And AMD is preparing 3rd gen Threaripper with 64 cores lol.
[doublepost=1549041269][/doublepost]
Only in iOS system. We probably need to wait till 2020 after they put their own processor in their MacBook.
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.
MP 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)
- Thread starter Mago
- Start date
-
- Tags
- macpro 2016
- Sort by reaction score
And AMD is preparing 3rd gen Threaripper with 64 cores lol.
[doublepost=1549041269][/doublepost]
Only in iOS system. We probably need to wait till 2020 after they put their own processor in their MacBook.
But then you are starving the cores of ram, so you would have to move to Epyc. That would be the only downside.
Specifically there has to be at least a year lag of announcing something to developers, and then shipping a consumer product. That way they can distribute betas and allow people to release their updates.
Be interesting to see how they do it. Last time they built custom Intel boxes for developers during that year lag. Maybe we'll see something like macOS for iPad for developers to test on?
I think you have it backwards.
Like the Intel transition boxes developers would probable be able to buy an 24 in. iMac with custom ARM chips with a hybrid IOS OS.
All Apple has to do is be able to drive a 24 in display and the SOC x 18 etc.. could do that pretty easy.
Completely solid state. No moving parts.
I suppose like with the Intel boxes, they could just throw ARM boards into a Mac mini case. The developer Intel boxes were literally built out of generic parts with not even a special Apple firmware. It would be a bit more effort to do a dedicated board run for the developer boxes, but I guess Apple has the resources and the will to do it.
I had just assumed they wouldn't want to do any production runs specifically for developers. But maybe they could even just stuff their existing iPad Pro boards into a different case. iPad Pro has USB-C now which means they could re-use the board probably without including an internal display.
I wonder how big will be outcry on this very forum if Apple will come up with anything similar to Corsair One computer 
.
P.S. AMD has changed their policy for Data Centers. You can get massive discounts for both Rome EPYC and MI GPUs if you buy in bundle. This allows hyperscalers to get the GPU at low price+partial prepayment for Rome for guaranteed early supply.
Well. The new team that is focused on selling hardware is starting to pull off miracles. 12.5% market share in Data center of GPUs. 5% CPU marketshare gained in 2018. AMD will have even better 2019.
Now. Can you imagine that they come to Apple with deals on their hardware, and try to sell HSA? can you imagine, that Apple demands porting ROCm to macOS, as a part of hardware deal?
I can easily imagine this scenario. AMD finally has tech advantage over Intel. They have the position to make such deals with Apple.
.P.S. AMD has changed their policy for Data Centers. You can get massive discounts for both Rome EPYC and MI GPUs if you buy in bundle. This allows hyperscalers to get the GPU at low price+partial prepayment for Rome for guaranteed early supply.
Well. The new team that is focused on selling hardware is starting to pull off miracles. 12.5% market share in Data center of GPUs. 5% CPU marketshare gained in 2018. AMD will have even better 2019.
Now. Can you imagine that they come to Apple with deals on their hardware, and try to sell HSA? can you imagine, that Apple demands porting ROCm to macOS, as a part of hardware deal?
I can easily imagine this scenario. AMD finally has tech advantage over Intel. They have the position to make such deals with Apple.
Last edited:
I wonder how big will be outcry on this very forum if Apple will come up with anything similar to Corsair One computer
it is macrumors so some folks will complain that the sky is blue.
How big. Just about as large as it was for the Mac Pro 2013. If the default is an AMD GPU ..... the Nvidia fan boys aren't going to be happy. There would be some slight shift in complaint set if there was an Nvidia GPU. It isn't a generic off the shelf GPU replaceable by any random board. So the folks who are complaining about not buying stuff off the shelf would still be complaining.
Corsair doesn't have Thunderbolt, but I think does some video port redirect. Is Apple going to hide the "loop back" Rube Goldberg solution inside the case? .... probably not. So even less "off the shelf" GPU card than that. [ There are some other vendors that use a MXM GPU card but again will have folks moaning about it isn't a broad standard slot. ]
Only one GPU possible so the "need 2+ GPUs" folks will still complain. ( And Apple pretty much will be skipping a decent chunk of the folks they previously found that liked having 2 GPUs. There were aspects of the Mac Pro 2013 that did work with some. )
No empty standard PCI-e slot .... pages of complaints about that.
No 3.5" drive ... plenty of moaning and groan will occur on that.
No optical drive ... the relatively steady drip , drip , drip water torture crowd on that will be certainly show up also. Apple Macs walked away from internal optical drives almost a decade ago and folks
It isn't like the Corsair One hasn't made multiple appearances on these "waiting for" threads before. Won't change much if presented for the nth time.
