products with significantly *worse* performance than older products. I.e. they ain't gonna go back to intel IGP.

More likely, they'll switch to intel northbridge and use ATI for the GPU. That would make the most sense, and quite frankly I would prefer it. ATI chipsets are superior these days anyways - Nvidia has simply taken old chips and relabeled them for 2 years now. Time for something new and fresh (and not defective).

Nvidia tried to screw everyone with their defective products, they deserve to get left out in the cold by Apple.

HP did the same thing already. All the hp consumer line laptops that previously had Nvidia GPU have now transitioned over to ATI GPU's and intel northbridge for the current models.

[thejadedmonkey]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A341 Safari/528.16)

It doesn't seem like this would be a smart move. Nvidia is pretty much the standard in high end graphics cards. I hope this proves to be false.

Yeah... but in the mid-range, which is what Apple uses, ATI is the big winner :p

I was referring to Snow Leopard.

If apple decides to adopt ATI graphics cards, I'm sure they could release a point update that introduces the same support for ATI cards.

I doesn't make sense for Apple to drop nVidia now for a few reasons:

1. All Macs come standard with an nVidia GPU and many of them only have nVidia GPU options.

Of 4 mac's I have been responsible for purchasing, 3 have an ATI GPU and 1 has an Intel GPU. Not a single one has an nVidia GPU.

2. Open CL mostly supports nVidia GPUs.

Actually... no.
http://ati.amd.com/technology/streamcomputing/opencl.html

3. ATi is an AMD brand and Apple uses Intel chips.

nVidia is an nVidia brand, and Apple uses Intel chips. What's your point?

4. Intel integrated GPUs (if you can call them that) suck, though Apple has switched to them before.

Yeah, but you haven't convinced me that Apple can't use ATI or even design their own.

Personally, I hope that Apple switches to an ATI GPU, and puts it in every-single-MBP. and get rid of the friggin black bezel.

[Sehnsucht]

Perhaps, but I call bulls**t on the notion of going back to Intel IGPs. :eek: If they did, my reaction would be something like this:

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=29348005

ATI has always had a better selection of Mac-compatible graphics cards. If Apple does indeed drop NVIDIA, they sure as hell better go ATI, *not* those ******-tacular Intel IGPs...:rolleyes:

Personally, I hope that Apple switches to an ATI GPU, and puts it in every-single-MBP. and get rid of the friggin black bezel.

Complaining about the black bezel is *so* six months ago. Complaining about the existence of the 13" MacBook "Pro" is the new thing. :D

[jaw04005]

"The shift from Intel to NVIDIA chipsets, however, was responsible for notable gains in the low-end graphics processing power in the new MacBooks and iMacs which will also be leveraged in Apple's upcoming Snow Leopard operating system."

New MacBooks maybe, but the NVIDIA chipset in the iMac is for the most part irrelevant. In fact, both the integrated 9400M in the mid-level and discrete GT120 in the high-end are actually a step backward compared to the previous generation's HD 2600 Pro and 8800 GS.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Of 4 mac's I have been responsible for purchasing, 3 have an ATI GPU and 1 has an Intel GPU. Not a single one has an nVidia GPU.


Good for you. But still, all Macs today come standard with an nVidia GPU, and some only have nVidia options.


Actually... no.
http://ati.amd.com/technology/streamcomputing/opencl.html


For SL at it is.


nVidia is an nVidia brand, and Apple uses Intel chips. What's your point?

That ATi is an AMD brand and a competitor to Intel.

[-=XX=-Nephilim]

Here is my take on all this:

I am using my MBP professionally on daily bases.

It died on me 14 months after I bought it.

Cause of death - fried 8600M!

Resurrection process - replacement of entire mobo!

LUCKILY I am based in Berlin so entire repair process took less than a week and of course it has been carried out free of charge.


But...


1. I lost 1 week worth of work (would be much more than that if I was less lucky)

2. Apple lost fair bit of money

3. Apple reputation got damaged due to the fact that my case was only one in 10s of thousands (perhaps even more)

4. Researches are pointing out that 9600M chip in latest MBP is apparently suffering from exactly the same problem...


I say drop NVidia now and move back to AMD asap...

[HONDAxACURA]

If that were true, It's either nVidia or no Apple products for me until they get nVidia back. Intel video cards suck! Total fail!

[slackpacker]

I understand about the Chipset Chips. But if there are No Nvidia Graphics and I'm Not buying another Apple Laptop.

[Peace]

Any real SL devs here should know OpenCL is only working on nVidia graphics.

[-=XX=-Nephilim]

If that were true, It's either nVidia or no Apple products for me until they get nVidia back. Intel video cards suck! Total fail!

Why so many of you think if Apple drops NVidia they will move to Intel!?!?!

If this rumour is indeed true and if Apple is to replace their GPU maker with someone else it simply can not be anyone else but AMD...

Intel will be there to provide mobo chipset + cpu but not GPU like so many of you think...

[iMaggot]

Maybe they want to go with ATI next time ?

[ironman159]

I'm kind of a newbie here (as you can see:D), so my ? is: does the 9400M in my "limited" edition macbook unibody is affected? :confused:

[Tallest Skil]

I'm kind of a newbie here (as you can see:D), so my ? is: does the 9400M in my "limited" edition macbook unibody is affected? :confused:

They're not going to come to your house and remove your chip. This is for future Macs.

[MacHappytjg]

Here's what i think AMD + ATI = Happiness, then Intel + nVidia = happiness, ive always liked nvidia better because there video cards dont get outta date as fast as the ati's, so in my opinion i think apple should stick with nVidia as long as there running intel processors.

[windywoo]

Any real SL devs here should know OpenCL is only working on nVidia graphics.

Are you saying the ATI extensions aren't developed yet? Or just that it won't work on ATIs mobile solutions?

[noodle654]

Bad news....bad news....bad news.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Are you saying the ATI extensions aren't developed yet? Or just that it won't work on ATIs mobile solutions?

Of course it won't work with ATi mobile anything.

I just think the extensions aren't there yet.

[MShock]

you all know the part about intel and nvidia licensing may lend credibility to the rumor that nvidia is developing a x64 processor to compete with nehelem. Arstechnica ran a story on that a while back.

i don't understand the link between a small past notebook platform fault, and why apple would drop when the current platform (9400 and 9600) is phenomenal! I love my unibody 15" macbook pro (late 2008), and it is selling like crazy for Apple. Dropping nvidia's quality would be dumb.

[Peace]

Of course it won't work with ATi mobile anything.

I just think the extensions aren't there yet.

If Apple was moving all their iMacs and Macbook Pros away from nVidia one would think ATI/Intel extensions would be working by now wouldn't one ? ;)

This is stupid. Some site that by it's own name is guessing something for click throughs and MR falls for it.
:rolleyes:

[Eidorian]

Any Intel processor with DMI and an onboard PCI-Express controller is going to ruin nVidia's day on the mobile IGP side.

ION 2 we hardly knew ye. Well unless Apple plans on shipping Core 2 hardware forever.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

If Apple was moving all their iMacs and Macbook Pros away from nVidia one would think ATI/Intel extensions would be working by now wouldn't one ? ;)

This is stupid. Some site that by it's own name is guessing something for click throughs and MR falls for it.
:rolleyes:

I agree.

It is obvious that Apple won't move to ATi any time soon.

[Eidorian]

I agree.

It is obvious that Apple won't move to ATi any time soon.And the replacement to the 9400M G is?

[Shake 'n' Bake]

And the replacement to the 9400M G is?

I don't know. What ever comes next.

Apple just moved to nVidia, so I really, really doubt they will move to ATi so soon.

[Eidorian]

I don't know. What ever comes next.

Apple just moved to nVidia, so I really, really doubt they will move to ATi so soon.No one knows and any Nehalem DMI based derivative kills IGPs outside of what Intel provides.

[ironman159]

They're not going to come to your house and remove your chip. This is for future Macs.

Sorry! I didn't explain myself very well... What I meant was if it was affected by the frying problems/faulty units the 8600 had.

[nesces]

Why not ATI?

[-=XX=-Nephilim]

Sorry! I didn't explain myself very well... What I meant was if it was affected by the frying problems/faulty units the 8600 had.

No...

But apparently 9600M is :(

All of you who bought MBP recently will know in about 10 months time...

My experience with 8600M was like that - it worked perfectly for about 14 months and one day screen simple went black...

Hence infamous "black screen of death"...

Google it and you will understand better why this rumour might indeed be true :)

[MattInOz]

Larrabee....

Look it up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larrabee_(GPU)), and factor in OpenCL.

Apple are crazy like fox.

Larrabee as a GPU or as CPU?

