Intel touts power of upcoming Yonah laptop chip - Page 2

For most people, most of the time, a 1.67Ghz G4 is faster than they need.

They only need the Dual-core 2+Ghz chips of pissing contests in forums.

Of course they don't. There are shared resources. Each core isn't 75% of the power. 1 core + supporting architecture is 75%. The whole processor is slightly less than 30% more. How much it'll actually hit that 30% more figure is also somewhat debatable.

For most people, most of the time, a 1.67Ghz G4 is faster than they need.

I recently took up using Blender3D to do some 3D modeling, and it is extremely slow to the point of being unusable at times on my laptop. And this is only with very basic models with a few hundred vertices at most. Granted my PB is only 1.25 Ghz with 512 of RAM, but even still. I have to go to my friend's house with a dual G5 tower if I want to get any serious work done.

I've a 1Mhz Z80 based laptop* that's crap at 3D modelling too - that's why I only use it for word processing and leave the 3D modelling to my desktop.

Horses for courses.



* It does get 20 hours out of a set of 4 AA batteries though. Intel breaking the 5 hour limit - I'm impressed. ;-)

How do you know?

Intel means that when the two cores are being stressed, the usage of each will be 25% less.

There is almost nothing on these chips that uses significant amounts of power other than the logic units, and to a lesser extent, the cache.

And where did you come up with that. Considering that they aren't Intel's numbers. Intel said "core". Not "core plus supporting architecture".

What shared resources take up enough power that it would make a difference? Both cores share the same amount of cache. No savings there. You can't properly assume that one chip is going to do most of the work. That may be true some of the time, but in a symmetric arrangement, that's not true most of the time.

Just keep Activity Monitor on in your machine, and you will see that for the vast percentage of time, both chips, or cores track equally.

ROTFLMAO ... that was a great one :-)

Not me. I've been wanting a new machine for a couple years now. If the first gen MacIntel laptops aren't compelling enough, my wife will just spend the money on something frivolous like furniture or carpets.

- Jasen.

To put my remark in context, in Spring I bought a shiny new PowerMac with a 20" Cinema Display plus Final Cut Studio and just recently Aperture (\). My 12" Powerbook has traveled with me extensively, but it's beginning to chug. (This, of course, is purely psychological since it's running the same speed that day I got it).

Anyway, as a veteran Apple user, I know to stay clear of anything version 1.0 or revision A. This time, doubly so since this will be a revision A on a new chipset.

Run. Fear. Hide. I expect thermal issues non-stop until revision C.

If not, good for Apple...

I'd rather not be so negative about this. It has been a major transition to Express, but it has gone very well.

This is a bigger transition, to be sure, but let's not assume that it won't go well either. Apple has a lot at stake. And it's proven technology. It isn't something new. And Apple has been working with it for some time.

I haven't heard of many problems with the cobbled together developers machines.

There's not a lot to go wrong there though is there?

It's an off the shelf Intel motherboard with integrated graphics and a BIOS in a huge aluminium case.

A new production MacIntel will most likely have a new motherboard, no BIOS and a new case design.

Right, but that's the point I was making. It's just an off the shelf system, and it still works fine.

The case design shouldn't matter. It's only rarely that their cases have major problems, even though they get a lot of attention when they do.

It will still be a PC mobo at this point. I doubt that Apple will, or even can, do much that's different right now. Unless Intel has some stuff that we don't know about. EFI has been around for a few years. I'm sure Apple has been wringing it out.

I prefer to be positive. There might be some trivial issues, but it's not likely, with all they have at stake here, that there will be a showstopper.

There is no reason to believe it will be an Apple custom built motherboard. I would be surprised if it were. That being the case, there wouldn't be any more or less motherboard/cpu related problems than with the Yonah laptops sold by HP, Dell, etc. aside from whether they use BIOS or EFI.

I really think that Apple will use Intel motherboard designs (Yonah + Napa) that Apple crafts for their form factor (and maybe stick some little chip onto that OS X requires).

Basically, what I am trying to say is that it won't be a first-generation device, it will be the same multi-generation intel technology that other makers will be shipping.

I said "I know," not "I always do." I admit I got sucked by the eye pr0n.

Anyway, no board in any recent line was "off the shelf" because of them being for a PowerPC. Even for an Intel chip, I just can't see Apple trusting an OEM and letting go of that control.

[Exit clause] Let me amend that a wee bit. Maybe-- what if-- Apple had influence in the Viiv specs. Hm, that'd be something.

Here's another report about no Intel Mac's in January. Take with with the amount of salt of your choosing.


http://derekpicone.blogsome.com/2005...l-at-macworld/

Aah, who knows anymore.