Not particularly a miracle when simply just stop shooting yourself in the foot and your major competitor takes to shooting themselves in the foot instead.
AMD is primarily is simply just executing what they should be doing mostly on time. AMD shouldn't have walked/dug the hole they did for so long. ( going off to chase Seamicro ( ~$300M down the drain), chasing after ARM , squatting on the flawed design assumptions too long, going down tangents like SSD drives, etc. )
Now. Can you imagine that they come to Apple with deals on their hardware, and try to sell HSA? can you imagine, that Apple demands porting ROCm to macOS, as a part of hardware deal?
This is the same AMD that helped walk Apple into the 'corner' on the Mac Pro 2013 GPUs. AMD appears to be on track to do better over next year or so but it isn't like Apple hasn't had their fingertips toasted (if not burnt) by them before.
Apple demands ROCm to macOS? LOL. Perhaps if Apple pays entirely upfront for ROCm to be porting. ROCm is at the stage right now where AMD shouldn't be pulling much of the core engine out to put in another another non-portable engine to power it. That other engine isn't going to help them on Linux or Windows so ....... not a big upside to that. ROCM is already on OpenCL 2.0 and should be moving to 2.1-2.2. Apple has no 2.0 and is even on edge of abandoning the sub 2.0 instances.
Apple has had every opportunity to join and formally support HSA for years and they haven't. Why are they going to start now? Probably going to happen.
Intel's GPU for for OpenCL 2.1-2.2 (including flatter address space support ) got coupled to the "Cannon Lake" GPUs. ( Gen 10) So it had to slide. It appears that Intel has decoupled that and coupled it to the Sandy Cove comes with Gen 11 (which is obviously incrementally past 10). I don't think AMD has the "huge gap" you are trying to imply here.
It isn't just AMD hardware tech. AMD's firmware , thunderbolt boot support , design board spin up support , driver support assistance , etc. would all have to equal or past Intel also for Apple's requirements.
( having 'sexy' tech and lacking on other dimensions isn't helping Nvidia much right now. It wouldn't help AMD either. )
There is a plausible path for AMD right now but it isn't a sure thing.
The feeling I've gotten from whispers is that Apple actually would prefer working with Nvidia... But that they also want a GPU partner that they can collaborate with on design. That rules out Nvidia as long as long as Tegra exists, which is basically permanent because Nvidia isn't giving up Tegra. Apple is afraid anything from the A series they share with Nvidia will end up in Tegra, and Nvidia is afraid anything they share about their GPUs will end up in the A series. It's not the only problem, but it's the clearest blocker.
So with all that in mind, AMD has a spotty track record, but they're also the only ones who can work with Apple in the way Apple wants to work with a vendor.
[doublepost=1549056483][/doublepost]
The rumor mill says Apple will stop using Intel as a vendor completely within the next few years. That still leaves a lot of room for the next Mac Pro to still be a Xeon box. But I wouldn't be surprised, given their existing relationship, if AMD isn't doing the hard sell right now on Apple.
I just wouldn't bet good money we'll see any changes in vendors this year.
if they are only peeling off a low end laptops why would a desktop but suitable?
About just as easily they could slap a ARM SoC inside the Macbook Air. ( How many generic. open market ARM desktop boards are there. Not counting the Rasberry Pi like stuff. ). If is a semi custom board it could just about as easily be a one port wonder MacBook. Can probably just stuff an iPad Pro board into a MacBook. The only "custom' part would be attaching the keyboard , display, and port internally.
Apple didn't sell those kludge boxes. They were just 'rented' and came back. They can rent laptops too ........ probably more than reasonable if not trying to sell ARM desktops at all . Once back can be disassembled for spare parts for same systems took the parts from.
They have MacBook displays. If they wanted even cheaper just use old MBA cases just stuff some plastic in the holes don't use.
The problem they have by tossing displayless boxes out there is folks will hook up random displays to them and then Apple would have to support those random ( e.g., perhaps non hiDPI ) resolutions.
If they wanted a headless box they could just do AppleTV. All the more so if Apple bumps up Apple TV to the current iPad Pro chip later this year. If headless is primarily just to be cheap ... then that is even more affordable.
Switching from Intel to AMD is a sidestep. It is also stupid for Apple to do this. Apple is not some Junior CG artist who might buy Threadripper for the core-count. And core-count is what AMD is selling to all the "junior" wannabe's out there. It's like when an actual "junior" sees V8 plastered in a car and ejacs emotionally at the thought of more V's. Like, an ego, hormonal thing.
