NVIDIA Sources Refute Claim of Split With Apple

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/03/nvidia-sources-refute-claim-of-split-with-apple/)

Fudzilla has heard (http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/14512/34/) from industry sources close to NVIDIA that a recent report (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/01/apple-dropping-nvidia-for-future-macs/) claiming that Apple will be dropping NVIDIA-based designs for future Macs is false and that the companies' relationship is "just fine."Apple is still buying Nvidia notebook chips and chipsets and nothing has changed in the last few weeks. Nvidia and Jensen [NVIDIA CEO Jen-Hsun Huang] himself have a lot of respect for fuss maker Apple, and therefore this relationship has top priority for Nvidia people.According to the earlier report, Apple's dissatisfaction with manufacturing defects (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/01/apple-extends-nvidia-macbook-pro-warranty-to-3-years/) in NVIDIA's chipsets for a number of MacBook Pros had led Apple to drop NVIDIA for future Macs.

The future of NVIDIA's chipsets in Macs remains in question, however, as Intel and NVIDIA have filed lawsuits against each other over licensing of Intel's Nehalem architecture, which is expected to make its way into Apple's mobile line later this year.

Article Link: NVIDIA Sources Refute Claim of Split With Apple (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/03/nvidia-sources-refute-claim-of-split-with-apple/)

[Kilamite]

Hmm. We'll see.

If they sort out their huge defects then they'll be fine. Their chips are good, and the 9400M outlines how good their integrated solutions can be. They just need to tighten down their manufacturing.

[Tallest Skil]

"We will never make a phone." -Apple
"We're still selling to Apple." -nVidia

Eh, there's no stock in this.

[earthandtone]

I hope they stick with nvidIa!

[Abstract]

Lots of other manufacturers are customers of multiple companies competing after each other. I don't see why anybody would have to "split" from such a relationship. Perhaps Apple would buy more ATI graphics sets right now, but everything is temporary, and Apple could exclusively buy from Nvidia in the future.

The only thing that doesn't make sense is for Apple to have a bad relationship with Nvidia because they're decided to go with ATI, or back to Intel for their integrated graphics. Again, every tight relationship is temporary in technology.

[wardev]

I hope they stick with nvidIa!

me too, i was glad macs finally had decent graphics chips

[jav6454]

"We will never make a phone." -Apple
"We're still selling to Apple." -nVidia

Eh, there's no stock in this.

Lol...


In a side note. I've been quite happy with the adoption of the 9400M, I hope the nVidia deal still sticks thru, I would like to stay away as far as possible (not even wanting to touch it with a 10 ft pole) from Intel graphics.

[mdntcallr]

well, dropping Nvidia would severely limit apple's graphics chips options especially in laptops.

That said, reliability is a huge issue and if chips were coming in defective, Nvidia ought to pay for all the issues it creates.

I hope Nvidia works to repair any problems and their relationship with Apple. maybe apple will understand. they aren't perfect either. ie the current heating and coloration issues on the white iphone 3gs

[Gregintosh]

Maybe this whole thing was a subtle PR stunt designed to improve Apple's position in negotiations (as now you probably have the Account Executives in charge of Apple's relationship calling frantically and making concessions to keep Apple happy).

I think dropping nVidia would be a big mistake, especially if it means that all computers with the integrated chips all of a sudden take a big hit in performance (making future revisions effectively downgrades).

On the other hand, it would be wise for Apple to have a plan in place in case nVidia loses that lawsuit and is unable to provide chipsets, etc. to anyone. In this case Apple would be stupid not to have an alternative plan lined up that wouldn't force them to delay future upgrades by more than necessary (so we don't have another mac mini situation where all the Apple computers go 18+ months without an update because they had to start planning from scratch).

The original source of the rumors might have been given information about such an alternative plan that involves dropping nVidia altogether, but it does not mean that this plan is Apple's priority or it will ever be implemented (unless that lawsuit forces it).

[oyebto]

something tells me apple is the one who started the rumour in the 1st place.

[talkingfuture]

I didn't have much faith in the original report. I suppose we find out for certain when the next round of hardware updates appear.

[Peace]

something tells me apple is the one who started the rumour in the 1st place.

Someone who wanted ad revenue started it.

[OriginalMacRat]

Flashback: "IBM Sources Refute Claim of Split With Apple"

[iMacmatician]

Flashback: "IBM Sources Refute Claim of Split With Apple"That's exactly what I was thinking.

[manhattanboy]

I for one quite like the vid cards from the Big N.
The last intel graphics incorporated into a macbook that I can remember was the first generation Air... Maybe that is the "model" Apple is hoping for:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[cg0def]

If you really believe that Apple will stop using nvidia chips over some alleged manufacturing problem then I have a piece of land you might be interested in. Apple does not like working with AMD ( probably has to do with the fact that AMD generally does not negotiate prices ) and Apple really has no other choice besides Nvidia. Intel is so far back in the GPU games that I don't think even Intel employees believe that they will ever catch up. And it would be wise to remember that Apple did make a huge investment in GPU processing. If nothing else Apple needs nvidia.
One more thing, a single chip solution like the 9400m saves Apple a considerable chunk of cash and they need a really good reason to change it. A manufacturing problem with a previous gen hardware that did get fixed is note a good reason at all.

Oh and next time, if you are going to make up something at least make it half believable!

[iAlexG]

I hope Apple stays with Nvidia and they upgrade the Macbook Pro 13 GPU

[macintoshtoffy]

me too, i was glad macs finally had decent graphics chips

Why not have Intel chipset with an ATI graphics card? you'll still get great performance from a GPU vendor whose products don't die after 6 months (then turn around to blame the OEM's by claiming that they didn't follow the specification requirements for heat dissipation).

