Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:39 PM   #26
zeromeus
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SOCAL
Quote:
Originally Posted by benthewraith View Post
I've seen videos of people removing the CPU fan on an Intel processor and cause the computer to crash. I've seen videos of people removing the CPU fan on an AMD processor keep chugging along.
Remove the fan or heatsink from an AMD processor and say good bye to your $10 CPU!

Intel processors have built-in sensors that would shut the system down and prevent the CPU from frying itself.
zeromeus is offline   -5 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:39 PM   #27
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cuidad de México
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
Quote:
Originally Posted by macguy360 View Post
I can't imagine Apple would do anything so stupid as to switch to AMD to power the macbook air's. AMD does not have the fabrication technology to produce anything in the 22nm range. They just came out with the 32nm processors in mid/late 2011. When it comes to the macbook air, the key thing is going to be heat production and performance, both of which will be most successful with intel who has already been producing the combination cpu/gpu and will now be scaling down the process to 22nm to allow for an even thinner macbook air.
AMD is about 18 months behind Intel in process nodes. 28nm APUs (Deccan platform) were sacrificed for either HD 7000 wafers or due to the management mixup from last year.

Thumb resize.

AMD is going to keep pushing as many 40nm bulk and 32nm SOI lines until everything moves to 28nm. After that we have a good chance of getting a heterogenous platform where operations are carried out based on context instead of CPU or GPU ones being split off.
__________________
Core i5 750 / 16 GB RAM / 500 GB SSD / HD 7950 / Windows 8.1
13" Retina MacBook Pro
Eidorian is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:39 PM   #28
seek3r
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESNOS View Post
AMD's CPUs are horrible... I thought Apple cared about power usage. Intel has done quite a bit of work on that, plus, AMD's implementation of Turboboost is pretty bad...
AMD's fusion chips kick the ass of equivalent intel chips in general usage 'cause while the cpu is a bit inferior the on-die ATI-derived graphics are orders of magnitude better than Intel's integrated crap.

I don't want AMD procs in my workstation or clusters right now (until they solve the problems with bulldozer's threading implementation, if they do that their next iteration of desktop/workstation chips ought to be pretty awesome), but fusion APUs in a macbook air? Hell yeah!
__________________
Home:MM 2006(upgrd to 2.0 C2D, 3GB), Used to have a MP moved on to a Dell workstation. Apple, win me back!
Road:MBA 13" 2012(1.8, 8GB, 128GB) & iPhone 5(32GB)
I met a traveler from an antique land..
seek3r is offline   -4 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:40 PM   #29
Durendal
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
What's their source? That blathering buttwad Charlie Demerjian over at Semiaccurate? This is baloney for one simple reason: AMD didn't have any Fusion parts suitable for the MBA.

The E-series? Not a chance in hell. It's slower than a Core 2 Duo, and we're talking old and low-end Core 2 Duo. The A-series? Nope. They have a minimum TDP of 35w, twice that of the i5/i7 ULV CPUs used in the current Air. Dual core A-series CPUs were out because they'd get crushed by an i5, no questions asked. A little more graphical horsepower wouldn't make up for that. This leaves quads, which are out because the best 35w part is a 1.5ghz CPU. If AMD were to get that within 17w, it would certainly mean chopping the clocks down further. They'd manage 1.2ghz at the very best. Again, not worth it.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple looked at Llano and maybe even made a few prototypes. That doesn't mean they were anywhere close to making a Llano Air an actual product.
Durendal is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:40 PM   #30
ThisIsNotMe
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvpython View Post
Not AMD please!
Who gives a **** what processor(s) Apple uses in its products as long as they deliver performance increases over previous models and preserve the user experience.

If Apple could put a Pentium 2 in a MacBook Air and was (somehow) able to deliver comparable or better performance, it wouldn't stop me from buying a new MacBook Air.

I really don't get why people get so hung up on 'specs' and don't focus on usability.

Apple isn't going to release a notebook that has a processor that doesn't work to its standards.
ThisIsNotMe is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:41 PM   #31
wikus
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Planet earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvpython View Post
Not AMD please!
Reading all these negative comments about AMD is hilarious. Its kind of like reading the negative comments from apple fanboys in regards to flash or android or windows or samsung or google.. or basically anything non-apple.

