“Taiwan passive component makers are witnessing an aggressive increase in orders for high-capacitance multi-layer ceramic capacitors (MLCCs), with most of the MLCCs having a capacitance of 22μF, and being for use in an AMD-based Apple notebook, sources at the makers noted. For this new notebook, about 70 22μF MLCCs will be required, with Japan-based Murata Manufacturing, Taiyo Yuden and TDK being the three major suppliers, the sources added,” Yen Ting Chen, Shawn Chen and Nuying Huang, and Esther Lam report for DigiTimes.
“Passive component makers are generally optimistic about the growth catalyst that the new AMD-base Mac notebooks could bring. Already, demand for Intel-based dual-core Apple notebook models that require about 80 22μ MLCCs has caused supply to tighten for the high-capacitance MLCCs, with notebook makers having to adjust their MLCC mixture, the makers noted,” DigiTimes reports.
“However, some motherboard makers are doubtful about any AMD and Apple partnership, with the makers noting the performance advantage Intel currently enjoys over AMD, especially for the Core 2 Duo processor compared with AMD’s present CPU lineup. AMD is also considered to have insufficient capacity, the makers added,” DigiTimes reports. “Sources at Taiwan server makers, though, indicated that Apple may apply AMD’s x86 socket CPUs to its servers.”
Full article here.
Tony Smith reports for The Register, “It’s not clear why an increased demand for these components should indicate an Apple AMD-based product, particularly when the same sources suggest AMD-based machines require fewer MLCCs than Intel-based ones do.”
“Just as pertinent a dampener on the Taiwanese moles’ claim: Apple’s MLCC suppliers are said to be Japanese not Taiwanese. As we’ve noted before, now that Dell’s started offering AMD-based systems, Apple is now the only company rumourmongers can turn to for claims that a major vendor is ditching its Intel-only policy,” Smith reports. “It’s hard to imagine Apple not at very least evaluating AMD processors, but the exclusivity of its deal with Intel would appear for now to outweigh the benefits of bringing a second source of CPUs on board.”
Full article here.
Jobs knows that stranger things have happened, and with Apple, anything can happen, but this just doesn’t seem plausible to us right now.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
AMD will sell processors to Apple in future, CEO Ruiz says – September 21, 2006
AMD Opteron is DOA, significantly less powerful than Intel’s ‘Woodcrest’ Xeon – August 17, 2006
IDC: Apple Mac attained 4.8% U.S. market share in Q2 06 – July 19, 2006
Gartner: Apple Mac grabbed 4.6% U.S. market share in Q2 06 – July 19, 2006
‘Fantastic quarter’ helps Apple double share of U.S. retail notebook market to 12% – July 19, 2006
Intel Core 2 Duo ‘Conroe’ vs. AMD Athlon FX62 – July 17, 2006
Report: Dell signs deal with AMD for millions of chips for full range of desktops, notebooks – June 26, 2006
Apple chose well: Intel poised to take massive lead across the board over AMD – June 07, 2006
AMD: 85-percent of Windows PC users run six apps concurrently; five of them are anti-malware apps – May 17, 2006
These mythical AMD chips are for the mythical Tablet Mac which, I hear, will have a built in, mythical Apple iPhone.
Mystery solved and you heard it first on MDN.
The way Apple leverages Intel right now is by being the only major PC provider that uses only Intel.
While Apple is relatively small, they are growing CPU sales, and from Intel’s point of view, they are the best company to work with. Every Mac going out the door is a guaranteed Intel sale. Every Dell or HP? Who knows. It is these companies who give AMD a foot in the door and once someone buys an AMD Dell or HP, and discovers everything just works like it did before (crappie Windows and all), the Intel inside message becomes irrelevant.
For Intel to own as much of the market as possible, this is a great thing for Intel – for now…
Intel has been very responsive to what Apple has demanded they deliver, so it shows that Intel and Apple are clearly rowing in the same boat, in the same direction – for now…
Apple adding AMD to the mix can only weaken the strong Intel/Apple alliance.
Why not plausible? The MacBooks start at nearly $1100. Primarily due to the cost associated with Intel processors. Unless Apple decides to use the original Core Duo processors in a lower end laptop, AMD’s processors, being much cheaper than Intel’s, would be another alternative. Especially since Apple has been trying for a good while now to move to an entirely 64-bit system. Intel has no good low-end processors that are 64-bit capable, so AMD is the next logical choice for a sub-$1000 laptop for Apple. Hell, they could even make one that costs around $700, like most other laptop manufacturers are doing now.
Not a good idea. I think Intel is the horse to stick with for the foreseeable future here. Apple has gained the loyalty of Intel, and vice-versa. Cases of Apple getting priority treatment from Intel have been documented on the internet. Add this to all the PR BS about how Intel and Apple “get along” and “have common goals” and “are similar in vision” and I don’t see any reason why Apple would jump ship to AMD right now. All it would do is piss Intel off, and why would Apple want to do that when Intel has the faster chips!?
–mAc