So how would you guys feel if the next imac had an AMD inside. I feel like it would be a step backwards performance wise. The only advantage I could see would be if we got new ATi graphics sooner then later. The current imacs can have 4850's in them but desktop graphics have had the 5000 series for a while. I do plan on buying a new desktop with in the next 1-2 years. I would personally rather have an intel mac over an amd one.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AMD iMac
- Thread starter shujin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I always enjoyed the speed and performance from old gaming pc that used an AMD processor. No complaints here.
I could see AMDs being used for the lower end machines on Apples scale, could help introduce lower cost macs without terrible performance.
the AMD machines do feel as though they are performing better gaming wise, that must just be their "thing". but clock for clock wise, they just do not perform. the latest server and consumer CPUs are quiet horrid when compared to intel - they just cant keep up at this rate.
for the lower ended machines, such as the mini/MB, i would be happy having a low end (cheap) AMD machine avaiable to purchase - it might get even more "switchers"
nice one
i order the first amd Mac , no matter what mac it might be and no matter what it costs ,
because amd processor and ati graphic cards work much better together , as they are made to work together as a team and not like two separate devices
the phenom2 might not be as fast as the i7 , but the saving should enable apple to put the savings towards the graphic card the iMac would deserve a ati radeon hd 5970 which would make the gamers and people who actually need graphic performance very happy and there is enough space in in the 27"iMac
only one thing the psu should be upgraded too... as the hd 5970 card will draw most of the energy of the current psu
because amd processor and ati graphic cards work much better together , as they are made to work together as a team and not like two separate devices
the phenom2 might not be as fast as the i7 , but the saving should enable apple to put the savings towards the graphic card the iMac would deserve a ati radeon hd 5970 which would make the gamers and people who actually need graphic performance very happy and there is enough space in in the 27"iMac
only one thing the psu should be upgraded too... as the hd 5970 card will draw most of the energy of the current psu
the AMD machines do feel as though they are performing better gaming wise, that must just be their "thing". but clock for clock wise, they just do not perform. the latest server and consumer CPUs are quiet horrid when compared to intel - they just cant keep up at this rate.
for the lower ended machines, such as the mini/MB, i would be happy having a low end (cheap) AMD machine avaiable to purchase - it might get even more "switchers"
nice one
Actually gaming wise I have read reports that most people are using Nvidia and Intel in their gaming machines. I feel like the saying that AMD is good for gaming was true about four years ago but not now. Though I do agree if apple wanted to make a more PROFITABLE mac it would be powered by an AMD chip. But then again I feel like that would be following the dell method of building pcs. Apple doesn't follow that method at all.
AMD's are SWEET Processors! They are SOOO much better than intel!
I have always had an AMD windows machine. They run quicker, quieter and cooler than Intel. And I always use ATI graphics cards as well.
How can you say that they don't DoFoT9? They have such better chip sets than Intel.
I would love to see them switch and become great again!
I have always had an AMD windows machine. They run quicker, quieter and cooler than Intel. And I always use ATI graphics cards as well.
How can you say that they don't DoFoT9? They have such better chip sets than Intel.
I would love to see them switch and become great again!
Lol, you mean back when Intel had netburst architecture and AMD riding high with Athlon 64s right? Intel had performance lead ever since Core 2 came out, and more power efficient also.
Only segment that AMD is competitive is desktop market, with Phenom IIs having pretty good performance/price ratio. On laptop scene, AMD is way behind intel.
I do love their GPU line though, I have 5870 on my core i7 gaming rig and what a great decision it was, instead of waiting for Nvidia Fermi.
As far as performance, I have a 3.2 GHz dual-core Windsor in my former gaming machine; thing owns at 1680x1050 with an 8800GT. No AA, but Source games run like butter on it. Only real complaint is more directed at boardmakers, I've gone through one mobo and parts on the second are dying. Teach me to buy (Brand X) boards. Still, I would say that its easily outperformed by several Intel parts (not to mention, based on 90 nm, its a heater).
To the point, though; I've heard around that the newest AMD processors are comparable to C2D chips. So not much new for the iMac.
I'd like to see AMD chipsets supported natively though, it would make things far easier for an AMD-based render node (price of Thuban compared to the price of Gulftown? I'm a student, d*mmit)
Using AMD apple could finally introduce a mid-range desktop system.. I can't really see them in an iMac i'm afraid.
AMD make pretty good chips; people often forget that Intel have multibillion R&D budgets so the fact AMD are getting shaken down when it comes to market is unsurprising. They can develop in months what AMD takes years. If Apple push more budget into AMD's R&D we might see something good.
I don't think Steve is compassionate enough to give them a chance. But if Apple give AMD a chance it'd validate AMD in the eyes of a *lot* of Manufactures, Companies and Consumers.
But.. cheaper mac pro, a mid range desktop or XServ are where i see AMD appearing
AMD make pretty good chips; people often forget that Intel have multibillion R&D budgets so the fact AMD are getting shaken down when it comes to market is unsurprising. They can develop in months what AMD takes years. If Apple push more budget into AMD's R&D we might see something good.
I don't think Steve is compassionate enough to give them a chance. But if Apple give AMD a chance it'd validate AMD in the eyes of a *lot* of Manufactures, Companies and Consumers.
