• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

After 15 Years, Apple Prepares to Break Up With Intel (Possible announcement tomorrow at WWDC 20 Keynote).

MaestroMike

Member
Sep 25, 2011
2,169
2,299
830
After 15 Years, Apple Prepares to Break Up With Intel

Apple could announce plans as soon as Monday to replace Intel processors in Macs with chips that it designed itself.

OAKLAND, Calif. — Silicon Valley is bracing for a long-expected breakup of Apple and Intel, signaling both the end of one of the tech industry’s most influential partnerships and Apple’s determination to take more control of how its products are built.

Apple has been working for years on designing chips to replace the Intel microprocessors used in Mac computers, according to five people with knowledge of the effort, who weren’t authorized to speak about it. They say Apple could announce its plans as soon as a company conference for developers on Monday, with computers based on the new chips arriving next year.

Apple’s move is an indication of the growing power of the biggest tech companies to expand their abilities and reduce their dependence on major partners that have provided them with services for years — even as smaller competitors and the global economy struggle because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Facebook, for example, is investing billions of dollars into one of Indonesia’s fastest-growing apps, a telecom giant in India and an undersea fiber-optic cable around Africa. Amazon has built out its own fleet of cargo planes and delivery trucks. And Google and Apple continue to buy upstarts to expand their empires.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing, the partner Apple uses to build similar components it designs for iPhones and iPads, is expected to make the Mac chips in factories in Asia — an arrangement much like Apple’s use of Foxconn to assemble iPhones.

Intel and Apple declined to comment. Bloomberg previously reported on Apple’s plans.

Other big tech companies like Amazon and Google already design some of their own chips, both for performance and potential cost reasons. Some tasks, like artificial intelligence and the rendering of 3-D images, can be handled more efficiently on special-purpose circuitry rather than the general-purpose microprocessors that are Intel’s mainstay.

Since 2005, Macs have used effectively the same Intel chips that most PCs do. Making its own processors would give Apple even more control over how Mac computers work. Apple has always designed the chips used in iPhones and iPads, adding features to customize designs licensed by Arm, a semiconductor firm owned by the Japanese conglomerate SoftBank. Apple’s forthcoming Mac chips are also expected to rely on Arm technology, improving compatibility with its mobile devices.
Apple has created a large chip-design team, building on the 2008 purchase of a 150-employee start-up, PA Semi. A large number of them once worked at Intel, including Johny Srouji, who reports directly to Apple’s chief executive, Tim Cook.

Apple’s move would be a symbolic blow to Intel, particularly when civilian and military officials are concerned over the weakening of American leadership in chip manufacturing, which they regard as crucial to the country’s ability to retain an edge over China. Legislation introduced in Congress last week, with rare bipartisan agreement, would funnel tens of billions of dollars to bolstering U.S. research and manufacturing in semiconductors.

Intel has long been a U.S. standard-bearer in the semiconductor business, particularly in the complex manufacturing processes that turn silicon wafers into the chips that power computers, smartphones, cars and consumer devices.

The move’s financial impact on Intel would be muted, at least in the short term. Intel sells Apple about $3.4 billion in chips for Macs each year, according to C.J. Muse, an Evercore analyst. That is less than 5 percent of Intel’s annual sales, and Mr. Muse forecast that the blow would be closer to half that since Apple might change the chips on only some Mac models. Apple sells nearly 20 million Macs a year.

“That’s not chicken feed, but it’s compared to total PCs sold of about 260 million” a year, said Tim Bajarin, an analyst who has tracked Apple for nearly 40 years. Intel supplies the chips for just about every PC.

But the long-term effects could still be serious for Intel. The chipmaker’s lofty profit margins have long been linked to its track record of delivering the most powerful computing engines on the market, particularly for laptops and computer servers. But Intel has never done well selling chips for newer tech products like smartphones and tablets.

Apple’s last chip transition for Macs, in 2005, was viewed as a major step in the long-term comeback orchestrated by Steve Jobs, one of the company’s founders, as well as a big victory for Intel. Macs had long relied on a design, called PowerPC, that was a collaboration among Apple, Motorola and IBM. But Mr. Jobs bet that Intel could provide much faster performance.

