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 to Adopt Alternative Chipsets for Next Laptops?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If I'm not mistaken, the Montevina Platform does not allow for separation of Wi-Fi from the chipset. Apple has never used the Centrino chipsets, so I suspect that this is just Apple wanting to use Broadcomm chips for Wi-Fi.
Also, you will find AMD chips everywhere. Heck, many of the PPC Macs used AMD chipsets as there was no regular PPC chipset, and Apple did not like all the integration happening in the Intel chipsets back then.
TEG
Also, you will find AMD chips everywhere. Heck, many of the PPC Macs used AMD chipsets as there was no regular PPC chipset, and Apple did not like all the integration happening in the Intel chipsets back then.
TEG
Don't give techies too much credit. Macs are fashionable right now, having a MacBook and an iPod makes you look classy. That's the simple reason that the market share has gone up.Would be really sad
Apple could pull of a chipset (obviously), but they would spend alot of money doing it and even more maintaining it for newer processors.
About the only reason for them to do it would be to close the loop on the hackintoshes crowd. They could easily contract a chipset maker to extend an existing chipset if they wanted to add additional features at a much lower cost than roling thier own. It's sad and if they go that route they will undoubtledy loose cred in tech circles and market share.
Apple could pull of a chipset (obviously), but they would spend alot of money doing it and even more maintaining it for newer processors.
About the only reason for them to do it would be to close the loop on the hackintoshes crowd. They could easily contract a chipset maker to extend an existing chipset if they wanted to add additional features at a much lower cost than roling thier own. It's sad and if they go that route they will undoubtledy loose cred in tech circles and market share.
All I know is that Apple should do whatever they are working on WITH Intel's cooperation. The last thing they need is to piss off Intel. Look at what AMD did with K8 and what they awoke and where they are now.
That said, for those who want a crash course in hardware with regards to the x86 platform:
Basically the way the typical x86 platform works for Intel and AMD right now is theirs the CPU, the chipset (Northbridge typically) and southbridge. The CPU does the processing while the chipset handles things such as graphics card (or IGP), memory (for current Intel chipsets, once Nehalem is here Intel will be like AMD in that the CPU will have an integrated memory controller or IMC to interface with the RAM), and the chipset (though usually its the southbridge) handles the other ports such as USB ports, SATA, RAID, etc.
THat's a VERY rough overview. But the point is that the CPU is NOT the Chipset. The Chipset merely interfaces with the CPU to handle other aspects of the platform.
For example, Intel has the X48 as its current performance chipset. Nvidia also makes motherboards that allow use of the LGA775 CPU's (all the Core 2 Duo, Quad, Extreme, and Pentium Dual Core processors) from Intel. However, Nvidia makes its own chipset. For example, its current performance chipset is the 790i for Intel.
Moving to Via would be a joke. AFAIK, ATI doesn't make chipsets for Intel anymore though pre-existing licenses still exist IIRC since Intel still has CrossFire enabled on all their multi PCI-E x16 Motherboards.
Moving to Nvidia would be stupid as well given their recent GPU chipset woes, and the fact that Nvidia chipsets + Intel CPU motherboards have had loads and loads of problems (680i, 780i, and 790i problems anyone?) that enthusiasts have had to deal with (believe it or not, most hardware issues actually lie with the hardware makers, and not Windows)
ATI's recent forays into helping AMD chipsets, however, have been excellent. Those who follow HomeTheater PC's know that the AMD 780G and soon 790GX chipsets have been excellent featuring far better IGP performance than Intel and Nvidia's offerings as well as offering UVD (Universal Video Decoder to decode HD content on the GPU isntead of the CPU). They also support the discrete GPU + IGP solution where you run IGP during non-intensive tasks and turn on the discrete GPU when necessary, thus allowing power savings while including the discrete mobile 3xxx series GPU and future mobile 4xxx GPU. However, this platform, the 'Puma' platform uses AMD CPU's only. While in the mobility sector, the differecne between the K8.5 AMD notebook CPU's and the Intel Core 2 CPU's isn't that great, I don't see Apple going to AMD right now, though its not out of the realm of possibility.
THe reason why a switch to AMD wouldn't matter is that Intel licensed out the x86 license only to AMD and VIA and AMD is still competitive so Windows would still be runnable.
Anyways, I think this article is likely FUD or this won't happen for some time yet anyways since Intel is just about to begin Nehalem for the desktop and will certainly follow with it within a year as Montevina was jsut launched.
