7 ms·

Yikes... those are some power hungry chips. Why would a person still buy x86? Compared to ARM, it's inefficient and outdated technology. Buying computers with A

Yikes... those are some power hungry chips. Why would a person still buy x86? Compared to ARM, it's inefficient and outdated technology. Buying computers with AMD and Intel chips is like buying a gasoline car when electric cars are the future.

pythonaut_16 4y ago
Because lots of people need more flexibility or lower cost than Apple Silicon. GPU, RAM, storage configurations, etc. Apple Silicon is great but doesn't serve every need.
kennend3 4y ago
Why does your beloved apple still sell Intel based systems if this is like a "gasoline engine"? https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/mac-pro https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/mac-pro https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/mac-mini https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/mac-mini Maybe not everyone wants/needs to be locked into the apple Ecosystem? PS. Electric cars are the past as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehicl...
- Macha 4y ago
  But seriously, why do they sell the Intel Mac Mini? The Intel Mac Pro still exists because they haven't made a modular apple silicon machine and their remaining large scale video production customers would leave them if they were told just to to migrate to M1 Studio machines. I don't see a similar argument for the Mini, especially as it's still on 8th gen. I'm honestly surprised Intel is still supplying Skylake CPUs for it
  - kennend3 4y ago
    I have the exact same thoughts as you.. While you can sort of see the Mac pro's place, the intel mini makes zero sense? Perhaps they have a warehouse of these somewhere and they are still trying to unload them? I see Intel based iMac's for sale at Costco yet they are not on Apple's site?
    - washadjeffmad 4y ago
      I think you're right and that they're hoping to unload the last of the 2019s this Black November at a ridiculous discount (again). I think I saw a decently specced 21.5" Intel iMac going for $599 last year, although an M1 Mac Mini would still be my choice.
  - GeekyBear 4y ago
    The word out of the supply chain is that the Mini is due for an update when the 3nm M2 Pro ships.
qalmakka 4y ago
I would if there were any decent options that weren't Macs, honestly, and if there was a standardized platform such as the PC. The success of x86 wasn't only due to software, but also thanks to the standardization of hardware and firmware. You can release a single image and boot it on every PC-compatible computer, because stuff like the BIOS, PCI, VGA, ... are all standard. A bare x86 CPU is of little use without all the thingamajigs that make a PC a PC. Viceversa, on ARM outside the few boards or computers with an UEFI it's a far west of options, configurations, and so on. ARM PCs will never succeed outside of Apple closed garden until they get as convenient to install and upgrade as their x86_64 counterparts are.
jonathantf2 4y ago
Because most apps still run on x86?
- kube-system 4y ago
  That’s only true for apps that are compiled and run on a PC. Most general purpose computers in the world run ARM/Android.
  - jonathantf2 4y ago
    These are desktop processors.
    - kube-system 4y ago
      They are, but cross-platform and cross-architecture software is quite common nowadays because x86 PCs are now a minority of computers. I am challenging the claim that "most apps" require x86.
allenrb 4y ago
For now, at least, Apple doesn't serve the upper end of the market with anything remotely affordable. I bought an M1 Mini early on and it's been an absolutely wonderful machine. But it's got 16 GiB RAM and a few ports on the back. On the same desk, I've got an AMD 3900X w/ 64 GiB and expansion slots and room inside the case. The point being, different needs are being met.
- washadjeffmad 4y ago
  True for personal purchases, at least. We just bought three fully specced Studios because the team that uses them will earn the cost back within the quarter. Apple isn't ever going to win any hyperscale awards, but they're putting on a good show for HEDT despite Threadripper and other recent high performance CPUs. They're very good at what they're good at. And for me, anything I'd want to put Linux on these days is either embedded or lives in a rack. Desktop is a big market, but give me something cool and silent or else far away any day.
fetus8 4y ago
Can I build a customizable gaming PC with an off the shelf ARM CPU yet?
asiekierka 4y ago
For me at least, an AMD/Intel desktop box plus its multi-year power bill still is likely to come out cheaper than a comparable Apple desktop or high-end laptop plus its multi-year power bill. The lower-end Apple laptops are not an option for me due to the "one external display" limitation. Competing ARM desktop hardware is not an option for me due to insufficient performance - I might as well not upgrade at all.
- Marsymars 4y ago
  FWIW, I was a long-time dual monitor user who migrated down to one due to MacBook support. I still have dual monitors at the office, and find my home setup broadly comparable - I use a 34” ultrawide with my MacBook mounted on a monitor arm next to it and serving as a second monitor. (Obviously doesn’t scale to >2 monitors.)
temptemptemp111 4y ago
howinteresting 4y ago
I can't play the video games I want to play on an ARM CPU.
polski-g 4y ago
This is why: https://twitter.com/GeraldUndone/status/1501558289334681613 https://twitter.com/GeraldUndone/status/1501558289334681613
brokenmachine 4y ago
That's a pretty apt analogy, because there's a lot of negatives about electric cars currently. I wouldn't buy an electric car right now, and I similarly wouldn't buy ARM desktop PC that's bundled with anal probing from Apple and unlimited limitations.
fulafel 4y ago
It's interesting to see this sentiment surface again, as x86 was far behind other architectures for such a long time and this argument was a basic ingredient of the platform debates in years past. The answer of course is software compatiblity, OSes, CPU platforms, HW markets etc are not interchangeable, and x86 was and is the only practically open platform with big enough market that there's working competition between hw/system vendors, os vendors, sw vendors, etc. Then eventually in the late 90s, x86 matched and later overtook the competitors, helped by the huge volumes leaving process investments of competitors too far behind. (Everyone had0 their own private fabs then, and process generations got expoenntially more expensive). After the RISC camp struggled head to head with x86 for a few years the race was over in 5-ish years. Probably the 21164 and 21264 were the last chips to hands down beat x86 by a large margin. They had a Rosetta style translator back then and most (?) x86 Windows apps ran faster on the Alpha/WinNT platform than on fastest native x86 chip for a time.

