In article <pan.2005.06.08.22.25.51.729532@null.com>, epaton <epaton@null.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 14:33:36 -0500, xenon360 wrote: > > > http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23849 > > > > > > http://xlr8yourmac.com/ > > > > quote: > > "Also, all the cell people and the AMD people need to be quiet. Apple > > evaluated both. AMD has the same, if not worse, supply problems as IBM. > > Their roadmap is fine, but the production capacity is not. > > > > The tested Cell as well. That processor is NOT intended for PC > > applications. (it was designed for game systems, not as a general use CPU) > > The lack of out of order execution and ILP control logic creates very poor > > performance with existing software. Having developers rewrite for cell > > would have been MUCH more work than reworking for Intel. And that's what > > this is, you rework your codebase in ALL cases, not rewrite it. " > > i may be wrong but doesnt amd have a substanitaly larger share of the > computer market than apple, their ability to produce cheaply enough to > give apple big discounts but i guess amd will be happy enough with > the highend.
While AMD's list price is lower than Intel's, look at Intel's profit vs. AMD's. Intel can easily afford to give Apple a pretty good deal.
Dell steadfastly refuses to consider AMD. If Intel weren't competitive, don't you think Dell (who does a better job than anyone of reducing component costs) would look at them?
