Apple Considering Adopting AMD Processors for Upcoming Macs?

[shervieux]

Any paradigm shift that requires the original paradigm to remain intact in order to function is anything but "mind blowing". Consider just how useful that iPad is without keeping a conventional computer around to service it with iTunes. Or develop for it. Or back it up. Or print. Or access other hardware and storage media. Or any number of other basic uses we would have to give up to replace our notebooks and netbooks with a yPad.

Shift to cloud computing answer that? Let's look at some facts. iPad was not meant to replace anything, it is an in between device; much like a netbook is. But with the apps that people are coming up with in the app store, it is a darn brilliant piece of machinery in an awesome form factor.

Servicing with itunes - could eventually be done over air, much like you can buy apps directly on your iphone. granted a little slower; you could do backups and restores over the air with the right apps (everything backs up and syncs with a farm. when you want to restore, a small chip with an prom allows for installation of the original OS. Once back up, it sends a signal to download your last backup). like I said, a little slower. Note PROM (programmable, read only memory) - could be used with an internal code to know which data belongs to which machine to restore to.

Print - there are already apps that will recognize wi-fi / over the cloud networked printers. Up to the developers to put that in their apps.

Access other hardware and storage media - there are a lot of apps that allow sharing through a browser over wifi. PLus if you have mobile Me, Apple has the iDisk app. PLus I think future developments will allow for a USB to connect to. Maybe.

Paradigm shift as in pretty darn close to a real computer, with smaller non-bloated full featured apps. Heck of a lot better than a PDA, almost like a real computer (using what we call a real computer). and blows away those early pocket PC'ds Compaq put out years ago.

 

[Speedy2]

Pfft, the Core Duo isn't much better. My 2006 2GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro runs 160 degrees most of the time and goes up to around 200 degrees under medium stress.

It IS much better. Computer makers might be able to screw up the design of a Core-based laptop (plenty have done so), but it's simply no possible to build a decent Turion machine on par with good Core laptops like the Macbook or a good Thinkpad.

 

[AidenShaw]

Seems PC's only have a 2-3 year life span where as Apple has a 5-6 year one.

HA HA HA...

Any 5 year old Apple has a PowerPC processor. That didn't work out so well, did it?

To give him credit though, I think we has saying that there are still somewhat decently spec'd netbooks for under $300.00 - for those who want one.

Thank you - you understood my post.

The $259 netbook does allow the user to swap the 1 GiB RAM for 2 GiB - which would be my first mod.

(I have an Asus 901 netbook running Windows 7 Home Premium with 2 GiB on a 64 GB SSD. It's fine except for the smaller than standard keyboard - my fingers don't quite fit.)

 

[Eidorian]

Seems PC's only have a 2-3 year life span where as Apple has a 5-6 year one.

Everyone keeps telling me about their 7 year old Dells. Did I miss a memo?

A Northwood era Pentium 4 still appears to be the most common processor.

 

[ouimetnick]

Everyone keeps telling me about their 7 year old Dells. Did I miss a memo?

A Northwood era Pentium 4 still appears to be the most common processor.

Really. I was told on this forum that dells are **** and fall apart. i've never had an issue with dell. Have you ever used one?

 

[iMacmatician]

A few things I'm going to say here:

While K10 is behind Nehalem and Sandy Bridge core-for-core, a K10 core is smaller than a Nehalem core or a Sandy Bridge core. 32 nm K10 (for Llano) is 9.69 mm^2, while a Sandy Bridge core is ~19 mm^2. So two K10 cores can fit where 1 Sandy Bridge core fits. While a K10 core also has its associated L2 cache (which brings up the area to 17.7 mm^2), Sandy Bridge cores have L3 cache too, which K10 CPUs don't necessarily have (Llano won't).

Even though two Sandy Bridge cores are much higher performing than two K10 cores, maybe even two Bulldozer cores (1 module), what happens when AMD's price advantage brings two Sandy Bridge cores into competition with four K10 cores? Also note that AMD's upcoming mobile quad-cores are 25 W (1.6 GHz) to 45 W (2.0 GHz), while Intel's are 45 W (1.6/1.73 GHz) to 55 W (2.0 GHz). Sandy Bridge-MB quad-cores are still 45 W, although those CPUs integrate a GPU (~10 W?).

Magny-Cours is basically in the same ballpark as Gulftown, thanks to MC having twice the cores as Gulftown (12 vs. 6). This will repeat itself with Interlagos and Sandy Bridge-EP (16 vs. 8).

Bulldozer's the big "if" here. From rough AMD performance estimates, Interlagos appears to be ≥60% higher performance than Magny-Cours. (As of note, Magny-Cours exceeded its predicted performance.) Sandy Bridge mobile appears to have 20% higher performance from Arrandale to SNB dual-core. I think Sandy Bridge may see larger gains than 20% in high-end desktops and workstations/servers due to the core count increase from 6 to 8. That may not result in a 60% increase though.

