Rumor: Apple to Switch Back to Nvidia for 2012 GPUs

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]well AMD is making it really easy all i was doing is calling that dud out. intel has had its problems in the past too. and what is the point in releasing a CPU when it doesn't even have peak performance with current software?[/citation]

Smart guy here ^^^ hmmm... AMD Athlon 64 days... 64bit processor and how long before 64bit computing was optimized? How did this Athlon cpu do?
 
Doesn't really matter what GPU they use. They always put something crappy anyways. At least not worth the price they are asking for.
 
[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]i wonder too. they admitted defeat in the mhz race a few years ago and changed there nameing scheme for there CPUs to show that, the phenom CPU was a big mess out of the gate and now the same thing is happening to the bulldozer. OH! im sorry we will have to wait for a new OS to truly see how BD performs. soory fanboisface it the only success AMD has now is because of ATI. while there dollar store CPUs continue to declineFAIL[/citation]

yes, you do have to wait, considering that we already have benchmarks on quasi bulldozer ready platforms thanks to linux, and there, bulldozer dose remarkably well. and if wondows 8 rumor of how it handles single thread applications is true... bulldozer could be looking great.

[citation][nom]ap3x[/nom]They run games just fine. What are you talking aboutAnd the PC will take up twice the room, have at least 7 different cables coming out of the back and collect dust on the inside like a vacuum cleaner. Apple does not make a tower machine for the mid market. They make the IMac and then the Mac Pro which is a professional workstation and no, you are not outrunning that thing unless you use your computer for games only. You are comparing Aa\pples to Oranges. Personally, I like both but I would choose between the two based on how I expect to use it. At the end of the day it is a tool.[/citation]

call me crazy, but when my webcam fails i like removing the webcam and sending it back, still having a computer to use.

i like having all the cables too, as each one of those isnt an integrated part, meaning that i can remove and replace almost anything at home.

but you have a point, some people need to have everything look immaculate and in their etes a computer tower is a worse problem in the world than cancer.

[citation][nom]sceen311[/nom]Hey new guy, try rendering in After Effects with Nvidia instead of an amd card. Some people actually use computers for useful things not just playing games, they're called grown ups.and I'm pretty sure diablo 3 runs fine on a mac.[/citation]

thats really the only reason that macs would need a non integrated gpu, considering they are always seen as "what the pros use"

 
"You can not play games on a mac" What a incredible piece of bullshit.
This indicates that most of the people just yell about everything, without doing their research.

The Apple Hardware is really powerful, you can buy Apple desktops with more then 8 cores for almost 6 years, while regular hardware is still on 4 or maybe 6 cores.
Mac's support things like SLI for years, you can run Windows on it like a regular desktop and play the games you want to play, you can run Linux on it and run everything you want to do on there.
So the only difference between a Desktop/Laptop and a Mac, is that you can not run Mac on a Desktop system (without doing weird things), and you can on a Mac!

I agree that Apple hardware is a little pricier then regular hardware, but my 2000 euro mac rig can outperform your desktop 2000 gaming rig every day.
Click to expand...
Crossfire 5770's vs sli 580s..............hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Conclusion: Failed trolling :pfff:
 
"According to Demerjin, part of the reason for the switch was an earlier decision not to use AMD microprocessors in the Macbook Air. The story goes that Apple and AMD were working on an AMD Llano-based MacBook Air last spring but the machine was cancelled despite being 'really, really close to production' because of supply issues."

Probably why AMD has stopped production of their CPU's at GlobalFoundries...
 
