Waiting for the 2019 MBP [Merged]

[Ma2k5]

If he’s got a machine that suits his needs then why on Earth not? Apple changed direction on making iPhones thinner to accommodate more of what they wanted to include, the 7 was thicker than the 6, the 8 thicker than the 7 and the X thinner still. All is not set in stone here...

We are not even talking half a millimetre of difference in thickness between the iPhones, hardly can be described as “changed direction”. Forced to do so as well probably (bendgate, having to go water resistant to keep up with competition, battery complaints etc).

Now if they had re-added the headphone jack, you’d have a point. That would be a real change of direction.

 

[koyoot]

For those interested in 10 nm process.

Its dead. Intel is porting whole process, to be essentially 12 nm process, and we can expect it at best in 18 months time.

https://twitter.com/CDemerjian/status/1040586902540378113

 

[Ma2k5]

For those interested in 10 nm process.

Its dead. Intel is porting whole process, to be essentially 12 nm process, and we can expect it at best in 18 months time.

https://twitter.com/CDemerjian/status/1040586902540378113

I don’t know why people on that thread are saying Intel is behind. They are behind schedule but not behind the competition - An AMD/TSM 10nm/7nm is not equivalent to Intels.

There is reason they still and will continue to dominate the PC market. I’ve been hearing for years how far AMD has come through. And what was their breakthrough? An Intel G CPU with AMD graphics - that partnership will probably die now that Intel is going into the dGPU market. You can probably count the number of AMD flagship laptops on your fingers.

Intel has made a mistake - either it got lazy or it has been over ambitious with its 10nm node and now it’s missing targets, or both. But is there really any true competitors?

 

[koyoot]

I don’t know why people on that thread are saying Intel is behind. They are behind schedule but not behind the competition - An AMD/TSM 10nm/7nm is not equivalent to Intels.

There is reason they still and will continue to dominate the PC market. I’ve been hearing for years how far AMD has come through. And what was their breakthrough? An Intel G CPU with AMD graphics - that partnership will probably die now that Intel is going into the dGPU market. You can probably count the number of AMD flagship laptops on your fingers.

Intel has made a mistake - either it got lazy or it has been over ambitious with its 10nm node and now it’s missing targets, or both. But is there really any true competitors?

Well, first of all, TSMCs 7N process, on which Apple A12 Bionic is made has 69 mTR/mm2. GloFo 14 nm LP has 25 mTR/mm2, Intel's 14 nm process has 25 mTR/mm2, and TSMC's 7 nm HPC node on which AMD Matisse, Rome and Vega will be made, have 67 mTR/mm2.

As you can see in pure density Intel is 2 years behind their competition. 12 nm process will cut in half the advancement of 10 nm node, and you will get at best 55 mTR/mm2 with it, with performance capabilities of Intel's 14 nm ++ node.

And remember, 10/12 nm Intel CPUs will come out as "early" as Q4 2019, if they will be able to put out enough capacity, and the CPUs will be viable.

For now Intel will not release anything viable to compete with anybody that will be making on 7 nm process, and will be capacity constraint with 14 nm products(they already are, today I have found that ALL of Coffee Lake CPUs are around 70-100$ more expensive to buy, or are out of stock everywhere).

Ashraf Eassa on Twitter pointed out that currently, Intel with Leading Edge nodes, is dead last. Even Samsung is far more advanced with their tech than Intel. TSMC - is in their own class. N7 process is working(Apple A12 Bionic), soon we will get EUV, and 7 nm HPC chips from AMD(Matisse, Rome, Navi). Where is Intel with 10 nm process?

Nowhere.

 

[afir93]

I don’t know why people on that thread are saying Intel is behind. They are behind schedule but not behind the competition - An AMD/TSM 10nm/7nm is not equivalent to Intels.

Could you explain what you mean by that? Not trying to prove you wrong, I'm just curious how this can be the case as I'm not that knowledgeable in this area. So you are saying that Intel being stuck on 14nm for at least another 1-2 years isn't at all behind competition like TSMC's 7nm chips which are already being rolled out in the iPhones this year, but why? How can that be when in terms of transistor density, they are so far apart? How can they be equivalent, what does Intel do that makes their 14nm in your opinion equal or just as good as, say, the A12 even though they are so much less denser packed in terms of transistors?

