Apple ready to embrace AMD?

[jennyh]

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/04/16/apple_in_advanced_discussions_to_adopt_amd_chips.html

Intel has served as Apple's sole source for the microprocessors used in its notebook and desktop personal computers since the company began its transition away from PowerPC in 2006, but that may soon change given the company's recent talks with Intel's chief CPU rival Advanced Micro Devices.

This could be a lot of things, apple trying to get a better deal out of intel is an obvious one.

Some suggestions have been made that AMD's Llano 'fusion' is so far ahead of intels solution and that is the reason why.

It should be interesting.

 

[jimmysmitty]

If they do go AMD, it wont be for a while. APple just refreshed its Macbooks with Core i5/i7s so they wont move for another 1-2 years.

As for Llano, no benchmarks and no real concrete proof, so I doubt Apple would take word of mouth as fact.

 

[jennyh]

AMD's CEO Dirk Meyer said during the Q1 CC that Llano was already sampling, and rumour has it that Apple were amongst the first to get samples.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Keyword, rumor.

Apple would not switch after refreshing so fast. It took them a year to get Core i7 alone. They are slow on the tech uptake these days.

Plus changing to AMD means a redo of OS X since they only use one CPU type ever and thats how they stay more bug free.

And remember, Apple is a "premier" PC company. I highly doubt they would use a IGP GPU over a discrete since their main is video editing and no matter how good AMDs fusion will be, it will not beat discrete.

Add in VALVe putting Steam to Mac along with all their games and some others, Apple will have a new crowd to please.

 

[jennyh]

Fusion won't beat what discrete? You mean the 'new' 330M in the macbook pro?

I think you'll find that Llano will beat that hands down.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Or we could wait for actual benchmarks because there was a article about that 330M that said it was custom made for Apple by nVidia.

Besides, Llano has at least a year before it hits which means there might be a better option to go with.

Intel is also sampling Sandy Bridge but we still need to wait for actual benchmarks showing the CPUs power before jumping to conclusions.

 

[jennyh]

Llano will be here much sooner than 1 year jimmy.

Something is going on - whether apple is getting tired of intels greed/lockouts, or maybe they just want better graphics eod?

If most macs are shipping with core 2's yet, there sure as hell isn't any reason
why those couldn't be cheaper Phenom II's.

It looks to me like Apple is finally wisening up. The end user can normally be fleeced once, and with Apple and intel both trying their best to fleece us, well I guess the average apple comp isn't big enough to fit both.

 

[MarkG]

Something is going on - whether apple is getting tired of intels greed/lockouts, or maybe they just want better graphics eod?

Apple would be foolish if they're not talking to AMD. They would also be foolish if they switched to AMD without a very good reason.

The fact that Apple are talking to a company tells you very little other than that the people who make technology decisions at Apple are doing the job they're paid for.

 

[jennyh]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/macbook-mac-macbook-pro-radeon-os-x,10206.html

 

[jimmysmitty]

Llano will be here much sooner than 1 year jimmy.

Something is going on - whether apple is getting tired of intels greed/lockouts, or maybe they just want better graphics eod?

If most macs are shipping with core 2's yet, there sure as hell isn't any reason
why those couldn't be cheaper Phenom II's.

It looks to me like Apple is finally wisening up. The end user can normally be fleeced once, and with Apple and intel both trying their best to fleece us, well I guess the average apple comp isn't big enough to fit both.

Apple locks themselves out. They went with Power PC then to Intel because they prefer to go with as little hardware as possible to maintain a more stable OS> Thats why the parts you buy for a Mac need to be Mac compatable and are normally only for Macs.

Intel in no way holds Apple, rather Apple creates a contract to get so many CPUs.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/macbook-mac-macbook-pro-radeon-os-x,10206.html

Pretty bad article. Intel not giving nVidia a QPI license in no way affects anything. In fact Apple having to use Intel chipsets, which are far better than nVidias, doesn't drop SLI support since they have SLI in both and CrossFire support.

From this, I think they might mean as in GPUs which they already have ATI for their desktop available, but the Mac Books don't. Possibly they will go with Radeons instead of GeForce cards.

Still, not being able to use nVidia chipsets does not mean they cannot use SLI or wont work with Intel chipsets. Thats just a load of bull.

 

[MarkG]

Possibly they will go with Radeons instead of GeForce cards.

True: that would be a very good reason for Apple to be talking to AMD right now.

 

[jennyh]

I just read this, and I don't think I could say it better myself.

Where to put it: the iMac

Given that Intel has the performance crown for servers and the performance/watt crown in mobile, the most likely place for Apple to use AMD is in the iMac.

Right now, the iMac is still on the 45nm Core 2 Duo. The obvious Intel replacement for the iMac's C2D is Intel's dual-core, 32nm Clarkdale family, either the Core i5 or the Core i3, both of which have been out since the start of the year. But the new Core i5 Clarkdales don't really improve on the older, quad-core, 45nm "Lynnfield" part that's are currently in the 27" iMac, because the Clarkdale i5 is kind of a dog.