That selling point has been undermined by troubling news from Intel’s huge factories. Much of the company’s success in computers stems from its history of packing more transistors on each square of silicon, which allows the chips to keep carrying out more computing tasks at a lower cost.

But Intel has stumbled badly in that industrywide race to miniaturize. Intel’s latest process for making chips, once expected as early as 2015, did not enter high-volume production until 2019. The delay aided Taiwan Semiconductor and Samsung Electronics, which produce chips designed by multiple companies. The competitors exploited Intel’s lag to take a technology lead.

“Intel has fallen behind by 12 months, maybe 18 months,” said Handel Jones, chief executive of International Business Strategies, which offers consulting services to the chip industry.

Apple was troubled by the production stumble, according to three people familiar with the situation, who were not authorized to speak about confidential dealings between the companies. Intel also ran into stronger-than-expected demand for other types of chips, causing production shortages that crimped sales for some PC makers last year. The combination further tarnished Intel’s image as a reliable producer.

Robert Swan, Intel’s chief executive, has vowed to make the changes necessary to regain technology leadership and prevent product shortages. But if Apple succeeds in offering Macs with its own chips that seem noticeably superior to Intel’s, analysts and industry executives said, other PC makers might shift more models to chips from rivals like Advanced Micro Devices or even start designing their own chips, though that would take years.

“I think it could inspire other companies to look at non-Intel processors,” said Patrick Moorhead, an analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy. “Reputationally, this is not a good thing for Intel.”

Microsoft, a longtime Intel partner, already sells some laptop computers with Arm-based chips from Qualcomm, though analysts said their performance didn’t match that of models powered by Intel technology. If that situation changes, they add, Apple and Intel could become outright rivals, using their hefty marketing might to counter each other’s technical claims.

Another trend making it easier for Apple to consider the shift is the increasing use of web-based software, rather than software running on people’s PCs and tailored for their hardware.

Still, Macs in particular are a mainstay of certain creative professions, such as animation and film editing, and developers of those software applications will have to modify Mac programs to take advantage of Apple’s new chips. That could lead to a delay in some software working for the new Macs when they are released, said Jeff Johnson, a Mac developer in Madison, Wis.

“The professional software is the hardest and slowest software to make big changes to, so those are the types that you may not see ready on Day 1,” he said. “The new Macs may have some issues out of the gate.”


Apple Plans to Announce Move to Its Own Mac Chips at WWDC
Apple Inc. is preparing to announce a shift to its own main processors in Mac computers, replacing chips from Intel Corp., as early as this month at its annual developer conference, according to people familiar with the plans.

The company is holding WWDC the week of June 22. Unveiling the initiative, codenamed Kalamata, at the event would give outside developers time to adjust before new Macs roll out in 2021, the people said. Since the hardware transition is still months away, the timing of the announcement could change, they added, while asking not to be identified discussing private plans.

The new processors will be based on the same technology used in Apple-designed iPhone and iPad chips. However, future Macs will still run the macOS operating system rather than the iOS software on mobile devices from the company. Bloomberg News reported on Apple’s effort to move away from Intel earlier this year, and in 2018. Apple shares were up less than 1% Tuesday while Intel was down less than 1%.

Apple is using technology licensed from Arm Ltd., part of Japanese tech conglomerate SoftBank Group Corp. This architecture is different from the underlying technology in Intel chips, so developers will need time to optimize their software for the new components. Cupertino, California-based Apple and Santa Clara-based Intel declined to comment.

This will be the first time in the 36-year history of the Mac that Apple-designed processors will power these machines. It has changed chips only two other times. In the early 1990s, Apple switched from Motorola processors to PowerPC. At WWDC in 2005, Steve Jobs announced a move from PowerPC to Intel, and Apple rolled out those first Intel-based Macs in January 2006. Like it did then, the company plans to eventually transition the entire Mac lineup to its Arm-based processors, including the priciest desktop computers, the people said.

Apple has about 10% of the PC market, so the change may not cut into Intel sales much. However, Macs are considered premium products. So if the company moves away from Intel for performance reasons it may prompt other PC makers to look at different options, too. Microsoft Corp., Samsung Electronics Co. and Lenovo Group Ltd. have already debuted laptops that run on Arm-based chips.