 

[Ma2k5]

Well, first of all, TSMCs 7N process, on which Apple A12 Bionic is made has 69 mTR/mm2. GloFo 14 nm LP has 25 mTR/mm2, Intel's 14 nm process has 25 mTR/mm2, and TSMC's 7 nm HPC node on which AMD Matisse, Rome and Vega will be made, have 67 mTR/mm2.

As you can see in pure density Intel is 2 years behind their competition. 12 nm process will cut in half the advancement of 10 nm node, and you will get at best 55 mTR/mm2 with it, with performance capabilities of Intel's 14 nm ++ node.

And remember, 10/12 nm Intel CPUs will come out as "early" as Q4 2019, if they will be able to put out enough capacity, and the CPUs will be viable.

For now Intel will not release anything viable to compete with anybody that will be making on 7 nm process, and will be capacity constraint with 14 nm products(they already are, today I have found that ALL of Coffee Lake CPUs are around 70-100$ more expensive to buy, or are out of stock everywhere).

Ashraf Eassa on Twitter pointed out that currently, Intel with Leading Edge nodes, is dead last. Even Samsung is far more advanced with their tech than Intel. TSMC - is in their own class. N7 process is working(Apple A12 Bionic), soon we will get EUV, and 7 nm HPC chips from AMD(Matisse, Rome, Navi). Where is Intel with 10 nm process?

Nowhere.

Could you explain what you mean by that? Not trying to prove you wrong, I'm just curious how this can be the case as I'm not that knowledgeable in this area. So you are saying that Intel being stuck on 14nm for at least another 1-2 years isn't at all behind competition like TSMC's 7nm chips which are already being rolled out in the iPhones this year, but why? How can that be when in terms of transistor density, they are so far apart? How can they be equivalent, what does Intel do that makes their 14nm in your opinion equal or just as good as, say, the A12 even though they are so much less denser packed in terms of transistors?

Maybe this is the issue - people are comparing mobile/ARM chips compared to what Intel targets. I am just going by the market trend that in the desktop/laptop realm, why has no one touched Intel if they are actually two years behind? Can AMD/TSMC, with their supposed tech advantage, create a viable competitor at the 15/28/45+ TDP level?

People said Ryzen was going to finally topple Intel - and myself I have no loyalty to any CPU brand, but it isn’t happening is it.

Maybe years down the line someone will steal the crown from Intel, but it hasn’t happened yet - TSMC looks promising with all its investments, but seeing AMD struggle so many years, who knows what will happen.

 

[koyoot]

Maybe this is the issue - people are comparing mobile/ARM chips compared to what Intel targets. I am just going by the market trend that in the desktop/laptop realm, why has no one touched Intel if they are actually two years behind? Can AMD/TSMC, with their supposed tech advantage, create a viable competitor at the 15/28/45+ TDP level?

People said Ryzen was going to finally topple Intel - and myself I have no loyalty to any CPU brand, but it isn’t happening is it.

Maybe years down the line someone will steal the crown from Intel, but it hasn’t happened yet - TSMC looks promising with all its investments, but seeing AMD struggle so many years, who knows what will happen.

The reason why nobody is catching up to Intel in market penetration is not tech, but money AMD invested in helping OEMs in delivering hardware. Ryzen 5 2500U is 4 core 8 thread CPU with 2 GHz base clock, and 3.6 boost clock, 15W TDP CPU, and Vega 8, with 512 GCN cores. GPU is 95% of what Nvidia MX150 is, and the CPU is 85-90% of what i5-8250U. It is best of both worlds.

From technological point of view - Intel already is behind in terms of efficiency, of AMD. 15W APU is delivering the same performance as is 15W CPU + 25W GPU combo.

And most importantly: Intel is capacity constrained right now. And will be foreseeable future. That is biggest problem you can face.

Could you explain what you mean by that? Not trying to prove you wrong, I'm just curious how this can be the case as I'm not that knowledgeable in this area. So you are saying that Intel being stuck on 14nm for at least another 1-2 years isn't at all behind competition like TSMC's 7nm chips which are already being rolled out in the iPhones this year, but why? How can that be when in terms of transistor density, they are so far apart? How can they be equivalent, what does Intel do that makes their 14nm in your opinion equal or just as good as, say, the A12 even though they are so much less denser packed in terms of transistors?

Everything made by Intel on 14 nm process, will be completely destroyed by everything made on 7 nm process. it is this simple. AMD will make 8C/16T design for AM4 platform, without iGPU. No difference in core count here, but the efficiency will be much better.

