It\'s true, Apple is going Intel

[Jumpman]

hhhhm hello amd what are you doing in here with me?

"Thought that it would be intersting to see what it\'s like being Intel".

[Evi]

intel != microsoft

You\'re right, but what has been a big thing for Apple is having some of the most powerful hardware on the market when running multimedia applications. Now they\'ll be on par with everyone else. I\'m not really affected by this. Apple has said they\'ve been planning this for years. For 5 years, OS X has been compatible with PowerPC and Intel architectures...Steve Jobs confirmed this rumor during his Keynote speech. He said they\'ll be able to get more power out of the Intel chips in the long run, so I think it could be a good move on their part.

but what has been a big thing for Apple is having some of the most powerful hardware on the market when running multimedia applications.

Are you joking? Please do tell this most powerful hardware that apple has had. If you are referring the fact that apple has had applications programmed specially for there closed hardware which in turn has made certain applications run faster than there pc counter part then that I can understand. But apple uses the same tech for HDD , video cards, sound cards etc..... Only difference was there CPU, which by the way was not more powerful, AMD64 clearly demonstrated that against the apple PowerPC.

[Evi]

I didn\'t know.

AMD64 clearly demonstrated that against the apple PowerPC.

Where can I find these benchmark tests?

address of data: http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/cfp2000.html

(single CPU)

G5 2GHz = 840
AMD Opteron 246 2GHz = 1209
AMD MP2600+ = 602
AMD XP3200+ = 873
Dell, P4 3.0 = 1229
Intel, P4 3.2 = 1252
Dell, 3.06 Xeon = 1173
HP rx5670, Itanium2 1.5 = 2108 (just for fun)
HP rx5670, Itanium2 1000 = 1431


http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/cint2000.html

(single CPU)

G5 2GHz = 800
AMD Opteron 246 2GHz = 1248
AMD MP2600+ = 751
AMD XP3200+ = 1044
Dell, P4 3.0 = 1205
Intel, P4 3.2 = 1221
Dell, 3.06 Xeon = 1242
HP rx5670, Itanium2 1.5 = 1312
HP rx5670, Itanium2 1000 = 807 (that makes Itanium2 about 2x faster than G5, clock for clock comparison!!!)


http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/rfp2000.html

(2x=dual CPU, 1x=one CPU)

2x G5 2GHz = 15.7
2x AMD a4800 Opteron 246 2GHz = 28.1
2x AMD MP2600+ = 10.4
1x AMD XP2800+ = 9.07
1x Dell, P4 3.0 = 12.7
1x Intel, P4 3.0 = 13.6
2x Dell, 3.06 Xeon = 18.0
2x HP rx5670, Itanium2 1.5 = 42.6
2x HP rx5670, Itanium2 1000 = 24.2


http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/rint2000.html

(2x=dual CPU, 1x=one CPU)

2x G5 2GHz = 17.2
2x AMD a4800 Opteron 246 2GHz = 28.8
2x AMD MP2600+ = 15.3
1x AMD XP2800+ = 10.4
1x Dell, P4 3.0 = 12.6
1x Intel, P4 3.0 = 13.8
2x Dell, 3.06 Xeon = 25.6
2x HP rx5670, Itanium2 1.5 = 30.3
2x HP rx5670, Itanium2 1000 = 18.6 (this makes Itanium2 twice faster than G5, again!)

[Evi]

Nice.

In regards to why Apple chose Intel over AMD, anand say\'s it best:
"Why not AMD? Much of Apple\'s success is due to marketing and branding, not necessarily technological leadership. That should sound a lot like Intel these days, whose processors essentially lag behind AMD in terms of technology, but outsell AMD by huge margins, thanks to strong marketing and branding. The Intel brand is much stronger than AMD\'s, and that is the sort of partner that Apple is interested in.

The ability to supply Apple\'s volumes isn\'t a huge deal, as many have pointed out. AMD could most definitely handle Apple\'s volumes. Intel\'s pricing to Apple is most likely far more attractive than anything AMD could put together, however, and when existing as a premium PC manufacturer is already quite difficult, any breaks on CPU pricing that you can get are definitely worth it."

[Evi]

So they\'re basically going for cheaper prices and trying to sell a hell of a lot more Apple PCs. I hope they don\'t funk everything up.