Apple’s chip-development group, led by Johny Srouji, decided to make the switch after Intel’s annual chip performance gains slowed. Apple engineers worried that sticking to Intel’s road map would delay or derail some future Macs, according to people familiar with the effort.

Inside Apple, tests of new Macs with the Arm-based chips have shown sizable improvements over Intel-powered versions, specifically in graphics performance and apps using artificial intelligence, the people said. Apple’s processors are also more power-efficient than Intel’s, which may mean thinner and lighter Mac laptops in the future.

Apple’s move would be a highlight of this year’s WWDC, which will be held online due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Because of the fluid nature of the global health crisis and its impact on Apple’s product development, the timing of the chip announcement could change.

At the conference, Apple is also readying updates to its other operating systems -- iOS, iPadOS, tvOS and watchOS -- with changes to augmented-reality capabilities, deeper integration with outside apps and services, and improved Apple Watch fitness features. A big priority is improving the performance of its mobile software after last year’s release, iOS 13, suffered from several issues.

The company is working on at least three of its own Mac processors, known as systems-on-a-chip, with the first based on the A14 processor in the next iPhone. In addition to the main central processing unit, there will be a graphics processing unit and a Neural Engine for handling machine learning, a popular and powerful type of AI, the people said. In the past, Apple has made chips for specific Mac functions, such as security.

Intel has faced more competition as its lead in production technology -- a key way to improve semiconductor performance -- has slipped. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. makes processors for many of Intel’s rivals using a more advanced process.

TSMC will build the new Mac processors using a 5-nanometer production technique -- the same approach as for the next iPhones and iPad Pros. Intel rivals Qualcomm Inc. and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. also use TSMC to make their chips.

The Apple chip project has been in the works for several years and is considered one of the company’s most secretive efforts. In 2018, Apple successfully developed a Mac chip based on the iPad Pro’s processor for internal testing, giving the company confidence it could announce such a shift this year.


WWDC 20 Keynote starts tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. PT, 1:00 p.m ET so we may find out then.

 
Last edited:

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
14,563
14,686
1,800
This could be one of the most interesting moves in computing history. There are so many questions, and I’m really curious about the answers. Stuff like: what sort of performance are they getting? How far “up” the MB line will it go? What will they do for compatibility with old software? Will they use this to re-design the OS (MacOS 11?). Etc. It seems like such an utterly bizarre and crazy move but if anyone can pull it off, it is them.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: MaestroMike

samporter

Banned
May 29, 2020
286
653
325
If true, this could be a serious blow to the x86 architech, which would effect both Intel and AMD. With the world moving increasingly toward ARM, and ARM increasingly catching up to x86 in terms of performance, this double whammy may spell the beginning of the end for x86. Just as how x86 destroyed powerpc, ARM may end up destroying x86.

We know that much of the things people do with a computer does not require the amount of processing power x86 offers. x86 also cannot compete against ARM with their current design. Intel tried to shrink thei x86 design with the Intel Atom and they found that the performance/watt ratio was not sustainable. The only thing left for x86 would be to start shifting focus away from the consumer market and concentrate on the business market.

My Samsung Galaxy S9 is almost as fast a an intel i3, as was tested in retroarch Mame core. Going at this rate, it would not be long until ARM catches up to Intel desktop chips, while consuming 1/3 their power. A 5watt chip that can compete against a 15watt chip is no small feat. The battery and size advantage is something Intel will not be able to compete with. This is a disruption for Intel and it will be interesting to see what they come up with.
 
F

Foamy

Unconfirmed Member
Good. Been wanting to buy Intel stock on a dip.
 

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
14,563
14,686
1,800
If true, this could be a serious blow to the x86 architech, which would effect both Intel and AMD. With the world moving increasingly toward ARM, and ARM increasingly catching up to x86 in terms of performance, this double whammy may spell the beginning of the end for x86. Just as how x86 destroyed powerpc, ARM may end up destroying x86.

We know that much of the things people do with a computer does not require the amount of processing power x86 offers. x86 also cannot compete against ARM with their current design. Intel tried to shrink thei x86 design with the Intel Atom and they found that the performance/watt ratio was not sustainable. The only thing left for x86 would be to start shifting focus away from the consumer market and concentrate on the business market.

