I don't buy this. It would be a disaster to go back to intel integrated after people had a taste of a decent gpu in the current low end.
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 Dropping NVIDIA for Future Macs?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Let's see here...
If they wanted to drop nVidia, THEY WOULD HAVE DONE IT AFTER THE FAULTS OF THE 8600M GT. NOT THREE REVISIONS LATER AFTER HAVING INCLUDED EVEN MORE NVIDIA CHIPS IN THEIR COMPUTERS.
SemiAccurate?! No. NO. CanNeverBeTrustedAgain is more appropriate.
I don't think it's that clear-cut. The design of those tree revisions began long before they hit shelves. And the design of new nVidia-free revisions takes time too. In addition, the scope of nVidia's problems may have become more clear over time, eventually contributing to a decision.
Too true, which is too bad because I would rather Apple pick the best parts rather than letting politics decide.
Not necessarily true. Apple had these designs in the pipeline for a while. It would have set them even further behind if they had to start from scratch design wise.
In my 2007 Al iMac, it has the ATI/Radeon HD2600. Is this graphic card outdated already?
Will Apple turn to ATI over Nvidia?
I was going to bring up ATI/AMD if no one did. My only concern is that since AMD & Intel are rivals, not sure how that would affect the Apple/Intel relationship. NVidia, AFAIK, only does graphics cards & motherboard chipsets, not procs.
We've been talking about the likely dropping of NVIDIA from MacBooks for several weeks over in the MacBook Pro/PowerBook thread here on MacRumors. Here is the link (last several pages have information about problems in using the 9400M or ANY NVIDIA chipset in Intel's Arrandale mobile processor).
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/668803/
This post does a fairly good summary of the problem:
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/7938678/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/668803/
This post does a fairly good summary of the problem:
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/7938678/
Isn't it clear that Apple will pick the cheapest parts to keep their profits margins so obscenely high? (LCD panels, 1394 chipsets, Macbook plastics, ....)
Intel BLOWS
Intel may make great CPUs, but their GPUs are horrendous and set Macs back 2-3 years.
I call BS on this rumor. Only the latest NVIDIA chips (and an ATI or two) support CoreCL. Unless they switch to ATI, which has been hit and miss for years, GPUs would set us back to 2006 again!
Intel GPUs are total garbage. Apple must know that. Intel probably knows it, too.
Apple, just say NO to Intel GPUs!
Edit: The SemiAccurate article says NOTHING about going to Intel chips. Is MacRumors embellishing a bit?
Intel may make great CPUs, but their GPUs are horrendous and set Macs back 2-3 years.
I call BS on this rumor. Only the latest NVIDIA chips (and an ATI or two) support CoreCL. Unless they switch to ATI, which has been hit and miss for years, GPUs would set us back to 2006 again!
Intel GPUs are total garbage. Apple must know that. Intel probably knows it, too.
Apple, just say NO to Intel GPUs!
Edit: The SemiAccurate article says NOTHING about going to Intel chips. Is MacRumors embellishing a bit?
Doubt it. Intel would probably throw fits. So I doubt this rumor is true, unless Apple really likes Intel's crap.
I think they have, starting in October of last year.
To which the reply rings, "No! Apple will go back to Intel GPUs! This nVidia thing was just a fad because said it was."
Agreed. Glad I nabbed the MacBook Pro with the NVidia 9600m GT. At least that is a decent (if even only unimpressive GPU).
It plays Eve Online fine.
All righty, what say you about this:
I reported on my e-mail from Steve Jobs saying that the 8600M was perfectly fine, even though I believed along with everyone else that they were failing. Now, since I believed they were failing, you should believe that they're all fine; but if you believe that Jobs was lying, which he was, you should believe that they're all...
Yep. Anyone else who claims that my predictions are the opposite of fact gets paradoxes shoved in their face.
Please, how arrogant. It's clear you imagine yourself as some authority on Apple's future plans, but that is totally undeserved. Take for example your "legendary" Nehalem Mac Pro thread. Not only were you wrong on most of your key points, the stuff you were right about was pretty much derived from key features of the Nehalem platform anyway.
At least that thread spurred some pretty good discussion.
IIRC, the G4 mini had a discrete GPU.
Apple had been using ATi and nVidia for a while after the transition and still are. Intel, as far as I'm aware, haven't expressed any dissent.
Unless this licensing thing is sorted out there will be no Nvidia chips for arrandale. Also, there's no way Apple is going back to Intel IGP unless Larrabee is amazing and supports openCL (?) etc. I think it's more likely they'll put a G210M in place of the 9400 and a G260M in place of the 9600GT if they have to go back to Intel chipsets.
Apple needs NVIDIA (well sort of) for Snow Leopard (Cuda/OpenCL) and thus this is not going to happen any time soon. Maybe in 2010 when Intel can help to reduce the hardware prices – putting pressure on NVIDIA might help to lower prices earlier, possibly in Q4 2009 already.
That's... the point, I thought. Apple isn't deviating from standardization to create their own platforms (thank heavens, all PA Semi aside). Had they followed their past trends, I would have been closer (okay, SSD in a Mac Pro? THAT was a sham) Had they kept to their pricing, I would have been right on with those numbers.
Did any one of you say that we'd be hit with the Apple Tax on the Mac Pros? I don't think so.
TOPIC: Any nVidia drop wouldn't be based on defects; it would be based on the newfound licensing issue with Arrandale.
Senseless rambling: 'Course, they could drop Arrandale for a chip they made themselves! Perfect timing!
...
Er, there's no self-facepalm emoticion, so just imagine one after that last bit.
The only way Apple would go back to Intel is if Larrabee kicked ass.
It's scheduled for a release in H1 2010, so inclusion in the Mac line is possible. However, nobody's sure what form factors will be available - it's possible (likely even) that there won't be a portable version at launch (probably coming in Q3 or Q4 2010).
EDIT: Actually, it's earlier than that. Intel now says "2009/2010" and gave details at a mobility conference, indicating that LB may launch with a portable GPU component. See: http://arstechnica.com/hardware/new...oorestown-new-atoms-larrabee-in-late-2009.ars
It's scheduled for a release in H1 2010, so inclusion in the Mac line is possible. However, nobody's sure what form factors will be available - it's possible (likely even) that there won't be a portable version at launch (probably coming in Q3 or Q4 2010).
EDIT: Actually, it's earlier than that. Intel now says "2009/2010" and gave details at a mobility conference, indicating that LB may launch with a portable GPU component. See: http://arstechnica.com/hardware/new...oorestown-new-atoms-larrabee-in-late-2009.ars
PCers seem to get a lot more of out of their video cards through a more aggressive drivers.
I think Intel was unhappy about losing Apples' business to Nvidia and vowed to get it back. Apple got Nehalem server CPUs early for the Mac Pro, maybe they will get Larrabee early... Q1 2010 perhaps
so hows SL supposed to do some of its magic stuff without the 9400m? I guess more Vidcards need to be supported.(good cause i have the orignal al. iMac)
I guess more Vidcards need to be supported.(good cause i have the orignal al. iMac)