Fusion. Llano's GPU is rumored to have 480 shaders, which is more than HD 5600 series (400). Shader count isn't the only factor of GPU performance, but that signifies that Llano's GPU won't be your average integrated GPU. Sandy Bridge's GPU is supposed to be much better than Arrandale's, but it will most likely fall significantly behind Llano's. With Apple's emphasis on GPU over CPU with the 13" MacBook Pro, Llano may be more enticing than Sandy Bridge-MB. Intel most likely won't have an answer until Larrabee appears…which assuming it doesn't get delayed/canceled, looks to be 2011, and won't show up in CPUs until ~2015.

In the high-end desktop area, AMD appears to be weakest. Zambezi (8-core) will face off against 8-core Sandy Bridge, so AMD won't have a core count advantage. The same happens with Orochi (4-core) and Sandy Bridge-DT (2/4-core). AMD may be able to compete on price though. Since the 27" iMac can hold up to 95 W CPU, if Intel can get 6-core Sandy Bridge in ~95 W, that may be the way to go in 2011. Something similar might happen with the 21.5" iMac.


If we assume the first AMD Macs will show up in 2011, then I'll predict Llano notebooks (MacBook Air looks nice) and Valencia/Interlagos Mac Pros.

 

[cmaier]

Really. I was told on this forum that dells are **** and fall apart. i've never had an issue with dell. Have you ever used one?

I'm on my 7th dell laptop at work in the past 3 years due to machine failures. I'll chock it up to horrible luck. (although it's a laptop, it never leaves the docking station or my office, so it's not rough handling).

 

[snar3281]

HA HA HA...

Any 5 year old Apple has a PowerPC processor. That didn't work out so well, did it?

I've still got an iBook G3 from 2000 running 10.4 right next to me. What's the problem again?

 

[Eidorian]

Really. I was told on this forum that dells are **** and fall apart. i've never had an issue with dell. Have you ever used one?

I've never bought a Dell for myself. When I do have to support them it's always some Pentium 4 era dust filled monster that the user wants to spend more on worthless upgrades instead of buying a new computer.

 

[mr.steevo]

HA HA HA...

Any 5 year old Apple has a PowerPC processor. That didn't work out so well, did it?

Hi,

My 1Ghz iBook (10.4) is still my daily driver. I bought it in '04 and other than slow youtube streaming I am not feeling the need to upgrade yet. I'm very certain I am in the minority.

How well would a 6 year old PC laptop be running today? I don't have any experience with them.

s.

 

[daxomni]

Shift to cloud computing answer that?

Not yet it doesn't.

Let's look at some facts. iPad was not meant to replace anything, it is an in between device; much like a netbook is.

First of all that's not a fact, it's a view. It's not even a coherent view since you're saying the yPad is a functional replacement for a netbook, which it most certainly is not. Netbooks don't need any other computers around to manage them as they can manage their own functions just fine without any external help.

But with the apps that people are coming up with in the app store, it is a darn brilliant piece of machinery in an awesome form factor.

The iPhone was certainly brilliant, in large part because it replaced many other devices and combined them into one easy to use and easy to carry super-device that almost made up the cost of the device itself. The yPad can make no similar claim in my view.

Servicing with itunes - could eventually be done over air, much like you can buy apps directly on your iphone.

Again, not a fact, just pure speculation about something that may or may not ever be offered with today's yPad.

Paradigm shift as in pretty darn close to a real computer, with smaller non-bloated full featured apps. Heck of a lot better than a PDA, almost like a real computer (using what we call a real computer). and blows away those early pocket PC'ds Compaq put out years ago.

If I can't do actual work on it for my actual job then it's not a computer. It's as simple as that. I can do everything my job would ever ask of me on a netbook. The yPad? Not even close. But then maybe that's because I expect more than "pretty darn close" to a real paycheck.

 

[Gray.2]

I've still got an iBook G3 from 2000 running 10.4 right next to me. What's the problem again?

I think he's referring to the G5 capacitor issues.

 

[NT1440]

HA HA HA...

Any 5 year old Apple has a PowerPC processor. That didn't work out so well, did it?

If it still runs, what the hell does it matter?

 

[German]

But this is Aiden Shaw, Ladies and Gentlemen!

And you are using 10.5 or 10.4?

If you are using 10.4 you will not get any security updates.
And there sould be some holes in 10.4, e.g. -> Charles Miller and Pwn2Own contest 2010 or Quicktime, ...

[/off topic]

 

[G2244]

Apple could be gearing up for a new product: the "midrange tower" that folks wish for from time to time. That is, a tower configuration that allows a choice of graphics cards, additional hard drives etc. somewhat like the Mac Pro, but at a middle price range, for the same people who like a tower configuration but today would go with a Dell or self-built because the Pro is awfully expensive. Maybe AMD would be part of a strategy of producing such a product at a moderate price. Of course, you wouldn't get all the options of the pro, but a smaller tower with space for 2 drives and some selection of graphics and sound cards would be welcome.

Like this perhaps:
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/04/an-apple-patent-may-hint-at-a-mini-tower-desktop-with-usb-30.html

 

[mrchinchilla]

And you are using 10.5 or 10.4?

If you are using 10.4 you will not get any security updates.
And there sould be some holes in 10.4, e.g. -> Charles Miller and Pwn2Own contest 2010 or Quicktime, ...