But.. cheaper mac pro, a mid range desktop or XServ are where i see AMD appearing
Intlel CPU's are better then AMD nowadays, since the introduction of the Core lineup. Nvidia always used to be the preferred GPU's for gamers but the new Fermi's are stupidly hot and power hungry and still can't match the Radeon 5970 (or the cheaper 5870 half the time).
well.. to be honest.. even my imac 4850 would kill @1050p with no AA... comparing a product that has been superseeded 3 times doesnt really constitute anything, especially when your comparing it to a game that was made what - +5 years ago?
im sorry nate, but you sound like you know nothing about CPUs. the AMD line up is getting KILLED clock for clock. sure, they might be 6-core (server side) which beat the intels - but clock for clock they have nothing on the intel CPUs. price wise yea AMD rules, intel has the majority and therefore set the pricetags unfortunately!
yea profitable.. but thats a lot of work for apple to do - and i wouldnt buy it to be honest. seems like such a waste of investment.
I agree with OP.
I think teaming up with AMD would be a mistake, unless they offered some of AMD's best chips on very low end models, and just get rid of C2D.
To me it really doesn't look like Apple will be teaming up with AMD anytime soon, since they just came out with the new MBPs with intel chips in them.
I really hope Apple continue their healthy partnership with intel and not even thinking of offering AMD processors in any of their computers.
I think teaming up with AMD would be a mistake, unless they offered some of AMD's best chips on very low end models, and just get rid of C2D.
To me it really doesn't look like Apple will be teaming up with AMD anytime soon, since they just came out with the new MBPs with intel chips in them.
I really hope Apple continue their healthy partnership with intel and not even thinking of offering AMD processors in any of their computers.
L4D2 is a 2009 game, IIRC.
I should've made myself a bit more to the point by saying that AMDs stuff can game, as you said, but I completely forgot to compare it to the performance of a different computer; in essence, a lower-clocked processor of the same era doing exactly what you said, outperforming the AMD.
Gonna second this, unless AMD is going to be far more competitive when Global Foundries opens up their new fabs (IIRC 2011-12?).
well from that era, it would roughly be from the C2D machines - so yes i still expect the Intel CPUs to "beat" the AMD CPUs.
tbh, doesnt look like it
Have you been hiding under a rock? Intel have been supierior for many years now. Overclock an i7 quad core to 4Ghz and it's all over red rover.
There is always the chance that the anti-trust folks are getting on Apple's back for being Intel exclusive.
Just a few months ago AMD won a major anti-trust case against intel and their anti-competitive measures (people don't use AMD chips because they are 'bad' they don't use them because OEMs are wrapped around intel's finger)
So there is a plausibility that Apple might introduce an AMD machine in some obscure fashion just to appease them.
Just a few months ago AMD won a major anti-trust case against intel and their anti-competitive measures (people don't use AMD chips because they are 'bad' they don't use them because OEMs are wrapped around intel's finger)
So there is a plausibility that Apple might introduce an AMD machine in some obscure fashion just to appease them.
Wouldn't there be a problem running windows as well
Didn't the move from powerpc to intel open the door to windows/bootcamp
Didn't the move from powerpc to intel open the door to windows/bootcamp
What anti-trust?!? Apple owns less than 10% of the computer market!
As things are now, no one can dictate what type of processor Apple uses except Steve Jobs.
Wouldn't there be a problem running windows as well
Didn't the move from powerpc to intel open the door to windows/bootcamp
uummm.... can you not run windows on AMD based computers? silly billy.
tbh, doesnt look like it
Yeah, the possibility is slim. If for some reason Apple wanted all quad-cores in their iMac lineup, maintaining their current margins and volume sales would be pretty hard to do (unless hey started using C2Q), but the chances of that happening are slim as well.
Speculation on this entire Apple-in-negotiations-with-AMD might have more to do with graphics then processors... unless its just poking Intel in the ribs for only offering a mobile platform with an intergrated GPU, IIRC. Which is much more what this seems like then anything else.
I think that having some AMD based systems could help Apple offer lower cost Macs. Having more choices is definitely a good thing. Granted, from what I've seen in the last several years, AMD processors have not been able to keep up with Intel's, but they have priced their offerings accordingly and sometimes offers good value.
Another benefit that an alliance with AMD could bring is current generation ATI graphic cards. It sucks that Apple users always seem to be about a generation behind when it comes to graphics cards.
Another benefit that an alliance with AMD could bring is current generation ATI graphic cards. It sucks that Apple users always seem to be about a generation behind when it comes to graphics cards.
Well, AMD makes okay desktop chips but pretty hot for other than Mac Pros. In mobile chips they are WAY behind Intel (think they top out at 2.4GHz dual core?).
Apple would also have to update OS X to support AMD which may not be very small task.
I personally doubt this very much, mainly because AMD is behind Intel and as seen in new MBPs, Apple continues to use nVidia. IF Apple would use AMD, they would make a deal and use only ATI as well to get better deals (all from same company)
Apple would also have to update OS X to support AMD which may not be very small task.
I personally doubt this very much, mainly because AMD is behind Intel and as seen in new MBPs, Apple continues to use nVidia. IF Apple would use AMD, they would make a deal and use only ATI as well to get better deals (all from same company)
i do agree, a low end, low powered, cheap iMac AMD machine (or macbook/macbook pro) would attract alot of attention from potential noobie switchers
yup id agree with everything you just said there. (Y)
ohhhh yea, making OSX compatible with AMD is a HUGE task. apple is working on iphone os4 versions now, and they dont have many other workers lying around!
the AMD chips are hot>? how hot!