[AmbitiousLemon]

"We will never make a phone." -Apple


Trouble is Apple never said any such thing. :rolleyes:

[macintoshtoffy]

Trouble is Apple never said any such thing. :rolleyes:

That won't stop people from regurgitating in accurate thins many times - its like the 640K quotation attributed to Bill Gates of which he never said.

[Tallest Skil]

Trouble is Apple never said any such thing. :rolleyes:

What'd they say, then? Just vague denials of its existence?

[macintoshtoffy]

What'd they say, then? Just vague denials of its existence?

Failure to read on your part is an epidemic. He stated that there was no evidence as to the explicit statement denying the working on a telephone. You seem to ignore what the original poster said in favour of going off on a tangent.

[zw-gator]

Two weeks ago eveyone was like "EPIC FAIL....13" MBP only has a 9400M"

Now, the 9400M is not so bad

[Tallest Skil]

He stated that there was no evidence as to the explicit statement denying the working on a telephone.

Prompting me to ask what was actually said.

You seem to ignore what the original poster said in favour of going off on a tangent.

The tangent being asking what they actually said.

[macintoshtoffy]

Two weeks ago eveyone was like "EPIC FAIL....13" MBP only has a 9400M"

Now, the 9400M is not so bad

Well, its like the G5 issue:

"EPIC Fail, even though I bought a G5 knowing it will be replaced with an Intel and I wasn't willing to wait for my software to appear on Intel I decided to upgrade to a G5 I am going to complain because there is no Snow Leopard PowerPC".

[Shake 'n' Bake]

By a show of hands, who is really surprised to hear this news? :rolleyes:

[-wiseguy-]

phew:)

[Eidorian]

And we're still waiting to see what will happen once Arrandale hits.

[whooleytoo]

Nvidia and Jensen [NVIDIA CEO Jen-Hsun Huang] himself have a lot of respect for fuss maker Apple


Eh?

"We have a lot of respect for those darn trouble makers Apple.." :p

[Peace]

Eh?

"We have a lot of respect for those darn trouble makers Apple.." :p

I think the CEO was probably referring to Steve Jobs.:D

[OceanView]

We'll wait and see.
Hopefully they can work things out.

[deconstruct60]

Maybe this whole thing was a subtle PR stunt designed to improve Apple's position in negotiations (as now you probably have the Account Executives in charge of Apple's relationship calling frantically and making concessions to keep Apple happy).


Or a "PR Stunt" to boost webhits at SemiAccurate?

http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/personal?x_myspace_page=profile&u=342002505931

The report at SemiAccurate links up to support stories at inquirer..... however all of the stuff is written by the same person.

Looking over at Dell's site appears to be quite a few boxes that have flipped over to i7. The causality of "bump problem made them dump" is very suspect for that shift. For the AMD and i7 ( and coming i5 and i3 ) the "blowback for bump problem" is a seriously flawed hypothesis.

If look for boxes with Core 2 Duos on Dell's site.... surprise you run into Nvidia products.

I'm sure the problems Nvidia had caused some negative impacts with their Apple relationship. However, seems overblown (unless Nvidia is truely incompetent. )

From a core I/O (with integrated graphics) chipset perspective since Nvidia and Intel are suing each other over Core i7,i5,i3 offerings , does it make any sense what so ever that Apple even remotely try to walk into the middle of that???? When Intel and Nvidia are done taking whacks at each other and the legal clouds clear then perhaps maybe Nvidia might have a chance. However, if Nvidia showed up with some dog-and-pony show that claimed they were going to win and to start incorporating their roadmap into Apple's future plans now. Yeah, that would be "don't call us, we'll call you" moment.

Similarly with the "Intel IGP is complete crap". Why would Intel put a complete crap IGP configuration inside the chip package with their latest, bleeding edge mobile cores (Arrandale)? Is it going to win performance benchmark contests against all comers? Probably not. Could it slightly less than double scores with a process shrink (from previous implemntations) and a few more graphics cores? Sure.

They can make people take IGP because it is bundled, but if th IGP sucks really badly then folks may not buy the whole package.



The average gap between Mac Pro updates about 6 months so conceptually since Arrandale is due in Q4 2009 and there is no January MacWorld show to hoild them back for could release new laptops in December. May have trouble getting major media attention, but possible.

[danielwsmithee]

If Apple does drop NVidia, at least temporarily it will be due to Nehalem.

Lets see for an iMac they could have a Core 2 Duo with a GT130 or a Nehalem CoreI7 with an ATI Radeon HD 4850 ... same goes for the next generation MBP.

I could totally see Apple still using NVIDIA with a Core2 on their cheaper models and introduce Nehalem with ATI on their more expensive models.

This really only affects integrated graphics, and Nehalem will be at a much higher price point for the next year or so then would allow for integrated graphics. I just can't see them building a machine that splurges on a Nehalem but skimps on integrated graphics.

[SandynJosh]

... and there is no January MacWorld show to hoild them back for could release new laptops in December. May have trouble getting major media attention, but possible.

December, just before Christmas, would be a totally bad time to release a new product. The best time to release a new computer is early in the calendar year to catch all the school systems purchases, followed by the June graduation purchases, followed by the back-to-school purchases.

[John Jacob]

well, dropping Nvidia would severely limit apple's graphics chips options especially in laptops.


Although Electronista reports (http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/07/02/radeon.hd.4200.leak/) that ATI is developing their own integrated 9400M competitor, to be labeled the Radeon HD 4200. Performance is expected to exceed the 9400M by 15 percent. And ATI has a license to manufacture Nehalem chipsets, unlike nVidia (whose license is under litigation with Intel).

