Apple has selected AMD Zen as the CPU vendor for the Late 2016 iMac refresh.
>>52540829
source?
>>52540877
this
>>52540829
if this is true it'll throw AMD into the limelight.
Or it'll make Apple look like cheaper shit.
>>52540904
Win-win.
>>52540904
Hopefully it'll give AMD more appeal, god knows they need it.
However, I don't want AMD to ditch their 'bang for your buck' devices.
apple a shit
>>52540829
Apple has not selected shit yet.
>Either way, buying AMD would have five obvious advantages for Apple:
1) it would gain the ability to design its own x86-compatible SoCs to replace off-the-shelf Intel chips;
2) it would have access to advanced graphics chip designs such as FirePro (AMD acquired ATI for $5.4 billion in 2006);
3) it would get AMD's advanced ARM chip, code-named K12, which has been co-developed with Zen;
4) it would get AMD's large patent portfolio;
5) it would have more control over its own destiny, which is something Apple values highly.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/will-zen-save-amd-or-might-apple/
>>52540829
OSX can't do AMD CPUs
at most they'd maybe use APUs for the Mac minis so they can market them for better GPU acceleration
>>52540986
Plz no, let samsung buy them
>>52540996
OS X isn't good with AMD CPUs because Apple doesn't support them officially. If Apple shipped Macs with AMD CPUs they'd do some work on OS X, you fucking dumbass.
>>52541009
Which means they have to spend time on that costing them money, when they could instead just stick to intel chips
>>52540904
Most people who buy a Mac have no knowledge which components are inside. So Apple can do that. Apple did the same with the graphics card inside the Macbook Pro 2015.
>>52540986
Apple would rather move to ARM than waste money on a sinking ship. Shit is already moving in that direction, wouldn't be surprised if the upcoming Retina MacBook has an A10X inside.
>>52541018
No doubt the jews at Apple have already worked it all out.
Most likely scenario is AMD cut a near-zero-profit deal with Apple, making their chips dirt cheap to buy in, and then offered to help with the optimisations (Which they did EA and Mantle integration) I'm willing to bet that Apple have almost no money going into this partnership.
>>52541002
This
Samsung is a pretty good guy
>>52541049
Either way it would only happen with zen, as AMD's current CPUs are far too slow even for mactards
>>52540829
>they chose it because of the name
apple would
but I doubt it's true
>>52541061
Samsung buying up AMD wouldn't be bad at all. If they kept all the AMD staff onboard.
In essence it would just be like AMD requiring a fab.
>>52541002
>>52541061
>>52541076
Don't be retarded. Samsung is the Korean Apple. Arguably even more corrupt. They're both fucking awful. In Samsung's favor is it's fabs but, that's it.
>yfw intel buys AMD's GPU division
>>52541062
It wouldn't be so much the problem of performance, which is not a major one in properly developed software.
But the problem instead lies in cooling. Even now on 16nm Haswell chips Macbooks overheat and throttle, can you imagine just how quicky this would occur with 32nm Excavator? Trying to passively cool that with the body the same way they do their current products would be a nightmare to say the least.
But putting a powerful APU in a Macbook would be really good for both Apple and AMD. They would finally have the graphical performance, and it would make other laptop manufacturers start using higher end APUs in properly engineered chassis.
>>52541116
but they already include 940ms in macbooks
>>52541049
Business doesn't have to be nice. Deal with it, nerd.
>>52541002
>Samsung
god not pls
FUCK off you Dipshit!
>>52541193
Samsung could give them the money and fabs they need to compete with intel
Also AMD does some ARM work on the side
Wasn't there rumors of Apple doing their own ARM chips for MacBooks?
If Apple wants to do their own chips they should just buy AMD.
>>52540996
>OSX can't do AMD CPUs
Only because it's a one simple setting preventing hackintosh.
x86 is x86, they are same shit. OSX could well run on anything they compile it for.
>>52541165
Which means Apple must then deal with multiple Vendors. Which makes things difficult for any company. More so than dealing with a single vendor atleast.
They then also have the problem of trying to cool 2 units.
>>52541213
At some point they're going to merge iOS and OSX and people will praise them and say they invented it
>>52541185
At what point did I suggest it was?
>>52541213
>apple buying amd
>amd CPU/cadrs become overpriced shit like rest of their production
no thx
apple confirmed for kill
>>52541225
I suppose but they're probably going to wait for zen to do anything with AMD, aside from their GPUs
>>52541204
>Samsung
Samsung might arguably be worse than apple.
They make overpriced stuff out of cheapest and shitties plastic. at least Apple uses metal.
>>52541213
They did venture into their own arm chips for a while, and they were competitive against the Intel CPUs being used at the time.
By competitive, I ofcourse mean that they slaughtered them.
Jim Keller was brought over to Apple for some time, where he developed the A7 and A8 chips for them before leaving,
>>52541213
There's also reputation at stake. Before apple can buy the chip company with the bad reputation, and this take on that bad reputation in it's own products, AMD needs to release a promising product. If Zen lives up or exceeds the hooplah, there's a potential for strong negotiations:
AMD will have prospects of it's own, and won't have to take a deal from apple, or qualcomm, or whomever, but also, Apple may very well want to buy AMD so it can have full control of the hardware. I can see either scenario playing out in the favor of consumers.
1) If apple gets full control of the hardware, their products get even better (inb4 shills)
2) If AMD doesn't get bought, competition between intel and AMD rises, and we're back in the early 2000's when amd released the athlon 64
>>52541230
They are losing marketshare right now because Microsoft did the right choice by combining mobile and desktop. Apple will have to follow.
Keeping iOS and OS X separate was a good choice for the early tablets, but now the hardware has advanced enough that having a laptop and tablet in one device is perfectly feasible.
>>52541244
Waiting for Zen is the only thing anyone can do.
The only CPU out of AMD worth buying right now as a consumer would the the 8320-E.
Their GPUs are top notch. And Apple using them in the MacPro trashca- I mean -Workstations - is certainly giving developers some pause to focus a little more on FirePro Optimisation rather than pushing CUDA and PhysX to their boundaries for the last inklings of performance there.
The Income, and attention that brings for AMD is really good for the market. Gives them some money to start innovating heavily again.
>>52541280
one uses cocoa touch, one uses cocoa.
>>52541259
>their products get even better (inb4 shills)
Via increased R&D budgetting and an increase in staffing.
Apple are hardly the pinnacle of Design.
>>52541291
>implying FX 6300 isn't the best performance/$ chip for consumers
[spoiler]if consumers were still buying desktops[/spoiler]
>>52541252
>They did venture into their own arm chips for a while, and they were competitive against the Intel CPUs being used at the time.
Still are, the 2W A9 used in the iPhone 6S performs neck to neck with Intel's Broadwell Core M turbo-boosted at 17W.
>>52541025
This. They've been using amd laptop graphics in their macs and macbooks.
If you can get a good deal then why not? I'm sure amd is shitting out CPUs and GPUs for apple just for the free marketing.
>>52541307
never implied they have top notch design (but i personally feel that they are of a certain benchmark in ergonomic/visual/functional design, but i am withholding those feelings from my judgement)
if apple acquires AMD and the two teams of R&D boffins collaborate even closer, then who really knows what can happen?
What if AMD buys applel?
![d34a56309c76568f4b57a0a96622df86[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/OLSXgiR.png "d34a56309c76568f4b57a0a96622df86[1].png")
>>52541317
While the 6300 is a fantastically well performing chip for it's price. Here in the UK, the 8320-E is hardly £20 more to buy.
And you can easily OC the 8320 to bring it to 8350 levels and beyond.
>>52541317
>>52541459
>fx-6100
>gtx-970
s-should i upgrade to intel??
>>52541459
>95W
Christ.
>>52541497
Just grab an 8320 or 6300.
The cost of an Intel CPU and Mobo does not make up for the marginal performance increase you would see in most games.
If you're doing a new build all together, then Intel, sure, why not if you have the money.
>>52541497
Wait. for. Zen.
>>52541512
95w
8 cores
32nm
Inefficient (From a power usage standpoint) design
I'd say AMD did well to bring it down to that.
Even some newer i7s hit 95 watt TDP
>>52541458
that would mean AMD has invented something much more valuable than a more efficient processor. it has invented a way to create money. aka, it will have usurped the Fed.
>>52540996
Apple can just add the support to OS X.
x86 is x86 architecture.
>>52541002
I would like to see Google to buy AMD.
They have enough money to develop awesome CPUs.
Make AMD Great Again!
>>52541530
>Even some newer i7s hit 95 watt TDP
With double or triple the performance of an equivalent AMD in that thermal range though.
Probably not big deal for most people, but for countries where electricity is expensive or server rooms, it's a lost sale as soon as they see the specs.
>>52541556
>AMD powered Military Spec, Google Branded, Kill bots
No thanks.
>>52541556
>not IBM
Calling bullshit, but that'd be fucking cool.
>>52541573
I see your point, but then again.
>8320E
>Consumer Chip
>Server room
Sort of a loose string being drawn out here, don't you agree?
Opterons have their place. The physical core count is certainly something some companies look for.
AMD are doing what they can to a 5 year old process, and an equally aged Architecture.
The fact that Intel exceed the performance of such chips by 3-fold (In synthetic benchmarks, yet to see it in an actual workload) is no surprise. Infact, considering the technological advancements made in such time, it's quite insulting to Intel that they are only that far ahead, even more so considering their income.
People always comment on how AMD was mismanaged under Rory Reed, but look at Intel in these past 3 years.
>>52541579
>implying IBM wants that x86 trash
>>52541595
you can't call bullshit on something that someone else already called bullshit on. you can only be in agreement with the consensus or in disagreement.
>macs can already boil water with intel chips
>putting amd housefires in applel memebooks with no cooling
>>52541635
Some men just want to watch the world burn.
Are we finally getting AMD graphics in the rMBP??
>>52541619
Well then calling Mr past anon and telling him he has a pretty good opinion.
>>52541635
>>52541669
It will be glorious.
>>52541669
>thinkpads in space
Didn't know that, bretty gud. Strange they don't really seem to use that for advertising.
>>52540829
i only have 5k how can i invest in AMD?
>>52540829
I doubt it. Most projections expect the IPC of Zen to not even match Haswell, never mind Skylake. People buy iMacs to run Photoshop and other professional tools, they won't buy them if they're slow.
>>52541556
They fucking bought Motorola just to get their patents and just left them for dead.
Yes, I will be forever mad.
>>52541002
fuck off kim jong un
>>52543263
>They fucking bought Motorola just to get their patents and just left them for dead.
also mad at this. They took the engineer team they wanted and the patents and after making a decent phone they left them to be destroyed by Lenovo.
>>52541029
here's your (you)
>tfw you can finally install OSX without problems (including kikeware)
>>52541337
No it doesn't retard. Apple just thermal throttles it so much it with shitty cooling it only looks that way.
>>52543799
Geekbench 3 on the first run scores comparatively with any other Core M laptop, but on the second run, the thermals cause it to score around 1/3 of the first score. Shit doesn't look good for Intel if they're advertising it as a fanless chip with "4.5W SDP". An Atom X5 would be better for sustained tasks on fanless computers.
>>52541635
My sister had that problem, she went to their store and they replaced the motherboard, now it sits at 50/60 all day
>>52541573
>double or triple the performance
Here is your reply
>>52543179
Intel's core arch is relatively huge. Haswell cores in 22nm were 14.5mm2 each. In comparison a 28nm Excavator module is 14.48mm2.
A Zen core is most definitely bigger than a core from any of the Bulldozer derivatives, but probably won't be quite as large as intel's. Smaller die size in implementation might mean they clock slightly higher at a given power level which would offset the lower IPC.
>>52541612
I still sort of question the idea that Rory Reed mismanaged AMD.
If anything, he made a bold play that has yet to really pay dividends, and might not ever pay dividends (APU compute). At least part of the reason it hasn't paid dividends is due to Intel's unfair shenanigans with OEMs and retailers, because I just recently bought my sister an A8-based laptop and it is probably the most well-balanced laptop I've ever had the pleasure of using.
So yeah, it sucks that it didn't work out, but when you're AMD you have to make bold plays. I'm glad they did that. I'm not so glad they abandoned HPC under Reed, but it looks like that damage was temporary, and really (unless you're an autismo), they did so at a time when HPC was just fine for most of the software out there. Shit, they got trashed all over for their octocores just because they were overkill. Now those same chips are coming into their own. AMD basically made a chip that allowed it to rest on its laurels for a while. It's the fault of the consumers in the market that they didn't realize that.
>>52541116
>16nm Haswell chips
Nigga wut
>>52544670
Rory was nothing but an interim head overseeing AMD's finances while vetting a long term replacement. The issue was that he dropped AMD's stock value every time he opened his mouth, the man is a vacuum for investor confidence.
He did spear head a couple projects which never got off the ground though.
>>52541291
Why is the 8320 E worth it? Is it because of overclocking?
>>52544806
Are you telling me he was not the man behind the decision to go all-out on APUs? I could have sworn I'd read that was attributable to him.
>>52544873
>cheapest octocore you can get from AMD
>95W TDP instead of 125W means better cooling and power consumption
>better cooling means better overclocking
>turbo mode brings its speed up to non-E levels perfectly anyway, so no real loss
It's basically a lot better. When I build for customers though I usually end up going non-E, because it's impossible to convince people that turbo mode is for real.
>>52544873
All of the E designated parts are the latest and highest binnings they've produced. They'll reach clocks with less voltage than others, and the 8320E in particular is only $140-$150. You can overclock it and still get lower power consumption than a stock 8350.
>>52544903
The FUSION initiative at AMD started well before 2010, and Read was in charge starting sometime in 2011.
>>52544922
my mistake, then. who was the mastermind of FUSION?
>>52544933
Ruiz, part of acquiring ATI was for the purpose of building APUs.
>>52544919
>better cooling means better overclocking
No, you idiot
The 8320e and 8370e regulates the voltage so that it can never run above 95W TDP, like with the Nano. It's shit for overclocking because you'd end up with a 125W TDP CPU by undoing the voltage magic doohonkey
>>52544994
They aren't throttling, the chips aren't any different from any other Vishera die. They're just better binnings.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,3929.html
This is an FX 8370E over clocked to stable 4ghz with turbo core turned off. They're supplying it with less than 1.2v. Stock vcore for an FX 8350 is 1.35v, and 1.375v for turbo.
There is no throttling "magic" going on here. Just GloFo finally ironing out issues with their 32nm PD-SOI trainwreck.
>>52544994
I suppose that's why it has a better OC result than the 8320 on UserBench, HWBOT, and got a great OC review from anandtech:
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/fx_8320e/
vs
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/fx_8320/
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-FX-8320E-vs-AMD-FX-8320/2985vs1983
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8864/amd-fx-8320e-cpu-review-the-other-95w-vishera/2
What did you learn?
>>52545049
>>52545091
>buying AMD lies and paid reviewers again
I thought /g/ was better than this
>>52545114
lol, how does that even make sense?
I'll be the first to tell you AMD can't compete with intel right now, and the first to tell you that you were fucking wrong about the FX-8320E
jog on, you incredible abortion of nature.
>>52545114
>get proven wrong so you immediately shitpost
If you want to behave like a child then stay on /b/.
>>52544978
til
>>52545142
I thought this is exactly what /g/ is for?
>not shitposting about tech related topics until your fingers bleed
Why fucken live?
>>52545142
>>52545134
>oc'd 8320e uses more voltage when overclocked THAN A 9590
BTFO
T
F
O
>>52545397
>overclocking causes increases in voltage
>some children still don't know this in the year of our lord 2016
at stock it uses less than half the TDP of the 9590, what point do you think you're making?
In any case the reason any AMD user would care about the TDP is not efficiency; for that they'd go intel anyway. TDP is only important for AMD insofar as it provides a rough estimate of the kind of cooling solution you'll need for the chip.
take that BTFO and shove it right back up your ass.
>>52545114
>AMD
>paying people
Theyre broke
>>52545610
>what point do you think you're making
The whole point that the "better cooling" (aka lies) makes them overclock better when they behave almost exactly the same as the FX-9590 in that arena. Not only does the 8320e use more voltage as the ridiculous 9590 for lower clock speeds, but it runs equally as hot.
>>52540986
they don't have to. Apple IS shit.
>>52540829
Is this beyond rumor now? Link?
What models?
>2017.6
>Zen is here and in full swing
>renewed public interest in AMD
>$5 stock price again
>polaris is super efficient
>Zen+Polaris FirePro APUs used in tons of Apple stuff
>Zen+Polaris APUs used in PS5 and Xbox Infinity, they're still 30FPS shit but it drives revenue all the same
>Google buys AMD
>Intel gets sweaty
>Google posts global wanted ads for Jim Keller
>Jim sipping Intel tears frappuchino in France
>sees his face on the TV appear
>his eyes go serious
>he drops his cup, it shatters
>"It's time for Zen 2"
>he teleports to Google HQ and hands them an already-completed blueprint for Zen 2, which he lovingly designed for AMD after silently leaving in 2015
>"There's one final piece"
>his body desintegrates into stardust and floats into the blueprint, connecting never-before-connected points, completing the Zen 2 design
>his soul floats up into space
>Keller the Stellar has saved us all
>Google begins fabbing the next day
>it was designed in such a way that it can even be printed on 32nm silicon, and it still shrinks down to 10nm
>beats Intel CPUs by 100x
>Polaris on-die GPU deletes all Nvidia GPUs in the same machine, gets 10,000FPS on Star Citizen maxed at 16k
>Intel commits sudoku and overheats because their chips can't crunch the numbers anymore, their fabs had to go back to using dirt for their fabs since GAMD took all the good sand
>a star shimmers in the night sky, almost looking like an eye blinking through tears
>>52546163
is this yours or a pasta?
>>Google posts global wanted ads for Jim Keller
I imagined google putting personalized ads just for Keller to every single fucking site he visits on the web
>>52541524
wait, wait, wait. that's all g ever tells people to do, that and install gentoo
>>52546489
apple a shit
>>52546163
nobody can buy AMD though, they will lose x86
>>52540829
sauce?
>>52545673
jesus christ you have poor reading comprehension.
even if all of what you said were true, the price difference between the two chips negates any advantage the 9590 might have from a cost-effectiveness standpoint.
>>52546534
this is actually true AFAIK. When Intel licensed x86 to AMD, it was a license written such that the company could not sell it off, and that it died with AMD, basically.
That being said, there are plenty of good reasons to buy AMD aside from x86. If they really truly do die, they will be bought out first.
>>52546534
>>52546583
Wrong. It's a cross licensing deal. Intel uses AMD's patents and IP just as much as AMD is using Intel's. Intel could not sell any processors unless the renegotiate the deal with AMD.
Probably part of the reason they wanted Itanium to succeed.
>>52540829
Probably cheaper than Intel CPUs while keeping the price the same = more profit.
unlikely
battery life would suffer
Apparently apple already wanted Llano inside macbook airs in the past but it (obviously) did not happen:
http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/105989-amd-powered-macbook-air-a-tantalizing-might-have-been
Personally I don't think it is too far from reality...
Apple was always about custom designed hardware:
Designing custom ARM chip for way longer then anyone else.
Only dropped ARM on desktop because their was no eco-system
Used AMD custom designs in the past (380X)
Never had a good relationship with intel
On AMDs side:
Semicustom is their only profit-producing sector
They are good at making custom chips -> why all consoles use them
Has had a decent relationship with AMD (Might be due to Jim Keller)
Zen is all about customization -> same chip can scale from notebooks to server
Next-gen APUs come with HBM so they will probably btfo intels iGPUs
>>52540986
If they buy AMD they lose x86 license so no more x86 CPUs from AMD-Apple.
>>52547061
Stop regurgitating this, its wrong.
Intel's X86 license is defunct, and any company who purchases either AMD or VIA will be able to produce X86 chips. The FTC ruled that intel must negotiate "in good faith" and the FTC reserved the right to define what that term meant. The bottom line is that intel can never stop anyone from using the portfolio of X86 IP that AMD and VIA possess.
All intel can withhold is their modern instructions like AVX, and that would end up going to court.
>>52546763
no, u. When Intel gave AMD the lic, AMD had yet to create the x86_64 standard, which is the license you're referring to.
