Amen!
i am in computer business since 1989 and this is most accurate comment i have ever seen about PC hardware.
cheers.
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 Seriously Considered Switching to AMD in 2011 MacBook Air
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Amen!
i am in computer business since 1989 and this is most accurate comment i have ever seen about PC hardware.
cheers.
Maybe I'm just being cynical...but I have a hard time believing AMD was ever even in consideration. I think it was just a bargaining chip to drive down prices from Intel. That's business.
Unfortunately that seems to be the case. I used to have AMD for its great bang-for-the-buck factor but after Sandy Bridge and the disappointment of Bulldozer it's hard to deny AMD is really struggling to stay competitive.
I suppose APUs are a slightly different story with its respectable built-in GPU but the raw CPU performance is still much more important than the GPU, especially as a pro tool, and Intel has gotten a lot better in the GPU as well.
One tidbit I might add is that Macrumors is the place where a former AMD employee described the decline of internal workings within AMD since the Athlon 64 days and he predicted Bulldozer will disappoint when the chip is released. Predictably numerous AMD supporters proceeded to attack him in other forums and questioned his credentials (which wasn't that hard to find on Google) Turned out, he was absolutely right.
The problem with AMD is they are too behind in CPU performance, has less money to attract top engineers, and they are also behind in manufacturing process. Their APU is still good and they still provide pretty darn good value in many cases, but I just don't see why Apple would be interested in AMD until they make a killer design. Maybe an APU with a respectable CPU and an amazing built-in GPU on the chip?
Apple already uses ARM for the majority of computers it sells (iPads). As regular computers become less popular and more of a niche product, don't see why they would need to sacrifice power for battery life. Haswell in 2013 is supposed to focus on battery life as well and Intel's chips keep shrinking every year.
Although I'd be surprised if that ever happened (at least any time soon), it's a fantastic idea if it were to be implemented properly!
Have a basic processor for all your day to day tasks (internet, email, etc) while maximizing battery life, while having a more powerful "real" processor to use when you need some heavy lifting... how cool would that be!
Why does anyone care what processor it has? If an AMD showed performance gains over the previous generation, what difference does it make? I could personally care less if it had an Intel or AMD chip under the hood, as long as it was quicker than the previous generation and maintained an acceptable user experience. That's more important than numbers, especially in a MacBook. It's the reason my 2008 Aluminum MacBook with a 2.0Ghz Core 2 Duo feels quicker than many newer Windows laptops with i7's and such. It's perceived and when I'm writing a document for my school or taking notes in lecture, the last thing I could care about is the clock speed of my fancy processor. Hell, it could run a Qualcomm Snapdragon for all I care...
Intel is starting to need another Pentium 4 vs. Athlon 64 type kick in the ass. I will continue rooting for AMD although I will probably have to build an Ivy Bridge for my next PC.
I've seen videos of people removing the CPU fan on an Intel processor and causing the CPU to throttle it's speed or lock up with no harm to the processor.
I've seen videos of people removing the CPU fan on an AMD processor causing it to go up in smoke.
You're absolutely right especially since they use the same instruction set. However it's just something that has run so deeply in internet forums and a topic that bring up emotional responses from many of us.
Look at this post from this thread:
Of course, that's completely wrong. Current Intel processors are just superior as they destroy AMDs in general CPU performance, not because of any prejudice. But you can see how emotion gets best of the poster.
The unfortunate part for AMD is that when they had the much better technical design, Intel was able to sustain the advantage through prejudice and better manufacturing capacity. Now AMD has lost the technical edge, there's little to sustain AMD sales apart from the value and the core supporters, which aren't that big.
I believe that's pretty much what's happening in the ARM land with their big-little configuration as seen in Tegra3. However from what I've seen, I don't know how beneficial it really is because just internet web browsing can be surprisingly demanding with Javascripts running.
You're batting .500 and you knocked it out of the park.
The last good cpu's AMD produced were the Athlon and the Opteron
during the infamous Intel Preschot P4 fiasco back in the late 50's.