[deconstruct60]

If Apple does drop NVidia, at least temporarily it will be due to Nehalem.

Lets see for an iMac they could have a Core 2 Duo with a GT130 or a Nehalem CoreI7 with an ATI Radeon HD 4850 ... same goes for the next generation MBP.


Apple has not used any i7 (quad core) products previously in non Mac Pro class boxes before. Why would they start now??? The power/thermal requirements for those are not aligned with iMac/Mini/MacBook kinds of constraints. Isn't like Nahalem substantially changed the TDP power budget for i7 class processors. Likewise the cost of the i7 class processors is substantially higher (which is a margin killer).


The i3 mobile class Nehalem solution is Arrandale. It has integrated graphics built in to it so the "choice" of IGP vendor is pretty much a done deal with those.

As far as the discrete options on the higher end options. Nvidia has released the 2xx series ( the 1xx series is now old. ) so stuff shipping later in the year. But could just take the current high iMacs and make them low end. So would be exactly what the options are now since not going to incurr any new R&D to move the same exact config down.

[deconstruct60]

Although Electronista reports (http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/07/02/radeon.hd.4200.leak/) that ATI is developing their own integrated 9400M competitor, to be labeled the Radeon HD 4200. Performance is expected to exceed the 9400M by 15 percent. And ATI has a license to manufacture Nehalem chipsets, unlike nVidia (whose license is under litigation with Intel).

Could be a wrong Wikipedia info but

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_ATI_Graphics_Processing_Units#Radeon_R600_IGP_.28HD_3xxx.2C_HD_4xxx.29_series

The code name RS880 with Radeon 4200 is attached to rumors about the 785G IGP. That's an AMD CPU solution. AMD has a AMD CPU package + IGP "gap" to fill before they set up something to sell more Intel CPU packages.

Looking for a IGP chipset that AMD/ATI has dropped in last year for Intels.... maybe not looking in right places but they don't seem to be doing that.

[MacsRgr8]

me too, i was glad macs finally had decent graphics chips

Anything wrong with ATi?

[deconstruct60]

Anything wrong with ATi?

One reason why I the Nvidia thing has spawned two days of rumors is because of the Nvidia vs. ATI ( vs Intel ) war that constantly rages.
It is like mac vs. PC , vi vs. emacs , etc. that is good for folks doing battle.

Apple on the discrete graphics front Apple has gone back and forth ATI , Nvidia, ATI given who had something better at the same time of the apple design cycle for the last 9+ years. If it is going through another cycle what is new with that?

If a IGP + Core I/O chipset the problem with AMD/ATI is that don't seem have much to offer if sticking with Intel cores.

If it is discrete graphics.... there are ATI options now. It may shift that there are more ATI options than Nvidia options but somewhat wouldn't expect them to toss them both out, if the discrete chips can both operate with close to identical power/thermal(and package-size for on motherboard options) constraints since sitting on the end of a PCI-e bus.

[glycon]

Intel should buy NVIDIA.

[xVeinx]

Intel should buy NVIDIA.

They are already in the process of producing their next attempt at a discrete graphics card (larabee). There isn't a need to buy nvidia.

Both FUD and the Inquirer have roughly -33 credibility on anything anymore. It's unfortunate, but many tech news sites have gone downhill in the past couple of years. At any rate, Arstechnica's analysis is the most logical and explains things pretty well. Nvidia will likely remain a graphics option for Apple, but they will end up choosing whichever company gives them the best solution at the best price. If ATI is able to get a one-up on graphics in a new chipset, then they may be the next option.

[DELLsFan]

nVidia ... ATI ... I don't care who Apple chooses or loses ... I just want my Macs to have the capability to configure with top or near-top of the line, modern graphics ... not graphics that were top of the line 5 years ago. :o

[macintoshtoffy]

They are already in the process of producing their next attempt at a discrete graphics card (larabee). There isn't a need to buy nvidia.

Both FUD and the Inquirer have roughly -33 credibility on anything anymore. It's unfortunate, but many tech news sites have gone downhill in the past couple of years. At any rate, Arstechnica's analysis is the most logical and explains things pretty well. Nvidia will likely remain a graphics option for Apple, but they will end up choosing whichever company gives them the best solution at the best price. If ATI is able to get a one-up on graphics in a new chipset, then they may be the next option.

Well, it is called the inquirer - I'd challenge anyone to show me a publication with 'Inquirer' in the title that is of a credible nature.

[Drag'nGT]

I can't say ATI or NVIDIA is any better than the other. I just want to see those GPUs instead of Intel ones. But make sure that they are top of the line and worth the premium we pay.

[MorphingDragon]

I will always spend the extra money to get the ATi card. Not until nVidia (Apple whatever) up the anti with drivers and we get something better than a mediocre 8600 Renamed (GT130) or Non Renamed (8600GTM).

[twoodcc]

it will be interesting to see what actually happens. i bet the lawsuit will have a big impact on it

[bruinsrme]

I am not sure why this really surprises anyone.

Watch Apple will be switching to AMD/ATI. why because Apple a few month back hired some big wigs from AMD.
Not Intel but AMD. Boom suddenly you get inside connections.
AMD = less expensive chips = easier to maintain profit margins.
Oh wait Apple will pass the savings onto the end users LOL

[macintoshtoffy]

I am not sure why this really surprises anyone.

Watch Apple will be switching to AMD/ATI. why because Apple a few month back hired some big wigs from AMD.
Not Intel but AMD. Boom suddenly you get inside connections.
AMD = less expensive chips = easier to maintain profit margins.
Oh wait Apple will pass the savings onto the end users LOL

Then obviously you ignore the reality of AMD's CPU's.

[bruinsrme]

Then obviously you ignore the reality of AMD's CPU's.