pythonaut_16 4y ago

Because lots of people need more flexibility or lower cost than Apple Silicon. GPU, RAM, storage configurations, etc. Apple Silicon is great but doesn't serve every need.

kennend3 4y ago

Why does your beloved apple still sell Intel based systems if this is like a "gasoline engine"? https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/mac-pro https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/mac-pro https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/mac-mini https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/mac-mini Maybe not everyone wants/needs to be locked into the apple Ecosystem? PS. Electric cars are the past as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehicl...

Macha 4y ago
But seriously, why do they sell the Intel Mac Mini? The Intel Mac Pro still exists because they haven't made a modular apple silicon machine and their remaining large scale video production customers would leave them if they were told just to to migrate to M1 Studio machines. I don't see a similar argument for the Mini, especially as it's still on 8th gen. I'm honestly surprised Intel is still supplying Skylake CPUs for it
- kennend3 4y ago
  I have the exact same thoughts as you.. While you can sort of see the Mac pro's place, the intel mini makes zero sense? Perhaps they have a warehouse of these somewhere and they are still trying to unload them? I see Intel based iMac's for sale at Costco yet they are not on Apple's site?
  - washadjeffmad 4y ago
    I think you're right and that they're hoping to unload the last of the 2019s this Black November at a ridiculous discount (again). I think I saw a decently specced 21.5" Intel iMac going for $599 last year, although an M1 Mac Mini would still be my choice.
- GeekyBear 4y ago
  The word out of the supply chain is that the Mini is due for an update when the 3nm M2 Pro ships.

