Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:22 PM   #201
daxomni
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Lots of reactionary stuff in this thread. Time for a reality check. All this talk about I'd never/only buy AMD/Intel is nothing but childish nonsense. Here at work we have had horrible reliability problems with Dell laptops, so we're ending our buying agreement with that portion of their business and forming an agreement with a more capable supplier. However, we've had great reliability from Dell's servers, so we're keeping them and buying more. If and when Dell can fix their laptop problems over the long term we may eventually place a future order with them again. That's how logical buying decisions are made. They attempt to weigh the costs and benefits and risks and go for the best overall value. Both Intel and AMD make hardware that is capable of being used effectively by Apple somewhere in their lineup. That is a simple and obvious fact. They both offer products that are a benefit in cost or performance or availability compared to the other.

Apple is in a fairly unique situation because they are one of the very few remaining Intel-only brands. They also don't normally draw much attention to what is actually inside their case. Excepting a rare deviation for the first use of the A4, Apple generally sells the whole device as one single piece of equipment and leaves the internal technical details out of the marketing equation. This makes future swaps to other sources of compatible hardware easier and less noticeable to the consumer. The consumer might not even know that the CPU is different if they're not a technical junkie. Just like many (most?) iPhone users have little if any idea what exactly is powering their device or who designed it. Apple is unlikely to make a wholesale move to AMD but they may have specific cases in mind where AMD and/or ATI can help them reach a specific cost or performance target. Not to mention that AMD has new developments in the pipeline that may catch up or even leapfrog Intel's current offerings.

I've heard all the same "Nobody will ever beat Intel" claims prior to the K6 and K7 and K8 and each of them managed to beat Intel in one market segment or another. Every R&D department goes through low and high tides. Sometimes talented individuals are cut or leave on their own and sometimes they stay but slowly become complacent and less effective at finding new solutions in a mature market. There is also the possibility that Apple could help shift the balance of power by using some of their enormous pile of cash to help design and fund future projects that result in products AMD sells to them at a preferential rate and schedule. Regardless of your opinion of Intel or AMD or Apple, any development that results in more competition among more competent sources is almost always a net benefit for the consumer, including for people outside Apple's ecosystem.
__________________
iPod 3 | Nano 1/3/6 | Touch 2 | iPhone 1/2/4 | iOS 1/2/3/5 |MBP 2K9/2K10/2K12 | OSX 5/6/7/8 | E4G | GS3 | AOS 2/4 | DOS 5/6 | W31/95/98/XP/W7/W8 | NT4/2K/2K3/2K8
daxomni is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:25 PM   #202
trrosen
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmaier View Post
For the third time: AMD has ZERO fab facilities. They spun that off into Global Foundries. If Apple wants Global Foundries to make A4 chips, all they have to do is pay, just like everyone else (including AMD).
AMD has lots of FABs there called Global Foundries. AMD still owns Global Foundries just as Apple still owns Filemaker.
trrosen is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:27 PM   #203
PAC88
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattie Num Nums View Post
Why are you waiting for AMD???
I love AMD.. Intel is like a 1000lb gorilla that plays dirty..

if apple works with AMD and they can because AMD is a small company.. It will take both companies to the next level and Apple will be like they were in the Power PC days..

Apple will have a truly customized and optimized chipset to work with AMD on. Look at what happend with intel.. they are having cpu shortages which caused delays for apple because they are an f'n monopoly and eventually will start to cut down on quality.. Intel is not better than AMD.. they just want to be perceived that way
__________________
...
PAC88 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:29 PM   #204
djellison
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Pasadena CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckinfutz View Post
Precisely. If you wouldn't perceive a difference ...
You would perceive a difference. AMD's best offerings are currently nothing like the current i5/i7/Xeon lines in terms of performance.
djellison is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:31 PM   #205
50548
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Currently in Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace View Post
I agree. AMD has some good multi-core chips coming up. Using AMD with their GPU's would make sense.
Isn't Magny Cours the fastest chip ever due to its innovating 12-core implementation? Having said that:

AMD IS DEAD.
50548 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:33 PM   #206
cmaier
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by trrosen View Post
AMD has lots of FABs there called Global Foundries. AMD still owns Global Foundries just as Apple still owns Filemaker.
Um, no. First Global Foundries has ONE fab, in Dresden. When they finish the NY plant they will have 2, though the one in Dresden will be for an older process until it is phased out. Second, AMD owns only 34% of Global Foundries. The rest is owned by an investment fund.