In what way?
supply channels
Perfromance
applications
cost
heat
chipsets
cpu/gpu relationships
bus features

[Eidorian]

Then obviously you ignore the reality of AMD's CPU's.Phenom II can hold its own against Core 2. LGA 775 is a dead socket walking right now.

Core i7 on LGA 1366 is nice for the high end but not on a single socket system. Bloomfield/Gainestown is for multi-socket systems with the move to QPI.

AMD's strength right now is it's platform as a whole. You're not going to run into licensing nonsense like Intel vs. nVidia right now over DMI and chipsets. Unless you cough up for the 9400 there aren't any decent IGP solutions over on the Intel side. AMD/ATI and nVidia offer a smorgasbord of choices on AMD's side. It's somewhat amazing what IGPs you have to pick from.

Where do we go on Arrandale for the IGP unless Apple goes discrete again? It's a whole new mess of GPU nonsense from Apple that they can't commit to.

[macintoshtoffy]

In what way?
supply channels
Perfromance
applications
cost
heat
chipsets
cpu/gpu relationships
bus features

Performance/Power relationship - right now AMD is horrible. Their GPU's are nice, their chipset and CPU are behind Intel when it comes to performance/power/efficiency.

[bruinsrme]

Performance/Power relationship - right now AMD is horrible. Their GPU's are nice, their chipset and CPU are behind Intel when it comes to performance/power/efficiency.

while I agree with all that looking at from an economic stand point Apple is Apple and they are in a position where they can really through any system together and sell it, regardless if it is the fastest and greatest, because they are the only legit show selling OSX.
They woukd jsut have to figure out how to pinch power to get the battery lifes they want. that can be done by sacrficing speed but how much would they want to give up is the question.

[Eidorian]

Performance/Power relationship - right now AMD is horrible. Their GPU's are nice, their chipset and CPU are behind Intel when it comes to performance/power/efficiency.Please tell me more about AMD's inferior chipsets.

[macintoshtoffy]

Please tell me more about AMD's inferior chipsets.

Nice to see you ignore what I stated.

[Eidorian]

Nice to see you ignore what I stated.Please read my point on looking at the platform as a whole and the IGP situation among many other things.

I would still like to know more about AMD's inferior chipsets as you pointed out.

[MorphingDragon]

Nice to see you ignore what I stated.

Umm, the top Phenom 2 only gets out perfromed by the fastest and the extreme i7 for like 1/2 the price or smaller. They have a Dual Core and a Triple Core based on the Phenom 2 technology and Opterons outperform only but the most expensive Nehalem Xeons (I'm talking about the 3 and above again) For once again 1/2 the price.

So yes please tell me about AMD's inferior technology. I bet you take 64bit for granted too.

[MattInOz]

Anything wrong with ATi?

Flakey OpenGL mostly.

[MorphingDragon]

Flakey OpenGL mostly.

On Windows...
ATi has superior OpenGL on Mac OSX

[MattInOz]

On Windows...
ATi has superior OpenGL on Mac OSX

In benchmarks maybe but they tend to over heat and flake out when driven hard. Although much improved in that regard after 10.5.7.

[bruinsrme]

So if AMD is better performance/cost than intel
Why isn't apple using them now?
Do youthink they will use them in the future?

[Eidorian]

So if AMD is better performance/cost than intel
Why isn't apple using them now?
Do youthink they will use them in the future?Intel leverages heavy subsidies and rebates to keep vendors buying Intel.

AMD isn't the performance king it was with the Athlon 64 in the Netburst days but they manage to provide a platform with decent performance per dollar/watt.

[MorphingDragon]

In benchmarks maybe but they tend to over heat and flake out when driven hard. Although much improved in that regard after 10.5.7.

So we dont really know in other words.

[MorphingDragon]

Intel leverages heavy subsidies and rebates to keep vendors buying Intel.

AMD isn't the performance king it was with the Athlon 64 in the Netburst days but they manage to provide a platform with decent performance per dollar/watt.

The EU has stopped them from doing that now. Too bad the 1.2Bill didnt go into AMDs R&D.

[xVeinx]

AMD isn't an option for processors. They don't have the ability to properly supply Apple, and their laptop processors aren't as energy efficient (read: poor battery life). The chipsets and graphics are indeed an option, as both are fairly solid over all. The IO for AMD's chipsets are currently 5-10% less than Intel, but that is less of an issue for laptops. Nvidia and AMD each have their strengths in terms of graphics, and both have been utilized successfully by Apple. If Nvidia wants to pick a fight with Intel however, they could lose quite a bit in the end.

[Eidorian]

AMD isn't an option for processors. They don't have the ability to properly supply Apple, and their laptop processors aren't as energy efficient (read: poor battery life). The chipsets and graphics are indeed an option, as both are fairly solid over all. The IO for AMD's chipsets are currently 5-10% less than Intel, but that is less of an issue for laptops. Nvidia and AMD each have their strengths in terms of graphics, and both have been utilized successfully by Apple. If Nvidia wants to pick a fight with Intel however, they could lose quite a bit in the end.They can support every other manufacturer and retail with AMD components but not Apple?

I agree with your other points though.

[macintoshtoffy]

They can support every other manufacturer and retail with AMD components but not Apple?

I agree with your other points though.

They're not used in their larger mass produced products - only in niche product ranges. Go into any retail chain and for every 1 amd laptop from a vendor there will be 5 intel ones available.

AMD has always had the problem of not being able to supply chips in volume when required - but things are going to change because what you're seeing today is the gradual turning of AMD into a fabless company.

With that being said, their power efficiency for their CPU's aren't as good, as for their chipsets - I am unsure as to whether they are creating chips for Intel; if they do create chips for Intel CPU's then maybe it could become a viable option.