If it doesnt have an apple logo or isnt apple endorsed, it must suck.
wikus is offline   8 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:42 PM   #32
Durendal
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by seek3r View Post
AMD's fusion chips kick the ass of equivalent intel chips in general usage 'cause while the cpu is a bit inferior the on-die ATI-derived graphics are orders of magnitude better than Intel's integrated crap.
"General usage" makes little use of the GPU. This is utter crap. A dual core SB i7 and a dual core Llano at the same clocks = the Llano gets eaten alive by the i7.
Durendal is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:43 PM   #33
macguy360
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eidorian View Post
AMD is about 18 months behind Intel in process nodes. 28nm APUs were sacrificed for either HD 7900 wafers or due to the management mixup from last year.

Thumb resize.

AMD is going to keep pushing as many 40nm bulk and 32nm SOI lines until everything moves to 28nm. After that we have a good chance of getting a heterogenous platform where operations are carried out based on context instead of CPU or GPU ones being split off.
18 months is a lifetime in the computer industry. There is no way Apple would choose to go with a company who is that far behind.
macguy360 is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:44 PM   #34
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cuidad de México
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
Quote:
Originally Posted by seek3r View Post
AMD's fusion chips kick the ass of equivalent intel chips in general usage 'cause while the cpu is a bit inferior the on-die ATI-derived graphics are orders of magnitude better than Intel's integrated crap.
You are looking at having Brazos face off against the Atom core that has been unchanged since launch in 2008. Atom has progressed with lower prices for lower power points on 32nm but not much else. Not to mention you have to endure Atom's terrible IGP.

Llano does have the fGPU advantage but not much else. Though it is noted to be rather efficient on the mobile front. AMD is still pushing their stock voltages much too high for my tastes.
__________________
Core i5 750 / 16 GB RAM / 500 GB SSD / HD 7950 / Windows 8.1
13" Retina MacBook Pro
Eidorian is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:46 PM   #35
dylin
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by benthewraith View Post
I've seen videos of people removing the CPU fan on an Intel processor and cause the computer to crash. I've seen videos of people removing the CPU fan on an AMD processor keep chugging along.
I actually saw different.
__________________
2012 Macbook Pro:Core i5/8GB RAM/256GB SSD iPhone 5s 32GB Motivation for Everyday Living
dylin is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:50 PM   #36
LachlanH
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Back in the early 2000's AMD would have been an excellent choice. Intel CPU's used to run crazy hot and yet somehow managed to deliver less performance that AMD CPU's running at 2/3 the clock speed.

This has all changed in the last 4 years or so.

As someone who loved AMD CPU's from about 2000-2008, I would never choose one today over Intel's Sandy Bridge line of CPU's.

There is just no escaping that fact that Intel is currently producing the superior processors at the moment, and while they continue to do so, AMD is a poor choice in my opinion.

Graphics wise yes it does muddy up the issue somewhat, but we are talking about Macbook Air's here, is graphics performance even worth discussing?
LachlanH is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:51 PM   #37
smulji
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by wikus View Post
The macbook airs suck for any kind of serious work anyway. Power users running intense photoshop documents or anything of the likes arent going to be running out to buy a macbook air.

The MBA is really geared for basic use like sending photos of your cat to grandma or typing a document in MS Word for your university paper. And in that regards, the AMD cpus are more than capable.
I'll wager that Apple creates their own ARM-based custom processor for the MBA before they start using AMD processors. It's either Intel or ARM. AMD doesn't cut it from a performance (compared to Intel) or power efficiency (compared to ARM) standpoint.
smulji is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:52 PM   #38
macguy360
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by LachlanH View Post
Back in the early 2000's AMD would have been an excellent choice. Intel CPU's used to run crazy hot and yet somehow managed to deliver less performance that AMD CPU's running at 2/3 the clock speed.

This has all changed in the last 4 years or so.

As someone who loved AMD CPU's from about 2000-2008, I would never choose one today over Intel's Sandy Bridge line of CPU's.

There is just no escaping that fact that Intel is currently producing the superior processors at the moment, and while they continue to do so, AMD is a poor choice in my opinion.

Graphics wise yes it does muddy up the issue somewhat, but we are talking about Macbook Air's here, is graphics performance even worth discussing?
If graphics performance is even a concern, who cares its on a 22nm die and can be overclocked to hell and back.
macguy360 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:55 PM   #39
zeromeus
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SOCAL
Quote:
Originally Posted by dylin View Post
I actually saw different.
He's actually right. The AMD processor doesn't have heat sensor, so it'll keep chugging along for a few seconds before it burns. Intel processors have heat sensors that will shut the system down before any damage could be done by overheating.