My Samsung Galaxy S9 is almost as fast a an intel i3, as was tested in retroarch Mame core. Going at this rate, it would not be long until ARM catches up to Intel desktop chips, while consuming 1/3 their power. A 5watt chip that can compete against a 15watt chip is no small feat. The battery and size advantage is something Intel will not be able to compete with. This is a disruption for Intel and it will be interesting to see what they come up with.

If Apple really figured it all out and you can get full software like PS and Final Cut Pro on ARM and you get 20 hour battery life (like on the shitty ARM Windows PCs), yea it’s a game changer. That’s why it is so interesting
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: T-Cake

theclaw135

Member
Oct 1, 2014
1,464
558
560
x86 is an antiquated, lumbering hackjob. The mainstream consumer doesn't care about having forty years of (instruction set level) backwards compatibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iconmaster and Hudo

LordCBH

Member
Jun 4, 2020
2,037
5,083
445
I am highly interested to see how their own A series chips can scale up to a more power-oriented device, especially considering the performance of their current generation variants.

I’m also very interested in seeing if it’s going to be a cold turkey transition, or if they’ll try to emulate x86 applications for a few years. isn’t the x86 emulation on the Surface Pro X pretty wonky? Wonder if Apple could have better success.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hudo

Stiflers Mom

Banned
Apr 27, 2012
8,476
12,740
1,150
x86 has always been a shit CPU architecture that just happened to be at the right place in the right time. What a shame it killed off the much superior Motorola 68000.

What a weird thing to witness that those RISC architectures won in the end.
 

Anki

Member
Mar 1, 2019
616
1,097
490
If ios and macos share the same architecture that means we can develop one app and be used everywhere. I am excited for this lets see tonight whats gonna happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iconmaster

HUELEN10

Member
Feb 29, 2008
26,483
3,000
1,820
If ios and macos share the same architecture that means we can develop one app and be used everywhere. I am excited for this lets see tonight whats gonna happen.
You can already do that despite differing processors, have you heard of Catalyst?
 

Hudo

Member
Jul 26, 2018
4,938
6,342
490
x86 is an antiquated, lumbering hackjob. The mainstream consumer doesn't care about having forty years of (instruction set level) backwards compatibility.
x86 has always been a shit CPU architecture that just happened to be at the right place in the right time. What a shame it killed off the much superior Motorola 68000.

What a weird thing to witness that those RISC architectures won in the end.
Agreed. As someone who had the unfortunate "pleasure" to write some assembly level code and SSE code for SIMD shit for X86-based Intel CPUs, it was one of the more convoluted and head-scratching experiences I've had. ARM, while not perfect, has such a nice Instruction Set in comparison. Probably because CISC-based CPUs are not meant for humans to write for directly (IMHO). x86's evolution can be summed up with "we needed to add another hackjob to our microarchitecture because that previous hackjob would've made our new extension less backwards compatible (and expliotable...probably).

RISC-based CPUs, while not without tradeoffs and flaws themselves, are much nicer to reason about. For example, just that their instructions have all the same length makes it a lot less complicated to think about pipelining etc (Not true for ARMs T32 instruction set, though. But at least you've got a choice here).

If their previous transition from PowerPC to Intel is something to go by, they might introduce some sort of abstraction layer to provide forwards compatibility for old apps to the new platform without having to touch the code base (with impacts to performance, of course), while providing a new API etc. for their stuff and prompting devs to switch ASAP. Apple have managed that previous transition quite well, all things considered.
 

Stiflers Mom

Banned
Apr 27, 2012
8,476
12,740
1,150
Probably because CISC-based CPUs are not meant for humans to write for directly (IMHO).
You should check out the Motorola 68K CPU then and it's pure CISC.
Most beautiful architecture ever.

It's basically like writing C code in assembly.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Hudo

Super Mario

Banned
Nov 12, 2016
3,478
5,930
655
I love all of the technical discussion like any of that matters to 95%+ of consumers.

Apple can produce something far less expensive, pocketing that money. Their consumers don't give a shit and probably didn't even know Intel was already inside.
 

Ovek

7Member7
May 30, 2013
3,302
1,790
760
Considering Apple has been kneecapping the performance of Intel CPU's for years with complete crap thermal solutions and overly aggressive power management, I would say the ARM cpus they introduce will magically be cooler and faster.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: V4skunk

Durask

Member
Feb 6, 2012
2,958
2,177
860
My gut feeling is that most people use Macs for word processing, Safari and Facetime so they will not notice the difference.

