Personal computing discussed

Moderators: renee, Flying Fox, morphine

  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
 
End User
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2977
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Upper Canada

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:22 pm

Glorious wrote:
They fundamentally cannot know where they stand regarding "performance" in that category without fully-developed products from their ISVs. Those obviously don't exist.

Your fanboyism is completely out of control.

Your ignorance is completely out of control.Transitions are hard. Apple has been down this road before with great success. The rewards are even greater this time around.
 
Captain Ned
Global Moderator
Posts: 28704
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:24 pm

End User wrote:
The A11 is an example of what Apple has accomplished to date.

In a very confined market space. How many decades back must one go to find an Apple desktop chip widely regarded (a/k/a including those not infected by the RDF) as clearly superior to the x86 equivalent of the time? One does not win back those decades quickly.

My personal opinion, and it is strictly opinion, is that the RDF crowd will take anything they can get to reverse what they consider as Jobs' apostasy and the decision to go with Intel and x86 in the first place.
What we have today is way too much pluribus and not enough unum.
 
Glorious
Gerbilus Supremus
Posts: 12343
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:29 pm

End User wrote:
Your ignorance is completely out of control.Transitions are hard. Apple has been down this road before with great success. The rewards are even greater this time around.


This is just ridiculous, I've said this, repeatedly, in posts that I know you've read because you've responded to them:

Glorious wrote:
Apple can choose whatever hardware it likes, as it has switched between 3 different architectures in my lifetime and could easily (for the macbook airs or something) switch to a fourth for the low-end. The vast majority of people would literally not even notice.



By the way, DID YOU EVEN READ THAT ARTICLE?

The Mac Pro was the last one they switched!

End User wrote:
August 7, 2006: "Transition Complete" - Apple announces the Intel-based Mac Pro and Xserve, replacing the Power Mac G5 and Xserve G5, at the Worldwide Developers Conference; both use the Xeon 5100 series ("Woodcrest") processors.


You're just trolling now.
 
whm1974
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6361
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2014 5:29 am

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:33 pm

Captain Ned wrote:
End User wrote:
The A11 is an example of what Apple has accomplished to date.

In a very confined market space. How many decades back must one go to find an Apple desktop chip widely regarded (a/k/a including those not infected by the RDF) as clearly superior to the x86 equivalent of the time? One does not win back those decades quickly.

My personal opinion, and it is strictly opinion, is that the RDF crowd will take anything they can get to reverse what they consider as Jobs' apostasy and the decision to go with Intel and x86 in the first place.

Didn't Jobs made the decision to switch the Mac over from the PowerPC to x86 because he had to? As i recall, x86 was already outperforming PPC at a lower cost by then.
 
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Posts: 25427
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: Comin' to you directly from the Mothership

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:37 pm

I think it had most to do with stagnating low-power PPC processors. There had been three generations of G5 in PowerMacs and iMacs but the PowerBook and iBook line was stranded on PPC7447-based G4 processors with no fix in sight. Much like today, notebooks at the time were the top sellers. That was very much "do or die" for the Mac.

If anything, Intel is not stagnating in mobile because they're consistently finding ways to wring additional speed out of the existing process without cranking up the power requirements. It's the desktop where they had stagnated.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.
Twittering away the day at @TVsBen
 
End User
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2977
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Upper Canada

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:45 pm

Glorious wrote:
The Mac Pro was the last one they switched!

My gut is telling me that Apple is going to transition much faster this time around.
 
Glorious
Gerbilus Supremus
Posts: 12343
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:46 pm

Yeah they couldn't get the G5 to offer enough performance at low enough power, and there didn't seem to be any end in sight.

I mean, for heaven's sake, the later/fastest G5 towers (which still couldn't even reach the promised 3Ghz) were sold as OEM water-cooled.
 
Glorious
Gerbilus Supremus
Posts: 12343
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:49 pm

End User wrote:
My gut is telling me that Apple is going to transition much faster this time around.


Reality is telling me that the Intel transition of the mid-2000s was to a pre-existing, market-dominating, well-known commodity processor that offered significantly more performance right off the bat.

Reality is also telling me that "Apple" isn't the only one that has to do this transition: the ISVs do or the Mac Pro will have nothing to run. <- I've been telling you this repeatedly and you flagrantly ignore it.
 
