NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Apple Forums › Apple Notebooks › WHy didnt apple switch to AMD and Intel
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WHy didnt apple switch to AMD and Intel - Page 2

post #21 of 31
9/4/05 at 11:24pm
Thank God someone finally put Laptop<3 in his place on the whole Intel Pentium M thing. I personally love what AMD has done with their chips and I also like the fact that they are finally getting into some good competition with Intel in the chip market. I cannot wait until AMD moves into the 65 nm manufacturing process with their dual core Turion chips, then we will see some really good competition. It will not be long before AMD is able to produce a superior mobel processor that will outperform Intel in every aspect. Cross your fingers everyone, the day of AMD is upon us.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 31
9/5/05 at 3:23am
The only problem with AMD is that they can't come close to Intel as far as capacity, which means they're not able to offer the bulk discounts like Intel does on their chips—especially their dual cores which are at least twice as expensive as Intel's.

The day of AMD will only happen when they're able to convince major computer makers, that one, they have the capacity to supply them with as many chips as they need, two, they're able to offer the rock bottom prices that Intel can, and three, that they should use AMD for most, if not all, of their future computers.

If AMD can convince Dell to introduce even one major computer model with an AMD chip they'll have a pretty good food in the door.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 31
9/5/05 at 4:34am
I am sure the only reason Apple won't be using AMD chips is because Intel won't let them (see the amd lawsuit). AMD has a new fab comming online very soon and will have more then enough capacity to contribute to some of Apple's new x86 line.

IMO AMD simply makes a better product. Intel just does not have anything going for them except hyperthreading for those that can use it and the P-M (which is by far the best cpu Intel is making).

I will admit I am a big fan of AMD's products. I bought my first AMD, a K6-2 and havn't looked back. (ok so i have a dell..the ONLY reason I have a dell is because the gave me a credit account but best buy wouldnt so I could get the Gateway A64 laptop I really wanted). Right now I have 5 desktops in my house all are AMD's.

Quote:
If AMD can convince Dell to introduce even one major computer model with an AMD chip they'll have a pretty good food in the door.
Right now the only thing I could see comming from Dell would be a 2-way opteron server with dual-core cpu's. Intel is still months away from dual-core xeons and those will be slapped together almost as bad as the pentium-d's were just to make Dell happy.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 31
9/5/05 at 4:40am
Thread Starter 
Once amd comes out iwht a prduct that is faster per watt than the pentium M youll see my hands all over it. I despise intel but pentium m offers the same prefromance of not better than turon at a lot less heat and more battery life. Trust me i am waiting to what amd has up their sleves there not stupid you know. Ooh as for desktop Amd is a no branier.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 31
9/5/05 at 5:58am
sorienor, just because we pounced on the guy spouting pro-Intel doesn't mean we're pro-AMD. I also had a K6-2, and it was crap--more because of the speed than the build of the chip. Besides which, AMD has remained pretty much subpar compared to Intel until recently (the past few years), where they've really made leaps and bounds. One reason they might have preferred the Pentium M over the Turion was because the speed could be controlled much more easily, or that they could be manufacturered faster, run cooler, or any variety of reasons. The fact is, nobody knows.

Also, I think you guys need to get your prices straight. The brand spanking new Turion MT-37, the low wattage 2.0ghz processor from AMD, goes for a whopping $25 less than the equivalent Pentium M. It's not exactly going to make the difference between sending the kids to college and getting a faster processor. This is also assuming the Turion retails for that much, and THAT isn't even including bulk. I'm sure that Intel's higher production status enables it to give much lower quotes than AMD.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 31
9/5/05 at 9:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tntoak
Actually, Apple is buying PPC chips through 2008. Apple is not switching "completely" to Intel until that contract has expired. Even Apple has confirmed this one.
It's for warranty purposes.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 31
9/5/05 at 2:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmumba
sorienor, just because we pounced on the guy spouting pro-Intel doesn't mean we're pro-AMD. I also had a K6-2, and it was crap--more because of the speed than the build of the chip. Besides which, AMD has remained pretty much subpar compared to Intel until recently (the past few years), where they've really made leaps and bounds. One reason they might have preferred the Pentium M over the Turion was because the speed could be controlled much more easily, or that they could be manufacturered faster, run cooler, or any variety of reasons. The fact is, nobody knows.
1. I think AMD has had a better cpu since the release of the Athlon. The only time AMD's were slower then Intel is when the 800fsb Northwoods were out and before the release of the A64..about a year and a half out of the last 6.

2. The OP was asking why there were not gonna be AMD Apples, I tried to answer that.

3. There are gonna be x86 desktops as well as laptops. I don't know if Apple is gonna be using the P-M in desktops or not - if not why not get the better product: AMD? And what about servers? There is very, very few people who says Intel has better server chips right now.

4. I will admit I am an AMD fanboy but I don't think there was really much Intel bashing in my post. At least not as much as there could have been
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 31
9/6/05 at 12:27am
AMD won the lawsuit, IIRC. Intel is no longer allowed to force companies to use them and only them. Which is good; it's anti competitive of Intel to bully companies into only using their product.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 31
9/6/05 at 5:22pm
Quote:

Apparently, Steve Jobs doesn't agree, because he considered AMD but decided that they would not be able to offer the same offer as INtel--mainly due to the fact that AMD's processing lines are much smaller than INtel's (Intel still makes up 85% of current computer sales, despite many people's beliefs). Saying that Apple didn't compare the two processors is ridiculous, seeing as Apple is a huge company, and they're far from being idiots.
You said he considered AMD, but there is nothing saying Jobs actually TALKED to AMD. Besides, when Apple has been working directly with Intel on OSX x86 since OSX was first released, I'd say there was a significant comfort level with Intel's products that did not exist with AMD because of the lack of discussion.

And as much as I like Apple's products, I do take contention with your blanket statement that Apple wouldn't do anything stupid because "they're not idiots". The Mac clone debacle, the Newton, the G3 Cube, John Sculley & Gil Amelio all come to mind as examples where Apple messed up royally.

Kakaze,

The lawsuit hasn't even gone to trial yet - Intel just submitted their pretrial brief last week, in which they denied more charges than were made in the initial complaint.
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 31
9/6/05 at 6:48pm
Well something happened because I remember it being in the news that Intel wasn't allowed to make companies exclusive to them anymore.
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 31
9/7/05 at 6:45pm
Kakaze,

The ONLY ruling to date against Intel was by the Japanese Fair Trade Commission. It has no bearing on Intel's practices outside Japan. Currently, you have the US case awaiting a trial date in Deleware, the EU beginning to investigate Intel's practices in Europe, and the South Korean government investigating Intel as well. Intel can still offer inducements and pressure OEMs to use only Intel products in the US, pending the outcome of the Delaware case.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Apple Notebooks
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Apple Forums › Apple Notebooks › WHy didnt apple switch to AMD and Intel