[Eidorian]

They're not used in their larger mass produced products - only in niche product ranges. Go into any retail chain and for every 1 amd laptop from a vendor there will be 5 intel ones available.I've seen it go as high as a 50/50 split depending on the retailer.


AMD has always had the problem of not being able to supply chips in volume when required - but things are going to change because what you're seeing today is the gradual turning of AMD into a fabless company.That is a valid concern.


With that being said, their power efficiency for their CPU's aren't as good, as for their chipsets - I am unsure as to whether they are creating chips for Intel; if they do create chips for Intel CPU's then maybe it could become a viable option.I can't imagine AMD/ATI making another chipset or IGP for Intel ever again. They plan on taking on the 9400 one the home turf with the 785G.

[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)

I'm glad to hear something positive on this front. I really like NVIDIA. Everyone has a manufacturing issue from time to time.

[macintoshtoffy]

I've seen it go as high as a 50/50 split depending on the retailer.

That is a valid concern.

I can't imagine AMD/ATI making another chipset or IGP for Intel ever again. They plan on taking on the 9400 one the home turf with the 785G.

I'm sure there are a whole host of issues, especially ones relating to the arrangement Apple have with Intel - they've been with them exclusively for 3 years, so there must be something in the arrangement that makes them superior. At the end of the day, Apple want to be on the winning team - they already had to settle for second best when they delt with IBM and Motorola, I'm sure Apple don't want to go through another fiasco of playing second fiddle to the big players.

Intel is big and reliable and that is what Apple needs when thy are growing - they can't afford to bank on a vendor like AMD that routinely goes through periods of knocking on deaths door and products falling too far behind the curve.

[Eidorian]

I'm sure there are a whole host of issues, especially ones relating to the arrangement Apple have with Intel - they've been with them exclusively for 3 years, so there must be something in the arrangement that makes them superior. At the end of the day, Apple want to be on the winning team - they already had to settle for second best when they delt with IBM and Motorola, I'm sure Apple don't want to go through another fiasco of playing second fiddle to the big players.

Intel is big and reliable and that is what Apple needs when thy are growing - they can't afford to bank on a vendor like AMD that routinely goes through periods of knocking on deaths door and products falling too far behind the curve.If AMD/ATI does have a license to make chipsets/controllers and IGP's for Intel's DMI base platforms I could imagine them providing a solution for Apple.

[Eidorian]

A little more information on the Radeon 4200 IGP (http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1432725/more-amd-rs880-details-tip).

[macintoshtoffy]

If AMD/ATI does have a license to make chipsets/controllers and IGP's for Intel's DMI base platforms I could imagine them providing a solution for Apple.

True, but that would raise an interesting question regarding 'conflict of interest' where Intel will need to transfer large amounts of information relating to their CPU to a vendor who not only makes chipsets and GPU's but also a product that competes with Intel. I wonder how they will get around that.

[Sun Baked]

We spoke to industry sources close to Nvidia and got clear confirmation that the Nvidia-Apple relationship is doing just fine.

Hmm... sounds like a leak, which can be used to misdirect and confuse the competition.

"Psst, we are fine and no problems at all with Apple, don't tell anyone."

If the leak was from the head of the group working with Apple or the CEO, I'd say this source is legit.

Otherwise, it would be like depending on an Applestore employee for news of future Apple products.

[Val-kyrie]

Maybe this whole thing was a subtle PR stunt designed to improve Apple's position in negotiations (as now you probably have the Account Executives in charge of Apple's relationship calling frantically and making concessions to keep Apple happy).

I think dropping nVidia would be a big mistake, especially if it means that all computers with the integrated chips all of a sudden take a big hit in performance (making future revisions effectively downgrades). ... [snipped]

I am not so sure it would be a mistake to walk away from NVidia. There is growing evidence that NVidia knew about the problems with 8600M it sold to Apple and lied about it. Heck, NVidia is even trying to avoid answering the inquiries by its own insurance company which is covering reimbursement for bad chips. There was also a suggestion that the new 9400 series had problems with heat early on (this was what partially caused the delay in its release) and that NVidia was cherry-picking them for Apple.

Most of this information is covered by the Inquirer and no matter what you think about the site, its information makes sense. If true, look for Apple to change graphics (to ATI?) when Nehalem is introduced. Hopefully Apple will also use a low-end ATI card and not Intel for integrated graphics.

BTW, it also sounds like Dell showed the door to NVidia (http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1137463/nvidia-dell), as well. This gives more credence to Apple doing the same.

[coocooforcocoap]

As I am now on my 4th 8600 GT chip for one MBP and waiting for it to die outside the extended warranty period, I say good riddance to Nvidea if this rumor is even true. Sure, ATI probably has bad chips too, but this was a total fiasco, and if we had not invested so much in Apple (and were such fan boys and girls) we would have dumped the whole product line for our small business. imo apple has to be tuf with its vendors to keep their quality up, as we are all paying premium prices for just that (i think, not sure why we are paying so much really:)

[macintoshtoffy]

I am not so sure it would be a mistake to walk away from NVidia. There is growing evidence that NVidia knew about the problems with 8600M it sold to Apple and lied about it. Heck, NVidia is even trying to avoid answering the inquiries by its own insurance company which is covering reimbursement for bad chips. There was also a suggestion that the new 9400 series had problems with heat early on (this was what partially caused the delay in its release) and that NVidia was cherry-picking them for Apple.

Most of this information is covered by the Inquirer and no matter what you think about the site, its information makes sense. If true, look for Apple to change graphics (to ATI?) when Nehalem is introduced. Hopefully Apple will also use a low-end ATI card and not Intel for integrated graphics.

