Apple to switch from ATI to NVIDIA by 2007?

“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,” Jason D. O’Grady blogs for ZDNet.

“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,” O’Grady writes.

“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,” O’Grady writes.

Full article here.

Related MacDailyNews article:
AMD to buy graphics chip maker ATI for $5.4 billion – July 24, 2006

25 Comments

  1. Intel won’t tell Apply what graphics chipset to use (they already use intel in the MacMini). AMD, however, may convert ATI chipsets to be compatible with AMD processors/MBs. Who knows, why speculate, we will know soon enough. It does benefit Nvidia in my opinion. A lot of ATI customers have to protect themselves by at least preparing to use Nvidia if they don’t already.

  2. It seems the person who wrote the ZDNet article may have confused the lack of a “chipset” license to mean that ATI can no longer make graphics cards for machines with Intel processors. This, of course, is ridonkulous.

    I keep re-reading to see if I’m misunderstanding, but I think the author is just very confused as to what “chipset” means in this case.

  3. Apple is going to forgo the whole graphics card in the new Mac Pro’s in favor of more cores.

    Much like how the Cell processor operates, the new Mac Pro’s will have up to eight cores, which a couple is needed for asymmetrical multi-processing of the 3D game engine and sound, plus 6 cores for symmetrical multi-processing of the 3D video.

    Sony’s plan is to put all their cores on one die, which unfortunatly lowers the yield (and is). Intel’s plan is to place all the cores close enough on one chip, therefore retaining the ability to reject defective cores.

    When it comes to the rest of Apple’s product line, they will slowly all switched to Intel’s graphics. Why? HDCP, the Hollywood endorsed content protection scheme for HD video.

    No graphics card = no loophole to snag the content.

    DRM Apple monitors to come as well.

    Something for you to think about as well.

    Rememeber the “hack my webpage” sported by Dave Schroeder?

    Well it turns out HE WAS HACKED. And the coverup was the “I wasn’t authorized” story. See this:

    ….the local ‘passwd’ exploit (a zero day based exploit) reported on 03.02.06, which was used to hack the system of Dave Schroeder during the “rm-my-mac” competition.

    http://www.net-security.org/article.php?id=933

  4. If Apple swithces to Nvidia due to pressure from Intel alone, then I’d be mighty disappointed in Apple. Whether they use ATI or Nvidia isn’t important, but they should always choose whichever is best at the moment. and have, in the past, switchde back and forth.

    And I agree with Spark. AMD could offer huge incentives for Apple to use both ATI GPUs and AMD CPUs (largely as an advantage of having greater volume). Unfortunately AMD has nothing to rival the Core2 line. Nothing.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.