Theoretically Larrabee's x86 processor cores can run existing PC software; even operating systems. However, Larrabee's video card will not include all the features of a PC-compatible motherboard, so PC operating systems and applications will not run without modifications. A differentversion of Larrabee might sit in motherboard CPU sockets using QuickPath[13], but Intel has not yet announced plans for this. Though Larrabee Native's C/C++ compiler includes auto-vectorization and many applications can execute correctly after recompiling, maximum efficiency may require code optimization using C++ vector intrinsics or inline Larrabee assembly code.[10] However, as in all GPGPU, not all software benefits from utilization of a vector processing unit.

Add LLVM into the mix and Apple could build a two chip mobo with nVidia Chipset(maybe with an ARM core to handle system level stuff) and integrated Graphics with a Larrabee Hanging off it as another GPU but the OS treats it as the CPU. The top end MPB's would get a dedicated CPU on top.

Even if it isn't the plan to release I'm sure Apple have this as a prototype to keep all parties keen.

[windywoo]

Of course it won't work with ATi mobile anything.

I just think the extensions aren't there yet.

The mobile 4800 series looks to have similar features to the desktop ones.

[Eidorian]

The mobile 4800 series looks to have similar features to the desktop ones.In fact ATI's mobile line has just been lowered clocked and lower voltage versions of their desktop components.

You don't have to play a name game like you do with nVidia. Not to mention the desktop drivers will work for the mobile components. At least on Windows...

[Peace]

And the replacement to the 9400M G is?

Perhaps this one :

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gtx_280m_us.html

[Shake 'n' Bake]

The mobile 4800 series looks to have similar features to the desktop ones.

Those are just the features, not the BIOS or other software required to use it.

EDIT: Saw Eiodorian's post.

[Eidorian]

Perhaps this one :

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gtx_280m_us.htmlThat would be the best MacBook ever.

Those are just the features, not the BIOS or other software required to use it.Do go on.

[windywoo]

Those are just the features, not the BIOS or other software required to use it.

Apple's compatibility list only includes products they currently use. If they drop nvidia and take up ATI it will not be a huge stretch to adapt OpenCL for the mobile series as well as the desktop series.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

That would be the best MacBook ever.

Then what goes in the MBP? :D


Do go on.


I didn't know that's what ATi did with their GPUs.

[Jayomat]

Perhaps this one :

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gtx_280m_us.html

unlikely ;)

[Peace]

Apple's compatibility list only includes products they currently use. If they drop nvidia and take up ATI it will not be a huge stretch to adapt OpenCL for the mobile series as well as the desktop series.


2-3 months before Snow Leopard and a new iMac come out it would be a huge stretch considering OpenCL isn't supported on ATI as of 10A394.

[Eidorian]

2-3 months before Snow Leopard and a new iMac come out it would be a huge stretch considering OpenCL isn't supported on ATI as of 10A394.So Apple's own page on OS X Tech Specs for OpenCL isn't accurate with its ATI support?

[Peace]

So Apple's own page on OS X Tech Specs for OpenCL isn't accurate with its ATI support?

Do you really expect an honest answer here ?..LOL

I might as well go jump off a bridge. I've probably already got myself a nice email on the way.

[Eidorian]

Do you really expect an honest answer here ?..LOLOne can hope.

[AidenShaw]

dell has alot of ati gpus in their lappies. nvidia has really done themselves an injustice by producing so many sub par gpus for most of the major laptop producers. it's not surprising they are ditching them.

And I don't buy the ATI systems. I buy Quadro laptops.... Been burned, won't do ATI again.

[Eidorian]

And I don't buy the ATI systems. I buy Quadro laptops.... Been burned, won't do ATI again.Oh why is that?

Anything special per se about the Quadro on a mobile platform?

[MorphingDragon]

Can it hurt to hope? nVidia needlessly cripple the GeForce OpenGL capabilities.
You want proof? The Quadro Cards are the same as their GeForce derivatives but with more RAM and a different ROM.

The HD4850 is a god send to iMac users if you can pay for it.

[fun173]

If apple puts intel graphics i will never buy one as long as there is intel graphics in it they suck

[danthespaceman]

How does this news affect someone looking to purchase a higher end macbook pro with a dedicated graphics card in the next 6 months? I hear a lot of people worried about performance drops in the lower end models, but what are the chances of performance drops in the higher end models?

[MattInOz]

Well if they are considering ATI agian it would explain why they finally got around to fixing a whole stack of ATI bugs in 10.5.7.

Including the one they never admitting to existing in the last batch of ATI iMacs.

[str1f3]

If apple puts intel graphics i will never buy one as long as there is intel graphics in it they suck

I wonder if they would move back to Intel. Since Apple has changed the 13" to pro, would they still use a cheap Intel solution? It would be hard to believe that they would. Apple should just use a dedicated graphics card solution across the entire MBP line with more powerful cards on the high end models.

It remains to be seen what Larrabee can do. I don't expect much in the gaming department but it could be serviceable for OpenCL. ATI as of now doesn't support OpenCL on the majority of their cards.

As it is I'm happy with the 13" MBP I just got and won't be looking to upgrade for a couple of years.

[Leo72]

To me, it's a good news.

[fun173]

I wonder if they would move back to Intel. Since Apple has changed the 13" to pro, would they still use a cheap Intel solution? It would be hard to believe that they would. Apple should just use a dedicated graphics card solution across the entire MBP line with more powerful cards on the high end models.

It remains to be seen what Larrabee can do. I don't expect much in the gaming department but it could be serviceable for OpenCL. ATI as of now doesn't support OpenCL on the majority of their cards.

As it is I'm happy with the 13" MBP I just got and won't be looking to upgrade for a couple of years.

I would really love dedicated graphics across the line i dont really care what manufacturer besides intel. even if it was an intel dedicated card my macbook with the x3100 cant even play san andreas with the settings turned up one bit

[iAlex]

This means you should buy NOW to avoid future graphic-gimped MBPs.... Hmmm :eek:

[fun173]

This means you should buy NOW to avoid future graphic-gimped MBPs.... Hmmm :eek:

or waitfor new crap ones and buy old better ones for les $ in refurb store :p

[troller]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/01/apple-dropping-nvidia-for-future-macs/)

SemiAccurate claims (http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/06/26/apple-nvidia-dont-let-door-hit-your-ss-way-out/) that Apple will be dropping NVIDIA-based designs in their next iMacs and laptops for at least the next few years. They claim the reason is due to the recent NVIDIA manufacturing defects (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/01/apple-extends-nvidia-macbook-pro-warranty-to-3-years/) which affected a number of MacBook Pros.

The shift back to Intel-based chipsets was not entirely unexpected, however, as Intel and NVIDIA have been under a licensing battle (http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2009/02/intel-sues-nvidia-over-chipset-license-agreement.ars) over whether or not NVIDIA can even produce Nehalem-based chipsets in the future. Apple currently uses the Nehalem processors for their Mac Pro line, and is expected to adopt the mobile Nehalem processors for its mobile line later this year (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/02/11/core-i7-nehalem-based-macbook-pros-possible-in-q4-2009/).


Article Link: Apple Dropping NVIDIA for Future Macs? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/01/apple-dropping-nvidia-for-future-macs/)

Steve Jobs is back to work lol :D :eek: This means You don't get what you pay for, you just PAY. Or maybe the holy glorious Mr Jobs will sell the nvidia as a option for additional $2000. I would not wonder.

[philamac]

You know, the other poster is right. Sounds like they're not talking about GPUs at all. Sounds like they're only talking about chipsets.

If they're just replacing NVIDIA with INTEL chipsets, northbridge & southbridge, etc.. I don't care as much. As long as they still include decent GPUs made by NVIDIA or ATI.

And to all those saying they prefer an INTEL over NVIDIA/ATI GPU.... you gotta do some research. Like many others have said, I would take a possibly defective NVIDIA GPU over an INTEL GPU any day.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

There won't be a switch away from nVidia. Here's why:

nVidia makes the chipsets for Apple computers right now. If Apple starts using ATi GPUs, nVidia won't like that nor will Intel. So then the only choices are to go back to nVidia or to use the crappy Intel graphics cards.

It just won't happen.

[MorphingDragon]

There won't be a switch away from nVidia. Here's why:

nVidia makes the chipsets for Apple computers right now. If Apple starts using ATi GPUs, nVidia won't like that nor will Intel. So then the only choices are to go back to nVidia or to use the crappy Intel graphics cards.

It just won't happen.

So? Intel only makes iGPUs so they wont care. Apple wont care if nVidia does not like it. They could easily just include an ATi HD4350 in the low end segment and use Intel Chipsets which are a lot better IMO.

[djellison]

They claim the reason is due to the recent NVIDIA manufacturing defects (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/01/apple-extends-nvidia-macbook-pro-warranty-to-3-years/) which affected a number of MacBook Pros.

