Apple may dump NVidia for next gen Macs

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
If it's good enough for the 'Windows 7'-experience, Apple might use it in conjunction with ATI-gpu's, but thats pure speculation.

Being good enough for the OS doesn't really mean anything. Two of the computers in my house have integrated Intel graphics and they can run Vista's Aero Desktop easily. Windows 7 is basically the same, and I've heard that its requirements for most things are actually lower than Vista. That's why I posted above asking why not use Intel graphics. If it's good enough for a Dell/HP/Acer, it's good enough for a Mac. If you want discrete video, buy a Mac Pro. Hasn't it usually been that way in the past?

In any event, having an Intel chipset doesn't limit Apple's ability to use AMD or Nvidia products. The computer I'm using right now has an Intel chipset with a Nvidia graphics card. I also have a computer with an AMD chipset, integrated AMD graphics, and discrete Nvidia graphics. It might look a bit weird to have an Intel chipset and Nvidia graphics on the same motherboard, but I don't see why it can't be done.

You're missing the point. AMD simply doesn't make any chipsets compatible with Intel cpu's. Nvidia is really pretty much the only third party chipset manufacturer that makes chipsets for both Intel and AMD. AMD and Intel both only produce chipsets compatible with their own cpu's.

I hate to break this to you but you can already buy Apple computers that have Intel processors and chipsets but use AMD graphics. 24 inch iMac and Mac Pro are both compatible with Radeon 4850 graphics even though AMD is not able to make chipsets for Intel. Chipset and GPU are not related in any way.

Having integrated Intel graphics alongside Nvidia graphics should have next to no effect on the price of the computer. If you go to newegg and sort the socket 775 motherboards by price, you'll notice that cheap motherboards include integrated Intel video while the more expensive motherboards do not. Newegg also says a discrete GeForce 9400GT costs $40 US (it's cheaper if you're an OEM like Apple, but whatever). There you have it; crippled Intel platform + $40 USD = Intel platform with GeForce 9400 graphics. Wait I forgot to add Apple's arbitrary markup to the cost of the extra video hardware. Crippled Intel + $200 USD = Intel with GeForce 9400.

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Apple has more to lose from this than NVIDIA does. Apple is not exactly a huge market and if they lost NVIDIA they would be stuck with the horrible Intel graphics.

Point being? Most Windows based computers use Intel graphics and they work just fine. Two of the computers in my house have Intel graphics and I have no intention of upgrading either of them. My laptop is a 1.6ghz Conroe Celeron with some generic Intel graphics and it's still able to run 2D AutoCAD without a problem. It also does DVD movies, XviD movies, DivX movies, Aero Desktop, and Google Earth. A guy responded to my previous post by saying that Google Earth runs better on a GeForce 9400m, which is true, but my Intel graphics can get 30fps and I'm perfectly happy with that.

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: MarcVenice

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
If it's good enough for the 'Windows 7'-experience, Apple might use it in conjunction with ATI-gpu's, but thats pure speculation.

Being good enough for the OS doesn't really mean anything. Two of the computers in my house have integrated Intel graphics and they can run Vista's Aero Desktop easily. Windows 7 is basically the same, and I've heard that its requirements for most things are actually lower than Vista. That's why I posted above asking why not use Intel graphics. If it's good enough for a Dell/HP/Acer, it's good enough for a Mac. If you want discrete video, buy a Mac Pro. Hasn't it usually been that way in the past?

In any event, having an Intel chipset doesn't limit Apple's ability to use AMD or Nvidia products. The computer I'm using right now has an Intel chipset with a Nvidia graphics card. I also have a computer with an AMD chipset, integrated AMD graphics, and discrete Nvidia graphics. It might look a bit weird to have an Intel chipset and Nvidia graphics on the same motherboard, but I don't see why it can't be done.

You're missing the point. AMD simply doesn't make any chipsets compatible with Intel cpu's. Nvidia is really pretty much the only third party chipset manufacturer that makes chipsets for both Intel and AMD. AMD and Intel both only produce chipsets compatible with their own cpu's.

I hate to break this to you but you can already buy Apple computers that have Intel processors and chipsets but use AMD graphics. 24 inch iMac and Mac Pro are both compatible with Radeon 4850 graphics even though AMD is not able to make chipsets for Intel. Chipset and GPU are not related in any way.