AMD Rome is based on 9 dies, 8 Matisse dies, plus one die for I/O, in 225W TDP package. What this means is that those Rome dies have to have higher than 2 GHz all core turbo in 25W TDP package. TSMC overpromised a bit in terms of raw performance, but delivered in terms of power consumption. This is the reason why.

Imagine that AMD can deliver 5%-10% higher IPC that Latest and greatest Intel Coffee Lake CPU, clock it to 4.6 GHz all core boost, in 95W envelope WITHOUT OC, on a 8C/16T design. You get the picture.

Also bare in mind that every company can burn some transinstors to increase core clocks, on smaller nodes, by elongating the pipelines. Pure transistor density will have gigantic impact on 7 nm CPU performance.

 

[Ma2k5]

The reason why nobody is catching up to Intel in market penetration is not tech, but money AMD invested in helping OEMs in delivering hardware. Ryzen 5 2500U is 4 core 8 thread CPU with 2 GHz base clock, and 3.6 boost clock, 15W TDP CPU, and Vega 8, with 512 GCN cores. GPU is 95% of what Nvidia MX150 is, and the CPU is 85-90% of what i5-8250U. It is best of both worlds.

From technological point of view - Intel already is behind in terms of efficiency, of AMD. 15W APU is delivering the same performance as is 15W CPU + 25W GPU combo.

And most importantly: Intel is capacity constrained right now. And will be foreseeable future. That is biggest problem you can face.

Everything made by Intel on 14 nm process, will be completely destroyed by everything made on 7 nm process. it is this simple. AMD will make 8C/16T design for AM4 platform, without iGPU. No difference in core count here, but the efficiency will be much better.

AMD Rome is based on 9 dies, 8 Matisse dies, plus one die for I/O, in 225W TDP package. What this means is that those Rome dies have to have higher than 2 GHz all core turbo in 25W TDP package. TSMC overpromised a bit in terms of raw performance, but delivered in terms of power consumption. This is the reason why.

Imagine that AMD can deliver 5%-10% higher IPC that Latest and greatest Intel Coffee Lake CPU, clock it to 4.6 GHz all core boost, in 95W envelope WITHOUT OC, on a 8C/16T design. You get the picture.

Also bare in mind that every company can burn some transinstors to increase core clocks, on smaller nodes, by elongating the pipelines. Pure transistor density will have gigantic impact on 7 nm CPU performance.

Without iGPU, isn’t that a disadvantage though? The iGPU’s are pretty great for what they manage to do and no need to add any dGPU which would affect size, cooling, battery life? Must also make a lot of the manufacturing process for many devices easy with a far simpler design.

 

[Falhófnir]

We are not even talking half a millimetre of difference in thickness between the iPhones, hardly can be described as “changed direction”. Forced to do so as well probably (bendgate, having to go water resistant to keep up with competition, battery complaints etc).

Now if they had re-added the headphone jack, you’d have a point. That would be a real change of direction.

Actually the cumulative increase between the 6 and the X/s is 0.8mm - a clear decision has been made that to incorporate new technologies like wireless charging and larger batteries that they will allow the phones to be thicker. The trajectory prior to this was always downwards. I see no reason they wouldn’t make the same decision for MacBooks, particularly pro models if they wish to include more powerful internals or increase battery sizes.

The reason why nobody is catching up to Intel in market penetration is not tech, but money AMD invested in helping OEMs in delivering hardware. Ryzen 5 2500U is 4 core 8 thread CPU with 2 GHz base clock, and 3.6 boost clock, 15W TDP CPU, and Vega 8, with 512 GCN cores. GPU is 95% of what Nvidia MX150 is, and the CPU is 85-90% of what i5-8250U. It is best of both worlds.

From technological point of view - Intel already is behind in terms of efficiency, of AMD. 15W APU is delivering the same performance as is 15W CPU + 25W GPU combo.

And most importantly: Intel is capacity constrained right now. And will be foreseeable future. That is biggest problem you can face.

Everything made by Intel on 14 nm process, will be completely destroyed by everything made on 7 nm process. it is this simple. AMD will make 8C/16T design for AM4 platform, without iGPU. No difference in core count here, but the efficiency will be much better.

AMD Rome is based on 9 dies, 8 Matisse dies, plus one die for I/O, in 225W TDP package. What this means is that those Rome dies have to have higher than 2 GHz all core turbo in 25W TDP package. TSMC overpromised a bit in terms of raw performance, but delivered in terms of power consumption. This is the reason why.