But a few key points:
In order to continue running Windows, they will have to continue use of x86 which means CPU wise, Intel AMD and Via are the only options. And of those, only Intel and AMD meet performance requireemnts.
Chipset-wise, Intel does NOT license out their chipset for Notebooks. Meaning if you use an Intel CPU, you are stuck with the Intel platform (same for AMD - if you use an AMD CPU for your notebook, you are stuck with their platform. THat doesn't mean you can't add discrete GPU's to your notebook, such as the 8600M arleady in the MBP but that the platform is still the same, and so far Apple has used the Santa Rosa platform for example.
Thus I find the article to be misleading since they say they won't use Montevina but will continue using the Intel CPUs. Thus there MUST be some collaboration with Intel on chipsets at the minimum in order to allow this continue or Intel will simply pull the plug on Apple using Intel CPU's, and Intel certainly isn't known to be pushed around.
Yes they acquried PA Semi but I don't think they have had the time to pull a chipset out of nowhere from Intel without serious collbaroation work otherwise we're likely to see buggy chipsets. Look at Nvidia's chipsets vs. Intel chispets. There is aboslutely no question who has the reliability thing down pat - and that's Intel chipset on an Intel platform.
This'll be interesting if true but as of right now, I'm filing this under FUD until further notice. Apple might be known for pushing the envelope but when it comes to hardware, Intel isn't pushed around and jumps aren't as easy as people seem to think
That said, for those who want a crash course in hardware with regards to the x86 platform:
Basically the way the typical x86 platform works for Intel and AMD right now is theirs the CPU, the chipset (Northbridge typically) and southbridge. The CPU does the processing while the chipset handles things such as graphics card (or IGP), memory (for current Intel chipsets, once Nehalem is here Intel will be like AMD in that the CPU will have an integrated memory controller or IMC to interface with the RAM), and the chipset (though usually its the southbridge) handles the other ports such as USB ports, SATA, RAID, etc.
THat's a VERY rough overview. But the point is that the CPU is NOT the Chipset. The Chipset merely interfaces with the CPU to handle other aspects of the platform.
For example, Intel has the X48 as its current performance chipset. Nvidia also makes motherboards that allow use of the LGA775 CPU's (all the Core 2 Duo, Quad, Extreme, and Pentium Dual Core processors) from Intel. However, Nvidia makes its own chipset. For example, its current performance chipset is the 790i for Intel.
Moving to Via would be a joke. AFAIK, ATI doesn't make chipsets for Intel anymore though pre-existing licenses still exist IIRC since Intel still has CrossFire enabled on all their multi PCI-E x16 Motherboards.
Moving to Nvidia would be stupid as well given their recent GPU chipset woes, and the fact that Nvidia chipsets + Intel CPU motherboards have had loads and loads of problems (680i, 780i, and 790i problems anyone?) that enthusiasts have had to deal with (believe it or not, most hardware issues actually lie with the hardware makers, and not Windows
)ATI's recent forays into helping AMD chipsets, however, have been excellent. Those who follow HomeTheater PC's know that the AMD 780G and soon 790GX chipsets have been excellent featuring far better IGP performance than Intel and Nvidia's offerings as well as offering UVD (Universal Video Decoder to decode HD content on the GPU isntead of the CPU). They also support the discrete GPU + IGP solution where you run IGP during non-intensive tasks and turn on the discrete GPU when necessary, thus allowing power savings while including the discrete mobile 3xxx series GPU and future mobile 4xxx GPU. However, this platform, the 'Puma' platform uses AMD CPU's only. While in the mobility sector, the differecne between the K8.5 AMD notebook CPU's and the Intel Core 2 CPU's isn't that great, I don't see Apple going to AMD right now, though its not out of the realm of possibility.
THe reason why a switch to AMD wouldn't matter is that Intel licensed out the x86 license only to AMD and VIA and AMD is still competitive so Windows would still be runnable.
Anyways, I think this article is likely FUD or this won't happen for some time yet anyways since Intel is just about to begin Nehalem for the desktop and will certainly follow with it within a year as Montevina was jsut launched.
But a few key points:
In order to continue running Windows, they will have to continue use of x86 which means CPU wise, Intel AMD and Via are the only options. And of those, only Intel and AMD meet performance requireemnts.
