Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by cube, Jul 3, 2007.
I want to see real world results before I jump to this conclusion.
I don't quite see why?
The initial Barcelona are going to be 2.3Ghz and stuck there until sometime in 2008.
AMD is not financial well these days and their future seems pretty dim.
Apparently the K10 is ready for a do over, much like Thoroughbred A and ClawHammer. They have trouble with Strained Silicon (SOI).
They are having yield and speed problems, which won't go away and any supply that comes in 2007, will be slower and quite frankly not the K10 we really want.
Don't listen too much to marketing...remember where the numbers come from.
If that is true, that is very very impressive benchmarks, although I think I would like to see some real world progam results, spec never seems to be 100% true in my view.
For me 3ds max would be a good test as its my main program and with the right file could easily stress even the highest spec pc going.
You can't break with the Intel mafia.
Once you've signed on with Intel, you can't start selling chips from the competition. You watch, Apple will never, ever sell an AMD processor machine, no matter how bad the Intel chips get.
Besides, they're using some proprietary Trusted Computing part (echh) to lock Mac OS X onto these motherboards.
Intel's chips aren't too bad these days. You'll get used to not having a choice.
Not too bad? The current Intel chips spank the current AMD chips. AMD have been forced to compete on price only.
Sun's new blades exist in Barcelona, Clovertown and Niagara flavors.
If Xeon were better, they wouldn't be waiting for the AMDs to deliver the new top-ranked supercomputer they are building in Texas.
Cray is also waiting for Barcelona.
Note the word current in my previous post.
These companies will be trading punches for years. AMD is not a company I would make a commitment with right now. They have to solve some issues, mainly in manufacturing engineering. I think they are pretty solid in design. If they can produce a stellar product, and Intel cannot match it (unlikely as that might seem), then AMD will win the business. It is really based on results, isn't it?
I was taking to the people wanting to see "real" benchmarks.
Commiting exclusively to Intel has rarely been based on results.
Just to clarify, by AMD chips/processor machine, you mean AMD CPUs. AMD owns ATi now, so I suppose you could say Apple does sell AMD processors (GPUs), [Obi Wan Kenobi]From a certain point of view...[/Obi Wan Kenobi].
When I used to build my own machines, AMD was the top dog. They had the hot stuff. However, for the past couple years Intel has beat the crap out of them. Not only that, but Intel has more consistently had top-performing products than AMD or any other chipmaker, and has always had better mobile products by a huge margin. Considering that every product but one in Apple's lineup uses mobile chips, going Intel was a no-brainer. It made sense at the time, and it still makes sense now.
I would rather see Apple use the "G7" processor, at least in the Mac Pro as an option. I think it would perform better than the Barcelona processor. Just wish IBM brought down the Power6 processor to a G7, like the Power4 to G5.
I totally agree...AMD was initially a gamers CPU and the better CPU when released years back, they were cheaper, cooler, and faster than intel. This trend has changed, all but the cheaper part...Intel is now the better chip but that's not to say in a year or 2 who will be in the lead...Apple made the right decision at the time to go with Intel, their mobile chips were and are better.
side note, I love AMD...my first home-built computer was an AMD, but I'm not gonna be faithful, a computer is a computer, and I want the fastest, coolest, best chip for the cheapest price...and Intel's the manufacturer now...kinda reminds me of the U.S. Space Program in the 60's...
Oh, excuse me. I did not see that on the label.
Say No to AMD!
AMD Barcelona is going to launch in August with a top-out frequency of only 2.0GHz.
You might see 2.3 to 2.6GHz at the end of the year.
What you are seeing at The Inquirer is a "paper promise" of Barcelona's performance.
And they are giving "paper promise" tests of a Barcelona 2.3GHz Barcelona cpu not the 2.0GHz Barcelona that will be launched.
To quote the same article, "The only real question that now remains is whether AMD can execute. Sadly, the company's recent track record does not bode well, with constant delays of products and events. And we'll also wait to see real tests of the Barcelonas rather than paper promises."
Doesn't that sound like Motorola and IBM?
There is a big upside to AMD's launching of Barcelona. Some experts believe Intel will up the ante by bringing out the 45nm Penryn family of processors early.
"And we'll also wait to see real tests of the Barcelonas rather than paper promises."
CPU manufacturer make ridiculous claims on their up-and-coming cpus. Always. Intel and AMD both. I mean, yeah granted you have to do some self promoting. But let's see some real tests.
Kinda doubt that. AMD can not produce nearly as many chips as Intel, plus then they have been losing in the processor wars, and Barcelona has been delayed so many times already, and now its currently at 2.0GHz, quite a bit slower than Intels offerings.
I dont think Apple wants to be stuck at a clockspeed again.
I think Apple needs to focus on improving the Mac Pro's existing hardware (video cards anyone?) before even considering a move to AMD, which, I don't think they would ever do since they are in business with Intel.
Besides, as many have pointed out, Barcelona has a long way to go, and the "paper" specs AMD is dishing out are meaningless until the product is in reviewers/consumers' hands.
ibm promised the earth ( well 3 ghz ) and look what happened there
Intel all the way.
Especially for notebooks.
From past experiences (in another PC life) AMD ..... I hope not.
Stop comparing clock speeds.
But still, Intel all the way.