qcmadness

http://techreport.com/news/27673 ... -from-intel-by-2017

果然

XT

一啲都唔意外

dom

要加碼 買 INTEL

tamalemon

引用:

原帖由 XT 於 2015-1-15 08:30 發表
一啲都唔意外

  即係點? ARM?

bebird

引用:

原帖由 tamalemon 於 15/1/2015 10:46 發表


  即係點? ARM?

yes, similar as iphone & ipad

Puff

Still think this is a stupid move from the prosumers' perspective, if true
Generic consumers should have no prob with it though.


for instance, now apple has to watch on its own economies of scale vs Intel's one spanning not only Macs but the rest of the world. they have to also rely on GF/TSMC against Intel's leading-edge technologies. prosumer features like windows virtualisation and bootcamp would be gone too. frankly speaking iDevices have the volume and market power to back its own series of chips, but Mac? Ehm. Using iPad chip in low-end Mac? Splitting up OS X does not sound a good idea, though the similar but failed attempt of Microsoft was because of being Metro-only and tablet-focused.

Having said that, if I agree a fairly powered AMD chips has a value preposition, it seems I should have also agreed on Apple bringing its own chip to Mac would not be as bad as AMD's value and volume after all. Unit shipments of Mac per year should be way more than OEM machines powered by AMD in a year... Moreover, pushing HSA alike on Mac would be an easy job for Apple with its vertical integration model.




I guess I would still buy it if my own one breaks at the right time and I am still a blind fanboi of Apple.
Quad-core Super Cyclone plus Apple-designed GPU with HBM in a retina Macbook Pro, please?


[ 本帖最後由 Puff 於 2015-1-15 14:34 編輯 ]

qcmadness

引用:

原帖由 Puff 於 2015-1-15 13:58 發表
Still think this is a stupid move from the prosumers' perspective, if true
Generic consumers should have no prob with it though.


for instance, now apple has to watch on its own economies of s ...

咪多幾個core lor

dom

引用:

原帖由 Puff 於 2015/1/15 13:58 發表
Still think this is a stupid move from the prosumers' perspective, if true
Generic consumers should have no prob with it though.


for instance, now apple has to watch on its own economies of s ...

Apple wish you Good luck with GF
Rubbish Fab that have lousy management and poor yield almost cost AMD to file Chapter 11 ...

Aware

Need not to think with compatibility?

Aware

引用:

原帖由 dom 於 2015-1-16 12:09 發表


Apple wish you Good luck with GF
Rubbish Fab that have lousy management and poor yield almost cost AMD to file Chapter 11 ...

I don't think Tim Cook will use GF

Puff

引用:

原帖由 Aware 於 2015-1-16 15:53 發表

I don't think Tim Cook will use GF

it is possible. *** and GF are synced fabs at 14nm.

XT

引用:

原帖由 Aware 於 2015-1-16 15:53 發表

I don't think Tim Cook will use GF

GOOD IDEA
產能不足, 又有得炒

qcmadness

引用:

原帖由 Aware 於 2015-1-16 15:53 發表

I don't think Tim Cook will use GF

應該會用, 因為TSMC睇來有問題

qcmadness

咁講啦, 3間foundry有各自問題
1. TSMC: 產能高, 最大的foundry
2. Samsung: 產能高, 價錢較TSMC進取
3. Globalfoundries: 產能中上, 價錢再進取d

對於Apple / 其他IC designer來講:
1. TSMC供貨穩定, 但應該最貴
2. Samsung都供貨穩定, 不過Apple唔想搵佢做生意
3. Globalfoundries供貨唔太穩定, 良率又唔會太高 (望下Snapdragon 810), 但價錢應該最平, 對於Apple / Qualcomm來講, 又近過Samsung / TSMC

同埋你地諗下, Apple A8 / A8X先開始搵TSMC, 以Apple的性格, 點會咁快又搵番Samsung? 有d野既

XT

引用:

原帖由 qcmadness 於 2015-1-17 14:45 發表
咁講啦, 3間foundry有各自問題
1. TSMC: 產能高, 最大的foundry
2. Samsung: 產能高, 價錢較TSMC進取
3. Globalfoundries: 產能中上, 價錢再進取d

對於Apple / 其他IC designer來講:
1. TSMC供貨穩定, 但應該最貴
2 ...

s810 有其他問題