Contribute
Register

End Of MacOS on Intel?

trs96

Moderator
Joined
Jul 31, 2012
Messages
14,464
Motherboard
GA-Z97X-UD3H-BK
CPU
i5-4690K
Graphics
HD4600 / RX 570
Mac
iMac, Mac mini
Mobile Phone
Android
Good article stating reasons why Apple may switch from Intel to AMD Ryzen CPUs in the near future.

 
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
4,777
Motherboard
GIGABYTE Z170M D3H
CPU
i5-6500
Graphics
RX 480
Mac
iMac
Good article stating reasons why Apple may switch from Intel to AMD Ryzen CPUs in the near future.


I read that a while ago, there is another bug out there that is said to only affect/infect Intel CPUs. The article says they tested AMD and it isn’t vulnerable. They mentioned it would take intel to change the architecture to fix it.

Currently with the custom kernel graphics suffer. Nvidia is about 50% and AMD cards about 85-90% of normal performance vs Intel CPUs. If Apple used them this could change.
 

trs96

Moderator
Joined
Jul 31, 2012
Messages
14,464
Motherboard
GA-Z97X-UD3H-BK
CPU
i5-4690K
Graphics
HD4600 / RX 570
Mac
iMac, Mac mini
Mobile Phone
Android
I read that a while ago, there is another bug out there that is said to only affect/infect Intel CPUs. The article says they tested AMD and it isn’t vulnerable. They mentioned it would take intel to change the architecture to fix it.

Currently with the custom kernel graphics suffer. Nvidia is about 50% and AMD cards about 85-90% of normal performance vs Intel CPUs. If Apple used them this could change.
It would be a real shocker if they put Threadripper chips into the next Mac Pro. It may be that they are having to work on Thunderbolt implementation before they can release one with Threadripper. (See my post on the potential delay of the 7,1 Mac Pro until 2020.) The prices are much lower than the equivalent Xeon W processors. Maybe Apple can put out a modular MP that starts under 4,000 dollars if they go with AMD ?
Can you imagine a Mac Pro shipping near the end of this year with up to 64 cores and 128 threads, with per-core performance on par with Intel’s latest and greatest?
Oh, and AMD is ahead of the game with PCI Express 4.0 support, too. Apple loves to put tons of fast I/O in its Pro desktop computers, so that’s just another feather in AMD’s cap.
From the article: PCIe 4.0 slots ? That would be nice too since the 2013 MP had 0 PCIe slots and way more TH2 ports than it really needed. (Daisy chaining)

So to sum it all up many Pro video editors dream machine would include: PCIe 4.0 slots for their choice of whatever graphics card works best for them. Nvidia or AMD. TH3 or TH4 ? A new Apple 6K monitor to edit on. 128 GB of DDR5 ram and to top it off a 64 core 128 thread CPU to make waiting for renders to finish a thing of the past. I'd guess that a maxed out MP like this would be something like $12,999. Before sales taxes of course. Would all depend on the choice of graphics and whether dual cards would be used. And of course if you could buy your ECC ram upgrade kit yourself and install it. If you buy that much ram "from the factory" plan on spending another 3,500 dollars.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
4,777
Motherboard
GIGABYTE Z170M D3H
CPU
i5-6500
Graphics
RX 480
Mac
iMac
It would be a real shocker if they put Threadripper chips into the next Mac Pro. It may be that they are having to work on Thunderbolt implementation before they can release one with Threadripper. The prices are much lower than the equivalent Xeon W processors. Maybe Apple can put out a modular MP that starts under 5000 dollars if they go with AMD ?
Intel has released Thunderbolt 3 licensing and the new USB4 is going to be those specs plus backward compatibility. So Thunderbolt could soon come to AMD boards.

 

pastrychef

Moderator
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
10,951
Motherboard
Asus ROG Strix Z370-G Gaming (Wi-Fi AC)
CPU
i9-9900K OC'd @ 5.0GHz
Graphics
Radeon VII
Mac
MacBook, Mac Pro
Classic Mac
iBook, Power Mac, PowerBook
Mobile Phone
iOS
Good article stating reasons why Apple may switch from Intel to AMD Ryzen CPUs in the near future.

I spoke to Stork right after the AMD keynote at CES and also made the argument that Apple should consider going with AMD. I think that it could bring Macs back to the realm of affordability without sacrificing performance. In fact, performance will probably increase.

With macOS relying heavily on Metal even for Finder, the more powerful IGPUs found in AMD CPUs will surely benefit every macOS user. Heat and power consumption should not be a concern since AMD has begun their transition to 7nm. At the very least, I feel that Apple should consider using AMD CPU/APUs for education focused Mac models. Remember, the eMac? Of course, this is all dependent on whether they stay on the X85/X64/AMD64 architecture....

As for Apple going to ARM based CPUs, it's looking increasingly probable with each passing day. I watched a video (which I can't find again for the life of me) explaining how CISC is finally beginning to reach its limits. For years, Intel fended off the limitations of CISC with increased core counts and shrinking manufacturing process (i.e. 14nm to 10nm, etc). But as we have seen it is getting increasingly difficult to shrink the dies. Meanwhile RISC performance has been improving at a dramatic pace. If you go strictly by Geekbench numbers, An iPhone XS Max already outperforms the latest MacBook Air.

