Former Intel Engineer reveals why Apple ditching the company's processors

[WYP]

It all started with Skylake.



Read more about Apple's decision to ditch Intel's processors.

[Digikid]

The REAL TRUTH is that Apple was sick and tired of people making Hackintosh systems It hurt their sales and THAT is the REAL reason why they are doing this.

[Dark NighT]

Originally Posted by Digikid

The REAL TRUTH is that Apple was sick and tired of people making Hackintosh systems It hurt their sales and THAT is the REAL reason why they are doing this.

Source?

[WYP]

Originally Posted by Digikid

The REAL TRUTH is that Apple was sick and tired of people making Hackintosh systems It hurt their sales and THAT is the REAL reason why they are doing this.

The custom PC market isn't that big when compared to the pre-built PC market. Hackintosh systems are a niche of an already niche market. Hackintosh builds are nothing in scale when compared to true Mac sales.

[AlienALX]

Originally Posted by Digikid

The REAL TRUTH is that Apple was sick and tired of people making Hackintosh systems It hurt their sales and THAT is the REAL reason why they are doing this.

Nah man it's not.

[NeverBackDown]

Not like they were helping the performance of their laptops. The heatsinks aren't even touching the die on their Air lineup.

[looz]

Apple's mobile chips are pretty impressive, I'm looking forward to these. Linux on an ARM Mac could be a proper low power workhorse - I've been struggling with my U series Haswell chip at our cottage as it's off the grid with 2x50W panels from '97.


Like check this out: https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comme...pu_its_almost/

[NeverBackDown]

The problem with that thread though is these are running on different OS's and only looking at single-core performance with older CPUs(at least for Epyc) that are meant for extreme parallelism/multithreading tasks. It's not that apples to apples.

There is no denying Apple's CPU is by far the best mobile has to offer, which is also partly due to software optimization, but it's still pretty difficult to get any conclusive results between mobile/desktop since they are pretty different.

If they were all running on a version of Linux then it would be a different story. Even then those Epyc/Xeon results were from an old Linux Kernal 4.4.0 and we are now on Kernal 5.7. Which should be tested again because now we also gain better ARM support to. That would be more conclusive to me.

[looz]

Yes I am aware of the data's incompleteness - but it's already clear that the wattage/performance ratio will be significantly better.

[NeverBackDown]

Originally Posted by looz

Yes I am aware of the data's incompleteness - but it's already clear that the wattage/performance ratio will be significantly better.

Based off that table yes. But again as you said the data is incomplete and the server chips are also running more I/O which consumes more power and factors into their overall power consumption which raises it's per-core power in the table. Which with how small the difference is(outside 6700k) could probably be achieved with more software optimization.

It's just apples to oranges really. I wouldn't say anything is better than anything. I'd say their intended purposes they all do equally well at