Well then why the hell are you even chanting from the rooftops about how great Fusion is *supposedly* going to be when you KNOW that the chances of Apple using it are slim to none? It's like a kid nagging his parents for the ice cream that has a fancier logo and packaging when they know their parents aren't going to buy it for them because in reality it's all the same and will most likely taste worse then what they bought previously despite what their ads say.
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.
Mac OS X 10.6.7 Adds Support for New AMD Graphics Cards
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well then why the hell are you even chanting from the rooftops about how great Fusion is *supposedly* going to be when you KNOW that the chances of Apple using it are slim to none? It's like a kid nagging his parents for the ice cream that has a fancier logo and packaging when they know their parents aren't going to buy it for them because in reality it's all the same and will most likely taste worse then what they bought previously despite what their ads say.
Because they suck, and have put up subpar product offerings. Also, those products need a NUCLEAR REACTOR to power and burn houses quicker than gas does.
ATI has years developing graphics. Functionality wins over a supposed performance edge.
Right.
Like running the new FF 4 (which appears to trigger the dGPU now for no apparent reason). Or when Safari needs to update its thumbnails and the dGPU kicks on.
Hopefully Apple will improve the switchover to make it more frugal.
Intel has had years developing graphics as well. That statement by itself really doesn't say anything.
Functionality wins over a supposed performance edge? Your whole argument is based on how Llano is supposedly going to be faster than Sandy Bridge. You have yet to state any OpenCL applications that you are using or plan on using in the future yet suddenly you need it NOW because you saw some AMD propaganda video on their YouTube channel. The fact of the matter is, Llano has a VERY slim chance of coming to Macs so it's high time you get over that video and just enjoy Sandy Bridge if you are only buying computers from Apple. If you really needed that extra power then you wouldn't be buying a machine with only an IGP to begin with.
Yeah, that's why I said generally, lol.Right.
Like running the new FF 4 (which appears to trigger the dGPU now for no apparent reason). Or when Safari needs to update its thumbnails and the dGPU kicks on.
Hopefully Apple will improve the switchover to make it more frugal.
What history? Developing crappy integrated graphics?
I missed writing "SMALL performance edge".
My assessment is not based on a small performance edge. It is based on Fusion enabling a whole new set of functionality thanks to OpenCL and DirectX 11 class hardware.
I established my preference BEFORE watching that video. That Sandy Bridge performs so poor in that demo just confirms my choice.
Sort of like AMD's CPU's these last five years? Oh, guess we shouldn't talk about that.
Whole NEW set of functionality? OpenCL's vaporware status has been around since Snow Leopard was introduced with a ton of Macs supporting it as soon as Snow Leopard was released. Nothing uses it, and if anything does it's hardly beneficial. You still haven't shown me what wonderful OpenCL apps you use. I'd love to hear what they are, I've been looking for something that uses OpenCL since Snow Leopard was released in 2009 only to find that NOTHING actually leverages it in a way that's beneficial or noticeable.
Oh, and on that note why the hell are you even mentioning DirectX if you don't use Windows? DirectX has no relation to Mac OS X.
Once again, if you NEED such powerful OpenCL support then buy a Mac with discrete graphics. What the hell are you doing that constitutes the need for OpenCL? You still haven't answered my questions. All you are doing is avoiding them.
You got it wrong.
Zacate, Brazos and pretty much every Fusion platform does not compete against Sandy Bridge. No...
It competes against Intel's Atom platform. Atom CPU offerings beat the many of the offerings on the AMD side. However, on the GPU side, AMD has got Intel really well.
Anandtech did a nice little article on this. They found the whole Fusion concept and implementation as a whole beats Intel's Atom implementation overall for the HTPC. However, down to specifics, well I just discussed it.
Last edited:
Just maybe, we can hope Apple will finally release a "normal" desktop computer. My older iMac is failing and I so much hate to have to toss out a nice, working 24" LCD display because of a problem with a graphics memory chip.
I'll likely build a Hackintosh so as to prevent this problem in the future. That is unless Apple finally sells computers that can be repaired for less then the price of a new computer.
I'll likely build a Hackintosh so as to prevent this problem in the future. That is unless Apple finally sells computers that can be repaired for less then the price of a new computer.
Llano is not Atom-level hardware. That is Zacate/Ontario.
Llano is the mainstream Sandy Bridge competitor.
Which is not even out yet. Brazos/Zacate and Ontario are the ones I'm referring. Let me edit that out.
Yes. And there are conflicting reports about whether Llano will be released in Q2 or Q3. Not such a long wait for a consumer which is not in a hurry.
In general, Zacate wins over Atom.
True, but its a wait for the overzealot AMD CPU fan base. AMD is very well behind Intel right now in CPUs. Their 6-core offerings barely match the processing power of a i7-870; which is a 4-core, 1156 socket! They can't even match the 1366 socket yet... not to mention the monster of a CPU that is the i7-980X.
You know what I mean. I don't have the names and what goes where on top of my head...
Why make such a computer when money so easily can be made selling you a new one... generally speaking, that is
But I agree,
really should build a computer for the consumers that actually knows something about computers and are interested in the area. But I guess that would be bad business, as it would be impossible to sell parts att 200% of the normal price if that box could be opened by the user.Shhh... don't tell him that. He insists that it will only be a "small performance edge". AMD
On the server, AMD has inexpensive 12-core, 4-way CPUs since some time. Now going for 16-core with Bulldozer (well, now it will be more like 16-core integer/8-core floating point).
The absolute bargain now are the 8-core, 4-way CPUs. You can have a 32-core machine for very little money.
The the next Atom will have a DirectX 10.1 GPU, meanwhile Bobcat Fusion already has DirectX 11 hardware and OpenCL.
Okay, so it's more power hungry. Not an issue on a Mac Pro workstation, though. Anything else?
AMD's CPU's are trash and they're cheap for a reason.
Oh and for someone who doesn't use Windows you sure seem interested in Windows only API's. Love all of those OpenCL applications you listed by the way.
AMD's CPU's are trash and they're cheap for a reason.
For someone who doesn't use Windows you sure seem interested in Windows only API's. Love all of those OpenCL applications you listed by the way.
I am not interested in Windows APIs. That's how the hardware capabilities are referred to. OpenGL has tended to lag in new features, so if the hardware has extra capabilities, it will probably support some future OpenGL version too.
OpenGL is much more like Direct3D. A part of DirectX. DirectX is just a collection of multiple API's. DirectSound is like OpenAL for example. The equivalent to OpenCL is DirectCompute.
You seem to think that DirectX 10.1 cards can't support OpenCL. Well newsflash, they can. DirectX is irrelevant in this conversation not only because it has nothing to do with Mac OS X but because it also has nothing to do with what you're associating it with.