391696391697

One of the biggest concerns of users regarding switching from X86/X64/AMD64 to ARM is loss of virtualization. I don't know how difficult it would be to add virtualization technology to an ARM CPU, but the other major operating systems already have ARM versions available. Windows is available for ARM. Linux is available for ARM.

ARM CPUs have also started finding their way in to server rooms, the most notable is probably Amazon developing their own ARM CPUs for servers. Apple started developing customized ARM CPUs for their devices long ago. It only stands to reason that they have at least tinkered with developing ARM based CPUs for high end desktop use.

All of this is only possible due to Intel's lack of innovation and improvements to their CPUs. Core count on remained unchanged on each generation of their CPUs with only minor bumps in MHz for years. This opened up the door for AMD and ARM to catch up and perhaps surpass them. Currently, Intel seems to be on a mad dash to regain some of the lead that it squandered. However, they have not been able to lower prices and pricing is extremely important to OEMs like Apple.

For all these reasons, I now think that it's just a matter of time before Apple dumps Intel and why I feel that a move to ARM based Macs may be inevitable. Analysts, and even Intel themselves, believe that Apple may begin their transition to ARM based Macs as soon as 2020. If they are that far along with moving to ARM, there may not be any time or room for AMD based Macs.
 
Last edited:

pastrychef

Moderator
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
10,951
Motherboard
Asus ROG Strix Z370-G Gaming (Wi-Fi AC)
CPU
i9-9900K OC'd @ 5.0GHz
Graphics
Radeon VII
Mac
MacBook, Mac Pro
Classic Mac
iBook, Power Mac, PowerBook
Mobile Phone
iOS
Intel has released Thunderbolt 3 licensing and the new USB4 is going to be those specs plus backward compatibility. So Thunderbolt could soon come to AMD boards.

The naming of the next version of USB and the renaming of current USB standards is absolutely ridiculous!!

What used to be known as USB 3.0 became USB 3.1 gen 1, and has now been renamed to USB 3.2 gen 1.
What used to be known as USB 3.1 became USB 3.1 gen 2, and has now been renamed to USB 3.2 gen 2.
The next version of USB (20Gb/s) will be known as USB 3.2 gen 2x2.

WTF???

I see no reason for any of this other than to confuse and trick consumers. Ridiculous!

Despite the stupid %#$@&!^ naming, it's good to see the latest iteration of USB have the bandwidth of Thunderbolt 2 (albeit probably with increased latency).

*Sorry for the ranting.
 

trs96

Moderator
Joined
Jul 31, 2012
Messages
14,464
Motherboard
GA-Z97X-UD3H-BK
CPU
i5-4690K
Graphics
HD4600 / RX 570
Mac
iMac, Mac mini
Mobile Phone
Android
The naming of the next version of USB and the renaming of current USB standards is absolutely ridiculous!!

What used to be known as USB 3.0 became USB 3.1 gen 1, and has now been renamed to USB 3.2 gen 1.
What used to be known as USB 3.1 became USB 3.1 gen 2, and has now been renamed to USB 3.2 gen 2.
The next version of USB (20Gb/s) will be known as USB 3.2 gen 2x2.

WTF???

I see no reason for any of this other than to confuse and trick consumers. Ridiculous!

Despite the stupid %#$@&!^ naming, it's good to see the latest iteration of USB have the bandwidth of Thunderbolt 2 (albeit probably with increased latency).

*Sorry for the ranting.
You forgot the part about every USB port will eventually be type C. So the consumer will not know which C port does what or what type C cable supports which version of USB... I agree that this is totally ludicrous. I have no clue as to how they will work these problems out.

391705
 

trs96

Moderator
Joined
Jul 31, 2012
Messages
14,464
Motherboard
GA-Z97X-UD3H-BK
CPU
i5-4690K
Graphics
HD4600 / RX 570
Mac
iMac, Mac mini
Mobile Phone
Android
there may not be any time or room for AMD based Macs.
You don't think that Phil Schiller would want to introduce the 7,1 Mac Pro with a 64 core Threadripper CPU and say "Can't make a Super powerful Mac Pro anymore, my A(^$#" ? Somehow an Apple A13X series chip wouldn't be as impressive.
"And here's the new Modular Mac Pro with same chip as our super powerful iPad Pro." "FCP X editors are really going to love this." I know, they could never do that and get away with it. Every year they need to tell us how much faster something is so that we spend more money on yet another shiny new Aluminium Mac.
 
Last edited:

pastrychef

Moderator
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
10,951
Motherboard
Asus ROG Strix Z370-G Gaming (Wi-Fi AC)
CPU
i9-9900K OC'd @ 5.0GHz
Graphics
Radeon VII
Mac
MacBook, Mac Pro
Classic Mac
iBook, Power Mac, PowerBook
Mobile Phone
iOS
You don't think that Phil Schiller would want to introduce the 7,1 Mac Pro with a 64 core Threadripper CPU and say "Can't make a Super powerful Mac Pro anymore, my A(^$#" ? Somehow an Apple A series chip wouldn't be as impressive.
If ARM CPUs are in the future, I don't think it would be wise to introduce the AMD architecture at this point. It would just add to difficulties from a support stand point for a product that would just exist for one generation. It makes much more sense to just offer a machine with the best that Intel has to offer and start working on replacing it immediately.

On the other hand, an introduction to an AMD based Mac, may signal that ARM based Macs are further off than many are predicting.
 
Top