Bull.

1) There's nothing better to switch to
2) They carried on with a roll out of 9400 across the ENTIRE RANGE, WELL after the orig nVidia problems were unearthed.

Complete nonsense.

[mdntcallr]

my god. will Apple really drop NVIDIA just because there are some defects in producing. it is hard to guess what Apple is planning. horrible.

by the same thoughts that Apple is giving, maybe apple consumers who have problems with apple computers ought to give up on Apple? no way.

right now Nvidia i think has corrected their problems and no doubt should have fixed the issue the problem created, ie pay for all this mess.

sorry, i hate intel graphics chips and i think ATI is good, but sometimes Nvidia has a better chip for a specific use.

[Michael Belisle]

It doesn't matter how much work Apple put into nVidia chips. Past experience with Apple is enough to show that they have no problem with abandoning something they put a lot work into. This is why there's no such thing as "legacy" support in the modern Mac world.

As for OpenCL, lack of current support for as-of-yet-unreleased graphics chips is a non-issue. New cards will support OpenCL. And the final OpenCL drivers aren't even out yet. The world will be a different place after the cross-platform OpenCL-compliant drivers are released (probably around the same time as Snow Leapord).

In fact, both the integrated 9400M in the mid-level and discrete GT120 in the high-end are actually a step backward compared to the previous generation's HD 2600 Pro and 8800 GS.

I personally verified this after I learned that the GT120 is nothing more than a low-cost OEM card. I was initially disappointed with the 8800GT in my early-2008 Mac Pro, but that was nothing compared to the disappointment I experienced when I compared graphics performance to a 2009 Mac Pro with the GT120. Hopefully, the GTX 285 on its way will fix all that.

[Michael Belisle]

For the record, I put all my chips in nVidia cards, having somehow totally missed the news about bumpgate. So I hope nVidia gets their act together, because I don't want to reevaluate that decision. I've had good experiences with nVidia across the board, a terrible experience with the worthless GMA 950, and wholly lackluster experiences with ATI chips.

If Apple switches, they better make a compelling and substantive case for why the change is a step in the right direction, not just tell us that crap is new black.

[xparaparafreakx]

Hopefully, the GTX 285 on its way will fix all that.

It is day and night with GT120 and GTX 285.

[javierbds]

Why do everybody forgets about the Mini? Please, put back there the Mini (OTOH maybe not, if this is true, I hope the Mini does not get updated for another couple of years :p). Let´s hope Intel can make a decent GPU in a couple of years. Can Larrabee match nVidia´s integrated GPUs? What about temperature?
The real reason for this seems to me Intel´s lawyers.

[markie]

nVIDIA makes total junk. They always have. Sure, it's fast performing junk (but they're also known to cheat on benchmarks by lowering rendering quality when they detect a benchmark)

ATI has always been more reliable, more stable, better rendering quality, and better supported - if not as fast.

Look at what nVIDIA did to 3dfx customers when they bought 3dfx - they immediately ceased releasing drivers, not even releasing an XP driver. Just dropped all support immediately, even for the most recently released 3dfx cards.

nVIDIA has ALWAYS been a lousy company that has an excellent price to speed ratio. You get what you pay for and I'm glad to see Apple turning away.

Oh, P.S. yes, I own a new 13" MacBook Pro and am TICKED about the SATA issues that the *nVIDIA CHIPSET* is having. Oh, and yes, I had a very recent (a few months before the buyout) 3dfx card years ago and was TICKED that it wasn't supported in XP because nVIDIA immediately dropped 3dfx driver support. nVIDIA has shown me time and again they are worthless. Oh, ask anyone who bought their 3D shutterglasses setup they sold then quit supporting. Or... Or...

Honestly, I was tempted not to buy the new Mac just cause of the nVIDIA chipset but figured all companies can make good for the right price, and Apple must be getting the best nVIDIA has. I'm learning how untrue that is with the SATA issues...

[str1f3]

Bull.

1) There's nothing better to switch to
2) They carried on with a roll out of 9400 across the ENTIRE RANGE, WELL after the orig nVidia problems were unearthed.

Complete nonsense.

It's not as simple as that. Apple was planning to use the 9400 for over a year which was about the time the issues with the 8600 were being recognized. There is even some question now of whether the 9600 will suffer those same issues.

I don't want to move away from Nvidia either but Apple would have to be pissed at having to service all those faulty MBPs without Applecare. This lack of reliability also hurts Apple's reputation. Maybe there will be ATI cards that will support OpenCL or Intel could improve their own solution.

I just hope Apple moves away from integrated graphics for all MBPs in the future.

[atomicshark]

I just don't know. ATI cards suck, NVIDIA apparently sucks now too, but Intel is a weak choice. If true, this move would suck.:mad:

BTW, Every mac I've owned with an NVIDIA chip has never had an issue. My Mac Pro at work has an ATI card that is glitchy and gave up the ghost last month. My bosses mac had the same card and it had major issues too. He replaced his with a nice NVIDIA card while I'm stuck with a Applecare replacement card that is still glitchy. Oh well, at least it works.

[walshlink]

Even though NVIDIA has had some manufacturing issues, Apple contines to make profits...BIG profits. People are still switching to Mac...not running away from it.

However, I would not count out Apple switching to Intel as Intel may have non-disclosed future products that may completely dominate NVIDIA.

Remember, HIS JOBNESS *starts religious chanting* is omniscient and "sees" the future, so I am sure whatever graphics options is selected will be the best... *end religious chanting*

[macintoshtoffy]

That would stink. I don't want Intel again.:(

Why? what is wrong with Intel? have you used the X4500? its a damn site more reliable than the rubbish that Nvidia pushes out as 'stable'. The last straw for me with Nvidia was their buck passing when their products started to fail - blaming everyone else except themselves. The worse part of the Nvidia fiasco is it isn't Nvidia who will suffer but those OEM's who used Nvidia products and are now having their products labelled as 'unreliable' by the average person.

Apple can't afford to have a supplier on their books that makes them look bad - name me a single Intel GPU that has had the specular product quality failures that Nvidia has.

[javierbds]

Why do everybody forgets about the Mini? Please, put back there the Mini (OTOH maybe not, if this is true, I hope the Mini does not get updated for another couple of years :p). Let´s hope Intel can make a decent GPU in a couple of years. Can Larrabee match nVidia´s integrated GPUs? What about temperature?
The real reason for this seems to me Intel´s lawyers.

Disclaimer: All my GPUs are ATI (iBook, iMac)

(That was supposed to be an edit :( )

[Pressure]

"SemiAccurate" or not, the fact remains that nVIDIA does not currently hold any license to manufacture and/or produce an Nehalem compatible chipset.

As far as it goes right now, it is entirely accurate!

Unless of course you all would rather see Apple dabble with Core 2 Duo in the next few revisions of the notebook family instead of using a Nehalem derivative.

Intel is expected to introduce new integrated graphic chips later this year to go with the new mobile processors.

[MattInOz]

You know, the other poster is right. Sounds like they're not talking about GPUs at all. Sounds like they're only talking about chipsets.

If they're just replacing NVIDIA with INTEL chipsets, northbridge & southbridge, etc.. I don't care as much. As long as they still include decent GPUs made by NVIDIA or ATI.

And to all those saying they prefer an INTEL over NVIDIA/ATI GPU.... you gotta do some research. Like many others have said, I would take a possibly defective NVIDIA GPU over an INTEL GPU any day.

It's all about chipsets but only really the southbridge part of the chipset, as the the new Nemehlem mobile CPU's integrate the whole of the northbridge with the CPU. So along with the DMI for linking to the southbridge they include and 8xPCI for Dedicated GPU connection.

The Intel/nVidia dispute is over the DMI seeing as nVidia Licensed the rights to make North and South bridges even though they never used the interface because they made them as one chip they say the license includes the right to build for DMI, Intel says No you don't.

So Apple either have to bring the parties together or choose from the option they have open. Which still includes adding a dedicated GPU of their choosing. But may have to live with intel southbridge which could mean they are stuck with intel wifi as well.

[macintoshtoffy]

I don't buy this. It would be a disaster to go back to intel integrated after people had a taste of a decent gpu in the current low end.

And your review of Intel graphics card is based on what expertise?

Use a X4500 or even a X3100 for every tasks and tell me there is a 'massive' amount of difference between those and Nvidia.

Oh, and at least with Intel it doesn't die after 6 months.

[macintoshtoffy]

I was going to bring up ATI/AMD if no one did. My only concern is that since AMD & Intel are rivals, not sure how that would affect the Apple/Intel relationship. NVidia, AFAIK, only does graphics cards & motherboard chipsets, not procs.

