NVIDIA Still Prohibited from Building Chipsets for Newest Intel Processors

[blackburn]

In windows it has no trouble with animations, only under os x, so it's a drivers issue. But using a more powerful graphics card (my good ol'gtx260) it runs fine.
I've formated the macbook a few times and never solved it, but I can play games just fine (simple games like age of empires)

 

[pr5owner]

There you go: simplified and easy to understand (finally). CPU and GPU have nearly impossible-to-decode names. Even the same family of chips can have major differences, it's a headache.

how does everyone else understand them then?

i think its just you having a hard time.

 

[twoodcc]

well as long as intel can deliver better performance, but we still want a choice

 

[Wild-Bill]

nVidia isn't the only game in town. AMD is quite capable of providing chipsets and / or graphics solutions for notebooks. I'm not sure why many news outlets have overlooked this fact while reporting the Intel / nVidia dispute.

 

[Mal]

nVidia isn't the only game in town. AMD is quite capable of providing chipsets and / or graphics solutions for notebooks. I'm not sure why many news outlets have overlooked this fact while reporting the Intel / nVidia dispute.

Does AMD make any chipsets for Intel processors though? I was under the impression they only made them for their own processors, which are not nearly as powerful right now. I honestly don't know for sure, though, so if you do, feel free to correct my assumption.

jW

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Does it really? Benchmarks are so easy to manipulate, I'll wait for real-world results instead. Let's see their GPU run things like World of Warcraft, Left 4 Dead 2, Starcraft II, Diablo III, Portal 2...

What? We all know that Mac people don't game unless it's on a phone! Shame on you for even bringing up that topic!

If anything, all these fights between Intel and nVidia are going to do is push Apple even further ahead in their future plans. They were able to go from 68K to PPC to x86. My guess is that nothing stops them from switching to AMD or even ARM at this point.

ARM...now there's a thought. I tend to think Apple is heading for iOS only at some point in the future anyway. I think they've learned their lesson that if you use generic world standard CPUs you're going to not only break all your previous financial earnings (who wants that?) but then you get people like me complaining that I cannot get a decent GPU or SLI support from Apple and want to use a hacked clone instead for half the price.

Apple has always made their money selling hardware you could not directly compare with everyone else and so realize you're getting screwed for your dollar and by moving to ARM they can bring that reality back once again, get rid of the Mac "open" concept while they're at it (gotta love that SWEET 30% off the top revenue deal iOS has with no open software except for hackers) and generally bring Apple products back down to the 3-4% of the market that Apple has been comfortable with until recently when sales sky-rocketed. Going back to PPC would look bad, but moving to the smart phone platform makes them look all smart-like...well...not really, but the average traditional Apple user doesn't know a USB port from an Atari 2600 joystick port anyway, so they won't notice! Full steam ahead!

 

[Yebubbleman]

This made me laugh , having in mind that:

Top 5 Countries by Download Speed are:
South Korea : 36.5 Mbps
Latvia : 23.3 Mbps
Republic of Moldova : 21.5 Mbps
Japan : 20.3 Mbps
Sweden : 19.8 Mbps

(Source: Net Index)

The only thing that we in the states are at the top is the <i>price</i> of broadband

Either way, that's still not enough bandwidth to convince me that the Internet is ready to replace the optical drive, let alone in places where Internet access isn't an option. And don't get me started on the inconvenience of that external Superdrive crap either.

seems like nvidia got the short end of the stick on this deal. intel doesn't have to invest any of their own time to make a decent gpu

Good thing too. Clearly, their efforts have consistently failed to produce anything worth using.

nVidia isn't the only game in town. AMD is quite capable of providing chipsets and / or graphics solutions for notebooks. I'm not sure why many news outlets have overlooked this fact while reporting the Intel / nVidia dispute.

It was brought up before. It makes sense, with AMD owning ATI, it's not like we have to worry about not being able to have a Radeon HD IGP on the chipset that would be servicing the mobile Phenom IIs. AMD's offerings are modest, but still solid. I've never had an AMD machine break on me. At least, not in ways that could be attributed to anything AMD makes.