Captain Ned
Global Moderator
Posts: 28704
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:49 pm

End User wrote:
My gut is telling me that Apple is going to transition much faster this time around.

Well, my gut tells me that I shouldn't have eaten that entire salad for lunch, so we're on an equal prognostication basis.
What we have today is way too much pluribus and not enough unum.
 
whm1974
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6361
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2014 5:29 am

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:52 pm

Glorious wrote:
Yeah they couldn't get the G5 to offer enough performance at low enough power, and there didn't seem to be any end in sight.

I mean, for heaven's sake, the later/fastest G5 towers (which still couldn't even reach the promised 3Ghz) were sold as OEM water-cooled.

Which is really ironic considering that during the late 80's/early 90's everyone including Intel thought that x86 was on it's last legs and will be replaced by RISC and VLIW CPUS.
 
Glorious
Gerbilus Supremus
Posts: 12343
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:59 pm

whm1974 wrote:
Which is really ironic considering that during the late 80's/early 90's everyone including Intel thought that x86 was on it's last legs and will be replaced by RISC and VLIW CPUS.


In the late 80s/early 90s, Apple was still using the 68k ISA, which was CISC.
 
End User
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2977
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Upper Canada

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:02 pm

Captain Ned wrote:
My personal opinion, and it is strictly opinion, is that the RDF crowd will take anything they can get to reverse what they consider as Jobs' apostasy and the decision to go with Intel and x86 in the first place.

I disagree.

I was in the audience at the 2006 WWDC when Jobs announced the Mac Pro to great fanfare. Back then the switch to Intel was a relief to the vast majority of Mac enthusiasts (myself included - I had switched to Windows/Linux on the desktop at that point using a PC I had built myself). While there were stories of individuals/businesses buying up the last of the PPC based PowerBooks and Mac workstations on a just in case basis, time has proven that the switch to Intel was a great success for both Apple and its customers.

This time around things are totally different. The switch to ARM based SoCs is about Apple gaining control of as much of their product stack as possible.
 
End User
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2977
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Upper Canada

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:03 pm

Captain Ned wrote:
End User wrote:
My gut is telling me that Apple is going to transition much faster this time around.

Well, my gut tells me that I shouldn't have eaten that entire salad for lunch, so we're on an equal prognostication basis.

Fair enough. Time will tell.
 
whm1974
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6361
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2014 5:29 am

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:04 pm

Glorious wrote:
whm1974 wrote:
Which is really ironic considering that during the late 80's/early 90's everyone including Intel thought that x86 was on it's last legs and will be replaced by RISC and VLIW CPUS.


In the late 80s/early 90s, Apple was still using the 68k ISA, which was CISC.

Which got replaced by PowerPC by '93/'94. Remember all the experts were crazy about the RISC ISA.
 
Glorious
Gerbilus Supremus
Posts: 12343
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:13 pm

End User wrote:
This time around things are totally different.


Yeah, you're wildly speculating about whether or not this CPU (desktop-class Apple-designed ARM) even exists.
 
the
Gerbil Elite
Posts: 941
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:26 am

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:14 pm

Glorious wrote:
the wrote:
I'd wager it is more likely that Apple would have to alter the internal bus for higher core counts than clock speeds to be competitive in multithreaded scenarios. The open question is how much Apple would have to change in their bus design as they can support at least six cores (presumably various coprocessors also sit on the same bus, which would put the probable limit at 16 devices on the coherent bus).


Why is the limit 16? You don't say. Hand-wave.


Typically maximum number of devices on a bus scales by powers of 2 and Apple already has six cores which would put the initial number at a mere 8. Presumably they have some coprocessors and/or the GPU on the same coherent but which would easy break that 8 limit. Next value up would simply be 16. I assumed that you could have picked that up from the subtext of my statements and your own knowledge but I mistakenly assumed that you'd actually read it.

Glorious wrote:
the wrote:
Apple would likely have to have at least twice as many cores as comparable Skylake-SP chips to be competitive here

Why would twice as many cores be comparable? Hand-wave.


Because the SIMD performance of a AVX 512 enabled Xeon is more than twice that of the peak of what Apple's A11 can achieve? Not difficult to fathom this one. The A11 has SIMD deficient compared to Sky Lake-SP. Making this up by adding additional cores would narrow this gap.

Glorious wrote:
the wrote:
An overly basic calculation of 30*5 W = 150 W to get 60 cores which would be under the 205W the top of the line Xeon Platinum 8160 consumes.


