Core 2 Duo's are old technology so not really a worth while comparison. On the desktop side of things AMD has competition for the i3s and i5s (Phenom II x2s and x4s with Thuban x6 around the corner) but nothing that beats the i7 really; and that will definitely not change anytime soon.
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 Considering Adopting AMD Processors for Upcoming Macs?
- Thread starter *LTD*
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Core 2 Duo's are old technology so not really a worth while comparison. On the desktop side of things AMD has competition for the i3s and i5s (Phenom II x2s and x4s with Thuban x6 around the corner) but nothing that beats the i7 really; and that will definitely not change anytime soon.
Yeah I completely agree and am concerned, I mean it would be like Ferrari buying parts off Proton to use on its cars lol. I do see its a possibility Apple are just enquiring you know just incase
. Like when PowerPC let Apple down and intel had been tested with OS X since its development in the early 2000'sCrap? Hardly, for the vast majority of people AMDs current line up is more then adequate.
While Phenom II has kind of caught up with the mid-range Core 2 Duos for the price of a higher TDP, I'd like to see one source that proves that Turion is faster than a comparable Core 2 Duo at the same TDP (please don't go below 2.0Ghz, not sure if they are sold anymore), let alone a Core i3 M or i5 M
Yeah I completely agree and am concerned, I mean it would be like Ferrari buying parts off Proton to use on its cars lol. I do see its a possibility Apple are just enquiring you know just incase
Tb more accurate, its not the architecture that let Apple down, its just Apple got ignored by the PowerPC makers for things like servers and consoles.
Apple Power!
Not until Apple start marketing their processor! it's all about marketing strategy I always thought that Apple adopts AMD when they switched to X86. Intel is the smartest decision for them to start and marketing the product is easier for Apple. Now that they established themselves that should not be a problem. When Apple says it's faster and better we always believe it's faster and better. Marketing is more powerful than the products itself!
Not until Apple start marketing their processor! it's all about marketing strategy I always thought that Apple adopts AMD when they switched to X86. Intel is the smartest decision for them to start and marketing the product is easier for Apple. Now that they established themselves that should not be a problem. When Apple says it's faster and better we always believe it's faster and better. Marketing is more powerful than the products itself!
That does suck. We have a just retired Deminsion 4550 from April 2003. My buddy's family is still using theirs. My grandfather has a Inspiron 530 from 2007. Still runs fine. My mom had a Latitude D620 for work. SHe got it in December 2006 Every 3 years, they upgrade her. She got a E6400 for her new machine last December 2009. The D620 was working great before she gave it up. So maybe its in some grateful owners hands now. I bought a Latitude D620 from DFS on eBay in Jan. I upgraded the RAm and HD. I also re-applied thermal paste. it runs OSX like a champ. My brother had a Gateway MX6426. He bought that in December 2006. In January 2009, he gave it to me and he purchased a MacBook. I got rid of it December 2009 and got my dell. The complain with the Gateway is that it HAD a SLOW AMD Turion 64. It was a single core chip. I'm guessing because it had a 4200 RPM HD and 1Gb Ram, that made it even less enjoyable to use.
The only thing I'm not lovin on the non Mac side is the software. windows vista and ALL operating systems by Microsoft before Windows 7 are terrible. I really Do like Windows 7 though. The only thing I hate on Mac computers is the guts. I find it pathetic that a Core i5 starts at $1799. And for $1199 you get a cheese Core 2 Duo. I love the Mac OS X, the casing design, and simplicity. Thats it.
I switched to Mac because of Intel Processors. Intel is the best manufacture. For those of you that say they are making too much money, they are a business, therefore it is their JOB to make money!!! lol, would you want a business in which you broke even or would you like to drive the lamborghini? If they can push out better chips than AMD and manufacture them in a way that gives them a nice profit margin, so what? Do you know how much it costs to make that shirt you are wearing...less than a couple dollars!! I paid $15 for mine which is a huge profit margin, why not go after the retail clothing stores? America is based on making money and spending money. If you don't like Intel chips, then by a PC.