Stop making stuff up.

Edit: Forgot GF bought chartered. Not sure if they are keeping the fab once NY opens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BRLawyer View Post
Isn't Magny Cours the fastest chip ever due to its innovating 12-core implementation? Having said that:

AMD IS DEAD.
It's not even a 12-core chip. It's 2 6-core chips glued together on an MCM.

AMD is indeed dead.
__________________
applenews.zone
Discussion of microprocessors and other technology, and reviews of tech products.
cmaier is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:33 PM   #207
seveej
macrumors 6502a
 
seveej's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post
Because today's performance is real and tomorrow is vapor? And because Intel also has improved chips on the horizon?
Back when I was in politics we had a saying:
The incumbent has 0 votes to begin with.
Same applies here.

But honestly dudes. Spew out as much hatred as you want, better here than kicking old ladies/blacks/whites/heteros or whatever your inclination.

The game has very very much changed since Apple got in bed with Intel. Apple is now one of the world's most highly valued companies and companies like that have a need to hedge their strategic risks. Apple's current dependence on Intel is a strategic risk of such a magnitude that the hardiest strategy consultant gets queasy and shaking when asked to draw up a worst-case scenario.

But let me point out a purely technological detail.
AMD has always been a budget supplier, usually pairing lower price with lower performance. Just Like Apple pairs higher price with design excellence and lower performance. And let's face it, Apple is not (except in the MP's maybe) a company which wants top notch processors. And AMD might just give the same performance cheaper.

But as someone here pointed out, chips, integrated circuits and the like are the most subcontracted business there is, even AMD does not make it's own chips. So Apple (which is not an IC dimwit outfit either) could co-operate with AMD designers to come up with something (later manufactured by TSMC or the likes).

My 2 (euro)cents.
__________________
MP 3,1 'nuff RAM, 3 HDD's, 1 SSD, AMD 5770, 10.6
2009 Mini, as server
, and a lot of other gear.
seveej is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:36 PM   #208
Raidersmojo
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burton michigan
chances of apple buying AMD? I know it sounds farfetched but they seem to be getting into the processor game a little bit with their A4 design. I am wondering if they are thinking about just making their own processors for everything.


doubt it happens, just a thought.


hope we stick with intel though.
Raidersmojo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:36 PM   #209
MagicBoy
macrumors 68000
 
MagicBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Manchester, UK
I'd never buy an AMD powered Mac. ATI graphics cards are excellent but the CPUs are subpar. They're not fast enough and use too much power.
__________________
Late 2013 15" MacBook Pro with retina display 2.3GHz; Mac mini (2009) 2GHz ;
iPhone 6 64GB ; PowerBook Titanium G4 667Mhz

RIP : Late 2011 15" MacBook Pro 2.2GHz HR-AG with dead GPU
MagicBoy is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:38 PM   #210
Speedy2
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckinfutz View Post
This posting is clear that the the product in question are AMD CPU. Apple already has access to GPU from ATI so why would execs be in meetings with Apple for GPU only when the partnership in that arena has been established.

Believe it or not, business meetings to discuss the future of current relationships are VERY common in the business world. The new MBPs don't sport AMD GPUs. It is very possible they were discussing the next MBP iteration.
While I believe that to be more likely than a CPU meeting, it could also be very possible that Apple wanted to have a look a Bulldozer to put a little pressure on Intel. From what I've heard, Acer had pre-ordered a lot of mobile Core iX CPUs in Q1 and therefore caused the shortage that forced Apple to push back its MBP refresh. It could very well be that this is their way of getting back at Intel.



Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckinfutz View Post

To relage Bulldozer (AMD's most significant core in 3 years or more) to a pithy comment like "might earn them a few laurel" signifies that you likely have not done due diligence in research

What you think about AMD products today has little bearing on where they will be in 2011 . AMD is clearly stronger in GPU and is more OpenCL compliant than Intel or Nvidia right now. They're already sampling Fusion.

I'm not saying AMD is going to eat all of Intel's business but there's little reason to be Intel only when AMD can offer nice systems that can be priced lower than Intel based computers.
Apple doesn't care about:
- desktop CPUs (save for the iMac, which is now on desktop CPUs)
- CPUs that run very hot under load
- saving a few bucks and sacrificing slim designs and battery life at the same time

Phenoms wouldn't be possible in iMacs because they run too freaking hot, and for everything else Apple uses mobile or server CPUs. AMD's mobile CPUs are just plain crap. There is not a single laptop out there that could match a Macbook's form factor combined with equally long battery life and CPU power. Not even close. AMD is competitive in the server business with their new 12-core-CPU, but we all now how important Mac Pros are nowdays.

