AMD appears to have just made an announcement that Apple will soon be using AMD chips. The slip up came during the AMD financial analyst day presentation where AMD included a few slides that clearly show a wide range of Apple products.
According to hwupgrade.it (in Italian), the slides clearly show a wide range of Apple products that may use the Fusion platform. For those that do not know, AMD Fusion "is a new approach to processor design and software development, delivering powerful CPU and GPU capabilities for HD, 3D and data-intensive workloads in a single-die processor called an APU".
If Apple does end up using the Fusion platform it will be a big shift for AMD who has only been supplying graphics chips to Apple. If they can begin selling APUs as well to Apple, it will not only help them fight back against Intel but it will also help give the Fusion brand a big leg up with consumer brand recognition.
Thanks for the tip and translation Darth Radeon
Comments (37)
ReplyI always wonder why there are not many Pc models with AMD processors on Dell and HP sites.
...and I wonder why Intel paid AMD over a billion dollars recently...
AMD chips aren't worth it. I would prefer Intel just buy AMD out, combine their resources, make better featured chips that over equal power with less power consumption. We really don't need to have 2 brands of CPU's on PC's when one brand dominates.
...and I wonder why Intel paid AMD over a billion dollars recently...
I wonder why in 1992 AMD admitted it couldn't compete with the Intel Inside campaign but chose to try anyway. AMD chips aren't worth teh silicon they come on. They are basically fancier Celerons with features that are only slightly better on some level. The only thing they did was help find a wy to run 32bit software with 64bit software in the same OS. For that I give them total props.
Yeah. The same high cost price with a shittier processor. Not offense to AMD (I know they are cheaply acquirable) , but just making a marketing technique which Apple will use.
I wonder if they will use AMD chips to lowest the price? imagine an iMac AMD for $799
That would be incredible. For the first time ever they would be sponsoring a "new mac" in less than a thousand dollars. We'll just have to wait and see.
If apple smartened up and made affordable PC's, theyd make a dent in that market to, rather than be an insignificant nobody
The cost of the materials to make the product doesnt matter and doesnt set the price. Otherwise everything would be much cheaper. Apple will continue charging high for their products as long as they can get away with it.
If apple smartened up and made affordable PC's, theyd make a dent in that market to, rather than be an insignificant nobody
You do realize that Apple sold 30% more Macs then they did in the previous year. That every year for nearly five years they have outpaced the PC industry in growth. And their Mac business alone would be #110 on the Fortune 500 list.
I wish I was that insignificant.
Apple will continue charging high for their products as long as they can get away with it.
Dude, your Apple bashing really gets old......
Just go and see every news on Neowin that has Apple mentioned... You are always there posting some rubbish....
You really need to go and talk to someone about this....
You do realize that Apple sold 30% more Macs then they did in the previous year. That every year for nearly five years they have outpaced the PC industry in growth. And their Mac business alone would be #110 on the Fortune 500 list.
I wish I was that insignificant.
How much of that was to new users as opposed to people just upgrading what they have?
Apple sells to Apple users.
How much of that was to new users as opposed to people just upgrading what they have?
Apple sells to Apple users.
Your logic and facts are pretty bad. The answer to your question is 50%.
But let's think about it. Sales are growing, quarter after quarter. So what you're trying to say is that Apple users are buying more and more computers and there are no new users?
When you sale 30% more than the previous year, if you sold 100 last year, you sell 130 this year. So unless those people are buying additional computers every year (that would be 1 this year, 2 the following, and 3 the next...), that makes it extremely difficult to do with the same user base.
Edit: Here's a link for your own reading: http://www.macrumors.com/2010/...-revenue-best-quarter-ever/
The never ending Apple pricing discussion.
I personally think Apple is intentionally using pretty high price margins for their desktop computers in order to push down the price more for mobile devices, and that the guy behind Daring Fireball made a good point: http://daringfireball.net/2010/11/apples_pricing_advantage
On average, Intel based Macs cost 20% - 40% more than other brands. And I have seen cases where Macs cost as much as 50% more.
So I agree 100% with you. Not that AMD chips are bad, its just the Mac is a POS and they cost way to much.
You do realize that Apple sold 30% more Macs then they did in the previous year. That every year for nearly five years they have outpaced the PC industry in growth. And their Mac business alone would be #110 on the Fortune 500 list.
