Intel Core i7-10700K processor review
Deepcool Gamerstorm Castle 280EX liquid cooler review
AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT review
AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT review
AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT review
Crucial P2 500 GB NVMe M2 SSD review
ASUS STRIX B550-I Gaming review
Kioxia Exceria 1TB M.2 NVMe SSD review
Samsung 870 QVO 2TB SSD review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - June 2020
AMD: Partner meeting on April 23 in preparation of Navi and Ryzen 3000 CPUs launch
On April 23, AMD will hold a meeting with the company's partners to discuss the next generation of Ryzen CPUs and the upcoming graphics architecture Navi. What exactly AMD will reveal on the presentation is unclear, but it is likely to address release dates and product details.
AMD will hold a partner meeting on April 23 to share information about the planned products in the 7nm process. Specifically, these are the upcoming Navi GPUs and the Ryzen 3000 processors with Zen 2 architecture ("Matisse"). Since this is a closed event, AMD has no specific information on the content discussed. It is also an event for North American partners. Meetings with partners from other regions will take place later. Wccftech suspects that the partners at the event will be given the planned release dates of this year's products.
AMD seems to be planning an announcement presentation of the products, or even a launch, at the Computex 2019, which will start May 28th and ends June 1st in Taipei. This is also supported by the fact that AMD opens this year's Computex with a keynote . Such an opening conference is quite a thing, it will be interesting to see what AMD will actually reveal, announce or introduce on the presentation.
"I am honored to host the opening keynote this year and to provide new details on AMD's Next Generation high performance platforms and products," said Su. In the press release, the Ryzen 3000 CPUs and Navi graphics cards are explicitly mentioned.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5658143 Posted on: 04/08/2019 08:05 PM
Not necessarily. Remember, Apple used to use PPC before they switched to Intel. They went through I think 2 or 3 versions of OSX that were PPC compatible (I think only one of them supported both PPC and Intel). Nowadays, most people who use a Mac are also mostly only using Apple software, and of course Apple is going to recompile their software for ARM if necessary. Other really big software provides (like Adobe or MS) will quickly conform with whatever Apple does. Apple's Xcode is also pretty competent software, where I assume most other Apple-exclusive devs could easily recompile their programs for ARM without much effort. Don't forget that a great deal of Mac-compatible programs are open-source, so they too can be recompiled.
And then there's web-based applications and iOS compatibility, which will give ARM-based Macs plenty of "backup" options.
That just leaves stuff like games and old programs behind. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple makes a new "Rosetta", which was the tool they made back around 2006 which allowed you to run PPC Mac binaries on Intel. Besides, Intel-based Macs already perform the worst of any OS for gaming, and now that Apple is in a feud with Nvidia, that makes gaming an even less attractive feature for Macs.
It's also worth taking a look at Apple's existing hardware. Except for stuff like the $5000+ Mac Pros, most of their current Intel computers are mediocre at best. Apple has their own in-house design for ARM CPUs, so if they add some bonus SSE instructions and crank up the clocks to 3GHz+, performance is going to be a non-issue for them. For the average Mac user, the GPU could do all of the real heavy-lifting.
EDIT:
One last thing to point out is Apple's exclusive graphics API called "Metal" (their competitor to Vulkan and DX12) while deliberately trying to ditch Vulkan and OpenGL. That's not a whole lot different than switching to ARM (in terms of complicated software compatibility), and yet, they're getting away with it. I think even Nvidia is supporting Metal, though don't quote me on that.
It wouldn't be as seamless as you'd expect. If you've ever attempted to build an AMD "hackintosh", you'll quickly realize that there are enough differences in AMD's hardware where Apple would still need to do quite a bit of work (assuming they don't just steal the work done by the hackintosh community). Honestly, I don't think going to ARM would be a whole lot more difficult, since Apple already has a great deal of investment in ARM and their own ARM-based architecture.
I would argue Apple is very much still a personality cult, it's just not as prominent as it once once.
If Apple drops Intel, they'll likely be dropping the Mac and general PC lines altogether, imo. ARM is fine for cell phones and low-powered devices like iPads and the like, but it doesn't hold a flame in terms of raw horsepower to either AMD or Intel's current x86. ARM is great for low-powered devices, which was its designed purpose (originally for embedded uses), but it's not and likely never will be a brute processor, imo.
Not necessarily. Remember, Apple used to use PPC before they switched to Intel. They went through I think 2 or 3 versions of OSX that were PPC compatible (I think only one of them supported both PPC and Intel). Nowadays, most people who use a Mac are also mostly only using Apple software, and of course Apple is going to recompile their software for ARM if necessary. Other really big software provides (like Adobe or MS) will quickly conform with whatever Apple does. Apple's Xcode is also pretty competent software, where I assume most other Apple-exclusive devs could easily recompile their programs for ARM without much effort. Don't forget that a great deal of Mac-compatible programs are open-source, so they too can be recompiled.
And then there's web-based applications and iOS compatibility, which will give ARM-based Macs plenty of "backup" options.
That just leaves stuff like games and old programs behind. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple makes a new "Rosetta", which was the tool they made back around 2006 which allowed you to run PPC Mac binaries on Intel. Besides, Intel-based Macs already perform the worst of any OS for gaming, and now that Apple is in a feud with Nvidia, that makes gaming an even less attractive feature for Macs.