You mention Fusion. How is Fusion going to be a danger for Intel's Core iX CPUs with integrated GPU, which are already being sold in huge numbers? Yeah, Fusion's GPU will surely be better, but no one will care if an integrated GPU will be twice as fast. People who need GPU power will put in a dedicated GPU (probably by AMD) and enjoy 10 times the performance. Fusion needs to be sold cheaper than Core iX, that is AMD's only chance. And I'm not sure if putting GPU and CPU on the same die is a wise choice to achieve that goal. They already failed miserably to get an advantage out of the "one-die" strategy with Phenom I and instead suffered huge losses because of it.

Bulldozer looks good, but there are no performance numbers out yet, and no performance/watt figures. It very much looks like a desktop CPU, but the future lies in the mobile space. Desktop is DEAD, and server will remain pretty unimportant.
Speedy2 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:39 PM   #211
AidenShaw
macrumors G5
 
AidenShaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Peninsula
Fact check from Fry's

Quote:
Originally Posted by shervieux View Post
Apple always said they could not make a netbook under $500 that was not junk. Some people have claimed that the current $200-$300 netbooks were junk and the prices have edged up to the $300-$400 range for a somewhat 1/2 way decent spec'd one.....
Decent enough?
  • 64-bit Atom N450 CPU (hyper-threading, 1.66 GHz)
  • GMA3150
  • Windows 7
  • 7.5 hour battery (* usual disclaimer)
  • 1 GiB RAM
  • 10" LED backlit display
  • 1.3 Mpixel webcam
  • 160 GB drive
  • Stereo speakers
  • RJ45 Ethernet and 802.11n
  • Card reader (SD/MMC/MS/xD)
  • Ports: Headphone, microphone, VGA, 3 USB 2.0, RJ-45

...for about half the price of the big Ipod Touch.

http://www.frys.com/product/6173599#detailed
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Untitled1.jpg
Views:	18
Size:	79.4 KB
ID:	222428  
__________________
6 October 2014 - the day that the debate about marriage equality ended. And equality prevailed.
nul

Last edited by AidenShaw; Apr 16, 2010 at 03:47 PM.
AidenShaw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:43 PM   #212
50548
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Currently in Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by AidenShaw View Post
Decent enough?
  • 64-bit Atom N450 CPU (hyper-threading, 1.66 GHz)
  • GMA3150
  • Windows 7
  • 1 GiB RAM
  • 10" LED backlit display
  • 1.3 Mpixel webcam
  • 160 GB drive
  • Stereo speakers
  • RJ45 Ethernet and 802.11n
  • Card reader (SD/MMC/MS/xD)
  • Ports: Headphone, microphone, VGA, 3 USB 2.0, RJ-45

...for about half the price of the big Ipod Touch.

http://www.frys.com/product/6173599#detailed
...and Aiden Shaw strikes again.

No, it's not decent enough:

- it contains Windows;
- it looks fugly;
-it uses Atom;
- it's a netbook.

Have you used an iPad yet before babbling? I suggest you do, as the paradigm shift is mindblowing.
50548 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:43 PM   #213
PAC88
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicBoy View Post
I'd never buy an AMD powered Mac. ATI graphics cards are excellent but the CPUs are subpar. They're not fast enough and use too much power.
What you say is kinda ignorant. You can't predict the future of anything and who says Intel stays on top forever? The only way for AMD to go is up, it just takes a little push from Apple and some R&D. Big things can happen and I won't be surprised when they do.
__________________
...
PAC88 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:45 PM   #214
alphaod
macrumors Core
 
alphaod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 上海 (Shanghai)
This should make hackintoshing an AMD machine much easier.
__________________
Mac Pro | Mac mini | 15" MacBook Pro | iPad Air | iPhone 6
alphaod is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:49 PM   #215
wikoogle
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Ideally, AMD's Bulldozer will kick Sandy Bridge in the nuts in terms of performance and Apple makes the switch, followed by everyone else.

I'm getting weary of Intel's monopoly and their attempts to monopolize the GPU market even though they can't make a decent GPU to save their life. The crap they pulled sticking a GPU with every i processor and refusing to let anyone replace or disable the GPU part is nonsense.

