Jump to content

Will Apple leave ATI for nVidia?

Colonel

By Colonel

 Share

Since Apple switched to using PowerPC processors they've been using ATI graphics cards. Even after Apple started the Intel transition, they still continue to make Macs with ATI cards, but that may change because of AMD's recent purchase of ATI. Because of the AMD's purchase, Intel will slowly stop supporting ATI.

 

Here's the article from ZDNet:

AMD yesterday announced that they plan to acquire Canadian video chip maker ATI for US$5.4 billion. The deal needs to be approved by stockholders and regulatory agencies. Arch-rival Intel announced that they won't be renewing ATI's chipset bus license as a result of the deal.

 

The move leaves Apple in a bit of a quandary because ATI video subsystems currently power two of Apple's Intel-based Macs: the MacBook Pro and the iMac both ship with ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 GPUs. The Mac mini and MacBook use Intel GMA950 graphics.

 

ATI chips shipped in most Macs prior to the PowerMac G4 announced in 2001. Apple's move to chips from Santa Clara-based NVIDIA was believed by some to be punishment for an ATI leak in July 2000 that pre-announced new iMacs and Power Macs.

 

Apple's aging PowerMac G5 ships with NVIDIA graphics (GeForce 6600, 7800 GT or Quadro FX 4500) but the graphics chip supplier for the new "Mac Pro" desktop is rumored to switch to back ATI. The Mac Pro, which could be announced as soon as 06 August at WWDC, is rumored to ship with ATI Radeon X1600 Pro and X1800 Pro graphics.

 

Will Intel allow Apple to continue to working with ATI on graphics after the company becomes wholly owned by rival AMD? I think that we'll probably see Intel gently "suggest" that Apple switch to another vendor for graphics technology in 2007. Once the dust settles I bet that all Macs from here on out will ship with graphics from either Intel or NVIDIA.

 

So what does this mean for Apple? Will they be forced to go with nVidia cards and if they are, how will this affect the Macvidia project?

 

 

*************************************************************************

This is my first article for InsanelyMac. Please let me know what you think. Thanks :)

 Share
Go to articles

User Feedback

Recommended Comments



gwprod12

As far as I can see, it's untrue. Skype is crippled by discrete code that checks for an intel processor. Remove that code, and it works with the same capability on an AMD processor.

 

The altivec code example doesnt even make any sense.

 

A better example would be if Adobe, when coding Photoshop CS3 for Windows put in a piece of code that checks whether or not the computer is a Dell. If it is a Dell, make it fast. If it's not a Dell, make it slow. Especially if Dell gave them $$ to do it.

 

As far as I can see (again), Skype uses no specific coding conventions that would limit its performance on an AMD processor. Only because Intel gave them consideration, did they cripple the software for AMD.

 

In the united states, that's a crime (and a tort, which AMD is having a big problem with). And is fairly easy to prove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bwhsh8r
As far as I can see, it's untrue. Skype is crippled by discrete code that checks for an intel processor. Remove that code, and it works with the same capability on an AMD processor.

 

The altivec code example doesnt even make any sense.

 

A better example would be if Adobe, when coding Photoshop CS3 for Windows put in a piece of code that checks whether or not the computer is a Dell. If it is a Dell, make it fast. If it's not a Dell, make it slow. Especially if Dell gave them $$ to do it.

 

As far as I can see (again), Skype uses no specific coding conventions that would limit its performance on an AMD processor. Only because Intel gave them consideration, did they cripple the software for AMD.

 

In the united states, that's a crime (and a tort, which AMD is having a big problem with). And is fairly easy to prove.

 

 

Yes, i messed up my post, that is true and you are right... it does not cripple on amd, but gets a performance boost on intel, and i am in america, so that would make me think that its illegal, also both AMD and Intel are based in america... so that would be anti trust.... and i dont think that skype can get in trouble, but intel sure can...

 

 

max

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gwprod12

Saturn: It might. The part that has intel stamped on it ;-p

 

If Skype does what it's supposed to do and has the same performance as Intel with Maxxus' patch, then I dont see how the software could be coded using some magical Intel instruction set. I think it's safe to say that Skype was influenced by Intel to cripple their conferencing on AMD, thus making an Intel more attractive to Skype users. That's wrong, and illegal. Even if Intel pressured Skype to use some Intel-specific instruction set (cant think of any that would do that, though) to make their product more powerful on an Intel CPU, that would still be illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A Nonny Moose
I may have worded my post wrong... its not discrimintaion, but its not teh same as what you sayed, because they do not INTENTIONALLY impair the performance of photoshop for g3 computers.... thats what Skype did, and also, it could be considered with the anti trust because Intel might have.... motivated skype in a way that would not be considered legal.... Skype intentionally added a line of code to check for the Intel procs, and if you didnt have one you are treated to a less useable Skype.... thats like photoshop disabling half of its features because you do not have a g4, instead of it being limited because of the hardware not being able to handle it....

 

im glad that we can discuss this in a civil, educated manner instead of a useless flame war, i thank you for that

 

max

 

So we're not sure if anything illegal has happened here. It could be Intel just freely giving out the Intel optimizers (which is legal os long as they don't say "use it or else") and Skype merely taking advantage fo such a nice offer. It could happen.

 

BTW, you are a poopy head, :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...