[citation][nom]SirDude0Lot[/nom]"You can not play games on a mac" What a incredible piece of bullshit.This indicates that most of the people just yell about everything, without doing their research.The Apple Hardware is really powerful, you can buy Apple desktops with more then 8 cores for almost 6 years, while regular hardware is still on 4 or maybe 6 cores.Mac's support things like SLI for years, you can run Windows on it like a regular desktop and play the games you want to play, you can run Linux on it and run everything you want to do on there.So the only difference between a Desktop/Laptop and a Mac, is that you can not run Mac on a Desktop system (without doing weird things), and you can on a Mac!I agree that Apple hardware is a little pricier then regular hardware, but my 2000 euro mac rig can outperform your desktop 2000 gaming rig every day.[/citation]

Dude...
Apple's OS uses x86 processors just like Windows does, their OS can only use the exact same CPU's that are available to PC users, no argument needed.

Apple has great products, but you have to admit that some components are very overpriced. Try building a Mac on Apple's website. The price increases they show to go from say, an i5-2500K to a i7-2600K, are much higher than the average $100 price increase it takes to do so on Newegg.
 
[citation][nom]ap3x[/nom]And the PC will take up twice the room, have at least 7 different cables coming out of the back and collect dust on the inside like a vacuum cleaner. Apple does not make a tower machine for the mid market. They make the IMac and then the Mac Pro which is a professional workstation and no, you are not outrunning that thing unless you use your computer for games only. You are comparing Aa\pples to Oranges. Personally, I like both but I would choose between the two based on how I expect to use it. At the end of the day it is a tool.[/citation]
That depends on the pc. There are tons of alternatives to the iMac, so uou have your issue with cables solved. The Mac Pro uses the same amount of cables as any other ordinary pc. About the dust that really depends on the case, there are quite a few PC cases that are just as good as the one in the Mac Pro, and some even better.

Of course a gaming PC will only have the advantage against the Mac Pro in gaming and if the Mac Pro has the original GPU. To compete against the Mac Pro there are tons of workstations from a variety of brands.
 
[citation][nom]molo9000[/nom]All desktop Macs except the Mac Pro use mobile CPUs[/citation]

I withdraw my statement! Should have looked that up first.
iMacs actually use desktop CPUs these days. When did that happen?
i5-2500S, i5-2400 or i7-2600 in the 27" model.

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]There are tons of alternatives to the iMac[/citation]

Sadly, not really. At least not for the 27" version. (why would anyone buy the 21.5" version?)
Asus is coming out with a 27" all-in-one soon, but I don't think anybody else makes an all-in-one this big or powerful.
 
So we're going back to making shitty Macbooks again...

NVIDIA chips are the reason why laptop makers were faced with class action lawsuit not that long ago, and are the major reason for failures in HP's high-selling, but low-reliability DV2000/6000/9000/6/7/9 line of notebooks. If you knew someone that had one, you know what I'm talking about. Tom's even had a video of a guy in Asia that took his HP notebook and slammed it on the floor of an HP office and went on a rant about the motherboard dying far too early. Honestly, over the course of about 4 years, I've seen probably 4-dozen DVx000 units with bad motherboards, and I RARELY see units come in for service that still work. If nothing comes up on the the screen at power-on, it's a bad board, and the most common were the AMD models because they used NVIDIA motherboard chipsets. I even sold a bunch of Compal whitebox Intel notebooks a couple of years ago because the specs were good (on paper), but of the couple dozen or so that I sold, EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. with an NVIDIA discrete GPU failed within 2 years time and cost me a huge amount of support hours.

This is why I won't trust NVIDIA anymore. I'm glad that they got out of the chipset business, but I still have no faith in the reliability of their GPU's.
 
"And the PC will take up twice the room, have at least 7 different cables coming out of the back and collect dust on the inside like a vacuum cleaner. Apple does not make a tower machine for the mid market. They make the IMac and then the Mac Pro which is a professional workstation and no, you are not outrunning that thing unless you use your computer for games only. You are comparing Aa\pples to Oranges. Personally, I like both but I would choose between the two based on how I expect to use it. At the end of the day it is a tool"


2000$ is a lot of money most people don't even think PC's are worth 1000$. And what happening when the mac breaks you have to send it in to apple or get a replacement.


