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 Skip Intel Arrandale? Demands Alternative Chip?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple is probably not the only company to want a Nalhalem CPU without the Intel integrated GPU. Since Intel and NVIDIA are in such a pissing contest, Intel has quickly attempted to throw integrated GPUs into everything in order to squeeze NVIDIA out of the market. The problem, of course, is that all integrated GPUs suck.
Windows 7 is being sold for 3 different CPU architectures
Microsoft is selling Windows 7 on three different, incompatible CPU architectures.
It's possible, like you say, that additional builds are done on unreleased architectures. (From an engineering standpoint, building on three, where one is radically different, is a good bit of insurance that no serious architectural assumptions will end up in the code. It might be smart, however, to continue to build the PowerPC version (or IA64 in big-endian mode) so that little-endian assumptions aren't made.)
Look at the previous paragraph.... Also, tell me how many architectures are supported by OSX 10.6....
Typo: "PCI Express" (or PCIe), not PCI-X. (PCI-X was the older server/workstation variant of PCI.)
Microsoft is selling Windows 7 on three different, incompatible CPU architectures.
- 32-bit x86
- 64-bit x64
- 64-bit IA64 (server version only)
It's possible, like you say, that additional builds are done on unreleased architectures. (From an engineering standpoint, building on three, where one is radically different, is a good bit of insurance that no serious architectural assumptions will end up in the code. It might be smart, however, to continue to build the PowerPC version (or IA64 in big-endian mode) so that little-endian assumptions aren't made.)
Look at the previous paragraph.... Also, tell me how many architectures are supported by OSX 10.6....
Typo: "PCI Express" (or PCIe), not PCI-X. (PCI-X was the older server/workstation variant of PCI.)
I really think this only going to be applicable to the lower end laptops that currently use the 9400m only. The higher end laptops that already have dedicated graphics will most likely be using Clarksfield. Arrandale is designed primarily to be cheap. An Arrandale - GPU + dedicated graphics sounds like a pretty nice upgrade for the lower end laptops.
This is likely a good thing, but I'm bummed because I was hoping for the new MBPs in January.
x5! I expect a MBP refresh delay til April '10.
Yes they CAN afford to wait, at least until June. Their stock will drop, which is fine (maybe $30/share), and just in time as the unemployment numbers drop significantly, credit card payments begin to rise in spring 2010, and credit card purchases begin to take off yet again in late spring. This is ripe for a stock split (which should be in 2010) and more stocks purchased raising value yet again and more money incidently in Apple's coffers
. It's all part of the plan. PS: I guess really nothing technical from Stopping Apple using NVidia & AMD in combo to Intel chips, is there?
What do you say when every other manufacturer is on Clarksfield and Arrandale while Apple stays on Core 2?
Really now, $999 gets you a quad core notebook. $600 gets you a quad core desktop. It's bad enough to see the $1,000 markup on the Mac Pro.
Apple's best value is still in the 13.3" MacBook (Pro).
Not going to happen. Apple always touts performance per watt as being the most important stat and Intel is miles ahead of AMD in this regard.
I say as long as it's reasonably fast, recent and reliable I don't really care. I[m not after raw specs and neither is the rest of Apple's market. In fact, Apple has been keeping just the right pace with evolving tech.
Dropping the integrated graphics would likely reduce cost (size of the die) and thermal profile and, of course, save battery life. Until such time as Intel can demonstrate an integrated graphics solution which is plainly superior to any discreet graphics solution within the same thermal profile, it makes sense to avoid being restricted. I doubt that Intel's Gen I solution can do that.
I've always wondered why Microsoft still bothers with an Itanium strain of Windows NT. The architecture is radically different than x86, there is essentially zero third-party software for the platform and compared to x86 (or even PPC/SPARC), there are only a handful of Itanium machines on earth. MS must be under contractual agreement with Intel to compile a Windows version for the IA64 architecture for a given number of years. Otherwise, IA64 is a dead architecture that was dead on arrival--the chips are still at a 90nm process and run at 1.6GHz max (with only 2 cores).
+1
Apple have been guilty of using old components for far too long. Please do not travel that path again.
Since Arrandale has a fixed die size and a maximum transistor count, even with a print shrink, one wonders what Apple wants to do with the 50% of real estate these requests clear up?
More cores no doubt.
Rocketman
More cores no doubt.
Rocketman
You mean the same apple who kept screaming how much better PPC was over c86 then the day after MW they were saying how much better x86 was than PPC.
Makes you wonder how much marketing crap is in all that doesnt it.
Too cool to be real....custom 32nm quad cores for Apple one year before the rest of the market...not gonna happen...
A few problems with your point of view.
This doesn't even take into account the pretty obvious moves by Apple to make heavy use of multi thread hardware in the future. Snow Leopard should be writing on the wall for anybody considering hardware purchases. It basically foretells the future.
Dave
- You really don't know how many cores any one app is capable of using today.
- Further Appples new technologies allow an app to sue as many cores as is required and available. This is actualy a huge feature so apps written with GCD in mind can leverage any number of CPU cores.
- Conversely many apps will never levear parallel processing in s significant way. That however means nothing with respect to buying hardware.