Does AMD make any chipsets for Intel processors though? I was under the impression they only made them for their own processors, which are not nearly as powerful right now. I honestly don't know for sure, though, so if you do, feel free to correct my assumption.

jW

They wouldn't need to. The AMD chipsets would complement AMD processors which is what that poster was suggesting be used. Hell, I'm open to it.

 

[blueraja]

Anyone else think this is going to end up hurting intel far more than nvidia, graphics performance of anything in house from Intel has always looked acceptable on paper but proved absolutely atrocious in the real world. Apple nor any other major hardware vendor currently using nvidia chipsets is not going to stand for offering future performance that is lower than what they currently offer. I see a big boost for AMD in the near future.

 

[wct097]

I'm in the market for a 15" MBP after the next refresh. If they nix the dedicated graphics card, or neglect to use Sandy Bridge, I'll probably look elsewhere. I want a Mac, but not if I'm going to be paying a premium price for aging technology.

 

[AidenShaw]

I want a Mac, but not if I'm going to be paying a premium price for aging technology.

You really should consider looking elsewhere - since Apple shifted their focus to the Itoys, the phrase "premium price for aging technology" has been a pretty good description of their Apple OSX systems.

 

[Yebubbleman]

I'm in the market for a 15" MBP after the next refresh. If they nix the dedicated graphics card, or neglect to use Sandy Bridge, I'll probably look elsewhere. I want a Mac, but not if I'm going to be paying a premium price for aging technology.

The 15" MacBook Pro isn't in danger of either happening. It's the 13" MacBook Pro that I'd start worrying about.

You really should consider looking elsewhere - since Apple shifted their focus to the Itoys, the phrase "premium price for aging technology" has been a pretty good description of their Apple OSX systems.

Or build a Hackintosh.

 

[alent1234]

This made me laugh , having in mind that:

Top 5 Countries by Download Speed are:
South Korea : 36.5 Mbps
Latvia : 23.3 Mbps
Republic of Moldova : 21.5 Mbps
Japan : 20.3 Mbps
Sweden : 19.8 Mbps

(Source: Net Index)

The only thing that we in the states are at the top is the <i>price</i> of broadband

hyped download speed and ISP internet backbone connection are two different things

i know someone who was paying comcast for higher speed and then downgraded and never saw a difference. reason is that comcast's connection to Tata is running at 100% as is

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Or build a Hackintosh.

Even a Hackintosh typically can only use devices that have drivers in OSX already. If there's no high-end GPU driver, no high-end GPUs will be of any real use on a Hackintosh (unless they're meant only for Windows also running on the same box with a 2nd OSX only card, but that still defeats the point of having a Hackintosh, IMO).

This is why I keep reiterating that if Steve Jobs has no interest in REAL computers anymore and just wants to play with gadgets and other mobile computing devices, he should hand the "Mac" division over to someone else to run. Frankly, I'd like to see Woz in there. He's into "computers" WAY more than Steve, who has always been the "business" guy. Let Woz head the creative teams and Steve can keep selling crap as usual and playing with phones and other gadgets.

The problem is Steve has a control problem and it would be very hard for him to let go of control of the Mac even if he has no real interest in it anymore. It's a psychological problem. And it's one that is hurting those of us that want to see top-notch Mac products and advancements in OSX that keep Windows at bay for many years to come.

Apple had a golden opportunity with Vista to make sure OSX was a full generation ahead of Windows for a long time, but they blew it and Windows7 has pretty much evened the playing field again. Yes, OSX still does some things better, but in other areas Windows is just kicking its butt. For instance, its graphics handling is light-years behind Windows at this point (they haven't even adopted OpenGL 3.x fully, let alone 4.x) and no one with a Windows based machine has to wait around for Steve to approve a new hardware spec like Blu-Ray drives, SLI graphics cards or USB 3.0. I realize these things don't mean anything to many Mac users (since a good part of the Mac demographic has always been the computer illiterate that just like the "easy to use" interface), but some of us actually like cutting edge stuff. I didn't like the Mac OS at all until it moved to Unix (i.e. OSX), but now the most amazing thing ever (i.e. taming the power of Unix with a fully functional GUI) is being wasted in large part due to simple non-interest on the part of Apple's CEO. Yes, they're making money. They're a successful "business" but that doesn't mean they're a great computer company anymore. The "computer" has literally left Apple and that's a shame.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Even a Hackintosh typically can only use devices that have drivers in OSX already. If there's no high-end GPU driver, no high-end GPUs will be of any real use on a Hackintosh (unless they're meant only for Windows also running on the same box with a 2nd OSX only card, but that still defeats the point of having a Hackintosh, IMO).