This is ArsTechnica's take on the "news":

At this point there really is no way of knowing any of this.

Apple has given no indication of anything. All we can say for sure is they will be using Intel processors by June.

LOL...AssTechnica.

At one point Apple said they'd have 3Ghz G5s within a year.

Nothing is certain.

I agree. My speculation above is just my analysis. I think it would be foolhearty for Apple to do their own motherboard, but they very well could. If they don't use Napa, then they will have shot themselves in the foot (in my opinion).

hahahahhaha! it's not ME this time that mentioned pr0n...! YEAH

heh. there are many many segments of society that consider buying the latest apple mac to be frivolous. i'm with you though, furniture and its associated depreciation is total bollocks[still my favourite word this week]

Would you mind elaborating?

The motherboard itself is not a particuarly big deal -- it is the chips on it that matter. It will be interesting to see if Apple goes with Intel motherboard chips. I expect that they will because it will save them pots of money and time, and doing their own chips gives them a fairly minimal advantage (if any at all). Apple can then focus on industrial design (i.e. the actual motherboard, its configuration, additional parts, and the case) where they've been doing well in recent years.

I think you missed the point here, it's not that a new case might have problems in and of itself - it is that a new, tiny powerbook case might cause problems for the new Intel chips with respect to heat management.

The giant aluminum G5 tower is already designed for hot desktop chips (the G5), and has plenty of room for air to circulate - it would have been very surprising if there had been any ventilation issues with putting a P4 in there, which has already been proven to work fine in much smaller PC cases.

But putting a new, untested chip architecture into the smallest possible casing is unlikely to be something they will get perfectly right first time. It is quite likely that either the case will be bulkier than it needs to be, in which case those who wait will get a slimmer laptop, or the case will be too small in which case the early adopters will get melted cpus or burned laps.

I'm not necessarily advocating that you not buy the first revision, incidentally (I have a revision A 15" aluminium powerbook and have had no problems with it), I am simply clarifying the issue.

That's right. The board is just wiring. Apple has either designed or had a hand in the design of so many of its chips over the years that we forget that it might not be necessary any more. Even the first WiFi chip was designed by Lucent with the help of Apple.

There are all of these small Asian mobo manufacturers out there who manage to come up with new board designs every 3 to 6 months. This isn't a big thing. It's just a matter of the form factor. If Apple sticks with the new BX form, they might not have to do anything. If they need a custom board, Intel could work one up for them easily. Intel sells almost half the Mobo's out there.

I understand what you are saying. But Apple is not alone any more. Intel has vast facilities to help with these design questions. Apple surely won't have any more of a problem than any other PC manufacturer has.

Look at Sony's small laptops, for example. No problem there. The same can be said about other's. Apple can figure this out just as well. I don't see their first products in this space to have any more problems than anyone else's.

As usual, I always express caution about ordering something the first day it is announced. NEVER get your fingers tapping out an order as soon as Apple announces the product. People who do that are asking for trouble. It isn't worth the bragging rights some people insist upon.

Wait a couple of weeks to a month before ordering. Look on Macfixit, Macintouch, here, and other places to see if any problems have surfaced that might be a problem for you. The same thing is true with software.

But, you don't have to wait 6 months to a year for a totally new revision to come out. Any small problems generally manifest themselves fairly quickly. Those that don't, can come at any time. Sometimes the first model is fine, and it's the second one with the problems.

So, you might never buy anything if you worry too much. Apple has been pretty good over the years if it can be shown that the problem is endemic to the design. They have extended guarantees for problems like case cracks, screen problems, etc.

With all of the experience that PC companies have had over the years with small, light notebooks, and the like, with hotter chips than the Yonah will be, I can't see any major problem popping up. And, as I've said, if there is, we should know pretty quickly.

For thermal design a CPU is just a hot spot. I don't see Apple having a problem they can't handle here. A lot of cooling solutions can be found in the market already and I'm shure Apple's engineers know them all.

Sometimes we forget that Apple doesnt design anything. People who work for Apple design the products that Apple releases. People leave, people make mistakes, bugs happen.

There are a number of factors to consider,
a new cpu ( bugs happen )
a chipset ( bugs happen )
a new case ( bugs happen )
a new OS ( bugs happen )
a new board ( bugs happen )

Thats a lot of new stuff going into these new machines. Im sure that lots of it will go right, Apple have been working on this for a long time. But Im also sure that plenty of things will go wrong. It would be wise to wait for a few machines to get out in the wild and see what doesnt work properly. It can take a lot of arm twisting to get Apple to acknowledge a widespread fault.

Of course, on the other hand, if Apple release an intel mini Ill be buying about 5 of them, theres really nothing comparable in the intel space for running dev servers.

