Sidebar Sidebar
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?

Apple needs to team up with HP

HP Labs Shows New Memristor Tech

April 9, 2010 10:23 AM
Daily Tech

"..

HP Labs produced another technological leap last week as it released information in the journalNature of a self-computing memristor. A device able to act as both a processor and a memory device. Without the need to send all instructions to a central processing unit, the memristor devices could contribute significantly to everything from supercomputers to hand-held electronics.

Memristors are faster than standard flash memory, able to hold more information then most current means of memory storage, and hold their "charge" without direct power. An instant-on device powered by memristors could literally be turned on and off at the users discretion without risk of losing data or lengthy boot-up times common to classical integrated circuit architecture.

Rather than storing data as an electrical charge, a memristor "remembers" the amount of voltage last run through it as a change in resistance in one layer. This resistance can be measured afterward and will not change even if the unit is not receiving power of any kind.

..."
 
KindredMAC said:
And don't fool yourself into thinking that Apple has turned its back completely on PPC chipsets as well...
Click to expand...

This would be suicide for the Mac platform. Part of the recent resurgence of the Mac is that you can run Windows and Linux applications natively. Personally speaking, if Apple went back to PPC, I would have to go to Windows and Linux for work, if not also for personal use. And some software vendors would stop supporting Mac as well.
 
Even if all this did was make AMD a (virtual) fab for Apple's custom chips, it would still be great. The fact Apple can do something like the iPad all-in-one chip, means they could do something for MacBookPro's along that line but have sophisticated graphics capability including GPU side processors to offload some tasks from the CPU, thus making absolute CPU superiority far less of an issue.

If they can also get the package to a tiny size, perhaps 2 stacks side by side, and a small die size, they could have a MacBook with a 24 hour battery life and also 200% more speed for heavy stuff like HD video and large format photographs.

The graphics piece is the missing piece and was addressed on iPad with integrated layers. AMD/NVIDIA could be a really good path.

I hope Apple sticks with Intel for servers, MacPros and some top end consumer stuff.

Rocketman
 
dXTC said:
If that's the case, then I'd like to give you a belated thanks, which you can feel free to pass on to your former teammates.

Several years ago, I built a PC for myself around an AMD Athlon 64-- the 3500+ Clawhammer, specifically. I was very impressed by its performance in comparison to my Pentium 4 laptop; it was the only PC I owned that ran iTunes for Windows satisfactorily. It still runs very well to this day, in fact.
Click to expand...

Heh heh. Thanks. You have me to thank for the name "hammer," too. It's a fun story involving a sledgehammer and an interior wall in our building at 920 DeGuigne in sunnyvale...
 
myoldwatermill said:
With the success of the i7,i5, & i3 you don't think that and would be developing a response?

Also on a budget, AMD chips have always been bang for your buck. If the future of AMD holds inexpensive chips that have performance competitive with intels i7
Click to expand...

um... yeah, it would be awesome if my computer ran on rainbows, too.

just because intel has success doesn't mean AMD has the capabilities to "develop a response"

IF future vaporware amd chips are as fast as future vaporware intel chips while using less power and costing less... then yes, what a great deal that would be.

but jeez man.. if magical elves gave us alien technology, that would also be awesome. and similar in probability.
 
Anandtech's summary of AMD for the next couple of years.

Unfortunately for AMD, 2010 isn’t really interesting. The company will have to rely on aggressive pricing and the continued success of its graphics teams to carry it for the next 12 - 18 months.
Bulldozer, from what I know, appears to be a bold enough architecture to really challenge Intel if AMD can get it done properly. Bulldozer should arrive between Sandy Bridge and Intel's first 22nm CPUs. It's too early to tell how well Bulldozer's execution is going; AMD absolutely must sample in 2010.
It's disappointing that Llano won't use Bulldozer. With 32nm Phenom II cores, Llano will be roughly one to two architecture generations behind Sandy Bridge. The GPU side should be strong though, it is ATI after all.
AMD’s graphics strategy is much stronger. Bringing an already industry leading GPU architecture on die and then revving it every year is going to completely change the way we look at annual CPU releases. The big question here is what apps are we going to be running on these integrated GPU cores? The market has roughly two years to start finding out.
Click to expand...

The last paragraph is the key. Where is AMD going to be in two years. It's likely that if a AMD gets invited to the table it'll be for 10.7 and on.
 
That is awesome! and to those who posted negative you guys are idiots :p AMD Processors perform very very well, especially the Phenom II line.. and guess what this probably means price drops on the new iMacs.. or higher spec'd iMacs (AMD Based).. I should know I'm a PC Enthusiast .. I build computers and push them to the limits..

A lot of people who know nothing about hardware seem to think Intel is the best.. but thats not entirely true.. I mean as far as performance + price ratio AMD FTW.. You can get a Quad Core 2.93GHZ Phenom II for = $131CAD!!! imagine having Quad Core on entry level macs..

I really hope this happens.. And to those who think Phenom II doesn't perform well do your research please.. These processors do quite well, and anyway I'd rather see a Quad Core Phenom II then a Dual Core i3/i5 on an entry level imac

Looking forward to seeing this happen.. I was actually gonna make a post about it.. :p
 
i'd definitely rather have a slightly slower amd processor with better graphics. processors these days are WAY more than the average user needs anyways, so for the mac mini/macbook/imac range of products, AMD could be awesome.
 
Yamcha said:
That is awesome! and to those who posted negative you guys are idiots :p AMD Processors perform very very well, especially the Phenom II line.. and guess what this probably means price drops on the new iMacs.. or higher spec'd iMacs (AMD Based).. I should know I'm a PC Enthusiast .. I build computers and push them to the limits..

A lot of people who know nothing about hardware seem to think Intel is the best.. but thats not entirely true.. I mean as far as performance + price ratio AMD FTW.. You can get a Quad Core 2.93GHZ Phenom II for = $131CAD!!! imagine having Quad Core on entry level macs..

I really hope this happens.. And to those who think Phenom II doesn't perform well do your research please.. These processors do quite well, and anyway I'd rather see a Quad Core Phenom II then a Dual Core i3/i5..

Looking forward to seeing this happen.. I was actually gonna make a post about it.. :p
Click to expand...


In the end, the 13" MBPs see Quad-core AMDs sooner than anything else.
 
AMD? Seriously? Well it would be a suicide attempt for Apple. I don't want to cook a bacon egg and cheese on the palmrest of my laptop. That's what AMD processors good at.

However, ATI? Well, sure.

I'm just hoping that Steve Jobs knows what he is doing. I'm sure that he wouldn't just take the whole Mac line up to AMD blindly. We'll see...
 
this is the dumbest article in like a week, stupid amd, why would you put an amd in anything but a desktop, thats their only good line of processors.
 
BaronStein said:
AMD? Seriously? Well it would be a suicide attempt for Apple. I don't want to cook a bacon egg and cheese on the palmrest of my laptop. That's what AMD processors good at.

However, ATI? Well, sure.

I'm just hoping that Steve Jobs knows what he is doing. I'm sure that he wouldn't just take the whole Mac line up to AMD blindly. We'll see...
Click to expand...

Who told you that? AMD processors are great, as far as heat is concerned I don't think it will be an issue the Core i7's heat up much more then the Quad Core AMD's..
 
I'm not quite sure what to think of this. :p

Due to a quad-core Mac being out of my budget, I built a PC with the 3.4 GHz Phenom II X4 965, and I gotta say for US$185 its performance can't be beat.

However, I'm still not crazy about the majority of AMD's CPU offerings at the moment. I'm actually pissed off that there wasn't an option for the quad-core i7-820QM on the new MacBook Pros (and AMD to my knowledge doesn't have an equivalent to this CPU.) I really really wanted a quad. :(
 
nuckinfutz said:
Precisely. If you wouldn't perceive a difference wouldn't you rather pay $400 less for a AMD based Mac Pro?

Intel has just announced record profits which means they're once again taking advantage of weaker competition and we're paying through the nose.
Click to expand...

Man, do you not see the giant, huge, enormous irony of this post?
 
TennisandMusic said:
Man, do you not see the giant, huge, enormous irony of this post?
Click to expand...

Please discuss.

I'm coming from the point of view that software optimization is more important than hardware optimization.

People will often fret over buying a 2.6Ghz or 2.8Ghz processor (within the same processor lineup) when the benchmarked difference is only 10% or so an thus barely perceptible unless one runs synthetic benchmarks.

AMD delivers more power for less money. If that translates into saving a bit of money on a Mac then those funds could be applied to beefiing up the configuration (like adding a SSD or RAM) which could negate the performance differential.
 
As an aapl investor I'd like to see Apple forge an alliance with AMD. Single sourcing from Intel puts a huge schedule risk into the development process ........... as the original article implies.

Apple is a master at pushing their parts vendors for quality and price so I see this as just an extension of that process.

JohnG
 
Could Apple ever buy AMD? Apple wants to control every bit of every product they sell... they bought PA Semiconductor so they could control iPad/iPhone CPUs... they changed the iPhone 4.0 SDK so they wouldn't be beholden to any 3rd party middleware manufacturers when it comes to iPad/iPhone software...

But when it comes to their "normal" computers, Apple is beholden to Intel... could Apple perhaps buy (or invest in) AMD as a method of extrapolating this strategy to their "normal" computer product lines?
 
Yamcha said:
Who told you that? AMD processors are great, as far as heat is concerned I don't think it will be an issue the Core i7's heat up much more then the Quad Core AMD's..
Click to expand...

Desktop AMD's are still good, for the price. However, mobile processors were always been bad. Have you ever used an AMD laptop? You can seriously cook a bacon egg and cheese on them.
 
nuckinfutz said:
Please discuss.

I'm coming from the point of view that software optimization is more important than hardware optimization.

People will often fret over buying a 2.6Ghz or 2.8Ghz processor (within the same processor lineup) when the benchmarked difference is only 10% or so an thus barely perceptible unless one runs synthetic benchmarks.

AMD delivers more power for less money. If that translates into saving a bit of money on a Mac then those funds could be applied to beefiing up the configuration (like adding a SSD or RAM) which could negate the performance differential.
Click to expand...

I think they meant the part of your post that referred to Intel's record profits. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back