You're half-right, half-wrong on that. For AMD (ATI) cards, it needs to have been in a shipping Mac. For NVIDIA cards, there are several ways to get drivers on there, even if the card has yet to exist in a shipping Mac. Though even for the AMD (ATI) cards, you can buy an ATI Radeon HD 5670 card with double the VRAM of the one currently shipping in the mid-range iMacs of current.

My housemate currently has a Hackintosh with an ATI Radeon HD 4850 card by XFX with 1GB of VRAM. The only shipping Mac to ever have that card was the Late 2009 generation of Quad Core i5 (i7 if you customized it) iMac, and it had that GPU with only 512 MB of VRAM. I'd imagine my housemate's card beats that iMac's card by virtue of increased VRAM.

 

[Nikonian]

Even a Hackintosh typically can only use devices that have drivers in OSX already. If there's no high-end GPU driver, no high-end GPUs will be of any real use on a Hackintosh (unless they're meant only for Windows also running on the same box with a 2nd OSX only card, but that still defeats the point of having a Hackintosh, IMO).

This is why I keep reiterating that if Steve Jobs has no interest in REAL computers anymore and just wants to play with gadgets and other mobile computing devices, he should hand the "Mac" division over to someone else to run. Frankly, I'd like to see Woz in there. He's into "computers" WAY more than Steve, who has always been the "business" guy. Let Woz head the creative teams and Steve can keep selling crap as usual and playing with phones and other gadgets.

The problem is Steve has a control problem and it would be very hard for him to let go of control of the Mac even if he has no real interest in it anymore. It's a psychological problem. And it's one that is hurting those of us that want to see top-notch Mac products and advancements in OSX that keep Windows at bay for many years to come.

Apple had a golden opportunity with Vista to make sure OSX was a full generation ahead of Windows for a long time, but they blew it and Windows7 has pretty much evened the playing field again. Yes, OSX still does some things better, but in other areas Windows is just kicking its butt. For instance, its graphics handling is light-years behind Windows at this point (they haven't even adopted OpenGL 3.x fully, let alone 4.x) and no one with a Windows based machine has to wait around for Steve to approve a new hardware spec like Blu-Ray drives, SLI graphics cards or USB 3.0. I realize these things don't mean anything to many Mac users (since a good part of the Mac demographic has always been the computer illiterate that just like the "easy to use" interface), but some of us actually like cutting edge stuff. I didn't like the Mac OS at all until it moved to Unix (i.e. OSX), but now the most amazing thing ever (i.e. taming the power of Unix with a fully functional GUI) is being wasted in large part due to simple non-interest on the part of Apple's CEO. Yes, they're making money. They're a successful "business" but that doesn't mean they're a great computer company anymore. The "computer" has literally left Apple and that's a shame.

Couldn't have said it better myself.
If Steve ends up kicking the bucket, or not coming back, we may see some of this in the future. If Woz took his place, we'll actually be getting what we're paying for, when it comes to the actual OSX and the hardware that runs it.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Couldn't have said it better myself.
If Steve ends up kicking the bucket, or not coming back, we may see some of this in the future. If Woz took his place, we'll actually be getting what we're paying for, when it comes to the actual OSX and the hardware that runs it.

Doubtful. It's not like Schiller and Cook wouldn't steer the ship in the same direction.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Couldn't have said it better myself.
If Steve ends up kicking the bucket, or not coming back, we may see some of this in the future. If Woz took his place, we'll actually be getting what we're paying for, when it comes to the actual OSX and the hardware that runs it.

