So in the end, a LOT of hoopla about a sub-orbital flight just like what was done some 60 years ago, with the difference that now it's a couple of billionaires burning money on the backs of retail monopolies. What else?
15 posts • joined 26 Feb 2018
Intel and AMD are toast, period.
Even under Rosetta 2 emulation, apps are ALREADY faster than any current Mac in native mode. As for native apps, even a single ARM iPad is already faster than virtually any Winblows desktop out there - the M1 will extend that lead so much that Intel/AMD will probably file for Chapter 11 protection in a couple of years.
It seems like my original comment ruffled a few AMD-fanboy feathers around here - yet they fail to counter any of the arguments I put forward when stating that this Ryzen development is basically irrelevant.
Again: Geekbench shows that, even with TODAY's A12/13 processors, iDevices already outperform most of the laptops on the market today - this is a fact. And to respond to another (un)informed poster: we are talking here about processors that are used for AAA gaming, Photoshop-grade apps and advanced audio and imaging, including multitasking. Now imagine what could happen in Macs with vastly larger heat dissipation areas/cooling parts.
And let us not forget what the acronym ARM means: "Advanced RISC Machine" - so Apple is now in a position to further leverage RISC superiority with much lower heat production and even higher core scalability.
Both AMD and Intel will be dead in no time.
Since Apple is coming soon with ARM-powered Macs that will dominate these irrelevant offerings by AMD in both heat dissipation and overall performance, why should we care?
iPads/iPhones are already more powerful than most laptops in the market; now imagine a multiple-core Mac with 100x the processor power of iDevices.So only unemployed geeks will be worried about using any of these weak Ryzen processors.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021