Imagine that AMD can deliver 5%-10% higher IPC that Latest and greatest Intel Coffee Lake CPU, clock it to 4.6 GHz all core boost, in 95W envelope WITHOUT OC, on a 8C/16T design. You get the picture.

Also bare in mind that every company can burn some transinstors to increase core clocks, on smaller nodes, by elongating the pipelines. Pure transistor density will have gigantic impact on 7 nm CPU performance.

I’m interested to see if AMD can finally catch up with or even overtake Intel in single core performance - that’s where Intel has always been the most dominant. If they can crack that then Intel’s premium pricing model comes into severe jeopardy as that is probably the biggest justification... I have a lot of respect for Intel as a company that puts out great chips and has pushed innovation but close competition will always be good for the consumer on pricing and rate of innovation!

 

[Ma2k5]

Actually the cumulative increase between the 6 and the X/s is 0.8mm - a clear decision has been made that to incorporate new technologies like wireless charging and larger batteries that they will allow the phones to be thicker. The trajectory prior to this was always downwards. I see no reason they wouldn’t make the same decision for MacBooks, particularly pro models if they wish to include more powerful internals or increase battery sizes.

Having owned all of those products, I can tell you that not once did I feel Apple changed direction - pretty much felt downhill since the iPhone 6. Cumulative (to suit you) at even 0.8mm over 4/5 years is nothing considering it was to keep up with competition (going back to glass back for wireless charging, waterproofing) and bend gate . I don’t call that regression, regression would be removal of Touch ID (not for me but for some), the notch or the lack of headphone jack. If they were to revert on those, I’d accept they have changed direction. I do question how much space is actually saved from lack of headphone since a Samsung Note seems to be able to implement SD card, headphone jack and a frigging stylus, plus a 4000mAh battery.

Now MacBooks, we have regresssed on MagSafe, battery size (from 99.5wh sub 80Wh back to ~83Wh), lack of physical fn keys and the keyboard. Again, some of these may not feel like regression that isn’t my point, rather just like the iPhone, there hasn’t been any change in direction. 2018 has a slightly higher battery capacity to the 2016 but again it was just to keep up with components that use more battery life, not a change in direction. If Apple suddenly removed touch bar, increases battery capacity back to 99.5W , added previous keyboard or reintroduced MagSafe, I’d say they are showing signs of changing direction.

 

[koyoot]

Without iGPU, isn’t that a disadvantage though? The iGPU’s are pretty great for what they manage to do and no need to add any dGPU which would affect size, cooling, battery life? Must also make a lot of the manufacturing process for many devices easy with a far simpler design.

Dude, haven't you heard anything about Raven Ridge, APUs?

You think APUs will not be designed for 7 nm HPC process?

Also, don't you think that Apple would be more interested in Semi-Custom AMD solutions? 4 core/8 Thread CPU, with 28-32 CU(1792-2048 GCN core) GPU, with HBM2 on the package, for example.

I’m interested to see if AMD can finally catch up with or even overtake Intel in single core performance - that’s where Intel has always been the most dominant. If they can crack that then Intel’s premium pricing model comes into severe jeopardy as that is probably the biggest justification... I have a lot of respect for Intel as a company that puts out great chips and has pushed innovation but close competition will always be good for the consumer on pricing and rate of innovation!

More important is not the pricing, but technology. Prices will not be changed, because that is how tech companies are making moneyz!1one. Technological disruption is what you want. For example, offering 8 core/16 thread CPU in times, when your competitor offers 4 core CPU, for the same price.

 

[gaanee]

That gives more reasons for Apple to switch to custom CPU... good point - it can even choose custom AMD if possible fr Pro models. ARM is also a possibility for low power consumer use

For those interested in 10 nm process.

Its dead. Intel is porting whole process, to be essentially 12 nm process, and we can expect it at best in 18 months time.

https://twitter.com/CDemerjian/status/1040586902540378113

Dude, haven't you heard anything about Raven Ridge, APUs?

You think APUs will not be designed for 7 nm HPC process?

Also, don't you think that Apple would be more interested in Semi-Custom AMD solutions? 4 core/8 Thread CPU, with 28-32 CU(1792-2048 GCN core) GPU, with HBM2 on the package, for example.

More important is not the pricing, but technology. Prices will not be changed, because that is how tech companies are making moneyz!1one. Technological disruption is what you want. For example, offering 8 core/16 thread CPU in times, when your competitor offers 4 core CPU, for the same price.