qalmakka 4y ago

I would if there were any decent options that weren't Macs, honestly, and if there was a standardized platform such as the PC. The success of x86 wasn't only due to software, but also thanks to the standardization of hardware and firmware. You can release a single image and boot it on every PC-compatible computer, because stuff like the BIOS, PCI, VGA, ... are all standard. A bare x86 CPU is of little use without all the thingamajigs that make a PC a PC. Viceversa, on ARM outside the few boards or computers with an UEFI it's a far west of options, configurations, and so on. ARM PCs will never succeed outside of Apple closed garden until they get as convenient to install and upgrade as their x86_64 counterparts are.

jonathantf2 4y ago

Because most apps still run on x86?

kube-system 4y ago
That’s only true for apps that are compiled and run on a PC. Most general purpose computers in the world run ARM/Android.
- jonathantf2 4y ago
  These are desktop processors.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    They are, but cross-platform and cross-architecture software is quite common nowadays because x86 PCs are now a minority of computers. I am challenging the claim that "most apps" require x86.

allenrb 4y ago

For now, at least, Apple doesn't serve the upper end of the market with anything remotely affordable. I bought an M1 Mini early on and it's been an absolutely wonderful machine. But it's got 16 GiB RAM and a few ports on the back. On the same desk, I've got an AMD 3900X w/ 64 GiB and expansion slots and room inside the case. The point being, different needs are being met.

washadjeffmad 4y ago
True for personal purchases, at least. We just bought three fully specced Studios because the team that uses them will earn the cost back within the quarter. Apple isn't ever going to win any hyperscale awards, but they're putting on a good show for HEDT despite Threadripper and other recent high performance CPUs. They're very good at what they're good at. And for me, anything I'd want to put Linux on these days is either embedded or lives in a rack. Desktop is a big market, but give me something cool and silent or else far away any day.

fetus8 4y ago

Can I build a customizable gaming PC with an off the shelf ARM CPU yet?

asiekierka 4y ago

For me at least, an AMD/Intel desktop box plus its multi-year power bill still is likely to come out cheaper than a comparable Apple desktop or high-end laptop plus its multi-year power bill. The lower-end Apple laptops are not an option for me due to the "one external display" limitation. Competing ARM desktop hardware is not an option for me due to insufficient performance - I might as well not upgrade at all.

Marsymars 4y ago
FWIW, I was a long-time dual monitor user who migrated down to one due to MacBook support. I still have dual monitors at the office, and find my home setup broadly comparable - I use a 34” ultrawide with my MacBook mounted on a monitor arm next to it and serving as a second monitor. (Obviously doesn’t scale to >2 monitors.)

temptemptemp111 4y ago

howinteresting 4y ago

I can't play the video games I want to play on an ARM CPU.

polski-g 4y ago

This is why: https://twitter.com/GeraldUndone/status/1501558289334681613 https://twitter.com/GeraldUndone/status/1501558289334681613

brokenmachine 4y ago

That's a pretty apt analogy, because there's a lot of negatives about electric cars currently. I wouldn't buy an electric car right now, and I similarly wouldn't buy ARM desktop PC that's bundled with anal probing from Apple and unlimited limitations.

fulafel 4y ago

It's interesting to see this sentiment surface again, as x86 was far behind other architectures for such a long time and this argument was a basic ingredient of the platform debates in years past. The answer of course is software compatiblity, OSes, CPU platforms, HW markets etc are not interchangeable, and x86 was and is the only practically open platform with big enough market that there's working competition between hw/system vendors, os vendors, sw vendors, etc. Then eventually in the late 90s, x86 matched and later overtook the competitors, helped by the huge volumes leaving process investments of competitors too far behind. (Everyone had0 their own private fabs then, and process generations got expoenntially more expensive). After the RISC camp struggled head to head with x86 for a few years the race was over in 5-ish years. Probably the 21164 and 21264 were the last chips to hands down beat x86 by a large margin. They had a Rosetta style translator back then and most (?) x86 Windows apps ran faster on the Alpha/WinNT platform than on fastest native x86 chip for a time.