Chipset-wise, Intel does NOT license out their chipset for Notebooks. Meaning if you use an Intel CPU, you are stuck with the Intel platform (same for AMD - if you use an AMD CPU for your notebook, you are stuck with their platform. THat doesn't mean you can't add discrete GPU's to your notebook, such as the 8600M arleady in the MBP but that the platform is still the same, and so far Apple has used the Santa Rosa platform for example.
Thus I find the article to be misleading since they say they won't use Montevina but will continue using the Intel CPUs. Thus there MUST be some collaboration with Intel on chipsets at the minimum in order to allow this continue or Intel will simply pull the plug on Apple using Intel CPU's, and Intel certainly isn't known to be pushed around.
Yes they acquried PA Semi but I don't think they have had the time to pull a chipset out of nowhere from Intel without serious collbaroation work otherwise we're likely to see buggy chipsets. Look at Nvidia's chipsets vs. Intel chispets. There is aboslutely no question who has the reliability thing down pat - and that's Intel chipset on an Intel platform.
This'll be interesting if true but as of right now, I'm filing this under FUD until further notice. Apple might be known for pushing the envelope but when it comes to hardware, Intel isn't pushed around and jumps aren't as easy as people seem to think
Sure, to some who don't care about what their computers can do
Believe it or not one of the biggest selling points is that it can do what any other Windows running platform to do, and for the vast majority of consumers who only know Windows, that safety net is enough to push them to Apple whether or not they use Windows ever after they encounter OS X
It's exactly why they run the "Hey, Macs can run Windows (better) too!" ads in the first place. Think of how many on our forums run a copy of Windows on their Macs via BootCamp or whatever as well..
Mostly agree with the exception that there is no way they are switching from Intel - if anything I wouldn't be blown away if Intel switched to Macs a year from now...
As for Semi P.A, I think more significantly Grand Central will be restricted to already released intel Mac's as a one-off concession, but going forward's GC will not work on any of the wintel chipsets - hence the 'two bridges' thing again - Apple's own intel hybrid, leveraging a special Semi P.A chipset 'brain' will be required to allow grand central to activate for anything after Penryn, thus delivering STUNNING performance advances for new Mac's (as well as existing ones). Current PC system builders using mainly off-the-shelf parts will simply not be able to match this performance at any price.
You can be sure if Apple have had a parrallel computing breakthru as Steve Jobs has suggested that they will protect this technology going forwards - and the best way to do that is to design your own custom chipset (in partnership with intel).
The signs are all there...
Here's my take.
1. I love where Apple is at now with Intel.
2. I have had a few AMD systems and I was not fond of them at the time. in fact the HP I just de-comissioned was an AMD Athelon 64 bit (3 years old).
However, I know a lot of gamers love the AMD, so maybe Apple will use the Intel for "normal" laptops and desktops and AMD for a gaming Mac, since so many people were crying for one.
Also, aren't AMD chips cheaper (I mean less expensive). Hence the article on transitioning lines and lower margins. Could Apple be bending to the demand of the masses and sacraficing quality? Lower priced? Gaming.
I hope Apple just does not become another computer company. I finally switched, my wife finally switched, and the nitch factor is great.
- please help - I am about to have a breakdown here.....
1. I love where Apple is at now with Intel.
2. I have had a few AMD systems and I was not fond of them at the time. in fact the HP I just de-comissioned was an AMD Athelon 64 bit (3 years old).
However, I know a lot of gamers love the AMD, so maybe Apple will use the Intel for "normal" laptops and desktops and AMD for a gaming Mac, since so many people were crying for one.
Also, aren't AMD chips cheaper (I mean less expensive). Hence the article on transitioning lines and lower margins. Could Apple be bending to the demand of the masses and sacraficing quality? Lower priced? Gaming.
I hope Apple just does not become another computer company. I finally switched, my wife finally switched, and the nitch factor is great.
- please help - I am about to have a breakdown here.....
I'm still wondering when AMD began making and will ever make a chipset that will support Intel CPU's...
Sure, to some who don't care about what their computers can do
Believe it or not one of the biggest selling points is that it can do what any other Windows running platform to do, and for the vast majority of consumers who only know Windows, that safety net is enough to push them to Apple whether or not they use Windows ever after they encounter OS X
It's exactly why they run the "Hey, Macs can run Windows (better) too!" ads in the first place. Think of how many on our forums run a copy of Windows on their Macs via BootCamp or whatever as well..
