8870 in GB? I just got an 11710 in my machine from my sig...QC Xeons are very underrated!
The i5-2500k costs a fraction of what those Xeons in your Mac Pro cost (when new) and uses a lot less power. And Geekbench favors heavy multithreading in a way that may or may not reflect real usage depending on what you do. So it's not exactly an apples-to-Apples comparison.
I think it is still a big scam by Intel to have shut out Nvidia of making IGP and chipsets for Intel CPUs, given how absolutely poor Intel graphics are compared to anything from Nvidia and AMD.
They have it in for NVidia. They are now dissing their GPUs with the video encoding, they hold an NVidia GPU up at 0:53:
They also show how low their aims are for IGPs. They expected 2010 GPUs to be 10x faster than 2006 but hit 25x. Imagine if they only managed to meet the expectations .
And they have a demo trying to impress women (in the video we have Rhonda) by rendering 50,000 polygons - that's right folks, fifty thousand polygons - in real-time. Wow, Rhonda is so creative, let's give it up for Rhonda (I'm quoting here).
Just that now Apple will have to bite the bullet and put in discrete GPUs in any Mac that uses Sandy Bridge.
I'm not sure they will. I really think they will drop the Macbook down a notch like they did when they went from the Radeon 9200 down to the GMA at the Intel switch. This hardware decoding and encoding stuff is all Apple needs as well as to match the 320M GPU performance. The Intel GPU isn't as good in medium quality demos but it's enough that they can switch.
I reckon we will see the MBA go to SB ULV, I think they will drop the white Macbook, the MBP will go SB no GPU, same with the Mini. The iMac and MBP will be SB + Radeon cards and the Mac Pro update won't come for a while.
It's the same as the 2010 2.8GHz quad-core Mac Pro, which you'd expect as the 2500K is a quad-core desktop chip too at a faster clock speed. Still, it means that the entry i7 iMac could be as fast as last year's entry Mac Pro, which is decent value for money. That's why the Mac Pro can't last. People buy them for 3+ years and they are already outperformed within 12 months by a cheaper machine that comes with a free 27" IPS display.
They have it in for NVidia. They are now dissing their GPUs with the video encoding, they hold an NVidia GPU up at 0:53...
The Anandtech review showed some very impressive transcoding (Quick Sync) that whips Nvidia in performance and quality. CUDA transcodes can be fast but aren't very pretty sometimes. So yeah, some real sucker punches to Nvidia from IGP to chipset to transcoding.
With PC gaming slowly fading away, the need for a powerful GPU on a Windows desktop or laptop is slowly fading too.
Overall Sandy Bridge looks impressive for CPU and transcoding. On the GPU side, nothing worthwhile as we all can conclude.
Just one fly in the ointment with Quick Sync:
"There’s just one hangup to all of this Quick Sync greatness: it only works if the processor’s GPU is enabled. In other words, on a desktop with a single monitor connected to a discrete GPU, you can’t use Quick Sync. This isn’t a problem for mobile since Sandy Bridge notebooks should support switchable graphics, meaning you can use Quick Sync without waking up the discrete GPU"
In any case I've decided, I will probably not replace my Windows desktop tower, I'll see what life it can give me in 2011, after that it's Xbox360. No more big hot desktop towers for me anymore.
I might get a Sandy Bridge MacBook Pro 15" if and when that comes out, or I may just skip this cycle and go straight to Ivy Bridge.
Intel will continue to dominate CPU and now APU, AMD will sweep up the low-end CPU market, luckily they have ATI and Fusion too. Nvidia will have it's discrete desktop and laptop GPUs and thankfully ARM stuff.
They also show how low their aims are for IGPs. They expected 2010 GPUs to be 10x faster than 2006 but hit 25x. Imagine if they only managed to meet the expectations .
Just imagine where Intel would be without the threat of a fast AMD GPU in the fusion line up. AMD combined with NVidia must have caused Intel to wake up to the importance of a GPU. Even then only a modest effort at catching up.