I wish I was that insignificant.
Yet their marketshare is on around 9% after being in the computer business for 30+ years?
yeahhhh reallll accomplishemnt..
Look at it this way, if you subtract the Mac loyalists that means in 3 decades the Mac market has only grown about 3%...that really isn't saying much.
Another way to look at it? It is estimated that 1.2B people own at least one computer in their home.
In 2008 it was surveyed that 83% of Mac overs have a Windows PC as well. And nowthat macs run Windows you can fairly say that many will run Windows bec that is the only way to get ALL of the software they want, be able to do REAL gaming and get to buy whatever accessory they want. Which means Windows has about a 99% market.
Apple sold 3.5M computers for the very first time in a single quarter. Why? because some iDiots are willing to spend a fortune on a PC just to run Windows the majority of the time. Yea that real smart money.
That's just a taste of how big iOS devices are for Apple, they make their own chips for those so they can afford to consider ditching intel for AMD on the now smaller part or their production (MACs and servers), or at least enough to create speculation from the media (not that the last part is hard to get).
Where did you read they are ditching Intel?
Nobody noticed all these apple products feature ATI Radeon graphics? C'mon people, it's not that hard to hit a product page and look whats inside shipping iMacs and Mac towers....
Since when did Sony start using AMD again?
AMD Fusion graphics with an Intel processor? AMD continues to be cheaper, but they don't have as many high-end cutting-edge CPUs as Intel does. AMD just releases Intel-speeds 6 months later at 1/2 the cost. Not sure Apple wants that.
well considering how long it takes for apple to upgrade the specs across their product ranges, I dont see how a 6 month delay for the same performance would be such a problem.
Larger chips that run warmer with less performance? Not quite what Apple usually looks for in their designs.
This could be a nice break for AMD. Maybe the added business will help them get back up to par.
This could be a nice break for AMD. Maybe the added business will help them get back up to par.
I'd have to disagree with the "warmer" part. I recently sold my Macbook with a 2.4Ghz Core 2 Duo. That thing ran extremely hot, to the point where I could only hold it on my lap for about 30-40 minutes before it would become uncomfortable.
I replaced the Macbook with a Toshiba L675D featuring a 2.9Ghz Phenom II x2, and that processor runs extremely cool - frequently the fan will shut down for several minutes at a time because the CPU can maintain temperature on passive cooling only.
That's got to be about graphics chips, not processors. There is no way Apple is getting out of intel's pants.
First of all, how in the world would they "slip up" a nicely made slide with today's date on it? Second, where is the mention of Fusion anywhere? Apparently everyone forgot that AMD already powers all of those devices shown in the picture with Radeon Graphics. They are not showing Macbooks because...? well, there's nothing from AMD there. LOL, worst assumption EVAAAAR.
down left on the image
down left on the image
oh **** =x I got owned.
Hopefully this will force AMD to improve their chips as they have not been doing so hot lately. And it is cool that AMD is getting a chance like this but if there are performance issues, then Apple better be prepared.
I'd like to see cheap apple machine too, but i doubt it, they don't care about the low end niche
Mac Mini?
Mac Mini?
700€ is not a low-end price.
Heh, Apple should just buy AMD and the whole fusion spinoff and make everything in-house and make it all jailbreakable and Mac App Store friendly. Then say that they find no reason Windows or Linux should be able to run on Macs because to end users they do the same thing.
/paranoid
Say it ain't so.
Right now AMD is trying to compete with Intel Core i5s, they cannot compete with i7s except on price. Performance wise it's still not even close.
So is Apple going to introduce a budget line?
Why do people continue to say AMD is Cheaper? It is not. At least not in Apple cases. Intel could win by price any time. And client as important as Apple would definitely get the price treatment if it is needed to. All those market budget of Centrino and Intel inside could be a figure being subsidized back to apple. ( Although that sounds wired but just one thing i thought they could do. )
Here a article of what the AMD Fusion processor is all about.
http://www.chipchick.com/2010/10/amd-fusion-apu.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerated_Processing_Unit
Apple would be smart to adopt this, at least in their Mac Mini. I could reasonably see them selling for $499 and still making a 40% profit. Only time will tell.