Having integrated Intel graphics alongside Nvidia graphics should have next to no effect on the price of the computer. If you go to newegg and sort the socket 775 motherboards by price, you'll notice that cheap motherboards include integrated Intel video while the more expensive motherboards do not. Newegg also says a discrete GeForce 9400GT costs $40 US (it's cheaper if you're an OEM like Apple, but whatever). There you have it; crippled Intel platform + $40 USD = Intel platform with GeForce 9400 graphics. Wait I forgot to add Apple's arbitrary markup to the cost of the extra video hardware. Crippled Intel + $200 USD = Intel with GeForce 9400.

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Apple has more to lose from this than NVIDIA does. Apple is not exactly a huge market and if they lost NVIDIA they would be stuck with the horrible Intel graphics.

Point being? Most Windows based computers use Intel graphics and they work just fine. Two of the computers in my house have Intel graphics and I have no intention of upgrading either of them. My laptop is a 1.6ghz Conroe Celeron with some generic Intel graphics and it's still able to run 2D AutoCAD without a problem. It also does DVD movies, XviD movies, DivX movies, Aero Desktop, and Google Earth. A guy responded to my previous post by saying that Google Earth runs better on a GeForce 9400m, which is true, but my Intel graphics can get 30fps and I'm perfectly happy with that.

Sorry about to go (more) offtopic.

ShawnD1 why do your links get redirected? Is this a new thing with the forums?

 

[vj8usa]

Originally posted by: WelshBloke
Sorry about to go (more) offtopic.

ShawnD1 why do your links get redirected? Is this a new thing with the forums?

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...id=40&threadid=2302094

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
This thread has gone from speculation about apple and what igp it would use, to complete ati-bashing. I wonder how that happened.

I made a quick post earlier about "Why bring ATI into this discussion at all?". After thinking about it afterward, the topic title suggests Apple will dump Nvidia. And besides Intel integrated graphics, who is left to take Nvidia's place? AMD. So it's really isn't surprising ATI is being brought up in this thread. I was too quick to post the above before. So the thread really isn't being derailed by bringing up AMD in here. It's a natural progression of the thread topic to wonder who will take NV's place if the thread topic is accurate, or at least it's source is.

BUT....

It's the WAY that it is done that turns it into an ATI bash fest, but apparently by only one member. And it's pretty obvious this is done for a few parts spite, and a few parts entertainment for the member. All I can suggest at this point is to forward everything to the AT mod account and let them decide what's going on.

Sorry for this quick OT guys. But this should be the last it is discussed in this thread, right?
Anything further ----> AT mod account.

Now that it's out of the way, OT :thumbsup:

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: dguy6789

What an assponcho

Either address the argument or don't post.

This is a warning; further such infractions will result in a vacation.


As for AMD/ATi and Intel, I'm happy to allow such discussion in this thread as long as it?s at least somewhat related to them being a possible replacement to nVidia. A derailment may however result in a lock, so use common sense and basic judgment when posting.

Video Mod BFG10K.

 

[postmortemIA]

This is another FUD from nvidia hater from the Inq, Charlie Demerjian

 

[Keysplayr]

I'll say one thing for the guy (Demerjian), he just doesn't give up. The hatin runs strong with the Demerjian!

EDIT: I can't bring up the semi-accurate article. Is it my browser? Or has it been pulled?

 

[akugami]

TheStreet.com

CNET

Seems other sites are picking up on the rumor including main stream sites. Investors are treating these rumors seriously enough that it has helped push down nVidia stock as noted by thestreet.com.

For what it's worth, it's still merely rumors. Unless (and until) Apple and AMD announces a partnership where AMD provides GPU's for Apple, it is still merely rumors. nVidia would of course deny any problems with Apple over these hardware issues but that is hardly surprising.

What also isn't surprising is Apple's lack of response. It is actually not in the best interest of Apple to deny the rumors. Obviously the best response would be for Apple to deny the rumors. This is actually good and bad for nVidia. It's good because it means that nVidia still has a chance to retain the Apple contracts. Which is good because nVidia obviously would be retaining a revenue stream and it denies AMD any revenues and possible profits from any deal with Apple. But it's bad in that it also means Apple may be trying to use these rumors, as well as the fact they genuinely are ticked off, as leverage for better contract terms. Less revenue, less profits. Apple also might be seriously considering moving to AMD.

I'm actually surprised at the report of Apple being responsible for about 7-8% of nVidia's revenue stream as noted in thestreet.com. I actually thought it was closer to half that. Losing 7-8% of your revenue is a pretty big blow. While I have no doubt nVidia can survive losing the Apple contract easily, it still has to hurt.