Pardon my ignorance but does AMD/ATI make chipsets for Intel?

[cg0def]

Yeah hum this is highly unlikely to happen since nvidia parts save Apple money and the manufacturing problems were fixed something like and year ago. It was after the manufacturing flaws were discovered that Apple went all the way in with nvidia chipsets so this supposed "rumor" is a pile of steaming crap. Plus Intel has no chipset that can compete with nvidia's offering or has real plans to make one. Considering that SL heavily depends on GPU processing going back to Intel is stupid even from an engineering perspective.

[macintoshtoffy]

We've been talking about the likely dropping of NVIDIA from MacBooks for several weeks over in the MacBook Pro/PowerBook thread here on MacRumors. Here is the link (last several pages have information about problems in using the 9400M or ANY NVIDIA chipset in Intel's Arrandale mobile processor).

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=668803

This post does a fairly good summary of the problem:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7938678&postcount=376

Thank you for the links; if it is going to be released in the forth quarter I wouldn't be surprised if one see's it appearing in Apples products by at least either the first or second quarter or 2010. Apple's fitting a war where they're trying to max out the grunt whilst also having a top notch battery life.

[edddeduck]

And your review of Intel graphics card is based on what expertise?

Use a X4500 or even a X3100 for every tasks and tell me there is a 'massive' amount of difference between those and Nvidia.

Oh, and at least with Intel it doesn't die after 6 months.


The difference between a X3100 and a NV9400 is like night and day! My day job is working in computer gaming and the new NV 9400 based machines can play newer Mac games in development with decent frame rates.

The X3100 has to have a special low end path written for it for it to even run at all in many cases.

On the PC the 3D Mark 05 for the three cards are below :-

NV9400 (http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-9400M-G.11949.0.html) - 3692 4.6x Faster
X4500 (http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Graphics-Media-Accelerator-4500MHD-GMA-X4500MHD.9883.0.html) - 1332 1.6x Faster
X3100 (http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Graphics-Media-Accelerator-X3100.2176.0.html) - 797

The newer 4500 card is a lot better than the X3100 but that does not mean it is in the same league as the 9400. (All these cards use integrated system memory).

Edwin

[walshlink]

"SemiAccurate" or not, the fact remains that nVIDIA does not currently hold any license to manufacture and/or produce an Nehalem compatible chipset.

As far as it goes right now, it is entirely accurate!

Unless of course you all would rather see Apple dabble with Core 2 Duo in the next few revisions of the notebook family instead of using a Nehalem derivative.

Intel is expected to introduce new integrated graphic chips later this year to go with the new mobile processors.

But for NVIDIA (or any other manufacturer) not to be able to buy licenses to manufacture/produce a Nehalem compatible chipset, would put Intel squarely as a target for a anti-trust lawsuit.

[tom.]

Let's see here...

If they wanted to drop nVidia, THEY WOULD HAVE DONE IT AFTER THE FAULTS OF THE 8600M GT. NOT THREE REVISIONS LATER AFTER HAVING INCLUDED EVEN MORE NVIDIA CHIPS IN THEIR COMPUTERS. :D:rolleyes:

SemiAccurate?! No. NO. CanNeverBeTrustedAgain is more appropriate. :p

Are you mental? You say everything like it is fact and yet 99% of the time you are completely off the mark (your infamous Nehalem thread, for example). Innocent passers-by and newbies might actually buy the stuff you post, so please either pipe-down or stop pretending you are preaching a known truth.

I think it is much more likely Apple will punish nVidia after several faulty roll-outs than after the first. However, that said - I don't think they will drop nVidia Chipsets

[macintoshtoffy]

I've also heard this from a source inside apple.

Too bad, cause the X3100 in my MacBook is terrible :(

Terrible? by what metric? are you trying to run Crysis or something on there? its a laptop, it does laptoppy things; if you want something to run games you're better off with a console, a high end iMac or a PC.

[MorphingDragon]

Driver Quality:
ATi/AMD, Intel

Power:
ATi/AMD, nVidia.

Ding Ding Ding

ATi wins Woo.

:eek:

NO really, Id prefer a GMA over GeForce because Intel can actually write drivers for their hardware. nVidia like messing with their customers. Why is a GT120 only an 8600 and GT130 a 8800 renamed?

[skinniezinho]

Those talking about intel graphics,have you heard of Larabee (http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Intel_Prepares_Its_2009_Larabee_Chip_Release_21514.html) ? It promises a lot,it's true,but it can be good,who knows?
For Nvidia,I hope they will change..
1st- nvidias had problems with the 8600gt and from what I've red with some 9600Gt too...
2nd - Ati's models equivalent to nvidia are cheaper, so it can be cheap to us too.And the performance are the same or better.
3rd - For those who say "there nothing better to change" you are joking right?If macbooks had a nvidia quadro maybe that could be true (even ati having firegl),but with geforce?!?!lol it's almost all the same.
So,for a macbook pro,best thing is:
intel + quadro fx or intel + ati radeon hybrid design :)

[BlizzardBomb]

Meh, nothing we say here is going to change anything. Only Apple, Intel, AMD and nVidia know about the politics of the whole thing. I for one think ATi, while they don't offer the strongest of graphics cards, beat nVidia hands down on bang for buck and their naming scheme. That and Intel are upping their game on the integrated graphics front.

[D A]

If the dispute between Intel and Nvidia doesn't get resolved (which it probably will), Macs will have to use chipsets by Intel. I find it highly unlikely that Intel would go and make a contract with AMD to make alternative chipset to the Intel one. With the Intel chipset they'd probably be stuck with an Intel IGP.

For the discrete GPU they could go either way with Nvidia or ATI. I'm guessing Apple will stay with Nvidia to unify their platform and cut development costs. A couple of weeks ago Nvidia announced a bunch of new mobile GPU which consume quite a bit less power than the ATI counterparts.

[MorphingDragon]

Wait...
A GT 120 is just a 9500GT which is a 8500GT
and the GT130 is a 9600GT qhich is an 8600GT... :eek:

[nickane]

as annoying as it is to go back to intel, Apple has been riding the back of the nVidia hypetrain to peddle iGPUs in "Pro"-designated machines as some supposedly inflation-busting tactic to lower prices that really only raises the bar of entry for a decent machine at a time when people are considering upgrading less often.

If Intel's iGPUs returning to the low-end is the price we have to pay for dGPUs in the MBPs and iMacs, across the board like it used to be, then I'm all for it.

But knowing Apple, they will simply keep the iGPU models integrated as their snowballing sales figures will suggest to them the market has accepted their ruse and nobody really needs a dedicated gfx unit anyways, even if their spending £1500 on a computer.

[MorphingDragon]

as annoying as it is to go back to intel, Apple has been riding the back of the nVidia hypetrain to peddle iGPUs in "Pro"-designated machines as some supposedly inflation-busting tactic to lower prices that really only raises the bar of entry for a decent machine at a time when people are considering upgrading less often.

If Intel's iGPUs returning to the low-end is the price we have to pay for dGPUs in the MBPs and iMacs, across the board like it used to be, then I'm all for it.

But knowing Apple, they will simply keep the iGPU models integrated as their snowballing sales figures will suggest to them the market has accepted their ruse and nobody really needs a dedicated gfx unit anyways, even if their spending £1500 on a computer.

Yes... DO IT. Bring back QuadroFX.
The only good stable peice of technology nVidia are capable of.

If this works then it gives Apple a good bitch slap in the face for such a stupid thing. I like Mac OSX but this stupidity is what is keeping me on this eMac.

Why cant they put the GTX285 and Quadro installed by default instead of buying it and installing it separately. Oh wait but it doesn't have ****** Mini DisplayPort. :/

[D A]

But for NVIDIA (or any other manufacturer) not to be able to buy licenses to manufacture/produce a Nehalem compatible chipset, would put Intel squarely as a target for a anti-trust lawsuit.

Nvidia can buy a license to produce Nehalem chipsets. They are not going to do that though (yet) as they believe their current contract with Intel allows them to produce Nehalem chipsets.

The dispute is quite simple really: Intel wants more $$$ from Nvidia but Nvidia don't want to give it to them that easily.

[nick9191]

Good riddance to bad rubbish. As long as we don't get the X4500 in the 13" (probably wont happen since it's now a pro).

[D A]

Wait...
A GT 120 is just a 9500GT which is a 8500GT
and the GT130 is a 9600GT qhich is an 8600GT... :eek:

Nvidia ran out of numbers for the GPU:s. Instead of going to 10,000 they decided to start over. In order to show where their older GPU:s compare to the newer ones they renamed them according to the new scale. Hence why they went to 2xx instead of 1xx with the new GPU:s. Anything in the 2xx series will be a new chip, below is older.