Quote:
And they have a demo trying to impress women (in the video we have Rhonda) by rendering 50,000 polygons - that's right folks, fifty thousand polygons - in real-time. Wow, Rhonda is so creative, let's give it up for Rhonda (I'm quoting here).
I'm always impressed at how easy it is to sway those with limited mental capacity. The fact is that the pool of humanity that knows better shrinks every year. Intel has nothing to loose by going after ignorance.
Intel has nothing to loose. Especially considering that more people likely understood technology in 1994 than they do today. In fact it seems to gave gotten worst over the last couple of years if forums are any indication. It simply doesn't take much these days to bambozzal the average person.
Quote:
I'm not sure they will. I really think they will drop the Macbook down a notch like they did when they went from the Radeon 9200 down to the GMA at the Intel switch. This hardware decoding and encoding stuff is all Apple needs as well as to match the 320M GPU performance.
Very possible and at a reduced rate.
Quote:
The Intel GPU isn't as good in medium quality demos but it's enough that they can switch.
Sure they can switch but will customers? That pretty much sums it up.
Quote:
I reckon we will see the MBA go to SB ULV, I think they will drop the white Macbook, the MBP will go SB no GPU, same with the Mini. The iMac and MBP will be SB + Radeon cards and the Mac Pro update won't come for a while.
The Anandtech review showed some very impressive transcoding (Quick Sync) that whips Nvidia in performance and quality. CUDA transcodes can be fast but aren't very pretty sometimes. So yeah, some real sucker punches to Nvidia from IGP to chipset to transcoding.
CUDA transcodeed are all about software. Thus they can be improved and upgraded.
Quote:
With PC gaming slowly fading away, the need for a powerful GPU on a Windows desktop or laptop is slowly fading too.
This is total BS and implies that those GPUs are only used for games. I really hope you don't believe that. In any event consider some of the uses for a high performance GPU:
CAD.
Matlab.
3D imaging.
Any of a number of engineering codes, that analyze structures, flows or other physical properties.
2D graphics programs.
Safari and other web browsers.
Many of the Macs libraries.
Even Windiws can now use GPU acceleration.
In any event the list can go on and on. The point is, especially with Macs, that gaming isn't always a justification for a good GPU. In many cases gaming has nothing to do with it. A high performance GPU these days can be an excellent place to accelerate the performance of a machine.
Quote:
Overall Sandy Bridge looks impressive for CPU and transcoding. On the GPU side, nothing worthwhile as we all can conclude.
Yep a mixed bag. However focusing to much on SB's CPU performance can be misleading as GPU performance has a bigger impact for many users. A GPU makes for a snappy GUI and is what is used to accelerate certain operations in web browsers. I don't want to dismiss the importance of the CPU performance increase as it can be very useful, it is just that for most users it doesn't help with the overall feel. AIRs are a good example of where focusing on other elements of the design, out side of the CPU, can lead to very acceptable results.
So the big question is, is SB good enough. To that end I'd have to say no for pro machine without a descrete GPU.
Quote:
Just one fly in the ointment with Quick Sync:
"There?s just one hangup to all of this Quick Sync greatness: it only works if the processor?s GPU is enabled. In other words, on a desktop with a single monitor connected to a discrete GPU, you can?t use Quick Sync. This isn?t a problem for mobile since Sandy Bridge notebooks should support switchable graphics, meaning you can use Quick Sync without waking up the discrete GPU"
In any case I've decided, I will probably not replace my Windows desktop tower, I'll see what life it can give me in 2011, after that it's Xbox360. No more big hot desktop towers for me anymore.
Won't a gaming platform be very limited? I'm not a big gamer so maybe this is an alien position but I see gaming boxes as a waste of money. Besides they are hot boxes themselves.
Quote:
I might get a Sandy Bridge MacBook Pro 15" if and when that comes out, or I may just skip this cycle and go straight to Ivy Bridge.
It depends, the new machines could be very compelling. Since I'm dual core now I will probably wait for a quad core in a MBP that is reasonably cool running.
Quote:
Intel will continue to dominate CPU and now APU, AMD will sweep up the low-end CPU market, luckily they have ATI and Fusion too. Nvidia will have it's discrete desktop and laptop GPUs and thankfully ARM stuff.