As for an all Intel system from Apple...no way. Not at this time. Maybe in a year or two but it's still way way too early to the somewhat conservative Apple to use such new and unproven technology. Apple at times moves to new technology at the cutting edge but usually that is for brand new products or a major shift in their product line.

 

[SickBeast]

I'll bet Apple could create an amazing 12" MacBook based on the new AMD Neo. It would probably get an 8 hour battery life or something crazy like that.

 

[SlowSpyder]

http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2377

I do have to say that the wording Apple uses does seem less than friendly towards Nvidia.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2377

I do have to say that the wording Apple uses does seem less than friendly towards Nvidia.

I don't know if all the companies with the affected GPUs are giving that kind of service but kudos to Apple for even paying for repairs done prior to this knowledge.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2377

I do have to say that the wording Apple uses does seem less than friendly towards Nvidia.

I don't know if all the companies with the affected GPUs are giving that kind of service but kudos to Apple for even paying for repairs done prior to this knowledge.

That is great that they are taking care of their customers, I'm sure Nvidia will be paying them back. But I'm suprised by the language of that page on the Apple support site. They more or less said that Nvidia gave them bad parts then told them that the parts Apple received weren't bad (Nvidia lied to Apple? Nvidia was incorrect?). I guess I'm just suprised that Apple put that out in public, they could have just said the parts are bad and that they will take care of their customers. Maybe I'm looking more into it than there is, but it seemed to be a 'callout' so to speak.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: WelshBloke
ShawnD1 why do your links get redirected? Is this a new thing with the forums?

Yes, its basically revenue enhancement as links are treated as "click thru ads" where deals have been made.

Try making a newegg link and see what happens. It's harmless, increases revenue for AT which might in turn result in better forum servers and the like for us all to benefit from.

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: WelshBloke
ShawnD1 why do your links get redirected? Is this a new thing with the forums?

Yes, its basically revenue enhancement as links are treated as "click thru ads" where deals have been made.

Try making a newegg link and see what happens. It's harmless, increases revenue for AT which might in turn result in better forum servers and the like for us all to benefit from.

Yeah, but it means I've got to change my hosts file now.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: akugami
Seems other sites are picking up on the rumor including main stream sites. Investors are treating these rumors seriously enough that it has helped push down nVidia stock as noted by thestreet.com.

Damn sheep. oh noes, the least popular computer in the world may or may not drop support for the most popular video card maker! We'd better sell right now! These are probably the same idiots who buy .com companies that have a negative P/E ratio then wonder why the stock tanks.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
I'll say one thing for the guy (Demerjian), he just doesn't give up. The hatin runs strong with the Demerjian!

EDIT: I can't bring up the semi-accurate article. Is it my browser? Or has it been pulled?

Actually, the entire site has just, vanished. Anyone else can't bring it up?

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
I'll say one thing for the guy (Demerjian), he just doesn't give up. The hatin runs strong with the Demerjian!

EDIT: I can't bring up the semi-accurate article. Is it my browser? Or has it been pulled?

Actually, the entire site has just, vanished. Anyone else can't bring it up?

Still there, still full of tripe.

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
I'll say one thing for the guy (Demerjian), he just doesn't give up. The hatin runs strong with the Demerjian!

EDIT: I can't bring up the semi-accurate article. Is it my browser? Or has it been pulled?

Actually, the entire site has just, vanished. Anyone else can't bring it up?

Unfortunately, still coming up fine here...and likely to many parts of the world.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
I'll say one thing for the guy (Demerjian), he just doesn't give up. The hatin runs strong with the Demerjian!

EDIT: I can't bring up the semi-accurate article. Is it my browser? Or has it been pulled?

Actually, the entire site has just, vanished. Anyone else can't bring it up?

Unfortunately, still coming up fine here...and likely to many parts of the world.

i imagine their host's bandwidth is under some strain
- that article has *instantly* got them mass popularity - true or not

No wonder Nvidia "denied" it
- it may be true
:Q

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2377

I do have to say that the wording Apple uses does seem less than friendly towards Nvidia.

Wow. :shocked:

In July 2008, NVIDIA publicly acknowledged a higher than normal failure rate for some of their graphics processors due to a packaging defect. At that same time, NVIDIA assured Apple that Mac computers with these graphics processors were not affected. However, after an Apple-led investigation, Apple has determined that some MacBook Pro computers with the NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT graphics processor may be affected. If the NVIDIA graphics processor in your MacBook Pro has failed, or fails within three years of the original date of purchase, a repair will be done free of charge, even if your MacBook Pro is out of warranty.