So if Apple ever put an AMD processor into their product, I'll buy the last generation of product that has ARM or Intel. Apple will receive nothing from me if they decide to cheap out with AMD.

If Apple decides to make their own processors based on ARM, I'll still support them even if it's underpowered. I'd rather have an underpowered computer than one that heats up like crazy and burns itself out. Although if Apple decides to use their MBA as a multi-use tool such as to cook your eggs and pancakes for breakfast, an AMD processor would definitely be suitable for that.
zeromeus is offline   -2 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:56 PM   #40
DESNOS
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by macguy360 View Post
18 months is a lifetime in the computer industry. There is no way Apple would choose to go with a company who is that far behind.
Normally that would be the case, however if AMD is willing to give Apple more control over what goes into the CPU, it's possible it could work out for them. Mac OS X-specific optimizations in other words. Their CPUs are still crap, but it might work out anyway.
DESNOS is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2012, 11:58 PM   #41
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cuidad de México
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durendal View Post
What's their source? That blathering buttwad Charlie Demerjian over at Semiaccurate? This is baloney for one simple reason: AMD didn't have any Fusion parts suitable for the MBA.

The E-series? Not a chance in hell. It's slower than a Core 2 Duo, and we're talking old and low-end Core 2 Duo. The A-series? Nope. They have a minimum TDP of 35w, twice that of the i5/i7 ULV CPUs used in the current Air. Dual core A-series CPUs were out because they'd get crushed by an i5, no questions asked. A little more graphical horsepower wouldn't make up for that. This leaves quads, which are out because the best 35w part is a 1.5ghz CPU. If AMD were to get that within 17w, it would certainly mean chopping the clocks down further. They'd manage 1.2ghz at the very best. Again, not worth it.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple looked at Llano and maybe even made a few prototypes. That doesn't mean they were anywhere close to making a Llano Air an actual product.
Trinity is aiming for 17W 2 module/4 core processors. I guess the extra module online is to make up for the lack of raw clock speed. I find very little documentation that Trinity ULV will be 1M/2C. They are pushing as much as possible to get that full die out there.

There is also 25W LV Trinty in their A10 category.

All this is from financial day slides earlier this month. Page 34 being the most interesting.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DESNOS View Post
Normally that would be the case, however if AMD is willing to give Apple more control over what goes into the CPU, it's possible it could work out for them. Mac OS X-specific optimizations in other words. Their CPUs are still crap, but it might work out anyway.
AMD is also offering the chance of client specific IP space on die.
__________________
Core i5 750 / 16 GB RAM / 500 GB SSD / HD 7950 / Windows 8.1
13" Retina MacBook Pro
Eidorian is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2012, 12:02 AM   #42
carmenodie
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by wikus View Post
The macbook airs suck for any kind of serious work anyway. Power users running intense photoshop documents or anything of the likes arent going to be running out to buy a macbook air.

The MBA is really geared for basic use like sending photos of your cat to grandma or typing a document in MS Word for your university paper. And in that regards, the AMD cpus are more than capable.
Thanks for stating what we already knew but you did it with a dig!
You sir need are in need of troll counseling!

----------

How far do you think AMD can go considering they are using Intel's x86 architecture? Intel has drawn the line in the sand concerning AMD and NVIDIA. They can only go so far in the market place as long as they are using Intel sh**!
And I'm sure Apple is well away of this.
carmenodie is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2012, 12:04 AM   #43
wikus
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Planet earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macguy360 View Post
If graphics performance is even a concern, who cares its on a 22nm die and can be overclocked to hell and back.
I'd agree, but there are several problems:

1) Mac users are generally noobs without a clue on how to overclock, swap hard drives, flash roms, etc. Development for such fine-tuning computer savvy people would be limited on the mac side.
2) GPU Drivers for OS X? I've never seen a single overclocking utility for any graphics card on a mac.
3) Overclocking still works best in Windows.
4) Anyone actually buying a mac to play games or do 3D work in OS X is crazy. Windows runs OS X into the pavement in this area, especially in gaming.
5) Graphics cards have always sucked hard on every macintosh computer and any 3rd party upgrade for the Mac (in this case, the mac pro, because apple doesnt believe in choice for iMac users) has always been expensive and to make matters worse, the offerings have usually been obsolete last generation.