Personally, I don't care if Apple adds AMD chips to their line as long as they give you the option to go to intel. The problem with this, Apple will have to add more drivers to their OS increasing the disk size yet again.
And I find it hilarious that all of you are complaining about price when you all have Apple's!!! Do you have any idea what the profit margin is for Apple's products? They have no debt and profit MILLIONS every year! Costs them like $200 to make the iPhone / iPad and they are selling it for $500+! And don't even say the iPhone only costs $199....AT&T is subsidizing it.
Intel and NVIDIA all the way!!
Personally, I don't care if Apple adds AMD chips to their line as long as they give you the option to go to intel. The problem with this, Apple will have to add more drivers to their OS increasing the disk size yet again.
And I find it hilarious that all of you are complaining about price when you all have Apple's!!! Do you have any idea what the profit margin is for Apple's products? They have no debt and profit MILLIONS every year! Costs them like $200 to make the iPhone / iPad and they are selling it for $500+! And don't even say the iPhone only costs $199....AT&T is subsidizing it.
Intel and NVIDIA all the way!!
Apple isn't supposed to be "adequate". They sell $1k+ computer and should have the parts to go along with it. AMD is so far behind that Intel chose to slow down the "tick tock" road map they had because of lack of competition.
I've come to a conclusion you have no clue what you are talking about.
Adding drivers for an AMD chipset, the size difference won't even be noticed by the user.
ATi > nVidia if you keep up with the know. /taps on head
---
I still think its completely hilarious that the reason why Intel's CPUs got so powerful is because the stole technology from a University.
Nothing in there refutes my reply.
You said "half the battery life" and I said "source?" I'm not here to do your work for you. You either know what you're talking about or you don't.
Most shareholders I know are happy with AMD's recent performance.
CPU's based on a completely different architecture and used for completely different applications. You really need to rethink this ARM = X86 thing you have going on here.
Sorry, I have not read anything else, yet.
Good idea Apple, get out of bed with Google & Intel, the smallest of the bunch.
Good idea Apple, get out of bed with Google & Intel, the smallest of the bunch.
They aren't crap.
Compared to intel, they are. AMD and Intel do not fight for the same market. It's comparing a Honda to a Ferrari. Intel cpus dominate the higher price bracket and AMD the lower. Apple makes high end expensive computers. They should not be looking to stuff lower end cheap chips in there.
No, they are not. Intel only has a real edge with their i7s, everything else (i3s/i5s) AMD can compete with no problem.
In otherwords, AMD can't compete when Intel artificially raises the thread count.
I can prove my point in all of a few seconds. Open another tab and go to newegg. Sort the cpus by price. There are no AMD cpus over $185. They are not fighting for the same market. Intel is high end and AMD is cheap. Apple are high end computers and they should stick with high end cpus.
Are you kidding? You probably wouldn't even notice the difference in most tasks if you had two computers with AMD and Intel comparable chips in them.
In all honesty I believe there's more motivation to put leverage on Intel or nVidia instead of actual adoption.
I hope you remember the Athlon 64 days where you'd cough up $300-800 for a single core Athlon 64 and all for an additional clock speed multiplier or two.
Wow, what a scientific approach to determining cpu power.....
Learn to read. I said nothing about cpu power. I said they are not competing for the same market. Honda is not competing for Ferraris market are they?
If you want benchmarks, google is your friend http://www.anandtech.com/show/2921
I still think there are a lot of people underestimating the capacity of global foundires, with more factories by 2011.
Those were the days...
when I was still using an Athlon XP.
I don't have an opinion of Global Foundries yet.
I remember when the Athlon XP 2600+ that I bought was a steal at $120.Those were the days...
when I was still using an Athlon XP.
I can't imagine there are many people who really want an Apple Tower.
I don't want a tower of any kind unless I am building it myself. I understand what you are saying, but building such a computer would be an absolutely horrible idea for Apple.
If I am going to have a PC I am going to build it myself. The only people I would buy a constructed computer from is Apple.