Could this be the New Mac architecture?

hulkaros

hulkaros

The Incredible...
AMD - nVidia - Apple...

I CAN'T say from where I heard it but let's just say that more likely THIS is the real deal! And NO I'm NOT making this up!


NOTE: If this thing IS going to happen, I prefer AMD and NOT intel and also I hope Apple will have all the saying and not other clone-makers... including AMD and nVidia partners! Also, I wanted Apple NOT to chose the x86 architecture and give a shot to quad G4 boxes instead :(

I REALLY hope my source is ALL wrong, really :(
 
Rumor or not, let's say it would happen...

I really don't belive it would be x86 architecture - I think it would be either Intel or AMD making a processor FOR Apple (ala IBM PowerPC G3 when they where ALSO making x86 processors for PCs), not Apple using an "Off-the shelf" processor from Intel or AMD...

At least... I hope not! :p
 
<quote>I really don't belive it would be x86 architecture - I think it would be either Intel or AMD making a processor FOR Apple (ala IBM PowerPC G3 when they where ALSO making x86 processors for PCs), not Apple using an "Off-the shelf" processor from Intel or AMD...</quote>

If AMD were to produce a CPU for Apple, it would probably be very similar if not the same, as the X86 processor. Cost containment would be the reason. Which would be good for Apple as well. A less expensive processor makes for a less expensive computer. If they do go with AMD and use the same processor, the bios and firmware would still be for Apple.

So OS X would still require an Apple to run. Although I'm still unsure if this is a good thing or not. I know a LOT of people that would drop Windows in a second if they could run OS X on their PC. It really comes down to whether selling enough copies of OS X for PC's would make up for the loss in Apple hardware sales. I honestly think it would be possible for Apple to sell OS X for PC's without harming their hardware sales.
 
Originally posted by Tormente
I really don't belive it would be x86 architecture - I think it would be either Intel or AMD making a processor FOR Apple (ala IBM PowerPC G3 when they where ALSO making x86 processors for PCs), not Apple using an "Off-the shelf" processor from Intel or AMD...
Click to expand...

If AMD were to produce a CPU for Apple, it would probably be very similar if not the same, as the X86 processor. Cost containment would be the reason. Which would be good for Apple as well. A less expensive processor makes for a less expensive computer. If they do go with AMD and use the same processor, the bios and firmware would still be for Apple.

So OS X would still require an Apple to run. Although I'm still unsure if this is a good thing or not. I know a LOT of people that would drop Windows in a second if they could run OS X on their PC. It really comes down to whether selling enough copies of OS X for PC's would make up for the loss in Apple hardware sales. I honestly think it would be possible for Apple to sell OS X for PC's without harming their hardware sales.
 
Regardless... if apple did use an x86 architecture clones WILL appear. Bios and firmware are easy to flash. If it needed a special chip to run imagine how fast it would appear on ebay. I, for one, would actualy build one. Not to take buisiness from apple... just to say that I did it.
 
AMD, nVidia and Apple ARE working together. In a consortium about bus architecture. It has nothing to do with Apple choosing an AMD chip for Macintosh computers.
 
Originally posted by hulkaros
AMD - nVidia - Apple...

I CAN'T say from where I heard it but let's just say that more likely THIS is the real deal! And NO I'm NOT making this up!


NOTE: If this thing IS going to happen, I prefer AMD and NOT intel and also I hope Apple will have all the saying and not other clone-makers... including AMD and nVidia partners! Also, I wanted Apple NOT to chose the x86 architecture and give a shot to quad G4 boxes instead :(

I REALLY hope my source is ALL wrong, really :(
Click to expand...

And I should buy this BS because you think? Or heard somewhere? It's a figment of you imagination. Show some proof next time.

On a lighter side, I do recall hearing of those three companies playing a part in a group on a new bus architecture...kinda like the many numerous other "standards" and technology groups Apple belong to.
 
Originally posted by fryke
Yes, as recently as ONE BLOODY POST ABOVE YOURS! :)
Click to expand...