There is so much hand-wave in this comparison that I don't even know you bothered to put numbers in it.


And? I openly admit as such as raw data on how much energy a memory controller consumes or just interconnect consumes are not readily available. This also ignores the various corprocessors that'd be removed from the A11 as they could be spun off into another chip that'd be easy to manufacture. The point being made is that Apple's cores are low power and if that isn't changing then scaling in that dimension is linear. There will be an increases in power consumption due to amount of IO work that needs to be done both on-die and off. However, these figures are not too far off from other ARM based server chips on the market with similarly proposed IO.

If you got better numbers that don't require Jedi mind tricks by all means present them.
Dual Opteron 6376, 96 GB DDR3, Asus KGPE-D16, GTX 970
Mac Pro Dual Xeon E5645, 48 GB DDR3, GTX 770
Core i7 [email protected] Ghz, 32 GB DDR3, GA-X79-UP5-Wifi
Core i7 [email protected] Ghz, 16 GB DDR3, GTX 970, GA-X68XP-UD4
 
the
Gerbil Elite
Posts: 941
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:26 am

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:18 pm

End User wrote:
While there were stories of individuals/businesses buying up the last of the PPC based PowerBooks and Mac workstations on a just in case basis, time has proven that the switch to Intel was a great success for both Apple and its customers.


Apple did pull off the switch rather well but Apple continued to sell a model of the G5 for six months after the Mac Pros were introduced. Those that needed new systems but didn't have their software ported over could get hardware to run their legacy applications on during the transition phase.

The rate Apple is going through, the 'legacy hardware' Apple would provide for the ARM transition would be the 2013 Mac Pro.
Dual Opteron 6376, 96 GB DDR3, Asus KGPE-D16, GTX 970
Mac Pro Dual Xeon E5645, 48 GB DDR3, GTX 770
Core i7 [email protected] Ghz, 32 GB DDR3, GA-X79-UP5-Wifi
Core i7 [email protected] Ghz, 16 GB DDR3, GTX 970, GA-X68XP-UD4
 
Glorious
Gerbilus Supremus
Posts: 12343
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:28 pm

the wrote:
Typically maximum number of devices on a bus scales by powers of 2 and Apple already has six cores which would put the initial number at a mere 8. Presumably they have some coprocessors and/or the GPU on the same coherent but which would easy break that 8 limit. Next value up would simply be 16. I assumed that you could have picked that up from the subtext of my statements and your own knowledge but I mistakenly assumed that you'd actually read it.


I picked up that you were hand-waving about some meaningless nonsense, yes. "Presumably" it ain't 8, so, ^2, SIXTEEN! Such nuance! Much subtext! Meanwhile you're doing all this other hand-waving math about how they're going to have like SIXTY, that is SIX, ZERO cores later on.

I would think you'd pick up on that utter incongruence yourself, seeing as you're the one saying it. But hey, that would mistakenly assuming that you understand what you actually write.

the wrote:
Because the SIMD performance of a AVX 512 enabled Xeon is more than twice that of the peak of what Apple's A11 can achieve? Not difficult to fathom this one. The A11 has SIMD deficient compared to Sky Lake-SP. Making this up by adding additional cores would narrow this gap.


Oh, so you know the comparative peak SIMD performance of the A11 now?

Interesting. Would you mind citing that for me?

the wrote:
And? I openly admit as such as raw data on how much energy a memory controller consumes or just interconnect consumes are not readily available. This also ignores the various corprocessors that'd be removed from the A11 as they could be spun off into another chip that'd be easy to manufacture. The point being made is that Apple's cores are low power and if that isn't changing then scaling in that dimension is linear. There will be an increases in power consumption due to amount of IO work that needs to be done both on-die and off. However, these figures are not too far off from other ARM based server chips on the market with similarly proposed IO.


No, your point is that the weakness of the individual cores can made up by just adding more. Fin.

That is completely wrong. It is fundamentally untrue. There are some workloads that are inherently single-threaded, and even in the generic case such performance is irreducibly important to a certain degree in everything: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law

the wrote:
If you got better numbers that don't require Jedi mind tricks by all means present them.


I'm still baffled at how you're an expert on the comparative SIMD performance of the A11.