The only reason for Apple to use AMD is for cheap and slow
for emailers, farcebook, farmville and Siri boyfriend users.
Call it the AirPro and charge more for it.
I can't imagine Apple would go with AMD anytime soon, since Apple has adopted and promotes Thunderbolt.
I am a fairly new iMac owner, and I just don't see myself utilizing the two Thunderbolt ports that I have on my new Mac anytime soon.
I am a fairly new iMac owner, and I just don't see myself utilizing the two Thunderbolt ports that I have on my new Mac anytime soon.
I personally have had a poor experience with AMD. I used to have a dell desktop with a dual core intel and an acer laptop with a single core intel. I then got a triple core AMD hp desktop and a dual core AMD sony vaio, this was going back around 3 years ago now (the sony was purchased last year mind). The AMD powered computers in my opinion were very sluggish after a few months, on the other hand intel performed more superiorly.
For this reason I would hesitate to buy another laptop or mac if it had an AMD processor.
For this reason I would hesitate to buy another laptop or mac if it had an AMD processor.
Last edited:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
It's a shame that AMD just doesn't have the CPU architecture to beat Intel's post-Nalhalem stuff, because AMD certainly has the GPU game cornered. I'm surprised that Intel hasn't just assimilated NVIDIA in order to have something to replace their crappy integrated GPU.
I'm dreading the day when Apple make the MBA the only MacBook, as Intel is never going to make a chip lacking the terrible GPU and Apple won't do discrete GPUs in order to make the machine super-thin.
It's a shame that AMD just doesn't have the CPU architecture to beat Intel's post-Nalhalem stuff, because AMD certainly has the GPU game cornered. I'm surprised that Intel hasn't just assimilated NVIDIA in order to have something to replace their crappy integrated GPU.
I'm dreading the day when Apple make the MBA the only MacBook, as Intel is never going to make a chip lacking the terrible GPU and Apple won't do discrete GPUs in order to make the machine super-thin.
Working in software development, I have noticed that more and more people in software development, people working in testing, managers, just about everybody, are switching to Macs for the computer they use at home, _and_ for the computer they will get or try to get for work. Well above 50% by now I would say.
And really, the people that I work with seem to have better things to do with their lives than overclocking computers. Overclocking isn't for geeks, it is for mugs.
We all loose in this integrated CPU+GPU ********.
Intel is the best for CPU but sucks for GPU and lots of people complain about it.
AMD makes the best GPUs but they have no business to do with CPUs.
So the solution would be to have the best of both worlds. Can you make that happen Apple ?
Intel is the best for CPU but sucks for GPU and lots of people complain about it.
AMD makes the best GPUs but they have no business to do with CPUs.
So the solution would be to have the best of both worlds. Can you make that happen Apple ?
This is many years old. The most recent Intel processor in this video is a Pentium 4.
No one on here has given a good reason as to why AMD CPUs would be a bad thing to have in Macs. It's all stupid brand prejudice based solely on marketing and product failures of nearly a decade ago that have long since been improved.
I must say...
I am not really satisfied with my Feb 2011 MBP. It pinwheels a lot, and I have to force power off a lot. I don't use it enough for it to be doing this. HOWEVER, it is still working WAY BETTER than any Windows computer I ever owned after a year. Actually, they usually have major issues in first month or two. Other than the pinwheeling, its an amazing device.
I am not really satisfied with my Feb 2011 MBP. It pinwheels a lot, and I have to force power off a lot. I don't use it enough for it to be doing this. HOWEVER, it is still working WAY BETTER than any Windows computer I ever owned after a year. Actually, they usually have major issues in first month or two. Other than the pinwheeling, its an amazing device.
While competition is great, AMD just hasn't kept up to snuff on CPUs. It would be nice if they did but Intel is pushing the envelope quite a bit ahead of them.
Make that statement once again when working with PSD files in excess of 1gb, dozens of layers in CMYK, etc.
I find it ridiculous how you make such a vague and general statement about professionals still on powermacs and powerbooks. How would you know how many professionals are still on a 6+ year old platform, including applications.