AMD-based Apple Notebook in the Works?

[CLiDE FTW!!1]

How do you justify this statement? Currently the Intel manufacturing process is still far ahead of AMD. Intel currently manufactures on a 65nm process and has been since the debut of the Core series product line in early 2006. The current Intel roadmap plans to cross over from the 65nm process to a 45nm process in 2007 and already has plants that have been producing chips on the 45nm process (Intel Press Release). AMD current products are still based on the 90nm process and chips based on the 65nm process won't begin shipping until Q1 of 2007. (AMD Press Release). Currently the heat problems with the AMD line are due to the 90nm process and the adoption of the 65nm process will help to eliminate that. However, Intel still has the upper hand and is at least 6 months if not a year ahead of development of their technologies in regards to AMD with their move towards a 45nm process just as AMD is adopting the 65nm process. I'm not a fanboy, I use the best technology at the time of purchase. That being said, I used to work for a company that specialized in building white boxes. In fact when AMD began pushing products that beat the pants off Intel performance and price wise I pushed the company president into adopting AMD based machines alongside Intel boxes. It was a move that made perfect sense. As far as "quality" goes I never saw a chip from either company fail in the 5,000+ computers I built. So if it isn't a rate of failure we are basing quality on what are we basing quality on? At the time the company I was working for adopted AMD chips, both Intel and AMD were manufacturing on a 130nm process, so as technologies go they were on the same playing field. This is not the same today. Intel has a superior manufacturing process and therefore produces a more advanced product. If you aren't referencing a rate of failure for quality what are you referencing?

Valid points. The quality difference between AMD and Intel miniscule. I really haven't had any problems with AMD or Intel (except when it comes to overclocking, then Intel is king).

 

But beyond all that, the Core 2 Duos beat the {censored} out of any AMD processors, so it's the most logical choice today.

[joe75]

If you aren't referencing a rate of failure for quality what are you referencing?

 

I'm referring to actual manufacturing, AMD is a more complicated chip produced in smaller volumes in less faculty's with better quality control.

For the record my 65nm Merom runs a hell of allot hotter then my 90nm Venice

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micro_Devices

 

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/AboutAM...9_10000,00.html

[retroz]

I'm referring to actual manufacturing, AMD is a more complicated chip produced in smaller volumes in less faculty's with better quality control.

For the record my 65nm Merom runs a hell of allot hotter then my 90nm Venice

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micro_Devices

 

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/AboutAM...9_10000,00.html

 

 

Old article....from August, but apparently, the move from K8 to KL8 is supposed (YMMV) be a Conroe killer.

 

Who knows...

 

Link

 

http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-k8l.html

[Technique]

I hope not. The next business venture I hope for Apple is with Quad-Core Intels. Not AMD. Only time will tell.

[CoolBits]

Why not AMD ?? We are doing all the hard work on making it work here And it already works on AMD but not officialy

[Zealot]

im expecting next year for the quads generation.

But Intel seems to like the 2+2 on the procesor (with low cache L2 shared by the 2 core 2 duo ).

On the other side Amd is working for a "real" quad that means 4 cores not 2+2 .I m not defending AMD but intel always seems hurry to make the next generation.

I have both type of procesors :

-Intel: great overclocking(as hot as hell)

-AMD: best procesor instructions (low production)

 

thats all i got