Originally posted by cubist
Just want to point out that the MacBook uses shared memory video, as the realists predicted. The realists are batting 1000, the dreamers are batting zero. Realists still say no Woodcrest in Macs.
For the first few months. the assumption was that Apple would use Conroe in the new towers. I've been saying during that time that they SHOULD, not necessarly would, use the Woodcrest. Those very same writers are now saying that Apple will use Woodcrest. I'm not a dreamer, as anyone here can attest to.
But, the realities are such, that the toweres will be competing with Woodcrest and Opteron machines, and that Conroe will show up in $1,000 dollar PC's, and possibly, especially a short while after they come out, in $750 machines as well.
Will Apple see that as a good comparison? That is, a $3,000+ machine against a $750 machine? Even if the $3,000+ machine has two chips?
I don't think so!
Right now the PM, even the Quad, is getting plastered in video editing tests. The top of the line Xeon machines are 20$ faster, and the top of the line Opterons have been up to 40% faster.
Apple has to close, or leap over that gap. If they use Conroes, then they will again, lag behind the new Woodcrest Xeons. If the Xeons are as fast, or possibly even faster than the Opterons, Apple may lag behind both again!
Let me tell you, video editing, particularly on the higher end of the spectrum is not only done on Mac's. That is not a done deal. People, and companies, look at these rendering times, and count them in terms of the $200 to $2,000 an hour that it is costing them. They will switch platforms if they see a big savings based upon these render differences.
The Mac is by no means sacred here.
Don't forget that two years ago Jobs said, in an interview, that it hurt every time he wrote out a check to Dell for machines to render, for Pixar.
If he is going to write a check to Apple instead, he has to make the case that it will save them money. Now that Pixar is owned by disney, that is even more true today.