Would much prefer to see an AMD Bulldozer paired with an ATI 5870 equivalent in next years Macbook Pros.
wikoogle is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:50 PM   #216
cube
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: May 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmaier View Post
It's not even a 12-core chip. It's 2 6-core chips glued together on an MCM.
In that case, Intel didn't have dual core and quad core chips for a long time, and AMD was first with them.
cube is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:50 PM   #217
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Peace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Maybe this is why the MBP's were late to the game ? Intel's a bit ticked off at Apple right now.
Peace is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:50 PM   #218
Speedy2
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
True, AMD offers desktop chips with good value for money.

However, Apple couldn't care less since they are only active in the premium segment, especially in the premium mobile segment. Macbooks in their current incarnation wouldn't be possible with AMD CPUs. They'd be twice as thick and run out of power at half the time. Plus, the performance would be at about 60% of the current models. Is that something you see Apple might be even slightly interested in??
Speedy2 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:50 PM   #219
marksman
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
This would have been awesome 10 years ago when AMD was kicking intel's butt.

It is too bad because those were good days where you had options.
marksman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:51 PM   #220
MacintoshMan
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
I really hope this is to bully Intel into giving apple what they want (What ever the **** that is)
MacintoshMan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:52 PM   #221
cube
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: May 2004
I find the news item inappropriate. Only Intel fanboys label AMD as subpar.
cube is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:53 PM   #222
shervieux
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by AidenShaw View Post
Decent enough?
  • 64-bit Atom N450 CPU (hyper-threading, 1.66 GHz)
  • GMA3150
  • Windows 7
  • 1 GiB RAM
  • 10" LED backlit display
  • 1.3 Mpixel webcam
  • 160 GB drive
  • Stereo speakers
  • RJ45 Ethernet and 802.11n
  • Card reader (SD/MMC/MS/xD)
  • Ports: Headphone, microphone, VGA, 3 USB 2.0, RJ-45

...for about half the price of the big Ipod Touch.

http://www.frys.com/product/6173599#detailed
LOL. Ok, ok. Well, There are no FRY's on the east coast, and I yet to see an MSI in a store.... Other than the fact that it has an ATOM, 1gb of ram, has a webcam, and no mention of an opticle drive, that is pretty much the spec of the Lenovo X61 T tablet I picked up at a Lenovo warehouse sale for $400.00 Of course mine is running 3gb ram and Vista Home Premium. The bad part is I find my tablet SLOW..

Wait, how the the heck are they running WIN 7 with 1 gb or ram? that has has got to be a slow machine.
shervieux is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:53 PM   #223
cmaier
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by cube View Post
In that case, Intel didn't have dual core and quad core chips for a long time, and AMD was first with them.
Yes, that is true. I designed the 2-core, but left before the 4-core.
__________________
applenews.zone
Discussion of microprocessors and other technology, and reviews of tech products.
cmaier is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:54 PM   #224
SPUY767
macrumors 68000
 
SPUY767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw04005 View Post
Sigh. I hope they’re just working on graphics technology. AMD’s processors haven’t been competitive (other than in price) in years.
So why wouldn't an inexpensive AMD be of benefit in a Mac Mini? At the mid range of AMD's lineup, you get more CPU power for your money with AMD than with Intel. That said, I seriously doubt that we'll see AMD processors in high end hardware.
__________________
Yo' mama's so STUPID, she went to Bangkok to get a TIE Fighter.
SPUY767 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2010, 03:57 PM   #225
Speedy2
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by trrosen View Post
AMD has lots of FABs there called Global Foundries. AMD still owns Global Foundries just as Apple still owns Filemaker.

You could hardly be more wrong. AMD only owns about 30% of Global Foundries and has the intention to sell that off in the near future. Major shareholder is ATIC (aka Abu Dhabi)

http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/sho...leID=223200132
Speedy2 is offline   0 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
Apple Marketing Chief Phil Schiller to Testify Again in Upcoming Apple vs. Samsung Case MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 18 Feb 17, 2014 01:34 PM
Yahoo adopting iOS7 'Flat' theme? Solomani Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 3 Sep 25, 2013 01:08 PM
The upcoming Apple TV Refresh BiscottiGelato Apple TV and Home Theater 29 Jan 30, 2013 11:36 AM
Samsung's Massive Document Outlining How to Improve Galaxy S by Adopting iPhone Solutions Surfaces MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 1182 Sep 12, 2012 08:49 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:42 PM.

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

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