[macintoshtoffy]

The difference between a X3100 and a NV9400 is like night and day! My day job is working in computer gaming and the new NV 9400 based machines can play newer Mac games in development with decent frame rates.

The X3100 has to have a special low end path written for it for it to even run at all in many cases.

On the PC the 3D Mark 05 for the three cards are below :-

NV9400 (http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-9400M-G.11949.0.html) - 3692 4.6x Faster
X4500 (http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Graphics-Media-Accelerator-4500MHD-GMA-X4500MHD.9883.0.html) - 1332 1.6x Faster
X3100 (http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Graphics-Media-Accelerator-X3100.2176.0.html) - 797

The newer 4500 card is a lot better than the X3100 but that does not mean it is in the same league as the 9400. (All these cards use integrated system memory).

Edwin

So what you're actually complaining about is the fact that you went out and purchased a laptop completely unsuitable for what you need to do - and it is Apple's fault because of it. If what you required was something with sufficient grunt and you're a developer, why didn't you go for their Pro range? MacBooks are consumer level laptops - you're trying to use your BWM Mini as a bulldozer.

As for the jump of assuming Intel - why? I have an iMac with an ATI GPU, why would it be strange for MacBooks to have an ATI graphics card? as for Intel's chipsets, why not? Apple doesn't use the Intel wireless or ethernet controller and yet Intel restrain themselves from throwing a wobbly.

[MorphingDragon]

Nvidia ran out of numbers for the GPU:s. Instead of going to 10,000 they decided to start over. In order to show where their older GPU:s compare to the newer ones they renamed them according to the new scale. Hence why they went to 2xx instead of 1xx with the new GPU:s. Anything in the 2xx series will be a new chip, below is older.

I know that. But the technology being sold in a "Pro" version is actually entry level!!! That was my point. nVidia has a recent history where it has just been renaming.

[nick9191]

It doesn't make sense for Apple to drop nVidia now for a few reasons:

1. All Macs come standard with an nVidia GPU and many of them only have nVidia GPU options.
Hence the switch. Besides this just refers to the chipset, Apple can still use Nvidia GPU's

2. Open CL mostly supports nVidia GPUs.
OpenCL supports the current Radeon Cards in the iMac and Mac Pro.

3. ATi is an AMD brand and Apple uses Intel chips.
Doesn't make a bit of difference. ATI chips run on Intel chipsets (whilst providing more power per cost might I add). That statement is exactly the same as Nvidia making their own chipsets yet their cards run on Intel chipsets. Both AMD and Nvidia would be screwed if they only made GPU's for their own chipsets.

4. Intel integrated GPUs (if you can call them that) suck, though Apple has switched to them before.
No one said they were going to use them. an Intel X4500 in a "pro" laptop would be ridiculous even by Apple's standards. I could see an X4500 (or whatever IGP Nehalem uses) in a Mini though.

[BlizzardBomb]

Nvidia ran out of numbers for the GPU:s. Instead of going to 10,000 they decided to start over. In order to show where their older GPU:s compare to the newer ones they renamed them according to the new scale. Hence why they went to 2xx instead of 1xx with the new GPU:s. Anything in the 2xx series will be a new chip, below is older.

So by 2015, we'll be back to GeForce FX 5200, oh wait I mean GeForce GTX 5200. nVidia's naming scheme is a mess and it doesn't help that they keep rebranding, renaming and re-everythinging their old cards over and over again.

[D A]

So by 2015, we'll be back to GeForce FX 5200, oh wait I mean GeForce GTX 5200. nVidia's naming scheme is a mess and it doesn't help that they keep rebranding, renaming and re-everythinging their old cards over and over again.

Well, they don't have to do it for at least 7 generations now. If they decide to to 1000-names again they have even more generations. Unless they decide to drop the number scheme. ATI is no better in their top segment with the 47x0 and 48x0 series cards.

Better look at the actual specs than the name of the card.

[DELTAsnake]

If Apple dose this it would be a shame. I have used used nVidia chipset based motherboards since they first came out, there fast, reliable and very tweekable. and I'm sure the engineers at Apple love making tweeks to the nVidia chipset to give Apple an edge.

There have been some problems with some nVidia products, but that's ultimately TSMC's fault not nVidia's. TSMC make chips for practically everyone except Intel. But AMD have started a new independent company called Global Foundries that is starting to make there chips and nVidia is rumored to be in talks with GF to make there chips instead of TSMC.

[MacAndy74]

I hope it's true myself. I'm really not a fan of Nvidia - their drivers specially. Then there's their dodgy re-branding of old GPU's to make customers think they're buying new technology which they aren't.

Would be good, IMHO, to see Apple buying a share of the ATI operations of AMD. ;)

[MorphingDragon]

Why doesn't Apple just stop this and go with the people that integrate the Solutions together? That would really piss the two companies off and AMD will have the revenue to create another Athlon 64 Goliath. The opterons still outperform the Nehalem Xeons so why not or run really cool for a bit of a speed drop?

(Yes Its fun in my world isnt it :apple:)

[Anuba]

I had a feeling this wouldn't last long. Defects = NVidia's middle name. It was on the verge of becoming Apple's middle name too.

[macintoshtoffy]

Assuming Wikipedia is accurate, the effected 8600M were in in computers manufactured between May 2007 and September 2008 - I wonder, therefore, the replacement motherboards; are they still bundling the faulty 8600M or have they done a new run of 8600M chips and the replacements don't have the manufacturing flaws?

[motulist]

WHY are Intel's graphics chip sets so inferior to other manufacturer's graphics chip sets? Intel is very very good at manufacturing a zillion different types of chips, from tiny component chips all the way up to main CPU processors. What's so different about graphics chips? Why is it so hard for Intel to create good graphics chips when they're good at making every other type of chip?

[mabaker]

It's kind of ironic especially cuzz ATI graphics card are far better optimized for Mac OS and always have been. Yet Apple decided to go Nvidia.

I'd welcome good old ATI/AMD card in all macs on all fronts. Mac OS X flies on ATI cards.

[bananas]

It doesn't matter which GPU they use as long as it's not a downgrade in performance.

Intel has been working a long time on GPUs, so they might finally be able to come up with something as powerful as GeForce 9400.

Anyway, there's always ATi if Intel cannot make better graphics chip.

[MacAndy74]

It was on the verge of becoming Apple's middle name too.

So don't just talk the talk, buy a Dell and see how it really is on the other side of the fence.

[Solemony]

I don't like that idea very much... O.O

[miniConvert]

Meh. I think the nVidia chipset is great right now, but if that doesn't remain the case when upgrades come around then Apple should absolutely do what it always does - move on :D

[DELLsFan]

That's too bad ... I wonder if the failure rate of AMD/ATI graphics products compares ...

Which graphics are better for the Mac on the whole, anyway? ATI or nVidia? Or is the better question: which company inked the sweeter deal with Apple this year? Considering all the hype marketing by Apple recently in the embrace of nVidia on the MacBook family, I'm not terribly surprised at their announcement. No one likes a pie in the face ... :rolleyes:

[skinniezinho]

WHY are Intel's graphics chip sets so inferior to other manufacturer's graphics chip sets? Intel is very very good at manufacturing a zillion different types of chips, from tiny component chips all the way up to main CPU processors. What's so different about graphics chips? Why is it so hard for Intel to create good graphics chips when they're good at making every other type of chip?

because they are designed for max battery life and low cost...that's all..

[motulist]

because they are designed for max battery life and low cost...that's all..

Okay well, assuming that's true, then why is that the only thing they're designed for? Clearly there is (and has been) a huge demand for integrated Intel graphics chips that deliver at least moderate performance rather than just absolutely longest battery life.

[MorphingDragon]

That's too bad ... I wonder if the failure rate of AMD/ATI graphics products compares ...

Which graphics are better for the Mac on the whole, anyway? ATI or nVidia? Or is the better question: which company inked the sweeter deal with Apple this year? Considering all the hype marketing by Apple recently in the embrace of nVidia on the MacBook family, I'm not terribly surprised at their announcement. No one likes a pie in the face ... :rolleyes:

Lets put it this way, one time I couldn't get some really random kind of thermal grease off a Phenom Heat Spreader (Not Sink, The head spreader is the large metal thing directly on the CPU). Out of desperation and probably stupidity I removed the spreader from the CPU. Put both the CPU and the Spreader in Spirits. Let it soak for 2 hours. Rinse with Alcohol and Water and let it dry for 24 hours. The Phenom Still works and runs cooler now for some reason. Maybe because the spreader has Arctic Silver 5 instead of that crap that comes with it.
Whereas Ive had Pentium 4s die because they've fallen of my workbench.

