Who'd want to see this?

[76ShovelHead]

An AMD FX 8-Core-Powered Mac Pro?

I know Intel is [a few] leaps ahead of AMD (AMD FX 6-Core's are now comparable to the Core i5, but not by much).

That said, despite AMD's performance not being spot-on with Intel's, they do have a couple compelling offerings for Mac. That being their new APU's which Apple could surely utilize in their Mac Mini and MacBook Air lines. This is because they offer discrete-level graphics performance built into the chip –as opposed to Intel's new SB integrated HD 3000. This could save them money and attract more customers because the Graphics would no longer be a joke. And then there is the AMD FX 8-Core processor, It could seriously fit in well with the Mac Pro, again reducing costs and offering many cores for all the content creators.

With AMD's new APU, I personally wouldn't look anywhere else for laptop because, for all the performance you get with a SB, you can only utilize it so much because of the graphics. So kudos to AMD.

Not to mention the impact it would have on the hackintosh community :roll eyes:

So what do you guys think?

 

[Hellhammer]

Are you talking about Faildozer? AMD's offerings in the high-performance class are a joke. Even a quad core i5 runs circles around the 8-core Bulldozer in most tasks, especially if it's a single-threaded task.

The APUs might fit nicely in some Macs, but the CPU performance would take a hit. Ivy Bridge should improve the GPU by another 60% so Intel is also making some progress. Besides, one cal always go for 15" MBP if graphics performance is important.

 

[76ShovelHead]

Are you talking about Faildozer? AMD's offerings in the high-performance class are a joke. Even a quad core i5 runs circles around the 8-core Bulldozer in most tasks, especially if it's a single-threaded task.

The APUs might fit nicely in some Macs, but the CPU performance would take a hit. Ivy Bridge should improve the GPU by another 60% so Intel is also making some progress. Besides, one cal always go for 15" MBP if graphics performance is important.

Haha yes, that is what I'm talking about. And your correct, their high-performance is a joke, but the 8-Core is just that, and would in theory really beat the Intel when it comes to content creation that utilizes all 8 of those cores. So that's my only argument there. Which isn't very good, but it's just a thought.

The APU's are awesome. At the moment they're a good buy. Who knows if Intel's Ivy-Bridge is really going to deliver to all the hype such as a 60% increase in GPU performance. It would be funny if Intel, the company known for great processors and terrible integrated graphics, became the next nVidia/ATI. But then again they weren't always known for great processors, so they could pull this off...

 

[paronga]

pffft.

it's been 10 years since AMD has been worth it for performance.
most of the time, only so many cores make a difference.
I NEED single thread performance as much as multi-thread. BUT i use single thread more, so i'll take that any day.

for multi-thread performance, i'd rather offload that to the GPU, which ***** and the crummy AMD gpu in their APU things.

you'd be MAD to want AMD

 

[donuttakedonuts]

Someone with a 8150FX hackint0sh it already and lets see some benchmarks!