Threadripper is that... hormonal.... Seasonal!!! Look at the name. Can you say Threadripper 2 yrs from now?
Are we saying Piledriver in 2019?
Say Piledriver now in your mind... it doesn't sound good does it?
I don't think so!!!
Apple is not that stupid to just switch from Intel to AMD for no reason whatsoever.
Apple can probably make a better CPU than AMD. Look at the CPU in the new iPad and new iPhone. If, Apple can make that, they don't need threadripper.
Thank you!
I'd assume, like macOS on Intel, macOS on ARM will support all the same external displays. I don't think non hiDPI is going to be dropped on ARM. Apple will surely yank some things (like possibly OpenGL), but I think it's mostly going to be a straight across "normal user wouldn't even know this is different" port. So anything that works with a Mini would work with macOS on ARM.
That's.... a really interesting idea.
They dropped the USB-C port on the AppleTV 4ks, but that might be a bit easier to do a limited run on.
Now I'm thinking how awesome a puck Mac based on AppleTV would be. The GPU in the AppleTV is capable enough that might be a good enough Mac for a lot of people, even those who dip into games every once in a while.
LOL - Piledriver was such a train wreck for AMD - but at least it was better than Bulldozer.
Why do ppl here in Apple land even fancy the idea of AMD CPU in macs? AMD are in consoles and it will be in the next gen consoles. I, for one, don't want AMD Inside in a future Mac.
"Think Different" will not be... ummm... different if indeed Apple decides to put AMD CPU in a Mac.
Intel, as ubiquitous as it is, aren't found in consoles. Not that I have anything against consoles. I just don't want AMD CPU in a Mac. It's as simple as that.
And, it's not like switching to AMD makes Macs better or faster.
Nor, do I think will it make a Mac cheaper.
So, there is zero reason, in my mind, why AMD CPU in a Mac is even viable.
"Think Different" will not be... ummm... different if indeed Apple decides to put AMD CPU in a Mac.
Intel, as ubiquitous as it is, aren't found in consoles. Not that I have anything against consoles. I just don't want AMD CPU in a Mac. It's as simple as that.
And, it's not like switching to AMD makes Macs better or faster.
Nor, do I think will it make a Mac cheaper.
So, there is zero reason, in my mind, why AMD CPU in a Mac is even viable.
Errr, Apple buys more GPUs in number of revenue from Intel than they do from AMD now. AMD being the "only possible" GPU video is disappearing as being pragmatically true. Apple could drop Intel for CPU and pick them up for discrete GPUs if AMD drops the ball. They don't necessarily need Nvidia going forward since the more will have an additionally robust competitor by next year or so.
I don't think that is necessarily true is Intel gets their act together and some other factors. If Qualcomm completely pisses off Apple (and Apple has to pay big fines ), I doubt they are going back. Mediatek is extremely likely an empty threat. Samsung may if their 7nm is as on track as they say it is and the parent Samsung doesn't rock the boat.
I suspect AMD is trying to talk a big sell for last several years. The viability is whether they have all the full package. Laptops solutions they aren't quite there. High end desktop and core count on workstation..... but that isn't the core of the Mac line up. You isn't what the bulk of the Mac systems sold are.
minimized z height solutions with very performance AMD doesn't particularly have an answer there in the mid-high range laptop space. Neither does Apple. Misdirect point a "Y Class"/"Core M class" stuff all day long, but Apple isn't particularly competitive in the H space (and parts of U as Gen 11 rolls out).
Well, maybe the main reason why Apple would switch from Intel to AMD is because AMD has technological advantage over Intel? Better efficiency, equal clock speeds, higher IPC, higher core counts, lower costs of hardware?
And no. Until Apple will design ARM to be capable of running at 100-200 amps of power delivered, we will not see Apple CPUs in any workstation.
It's possible. I'm just skeptical of the Intel GPU hype because that's been going on for a while now.
There's also the possibility that Apple jumps in with discrete GPUs. That might end their relationship with AMD, but it's possible. If they keep moving away from PCIe, they could just build a big GPU and throw them right onto their workstation boards.
Right. I think, like they did repeatedly with PowerPC, they are playing hardball with Intel right now. But I also think their issues with Intel are legitimate, and that Intel hasn't done much to change course yet. And they may not have anything by the 2020-2022 timeframe when Apple is supposedly threatening to switch. And I don't think Apple is bluffing.
If Intel really changes things in the next year, they could halt a switch. But nothing on their roadmap looks to me like it would cure their problems with Apple.