Haven't tried it with a GPU yet ;)

[commander.data]

The major impediment to nVidia chipset adoption post Nehalem really isn't reliability or licensing issues but the fact that mainstream Nehalem's don't have QPI links but only a low-speed DMI link to a southbridge. Any IGP using the DMI link would by definition be sharing bandwidth since any IGP for mainstream Nehalem would have to be integrated on the southbridge. DMI has the bandwidth of PCIe 1.0 x4 and the IGP would be fighting for bandwidth against the SATA hard drives, optical drives, Firewire, USB, gigabit ethernet, etc. Even for quad core Clarksfield that doesn't include an Intel IGP, it doesn't have QPI links and only DMI making it hard to make an IGP viable.

The alternative of putting a separate IGP on the PCIe links or giving it a small amount of dedicated VRAM may work well for desktop solutions but not for what Apple is targeting in notebooks. Specifically, Apple's major support for IGPs in notebooks is the reduction in PCB space by not having to accommodate a separate GPU chip and VRAM. If an IGP is attached to the PCIe links and has a bit of dedicated VRAM basically acting as a crippled discrete GPU then you might as well just put in a true low-end GPU since the board space wouldn't be much more and the performance would be a lot better.

In terms of Intel's IGP in Arrandale, there is some hope that at least it won't be a downgrade from the 9400M. The GMA X4500MHD is about half the speed of the 9400M. Intel never took full advantage of the die shrink from 90nm in the X3100 to 65nm in the X4500 since they could have double the shader count but only increased it from 8 to 10. Arrandale's IGP will be further shrunk from 65nm to 45nm, so Intel could easily put in 16 shaders or more and coupled with higher clock speeds to at least match the 9400M. I doubt Apple would go back to Intel IGPs unless they would be competitive with existing solutions. Although Apple did go from the Mobility Radeon 9550 in the last iBook to the GMA950 so it isn't unheard of. In addition, admittedly the problem with Intel IGPs hasn't been the raw theoretical hardware capabilities, but poor driver support that takes a long time or never takes full advantage of the hardware.

[Plutonius]

Edit: Ah, I see Tallest Skil says the rumour's a lie. That probably means it'll turn out to be 100% accurate.

:)

[parapup]

Okay well, assuming that's true, then why is that the only thing they're designed for? Clearly there is (and has been) a huge demand for integrated Intel graphics chips that deliver at least moderate performance rather than just absolutely longest battery life.

GPUs are different beasts - Intel never had the technology to do high end GPUs like ATI and Nvidia does - and to make things even more difficult for Intel a lot of the GPU tech is patented amongst ATI and nVidia.

The reasons for Intel chips still being in the market are - a)majority of people do not care about graphics performance the way gamers or Pros do - they just want something that doesn't look too shabby b) For servers people want something that does not come in the way and require a lot of power and c) Intel almost bundles the GPU for free with their chipsets which means lower manufacturing costs for Dell/HP/Lenovo etc. (They don't have to pay separately to ATI/Nvidia for the GPU - remember Intel heavily discounts their entire CPU/Chipset/GPU package).

[edddeduck]

So what you're actually complaining about is the fact that you went out and purchased a laptop completely unsuitable for what you need to do - and it is Apple's fault because of it.

??? Confused on that one. I was just replying to your comment on the fact that the X3100 cards are just as good as the NV9400 cards, as I work making games on the Mac I can attest they are not as good when it comes to high end perfomance. As games are often a good test for how well the card can handle things I thought I would pass comment that the X3100 is vastly inferior in performance.

You might not notice it when opening a new finder window or an Excel spreadsheet but run iTunes visualization or iMovie on a high resolution or use an external screen and you might start to notice.


If what you required was something with sufficient grunt and you're a developer, why didn't you go for their Pro range? MacBooks are consumer level laptops - you're trying to use your BWM Mini as a bulldozer.


I agree in fact we don't develop on MacBooks with X3100 cards (although that is more down to the CPU and HD speeds than the card) but we as we sell games for Macintosh we have to try and support ALL the Mac's we can this includes X3100 and NV9400 based machines so we have examples of all the cards in the office. For development we can use a 8 core MacPro but you still have to support lower spec machines not just the fastest one money can buy.


As for the jump of assuming Intel - why? I have an iMac with an ATI GPU, why would it be strange for MacBooks to have an ATI graphics card?


Personally I really like guys in the Mac department at ATI and they are very helpful and they give us great support when we need help with driver issues etc. They have had their cards in the MacBookPro's with the X1600 card. They have also had the standard card in the MacPro with the 2600 and the iMac with the 2400. In fact the 3xxx and 4xxx series Mac cards are amazingly fast in the MacPro.

I did not assume Intel in any way, my comment was to reply to your comment which was in the context of comparing the current NV9400 solution to the currently unused on the Mac, Intel X4500 card.

I don't mind what card is placed in the Apple machines, NVIDIA, ATI or Intel. But as my job is based on games (that need as high a performance as possible) I would prefer a card that performs well so more people can play our games. :)

This at the moment favors the cards from ATI and NVIDIA but Intel have Larabee coming and from the news it looks like this new card series will be competitive against ATI and NVIDIA offerings.

The only point I was trying to make is the Intel integrated cards right now are underpowered compared to the ATI and NVIDIA integrated solutions. Although this effects games first it also can effect other applications like iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie and even the OS. This is because the OS is increasingly off loading tasks onto your graphics card (like QuartzExtreme) and as such a faster card will give you a nicer experience.

If you don't play games it does not matter as much but if you offered me a Mac with a X3100 or a NV9400 even if I did not play games I would choose the NV card as it is four and a half times more powerful. (ATI don't have an integrated card available on the Mac so that is not an option right now).

Edwin

[diamond.g]

It doesn't matter which GPU they use as long as it's not a downgrade in performance.

Intel has been working a long time on GPUs, so they might finally be able to come up with something as powerful as GeForce 9400.

Anyway, there's always ATi if Intel cannot make better graphics chip.
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. Intel really needs to get Larrabee out. That is their only hope for competing with Nvidia/ATI.

[Eriamjh1138@DAN]

I'll go on record to say that Larrabee will suck.

Intel can't make a GPU that doesn't suck. If Apple uses it, in 12 months, it will switch to something else because it sucks.

God, I hope I am wrong.

[Anuba]

So don't just talk the talk, buy a Dell and see how it really is on the other side of the fence.
Err... I walked the PC walk for 20 years, in fact I'm typing on a Dell right now since my iMac is dead (for the 2nd time) and my 2-week old MBP 17" is currently running the extended Apple Hardware Test to see if I get any error codes -- it won't start in neither OS X nor BootCamp/Win7 64-bit.

My last 5 machines were from Dell and I had no issues with any of them except one, which was a total piece of crap. It was not a normal Dell machine, however, it was an XPS700 gaming PC based on a chipset from... drumroll... NVidia. Some of their video cards are OK, but don't EVER let NVidia take control of other aspects of the machine like the chipset, it will only end in misery.

[Bubba Satori]

We just got a new 17.3" HP laptop in the store last week with the ATI 4650 1GB video card. We loaded Crysis on it to see how it would run. :eek: :D I hope the new Macbook Pro gets the 4650 soon. The HP is a Quad core 9000, 6GB ram, 500GB 7,200 HD and HDMI out. I can get one for $1,200 with my employee discount. Has anybody ever hacked one of the high end Pavilions ?

[MRKenan]

Lets put it this way, one time I couldn't get some really random kind of thermal grease off a Phenom Heat Spreader (Not Sink, The head spreader is the large metal thing directly on the CPU). Out of desperation and probably stupidity I removed the spreader from the CPU. Put both the CPU and the Spreader in Spirits. Let it soak for 2 hours. Rinse with Alcohol and Water and let it dry for 24 hours. The Phenom Still works and runs cooler now for some reason. Maybe because the spreader has Arctic Silver 5 instead of that crap that comes with it.
Whereas Ive had Pentium 4s die because they've fallen of my workbench.


This is not an accurate comparison of the quality of the chips. One was carefully removed taken apart and cleaned while the other had to withstand the shock of being dropped. Its like saying that that you carefully detailed your Geo Metro and it runs great but you took a sledge hammer to a Mazda 6 and now it's not running and from this it is obvious that the Geo Metro is a higher quality than a Mazda 6. It just doesn't follow.

[techfreak85]

What's this (http://www.9to5mac.com/apple-gpu) about Apple making their own GPUs??:rolleyes:

[diamond.g]

What's this (http://www.9to5mac.com/apple-gpu) about Apple making their own GPUs??:rolleyes:

Interesting. I wonder how that would affect bootcamp compatibility. I guess it is possible for them to come up with some decent GPU hardware. I wouldn't expect them to be able to outrun Nvidia or ATI though. They should be able to outdo Intel though...