Thats not to say I wouldnt like to see better gpu support for macs. If I could play Half Life 2 ep. 2, portal or other games at 1920 x 1200, 4X FSAA and maximum settings getting a constant (and minimum) 60fps, I'd be real happy.

But the reality is this: gaming and graphics cards are a complete pathetic JOKE in OS X. And anyone who disagrees is in denial.
wikus is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2012, 12:11 AM   #44
tom vilsack
macrumors 68000
 
tom vilsack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ladner cdn
market cap

apple 478 billion
amd 5 billion

apple cash on hand 100 billion

why not just buy amd and be done?
tom vilsack is offline   -3 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2012, 12:12 AM   #45
afin
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Midwest USA
I'm worried about AMD not doing so well these days, especially with their market failure FX line. Intel needs a real competitor in order to stay fit. Capitalism and all that.

Last edited by afin; Feb 23, 2012 at 12:20 AM.
afin is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2012, 12:14 AM   #46
Macman45
macrumors G5
 
Macman45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Somewhere Back In The Long Ago
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inakto View Post
if it works better fine by me. AMD is underrated.
Back a ways, I used to build PC's with AMD CPU's....they were robust, and an over clockers dream....I would replace my MBP or my MBA with an AMD based chip without any concerns at all.
__________________
Thats Not All Folks
Macman45 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2012, 12:14 AM   #47
wikus
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Planet earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom vilsack View Post
market cap

apple 478 billion
amd 5 billion

apple cash on hand 100 billion

why not just buy amd and be done?
Why? So that Apple can build on its monopoly?

And am I the only thats getting really tired of this 'why doesnt Apple just buy 'company X' ??'

As if every company out there is for sale and Apple should just become the next Microsoft... not like it hasnt already.
wikus is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2012, 12:15 AM   #48
ekwipt
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
AMD Apple TV would rock if they do it properly, Intel/Nvidia can't compete cost/performance, although performance is ultimately better on Intel/Nvidia IMO of course
ekwipt is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2012, 12:15 AM   #49
commander.data
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Probably for the best that the Llano MacBook Air didn't make it. Even with OpenCL, with I/O taken care of with SSDs, the biggest contributor to user performance experience for most tasks is CPU speed and Llano can't compare to Sandy Bridge on the CPU side. And the HD 3000 is doing surprising well with even the latest AAA Mac games supporting it including RAGE, Batman Arkham Asylum, and Bioshock 2. Some GPU performance is left on the table compared to Llano, but game/driver compatibility problems, which were traditionally Intel's weak point, seem to have been solved. Llano couldn't match LV Sandy Bridge's 17W TDP either. For a "Plan B", the Sandy Bridge MacBook Air turned out surprisingly well.
commander.data is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2012, 12:18 AM   #50
TMar
macrumors 68000
 
TMar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ky
Send a message via Yahoo to TMar Send a message via Skype™ to TMar
Quote:
Forbes reports that the company's Llano family of Fusion combination CPU-GPU systems was under consideration by Apple to be used as the brains behind the MacBook Air for its 2011 revision.
OK, let me be the first to report that Apple considers every major chip maker when looking at product revisions (you can quote me on that if you want to rerun the story). This is just common sense that Apple will prototype with different suppliers, they have no brand loyalty when it comes to components. They don't even offer any proof, how is common sense reportable media?
__________________
I wish more wireless service provider owners posted here so talk about tethering would be taboo too.
.....Theft is Theft....
TMar is offline   2 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2011 13" Macbook Air is Dead...Apple is Offering a Replacement..Please Help me Decide stfwayne MacBook Air 71 May 30, 2014 01:51 PM
Switching to a Macbook Air from Windows? DaBossIsHere MacBook Air 30 Oct 10, 2013 02:03 PM
Official apple ICC profile for Macbook Air 2011 Azathoth MacBook Air 0 Mar 29, 2013 05:04 AM
Macbook Pro 2011 AMD 6750M needs driver update!!! Sam235 MacBook Pro 0 Oct 14, 2012 09:11 AM
2011 Macbook Air VS. 2011-2012 Macbook Pro zakiay MacBook Pro 9 Sep 8, 2012 03:44 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:12 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC