>Apple will still use x86
Other urls found in this thread:
twitter.com
arstechnica.com
gizmodo.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
>implying in thread title
so custom amd chips
najs
custom VIA chips?
pls be true
So custom chips from AMD then, like the consoles have.
>Apple realizing they can buy cheap AMD chips and cut their overhead even more
>iToddlers will defend this
Intel hasn't sued AMD for the THATIC deal. It might be a deal akin to that but it seems unlike Apple.
>Apple isn't updating its macbook lineup to current gen quad cores so they can give AMD the credit for the performance boost
Devilish.
They will buy VIA.
Their new gen will support everything current CPUs do.
I'd like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as x86 is actually AMD64
Apple have been using AMD for years
They work nice as Planned obsolescence GPUs.
BGA GPU dies, rip motherboard unless you get a donor board + $300 for paying to someone to do it.
noice
>apple wants to license x86
>intel raises the price of license to offset loss from CPU supplier contract
I guess there's some logic to this now that Ryzen is a proven success and AMD has successfully shipped multiple custom APUs for Sony and MS.
Underrated.
I'd like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as x86 is actually x86/64, or as I've recently liked to call it, x86+64.
that's good
Why does everyone assume custom and not just normal amd shit? They didn't use some sort of super seekrit speshul shit with intel. My macbook air runs a plain old i5.
Apple will switch to amd and then charge 3x as much as they are retail (like they do with intel, if you take two models of macbook where the only difference is cpu and use the price difference as the cost of going from i5 to i7) so when it really comes down to it you're buying a regular laptop with shitty thermals (though really comfy keyboard and trackpad, it's the first laptop I've owned in 20 years that I don't use an extra mouse) for way more than it should cost based on parts.
At least with PPC you couldn't just build the same machine with off the shelf hardware and get pissed at the markup... That and being about 1.5x as fast as a comparable x86 chip in it's hey day (i.e. 100MHz PPC would match 150MHz x86 in benchmarks)
>twitter.com
x86 is the base instructionset, amd64 took the old design and just expanded the registers
>Use cheaper AMD chips
>Laptop gets a price hike
Sasuga, Apple
Hopefully it’ll be AMD CPU+GPU Apple computers.
interesting take... you might be onto something.
If this is the case, then the whole thing is just a ruse to squeeze Intel for cheaper chips.
Some user in the other thread said that it would be a custom x86 chip made by AMD with special branding.
Also
would be hilarious
Because AMD already does custom GPU's for Apple so they can avoid direct price/performance comparison and justify the retarded price tag, notice how in every comparison between a Mac pro and a equivalent PC the GPU is the most expensive component and if you remove it from the equation the Mac it's like 4 times more expensive.
They always try to use some absolutely absurd GPU typically found in CGI and simulation workstations, I'm guessing so they can try to schlock them off to DreamWorks and Pixar. But you're right, remove that fancy GPU and a Mac pro has the equivalent specs of a mid range pedestal server or workstation that costs like a grand, and they want you to pay 4k or more for it.
I miss the old Mac pro form factor where you'd get multiple xeons with a shitload of cores. Like the 2x12 core Xeon Mac pro my old boss had for a server (though he dumped macOS and put RHEL on it bc he was sick of 1/16 of his RAM being eaten up by aqua, quartz, etc when he ran it headless)
Apple always does custom if possible to make direct 1-to-1 comparison with commodity hardware impossible.
Oh boy, then building Ryzen now is worth it.
does that dude not know how to read?
>Decent AMD ultrabook.
The Lenovo 720s is garbage. An AMD powered macbook will be my first Apple product.
Apple is going to buy AMD?
He's a dirty italian mongoloid so no
They are going for that ARM shit they developed
Maybe x86 CPU with custom specifications and modifications by Apple but made by AMD?
>tfw this can really happen in your lifetime
I had a giggle
x86-64, or more correctly amd64 did more than just expand the registers. I'd like you to refer to amd64 as an extrension to x86 in the future and not undersell the advancements.
?? nVidia had more problems than AMD with this. It wasn't necessarily the GPU vendors at fault either, as the lead-free solder at the time was very new and not particularly well developed.
AMD CPUs and INTEL GPUs
Next Macbook will run X10 chip.
Intel BTFO.
Not only that, x86 and x86_64 are just the instruction sets. AMD has been designing and manufacturing their own silicon since the AM386-DX series in 1991.
exactly what they did with powerPC desu
this is very good though. Maybe Macbooks will be unique for once. Hopefully we'll see a Powerbook style laptop for once too. Is it too much to ask for a nipple?
>intel is fucked
>VIA is chinese, who cares?
It's AMD or IBM.
.. or apple, since they have high performance ARM chips now.
>ARM
>high performance
I bought 1000 shares of AMD when it was $1.94
Apple buying AMD would be the single greatest thing that could possibly happen to me.
>add AMD
>all of a sudden poo/g/eet AMD shills eat it up despite always shitting on Apple
Really makes you think
Why would Apple change to Intel GPU?
>change to
90% of their computers already use Intel GPUs
he means change from AMD GPUs to Intel GPUs
Post YFW when Apple will finally start using AMD Ryzen processors and we will finally get quad core for entry level macbooks and 8 core for macbook pro
Fuck me in the eth0 aleksi
No, it's x86_64
Apple adopting Ryzen would be fucking huge for AMD
100% of all Apple computers use AMD GPU.
AMD wants to pull an ARM here.
"planning to use its own chips" could mean anything so long as they stick an apple-designed chip in. In fact, this has already happened with that T2 chip in the iMac Pro.
I'm not sure if AMD's chips are low power enough to replace the Y-series chips in the 12" macbook.
It would make more sense for Apple to move to ARM chips in their low-power laptops because their A-series are more powerful than Intel's offerings in those power/thermal restrictions.
Man remember altivec? I miss the times when I believed the apple reality distortion field.
>somebody gets desktop linux to run on ARM
>no one cares
>microsoft gets ARM version of windows with full x86 emulation/compatibility to run on SD835 devices with actual hardware available to purchase within a month
>a few people clap
>some no source rumor states apple will copy linux/ms and also make their desktop os for ARM
>mactard pajeets shit their streets and claim it will be the second coming of christ
ALTIVEC STRONK
-Posted with a Motorola ppc7447, also known as the best CPU ever.
Altivec was a solid answer to SSE.
Without it, PPC would get rip to shreds by pentium 3.
Nowadays all CPUs (except for the WiiU one) support something like it.
I do not like Apple but AMD could use the revenue now that they are close to Intel's offerings, but cheaper.
>emulation
Nope. Intel is claiming patent on x86 emulation too.
arstechnica.com
If Apple moved to AMD, I don't think AMD would make very much margin on CPU sales. It would be good for them in turnover numbers, but they wouldn't be making all that much money.
It do smell like IP sale, like with the ARM CPUs.
In this case, it would be apple that would pay for the manufacturing etc.. of the chips, just like happens with their ARM SoCs.
AMD would pretty much just get the money without moving a finger.
Seems MS told Intel to fuck off or they're willing to take the legal penalties to get their devices out.
gizmodo.com
>Seems MS told Intel to fuck off or they're willing to take the legal penalties to get their devices out.
I'm in agreement with MS on that....
But I seriously want the Mac to fully merge with the iPad so that we don't have to deal with those insufferable cunts. Plus, it would be good for Linux.
I see this going in a few different ways
>Apple just forgets about thunderbolt and Macbook Pro 2020 doesn't even have a replacement
>Thunderbolt 3.x works on AMD
>Apple/AMD make their own Thunderbolt competitor for eGPU and docking
This would actually be good. CPU + GPU advancement would be through the roof in the following years. Only issue is if Apple keeps AMD separate or not.
Amd shills living on arms like usual. Apple will never use amd povery teir chips
I would almost buy a Mac Mini with a Ryzen APU, but I don't buy apple products so...
APPLES A11 CHIPS ARE FASTER THAN INTEL CHIPS IN GEEKBENCH!
This is why no one takes technology illiterate iToddlers seriously.
I'm sure Apple is content waiting until Hell'sfrozenoverlake for LPDDR4 support.
Apple's "own chips" are currently customized ARMs
They're doing to do what they've been doing, but integrate it more. They're going to make an in-house x86 chip with discrete AMD graphics (like the new intel/AMD APUs) and an ARM co-processor (like the latest macbook has) to seamlessly run iphone/ipad apps.
>IN GEEKBENCH
lmao, and appleltards still wonder why everyone thinks they are gay brainlets
It's going to be Zhaoxins
If that were possible Nvidia would have bought VIA ages ago. The x86 licenses prevent transfer of ownership through corporate take over. If apple buys via the license goes away.
>Implying this means implying
A
M
D
What am I missing here? Aren't even arm more capable than 4gb ram x86?
Nvidia is the killer of t61p laptops
what the fuck are you on about
where did they find an x86 license?
x86 can support 4gb ram max?
Macbook Pro, now with soldered 2200G/2400G varient APUs!
DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
en.wikipedia.org
Hasnt been a problem since mid 2000s
>also known as Intel 64
This is a different architecture, it's not x86.
Besides the x64, you can also use PAE.
>amd64? you mean Intel 64?
and lead free solder is still a cancer to this day.
That's a little disappointing. If there's one thing Apple is good at, it's forcing new tech with no backwards compatibility and then slowly making others adopt it. I would've liked to see a big competitor to x86 on the desktop.
Kinda like they did by adopting x86?
it's nothing to do with making others adopt tech of their choice. their end game is to get Macs to run iOS so their whole ecosystem becomes a locked down iTurd
APPLE could use x86-64
why not?>I would've liked to see a big competitor to x86 on the desktop.
>apple
>competitor in the desktop space
>ever
no