Sorry, replied to the original forum message before I saw yours, so calm down.
 
...
1. I didn't make this up
2. I don't want this thing to happen
3. It will NOT be a FULL transition to x86 platform (Apple supposedly will use technologies that WE ALL know is developing along AMD & nVidia)
4. The rumor(?!) goes something like this: Apple will use in the next incarnation of Macs technologies which they developed and still are being developed (and will continue to do so) by Apple-AMD-nVidia for Mac-ONLY products and NOT that they will go x86 crazy... Which are those technologies? Could they be CPUs? Mainboards? Sound systems? Graphics? All at the same time? Or something TOTALLY knew? If you read my first post I was describing the possible next Apple architecture for Macs and NOT a possible x86 transition ;)

As for what I think it really DOESN'T matter as well as it really DOESN'T matter what the non-believers are thinking... :D

I just posted what I've heard from a source... If my source is reliable or not I think we ALL going to find out in the next 3-4 months and then we will see who is imagining things and who knows things :cool:

Isn't this supposedly a Mac Rumors & News forum? So there... :) :p :D ;) :cool:
 
justa question, but aren't the AMD processors really RISC chips that do "code morphing" (I think that's the marketing term) to emulate the x86 architecture....

My guess is that this would involve some sort of performance penalty. It might make sense for apple to use AMD's chips in their native mode. This would mean cheaper chips for apple and better performance on the same chip than other OSs using the X86 instructions while at the same time keeping the CPU tied to apple software....

that might be an interesting possibility for the looong term. Right now I'm hoping that 1 quarter next year moto/IBM/someone comes up with something...
 
don't yell at me if i sound like a newbi but...

why an't apple make an x86 port for PC's?

why wouldn't the software work?

:confused:
 
I think that the real sticking point is classic. It would have to be truly dead for apple to switch architectures (can anyone say Quark!).

I think that once this happens, apple will have options (as steve obliquely pointed out).
 
Originally posted by JetosX
don't yell at me if i sound like a newbi but...

why an't apple make an x86 port for PC's?

why wouldn't the software work?

:confused:
Click to expand...

Search through the older messages in the forum, esp. about 3 months back and you'll have days of reading about that subject.
 
I would like to see AMD making chips with the PowerPC achitechture, but I know why that won't happen. IBM/Motorolla have that, and anyway, isn't the PowerPC architechture what's limiting the speeds of the macs already?

I just don't want to have to go though a transition like the 68k to PPC again.
 
... isn't the PowerPC architechture what's limiting the speeds of the macs already?

The real limiter on the speed is Motorola themselves. As stated numerous times in previous posts in theis forum, they receive little income from the sale of these chips vs. some of their other products. Good business sense dictates they focus more attention on the other, big money making areas. While Motorola struggled on 500 - 700mhz range G4's IBM already had produced 1ghz G3's. Apple couldn't let their "comsumer" models be faster (or seem faster) than their "pro/business" models.

We do not need X86 architecture on our Macs, what we need is for Motorola to straighten up or get off the train. Let IBM develop and produce the chips, or make a new alliance. Maybe Apple/IBM/AMD...I do think AMD has the ability to manufacture the chips for Apple per PowerPC specs more efficently and quicker than Motorola (more than Motorola does now, they do have the rescources to do it much faster but don't).
 
AMD is DRM, just as much as Intel. I do NOT want my CPU made by them.

But if I'm reading this right, AMD is providing new bus architecture, not chip design? Then the rumors about an IBM chip could still be true. AMD and nVidia on a bus design that possibly does graphic computations while data is transfered from the disk to processor?

People have jumped off the "bus bottleneck" argument that was all the rage this time last year but it still seems a valid point. Especially since DDR RAM isn't providing the expected boost.

Current excuses:
1.) Motorola cares about small, energy efficient chips which is why Macs are slow.
2.) The bus is restricting the movement of data on the motherboard
3.) The unix core of OS X is memory intensive so it writes to disk (virtual ram) too often and slow disk write speed becomes a factor.

Anything else apple should focus on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top