I had decided to switch to a MBP about a month ago. I've been waiting for this next release as I felt the current MBP was priced too far above the specs.
What caused me to want to buy a MBP was the fact I can run Windows if I need to. If I can't do that, I doubt I'll switch.
Yes, it's very possible and even probable that I may never use Windows when I get my Mac. However, I'm not willing to sink that much money into something that won't let me run Windows if I need it.
That said, I could care less what they do with the hardware. Just don't take away this ability.
Interesting you should say that, since Apple was directly involved with designing the PPC itself.
Nah, with AMD's recent problems I can't see Apple cozying up to them and ticking Intel off.
Their parallel computing is likely going to be with the fact that GPGPU progress has exploded in recent years. AMD-ATI for one is onboard with Apple on OpenCL and their 4850 and 4870 cards are producting 1.0 and 1.2 TFlops, respectively. Only issue is that they do not have their GPGPU API down yet w/r/t OpenCL.
NVidia is pushing 933 GFlops per GTX280 with their Tesla platform. Nvidia is a bit further ahead with their CUDA platform.
Microsoft's guidlines with DX11 calls for Compute Shade, which will basically standardize the use of shaders on a GPU to perform GPGPU calculations.
Intel is coming out with their own discrete GPU, Larrabee, which will run mini-x86 cores in parallel and will be > 1 TFlop in power supposedly closer to 2TFlops.
If anything, all this talk of using parallel computing is just Apple going along with what the big CPU and GPU makers are already pushing. Adobe and other people are already onboard with this (see folding@home as an example) and even if Intel doesn't want GPUs to overtake their CPUs, they already know it, hence Larrabee.
And you sure have a lot of faith in what this custom chipset can do for Apple. You think Intel is really that stupid to let it happen? Intel makes the vast majority of its money selling CPUs and associated chipsets. And the vast majority of those go into systems running Windows of one form another (be it home, enterprise, or server). Intel switching to Mac and optimizing for Mac is basically shooting itself in the foot and putting everything on Macs and limiting itself to Apple since only Apple offers its OS. In other words, they would put themselves at the mercy of Macs.
It's not going to happen - they aren't going to allow their CPUs to be run on a chipset that is much faster than their own chipsets, thus cannibalizing possible sales to other OEMs that bid against one another, thus pushing their own margins up. If anything, they'll pull the plug on CPUs for Apple rather than allow another chipset to beat itself thoroughly. At most, they will allow optimization chipsets that boost performance but do not overwhelm their own setups.
Intel is much like Microsoft - they're not going to jump to Macs or other hardware platforms. They have the muscle to set the standard (x86 for example) and wil continue to do so (as they pretty much said no QPI for Nvidia until Nvidia basically said SLI will be allowed on the X58).
Furthermore, if you think Apple is just going to forego the CPU - forget it. The CPU still has the instruction sets for complex calculations no GPU has yet since GPU's are very specialized still in their coding purposes. And if they abandon x86, kiss goodbye to any ability to run Windows parallely.
Features of the new chipset?
Assuming Apple designs the new chipset (not an AMD/VIA standard chipset), what may be its features? Note that these aren't just for the mobile line; AppleInsider says "an upcoming generation of Macs, lead by a trio of redesigned notebooks."
Some possibilities are below.
At least we have a fairly definite timeframe.
Assuming Apple designs the new chipset (not an AMD/VIA standard chipset), what may be its features? Note that these aren't just for the mobile line; AppleInsider says "an upcoming generation of Macs, lead by a trio of redesigned notebooks."
Some possibilities are below.
- Lower power consumption - Apple could use faster and hotter CPUs and still maintain the same heat output as before. Or they could use the same TDP chips as before and reduce total heat output. (I think this is most likely.)
- Smaller chipset - While Montevina is a significant (40% smaller) size reduction from Santa Rosa, Apple might be able to make something smaller, which would help with Apple's emphasis on thin laptops, and the rumored trimming on the laptops' sides.
- Faster FSB - Intel has done so with the latest iMacs (1067 MHz), maybe the MacBook Pros could get a 1333 MHz FSB and the MacBooks could get a 1067 MHz FSB. When Nehalem comes, the chipset could support QuickPath, which Calpella won't (AFAIK).
- 3 RAM slots - Triple channel RAM for 50% more memory bandwidth and 50% more maximum RAM (12 GB instead of 8 GB). The Mac Pro could have quad-channel RAM.