 

[RumorConsumer]

Well, first of all, TSMCs 7N process, on which Apple A12 Bionic is made has 69 mTR/mm2. GloFo 14 nm LP has 25 mTR/mm2, Intel's 14 nm process has 25 mTR/mm2, and TSMC's 7 nm HPC node on which AMD Matisse, Rome and Vega will be made, have 67 mTR/mm2.

As you can see in pure density Intel is 2 years behind their competition. 12 nm process will cut in half the advancement of 10 nm node, and you will get at best 55 mTR/mm2 with it, with performance capabilities of Intel's 14 nm ++ node.

And remember, 10/12 nm Intel CPUs will come out as "early" as Q4 2019, if they will be able to put out enough capacity, and the CPUs will be viable.

For now Intel will not release anything viable to compete with anybody that will be making on 7 nm process, and will be capacity constraint with 14 nm products(they already are, today I have found that ALL of Coffee Lake CPUs are around 70-100$ more expensive to buy, or are out of stock everywhere).

Ashraf Eassa on Twitter pointed out that currently, Intel with Leading Edge nodes, is dead last. Even Samsung is far more advanced with their tech than Intel. TSMC - is in their own class. N7 process is working(Apple A12 Bionic), soon we will get EUV, and 7 nm HPC chips from AMD(Matisse, Rome, Navi). Where is Intel with 10 nm process?

Nowhere.

Given all this what do you think we can expect in terms of variants/enhancements in the current process that might make their way into MBPs?
[doublepost=1537058740][/doublepost]

If he’s got a machine that suits his needs then why on Earth not? Apple changed direction on making iPhones thinner to accommodate more of what they wanted to include, the 7 was thicker than the 6, the 8 thicker than the 7 and the X thinner still. All is not set in stone here...

same happened w the 1" titanium. aluminum came along and chunked out.

 

[koyoot]

Given all this what do you think we can expect in terms of variants/enhancements in the current process that might make their way into MBPs?

Whos current process? Intel's, GloFo's, TSMC's?

 

[RumorConsumer]

Whos current process? Intel's, GloFo's, TSMC's?

ANYBODY'S!! LOL - I meant Intel. Like is Coffee Lake likely to receive updates that might find their way into new MBPs? Clock frequency upgrades (if anybody would want those with the heat questions..)?

 

[jackoatmon]

I'm living on my June 2013 Air. It's been struggling recently and the battery is long past overdue for a replacement. Was hoping to get a MBP but I don't know if these ones are worth it.

I might spend a day seriously cleaning up everything on the drive and might look into a battery replacement to get another year out of it.

Yuck to no quad core non TB.

Ok if you’re using an old macbook air and not getting fired, you DEFINITELY do not need a macbook pro

LOL


It’s like saying “I need to replace my baseball bat. But this nuclear bomb only blows up ONE city. I’ll wait for a more powerful option.

 

[ls1dreams]

Was hoping to buy the new macbook but can't until:

1. Completely new keyboard redesign which probably won't happen until the next chassis
2. Really want to see the touchbar gone

Beyond that it would be great to get 10nm chips for cooler running laptops, hardware AV1 decoding, and 802.11ax.

My laptop is really struggling though. Debating picking up a used 2015 or something to buy time.

 

[gaanee]

Has this been confirmed by Intel?
I wonder if it's possible for Intel to use TSMC's 7 and 10nm fabrication process for x86 architecture until it can catch up. That way Intel can bring new architecture much sooner. Right now, it looks like they are pretty much stagnated with x86 development because of fabrication process.
TSMC is making chips for AMD's x86 AMD64 architecture, so theoretically it should be possible unless Intel wants to do it alone.

For those interested in 10 nm process.

Its dead. Intel is porting whole process, to be essentially 12 nm process, and we can expect it at best in 18 months time.

https://twitter.com/CDemerjian/status/1040586902540378113

 

[maflynn]

Has this been confirmed by Intel?

If that tweet is accurate, then intel will be using 12nm and calling it 10nm, so I'm not sure they'll be all that forthright in confirming the news.

 

[Naimfan]

Lots of AMD fans here. And yet Intel still effectively owns the market and not a single major player in the personal computing space has converted to AMD.

 

[koyoot]

Lots of AMD fans here. And yet Intel still effectively owns the market and not a single major player in the personal computing space has converted to AMD.

Have you've been living under a rock for past 12 months?