[/off topic]

I'm very sure Charles Miller will be frantically hacking into all Macs still running 10.4.

 

[German]

I'm very sure Charles Miller will be frantically hacking into all Macs still running 10.4.

Are you sure that no one else is knowing the weakness?
What about other weaknesses that apple didn't patch (Tiger)?
It is not a good feeling using a system without patches.

Maybe you have luck because the market share of old macs with tiger is relatively small, so that nothing will happen...

[/off topic]

 

[seveej]

x2. This site amazes me, then again it is called mac RUMORS. The smallest rumor is brought up and then immediately people take the ball running around with their hands above their heads screaming Armageddon.

Amen (although I did not agree with all of your post).

I'm highjacking the quote above as a starting point for a extraordinary rant (extraordinary for me, that is).

I saw the headline and was intrigued, partly because when I did a training assignment some time back I came to the conclusion that Apple's Intel dependence was a major strategic risk (which I already mentioned in another post) and wondered whether it could really be that Apple was not discussing alternatives - hence my interest in the topic. (And yeah, I'm a business student (among other things), not a professor at MIT, so don't believe me unless you already agree)

I was frankly appalled by the language and sheer stupidity of an unusually high part of the posts. It's as if this rumor was all that was needed to let the long stymied flame-war-urges erupt.

Examples:
BLATANT LACK OF FACTS: Not to mention, AMD would not be able to produce 1/4 of the chips Apple orders from them.

BIAS: Intel is the BEST chip maker in the world hands down. I can't see having a flame war over that fact.

ON THE DEFENSE: I will never own a mac with a AMD CPU ...

LACK OF PERSPECTIVE: I hate AMD. I used to have a Gateway MX6426...

I could go on for quite some while you know...

Especially I wonder about everyone talking about AMD CPU's being subpar/sucking/crap etc. Where these people around in say 2003 when Intel hadn't won a benchmark in years, and if yes, then more importantly, were they Intel or AMD fanboys back then?

Please People. Just because this is an electronic bulletin board (us old farts still call them that) and not the real world, where you might get beaten up for saying anything that pops into your mind, could you do humanity a favor and stop submitting crap you would not want printed on your forehead.

RGDS, everyone.
Pekka

 

[avidmacuser]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't apple deny any kind of AMD switch last year?

could it be that ,Times a Changin'?

Not having a good enough gross margin, it make sense for Apple to look into saving money on components.

so where does the buck stop for 'quality' parts and 'performance' components?

I hope Apple isn't simply switching to AMD processors because they are cheaper since I doubt most of those savings would be passed on to consumers anyways. AMD's CPU performance and power consumption doesn't compare to Intel currently and while Bulldozer might catch up, it's not clear that it can actually surpass Sandy Bridge. On the mobile front though, Bulldozer won't be in that space, as such I don't think current or future AMD mobile processors will be competitive with what Intel can offer for notebooks. It's good to keep the option open, but hopefully Apple will make sure they aren't taking a step backwards in performance just to save money or to spite Intel.

Perhaps a refined, new-and-improved marketing plan should make us think otherwise?!?

 

[iObama]

Lord, I don't know what I've done to you. First, my cookies catch on fire leaving me with no extra ingredients to make another batch, and then rumors about Apple switching to AMD?!?!?!?!

*Sigh*

 

[seveej]

How well would a 6 year old PC laptop be running today? I don't have any experience with them.

I still keep my 6 year old IBM Thinkpad X40 as a backup laptop, in case my primary would break. It's in perfect working order and last I checked, even replacement batteries were still available. Performancewise it's pretty much on par with the 12" PB G4 1,5Ghz I sold three months ago, before upgrading to this alu macbook. The only downside: It does not run MacOS.

Pekka

 

[mr.steevo]

I still keep my 6 year old IBM Thinkpad X40 as a backup laptop, in case my primary would break. It's in perfect working order and last I checked, even replacement batteries were still available. Performancewise it's pretty much on par with the 12" PB G4 1,5Ghz I sold three months ago, before upgrading to this alu macbook. The only downside: It does not run MacOS.

Pekka

Hi,

I figured as much.

Thanks for the follow up.

s.

 

[mattster16]

Apple is not going to switch to AMD to save a few bucks if it would ever sacrifice performance - they don't roll that way. Stop the worrying.


Big companies are always in discussions with each other whether there is a likelihood of striking some kind of deal or not. That's just what they do.

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

Apple should adopt a new product paradigm;

Consumer Compact : Consumer : Pro Compact : Pro

[Mac Mini] [iMac] [???] [Mac Pro]

 

[RebootD]

I know it's a PC site but Toms Hardware does CPU tests and in the Mobile CPU Intel has the top 5-6 chips in just about every test. http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/mobile-cpu-charts/benchmarks-2,19.html

If you want to check out the desktop cpu charts for an even greater disparity.

The only reason for this rumor to be true would be

1. Tell Intel where to shove their "we don't support other chipsets"
2. Use AMD for lower end products where they are cheaper
3. Forgo speed for profit margins and hope we don't notice.