BTW, it also sounds like Dell showed the door to NVidia (http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1137463/nvidia-dell), as well. This gives more credence to Apple doing the same.

It makes me happy that I am hobbled with a 'crap Intel graphics card and chipset' given the fiasco that is unfolding with 8600, and mark my words, its going to happen to the 9400M customers as well.

I have an iMac and I deliberately bought the high end of the 20inch model - I could have bought the 24 inch model with an Nvidia chip but decided against it; I'm happy I did given all the overheating problems I see on the Mac forums.

When it comes to refreshing my MacBook at the end of next year or possibly the year after - if Apple decide to keep Nvidia for their MacBook and MacBook Pro range, they've lost a customer. Its just that simple. I couldn't care less if they're going to replace it - if it means I have to put up with my main board being replaced four times as coocooforcocoap has experienced, it isn't worth it. The replacement may be free but my time and loss of productivity isn't free.

[Macminiintel]

the day Apple switches to AMD is when hell freezes over and that only happened when apple made iTunes for windows lol

[Beerfloat]

if Apple decide to keep Nvidia for their MacBook and MacBook Pro range, they've lost a customer. Its just that simple.

And if they go with something other than Nvidia, I won't buy it. So that balances out nicely. ;)

[deconstruct60]

Heck, NVidia is even trying to avoid answering the inquiries by its own insurance company which is covering reimbursement for bad chips.
There was also a suggestion that the new 9400 series had problems with heat early on (this was what partially caused the delay in its release)


Errr, a part had heat problems prior to release. This is a newsflash?
The 9400 part has a Northbridge (with integrated graphics) and southbridge all inside of one package. Heat problems wouldn't be an expected problem? Seriously? Likewise the number of steppings till had worked out the bugs would be larger or smaller given collapsed functionality split over two chips which normally have a number of steppings each to stability?

Similarly, like name a insurance company that pays off on multimillion dollar policy without moaning about and/or looking at disqualifying conditions associated to it?

It also doesn't seem to be the Inquirer. Look at the byline of all these doom-and-gloom stories about Nvidia. Notice the same name constantally reappearing all the time? Notice the same name since bounced from the Inquirer still stuck on the very same tune at ?



... Dell shown the door ...


Go back to post #32 in this thread. Not going to repeat it here, but there are different reasons why Nvidia is disappearing from many of Dell's offerings (e.g., pre-Nehalem systems being shown the door.)




and mark my words, its going to happen to the 9400M customers as well.

Do you have any evidence to support that or is it just in the "nvidia is bad so therefore it is true" camp?



given all the overheating problems I see on the Mac forums.


What overheating problems? Overheating can be caused by Apple not balancing out the thermal balance inside the device.

Its just that simple. I couldn't care less if they're going to replace it -

There is a problem with the 8600M and multiple replacements is bad. But it isn't like Apple hasn't had "multiple replacements" either on other problems.

[macintoshtoffy]

Do you have any evidence to support that or is it just in the "nvidia is bad so therefore it is true" camp?

Four years of crap Nvidia support and product quality under my belt - I'm not expecting earth shattering, desk shaking, orgasm producing graphics at speeds that would make an old lady collapse on her zimmer frame but I do expect a reasonable degree of stability.

There is a reason why I have avoided Nvidia for almost a decade - if it isn't for their shonky product quality it is for their shonky driver quality.

What overheating problems? Overheating can be caused by Apple not balancing out the thermal balance inside the device.

Bull, that is the same pathetic and lame excuse that Nvidia used when their GPU's started to fail - blaming everyone else except themselves.

There is a problem with the 8600M and multiple replacements is bad. But it isn't like Apple hasn't had "multiple replacements" either on other problems.

The supply chain should have been flushed the moment that the fault was found and then the chain should have been resupplied. Either Apple isn't pulling all the faulty products out of the supply chain or Nvidia is still sending out shonky products. I'll let you be the judge.

[Eidorian]

Four years of crap Nvidia support and product quality under my belt - I'm not expecting earth shattering, desk shaking, orgasm producing graphics at speeds that would make an old lady collapse on her zimmer frame but I do expect a reasonable degree of stability.

There is a reason why I have avoided Nvidia for almost a decade - if it isn't for their shonky product quality it is for their shonky driver quality.Driver issues from nVidia? Are you sure it's not ATI you're talking about? On Linux? I've been a strong purchaser of ATI hardware for the past decade but nVidia still edges ahead in drivers.

Bull, that is the same pathetic and lame excuse that Nvidia used when their GPU's started to fail - blaming everyone else except themselves.Spend a few minutes looking at Apple's cooling solutions and razor's edge thermal behavior.

[deconstruct60]

If AMD/ATI does have a license to make chipsets/controllers and IGP's for Intel's DMI base platforms I could imagine them providing a solution for Apple.

True, but that would raise an interesting question regarding 'conflict of interest' where Intel will need to transfer large amounts of information relating to their CPU to a vendor who not only makes chipsets and GPU's but also a product that competes with Intel. I wonder how they will get around that.

Outer quote then on to inner one.

How they get around that. Well Intel competes now with the chipset vendors, so they have relationships with competitors now. It is called a Non Disclosure Agreement. It can be written up so that have to throw up a firewall between parts of your company for limited disclosure. Besides Intel's roadmap is usually about 12 months out in front of delivery..

Furthermore, don't really have to give out all the details of the core. They had to give out all the details about DMI. If the DMI standardization details are not enough to come out with compatible parts then it kind of sucks as a standard doesn't it?? The whole point of DMI is that it can deal with multiple Northbridge implementations. Sure you'll need to eventually do QA to make sure the South/North bridges actually work but that pretty late in the design process when some aspects of the CPU that the Northbridge is going to be packaged with are out in the press anyway. If Intel has a "neutral" lab where pre-release CPUs and chipsets can be tested, problem solved. (or a firewalled lab at AMD that is for chipset folks only get pre-release.)