I think it's kind of a shame that Woz doesn't have more input regardless. I mean he and Steve started the company and Steve was forced out once before and Woz has basically a token role. I guess that's what happens when you incorporate and start trading publicly. You lose control. Frankly, I can't help but think of the original Tron movie and its reference to Apple when Dillinger (more of a Bill Gates type with the "rip-off software" thing (i.e. CPM)) tells Dr. Walter Gibbs (i.e. Woz?) that he can arrange to put him back in his garage where Encom (Apple) was founded. Actually, the analogy isn't perfect because the Flynn character is more like Woz creatively and engineering-wise whereas I think Gibbs is probably more the business type that lost control (i.e. early Steve Jobs when he was being booted), although obviously age fits neither at the time. OTOH, Tron Legacy pins Flynn more as a visionary (Steve Jobs) yet totally hippy (Woz) and so seems to reflect some partial combination of both. Sadly, Apple lost its "both" combination a LONG time ago.

Oh well, Steve's health appears to be going down hill. I'd be more concerned about what happens to Apple without him than with him at this point. Apple doesn't have the best track record when run by other people and yet in some respects, I wish it were. Really, I'd just like to see someone head up the Mac division that loves computers, not just gadgets and looking for the next "big thing", which is clearly all Steve Jobs ever cared about. Hardware-wise, it's not that complicated to keep things up-to-date, but it doesn't happen under Steve. OS-wise, well creativity can be helpful there, but I kind of doubt Steve thought up all the new features along the way by himself. I think he spends his time dreaming up new toys and ways to sell them.

 

[Yebubbleman]

I think it's kind of a shame that Woz doesn't have more input regardless. I mean he and Steve started the company and Steve was forced out once before and Woz has basically a token role. I guess that's what happens when you incorporate and start trading publicly. You lose control. Frankly, I can't help but think of the original Tron movie and its reference to Apple when Dillinger (more of a Bill Gates type with the "rip-off software" thing (i.e. CPM)) tells Dr. Walter Gibbs (i.e. Woz?) that he can arrange to put him back in his garage where Encom (Apple) was founded. Actually, the analogy isn't perfect because the Flynn character is more like Woz creatively and engineering-wise whereas I think Gibbs is probably more the business type that lost control (i.e. early Steve Jobs when he was being booted), although obviously age fits neither at the time. OTOH, Tron Legacy pins Flynn more as a visionary (Steve Jobs) yet totally hippy (Woz) and so seems to reflect some partial combination of both. Sadly, Apple lost its "both" combination a LONG time ago.

Oh well, Steve's health appears to be going down hill. I'd be more concerned about what happens to Apple without him than with him at this point. Apple doesn't have the best track record when run by other people and yet in some respects, I wish it were. Really, I'd just like to see someone head up the Mac division that loves computers, not just gadgets and looking for the next "big thing", which is clearly all Steve Jobs ever cared about. Hardware-wise, it's not that complicated to keep things up-to-date, but it doesn't happen under Steve. OS-wise, well creativity can be helpful there, but I kind of doubt Steve thought up all the new features along the way by himself. I think he spends his time dreaming up new toys and ways to sell them.

Tim Cook and Company seemed to do just fine the last time Steve was out. I don't see any reason why they wouldn't continue to do so in Jobs' absence, especially with Ive and Schiller in tow.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Tim Cook and Company seemed to do just fine the last time Steve was out. I don't see any reason why they wouldn't continue to do so in Jobs' absence, especially with Ive and Schiller in tow.

I guess if you call towing the Steve Jobs line and putting out the same crap (i.e. iMacs with mostly notebook parts and slow performance instead of mid to high-end personal computers and Mac-Minis with more notebook parts and even worse performance instead of mid-level desktops) seeming to "do just fine" then I guess I would agree with that statement. But that's not what I'd like to see from Apple Computer (i.e. the Mac). I don't care about the case. I would like to see cutting edge hardware at reasonable prices, not an overpriced Mac Pro with a slow GPU selling for 2x the price of a comparable speed PC Tower with a high-end GPU that can actually do things like gaming at smooth frame rates. I mean it's just SAD that a $2400 Macintosh cannot game its way out of a paper bag and that a $800 PC can run circles around it all day long. What's high-end about it? It's got 4 CPUs at default? So does a $800 PC desktop. It doesn't have eSata. It doesn't have USB3. It doesn't have a decent GPU. OSX cannot even handle something like SLI. OSX doesn't even have a full implementation of OpenGL 3.x, let alone 4.x and thus gaming is even slower than it should be regardless of hardware compared to booting into Windows on the same machine.

