Apple Ditching Nvidia to Pair With AMD Instead?

[Rosanjin]

[citation][nom]demonhorde665[/nom]AMEN to that , seriously how does tom's get apple is going AMD , from Apple may use Intel chips in their enxt line ???? marcus did you throw away all logicalthinking to come to this conclusion in your title ????[/citation]

Please read the last two paragraphs of the article.

 

[ProDigit10]

AMD has always been better in power consumption, performance and pricing of their cards.
the quality of their cards are more than sufficient (even if Nvidia has the slight advantage on quality).

 

[curtis_87]

[citation][nom]ProDigit10[/nom]AMD has always been better in power consumption, performance and pricing of their cards.the quality of their cards are more than sufficient (even if Nvidia has the slight advantage on quality).[/citation]

SOrry got a little click happy thumbing down "edtuketdukdt 12/12/2010 3:35 PM" , doesnt seem to be a way to undo.

 

[STravis]

[citation][nom]Xatos[/nom]If Apple starts using ATI products, my next PC will be powered by Nvidia. Bottom line.[/citation]

I think that's just a funny statement - willing to use an inferior product just because Apple isn't.

 

[kelemvor4]

meh. whatever. Sheeple will buy mac no matter what, so they should just go with whatever gives them a bigger margin.

 

[frostyfireball]

[citation][nom]tsnor[/nom]And how is "Cnet reports, is that Apple could be dumping Nvidia in favor of going with Intel's integrated graphics. " the basis for the title "Apple Ditching Nvidia to Pair With AMD" ?Is this just a test to see who will write ATI vs. NVIDIA comments w/o reading the article ?[/citation]

Did YOU read the article?
Second last paragraph: "The high-end real "pro" MacBook Pro machines will still need discrete graphics, and Cnet believes that the 15- and 17-inch models could go with AMD graphics parts."
It wasn't the focus of the article, there is the rumor that Apple will switch to AMD discrete GPUs mentioned.

 

[megamanx00]

That's good for AMD, but otherwise *meh*

 

[cliffro]

[citation][nom]ProDigit10[/nom]AMD has always been better in power consumption, performance and pricing of their cards.the quality of their cards are more than sufficient (even if Nvidia has the slight advantage on quality).[/citation]

Always? That's such a bold statement!
Please refer to this comparison of the 1900XTX/7900GTX (it has the 7950GX2 thrown in as well)

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/video/power-noise/cons_premium.gif

There are no surprises in the power consumption diagrams: incorporating less transistors and having a micro-architecture optimized for low power consumption, the Nvidia GeForce 7900 GTX eats 33% less of power than its opponent under maximum 3D load.

And another quote from Xbit

So, we can’t say the GeForce 7900 GTX is a clear winner today, but it has done at least no worse than the Radeon X1900 XTX in 14 out of 18 tests. And it has the advantage of lower price: $499 against $549.

So Nvidia has in fact been price/performance king, AND power efficient all in the same card(Semi-recently). But lets also forget the hog that was the HD2900XT too. Hot, Underpowered yet used lots of power and only competed with the 8800GTS 640.

Remember, ATI/AMD and Nvidia will always go round and round, trading spots for Top Card, Best Power Use and Price. When both have competing cards, prices will be better, when one is late, the other will price high, and stay high until the other finally releases. Perfect examples 8800 Series, stayed high priced. DAAMIT couldn't touch the GTX or the Ultra, for 2 generations until the 48xx came out.
And Then the 5000 series came out first and prices stayed high, because Fermi was late, not as good considering how much heat and power use it had.

 

[jj463rd]

[citation][nom]apache_lives[/nom]the release of vista and nvidia's drivers for vista says otherwise for drivers and hows about google "hp nvidia dead" and see how many faults nvidia products have before saying that[/citation]
Yeah probably because AMD's graphics chips run cooler and most likely would last much longer (better reliability).

 

[molo9000]

Makes sense. iMacs and Mac Pros already use AMD graphics cards.

 

[maigo]

Stupid people, Apple already uses AMD for desktops.

 

[Nintendork]

The next step is using Llano instead of SB.

 

[Guest]

Okay, so the second paragraph says...

The word on the street now, Cnet reports, is that Apple could be dumping Nvidia in favor of going with Intel's integrated graphics.

And the third paragraph says...

The high-end real "pro" MacBook Pro machines will still need discrete graphics, and Cnet believes that the 15- and 17-inch models could go with AMD graphics parts.

So where exactly is the "rumor" about Apple using AMD discrete graphics? It's like my friend telling me that he thinks Nvidia will start making motorcycles. It's someones opinion and you're reporting it as a fact.

 

[WarraWarra]

The question remains is can you actually calculate more than 1+1=2 on the upcoming Apple laptops or will they now start to become a Apple Laptop again like we used to know and love back in the G4 Powerbook days when it was 1on1 with my then gaming desktop ?