All very large tech companies do this. HP has OS which compete with windows. IBM has stuff that competes with just about everyone else of any size. Apple routinely enters spaces where its smaller partners operate.

The bigger reason for AMD/ATI to not do business with Intel is because it is a distraction from getting maximum synergies out of their combined company. Once AMD full digests ATI into a smooth integration then they may have spare time to do something Intel. In the meantime it would very dubuious to spit efforts because the drama of integrating is over. That is just more complexity than is required to deal with.


Now the inner quote.

Putting a upper end Integrated graphics on the other side of DMI is going to create problems. DMI was designed as a Northbridge to Southbridge communications channel. All of the other Integrated graphics implementations place the IGX next to the memory controller. This makes tons of sense because need to keep the graphics cores filled with data.

With DMI you are putting the graphics cores farther away from the memory they leverage to get graphics work done.

Furthermore the typical high end PCI-e channels are also usually tied to the Northbridge. Those are the channels where higher end graphics are usually added to. Again that is on the other side of the DMI connection.

The chip package sitting on the other side of the DMI link from the nehalem CPU package is really the southbridge. First, does do chipset vendors really want to be in the biz of just selling Southbridge? Being squeezed out to lower margin part isn't a good track to be on.

They could go down the road of merging discrete graphics (with its own memory controller) with the rest of the I/O. There is resistance to that in the PC world because folks are fixated on non motherboard mounted discrete graphics (at least in the non laptop space). Once on can throw more power and lower thermal constraints will be able to crank out higher numbers. The non-IGX/max-cores CPU packages from Intel are all upper end, performance primary object offerings that have the wide/fast PCI-e connections. The normal approach is to just leverage thosue PCI-e connections for discrete graphics. (otherwise what else going to put on the those links? Who is going to buy the i7 class part and not use some of the interfaces to it? )

[macintoshtoffy]

Driver issues from nVidia? Are you sure it's not ATI you're talking about? On Linux? I've been a strong purchaser of ATI hardware for the past decade but nVidia still edges ahead in drivers.

I used neither; since I don't do gameing - guess what I use? :) I used a Matrox
G550 w/ 32MB VRAM; it was a marvelous device. The drivers were stable, the hardware was reliable for over 8 years.

Spend a few minutes looking at Apple's cooling solutions and razor's edge thermal behavior.

I've had a look but they're within the specifications Nvidia gives out - if it were me, though, I'd be questioning why they put 'thinness' ahead of 'making sure the damn thing works'. Then again, one only needs to look at the people here who go on and on about how an extra 0.00001 pound is a massive amount and how thin is incredibly important.

[Eidorian]

I used neither; since I don't do gameing - guess what I use? :) I used a Matrox
G550 w/ 32MB VRAM; it was a marvelous device. The drivers were stable, the hardware was reliable for over 8 years.Which is quite nice but Apple isn't going to be considering Matrox as a GPU vendor at this point. The last time I considered Matrox was back when the G200 came out. Now I feel old.

I've had a look but they're within the specifications Nvidia gives out - if it were me, though, I'd be questioning why they put 'thinness' ahead of 'making sure the damn thing works'. Then again, one only needs to look at the people here who go on and on about how an extra 0.00001 pound is a massive amount and how thin is incredibly important.Oh so true.

[macintoshtoffy]

Which is quite nice but Apple isn't going to be considering Matrox as a GPU vendor at this point. The last time I considered Matrox was back when the G200 came out. Now I feel old.

Imagine if they did consider Matrox :) I would be happy lad having a MacBook with a Matrox graphics card, intel chipset and cpu - it would definitely be something out of left field if it did happen. I guess then people would only have the performance to complain about rather than the host of issues that plague the Nvidia and Intel drivers (and hardware).

[HardBall]

And if they go with something other than Nvidia, I won't buy it. So that balances out nicely. ;)

Nvidia's days of making Apple IGPs are numbered.

The Inq merely stated the obvious, albeit in a somewhat misinformed way. The new range of Intel CPUs will have integrated mem-controller; and except for the high-end LGA1366, it will also contain integrated PCIe, and a dual DMI + FDI interconnect with the south bridge. The dual core versions will also have intel graphics integrated into the same MCM with the CPU and the aforementioned components.

So unless you are talking about pairing high-end LGA1366 with integrated graphics, then NV is never going to be an option. Only LGA1366 (Core i7 9xx) would have a high enough bandwidth off-package connection for a half-way decent graphics solution worth while; it has the QPI connection to a PCIe bridge, but requires a QPI license (which intel disputes NV having the access to).

The LGA1156 platform will have the PCIe controller integrated on package, and the IO-interconnect is the DMI which only operates at 2.0 GT/s, which is hardly sufficient for any remotely decent graphics with UMA access to system memory. And on top of that, it's not even certain that NV has a license for interfacing through Intel DMI either.

And as said before, the lower end dual core will have Intel graphics integrated, and certainly would preclude any Nv IGP solution. So the anser to the question of whether NV or ATI is going to make IGPs for Apple's intel platform, the answer is clearly NEITHER. And the migration over to these new platforms should be well underway by later this year (LGA1156 first arrives with Lynnfield and Clarksfield) and early next (Arrandale and company will arrive). And beyond that, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple dumps even the discrete NV GPUs for Larrabee when that arrives early next year.

NV's days with Apple are certainly numbered; and it doesn't really take any insider information to figure that out.