'Hey new guy, try rendering in After Effects with Nvidia instead of an amd card. Some people actually use computers for useful things not just playing games, they're called grown ups.and I'm pretty sure diablo 3 runs fine on a mac."

HA HA i love people who think apple is better for anything when its not. the only reason why apple PC's exceed at some of these task is because they give them 16GB of ram and put a 8 core in their PC. Really has nothing to do with the OS. And when the Amd radeon 7000 HD cards come out they might even be as good as nvidia at more computing tasks.


"This is why I won't trust NVIDIA anymore. I'm glad that they got out of the chipset business, but I still have no faith in the reliability of their GPU's."

BS Nvidia is just as good if not better then amd on certain things. All companies do things that they should't including Intel,Amd,Nvidia and just about any company.
 
Nvidia chipsets & graphics have about a 10 times higher failure rate than AMD. I've been repairing PCS for the last 12 years. I keep my equipment for an average of 4 years so I would never consider Nvidia.
 
[citation][nom]rpp[/nom]but macs rock i hate windows but why bother?Macs cant run gamesi have a big windows 7 gameing rig but you jmmy-bee dont understand its apple that can make gpus but is lazy and does not steve jobs said apple will make gpus in 2010 but apple still does not make gpus .sad times for AMD...and it's tough for them, poor chaps. Nvidia's twice as big in terms of capital and Intel's 30 times bigger.I think the only thing stopping Intel/Nvidia from buying AMD/ATI is an anti-trust lawsuit. and nintendo uses ati for the wii and used to for the gamecube and uses amd for the ds lite uses nvidia for dsi dsixl and 3ds but the big nintendo can make gpus but is lazy like apple the g15 a keybord uses ati mircosoft uses there own gpu[/citation]
...Whoa.
That right there is the pinnacle of all comments I've heard thus far.
 
[citation][nom]molo9000[/nom]Why is there always a discussion about Bulldozer whenever there is news about AMD?Apple has absolutely no interest in AMD desktop or server/workstation CPUs.All desktop Macs except the Mac Pro use mobile CPUs and the Mac Pro will probably use Xeons until hell freezes over.[/citation]

The iMacs have desktop processors as well, tho they have mobile gpus.
 
ok, I have one question for you all involved in this flame war, I just want to know one thing: Why does everyone get so defensive when one speaks their opinion?

 
[citation][nom]molo9000[/nom]Why is there always a discussion about Bulldozer whenever there is news about AMD?Apple has absolutely no interest in AMD desktop or server/workstation CPUs.All desktop Macs except the Mac Pro use mobile CPUs and the Mac Pro will probably use Xeons until hell freezes over.[/citation]
Only the Mac mini uses a mobile CPU. All iMacs use a desktop CPU. However all Macs with the exception of the Mac Pro come with a mobile GPU.
 
[citation][nom]molo9000[/nom]I withdraw my statement! Should have looked that up first.iMacs actually use desktop CPUs these days. When did that happen?i5-2500S, i5-2400 or i7-2600 in the 27" model.Sadly, not really. At least not for the 27" version. (why would anyone buy the 21.5" version?)Asus is coming out with a 27" all-in-one soon, but I don't think anybody else makes an all-in-one this big or powerful.[/citation]
If I remember correctly Apple first used it's first Intel desktop CPUs on the iMac in 2008 and the last iMac to use a mobile CPU was launched in 2009. Since then all iMacs use a desktop CPU.
 
[citation][nom]jdwii[/nom]"This is why I won't trust NVIDIA anymore. I'm glad that they got out of the chipset business, but I still have no faith in the reliability of their GPU's."

BS Nvidia is just as good if not better then amd on certain things. All companies do things that they should't including Intel,Amd,Nvidia and just about any company.[/citation]

No, NVIDIA got out of the chipset BECAUSE of their high failure rates. AMD chipsets are far more reliable.
 
[citation][nom]eightyfour[/nom]this means is that you're now overpaying for slightly different hardware?[/citation]

I believe everyone was already overpaying for the hardware they were getting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom