macOs on AMD RYZEN Threadripper- is it possible ?

[Shiv78]

Just now, Hunter259 said:

It is likely they stick with Intel seeing as AMD has 0 true mobile parts. 

Asus has an R7 1700 laptop in the works, but yeah I agree. They do almost exclusively use AMD GPUs now though, at least that's good.

[Hunter259]

1 minute ago, Shiv78 said:

Asus has an R7 1700 laptop in the works, but yeah I agree. They do almost exclusively use AMD GPUs now though, at least that's good.

I'm talking about actual mobile parts not just underclocked desktop parts. Intel has some crazy low power chips that Apple uses.

[tom_w141]

5 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

It is likely they stick with Intel seeing as AMD has 0 true mobile parts. 

1. Ryzen will have mobile parts later this year.

 

2. Don't see how that is at all relevant when they use desktop/server parts too. Soldered with a lower TDP ryzen would make Apple's machines throttle less/run cooler. Using an R7 would pull a lower core count Xeon's pants down, using a TR would pull a bigger Xeon's pants down and using Epyc would violate any Xeon's dignity. The only reason I see them not using TR or EPYC is maybe socket size. Ryzen I would expect to happen.

 

3. No one said they can only use one manufacturer.

[Shiv78]

5 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Using an R7 would pull a lower core count Xeon's pants down, using a TR would pull a bigger Xeon's pants down and using Epyc would violate any Xeon's dignity.

ded

[Hunter259]

1 minute ago, tom_w141 said:

1. Ryzen will have mobile parts later this year.

 

2. Don't see how that is at all relevant when they use desktop/server parts too. Soldered with a lower TDP ryzen would make Apple's machines throttle less/run cooler. Using an R7 would pull a lower core count Xeon's pants down, using a TR would pull a bigger Xeon's pants down and using Epyc would violate any Xeon's dignity. The only reason I see them not using TR or EPYC is maybe socket size. Ryzen I would expect to happen.

 

3. No one said they can only use one manufacturer.

Not in the super low power I.E. Macbook range

 

Because they would have to do quite a bit software work to make the kernel work now on two different processors after building an OS from the ground for a very specific instruction set. The benefits would not be that substantial. Also Apple loves using Quick Sync (Or whatever they call it) and AVX with is something Ryzen does not have/do well at.

 

Intel would

[Shiv78]

Just now, Hunter259 said:

Not in the super low power I.E. Macbook range

 

Apple should just put a quad core version of the iPad Pro CPU in those, it's pretty good.

[Hunter259]

Just now, Shiv78 said:

Apple should just put a quad core version of the iPad Pro CPU in those, it's pretty good.

And now you can't run Mac OS so it's just a stupid iPad. Even if you rewrote Mac OS to run on ARM you can't run any applications on it and if they made a compatibility layer for it to be able to run x86 software it would absolutely kill performance.

[tom_w141]

Just now, Hunter259 said:

Not in the super low power I.E. Macbook range

See point 3. They can stick with Intel for this if they like. Or maybe people buying MacBook Pros are actually professionals needing performance instead of well off spoilt teens in which case I think they would appreciate a 65W 8 core R7 in their new MacBook Pro.

 

2 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

Because they would have to do quite a bit software work to make the kernel work now on two different processors after building an OS from the ground for a very specific instruction set.

A lot less work than you think. If hobbyists can create a custom kernel whilst having a life, job and other commitments then image what a paid employee can do.

 

3 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

The benefits would not be that substantial.

Bet they would. Intel had to downclock Ryzen to 2GHz to make their 8 core Xeon seem relevant in their slides.

 

4 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

AVX with is something Ryzen does not have/do well at.

With double the cores Ryzen can do AVX a bit better than a 7700k. AVX512 it loses by a fair bit but you'd need skylake-X for that and I don't see that available in any apple product yet.

 

5 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

Intel would

Intel have overstepped the illegality line so many times in the past they probably can't risk doing it again  Also Apple are richer than Intel and won't give a fuck. Apple profits are up there with oil companies, Intel are small fry to them and can't tell them to do shit.

[Hunter259]

25 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

See point 3. They can stick with Intel for this if they like. Or maybe people buying MacBook Pros are actually professionals needing performance instead of well off spoilt teens in which case I think they would appreciate a 65W 8 core R7 in their new MacBook Pro.

 

A lot less work than you think. If hobbyists can create a custom kernel whilst having a life, job and other commitments then image what a paid employee can do.

 

Bet they would. Intel had to downclock Ryzen to 2GHz to make their 8 core Xeon seem relevant in their slides.

 

With double the cores Ryzen can do AVX a bit better than a 7700k. AVX512 it loses by a fair bit but you'd need skylake-X for that and I don't see that available in any apple product yet.

 

Intel have overstepped the illegality line so many times in the past they probably can't risk doing it again  Also Apple are richer than Intel and won't give a fuck. Apple profits are up there with oil companies, Intel are small fry to them and can't tell them to do shit.

I never said Macbook Pro I said Macbook. Reading is hard. They use 35W Cpu's in their Pro's BTW. I doubt a Ryzen chip would hit that mark and still be faster in multithread.

 

It's more time, work, and money to do so. To keep the uniformity between software and hardware would also become MUCH more difficult. They would do a complete switch.

 

Are you trying to be stupid? They clocked both at 2GHz likely because the Xeon was an engineering sample. That is such a weak argument.

 

Ryzen either barely beats or does as good as a chip with half it's cores in AVX work loads. That isn't much to be happy about.

 

How is that illegal? Come on now. Just because Apple has more money also doesn't mean they won't care when a 10 year+ partner leaves them with no choice but redesign and entire product stack.

[themctipers]

Yes. Someone got a 1700 working in Sierra 

[tom_w141]

Just now, Hunter259 said:

They use 35W Cpu's in their Pro's BTW. I doubt a Ryzen chip would hit that mark and still be faster in multithread.

^

27 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

See point 3. They can stick with Intel for this if they like.

Reading is indeed hard.

 

1 minute ago, Hunter259 said:

To keep the uniformity between software and hardware would also become MUCH more difficult.

No it wouldn't. Otherwise you'd see much more hardware specific OS'/Software.

 

9 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

Are you trying to be stupid? They clocked both at 2GHz likely because the Xeon was an engineering sample. That is such a weak argument.

They are both clocked at 2GHz because at 4GHz the xeon would have lost. It's beside the point, to make their comparison they had to down clock the competition.

 

10 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

Ryzen either barely beats or does as good as a chip with half it's cores in AVX work loads. That isn't much to be happy about.

Or Ryzen beats a chip that's more expensive, whilst having more cores, using less power and running cooler. I'd say that's plenty to be happy about. The AVX performance is not in the realms of Skylake-X territory but its the best at its price point. (Man imagine the apple mark up on a HEDT system )

 

12 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

How is that illegal? Come on now

Paying someone off is definitely illegal and Intel have been found guilty on several occasions. Do you live under a rock?

 

13 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

Just because Apple has more money also doesn't mean they won't care when a 10 year+ partner leaves them with no choice but redesign and entire product stack.

You make that sound like a lot of work but its not. Once the OS work is done, changing future products is easy... Also Intel wouldn't do this. It would literally be a case of cutting their nose to spite their face.

[tom_w141]

9 minutes ago, themctipers said:

Yes. Someone got a 1700 working in Sierra 

I've done it its really easy...

[themctipers]

Just now, tom_w141 said:

I've done it its really easy...

Danq

 

im waiting for zen+  

[Mira Yurizaki]

42 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

And now you can't run Mac OS so it's just a stupid iPad. Even if you rewrote Mac OS to run on ARM you can't run any applications on it and if they made a compatibility layer for it to be able to run x86 software it would absolutely kill performance.

If you develop your API framework in such a way that abstracts as much details of the system as possible, you can minimize the reduction in performance to a degree that makes user experience almost seamless. Otherwise how else do you explain Microsoft getting the 360 emulation so well on an XB1 that the XB1 runs 360 games better than the original system?

[MoonlightSylv]

9 hours ago, TheCherryKing said:

Custom kernals don't count.

What do you mean? They run the OS and it works fine.

[tom_w141]

5 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

If you develop your API framework in such a way that abstracts as much details of the system as possible, you can minimize the reduction in performance to a degree that makes user experience almost seamless. Otherwise how else do you explain Microsoft getting the 360 emulation so well on an XB1 that the XB1 runs 360 games better than the original system?

I'll save him some time and post his reply for him. Extrapolated using his other responses:

 

HERP DERP NO INTEL XEON MASTER RACE.

APPLE NO USE ANYTHING DIFFERENT.

TOO HARD.

APPLE AFRAID OF INTEL.

APPLE NO TIME GOTS FOR OS/SOFTWARE DEV.

APPLE ONLY USE ONE MANUFACTURER MUST.

MICROSOFT NO APPLE. MICROSOFT IS WINDOW.

[Mira Yurizaki]

I guess I should've expecting [redacted]-wagging for one side or the other. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[W-L]

Sorry but we don't allow the discussion for the setup of Hackintosh systems. 

https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/965477-community-standards/

Quote

• Talking about piracy in general, broad details, is acceptable however the posting or discussing pirated/hacked/cracked or otherwise nefariously obtained content is not. This includes Windows content, games, hackintosh, etc. Also discussions regarding ways to avoid or block legitimately installed monitoring/tracking software or the like is also not allowed.

 

-Locked-