My point is that the Mac is being very BADLY handled in some very real areas. Just because Apple is profitable as a company doesn't mean they are a good computer company (which is probably why they dropped the "computer" part of their name). Pretty? Yes. Reliable? Pretty much so on average. Well supported? Consumer feedback says so. FAST? Nope. Cutting edge? Nope. Better than Windows? Well...there aren't any viruses and there's no registry and the interface is nice. But show me something OSX can do that Windows cannot do at this point. I can show plenty of things that Windows can do that OSX sucks doing (like gaming).

And the thing is there is no reason why it has to be that way. I like the Mac interface and I like the current lack of malware and Vista really did suck. But Windows7 isn't quite so sucky and OSX is getting old in the tooth when it comes to graphics handling in general. Apparently, Apple thinks it doesn't need to bother because Steve doesn't like gaming. Since when is that a good excuse for being 2nd rate at something? No one says that a Corvette shouldn't have a big engine because the speed limit is 65-75mph!

What's new in Lion? The App store?

How many years are going to go by before Apple updates OpenGL to the present? I'm sure Microsoft appreciates Apple's lack of caring about OSX in general. Yes, Apple is kicking Microsoft's butt in phones and music players. Big deal. They're money makers, but they're not cutting edge computers.

 

[Yebubbleman]

I guess if you call towing the Steve Jobs line and putting out the same crap (i.e. iMacs with mostly notebook parts and slow performance instead of mid to high-end personal computers and Mac-Minis with more notebook parts and even worse performance instead of mid-level desktops) seeming to "do just fine" then I guess I would agree with that statement. But that's not what I'd like to see from Apple Computer (i.e. the Mac). I don't care about the case. I would like to see cutting edge hardware at reasonable prices, not an overpriced Mac Pro with a slow GPU selling for 2x the price of a comparable speed PC Tower with a high-end GPU that can actually do things like gaming at smooth frame rates. I mean it's just SAD that a $2400 Macintosh cannot game its way out of a paper bag and that a $800 PC can run circles around it all day long. What's high-end about it? It's got 4 CPUs at default? So does a $800 PC desktop. It doesn't have eSata. It doesn't have USB3. It doesn't have a decent GPU. OSX cannot even handle something like SLI. OSX doesn't even have a full implementation of OpenGL 3.x, let alone 4.x and thus gaming is even slower than it should be regardless of hardware compared to booting into Windows on the same machine.

My point is that the Mac is being very BADLY handled in some very real areas. Just because Apple is profitable as a company doesn't mean they are a good computer company (which is probably why they dropped the "computer" part of their name). Pretty? Yes. Reliable? Pretty much so on average. Well supported? Consumer feedback says so. FAST? Nope. Cutting edge? Nope. Better than Windows? Well...there aren't any viruses and there's no registry and the interface is nice. But show me something OSX can do that Windows cannot do at this point. I can show plenty of things that Windows can do that OSX sucks doing (like gaming).

And the thing is there is no reason why it has to be that way. I like the Mac interface and I like the current lack of malware and Vista really did suck. But Windows7 isn't quite so sucky and OSX is getting old in the tooth when it comes to graphics handling in general. Apparently, Apple thinks it doesn't need to bother because Steve doesn't like gaming. Since when is that a good excuse for being 2nd rate at something? No one says that a Corvette shouldn't have a big engine because the speed limit is 65-75mph!

What's new in Lion? The App store?

How many years are going to go by before Apple updates OpenGL to the present? I'm sure Microsoft appreciates Apple's lack of caring about OSX in general. Yes, Apple is kicking Microsoft's butt in phones and music players. Big deal. They're money makers, but they're not cutting edge computers.

I also wish Apple would improve on the hardware rather than the form. But they sell and they don't suck to use, so clearly they're doing something right, and in Jobs' absence we had the 13" Pro as well as the advent of the better batteries, the Unibody white MacBook, the Mac mini Server. I think Apple did just fine without him. Up to par with what we wished they'd do with computers? No, but they're not out to just cater to us, let alone every loony on these forums.

 

[AidenShaw]

Jobs' "absence" is a myth

...and in Jobs' absence we had the 13" Pro as well as the advent of the better batteries, the Unibody white MacBook, the Mac mini Server. I think Apple did just fine without him...

I'm surprised that people make a claim about Jobs' earlier absence, referring to the previous "Cook era" as a time of continued product announcements from Apple, which proves that Jobs' role is not important.

Except for a few weeks immediately around the transplant surgery, do you not think that Jobs was very much involved via email and phone with the planning and execution of strategy at Apple?

Cook was the puppet, and Jobs was the puppet-master.

And, regardless of Jobs' ability to do day-to-day micro-management, many of those products had been under development many months before Jobs' medical leave.

Unfortunately, the reading of the tea leaves says that most likely the next "Cook era" will not have the Steve on email and phone guiding him.

If you own Apple stock, now would be a good time to research new growth opportunities - then sell and reinvest. Apple won't flop, but it's very likely that the stock has peaked.

 

[Yebubbleman]

I'm surprised that people make a claim about Jobs' earlier absence, referring to the previous "Cook era" as a time of continued product announcements from Apple, which proves that Jobs' role is not important.

Except for a few weeks immediately around the transplant surgery, do you not think that Jobs was very much involved via email and phone with the planning and execution of strategy at Apple?

Cook was the puppet, and Jobs was the puppet-master.

And, regardless of Jobs' ability to do day-to-day micro-management, many of those products had been under development many months before Jobs' medical leave.

Unfortunately, the reading of the tea leaves says that most likely the next "Cook era" will not have the Steve on email and phone guiding him.

If you own Apple stock, now would be a good time to research new growth opportunities - then sell and reinvest. Apple won't flop, but it's very likely that the stock has peaked.

I don't know that I'd go that far, but okay.

 

[MrNomNoms]

Does it really? Benchmarks are so easy to manipulate, I'll wait for real-world results instead. Let's see their GPU run things like World of Warcraft, Left 4 Dead 2, Starcraft II, Diablo III, Portal 2...

If anything, all these fights between Intel and nVidia are going to do is push Apple even further ahead in their future plans. They were able to go from 68K to PPC to x86. My guess is that nothing stops them from switching to AMD or even ARM at this point.

The problem is that I just don't see on the horizon a 64bit ARM design coming out of ARM holdings any time soon. There is the A15 which I could see going into a netbook but to go into a desktop, workstation or a pro-level laptop is just simply unrealistic. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not against the idea of Apple moving to ARM if it means that Apple can avoid the fiasco of chipset vs. processor spats but I just don't think that ARM holdings has any desire to provide the sort of design required for a desktop, workstation or pro-level laptop.

With that being said, LLLVM-Clang has had some major optimisations for ARM which should hopefully translate into even higher performance for Apple's ARM devices in the future.

 

[Yebubbleman]

The problem is that I just don't see on the horizon a 64bit ARM design coming out of ARM holdings any time soon. There is the A15 which I could see going into a netbook but to go into a desktop, workstation or a pro-level laptop is just simply unrealistic. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not against the idea of Apple moving to ARM if it means that Apple can avoid the fiasco of chipset vs. processor spats but I just don't think that ARM holdings has any desire to provide the sort of design required for a desktop, workstation or pro-level laptop.

With that being said, LLLVM-Clang has had some major optimisations for ARM which should hopefully translate into even higher performance for Apple's ARM devices in the future.

True, but switching to AMD doesn't have that problem.

 

[AidenShaw]

I don't know that I'd go that far, but okay.

Thanks for the very lukewarm acknowledgement, at least.

Seriously though, product cycles are very long in the industry - and Jobs was there before his first leave for the major decisions for most of the products that the public saw during the first "Cook era".

Look at where we are today. Although people wonder about what products using Sandy Bridge will come this spring/summer from Apple - the reality is that Foxconn is working on manufacturing the Sandy Bridge systems and the teams at Apple have already moved on to working on Ivy Bridge systems. And "Ivy Bridge" is public knowledge - Apple partners under NDA have access to things after "Ivy Bridge" (or at least much better information about Ivy Bridge schedules and capabilities (server/desktop/mobile, dual/quad/hex core, chipsets, ...)).

So, anyway, claiming that "Apple did OK during the few months that Cook previously was acting CEO" is missing both that Jobs was in fact in touch during most of that leave and the fact that major decisions on many projects that the public saw during the leave had been made months before Jobs' leave.