Acer, Dell are the OEM's which offer AMD CPUs in their computers, both desktop and Mobile. Both AliExpress, and Weibo converted 70% of their servers to AMD EPYC. Cisco is offering AMD EPYC powered servers, and workstations.

And lastly. Are those AMD fans diagnosed by Intel fan?

Has this been confirmed by Intel?
I wonder if it's possible for Intel to use TSMC's 7 and 10nm fabrication process for x86 architecture until it can catch up. That way Intel can bring new architecture much sooner. Right now, it looks like they are pretty much stagnated with x86 development because of fabrication process.
TSMC is making chips for AMD's x86 AMD64 architecture, so theoretically it should be possible unless Intel wants to do it alone.

They are doing everything to cover that they F***** up, because that will result in complete plummeting oftheir stock price. And hiring talent is hard when you cannot pay them in stock that is growing, and has not high worth.
For the contrast, Nvidia is gaining with each year, and AMD just this year is 800% up, and was 4 years ago at 0.98$. Two days ago AMD mooned at 34$. It gives a perspective.

ANYBODY'S!! LOL - I meant Intel. Like is Coffee Lake likely to receive updates that might find their way into new MBPs? Clock frequency upgrades (if anybody would want those with the heat questions..)?

There won't be any increases in 14 nm process. That process allows Intel to clock their CPUs very high, but does not increase the efficiency, does not increase density, does not increase the clock speeds.

In essence, if Intel will push that effective 12 nm process, expect to see decrease in clock performance, increase in core count and IPC, and efficiency. But overall clock speeds you may see decrease.

If that tweet is accurate, then intel will be using 12nm and calling it 10nm, so I'm not sure they'll be all that forthright in confirming the news.

Author of the TT is the guy who was saying about Intel 10 nm woes as early as 2016. He said that 10 nm process is dead in august of last year, and they will never fix it.

There is no surprise in this.

 

[gaanee]

In that case, why doesn't Intel go to TSMC for fabrication and at least salvage whatever they can? Intel architecture is considered to be superior to AMD, so why not cash it on instead of allowing AMD to surpass Intel's advantage using better 7nm fabrication process.
Otherwise, in a few years even ARM will catch up let alone AMD in the x86-64 space.

They are doing everything to cover that they F***** up, because that will result in complete plummeting oftheir stock price. And hiring talent is hard when you cannot pay them in stock that is growing, and has not high worth.
For the contrast, Nvidia is gaining with each year, and AMD just this year is 800% up, and was 4 years ago at 0.98$. Two days ago AMD mooned at 34$. It gives a perspective.

 

[koyoot]

In that case, why doesn't Intel go to TSMC for fabrication and at least salvage whatever they can? Intel architecture is considered to be superior to AMD, so why not cash it on instead of allowing AMD to surpass Intel's advantage using better 7nm fabrication process.
Otherwise, in a few years even ARM will catch up let alone AMD in the x86-64 space.

You really thing Intel's Ego is open enough to do this?

They would lose a LOT if they would use anything else than their own process, for manufacturing of their CPUs. They will manufacture the GPUs on TSMC in 2020, and H310 chipset in 2018/2019.

 

[Naimfan]

Have you've been living under a rock for past 12 months?

Acer, Dell are the OEM's which offer AMD CPUs in their computers, both desktop and Mobile. Both AliExpress, and Weibo converted 70% of their servers to AMD EPYC. Cisco is offering AMD EPYC powered servers, and workstations.

And lastly. Are those AMD fans diagnosed by Intel fan?

(Emphasis added.)

Apparently you should take a vocabulary class. "Converted" is significantly different from "offer." Per the Dell website, 6 out of 130 of their 15" laptops use AMD processors, which translates to ~4.6%. That's not "converted," that's a rounding error.

And for server share, AMD just hit 1% (yes, after falling from 24% or so to below 1%), as you can see here.

So your implied suggestion that Apple, or any other company, switch to AMD for CPUs borders on the absurd.

 

[Ma2k5]

You really thing Intel's Ego is open enough to do this?

They would lose a LOT if they would use anything else than their own process, for manufacturing of their CPUs. They will manufacture the GPUs on TSMC in 2020, and H310 chipset in 2018/2019.

I just remember so much talk about AMD APU’s from years ago, I just can’t believd they will suddenly take over Intel, they failed so often - not you but a lot of AMD fans used to talk about the Intel killer years ago on overclock.net due to being disgruntled with Intel.

I’d be happy if they did, would increase competition.