WYP
News Guru
Last edited:
Former Intel Engineer reveals why Apple ditching the company's processors
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
Dark NighT
New member
WYP
News Guru
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
Well-known member
Nah man it's not.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Not like they were helping the performance of their laptops. The heatsinks aren't even touching the die on their Air lineup.
Last edited:
looz
Active member
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/comments/9midcx/apple_really_undersold_the_a12_cpu_its_almost/
Like check this out: https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/9midcx/apple_really_undersold_the_a12_cpu_its_almost/
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
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.
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.
Last edited:
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
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
AlienALX
Well-known member
That is deliberate. People wanted thin and light. Only so much you can do. Even when Linus "fixed" the cooling it still would not use any more wattage.
The heat they run at is irrelevant then. Apple must be confident there won't be a crap ton of RMA, and people will keep buying their weak crap for lots of $.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Didn't move any goalposts. I merely stated what's true.
Your assumption that's it's just plain better with perf/watt without it even being released is moving a goalposts.
Why you are getting defensive when you asked us to check out your source is beyond me. I even agreed Apple's mobile chips are impressive for heaven's sake. I'm only stating it's apples to oranges and using that table as you said that is incomplete, to form an opinion on, is not really a good comparison. That's just counter intuitive to say a fact that's "clear" and at the same time admitting it's incomplete data.
It's obviously deliberate but other thin and light notebooks have similar cooling systems and the die touch. It just seems they are tanking it's performance so ARM looks better. But I mean ARM will eventually be better or even start better. Intel won't improve performance so it's not like ARM is in a running race, it's just passing what's been done since what 2014? Won't be to hard for Apple
Last edited:
AlienALX
Well-known member
TBH Apple and performance has never ever gone hand in hand. They have always been woefully underpowered for the sake of looks.
They have never made a laptop that doesn't get completely spanked by an equivalently priced Windows laptop.
I have bought two Macs new in my lifetime. One was a Imac (98) because Windows 98 was terrible and needed reinstalling all of the time. When that is what you do for 10 hours a day the last thing you want is more when you get home. I just wanted a nice reliable machine to go on the net with.
I bought a lampshade G4 for Photoshop and other stuff back in about ooo, 03? something like that.
Other than that the only other mac I have ever had was a 13" air. And I got it cheap and sold it nearly two years later for what I paid for it. And that was literally for when I was moving and stuff and didn't have much access to a PC. Once it had fulfilled its purpose it too went.
They have never made a laptop that doesn't get completely spanked by an equivalently priced Windows laptop.
I have bought two Macs new in my lifetime. One was a Imac (98) because Windows 98 was terrible and needed reinstalling all of the time. When that is what you do for 10 hours a day the last thing you want is more when you get home. I just wanted a nice reliable machine to go on the net with.
I bought a lampshade G4 for Photoshop and other stuff back in about ooo, 03? something like that.
Other than that the only other mac I have ever had was a 13" air. And I got it cheap and sold it nearly two years later for what I paid for it. And that was literally for when I was moving and stuff and didn't have much access to a PC. Once it had fulfilled its purpose it too went.
demonking
New member
Im sure there is truth to all points but realistically, whats better. Buying an off the shelf part and working to make it work and fix issues as they go or build something bespoke that does exactly what you want it to?
No doubt seeing as its Apple, money is involved somehow, on the point of money you can also understand, anyone who has any idea of computing hardware asks, why am I paying so much more for an apple PC with essentially the same components as a windows based system?
This takes this away and Apple is free to charge whatever the hell they want without these sort of comparisons.
No doubt seeing as its Apple, money is involved somehow, on the point of money you can also understand, anyone who has any idea of computing hardware asks, why am I paying so much more for an apple PC with essentially the same components as a windows based system?
This takes this away and Apple is free to charge whatever the hell they want without these sort of comparisons.