Like, sure, I don't have "better" numbers: that's because I don't just make them up.
Last edited by Glorious on Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Glorious
Gerbilus Supremus
Posts: 12343
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:30 pm

the wrote:
Apple did pull off the switch rather well but Apple continued to sell a model of the G5 for six months after the Mac Pros were introduced. Those that needed new systems but didn't have their software ported over could get hardware to run their legacy applications on during the transition phase.


Right. Because the native Intel CS3 wasn't available until then.

And that's despite the official hardware/sdk kit being officially released in 2005 and how I can't imagine that Adobe didn't have at least some warning and preparation before then.
 
ptsant
Gerbil XP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 12:45 pm

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:44 pm

just brew it! wrote:
End User wrote:
Apple's SoC designs kick ass. It makes sense for them to push them out to all of their products ASAP.

...because one size fits all, so making a good smartphone SoC automatically means they can make laptop/desktop SoCs?

Umm... no. They might be able to do well in that space with their own CPU designs, but it remains to be seen.

It is unsurprising that they have been able to do well with their own SoCs in the market segment they single-handedly invented. This does not necessarily translate to other segments.


That is a very reasonable summary. Macbook [non pro] buyers could probably do with a performance similar to the ipad pro but other segments are an open question.

If/when a "pro" level Arm device comes out I will benchmark it on what I actually do and buy it if the price is right. All my tools are Unix/open source, so I don't care for x86. But I'm not just going to believe that just because it has the Apple logo it's going to be magically faster.
Image
 
the
Gerbil Elite
Posts: 941
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:26 am

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:50 pm

whm1974 wrote:
Captain Ned wrote:
End User wrote:
The A11 is an example of what Apple has accomplished to date.

In a very confined market space. How many decades back must one go to find an Apple desktop chip widely regarded (a/k/a including those not infected by the RDF) as clearly superior to the x86 equivalent of the time? One does not win back those decades quickly.

My personal opinion, and it is strictly opinion, is that the RDF crowd will take anything they can get to reverse what they consider as Jobs' apostasy and the decision to go with Intel and x86 in the first place.

Didn't Jobs made the decision to switch the Mac over from the PowerPC to x86 because he had to? As i recall, x86 was already outperforming PPC at a lower cost by then.


The interesting thing is that IBM was selling Apple the PowerPC 970MP chips dirt cheap. The dual core 2.5 Ghz were $250 to $300 from a reseller sheet I stumbled upon a decade ago. The really expensive parts in the G5 weren't the CPUs but rather the chipset. Apple designed the original G5 chipset but had a very poor memory controller. IBM did the memory controller and buffers for the dual core generation of chips which performed far better in memory tests. It also came at a much higher cost. IBM reused this memory controller in some of their own servers at the time for the PPC 970MP. The PCIe controller Apple used was from Broadcom originated from an Opteron chipset they were offering at the time. Another big expense for Apple was the cooling system in the G5's. They had tons of fans with the high end models having liquid cooling. Liquid cooling was a cost Apple wanted to avoid but the G5's just ran too hot.

Performance wise, the G5's were a mix. There was the two cycle integer execution which really hurt performance. Single precision FPU performance and integer SIMD was really good thanks to Altivec. But the double precision performance feel behind x86 at the time as Altivec didn't support that data type and thus everything relied on the dedicated scalar FPU. Mixed scalar FPU and Altivec code also suffered due to latencies between the register files. Intel at the time had rolled out 64 bit floats for SSE calculations so performance there jumped ahead of the PowerPC 970. One reason for the switch was that IBM was never able to get Apple a 3 Ghz PowerPC 970 into the G5's. Steve Jobs considered that an embarrassment as he laid that out as a performance target. The additional clock boost would have help the system's performance profile too.

The final thing that motivated the PowerPC to x86 transition was the lack of improvement in mobile. IBM couldn't get the PowerPC 970 down to a comfortable power level. Freescale had mostly abandoned the old PowerPC bus used by the G4's which hampered performance there. Apple has rejected two proposals for new bus interface's from Motorola/Freescale as Apple would have had to develop their own chipsets for it. Apple did find a PowerPC chip that they liked from PA-Semi but by the time they were being considered, IBM was angering Apple too much and the decision to switch to x86 was made. Years later Apple purchased PA-Semi who would then work on their SoC and ARM cores.
Dual Opteron 6376, 96 GB DDR3, Asus KGPE-D16, GTX 970
Mac Pro Dual Xeon E5645, 48 GB DDR3, GTX 770
Core i7 [email protected] Ghz, 32 GB DDR3, GA-X79-UP5-Wifi
Core i7 [email protected] Ghz, 16 GB DDR3, GTX 970, GA-X68XP-UD4
 