Apple are pretty quick to hold others to high standards, but if things are their fault they usually blame the end user.

 

[exar333]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
That struck me as really odd. How is a AMD-chipset going to support Intels mobile Nehalem cpu's? The problem is, Apple needs something like 9400m, coz Intels offerings suck. Apple could use HD 4850 for higher end, but that still leaves them without anything that can replace 9400m? RS880 is afaik a socket AM3-chipset.

9400m is pretty slow. It wouldn't be that big of a loss to use intel graphics in place of.

The 9400M trounces the Intel GMA solution. In games it is easily a good 5-10 times faster. The 9400M is a brilliant piece of work and can in no way be compared to Intel's GMA solution. They are completely in a different class.

In fact, when Apple moved to the 9400M solution, I almost bought a macbook despite my utter hatred for Steve Jobs and the mac community in general (the community has been getter better since the move to Intel).

I know not everyone plays games but even things like Google Earth run a lot better on the 9400M.

Is 10fps really that much better than 2fps? Neither is playable. If I want a high-end mobile GPU, get an ATI offering, if you want a cheap GPU, stick with Intel. The 9400M and similar class is a only a small step above crap anyways, and is worthless in 99% of decent graphics applications anyway.

Personally, I would take a rock-solid Intel GMA versus a crappy 9400M that is 5x faster anyday.

 

[exar333]

Originally posted by: ExarKun333

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
That struck me as really odd. How is a AMD-chipset going to support Intels mobile Nehalem cpu's? The problem is, Apple needs something like 9400m, coz Intels offerings suck. Apple could use HD 4850 for higher end, but that still leaves them without anything that can replace 9400m? RS880 is afaik a socket AM3-chipset.

9400m is pretty slow. It wouldn't be that big of a loss to use intel graphics in place of.

The 9400M trounces the Intel GMA solution. In games it is easily a good 5-10 times faster. The 9400M is a brilliant piece of work and can in no way be compared to Intel's GMA solution. They are completely in a different class.

In fact, when Apple moved to the 9400M solution, I almost bought a macbook despite my utter hatred for Steve Jobs and the mac community in general (the community has been getter better since the move to Intel).

I know not everyone plays games but even things like Google Earth run a lot better on the 9400M.

Is 10fps really that much better than 2fps? Neither is playable. If I want a high-end mobile GPU, get an ATI offering, if you want a cheap GPU, stick with Intel. The 9400M and similar class is a only a small step above crap anyways, and is worthless in 99% of decent graphics applications anyway.

Personally, I would take a rock-solid Intel GMA versus a crappy 9400M that is 5x faster anyday.

Edit: AT error...couldn't see my post content in the thread...

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: ExarKun333

Originally posted by: ExarKun333

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
That struck me as really odd. How is a AMD-chipset going to support Intels mobile Nehalem cpu's? The problem is, Apple needs something like 9400m, coz Intels offerings suck. Apple could use HD 4850 for higher end, but that still leaves them without anything that can replace 9400m? RS880 is afaik a socket AM3-chipset.

9400m is pretty slow. It wouldn't be that big of a loss to use intel graphics in place of.

The 9400M trounces the Intel GMA solution. In games it is easily a good 5-10 times faster. The 9400M is a brilliant piece of work and can in no way be compared to Intel's GMA solution. They are completely in a different class.

In fact, when Apple moved to the 9400M solution, I almost bought a macbook despite my utter hatred for Steve Jobs and the mac community in general (the community has been getter better since the move to Intel).

I know not everyone plays games but even things like Google Earth run a lot better on the 9400M.

Is 10fps really that much better than 2fps? Neither is playable. If I want a high-end mobile GPU, get an ATI offering, if you want a cheap GPU, stick with Intel. The 9400M and similar class is a only a small step above crap anyways, and is worthless in 99% of decent graphics applications anyway.

Personally, I would take a rock-solid Intel GMA versus a crappy 9400M that is 5x faster anyday.

Edit: AT error...couldn't see my post content in the thread...

What are you talking about?


Clearly Nvidia makes some great graphics solutions for notebooks - for many years and they have proved to be reliable; intel never did make anything but IG.

i have 8200 M which is good for very light 3D gaming and especially older DX9/8 PC games. Nvidia admittedly had a bad run and bad press but you cannot blanket condemn all of their mobile products. Dell and Nvidia announced a whole new line up of hi-performance notebooks recently.