Apple and the AMD Fusion

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by Eidorian, Nov 10, 2010.

  1. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #1

    Attached Files:

  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    Damn you were 10 minutes faster than me! :p Looks interesting though. Hopefully 13" lappies will use AMD so the GPU will at least be decent.

    BTW, any idea on the release schedule? Q1 2011? Any leaked specs like TDPs or number of cores or frequencies? I know I should be aware of these but been so busy lately that have had no time to follow the news
     
  3. iMacmatician, Nov 10, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2010

    iMacmatician macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    #3
    10 minutes faster than me too!

    Ontario and Zacate: Q1 2011
    Llano: H1 2011
    Bulldozer desktop: Q2 2011

    Zacate specs:
    E-350: 1.6 GHz, dual-core, 500 MHz HD 6310 (80 SPU), 18 W
    E-240: 1.5 GHz, single-core, 500 MHz HD 6310 (80 SPU), 18 W
     
  4. Eidorian thread starter macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #4
    I actually spent some time looking for a duplicate first. :p

    Anandtech and Tom's Hardware have preview articles right now. 9 and 18 W are the targets currently. AMD does appear to be aiming these products at Intel's Pentium line up just above Atom but below Core.

    It appears to be a two chip system with the CPU/GPU and a platform controller. The biggest issue right now is on the notebook side where you have to juggle around the PCIe lanes and throw on a SB750 in order to have discrete graphics. Don't expect USB 3.0 either.
     

    Attached Files:

  5. darkplanets macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    #5
    Hardware and performance wise how would these stack up against the current C2D, i3-5-7, or pending sandy bridge revisions? I'm not entirely familiar with AMD's offerings outside of the desktop/mobile GPUs.

    The bar seems a little low for anything but the MBA, which of course makes sense if they are pitting this against the Pentium lineup. Also, what's the intended meaning of using Apple images in an AMD presentation? I highly doubt that Apple would publicize such a choice at this time, even if they did decide to use them for an upcoming revision.
     
  6. Eidorian thread starter macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #6
    I haven't seen any concrete number yet.

    That doesn't stop AMD and it didn't stop nVidia.

    Hellhammer should recognize these codenames for AMD mobile GPUs.
     
  7. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #7
    Yeah, that's old stuff. You showed me the roadmap like 6 months ago

    [​IMG]
     
  8. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #8
    Slap an AMD in a MacBook or a Mini and I might actually consider buying one.
     
  9. res1233 macrumors 65816

    res1233

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    #9
    As it stands, AMD is Apple's best option for their lower-powered devices like the Mac Mini, MacBook, and MacBook Air, because apple would be forced to include Intel's integrated graphics with any Core iX processor if they were to include it. Apple knows as well as anyone how terrible Intel's graphics are compared to Nvidia and ATI. It's either they stick to the Core2 Duo, or they ditch Intel. I doubt this is going to change with any future offerings from Intel either, but ya never know.
     
  10. acurafan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    #10
    Ain't that the truth!

    i don't care as long as i can run my windows vm's on the new mbp's.
     
  11. Eidorian thread starter macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #11
    Why is that?

    It will be interesting to see how Sandy Bridge's IGP holds out. AMD does have the upper hand that they have ATI folded in but they're still missing out on the GPGPU wagon that I'm enjoying with nVidia.
     
  12. darkplanets macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    #12
    I don't have much faith in Intel's IGP, sandy bridge or not.

    If Fusion was aimed at the lower Core line instead of the Pentium line, then I'd be quite pleased, but right now the initial impression is a bit... lackluster.
    Also, since you guys seem to be more hardware oriented, a question: why haven't we seen any SLI or Crossfire implementations in the Mac Pro? I realize Intel makes the motherboard nowadays (or so I think), but what if Apple switched the mobo to support SLI or Crossfire?
     
  13. chrmjenkins macrumors 603

    chrmjenkins

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    CA
    #13
    I see no verbiage that indicates Apple is a fusion partner. They merely suggest that Apple uses AMD products, which they do in their iMac and Mac Pro lines. They've used them in their other lines previously as well.
     
  14. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #14
    I hope Apple adopts ATI GPUs from now on and let nVidia know their current GPUs are cr@p. I don't see nVidia surviving much longer if they keep up this high watt consumption and heat production stuff.

    GTX580 was a pull in the right direction, but as it stands. They are becoming sitting ducks.
     
  15. Eidorian thread starter macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #15
    Intel is going to have GPU Turbo pickup where the execution units fail. All mobile parts have 12 units vs. the 6 or 12 on desktop processors.

    ATI and nVidia are both stuck on 40nm right now. nVidia has the feature set, SLI, and GPGPU though.
     
  16. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #16
    Very true, and at both fronts I have to accept the fact nVidia has a better foothold there.

    However, they can still do better. I miss the nVidia from the 6000 seres and 8000 series.
     
  17. Eidorian thread starter macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #17
    I was a big ATI fan until I got my recent GTX 460. ATI can do well for lower power and mobile GPUs.

    The G80 debacle was ATI's own fault and they've been recovering since then. Late to the game and the 2900XT was lackluster compared to the 8800 lineup. nVidia was able to set prices over $500 in those days. Now it's a sparing match and constant price war between the two.

    I sure loved my AMD cards but I haven't had any weird driver issues and enjoy the CUDA folding power.
     
  18. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #18
    Very true. Right now, the GTX580 looks fine for Macross; however, the price is waaay to high for my liking $1k for a SLI configuration. That and I'll need a new PSU (since 1000W won't cut it on a 3.8GHz OC'd CPU).
     
  19. Eidorian thread starter macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #19
    http://pcper.com/article.php?aid=1036

    Soon!

    This tidbit is probably the most interesting. It should place it just over the HD 5400 lineup and at 500 MHz for the 18W Zacate processors.
     
  20. TSE macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Location:
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    #20
    As long as AMD's APU is all that it is cracked up to be and offers decent battery life, Apple would be hurting us consumers if they picked Intel's processor + crappy GPU over AMD's APU.
     
  21. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #21
    At this point in time, all AMD really has to do is increase their overall efficiency when it comes to CPUs. They've got great prices for the number of cores, it's just the performance leaves much to be desired.

    Intel is roasting AMD on that front. Sandy Bridge is almost out and all we hear from AMD is Bulldozer and it's variants. I hope Bulldozer pulls it off or AMD might find itself into more financial distress on the CPU block.
     
  22. iMacmatician macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    #22
    160 SPUs? That's new…
     
  23. Eidorian thread starter macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #23
  24. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #24
    No good reason really, just always kind of preferred AMD over Intel.
     
  25. CaoCao macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2010
    #25
    :eek:

    I'm sure AMD would easily make some pimped out Zacate for Apple (it would get them a foot in the door especially if those chips were done well)
     

Share This Page