The entire Clarkdale family has two features that Apple—and anyone else looking for maximum performance and minimum waste—is going to hate: 1) the memory controller has moved back off the CPU die, and 2) there's a IGP and northbridge in the package with the CPU. The off-die memory controller means that Clarkdale's memory latency stinks, and the in-package GPU/northbridge means that you're paying for a sub-par Intel IGP that you really don't want to use if you're building a performance desktop.

(Seriously, Intel, just give us a straight 32nm shrink of Lynnfield for the performance desktop segment.)

The upshot of all this is that, with the possible exception of HTPC builders, anyone who's considering putting Clarkdale in a performance or mid-range desktop would really be better off with a quad-core CPU from AMD, including Apple. The cheaper, 32nm, non-Lynnfield part of the Core i5 lineup just isn't that attractive right now.

We're not claiming that we'll actually see an AMD-based iMac, but it wouldn't surprise us. Intel has left the door open for AMD's Phenom X4 to walk right through, and it's possible that Apple will go ahead and invite the X4 in.

Isn't it interesting how things can work out? Intels money grubbing in the Asian markets at the expense of the US/EU looks like it could come back to haunt them with a vengeance.

Did intel truly believe that apple would be content with poor supply of the i5/i7 and awful 32nm Clarkdales? They've dropped the ball big time here. This is intels achilles heel, trying to play everybody everywhere.

 

[Chad Boga]

I just read this, and I don't think I could say it better myself.

Where to put it: the iMac

Given that Intel has the performance crown for servers and the performance/watt crown in mobile, the most likely place for Apple to use AMD is in the iMac.

Right now, the iMac is still on the 45nm Core 2 Duo. The obvious Intel replacement for the iMac's C2D is Intel's dual-core, 32nm Clarkdale family, either the Core i5 or the Core i3, both of which have been out since the start of the year. But the new Core i5 Clarkdales don't really improve on the older, quad-core, 45nm "Lynnfield" part that's are currently in the 27" iMac, because the Clarkdale i5 is kind of a dog.

The entire Clarkdale family has two features that Apple—and anyone else looking for maximum performance and minimum waste—is going to hate: 1) the memory controller has moved back off the CPU die, and 2) there's a IGP and northbridge in the package with the CPU. The off-die memory controller means that Clarkdale's memory latency stinks, and the in-package GPU/northbridge means that you're paying for a sub-par Intel IGP that you really don't want to use if you're building a performance desktop.

(Seriously, Intel, just give us a straight 32nm shrink of Lynnfield for the performance desktop segment.)

The upshot of all this is that, with the possible exception of HTPC builders, anyone who's considering putting Clarkdale in a performance or mid-range desktop would really be better off with a quad-core CPU from AMD, including Apple. The cheaper, 32nm, non-Lynnfield part of the Core i5 lineup just isn't that attractive right now.

We're not claiming that we'll actually see an AMD-based iMac, but it wouldn't surprise us. Intel has left the door open for AMD's Phenom X4 to walk right through, and it's possible that Apple will go ahead and invite the X4 in.

Isn't it interesting how things can work out? Intels money grubbing in the Asian markets at the expense of the US/EU looks like it could come back to haunt them with a vengeance.

Did intel truly believe that apple would be content with poor supply of the i5/i7 and awful 32nm Clarkdales? They've dropped the ball big time here. This is intels achilles heel, trying to play everybody everywhere.

:lol: Jenny, nothing has happened yet.

There were probably speculation pieces like this suggesting AMD had a shot with Apple when they were transitioning away from the PowerPC and we all know what happened next.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Hmm... complaints about a low end IGP that APple uses in their Mac Books when idle or low usage and switch to the high end part when heavy load.

Not sure how having a low power IGP is a down side since it will lower the desktops power drain when browsing the web or listening to music but hey, I guess Apple is so full of it.

I still say they are looking more towards the Radeon line than the CPU line.

 

[jennyh]

I think that's why Llano is being mentioned.

I don't really believe in coincidences, at least not like this. The day after the AMD CEO says that Llano is being sampled, this rumour appears. Llano is everything Apple could ever want, and you know its cheaper than any intel/nvidia combination.

Apple has every reason to make intel think hard about what they do. Intel threw thousands of cpu's at Acer recently, so many that Apple couldn't buy enough to satisfy demand. Dell would meekly accept it, Apple won't.

I expect to see a major announcement concerning this within the next 2-3 months. Llano is special for AMD, and it's something intel can't get close to.

Apple Fusion. Believe it's coming - maybe even before the end of this year.

 

[Chad Boga]

I think that's why Llano is being mentioned.

I don't really believe in coincidences, at least not like this. The day after the AMD CEO says that Llano is being sampled, this rumour appears. Llano is everything Apple could ever want, and you know its cheaper than any intel/nvidia combination.

