Gloabl is set to have another 2 factories up and running by 2011/2012, which will be when AMD releases Fusion and Bulldoser.
I dont think capacity will be a problem for AMD.
TSMC on the other hand...
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
Gloabl is set to have another 2 factories up and running by 2011/2012, which will be when AMD releases Fusion and Bulldoser.
I dont think capacity will be a problem for AMD.
TSMC on the other hand...
Would you like to explain since you know so much, its not like this isn't an old hobby of mine or anything.
I can tell from those specs that is an underperforming piece of crap.
I have a netbook very similar to that one, except I have more memory, and it sucks.
There is no such thing as a good netbook. You could have stopped after the first line.
I would love to see this change if AMD can come out with a good processor. I have always hated intel's draconian business methods (they are on my hit least along with nVidia).
But at the moment I am kind of forced to buy intel, since AMD simply cannot compete. Hopefully this will change with an Apple/AMD partnership.
But at the moment I am kind of forced to buy intel, since AMD simply cannot compete. Hopefully this will change with an Apple/AMD partnership.
All server CPUs. AMD and Intel do not compete for the same market. http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010340343 50001028&bop=And&Order=PRICED
Once again, dont quit your day job.
Intel and AMD all compete for the same markets. They're always trying to take the performance crown off eachother while trickling solutions down to the average users.
http://www.advancedclustering.com/c...ance-linpack-on-xeon-5500-v-opteron-2400.html
AMD is very prominent in the server market.
That's what I just said. His link all are SERVER CPUS!! There are no desktop cpus over $185. Where is the beating a dead horse icon when you need it.
Can we stop this "sucks major nuts" and 'doesn't compete for the same market' thing now. AMD and Intel all compete for the same market. It just depends on what you class your markets as.
That would mean no Boot Camp and no Fusion and no Parallels. Which would mean no Mac for me.
+1.
I have one too, with better specs than posted, and it's a dismal experience using that piece of crap. Fortunately it's intended for self-running demos etc. Totally impossible to live with that slow and unresponsive little ****, and Win7 is a big part of the reason. It's like a Pachinko machine OS, except Pachinko machines don't crash.
Wherever Apple finds that an AMD chip will actually do a better job then use it.
I've had an AMD chip in my pc before and it was ok, I can't say it performed much different. What I can say is that the motherboard I had used with the chip was problematic after a while. Perhaps Apple can make up some quality in that regard.
I've had an AMD chip in my pc before and it was ok, I can't say it performed much different. What I can say is that the motherboard I had used with the chip was problematic after a while. Perhaps Apple can make up some quality in that regard.
Ironically, my £179 older 2008 spec MSI U100 clone, running either Leo or Snowy, embarrasses all of my previous Macs bar my most recent, but then again, most of them were overpriced as well as underperforming.
In Snow it starts up in 35 seconds, shuts down in about two, Safari and Mail open in two bounces, it's far from slow to use.
Underperforming compared to????
Where do your specs differ? "Similar" doesn't count.
Yes, Steve.
We were definitely trying to compete for the same market. For awhile we were doing so successfully. But when we couldn't, we sold our chips into whatever market that was willing to buy them (usually low end retail desktops).
It seems like Apple is tired of being seesawed.Sorry, I have not read anything else, yet.
Good idea Apple, get out of bed with Google & Intel, the smallest of the bunch.
Apple can easily add AMD processors to their lineup and still not leave Intel.
ARM - iPhone, iPod touch, iPad
AMD - Apple TV, Mac mini, MacBook, MacBook Pro (13")
Intel - Xserve, Mac Pro, MacBook Pro (15", 17"), MacBook Air
The MacBook Air will have to stay Core 2 Duo until Apple decides to discontinue it or AMD gets a processor that can go into it.
What is wrong with AMD chips? That they benchmark slightly lower than Intel chips? That doesn't mean they aren't powerful enough to get work done, especially the kind of work average consumers do.
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.
The New AMD factory in New York will be a "foundry"
This may be good for Apple as they will be able to have more control on the functionality of their processor/platform. Does that mean more control over user experieince and imposing more restrictive hardware configurations. I don't know.
Running your product through a foundry based fab poses some challenges. Apple will be alloted blocks of time. If the yields are not what they are expecting this could actually increase the cost of the processors. if that is the case more fab time would be needed to prove the process, at a cost of course.
Intel is more flexible in that arena as they have more fab floor to absorb extra engineering experiments without taking massive hits on overall throughput.
this could be good for apple but minimal gains for the consumer