- Supports Beckton - Part of the reason why Xeon MP chips come so late is that they need significant certification. Maybe Intel could skip this certification for Mac Pro-bound Becktons. (I think this is least likely.)
- "Mac" chip - Marks the computer as a "Mac," stopping clones. Recognition of this chip would have to be placed in a future Mac OS X upgrade, most likely many years from now (10.7/10.8?).
- Custom accelerator chip - Intel and/or PA Semi could design a special 512-bit (or so) SSE chip or some other chip that would go on the chipset. Mac OS X Snow Leopard, iLife, etc. could be optimized for that chip, providing fast performance.
- Much better integrated graphics - Provides the double benefit of improving OpenCL performance as well as replacing low-end discrete graphics (like the iMac's HD 2400 XT).
Bingo...
And who's to say that Apple has to move away from Intel.
PA Semi was Fabless so this could be fabed by Intel. Apple taking more risk but getting massive market jump and getting to pick when Intel take it over as a product for mass production.
Does the chipset have to be x86 instruction set to support a x86 processor?
This Hypothetical Combo North/south bridge could be a PPC based.
Simple. Just include the drivers for it on the disc like the other boot camp drivers.
Just as a lot of people here already said, Apple has been designing chipsets for the PPC Macs and those worked pretty well. I love to see Apple go into making custom hardware again. If you make your own hardware, you can actually use its features with your own software. If snow Leopard works hand in hand with a custom chipset that actively supports multiple CPUs, that's a good thing. Saying that, I guess this will only be for Mac Pros. Those have lots of cores and are expensive to boot so the investment would only make sense there. They haven't been updated for just that reason maybe. "We could have more and faster cores, but the chipset is the bottleneck and the machine doesn't actually get faster."
I don't see why Intel would have a problem with Intel chips running better under OS X on a hybrid Intel/Apple chipset. I've never said anywhere that it'll be Apple's 'own' chipset - I said an Intel/Apple hybrid. Intel will continue to sell millions of chips to PC manufacturers regardless of what Apple do and, although I think it's a long shot, Intel's customers aren't going to stop buying Intel gear just because they switch to Macs - that'd be like not using Oil because it came from the middle east and not Texas, (or something equally absurd and irrational.)
For me the real tipping point is currently unknown and secret - and it all depends on whether Apple really have had a MAJOR breakthrough in parallel computing or are as you seem to suggest just 'blagging it' and are merely going to harness the GPU/Multi-core CPU's in a 'fancy way like everyone else.
From my understanding, however, the Grand Central advances had more to do with a specific intellectual/paradigm breakthrough in process/thread management than it does with which or how many actual specific processors do the donkey work. This is why I think that as the number of cores increases ( 8/16/32/+ GPU etc ) that this 'breakthru' will make the difference. That's not something Intel can stand in the way of really otherwise they would simply send Apple directly into the arms of AMD - heck, Apple would probably buy AMD if Intel ever said 'go away Apple'...Somehow Semi P.A fit into this puzzle...I don't know how but they do...
Apple isn't abandoning Intel architecture or it's processors - they are setting themselves up for a decade of blistering market share and technological breakthroughs...
You know, I don't believe that Apple would ever license OS X to other hardware manufacturers, however, if ever they agreed to release it to a few vendors (HP, for instance), HP would not only have to adhere to certain physical builds, but Macs would have a completely different chipset making them much more efficient than a standard PC. This could be thanks to the PA Semi acquisition.
Just thinking aloud, mind you.
Just thinking aloud, mind you.
Really? Let's see. I never had a hard crash, virus, spam, spyware, and a major failed OS. I do not get a blue screen of death, and it does not take 40 minutes to install the OS only to have to download numerous of updates and drivers to make a computer work. Additionally there is no bloat ware or "Free trial" offers. Just a solid machine that works, well. No these products do not make you classy as living in Georgia I see more toothless banjo playing moonshine drinker using iPods. Having that said people who an Apple as a brand, proves those with above average intelligence prefers a computer or phone that will deliver a solid solution, as it has for years.
how will this happen if steve said that apple ant intel have a special contract that apple will only use intel cpu's?
Psystar
My thoughts exactly. This seems like a move to keep cloners like psystar out. Its hardware lock-in which Apple has engaged in before.
My thoughts exactly. This seems like a move to keep cloners like psystar out. Its hardware lock-in which Apple has engaged in before.