We know that the "company" doesn't actually *do* anything.

But Apple has a better record than most. Even laptops that were hot ram without problems. Heat just can't be avoided at times. But as long as it's understood, it can be directed where it won't harm the computer.

Bugs happen. But meaningful bugs in hardware are rare. Software is tougher than hardware. Hardware can be tested and characterized much more easily than software can.

Evderyone will be using the same chips. That's certainly no reason to avoid the system.

Cases shouldn't be much of a problem. No more of a problem than before. You might as well say that every time Apple comes out with a new case, we should wait a year before buying. Only a very small percentage of people ever have a problem with a case, even when it turns out that the design WAS defective. The first Titaniums had problems with the first iteration. But, even then, less than 1% of the people who had them had a problem (other than with the paint, but that's cosmetic).

Motherboards are not hard to do. It's basic electronics design. I've designed a number of high performance boards over the years. It's much easier today, despite the greater complexity and higher frequencies involved.

It's unlikely that Apple will continue to design all of it's own chipsets, or even most of them. Possibly, none of them.

The OS seems to be fine. It's the only real area of contention. But within a couple of weeks we will see if there are any real problems. As I said eariler, check in with Maxfixit, Macinrough, her, and other sites. Any problems will quickly surface, as well as any workarounds.

Basically, Apple's problems should be no worse than other PC manufacturer. They are all transitioning over to Express. 30% of all new PC's now will have it by the end of 2005. Apple has successfully made that transition with remarkably little fuss. Going to Express is a bigger move electronically than going to a new cpu.

Software availability will be the biggest question. A lot of companies have already announced that they are ready. There will be far greater compliance with this switch than there ever was when Apple went to the PPC in the first place.

Think positive.

It's not just design and bugs though with a first revision, it's also manufacturing. It usually takes them a couple of months to find out what's failing or causing issues in a new product - any product. Whilst it rarely leads to an immediate Rev B, just little tweaks are often done by the manufacturing company in situ.

But I'm waiting for a Rev B. anyway as I don't find Yonah very compelling at all. It's not the great leap forward that Merom promises to be. In the great scheme of things I think the Yonah books will go down as a road apple.

That's understandable - it's only the fastest laptop cpu ever

Originally posted by smalM
That's understandable - it's only the fastest laptop cpu ever

until AMD's "yamato"

Can't disagree with your first statements, I do have issues with below though.

Well rev B could very well be Yonah also. I doubt that but waiting may be setting yourself up for disappointment. As to the follow ons to Yonah which ideally would be 64 bit, yeah they have a certain appeal there is no doubt there. Merom should be very nice indeed when it gets here.

That however doesn't imply that the advancement will be as compelling as the switch from PPC to Yonah. Frankly this should result in huge improvements over existing Apple Laptops to a far greater extent than the Yonah to Merom change.

I see the situation a little differently than you I geuss. The Yonah machines should be ideal for anybody that needs a significant speed boost right away. Hopefully that will come with a significant battery tiem boost also. At the same time though these machines will not be very usefull to people who need a 64 bit environment for whatever reason.

Dave

It's got nothing to do with 64bit although I'm dissapointed that Apple didn't completely skip IA32. But that's more for the instruction set and removal of so much legacy crap rather than the 64bit address space.

Yonah is the last gasp in the old Pentium M architecture. Merom/Conroe is a new architecture. What comes after Yonah is what's interesting.

If there's an Intel laptop in January then it's premature for me. Ill let the crash test dummies sort out Rev A and Rev B if that's what it takes but I see no point in them before OSX 10.5 and available applications and there's nothing on the desktop in the next year to beat the G5s so I guess I'm out for a year at least until the smoke has cleared.

edit: meant OSX 10.5 of course

That may very well be, after all how much speed does one need to run Wordstar. The flip side of the coin is that modern software continues to make use of CPU resources that are available to it. Once a program becomes sluggish there is a ligitimate need for faster hardware.

Even worst is the reality of modern day OS'es and user patterns that end up with multiple applications taking up CPU resources. In the end it is unwise to try to define what "most people" need in the way of CPU resources. Even what an individual is satisfied with at one moment can be a hinderance toproductivity the next.



Nope not at all, each and everyone of us has differrent needs. On top of that each persons needs vary as they exploit the hardware at hand. Besides dual core offers the most natural fit for the advancement we see in OS'es and user patterns. To claim a pissing match is pretty much the same as admitting that one pisses into the wind.

Thanks
dave

That'll depend on the applications. If Adobe, Macromedia and Apple don't release Intel natives versions of the software I use then there's no speed boost.