It's also worth taking a look at Apple's existing hardware. Except for stuff like the $5000+ Mac Pros, most of their current Intel computers are mediocre at best. Apple has their own in-house design for ARM CPUs, so if they add some bonus SSE instructions and crank up the clocks to 3GHz+, performance is going to be a non-issue for them. For the average Mac user, the GPU could do all of the real heavy-lifting.
EDIT:
One last thing to point out is Apple's exclusive graphics API called "Metal" (their competitor to Vulkan and DX12) while deliberately trying to ditch Vulkan and OpenGL. That's not a whole lot different than switching to ARM (in terms of complicated software compatibility), and yet, they're getting away with it. I think even Nvidia is supporting Metal, though don't quote me on that.
If, otoh, Cook were to decide to transition all of Apple's current x86 PC products to AMD, then the transition would be virtually seamless--with none of the compatibility problems that always hobbled the Mac every time Jobs became incensed because a cpu manufacturer would not do his bidding--and dropped them to move the Mac somewhere else. Now that Apple is no longer a personality cult, it will have to survive on its products in the marketplace. My thought is that Cook and company would love to stick strictly with cell phones and can everything else, but we shall see.
It wouldn't be as seamless as you'd expect. If you've ever attempted to build an AMD "hackintosh", you'll quickly realize that there are enough differences in AMD's hardware where Apple would still need to do quite a bit of work (assuming they don't just steal the work done by the hackintosh community). Honestly, I don't think going to ARM would be a whole lot more difficult, since Apple already has a great deal of investment in ARM and their own ARM-based architecture.
I would argue Apple is very much still a personality cult, it's just not as prominent as it once once.
fredgml7
Member
Posts: 91
Joined: 2017-05-08
Member
Posts: 91
Joined: 2017-05-08
#5658152 Posted on: 04/08/2019 08:37 PM
I believe that if AMD sustains good earnings, it can compete strongly with Intel, winning is another thing (it's not necessary).
Ryzen 3000 (Zen2) is going to be good, I have no doubt, but I'm not sure about prices, I guess it will be as competitive as the old ones. Either way I'm going to upgrade to Ryzen 3000, probably in august.
I believe that if AMD sustains good earnings, it can compete strongly with Intel, winning is another thing (it's not necessary).
Ryzen 3000 (Zen2) is going to be good, I have no doubt, but I'm not sure about prices, I guess it will be as competitive as the old ones. Either way I'm going to upgrade to Ryzen 3000, probably in august.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5658154 Posted on: 04/08/2019 08:42 PM
I agree - AMD just needs to focus on improving revenue. Even if Intel's revenue doesn't go down, as long as AMD's is steadily increasing, that's what matters most.
I believe that if AMD sustains good earnings, it can compete strongly with Intel, winning is another thing (it's not necessary).
I agree - AMD just needs to focus on improving revenue. Even if Intel's revenue doesn't go down, as long as AMD's is steadily increasing, that's what matters most.
varkkon
Senior Member
Posts: 138
Joined: 2010-01-26
Senior Member
Posts: 138
Joined: 2010-01-26
#5658157 Posted on: 04/08/2019 09:04 PM
Does anyone know if the new x570 mobo's will be backwards compatible with a Ryzen Threadripper 1950X? I am assuming this is a yes since x399 mobo's with a bios update can take the new Zen 2 chips so it only make sense that x570 should be able to work with 1st Gen TR's(well I hope so).
Basically I want the extra lanes and new tech from x570 and just want to swamp mobo's, anyone see any issues with this? Also yes, I know PCIe 4.0 does not work on TR1, that is not my reason for wanting x570 on day 1.
Does anyone know if the new x570 mobo's will be backwards compatible with a Ryzen Threadripper 1950X? I am assuming this is a yes since x399 mobo's with a bios update can take the new Zen 2 chips so it only make sense that x570 should be able to work with 1st Gen TR's(well I hope so).
Basically I want the extra lanes and new tech from x570 and just want to swamp mobo's, anyone see any issues with this? Also yes, I know PCIe 4.0 does not work on TR1, that is not my reason for wanting x570 on day 1.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1075
Joined: 2014-07-22
Haha Apple is questioning their continued use with Intel, period. There's rumors that they're going to transition entirely to ARM.
Though, if Apple ceased to exist tomorrow, I don't think that would really impact Intel all that much. Apple and Intel, to my understanding, never really got along that well because Apple is very demanding and Intel doesn't have enough of an incentive to cater to their demands.
If Apple drops Intel, they'll likely be dropping the Mac and general PC lines altogether, imo. ARM is fine for cell phones and low-powered devices like iPads and the like, but it doesn't hold a flame in terms of raw horsepower to either AMD or Intel's current x86. ARM is great for low-powered devices, which was its designed purpose (originally for embedded uses), but it's not and likely never will be a brute processor, imo. If, otoh, Cook were to decide to transition all of Apple's current x86 PC products to AMD, then the transition would be virtually seamless--with none of the compatibility problems that always hobbled the Mac every time Jobs became incensed because a cpu manufacturer would not do his bidding--and dropped them to move the Mac somewhere else. Now that Apple is no longer a personality cult, it will have to survive on its products in the marketplace. My thought is that Cook and company would love to stick strictly with cell phones and can everything else, but we shall see.