Captain Ned
Global Moderator
Posts: 28704
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:04 pm

Some required reading for context. Jon "Hannibal" Stokes, back when Ars was a real tech blog:

https://arstechnica.com/features/2004/08/ppc-1/
https://arstechnica.com/features/2004/10/ppc-2/
What we have today is way too much pluribus and not enough unum.
 
the
Gerbil Elite
Posts: 941
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:26 am

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:24 pm

Glorious wrote:
the wrote:
Apple did pull off the switch rather well but Apple continued to sell a model of the G5 for six months after the Mac Pros were introduced. Those that needed new systems but didn't have their software ported over could get hardware to run their legacy applications on during the transition phase.


Right. Because the native Intel CS3 wasn't available until then.

And that's despite the official hardware/sdk kit being officially released in 2005 and how I can't imagine that Adobe didn't have at least some warning and preparation before then.


Apple was also transitioning from 32 bit to 64 bit at the time and changing a lot of the under laying APIS. Adobe had started to prepare for 64 bit Photoshop which was initially supposed to arrive alongside OS X 10.5. Apple then announced the x86 transition and along with it dropped the Carbon64 API Adobe was initially targeting. So much of the work done in Photoshop CS3 was to start the migration to the Cocoa frame work and validate x86 builds. It didn't help that OS X 10.5 itself was delayed.

64 bit support would only be possible in OS X GUI applications if they were Cocoa based. It wasn't until CS5 that this arrived on the Mac where as Windows got 64 bit Photoshop with CS4.

Needless to say Adobe wasn't too happy with Apple back then.
Dual Opteron 6376, 96 GB DDR3, Asus KGPE-D16, GTX 970
Mac Pro Dual Xeon E5645, 48 GB DDR3, GTX 770
Core i7 [email protected] Ghz, 32 GB DDR3, GA-X79-UP5-Wifi
Core i7 [email protected] Ghz, 16 GB DDR3, GTX 970, GA-X68XP-UD4
 
whm1974
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6361
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2014 5:29 am

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:43 pm

Captain Ned wrote:
Some required reading for context. Jon "Hannibal" Stokes, back when Ars was a real tech blog:

https://arstechnica.com/features/2004/08/ppc-1/
https://arstechnica.com/features/2004/10/ppc-2/

Really good articles that are still worth reading. I'm going to have to reread as I haven't read them in a long time.
 
End User
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2977
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Upper Canada

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:38 pm

Captain Ned wrote:
Some required reading for context. Jon "Hannibal" Stokes, back when Ars was a real tech blog:

https://arstechnica.com/features/2004/08/ppc-1/
https://arstechnica.com/features/2004/10/ppc-2/

Image
 
End User
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2977
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Upper Canada

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:41 pm

 
End User
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2977
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Upper Canada

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:51 pm

just brew it! wrote:
End User wrote:
Apple's SoC designs kick ass. It makes sense for them to push them out to all of their products ASAP.

...because one size fits all, so making a good smartphone SoC automatically means they can make laptop/desktop SoCs?

It goes without saying that Apple needs to develop SoCs tailored to laptop/desktop/workstation form factors. It would be suicidal for Apple to make the move away from Intel before achieving that.
 
Redocbew
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2495
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 11:44 am

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:52 pm

You know what the definition of insanity is, right? Doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results? Yeah, we're definitely getting there.
Do not meddle in the affairs of archers, for they are subtle and you won't hear them coming.
 
End User
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2977
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 6:47 pm
Location: Upper Canada

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:53 pm

Redocbew wrote:
You know what the definition of insanity is, right? Doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results? Yeah, we're definitely getting there.

Yet you keep coming back for more.
 
whm1974
Emperor Gerbilius I
Posts: 6361
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2014 5:29 am

Re: Apple Dumps Intel: CONFIRMED!

Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:55 pm

End User wrote:

Is it? Actually Apple so-called abandonment of x86 is pretty far from inevitable as neither Apple or for that matter you have shown that they have a viable ARM processor to replace it in the near future.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
GZIP: On