Wonder what will happen to Mac Pro - then again they are such a tiny slice of the market that Apple can easily ax them. They are essentially a halo product.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Irobot82

Hudo

Member
Jul 26, 2018
4,938
6,342
490
You should check out the Motorola 68K CPU then and it's pure CISC.
Most beautiful architecture ever.

It's basically like writing C code in assembly.
The Motorola 68K is actually one of the finest CPUs ever made IMHO and a pleasure to write for! I was more focussing on the Intel stuff. But yeah, you're right. Technically, the 68K is a CISC-based CPU (although the lines are a bit blurry there. Let's just say that Motorola applied caution when designing it, while Intel did not.)
 

LordOfChaos

Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,810
7,195
985
I’ve been excited about the possibility of an in house processor switch for years, ever since Apple started massively outperforming the rest of the mobile fare, and Intel at the same time had its famous foundary issues and stretched 14nm years beyond where it was meant to no longer be the high end, and 10nm even now is only in lower wattage, lower clocking parts (TGL looks promising tho).

The more it approaches though, the more I’m also apprehensive, I really don’t want to lose x86 boot camp, or at least a very low overhead virtualization of it. Sure, everyone knows you don’t buy a mac to game, but if you already needed a powerful mac workstation it does just so happen to be capable of gaming under Boot Camp in your downtime, if the appeal of moving to in-house is more powerful chips, it’s kind of a shame to lose that side use at the same time. Or things more serious than gaming, maybe you just had an odd piece of software under x86 Windows you needed.
 

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
14,563
14,686
1,800
My gut feeling is that most people use Macs for word processing, Safari and Facetime so they will not notice the difference.

Wonder what will happen to Mac Pro - then again they are such a tiny slice of the market that Apple can easily ax them. They are essentially a halo product.

Considering they just released the Mac Pro and its $700 wheels, I think they're going to be sticking with it for a long time. It will probably be the last computer they switch to ARM.
 
Last edited:

LordOfChaos

Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,810
7,195
985
They mentioned virtualization for other environments like Linux. Still not sure if x86 Windows made the cut.
 

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
14,563
14,686
1,800
This could be one of the most interesting moves in computing history. There are so many questions, and I’m really curious about the answers. Stuff like: what sort of performance are they getting? How far “up” the MB line will it go? What will they do for compatibility with old software? Will they use this to re-design the OS (MacOS 11?). Etc. It seems like such an utterly bizarre and crazy move but if anyone can pull it off, it is them.

Nailed it.

 
  • Fire
Reactions: Zefah

LordOfChaos

Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,810
7,195
985
This could be one of the most interesting moves in computing history. There are so many questions, and I’m really curious about the answers. Stuff like: what sort of performance are they getting? How far “up” the MB line will it go? What will they do for compatibility with old software? Will they use this to re-design the OS (MacOS 11?). Etc. It seems like such an utterly bizarre and crazy move but if anyone can pull it off, it is them.

All the way up. They announced a two year transition for all their products.

Creating one high performance, high perf/watt core architecture is the hard part. Scaling up core counts, bandwidth, and taking advantage of more power is relatively less hard. I for one don't doubt at all that their in house ARM efforts can't make it from the Watch to the Mac Pro, the top supercomputer just went to ARM on the same day.

 
Last edited:

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
14,563
14,686
1,800
All the way up. They announced a two year transition for all their products.

Creating one high performance, high perf/watt core architecture is the hard part. Scaling up core counts, bandwidth, and taking advantage of more power is relatively less hard. I for one don't doubt at all that their in house ARM efforts can't make it from the Watch to the Mac Pro, the top supercomputer just went to ARM on the same day.


Yep, they're all in. No accident they showed stuff like Maya and SOTR running in Rosetta mode. Now I just want to see what the chips are going to be.

I know that Apple isn't their biggest customer, but I doubt there were many happy people at Intel HQ yesterday. If Apple can put out ARM CPUs that can rival the fastest x86, x86 is in big trouble.
 