- The important thing with multiple cores isn't the software that can't be accelerated but the software that can be. In many cases the speed ups are very signficant. At times that can mean linear speed ups, but the average is usually lower.
- You forget that modern PC's are often running more than one app or process. The OS can allocate CPU time to those apps/processes any time. Four cores just keep a machine more repsonive and doing more chores before it become unacceptably slow.
- All apps to some extent use system resources and Libraries. use of those resources can result in multipel threades beign used at the apps request, So even a single threade app can at times see a speed up on multicore hardware. It all depends upon the libraries used.
This doesn't even take into account the pretty obvious moves by Apple to make heavy use of multi thread hardware in the future. Snow Leopard should be writing on the wall for anybody considering hardware purchases. It basically foretells the future.
Dave
It is a MCM a multi chip module!
Nothing gets freed up as they just delete a chip off the MCM. There is not change to the Arrandale die at all. If Apple is lucky all they need to do is to add a buffer chip to bring the interface lines out to the real world. If they are real lucky maybe they don't even need that. It all depends upon how that GPU is interfaced to the CPU, if a fully buffered DMI of PCI-Express port is used they just need to have the pads connected up to real world pins.
Dave
Nothing gets freed up as they just delete a chip off the MCM. There is not change to the Arrandale die at all. If Apple is lucky all they need to do is to add a buffer chip to bring the interface lines out to the real world. If they are real lucky maybe they don't even need that. It all depends upon how that GPU is interfaced to the CPU, if a fully buffered DMI of PCI-Express port is used they just need to have the pads connected up to real world pins.
Dave
I have been keeping track of the MacBook Pro line weeks before Thanksgiving. After seeing the new iMac update, I felt that the lowend MacBook Pro might just receive a speedbump.
On Black Friday, I pulled the trigger and ordered a 2.53/13.3/4GB/SSD. It's the best notebook I have ever used. I do hope Apple picks some higher resolution displays on the up-coming lineup.
On Black Friday, I pulled the trigger and ordered a 2.53/13.3/4GB/SSD. It's the best notebook I have ever used. I do hope Apple picks some higher resolution displays on the up-coming lineup.
Not completely true.
It would be nice if the above is completely true but it isn't. The speed of A?MD processors is very interesting especially if you compare a three core AMD chip to a two core Intel with HT support. Outside of that the AMD three core chips have very interesting performance characteristics when put up against Intel i5's. Sometimes AMD wins and really doesn't loose that badly when it does loose.
AMD isn't perfect no more than Intel. However Apple could come up with one hell of a Mini replacement with AMD and ATI hardware stuffed in the box.
AS to software who do you think invented the extensions used to define the x86_64 architecture? Snow Leopard should port to the AMD line up real quick. Most likely Apple has a maintenance requirement that the OS remain always runnable and well performing on AMD hardware. It is the smart thing to do if Intel gets a little to proud of their chips as it allows Apple to build out AMD machines real quick if needed.
Dave
It would be nice if the above is completely true but it isn't. The speed of A?MD processors is very interesting especially if you compare a three core AMD chip to a two core Intel with HT support. Outside of that the AMD three core chips have very interesting performance characteristics when put up against Intel i5's. Sometimes AMD wins and really doesn't loose that badly when it does loose.
AMD isn't perfect no more than Intel. However Apple could come up with one hell of a Mini replacement with AMD and ATI hardware stuffed in the box.
AS to software who do you think invented the extensions used to define the x86_64 architecture? Snow Leopard should port to the AMD line up real quick. Most likely Apple has a maintenance requirement that the OS remain always runnable and well performing on AMD hardware. It is the smart thing to do if Intel gets a little to proud of their chips as it allows Apple to build out AMD machines real quick if needed.
Dave
Fiduciary duty be damned!
Here's what I'm sure about. Apple wants happy customers, and even they aren't so arrogant to think they can continue to sell C2D chips and still own the mid/high end laptop market. They've thought this through long ago. We will be appeased come January. Either with an exceeding expectations (at least on these threads) IGP, or a custom solution.
If not, I'm sure there will be a loud "doh!" coming from Cupertino, and I will be building a Dell/HP/Lenovo Hackintosh Arrandale.
http://gizmodo.com/5065133/the-truth-about-the-apple-tax
Actually it's the complete opposite. Apple's best value is the 17'' Macbook Pro.
I've never had huge problems with AMD CPU's
I realize you are likely limited by agreement in what you can say about AMD but frankly I've never had huge issues with their CPU's Rather the problem I ran into was the quality of the supporting chipsets.
If you can do enlighten us about these AMD issues. Because frankly they might not have many suitable chip combos for Apple hardware but I do see the possibility of building one very nice Mini out of AMD hardware. It would be a machine that performs better than the current and a great deal cheaper to make.
Dave
I realize you are likely limited by agreement in what you can say about AMD but frankly I've never had huge issues with their CPU's Rather the problem I ran into was the quality of the supporting chipsets.
If you can do enlighten us about these AMD issues. Because frankly they might not have many suitable chip combos for Apple hardware but I do see the possibility of building one very nice Mini out of AMD hardware. It would be a machine that performs better than the current and a great deal cheaper to make.
Dave