[macintoshtoffy]

What's this (http://www.9to5mac.com/apple-gpu) about Apple making their own GPUs??:rolleyes:


I wouldn't look too much into that given that they've upped their investment in Imagination (which makes their GPU's on the iPhone) - I don't see Apple entering the GPU market simply because they, along with CPU's, have become so complex that you need massive economies of scale to ever recoup just the investment alone.

[macintoshtoffy]

We just got a new 17.3" HP laptop in the store last week with the ATI 4650 1GB video card. We loaded Crysis on it to see how it would run. :eek: :D I hope the new Macbook Pro gets the 4650 soon. The HP is a Quad core 9000, 6GB ram, 500GB 7,200 HD and HDMI out. I can get one for $1,200 with my employee discount. Has anybody ever hacked one of the high end Pavilions ?


Hang on, you're comparing a desktop replacement with a laptop? good lord; they aren't even the same beast. A desktop replacement is something that is minimally moved where as a MacBook Pro is designed to be used on the go. As I said, the two are completely different beasts.

[macintoshtoffy]

Err... I walked the PC walk for 20 years, in fact I'm typing on a Dell right now since my iMac is dead (for the 2nd time) and my 2-week old MBP 17" is currently running the extended Apple Hardware Test to see if I get any error codes -- it won't start in neither OS X nor BootCamp/Win7 64-bit.

My last 5 machines were from Dell and I had no issues with any of them except one, which was a total piece of crap. It was not a normal Dell machine, however, it was an XPS700 gaming PC based on a chipset from... drumroll... NVidia. Some of their video cards are OK, but don't EVER let NVidia take control of other aspects of the machine like the chipset, it will only end in misery.

I've actually found Dell really reliable; they aren't sexy, they're not fancy, but if you want to upgrade components, swap parts out - its a walk in the park compared to the proprietary ridden crap that HP puts out. I swear, when I was fixing up a customers HP computer that I have never seen so much crap in a single box - custom and proprietary everything.

If I was told to purchase a computer and it could only be a PC, I'd settle for either a Dell or Lenovo; probably Dell given that I prefer to get my computers online so that I am not hassled with sales drones in stores.

[str1f3]

Interestingly enough, Electronista is reporting that ATI will be releasing the Radeon HD 4200 and should compete with the 9400/m and give a 15% increase in performance. It should also support OpenCL.

http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/07/02/radeon.hd.4200.leak/

[Drag'nGT]

What's this (http://www.9to5mac.com/apple-gpu) about Apple making their own GPUs??:rolleyes:

You know this isn't too far fetched honestly. Apple's PPC beat the Intel chips back in the day and we never thought we'd see them in a Mac. I don't think Apple made the change for any other reason than to get Windows on it for the people who prior to Vista wanted to use both OS'.

Rumors are that Apple is making their own chips for future iPhones and Touches because they don't want the chips they used sold to the other phone manufacturers. Making their own GPUs will allow Apple to exceed what the other companies may build for the Mac as well as shutting down the Hackintosh abilities.

I just hope we don't go from good GPUs to OK GPUs. It's the shortcoming in Apple's lineup that everyone harps about. :(

[Eidorian]

Interestingly enough, Electronista is reporting that ATI will be releasing the Radeon HD 4200 and should compete with the 9400/m and give a 15% increase in performance. It should also support OpenCL.

http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/07/02/radeon.hd.4200.leak/And that RV620 will never see the light of day on an Intel platform.

Coming soon to an AMD 785G near you.

[22Hertz]

I didn't read all posts, but...

Apple makes smart decisions, and is making one by dropping a company producing a historically defective chipset.

A no brainer

Remember, Intel's 32nm chip is within a 1.5 yr reach.
Every time a die shrinks in size speeds get faster and chips more efficient. Less Heat - Faster - Smaller - Less Power Need - etc....

If Intel gets their GPU act together we could see some powerful new mobile devices (and desktops).

PS:Apple didn't work hard on GrandStation to abandon it ;)
:Intel wants the buisness - ATI is still an option - Nvidia, well IMO they have never represented stability

Have faith :apple: knows how to play ball:)

[Bubba Satori]

Hang on, you're comparing a desktop replacement with a laptop? good lord; they aren't even the same beast. A desktop replacement is something that is minimally moved where as a MacBook Pro is designed to be used on the go. As I said, the two are completely different beasts.


No, I'm not. I know they are two very different computers. I sell both of them to two very different types of customers.

I was just hoping that Apple would some day put an ATI 4000 series vid card in at least one Macbook Pro.

[MacFanJeff]

I wonder if this will have any bearing on NVIDIA graphics cards being available on new Mac Pros later on like when they revise them in 2010? As it stands now, I may have to switch back to a PC because Apple does not update their graphics cards often enough for me with good ones or if they do it is not the top end - like the 285 and not the 295. Given they may drop them for a while I would not expect to see NVIDIA support Apple with new cards.

I work mostly with 3D apps like Modo, Maya, ZBrush, Vue, etc. and this is REALLY going to hurt me because I MUST have the best cards possible. In fact, NVIDIA is often the favored card for most software like that.

Keeping fingers crossed though, have to wait and see.

[iPhoneNYC]

NVIDIA was a step forward - if it is to be replaced it will be hard, especially on the lower end.

[Anuba]

I've actually found Dell really reliable; they aren't sexy, they're not fancy, but if you want to upgrade components, swap parts out - its a walk in the park compared to the proprietary ridden crap that HP puts out.
That's pretty much my feeling as well. I started using Dell machines about 10 years ago and the perspective was very different back then... everyone else made beige junk that was horribly messy on the inside (once you hade gone through the pain of removing 4-6 screws just to open a minitower), while Dell had started making nice black enclosures that were easy to open and service, everything was neat, color-coded and tool-less on the inside. In 2001 they were the Macs of the PC universe.

Time has caught up with Dell since then and now there are plenty of brands with sexier design, but if I were to buy a PC again, I'd definitely get a Dell (just not one with NVidia chipset). Also, their support is phenomenal. I understand this isn't the case in the U.S, but here in Sweden we've got sort of a Bizarro world situation... Dell's support is uber-professional, they bend over backwards to fix any problem on-site within 24 hrs no matter if you live smack in the middle of Stockholm or in some remote mountain shack, while Apple's support is a sad joke... snooty, lazy, unhelpful amateurs.

NVIDIA was a step forward - if it is to be replaced it will be hard, especially on the lower end.
Performance wise it was a step forward. Quality wise it was two steps back.

[windywoo]

Those talking about intel graphics,have you heard of Larabee (http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Intel_Prepares_Its_2009_Larabee_Chip_Release_21514.html) ? It promises a lot,it's true,but it can be good,who knows?


I did know about Larabee but always thought it was in the far off future. Will it be ready for a new generation of Macs is another question to be asked.

[Rorikynn]

Larrabee is an ambitious idea that only Intel could pull off. The future of graphics (5+ years) could very well be advanced software rendering; photon mapping, ray tracing, voxels-based rendering. For Intel, getting their early Larrabee design in Macs would be a huge win. All they have to do is best the lowly 9400M or even the 9600M GT in performance. Larrabee would also be the perfect component for OpenCL and Grand Central. The big problem, I think, will be the thermal envelope. I don't think Larrabee will run cool enough to be placed in a laptop.

[windywoo]

Maybe PowerVR will make a comeback in the desktop market. I don't think laptops were popular enough back when they were still making graphics cards, but I'm sure they could have developed something by now.

I remember my PowerVR card was pretty good, but then within a couple of generations ATI and nVidia seemed to kill them off :(

[diamond.g]

Maybe PowerVR will make a comeback in the desktop market. I don't think laptops were popular enough back when they were still making graphics cards, but I'm sure they could have developed something by now.

I remember my PowerVR card was pretty good, but then within a couple of generations ATI and nVidia seemed to kill them off :(

They had good hardware (considering the tiling) but the drivers were crap. Plus they couldn't seem to keep up with the optimizations that Nvidia and ATI were doing (still do).

[emulator]

In my 2007 Al iMac, it has the ATI/Radeon HD2600. Is this graphic card outdated already? :confused:
Will Apple turn to ATI over Nvidia?
when taling about gfx cards, the newest ATI already outdated on release day.

[Mattie Num Nums]

I see this rumor being true. nVidia has not only dropped the ball with Apple many many times, but they are in a big fight with Intel right now. Apple will chose Intel's side 100% of the time.

[knewsom]

Either have your engineers create your own chipsets again (let's face it, apple... you've done it before and done it spectacularly well, you can do it again), or liscense NVIDIA's design and have it manufactured independently so you can monitor quality more carefully. Going back to the basic Intel chipset is such a step backward...

