They use just AMD for Gpu in their macs...so how to replace something with AMD when they are already using them ?!
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.
New References to AMD Processors Discovered in macOS 10.15.4 Beta
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The amount of fragmentation that is in the pipeline for Apples products...
Both of your points are invalid. Apple already redesign the motherboard on all their new computers. And about software testing, that is obviously already performed since they have internal builds already running on AMD and software testing is being ran thousands of times already. These are non issues
Factuallyincorrect. Since Zen+ the ECC RAM limit per Zen+ processor is 2 TB. The 256 GB limit is an OEM motherboard manufacturer decision.
Apple has custom designed AMD motherboards in-house for years.
When they flip the switch it will be ready.
Nothing regarding AMD X86_64 architecture will be foreign and/or is foreign to Apple.
The amount of FUD about what it would take is sad.
AMD’s latest APUs going on sale early March already best Intel’s top of the line mobile iGPUs and was demonstrated last month.
Just an FYI to anyone unaware of the "hackintosh" (running macOS on standard "PC" hardware) scene, its been possible to run macOS on AMD Ryzen CPUs with very little extra work (vs Intel) for over a year now. The performance is good and everything generally works about as well as an Intel hackintosh aside from a few edge cases (things that require the Intel QuickSync video encoder/decoder for example, but this is already being replaced in Macs by Apple's T series ARM coprocessors.)
Basically, for anyone worried about an architecture change/fragmentation/old software not working etc, that's not what this is. Intel and AMD both produce x86-64 chips that are mutually compatible. This is in no way like the move from PPC to x86 or like a prospective move from x86 to ARM would be.
Basically, for anyone worried about an architecture change/fragmentation/old software not working etc, that's not what this is. Intel and AMD both produce x86-64 chips that are mutually compatible. This is in no way like the move from PPC to x86 or like a prospective move from x86 to ARM would be.
Most Macs are probably intel integrated graphics which are really lackluster.
AMD has been killing intel in discrete CPUs but I doubt Apple would budge for that. There isn't that much difference particularly considering that value of money is the main reason to choose AMD and I doubt Apples moves in similar ways as a common client.
On the other hand having Macbooks of all kinds (Mac Minis and iMacs too) with a single AMD APU (like those codename Renoir and Picasso the news mentions) would be pretty great.
AMD has been killing intel in discrete CPUs but I doubt Apple would budge for that. There isn't that much difference particularly considering that value of money is the main reason to choose AMD and I doubt Apples moves in similar ways as a common client.
On the other hand having Macbooks of all kinds (Mac Minis and iMacs too) with a single AMD APU (like those codename Renoir and Picasso the news mentions) would be pretty great.
I was still surprised the new Mac Pro went with Intel. For the sort of market segment it is aimed at, AMD's Threadripper chips crush Intel.
Zen 3 must be really competitive if Apple is working to put it in their products.
Zen 3 must be really competitive if Apple is working to put it in their products.
I should have as well. 😔
Whenever someone’s skeptical, it usually means Apple’s about to introduce something unusual…
IIRC, there's a poison pill in AMD's agreements with Intel that expires the X86 license immediately upon AMD being purchased by a competitive entity. I believe Apple would qualify as such. There have been AMD acquisition rumors in the past (Oracle) and that's been cited as a potential roadblock.
You can't do VLIW on CISC. ARM is a RISC architecture. In VLIW, the compiler realigns instructions so they can be loaded into the execution units as a very large block. Each spot on the block corisponds to a specific execution unit. The first 12 could be general instructions. The next 15 could be integer, while another 18 could be floating point.... Using VLIW, it is not out of bounds to expect 64 instructions to be completed per clock, with a much higher clock than you could get with X-86.
The first step of software testing is putting AMD specific code into the OS build. That is what they did. Going from Intel to AMD is not a small MB change. It is a total redesign.
Holy moly that’s good news if true. That might make it easier for people to hackintosh. Especially those who didn’t want to bother with intel’s chips or nvidia’s lack of drivers for newer you’d.
Reason I switched from iMac to Ryzen was because it was much cheaper, though I do miss macOS, and AMD cpus at the moment aren’t as well supported on custom builds like with intel.
Reason I switched from iMac to Ryzen was because it was much cheaper, though I do miss macOS, and AMD cpus at the moment aren’t as well supported on custom builds like with intel.
i am so ready for this!!
the only thing my ryzenhack is missing is Thunderbolt... and that's b/c the x570 mobo that supported it didn't have enough PCI expansion slots or NVMe slots.
hopefully apple will retain the thunderbolt functionality.
Nope, long story short, Thunderbolt 3 is no longer proprietary to Intel. You can buy an AMD machine with Thunderbolt 3 today.
You're not going to get a high-end gaming computer withy
FTFY.
Probably at the expense of the security (e.g. some CPU exploits work only on Intel CPUs).
This was absolutely NOT the first step, putting AMD specific code into a beta version of macOS was NOT the first step, how can you even think that? You do understand that Apple have a ton of different builds of all their OS versions, right? Internal and public builds. They have had internal builds running on AMD hardware for over a decade now, claiming this build was the first step is absurd. AMD hardware has been ran, tested, validated etc for a long time now. Putting AMD identification strings into public builds is one of the LAST steps, not the first as you claim
Going from Intel to AMD in regards of MB design is a non issue, Apple redesign entire motherboards all the time, no issue. Other manufacturers develops AMD motherboards from scratch all the time. Its a non issue. Apple already have AMD motherboards
Apple is well prepared to use AMD CPU:s in their computers if they want to when their Intel exclusivity expires
I agree, however:
I don't understand why people don't instantly realize that the "ARM transition period" can happen in the form of Co-Processors. Apple is all about custom Co-Processors. Macs already have them. But right now they perform 1 or 2 specific, isolated tasks.
Going forward we'll see ARM-based co-processors designed to run Apple Apps. The rest will run on Intel, but Apple can add co-processors to run their Apps. They can take as a long as they want with this approach as there is no "transition" that anyone else need be aware of.
AMD and Intel are more toe-to-toe in this space, and in any other space AMD knocks Intel's socks off.