Kazekage1981

Member
Apr 7, 2019
1,172
2,079
410
1) is apple doing the same thing like Microsoft with Windows for ARM?
2) In terms of performance, does ARM even compete with x86 AMD and Intel processors-particularly for desktops? You only have a few die shrinks left until quantum computing
3) If they didnt like Intel, why not just go with AMD? They have a great portfolio of CPU, GPU, APU

The new MAC OS looks sleek and polished and love the transparent effects. Reminds me of Windows 7 aero/glass effect. Wish windows 10 would use that
 

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
14,563
14,686
1,800
1) is apple doing the same thing like Microsoft with Windows for ARM?
2) In terms of performance, does ARM even compete with x86 AMD and Intel processors-particularly for desktops? You only have a few die shrinks left until quantum computing
3) If they didnt like Intel, why not just go with AMD? They have a great portfolio of CPU, GPU, APU

The new MAC OS looks sleek and polished and love the transparent effects. Reminds me of Windows 7 aero/glass effect. Wish windows 10 would use that

Sort of, but unlike MS, they are all-in, and control the hardware.

Apple makes their own CPUs, and have since the first iPad. It's not about Intel or AMD, it is about them controlling every piece that goes into their products. They have been planning this for a long time. As for performance, jury is still out. On synthetic benchmarks, the high-end Apple CPUs can compete with Intel, and their demos in the video were impressive, but we won't know until this stuff is running on a computer.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kazekage1981
Mar 18, 2018
4,242
4,987
570
The Motorola 68K is actually one of the finest CPUs ever made IMHO and a pleasure to write for! I was more focussing on the Intel stuff. But yeah, you're right. Technically, the 68K is a CISC-based CPU (although the lines are a bit blurry there. Let's just say that Motorola applied caution when designing it, while Intel did not.)
Shut the fuck up nerds and make me a Phantasy Star V on the genesis already?
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Hudo

LordOfChaos

Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,810
7,195
985
1) is apple doing the same thing like Microsoft with Windows for ARM?
2) In terms of performance, does ARM even compete with x86 AMD and Intel processors-particularly for desktops? You only have a few die shrinks left until quantum computing
3) If they didnt like Intel, why not just go with AMD? They have a great portfolio of CPU, GPU, APU

The new MAC OS looks sleek and polished and love the transparent effects. Reminds me of Windows 7 aero/glass effect. Wish windows 10 would use that


Watching the phone SoCs for the years since A7, it was clear their architecture was overambitious for something staying in mobile. Their MLP is paralleled only by Ryzen on desktop, their IPC beyond Intel, and that's without having tried to make a dedicated 'PC' part.

Really recommend reading this and the next few pages to know where we are, again without them even trying to make a laptop/desktop part

 
  • Like
Reactions: Kazekage1981

Hudo

Member
Jul 26, 2018
4,938
6,342
490
Shut the fuck up nerds and make me a Phantasy Star V on the genesis already?
I wouldn't dare to make a Phantasy Star without Rieko Kodama. If Sega ever decides to make a new Phantasy Star RPG game, I hope it's directed by her.
There are a couple of cool interviews with her on Shmuplations.com, if anyone's interested.
 
Mar 18, 2018
4,242
4,987
570
I wouldn't dare to make a Phantasy Star without Rieko Kodama. If Sega ever decides to make a new Phantasy Star RPG game, I hope it's directed by her.
There are a couple of cool interviews with her on Shmuplations.com, if anyone's interested.
Your 68k knowledge is wasted then and I am sad. :messenger_downcast_sweat:
 

LordOfChaos

Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,810
7,195
985

akaFullmetal

Member
May 8, 2014
197
199
600
Maine, USA
Sweating James Mcavoy GIF
 

Pagusas

Elden Member
Jun 9, 2006
12,742
4,420
1,685
Prosper, Tx
Well apple certainly won this breakup. Intel looks like the petty little bitch ex while apple looks hot in its high heals and ready to conquer the world.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: QuantumZebra

QuantumZebra

Member
Dec 5, 2013
9,960
2,622
955
Atlanta, GA
Well apple certainly one this breakup. Intel looks like the petty little bitch ex while apple looks hot in its high heals and ready to conquer the world.
Couldn't happen to a worse company. Fuck Intel (yes I'm an old school AMD fanboy and still bitter over the late 2000s).

Even better that Dr. Lisa Su Bae Queen Yaaas is guiding AMD to greatness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drew1440