Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Had Late Stage Prototypes of an AMD Fusion Based MacBook Air
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yamcha
macrumors 68000
If this is true then awesome, despite the bulldozer processors performing poorly, I think the LLano provide great performance overall, especially when it comes to GPU performance.. A lot better then what a Intel HD 3000 series can provide..
Not to mention the Llano Processors also consume less battery...
Not to mention the Llano Processors also consume less battery...
0098386
Suspended
The 27" iMac has a tremendous graphics card. Currently playing Skyrim maxed out at native res, before that TF2 and Batman Arkham Asylum maxed out at native res.
But please continue.
thejadedmonkey
macrumors G3
I would have liked to have seen an AMD Macbook Air. It woudl be great to see Intel have some big-name competition for once.
They already did...
They already did...
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
Skyrim is not really all that demanding.
Only Apple can give you those check boxes to compile to multiple platforms!!1 *pounds fists on table*
Rodimus Prime
macrumors G4
Going AMD is a non issue. Going ARM would be an issue.
Remember AMD and Intel are both x86-64 chips. As long as they stick with the x86 set up they are fine.
I believe MS already has done it. Chances are MS .net languages work just fine flipping between the two.
MS .net set up is really nice for developing software on providing you want to work on MS.
I personally like them in terms of easy of us. I do not really like object C that much but that is because it is kind of wide to me in syntax as it does not follow the same C format like the other languages I have worked in (C, Java, C#, VB.net).
zap2
macrumors 604
Perhaps, in desktops I'd agree in that they will pick form over GPU performance(in machines like the iMac), but they picked GPU over CPU before they upgraded to Core iX in the Air/MBP
GenesisJLS
macrumors regular
Yeah, thejadedmonkey, has his facts wrong. I read his diatribe, and his facts were egregiously bad.
Diode
macrumors 68020
So a company, which has spent billions to increase production capacity at other firms, turned down AMD because they couldn't reach capacity? Something tells me Apple was turned off by something else and didn't want to spend the money to boost AMD.
Most likely that something was to use AMD as a pawn to force Intel into squeezing more power out of their chips.
Most likely that something was to use AMD as a pawn to force Intel into squeezing more power out of their chips.
I wouldn't mind AMD...
I also wouldn't mind ARM provided MS Office and Adobe Reader worked well. There is too much of an install base for such a large transition though. Apple could not do what they did with the PowerPC to x64 chips again.
What I think would be really interesting is Android for a laptop... or something more powerful than a tablet. With decent office and document markup software.
I also wouldn't mind ARM provided MS Office and Adobe Reader worked well. There is too much of an install base for such a large transition though. Apple could not do what they did with the PowerPC to x64 chips again.
What I think would be really interesting is Android for a laptop... or something more powerful than a tablet. With decent office and document markup software.
Jerome Morrow
macrumors 6502a
What a clueless person. If it was just a matter of putting a faster GPU clueless person would be right, but it's not as simple as clueless person thinks it is.
zap2
macrumors 604
Apple could do it again, they made it rather seamless. But it would be a challenge. And one nice thing about the switch last time was Intel preformed better then PPC, so they could emulate programs that were only coded for PPC.
But ARM likely isn't going to be faster then the Intel chip it replaces, just use a lot less power, which means the ability to emulate x86 on ARM chips isn't going to be nearly as smooth as it was last time.
But again, I think Apple could do it given the will, but have their line split between ARM and x86 would be a big issue. Over all it, it would be more issue then it's worth.
kiljoy616
macrumors 68000
Glad they did not do it, I for one love my Sandy Bridge macbook Air. CPU usage is about 30% for most programs I use, and video is fast and responsive. I just would like to have had an 8GB model but you can't have it all every time.
AMD would have been interesting but to think AMD could not keep up with demands of just Apple now that is very interesting.
----------
Or Apple already has a OS X that runs native in ARM chips but I do see the issue with 3rd party programs. Still I have to wonder how different would OS X Lion would have been if they went to ARM before going with sandy bridge.
----------
But can it run Crysis 1 muhahahaha 😉, that is one GPU intensive game even now. 🙄
AMD would have been interesting but to think AMD could not keep up with demands of just Apple now that is very interesting.
----------
Or Apple already has a OS X that runs native in ARM chips but I do see the issue with 3rd party programs. Still I have to wonder how different would OS X Lion would have been if they went to ARM before going with sandy bridge.
----------
But can it run Crysis 1 muhahahaha 😉, that is one GPU intensive game even now. 🙄
AppleScruff1
macrumors G4
Jerome Morrow
macrumors 6502a
And one with AMD stuff inside would have been just as good, ergo you make little to no sense.
----------
Silly comparison.
The CPU difference isn't small. Besides raw performance, Llano is based on AMD's last gen architecture lacking things like SSSE3 available since the 1st Intel Macs. Since all 64-bit Intel CPUs have SSSE3, Lion was compiled to require SSSE3 when it went 64-bit CPU only. Llano can't even run the Finder unless Apple actually intended to compile and maintain a completely separate version of Lion and several future versions of OS X that doesn't require SSSE3 just to support a Llano MacBook Air throughout it's life cycle. That seems highly unlikely.
Llano also lacks SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, and QuickSync, the later of which Apple uses to accelerate FaceTime. More importantly, the lowest TDP Llano is 35W compared to 17W for the Sandy Bridge CPUs in the current MacBook Air. I don't doubt Apple had Llano prototypes, but with Llano using double the power and heat I highly doubt they were plan B much less plan A.
AMD uses the dual core Zacate for ultra-portables with it's 18W TDP, but it's CPU performance is far behind Llano much less Sandy Bridge and Zacate's GPU is actually slower than Sandy Bridge's. (Interestingly, the slower Zacate does support SSSE3 while Llano doesn't since Zacate uses a newer architecture, albiet one targeted at lower power and lower performance). All in all, this was probably just another skunkworks research project.
Llano also lacks SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, and QuickSync, the later of which Apple uses to accelerate FaceTime. More importantly, the lowest TDP Llano is 35W compared to 17W for the Sandy Bridge CPUs in the current MacBook Air. I don't doubt Apple had Llano prototypes, but with Llano using double the power and heat I highly doubt they were plan B much less plan A.
AMD uses the dual core Zacate for ultra-portables with it's 18W TDP, but it's CPU performance is far behind Llano much less Sandy Bridge and Zacate's GPU is actually slower than Sandy Bridge's. (Interestingly, the slower Zacate does support SSSE3 while Llano doesn't since Zacate uses a newer architecture, albiet one targeted at lower power and lower performance). All in all, this was probably just another skunkworks research project.
AppleScruff1
macrumors G4
Jerome Morrow
macrumors 6502a
AppleScruff1
macrumors G4
Intel is heads and above AMD. ARM has no suitable "real computer" processor, hence AMD > ARM since this topic is about the MBA.
You're an idiot. AMD is what powers ALL intel x64 PCUs today. Inte;s x64 flopped, wiki that **** if you don't believe me. why do you think in Windows it's called AMD64?
Windows 7 SP1 x64
----------
SSE3... and AMD has SSE4a once again you show your noobiness.
Intel and AMD have had cross patent licenses since the 80s, instruction set wise, their the EXACT SAME
Last edited:
I am talking about SSSE3. SSE4a does not include SSSE3 just like it doesn't include SSE4.1 or SSE4.2. The only architectures that AMD has implemented SSSE3 is Brazos and Bulldozer. Llano is not based on either.
What specifically is compiled for SSSE3 only? that's like using OpenGL 3.1 + extensions instead of 3.2