Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Considering Adopting AMD Processors for Upcoming Macs?

RaZaK said:
Reduced to being Apple's fingerpuppet in its negotiations\scare tactics with Intel. :D
Click to expand...

That’s what I figure also. I dunno though. Apple is not happy about Intel forcing their integrated graphics solutions on them.

It’s just so hard to believe that AMD may have decent chips (in terms of performance, not just price) in the pipeline since they haven’t produced anything substantial in years.
 
rustedshut said:
I really hope this isn't true. Switching from Intel to AMD is a bad idea. AMD's processor technology is always behind Intel. Remember the years it took for OSX to switch from PPC to Intel? Do we really want to see that happen again in less than a decade? I don't see this being a quick transition. It'd be much better for Apple to just start making the chips themselves. They could probably just buy out AMD ha. I'd be cool with that.
Click to expand...

You can't compare moving from two different ISA (PPC to X86) to moving within the same ISA (X86).


cmaier said:
Because AMD has no roadmap. Their engineering is in complete disarray. They're selling chips that were designed a decade ago. They have no chief architect. Stick a fork in 'em.
Click to expand...

AMD has been forthcoming with their 2010-11 roadmap. Anandtech has a nice write up.
 
My guess is this has more to do with AMD's ATI GPU offerings then CPU Offerings, but I may be wrong. AMD also does a lot of chipset work so Apple may be sourcing them for other chips on the logic board.
 
Great News.

Many people complain about the price barrier when it comes to Apple Desktops/laptops, I could see this being great for Apple if they use these in low end offerings (ie $700.00 macbook/imac)
 
Low cost/power CPU with media-rich integrated GPU

I think moving to AMD for the low-cost Macs or low-end laptops doesn't sound that bad. Seeing how Apple's interest in better GPUs than marginally fast CPUs in the newest 13-inch Macbook Pros, we might actually one day see a Macbook or Mac Mini with AMD's offerings.
 
I can imagine a few positive scenarios:

1) AMD for Mac Mini, Apple TV and other low-end devices where price is key
2) Opteron for Mac Pro or Xserve
3) Additional use of ATI graphics

Any of these scenarios is OK with me. But I don't like AMD's laptop chip line - hope Apple isn't seriously looking at this.
 
mwayne85 said:
Correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't apple deny any kind of AMD switch last year?
Click to expand...

If they did, as you said, that was last year. Things change.

I don't know enough about AMD CPUs, so I don't know how they stack against Intel's.

As for nVidia, I could see going to AMD straining the relationship between Apple nVidia. AMD does own ATI, nVidia's biggest rival.

Just my 2¢
 
I know most of you have been in computers as long or longer than myself (12+ years, ex BBS sysop, etc). With that being said we have seen what AMD is capable of in the past. Maybe Apple does have some insight as to some un-publicized AMD offering. In all honesty with Apple backing AMD on something, I think it will work. While they are subpar right now (and I am certain AMD is aware they are currently sub-par to Intel), they will be doing what it takes to stay in the game.

The only AMD chip I have ever had was a k6-2 333mhz in a computer at one point ages ago. I remember being delighted in it. It was far better than the Cyrix MX II that I had and the Celeron that I later got. AMD can do it fellas, I say bring on the AMD super chip with a rad ATi gpu! Or bring on the failure. ahah Down with the higher priced shennanigans. LOL.

Seriously though I for one would like to see what happens. I don't want Apple to boycott Intel entirely. I would still love Intel chip options. Lets have the best of both worlds. Let them both compete for Apple's business instead of the other way around. If one outsells the other when they are both offered, then maybe it would be time for Apple to switch chip camps.

just my opinion. I try to stay open to new ideas and directions in my technology views. Except Star Trek. My wife prefers STTNG and I prefer DS9. Go figure.
 
Macbooks with AMD

Macbooks might be ideal candidate for AMD/ATI and where apple can lower the price and still can make profits, say like $799 or $899.

i would highly doubt they will go AMD for high end configs... at least in the mobile space.

when AMD is going 32nm?
 
AMD hasn't been on par for years now... so any move to AMD is a big step DOWN.

i thank them for spurring intel onward to build new architectures... but they spurred a little too well, and intel has completely owned them since C2D.

i can't believe they have anything too amazing in the pipeline, compared to intel... plus, they are losing money like it's their job. i'm actually surprised AMD still exists. they haven't been profitable for some time now.

so... eh. if amd figures out how to catch up to modern times, then this is fine news... but, they haven't yet, and i sure don't see how they could, unless intel really screws up.
 
Hopefully Apple will use both. Perhaps find ideal uses for each in their computers and devices.

It wouldn't be wise to switch to AMD and drop intel completely. If a decade goes by and AMD doesn't deliver, then where does Apple go? I'm sure intel would sell to them but if the relationship is strained then Apple would suffer.