Yeah, I think any decision here is basically deferred. Apple will tinker and see how hard it would be to roll up into that space. AMD will pitch solutions behind the scenes. Again, Intel seems like the one in real trouble because they're just so far behind on technology.
I don't think Apple even needs to make a final decision on the mid end or high end until after they ship the first ARM Macs. I just suspect it will won't take much effort for them to jump into mid end portables/Macbook Pros, and they won't be able to resist the allure of owning all the hardware on the mid end.
Apple can see through AMD's sell. They know exactly where and what is AMD (Apple is also a tech company, as well). And, this is a second place x86 CPU maker. And there are only two places in this space.
So, two places... and second place talking the big talk that they are sheet.
If there are only two places, second place is last place.
So, last place talking the big talk like they are the sheet.
Why would Apple listen?
Why would anyone listen?
You're in last place.
Haven't seen first in a long time.
And, I don't see AMD suddenly becoming Usain Bolt.
And, this CPU-Usain-Bolt is racing a two man race since forever.
Why would Apple wanna be like, you know what CPU-Wannabe-Usain-Bolt-always-second-place company? I'll pick you?
AMD CPUs are in data centers of major cloud vendors Azure , Baidu
https://www.nextplatform.com/2017/12/13/two-hyperscalers-amds-epyc-six-go/ (Dec 2017 ... over a year ago.. )
AWS Nov 2018
https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/wh..._ec2_instances_featuring_amd_epyc_processors/
By the end of 2019 AMD will probably be in all six.
They have a relatively broad product range that happens to include consoles but that isn't even close to being the broad extent of their sales or units delivered.
If Intel manages to screw up their 7hm as much as their 10nm design process that isn't necessarily true over next 1-2 years. Not saying they are going to, but Intel has pragmatically stalled over 2018-2019.
Apple probably would pocket the difference. But if Apple is chasing higher average selling price but can't raise prices they'll go that route . Especially if it is basically an even performance trade-off.
Well you can choose to put your head into the sand, but substantive numbers of people who need effective performance as switching.
Apple is driven no more by "Intel versus AMD" fan boy stuff in the CPU space anymore than they are driven by "Nvidia versus AMD" fan boy stuff in the GPU space. They look at much more than the latest tech porn benchmarks and how many rabid rans each vendor has.
Have you even read anything about Zen2, and Intel 10 nm Woes?
Have you even paid SLIGHT attention to technology market lately?
All what you are writing is basically incorrect. Educate yourself first, THEN speak, because what you are saying is completly not giving AMD justice, and giving TOO much credit to Intel lately, which is the incompetent company of those two.
So far, the picture for Intel 7 nm is quite good. They are investing quite a lot of funds in it, so there is a chance that "10 nm process" won't happen again.
The problem is: 7 nm products from Intel are AT LEAST 2 years away. AT LEAST. By that time, AMD will have Zen 3, and Milan architecture out the door. Which will be even more amazing, than Rome appears to be.
Nah, not being a fany boy in my bashing of AMD. Just because I criticize AMD doesn't mean I am a fanboy or like Intel. I simply don't think Apple needs an AMD CPU in their Macs. It's that simple, dude.
I simply look at AMD as "always second place" company in a two-player space.
It doesn't matter if Data Centers are using Epyc AMD stuff. They are in the mind of the data center their second-player ina two-player space.
What I mean is, datacenters and whatnot are switching between AMD and Intel, Intel then AMD, AMD then Intel.
So, for Apple to suddenly mimic the industry's switchy, itchy pattern might be par course but, isn't cool or Apple-y.
It's more "Think the Same" Or, "Think Similar." Not, "Think Different" which is... the Apple motto.
I don't think I am sticking my head in the proverbial sand. Rather, I'm sticking my head in the sky. But say what you will.
They're also not driven by instruction set fan-boyism. The instruction set is an implementation detail, not a deciding factor. They want the fastest possible chips at the best power efficiency at the best prices. Intel does not do well on those metrics right now compared to the competition. 4 years ago they did, but not these days.
What? I'm bashing AMD but I am not fanboy of Intel.
Also, Zen2 is not even out, yet.
Like, WTF dude? You tell me to get educated yet here you are talking about Zen2 which is not out yet.
Hypocrate much, sir?
You are not criticising AMD. What you are writing is incorrect, because of your "second row vendor" outlook for AMD.
Want to know why Server place is switching to EPYC? Because it is good product, and in some cases miles better, than Intel. And the ROADMAP AMD has is miles better than Intel. That is MAIN REASON why Server is switching to AMD.
Then stop bashing AMD, based on your perception of AMD, because you are looking like clueless person.