[AidenShaw]

b) For servers people want something that does not come in the way and require a lot of power.

HP and Dell use ATI discrete GPU chips in most of their servers. I don't believe that there are any multi-socket chipsets with integrated graphics.

Even most low-end servers use discrete GPUs (but note that Dell says "integrated graphics" in some places for their low-end tower servers, but the spec sheet says ATI RN50).


Apple's PPC beat the Intel chips back in the day and we never thought we'd see them in a Mac.

Actually, it was Motorola's PPC - and "the day" didn't last very long. Except for some Altivec-sweet applications Intel chips held their own in most tests.

[jdechko]

I didn't read all of the replies, but I'm just throwing my 2 cents' worth in the thread.

I would believe that they are dropping nVidia chipsets for upcoming models, because of the licensing issues. I think that Intel can probably do it better anyway with their onboard memory controller (is this new? I don't even know) and the new advances with its upcoming platforms. Fortunately, the removal of the nVidia chipset makes more room for dedicated graphics chips across the board (we have 2 chips currently, with Intel's CPU/Chipset combo, we'd have 1 chip with physical space for a second, ie: a GPU).

Also, with the upcoming Open CL that was so highly pushed, I doubt that Apple would abandon that technology in roughly half of it's machines.

So I think we will start seeing dedicated GPU's across the board, whether from nVidia or ATI.

[stainlessliquid]

who cares as long as they dont go back to intel graphics

I remember saying "why? nvidia chipsets havent been any good since nforce3" when the first rumor came out though

[gkarris]

Really, now. These IGA are getting really, really, powerful. How much power do you need if you are in the market for a low-end computer? :eek:

The next generation Intel IGA should be good enough for many, tasks - especially in Snow Leopard. This will also keep costs lower (for Apple and maybe the customer if Apple decides to pass the savings on).

I think that Apple will probably end up with ATI discreet graphics for mid and higher end machines.

[Anaxarxes]

Apple is very frustrated about defects on the 8600M GT. They decided to go mcp79 because x3100/x4500 was not performing good under anything. (OpenCL, OpenGL)

nVidia and Intel have a lawsuit going on over Nehalem chipset production. Since Nehalem has integrated memory controller, Intel claims that this violates the current chipset manufacturing agreement, and they claim a new agreement has to be established ( that probably means more royalty pays for nVidia, and that's why nVidia is pushing that current agreement should not be violated)

Intel is not happy that they lost Apple chipsets to nVidia. Now Labree finishing the design phase, Intel is confident that it'll gather integrated chipset performance crown. And with nVidia's situation about nehalem chipsets, that'll put intel back in the game.

Apple may very well ditch nVidia chipsets and they may very well ditch GeForce line of GPUs from all Macs until nVidia staightens out it's manufacturing problems ( Quadro option would probably stay )

As long as we get more performance and high quality, I don't care really. I own a 13" MBP with 9400m, and I'm very happy.

[dagamer34]

Apple is very frustrated about defects on the 8600M GT. They decided to go mcp79 because x3100/x4500 was not performing good under anything. (OpenCL, OpenGL)

nVidia and Intel have a lawsuit going on over Nehalem chipset production. Since Nehalem has integrated memory controller, Intel claims that this violates the current chipset manufacturing agreement, and they claim a new agreement has to be established ( that probably means more royalty pays for nVidia, and that's why nVidia is pushing that current agreement should not be violated)

Intel is not happy that they lost Apple chipsets to nVidia. Now Labree finishing the design phase, Intel is confident that it'll gather integrated chipset performance crown. And with nVidia's situation about nehalem chipsets, that'll put intel back in the game.

Apple may very well ditch nVidia chipsets and they may very well ditch GeForce line of GPUs from all Macs until nVidia staightens out it's manufacturing problems ( Quadro option would probably stay )

As long as we get more performance and high quality, I don't care really. I own a 13" MBP with 9400m, and I'm very happy.

No professional is going to buy a laptop with Larrabee graphics inside. That's like asking for trouble. Who buys a first generation product and expects it to last?

[Eidorian]

No professional is going to buy a laptop with Larrabee graphics inside. That's like asking for trouble. Who buys a first generation product and expects it to last?Everyone else except someone who buys an Apple product?

[Anaxarxes]

No professional is going to buy a laptop with Larrabee graphics inside. That's like asking for trouble. Who buys a first generation product and expects it to last?

Remember ATI 9500/9700? They were first generation DX9 cards that were gems. They lasted over 3 years a no opponent from nvidia was present to match them.

All I'm saying that Apple won't surprise me if they kick out nvidia as their mobile chipset choice. Considering that Intel will build Labree inside it's cpus that could very well be the next step.

[Eidorian]

Remember ATI 9500/9700? They were first generation DX9 cards that were gems. They lasted over 3 years a no opponent from nvidia was present to match them.

All I'm saying that Apple won't surprise me if they kick out nvidia as their mobile chipset choice. Considering that Intel will build Labree inside it's cpus that could very well be the next step.The Radeon 9600/9700 (R300) brings back fond memories of a killer product. The 9600 gave you good midrange performance even into 2005.

nVidia's G80 comes to mind for more recent times. The first DirectX 10 cards out and with killer performance as well. The 8800GTS 320/640 is still quite the passable card even today.

[gkarris]

Maybe PowerVR will make a comeback in the desktop market. I don't think laptops were popular enough back when they were still making graphics cards, but I'm sure they could have developed something by now.

I remember my PowerVR card was pretty good, but then within a couple of generations ATI and nVidia seemed to kill them off :(

Yes, they have, the GMA500...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA#GMA_500

[Anaxarxes]

The Radeon 9600/9700 (R300) brings back fond memories of a killer product. The 9600 gave you good midrange performance even into 2005.

nVidia's G80 comes to mind for more recent times. The first DirectX 10 cards out and with killer performance as well. The 8800GTS 320/640 is still quite the passable card even today.

G80 was good, too, but R300's successs was beyond anything I had seen. It remembered me Voodoo days. Good old 3dfx...

[Eidorian]

G80 was good, too, but R300's successs was beyond anything I had seen. It remembered me Voodoo days. Good old 3dfx...nVidia was down and out until the 6 Series showed up. The FX Series was just a miserable failure.

[diamond.g]

Yes, they have, the GMA500...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA#GMA_500

Which is just the SGX. It appears that it is only used (so far) in the Atom platform.


Sigh, come to find out only the 545 is DX10.1 capable (http://www.mitrax.de/?cont=artikel&aid=35&page=4)...

[22Hertz]

I didn't read all of the replies, but I'm just throwing my 2 cents' worth in the thread.

I would believe that they are dropping nVidia chipsets for upcoming models, because of the licensing issues. I think that Intel can probably do it better anyway with their onboard memory controller (is this new? I don't even know) and the new advances with its upcoming platforms. Fortunately, the removal of the nVidia chipset makes more room for dedicated graphics chips across the board (we have 2 chips currently, with Intel's CPU/Chipset combo, we'd have 1 chip with physical space for a second, ie: a GPU).

Also, with the upcoming Open CL that was so highly pushed, I doubt that Apple would abandon that technology in roughly half of it's machines.

So I think we will start seeing dedicated GPU's across the board, whether from nVidia or ATI.

Getting a dedicated graphic card (in that sense) would be near impossible without better cooling or under clocking the GPU. Today's graphic chips run hot and enough cooling is the problem.

Heat (and voltage spikes) are enemies to all electronics. Electronic Manufacturers specify a range the temp. is ok to be within...Engineers design to keep all components inside the normal operating heat range... in a laptop its necessary to balance heat dissipation, power usage and performance.

When Intel comes up with a 32nm chip it will use less power. All heat is, is power burnt off not used (technical term:D ) due to inefficiencies. If you reduce inefficiency you at the same reduce the amount of heat (due to loss power) AND that 'would have been heat' is now usable power = ability to have FASTER chips (under same conditions).
These chips will be a STEP up and possibly before moore's law predicts

jdechko - AMD was the first to use on-chip-memory-controller (to my knowledge)

[cult hero]

So I think we will start seeing dedicated GPU's across the board, whether from nVidia or ATI.

That's actually what I was hoping, except I gotta say, when I switch over to using the onboard video on my Oct. 2008 MBP I get another hour or so of battery life.

[cult hero]

jdechko - AMD was the first to use on-chip-memory-controller (to my knowledge)

They were. It was the AM2 platform.

[Eidorian]

They were. It was the AM2 platform.Socket 939 and 754 came before...

I'm sure a non-x86 platform had an onboard controller before AMD.

[windywoo]

Yes, they have, the GMA500...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA#GMA_500

Oh noes!