I would be extremely happy with an 8-core, 64GB, 32" 5K iMac.
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.
Intel Rumored to Debut Basin Falls Platform in May, Launch Coffee Lake Chips in August
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Or heaven forbid they make an iMac model that is slightly thicker... Who am I kidding, not going to happen.
I can promise you Apple doesn't need many. Compared to the rest of the PC market, they're probably one of the smaller purchases.
Not sure how happy you are going to be, but sounds good and add in a proper desktop GPU for me
I would be extremely happy if it runs quiet and doesn't overheat though, whilst delivering the above.
Can't really see this happening though, as won't be nice and slim.
Apple should consider using a Ryzen/Vega APU with HSA.
The benches I saw had them doing great in 3d and multicore, most beating Intel. Not so good in single core. But just to F Intel I'd love to see Apple go AMD.
Quantities are a non-issue.
This is not iPhone where you need 70 million chips in the first quarter, more like 1.5 million quad cores and 4 million dual cores. This aren't high volumes for Intel.
Can you elaborate please?
Definitely interested, both as a consumer and potential investor
Thanks
I guess this is good news? Its still weird that this is probably the longest I've gone between computer upgrades since the mid 90s, and I'm not sure even this next round has me sold on anything yet.
When it improves their bottom line.
If Apple can get equivalent or better performance processors from AMD, at lower cost, you don't think they'd consider them?
They sure as heck wouldn't pass on the savings in the form of price drops.
Anyone who's been paying attention is aware that Apple likes to have multiple suppliers as options when feasible. If AMD is ready to challenge Intel and finally provide another option for CPUs, Apple gains new leverage and can pit one against the other.
The typical Apple end user neither knows nor cares "what's inside," despite Intel's marketing. There have never been Intel stickers on Macs, and obfuscating specs is not a new practice for Apple marketing. Most people wouldn't notice.
Intel has been riding their CPU gravy train for a long time. Almost every other initiative and acquisition they've tried in order to to diversify and ween themselves off of it hasn't made a dent, if not gone down in flames entirely. That's not going to last forever.
Apple isn't really a large customer of Intel.
Let's say Intel needs to send 5 million chips to Apple. Sounds like a lot, right?
But Intel is also sending 9 million to Dell... 10 million to HP... and 12 million to Lenovo.
Basically... if Apple orders 5 million Intel chips... the rest of the PC industry is ordering 50 million.
So I'm not seeing how "Apple quantities" is a problem for Intel.
AMD major strength on the GPU from is their willingness to give specifications directly to their partners so then their partners can extract the maximum performance out of their hardware when compared to nVidia which refuses to work directly with Apple. What is the net result? AMD/ATI historically have had better performance on macOS when compared to nVidia where as nVidia refuse to disclose specifications/source code meaning nVidia is always writing their drivers for the lowest common denominator resulting in a crap experience for both *NIX/*BSD and macOS customers. I think in the long term AMD is in a good position and I think if AMD did pick up Apple I honestly believe at this stage they could tell the market to go take a hike and simply focus on Microsoft, Sony and Apple along with selling some enthusiast CPU's and GPU's because ultimately nothing is gained in a race to the bottom with Intel because Intel will always win on volume even if their chips are inferior - see the Intel P4 and how Dell continued using them along with RAMBUS even though AMD offered a superior chip.
Given the update cycles of macs......it just might
[doublepost=1492746840][/doublepost]Very happy with Ryzen, finally getting Intel to get off thier lazy arses.
johnnyturbouk
macrumors 68000
I think Intel should let toddlers name their processors from now on.Joker of the thread award.
While people are saying this is good for competition, i'd rather see Intel lose a bit of market share to AMD, and AMD getting a slight upper hand... these decisions wont help competition it's intended to stifle it.
I'm not touching AMD with a ten foot pole until enough other people have, but I'm glad they're finally competitive again.
Yeah, your right. I'm already seeing discounts of the 2016 model. It's usually a sign that we're not too far from an update.
Apple making a thicker computer? (gasps from the front row, someone in the back faints)
I think the question is more along the lines of "if Apple orders 5M and the rest of the industry orders 50M but Intel makes 53M, who gets shorted?"Apple isn't really a large customer of Intel.
Let's say Intel needs to send 5 million chips to Apple. Sounds like a lot, right?
But Intel is also sending 9 million to Dell... 10 million to HP... and 12 million to Lenovo.
Basically... if Apple orders 5 million Intel chips... the rest of the PC industry is ordering 50 million.
So I'm not seeing how "Apple quantities" is a problem for Intel.