[macintoshtoffy]

Nvidia's days of making Apple IGPs are numbered.

The Inq merely stated the obvious, albeit in a somewhat misinformed way. The new range of Intel CPUs will have integrated mem-controller; and except for the high-end LGA1366, it will also contain integrated PCIe, and a dual DMI + FDI interconnect with the south bridge. The dual core versions will also have intel graphics integrated into the same MCM with the CPU and the aforementioned components.

So unless you are talking about pairing high-end LGA1366 with integrated graphics, then NV is never going to be an option. Only LGA1366 (Core i7 9xx) would have a high enough bandwidth off-package connection for a half-way decent graphics solution worth while; it has the QPI connection to a PCIe bridge, but requires a QPI license (which intel disputes NV having the access to).

The LGA1156 platform will have the PCIe controller integrated on package, and the IO-interconnect is the DMI which only operates at 2.0 GT/s, which is hardly sufficient for any remotely decent graphics with UMA access to system memory. And on top of that, it's not even certain that NV has a license for interfacing through Intel DMI either.

And as said before, the lower end dual core will have Intel graphics integrated, and certainly would preclude any Nv IGP solution. So the anser to the question of whether NV or ATI is going to make IGPs for Apple's intel platform, the answer is clearly NEITHER. And the migration over to these new platforms should be well underway by later this year (LGA1156 first arrives with Lynnfield and Clarksfield) and early next (Arrandale and company will arrive). And beyond that, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple dumps even the discrete NV GPUs for Larrabee when that arrives early next year.

NV's days with Apple are certainly numbered; and it doesn't really take any insider information to figure that out.

Regarding Intel and integrated video; I'm wondering whether we'll see an attempt by video card vendors to try and block GPU/CPU integration - not saying that the integration is a bad thing but having seen ridiculous claims by competitors gain traction in the past it will be interesting to see how it is approached.

[fteoath64]

A lousy 15% increment of the RS880 (or 890? variant) over 9400m to switch to AMD ?. I don't think so. If there is not a minimum 40% increment in performance and a significant power consumption reduction (potentially 20% or more), it would not be worth it. The successor to 9400m is coming and will reap at least 20% increment in speed and 20% decrease in power consumption!.

AMD must have cross licensing agreements on CPUs and chipset core technologies to be able to make chipsets to Nahelem class CPUs. They prefer not to as the Istanbul class Opertons and its successors are competitive enough for the price they charge.

ATI needs to make serious concessions to pricing in order to win the business assuming that they have the part good enough to sell to Apple. I am holding out on this because none of us wants that crappy Intel IGP chip. Oh, give on on that already Intel, why waste R&D money?.

[deconstruct60]

And beyond that, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple dumps even the discrete NV GPUs for Larrabee when that arrives early next year.


There are no mobile Larrabee parts on the horizon early next year. (Have seen earlier posts that try to twist http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20090408corp_a.htm into Larrabee mobile. The first couple of paragraphs are about mobile/MID. The end, where Larrabee gets mentioned, are not focused on that space. ) More likely, it would appear as a card for the Mac Pro (there has to be a first time Mac Pro's get a bleeding edge card; they are kind of due ;-) ).

Speculation on the web about the TDP of a 30 core Larrabee put it around 300 W TDP. [ those might have been a bit high because think folks thought it would come out at 45 nm. Looks like Intel is going to skip 45nm and come out at 32nm. That won't be an order of magnitude drop though.] Perhaps they won't use 30 cores but they would have to cut that by around 10 times, 30W TDP, to get into the 30-60W TDP of the other mobility solutions. If there is a linear ratio between cores and power you're now down in the 3-6 cores range. How much "graphics juice" is it going to have at that point?

Discrete on the motherboard? Not likely. Part of the Larrabee graphics solution is software. They need to make that work well first. Then they can start doing refinements to keep it working while decrease the power requirements. It is going to be easier to make it work with a larger power budget.


Intel has to first ship something that competes in the discrete card space. Then they can do tweaks/shrinks on that to play in the discrete mobile space.
Intel already had the GMA stuff in the "limited power consumption" space. Would be very surprising if Larrabee was targeted to kill that off early on in its development.

[deconstruct60]

Regarding Intel and integrated video; I'm wondering whether we'll see an attempt by video card vendors to try and block GPU/CPU integration -

The driving force here is "Moore's Law". With increasingly larger transistor budget you can get more in same slice of silicon. The other factor is physics/timing (and complexity); you don't want to devote too many transistors to a single "unit". That's one of the driving factors splittting things into multiple cores. Swimming upstream from Moore's Law is doomed. They all know that or should if had a clue. The whole System on a Chip (SoC) concept has been yelped about for the last 6-9 years. That's why Nvidia bind the I/O around the GPU. That worked short term, but long term the CPU is bigger black hole like gravitational source.


Throw in the increased used of Multi Chip Module (MCM) packaging into the commodity chip package space and it is even more fighting against tech progress.

There used to be more storage controller , firewire , usb discrete chip vendors/solutions too. The North/Southbridge chips have been consolidating those for the last couple of years.

The discrete graphics folks can aim for the niches or get into the CPU business (through GPGPU, OpenCL , or combo CPU+GPU ). Matrox is aiming at the niches multi-monitor (3-4 screens), reasonable power consumption. That relatively low volume of what the overall graphics market is. If target a 2-3% niche and give up on high growth then that is a survivable over the long term. Folks who want to be geared for volume better figure out how to deliver Teraflops to end users though.

As a consumer choice.... higher chance will get screwed here. As long as AMD and VIA stay viable options in various niches they'll keep Intel somewhat honest in the PC space. The smaller/embedded space still has lots of diversity.