Perhaps they should team up with HP and plan ahead for when memristor based transputer chips come available in a few years.
 
rustedshut said:
I really hope this isn't true. Switching from Intel to AMD is a bad idea. AMD's processor technology is always behind Intel. Remember the years it took for OSX to switch from PPC to Intel? Do we really want to see that happen again in less than a decade? I don't see this being a quick transition. It'd be much better for Apple to just start making the chips themselves. They could probably just buy out AMD ha. I'd be cool with that.
Click to expand...

All your "transition" talk means nothing. There would be no "transition". It would be like switching from ATi to NVIDIA.

AMD is not always behind Intel. In fact, IRIC, they were neck and neck, or even ahead until Intel started its "Mhz myth" campaign, which pushed AMD even further to the side. I am not up to speed on their chips, but I doubt they lag too far behind Intel given the fact that they are still around.

At any rate, the point is moot. Whether AMD is slightly behind or not, Apple made their computer perform just dandy on the "inferior" motorola G chips for many years until the G5 roadblock. Well enough for many people not to care. I am sure they can do it again.

I would feel totally fine with AMD chips...as long as its their good ones, and the benchmarks stay up. And knowing how the company is run, I doubt they would switch to inferior processors. They have always been a little behind, but stick with good chips and mid level GPUs. I don't see that changing.
 
I see Apple likely tiering their options.

Lower end stuff is going to perform better and be more cost effective with AMD integrated solutions.

Intel is going to be better for the midrange on up though AMD's server/workstation stuff is so much cheaper than Intel right now.

If you have a renderfarm do you really care about the processor or do you need to maximise your processor power grunt?
 
Jason Beck said:
The only AMD chip I have ever had was a k6-2 333mhz in a computer at one point ages ago. I remember being delighted in it. It was far better than the Cyrix MX II that I had and the Celeron that I later got. AMD can do it fellas, I say bring on the AMD super chip with a rad ATi gpu! Or bring on the failure. ahah Down with the higher priced shennanigans. LOL.
Click to expand...

The team that designed the K6-2 was the CMD team, which was formed by the acquisition of a company called Nexgen. That team also designed Athlon 64 and Opteron (Athlon was designed by the TMD team). By 2007, all the key CMD folks were gone. The team that was left sucks, and has accomplished little since then other than shrinks to smaller technology and bolting more of the same cores on.
 
Opteron HE for Xserver maybe thats the only place AMD competes unless you wanted to make the base iMac cheaper.
 
Jason Beck said:
just my opinion. I try to stay open to new ideas and directions in my technology views. Except Star Trek. My wife prefers STTNG and I prefer DS9. Go figure.
Click to expand...

I prefer TNG, mainly because that's the one I grew up with, but DS9 is good, too.

Anyone notice how the computer systems in Star Trek look a lot like the iPhone OS?

Sorry, I know off topic, but still fun.
 
Jason Beck said:
The only AMD chip I have ever had was a k6-2 333mhz in a computer at one point ages ago. I remember being delighted in it. It was far better than the Cyrix MX II that I had and the Celeron that I later got.
Click to expand...

DUDE. lol. you compare a K6 to a cyrix and a celeron... and use that as your reason why "AMD can do it?"

that... is some crazy talk right there. i mean... seriously.

"My Atari 800 totally pwned my Timex Sinclaire, so i figure Atari can still get it done! bring on the atari chips!"
 
As ATi is owned by AMD, then there should be a much greater range of custom chipsets for Apple to have made by AMD as they can supply the processor and graphics.

Unlike with the new 13" MBP, where the desire for better graphics meant Apple had no choice but to use C2D due to Intel and nVidia issues.
 
cmaier said:
No they don't. If Apple bought AMD then AMD would have no x86 license.
Click to expand...

how do you figure? Wouldn't 1)the license transfer? & 2)with all the antitrust issues and rulings against Intel, do you really think they would be allowed to restrict the license?

I honestly know little to nothing about this stuff, so I'm honestly asking...i work finance/operations for a tech company, so I hear a lot, but understand less :)
 
xgman said:
God, I hope not. AMD processors are no longer in the same league as Intels. Maybe for the lowest end macs if any. :eek:
Click to expand...

From my own personal experience, AMD aren't as efficient at Intel processors. I used to have a HP notebook and it would run so hot that I would have to set it on an air conditioner vent to keep it from freezing up :eek:
 
When I shop for a netbook/ultraportable I am looking primarily for excellent battery life. Every time I read a review of an AMD powered laptop I am underwhelmed by the power consumption.

Apple, too, seems concerned about battery life given 10-hour run times of the new MacBook Pros.

Is this something AMD can truly learn to deliver?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back