Asus i7 740QM Ati 5870 $1299.00 No restocking fee if you don't like it.

Chitty Chitty bang bang:
APPLE i7 2.66ghz NV330m $2199 10% restocking fee for their iPad "in French" Phoenix AZ error.

So does this mean we might actually see the first non EeePC based 17" Apple mobile phones "PowerBook pro 17" build since Apple stopped producing laptops back with the G4 to Intel switch ?

Or will the madness continue:
Example:
3Dec 2010 Apple Ipad in French bought in Phoneix AZ as a english Ipad then have to download 2gb+ overloading the limited 3g data plan with updates and 8 hours of frustration later when it finally stopped copying 30gb pics + 60gb music "90gb" to the 64gb Ipad SSD so that it can fail then finally give user access + get it into English once you get access to it and delete all this irritation / pics / music off and back to near factory what it should have been + updated.

Everyone's kids loves to hear grand mother "57y old" shouting for 10 hours about this iPad and don't touch it and why we bought her this junk / good product that does not work.

PS> $669.00 Wifi 64gb iPad actually cost $1000+ with normal needed accessories and tax + 3g monthly data plan used up with this updates.

 

[amoghthegamer]

Okay First of All:

Apple robs people straight out of the pocket. I mean a $800 PC for $1500+? But they used top-quality parts like Intel CPU's and Nvidia GPU's. Now they are going to use shitty quality AMD and ATI parts and charge the same? Somebody better put Apple in their place.

 

[kronos_cornelius]

Apple: Hey Nvidia, you keep up that Tegra 2 tablet with Android stuff... and we walk !

Nvidia: Well, you guys know you are a niche market, and the real growth is in Android and PCs right !

 

[apache_lives]

[citation][nom]amoghthegamer[/nom]Okay First of All:Apple robs people straight out of the pocket. I mean a $800 PC for $1500+? But they used top-quality parts like Intel CPU's and Nvidia GPU's. Now they are going to use shitty quality AMD and ATI parts and charge the same? Somebody better put Apple in their place.[/citation]

nvidia mobility chips aint "top-quality", and your a typical Intel fanboy

 

[lradunovic77]

Apple just like ATI cards, suck!

 

[killbits]

[citation][nom]Xatos[/nom]If Apple starts using ATI products, my next PC will be powered by Nvidia. Bottom line.[/citation]

this is like saying, because Hitler founded Volkswagen I'm only going to drive a Ford Pinto.

you fail at logic.

 

[Travis Beane]

[citation][nom]sidspyker[/nom]Cooool, AMD always needs a lil more rating, so many people(except gamers and PC enthu. 's)think AMD is crap, which it isn't.[/citation]
Nvidia is the one in trouble right now. AMD comes out with a new 1.7 billion transistor GPU to replace their old 2 billion ones (reducing manufacturing costs), while Nvidia is still sipping away on a 3 billion transistor chip.

While I'll keep ATi in my desktop, I'm inclined towards Nvidia in the mobile space. The last mobile showdown here on Tom's showed that Nvidia mobile GPU's generally had superior performance while superior power usage (though Nvidia GPU's cost a lot more).

 

[oneblackened]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]and going with that in a mac will change that how?[/citation]
People associate Apple stuff with good quality... ie, "Oh, if Apple uses it it must be good!"

 

[f-14]

it makes sense with apples low power requirements. i don't understand why apple didn't gow ith AMD/ati in the first place as they were geared more towards everything apple is about. i would not be surprised if apple is testing the waters with AMD to jump ship from Intel (should AMD ever get it's cpu power requirements inline). i can also see apple using this deal with AMD as a barganing tool as leverage in their next contract with Intel to drop prices so 'Thee Almighty Jobs' gets to keep his yearly bonus for keeping the margins and bottom line ridiculously over profitable.
oh wait i forgot apple needs to over charge 3X's what a PC product is worth because alot of that extra money goes towards advertising that apple still exists, even if it's a dinosaur in the computing world. "can't let people forget(ignore) you or you shall cease to exist!" ~~Thee Almighty Relic Steve Jobs

 

[nebun]

[citation][nom]apache_lives[/nom]the release of vista and nvidia's drivers for vista says otherwise for drivers and hows about google "hp nvidia dead" and see how many faults nvidia products have before saying that[/citation]
from experience with ATI/AMD and nVidia products...nVidia has never given me any issues...also I love software for CUDA...ATI/AMD can't hold a candle to it

 

[Guest]

Apple finally doing something smart...AMDs graphics chips have pooped all over NVidia's crap for the past 3-4 years...

 

[gh0st]

Hate to say it but Nvidia getting what it deserves for talking so much shit.Or shall I say for it having a guy in charge talking so much shit!?