The license to AMD is a special kind of non-transferable license.
>>52547244
>The FTC ruled that intel must negotiate "in good faith" and the FTC reserved the right to define what that term meant.
If true, that would still mean going to court to get your x86, which would mean not getting to legally make x86 for YEARS after you bought AMD. So no, you would NOT buy AMD for the x86 lic under any circumstances.
>>52547298
It's all part of the same deal. That's why there are no exclusive extensions to X86.
>>52547341
> that would still mean going to court to get your x86,
Why do people like you always insist on talking out of your ass and pretending to be experts on topics they literally just learned about? Please tell me what goes through the mind of a subhuman cretin such as yourself.
They would not go to court, you retarded fuck. Business negotiations do not require any arbitration unless both parties refuse to concede and reach an agreement. Representatives from each company would meet in a board room and sit down with someone from the FTC and it would be done with. Intel has no reason to change the nature of their cross licensing, and anyone who acquired AMD wouldn't waste their time on pointless corporate bickering.
>>52547412
Well, I'm surely not a lawyer, but the reason I'm disagreeing with you is because based on the parts of the law that I DO understand, and based on my understanding of human nature, everything you're saying seem to miss a fundamental point:
Arbitration WOULD occur, because it is extremely unlikely, in my view, that both parties would agree to maintain the same cross licensing extant between AMD and Intel. Representative from each company would sit in a board room with an FTC dude, the FTC dude would remind Intel it must "negotiate in good faith" - a mushy directive if I ever heard of one - and Intel would tell the other company the terms it wanted for the licensing, which would be draconian, because Intel doesn't want to compete on x86 for realsies against the likes of Samsung. Samsung, or whoever, would sue under the exact pretext that Intel did not negotiate in good faith, and it would go to court.
Also, FWIW, I'm not as much of a mouth breather as you think I am; I'm just recalling what I've read in the past about the issue - I might be misinformed, but I've been following this for at least a few years. The last I heard of it, this was what AMD stated:
"Actually, the agreement is pretty clear – if there is a change of control for either company the agreement is terminated,” said Mr. Prairie. “That does not mean a new agreement could not be reached, but in a change of control the agreement is terminated.”
>>52540904
I'm pretty sure they already use AMD in iMacs
or was it the Mac Pro I'm not even sure
>>52547670
Wouldn't the same agreement cover AMD64?
>>52548040
as I understand it, yes.
>>52541252
>A8
LMAO
>>52540829
>amd processors
>apple
FAKE AND GAY! Now, fuck off!
>>52548933
That's what they said about Intel and Apple.
>>52545114
>AMD
>Buying out TomsShillWare from under Intel
Yeh no. Keep proving yourself the fool though.
>Experiencing problem with Diablo 3.
>Open up AMD Gaming Evolved utility aka "Raptr "
>Raptr states there's a new driver version: AMD Crimson 16.1
>Click to go to website & download file
>Run file & finishes installing
>Restart computer > Load Raptr
>Raptr states there's a new driver version: AMD Crimson 16.1
>Okay wtf
>Remove all AMD Drivers from PC
>Restart Computer
>Install latest driver according to AMD Auto-detect software (AMD Crimson 15.12)
>Restart Computer
>Turn on Raptr
>Raptr states there's a new driver version: AMD Crimson 16.1
>Download file again & run for install
>Restart Computer when it finishes
>Load Raptr again
>Raptr states there's a new driver version: AMD Crimson 16.1
Why does this shit have to be so complicated?
Also daily reminder:
drink more water
>>52550653
There was an error with that version of the Crimson Auto-installer that caused install loops.
Just manually download from the website and it will work fine.
>>52548012
Not CPU though. Running OSX on an AMD CPU takes a bunch of hacks.
Ok,all of you are retarded. OP clearly says that Apple have chosen AMD as VENDOR, not that they will buy the entire fucking company.
OPs claim needs sources though. So he can just fuck off.
>>52541669
>>52550784
>Sleeping with a bungee across your chest
I would be freaking the fuck out. I can't be doing with shit like that.
>>52541106
Stop senpai, my dick can only get so hard.
>>52550784
>going to space
>with a shitty thinkpad
I can't imagine a worser hell. At least get a gaming rig up there. You're gonna be sitting there for months.
>>52550715
That's what I've been doing this entire time.
I go to:
>http://support.amd.com/en-us/download/desktop?os=Windows%207%20-%2064
Scroll down to:
Radeon Software 315 MB Crimson Edition 16.1 Hotfix 1/7/2016
Then click download. Then I run the file.
The installation is over in under 60 seconds.
No screen blips
No default color screen (rainbow bars)
Nothing.
Is there another website I should be downloading from?
>>52546163
nice meme
>>52540829
I will always buy Intel™ because I only play games with Intel Inside™. Intel also pioneers innovative new technologies like Hyper Threading Technology™, Intel Rapid Start Technology™ and the highest quality chipsets to ever grace motherboards.
When I boot up with a brand new Intel™ i7™ with the latest Z chipset, I can enjoy the games the way they where meant to be with Intel Inside™. Intel™ also delivers a far more silkysmooth experience with its Hyper Threading Technology™.
Intel i5™ is also very power efficient. A processor is the most power hungry device in your house. Air conditioners, water heaters, lights, etc all use less power than a processor. Which is why Intel™ puts gamers first by ensuring that their gaming experience is of the highest quality while looking out for gamers by giving them the most value in their electrical bill.
At this point in time, there's really no reasons to consider an AMD processor at all. I tried once, it caused so much heat that it exploded and nearly burnt down my house. It also consumed so much power that it produced an EMP and destroyed not only the rest of my computer but my entire neighborhood.
Intel™ also pioneered how useless MORE CORES is with the i™ series processors. Years ago, everyone thought MORE CORES were the future. Now, Intel™ has debunked that myth entirely and increased efficiency. Now you can save thousands a year in electricity thanks to Intel™ with its powerful IPC. MORE CORES will never be part of Intel's™ line up.
It's quite clear that OPs an AMD shill trying to convince you to settle on something less than the optimal experience with Intel Inside™. Intel™ is the only real way to play games. We have seen recently that they offer incredible libraries for software developers like Intel C++ Compiler. He is probably too poor to afford the Intel Inside™ experience and can not afford to play any games.
Don't be a poor gamer with bad chipsets and a huge power bills. Play games with Intel Inside™
so hackintoshes on intel CPU's will be harder wtf?????
>>52550799
You would float away without it.
>>52550822
Hmm.
Dig through this thread and see if you can find a fix
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/40ny7d/crimson_driver_not_updating_to_1615/
>inb4 leddit
It was linked in a SemiAccurate Article as many people are reporting having similar problems. So I've just forwarded it here.
>>52550896
Velcro me to a fucking wall instead if need be. But don't be tying me down.
>>52550906
Thanks anon.
I'll take all the help I can get.
>>52550862
Fuck off you entitled shit
>>52550862
not harder for say. newer intel cpus and chipset series might have issues, but previous versions which apple has supported should work fine.
apple should just buy amd, or at least buy a controlling share.
>>52541615
>implying IBM can buy anything right now
If they did though it would help them extremely
Got some stocks from my grandpa, lost like $2000 because of drops in the past years
>>52541018
I mean, with that logic, why did they ever switch from powerpc if it was gonna take time to adapt to intel?
>>52540829
Not going to happen because AMD margins are lower.
Marking up 130% from $100 nets you less than marking up 130% from $150
Simple math really. Intel is more expensive so they can justify charging more for premium hardware. You think Apple sticks Retinas in everything because their 'users' demand it?
HBM allows apple to force users to buy more expensive models with actually having to buy the ram they solider.
>>52540829
If this is true it would most likely only be so that they can shift the lower end ones to APU only, thus making it thinner.
>>52540829
They already use amd gpu.
Apple is looking out for us guys, jewvidia will not prevail.
>>52541280
No fuck this touch interface in the desktop is horrible for productivity and everything
>>52547412
>>52547670
Completely and utterly BTFO. Total ass annihilation.
>>52541459
or just spend like £20 and get a decent i3
unless youre video rendering the i3 will outperform any existing amd cpu in real life usage.