Apple has every reason to make intel think hard about what they do. Intel threw thousands of cpu's at Acer recently, so many that Apple couldn't buy enough to satisfy demand. Dell would meekly accept it, Apple won't.

I expect to see a major announcement concerning this within the next 2-3 months. Llano is special for AMD, and it's something intel can't get close to.

Apple Fusion. Believe it's coming - maybe even before the end of this year.

What is so great about Llano?

Isn't it only going to deliver the performance of a $35-45 discrete GPU?

How is that substantially better than a 890GFX motherboard and CPU combo?

 

[MarkG]

There were probably speculation pieces like this suggesting AMD had a shot with Apple when they were transitioning away from the PowerPC and we all know what happened next.

From what I remember it was the other way around, with people unable to understand why Apple would pick Intel when AMD's CPUs were better at that time; Apple, of course, had seen both Intel and AMD's roadmaps of future CPUs whereas the average forum poster hadn't.

 

[jimmysmitty]

So Apple will willingly take a loss by throwing out a refresh again? I doubt it.

Llano is still nothing we have to look at. We have no real specs, no benchmarks and nothing to say that having a real GPU on the same package will be better since heat will go up as will power usage.

I am still waiting for more news. Not that I care which way Apple goes, but I would rather see a real article from Apple than chase some rumor like the "K10 40% better than Kentsfield" rumor.

From what I remember it was the other way around, with people unable to understand why Apple would pick Intel when AMD's CPUs were better at that time; Apple, of course, had seen both Intel and AMD's roadmaps of future CPUs whereas the average forum poster hadn't.

Apple didn't switch to Intel until the Core 2 line. But I think the announcement came out when Pentium D was Intels top which made people question it. They also might have choosen Intel since at the time AMD had a problem with supplying enough chips to all the OEMs that wanted them.

 

[MarkG]

But I think the announcement came out when Pentium D was Intels top which made people question it.

Yes, that's what I meant; Apple could presumably see that Intel had more to offer in the next few years even though AMD were ahead at the time.

 

[BadTrip]

AMD chips are viewed by the common apple snob as bargin bin. No way apple will risk its Elite status by using AMD.

This is obviously about GPU not CPU.

 

[jennyh]

What is so great about Llano?

Isn't it only going to deliver the performance of a $35-45 discrete GPU?

How is that substantially better than a 890GFX motherboard and CPU combo?

LLano is supposed to be a 1 billion transistor 'APU'. 300m of those are 4 phenom II cores, or an Athlon X4 @ 3ghz. The cpu part has no L3 cache.

That leaves 700m graphics transistors on 32nm SOI HKMG. Currently, a 5670 is around 627m transistors on TSMC's inferior 40nm.

At the very least it should be equal to a 5670. But if you add HKMG (not yet seen on any gpu), another process density (32 vs 40), GF has a smaller transistor density anyway, and finally the placement of the gpu so close to the cpu - you should end up with something a lot faster than a 5670.

I expect the graphics of LLano to be close to a 5770 up to 1680x1050 resolution but a lack of memory bandwidth might hurt it at 1920x1080 and above. This isn't Clarkdale, this is a real game changer.

 

[jennyh]

Bulldozer gets all the press but Llano is the chip that is most likely to start a revolution in favour of AMD.

 

[Chad Boga]

LLano is supposed to be a 1 billion transistor 'APU'. 300m of those are 4 phenom II cores, or an Athlon X4 @ 3ghz. The cpu part has no L3 cache.

That leaves 700m graphics transistors on 32nm SOI HKMG. Currently, a 5670 is around 627m transistors on TSMC's inferior 40nm.

At the very least it should be equal to a 5670. But if you add HKMG (not yet seen on any gpu), another process density (32 vs 40), GF has a smaller transistor density anyway, and finally the placement of the gpu so close to the cpu - you should end up with something a lot faster than a 5670.

I expect the graphics of LLano to be close to a 5770 up to 1680x1050 resolution but a lack of memory bandwidth might hurt it at 1920x1080 and above. This isn't Clarkdale, this is a real game changer.

Is there a definitive article about Llano's targeted level of performance somewhere?

 

[FALC0N]

I think this might be about cpu and gpu. Fusion brings with it great potential. Especially on laptops. But at some price levels, AMD is a better value than Intel. It would be to apple's benefit to keep their options open. I suspect all of this plays into it.

The defective Nvidia laptop chip problem may have convinced them that some diversity in there suppliers is a good thing.

 

[jennyh]

Is there a definitive article about Llano's targeted level of performance somewhere?

Nothing official, but this is pretty interesting.

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2010/2/9/amd-llano-fusion-taped-out2c-32nm-soi-cpu-2b-gpu.aspx

Most of that was based on AMD's first showing of LLano at some semiconductor meeting two months ago. Note that AMD didn't show the gpu portion of the chip - only the cpu portion. The power saving features are really nice apparently. Imo LLano is a much more interesting chip than Bulldozer is.