I don't think it is a given that Intel will walk away with the market here. You assume that everyone is focused on CPU performance which I have to say is wrong. All AMD really needs to do is offer up a really competitive GPU that does OpenCL well. These days the CPU can't be counted upon to deliver the user experience people expect.
Quote:
Well, 2011 will be an interesting year...!
Yes it will be. Hopefully we will see some long awaited technology surface. More importantly I hope Apple will fill a few gaps in it's product line up. I'd absolutely love to see a AMD based Mini tower. That is a taller Mini to accomodate more storage. A machine that can act as a true server or HTPC with a high performance GPU. xMac!
Sandy Bridge has hardware video encoding, but it remains to be seen how good the quality is. As anybody who has seen a bad DVD or Blu-ray can attest, having the right encoder can make all the difference between a reference-quality presentation and something with the horrible black crush and the life smeared out of it.
I wonder when Apple will release a version of FileVault that uses AES-NI instructions. Hardware en/decryption, if it really is fast, would go a long way towards improving the usability of FileVault.
Sandy Bridge has hardware video encoding, but it remains to be seen how good the quality is. As anybody who has seen a bad DVD or Blu-ray can attest, having the right encoder can make all the difference between a reference-quality presentation and something with the horrible black crush and the life smeared out of it.
Like everything SB related I'd take a wait and see attitude! First off most of the testing has been done on Windows machines so you have no idea if the results will translate to Apple software. Bad encoding does suck but proof is in the pudding. Besides we don't know yet if Apple will even use the facility as these features often go unused for years.
Quote:
I wonder when Apple will release a version of FileVault that uses AES-NI instructions. Hardware en/decryption, if it really is fast, would go a long way towards improving the usability of FileVault.
Speaking of features going unused, I have to wonder myself how soon Apple will start to use a hardware assist. Knowing Apple they won't tell us when the hardware is implemented into FileVault. Somebody will just say one day, gee that is fast!
In any event you highlight other reasons for people to wait on the new SB hardware. That is we don't know how good it is nor do we know if Apple has a plan to use any specific feature of SB.
Comments
8870 in GB? I just got an 11710 in my machine from my sig...QC Xeons are very underrated!
The i5-2500k costs a fraction of what those Xeons in your Mac Pro cost (when new) and uses a lot less power. And Geekbench favors heavy multithreading in a way that may or may not reflect real usage depending on what you do. So it's not exactly an apples-to-Apples comparison.
I think it is still a big scam by Intel to have shut out Nvidia of making IGP and chipsets for Intel CPUs, given how absolutely poor Intel graphics are compared to anything from Nvidia and AMD.
They have it in for NVidia. They are now dissing their GPUs with the video encoding, they hold an NVidia GPU up at 0:53:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pICA4JmQUo
They also show how low their aims are for IGPs. They expected 2010 GPUs to be 10x faster than 2006 but hit 25x. Imagine if they only managed to meet the expectations
And they have a demo trying to impress women (in the video we have Rhonda) by rendering 50,000 polygons - that's right folks, fifty thousand polygons - in real-time. Wow, Rhonda is so creative, let's give it up for Rhonda (I'm quoting here).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNN1-eZWaCM
Just that now Apple will have to bite the bullet and put in discrete GPUs in any Mac that uses Sandy Bridge.
I'm not sure they will. I really think they will drop the Macbook down a notch like they did when they went from the Radeon 9200 down to the GMA at the Intel switch. This hardware decoding and encoding stuff is all Apple needs as well as to match the 320M GPU performance. The Intel GPU isn't as good in medium quality demos but it's enough that they can switch.
I reckon we will see the MBA go to SB ULV, I think they will drop the white Macbook, the MBP will go SB no GPU, same with the Mini. The iMac and MBP will be SB + Radeon cards and the Mac Pro update won't come for a while.
It's the same as the 2010 2.8GHz quad-core Mac Pro, which you'd expect as the 2500K is a quad-core desktop chip too at a faster clock speed. Still, it means that the entry i7 iMac could be as fast as last year's entry Mac Pro, which is decent value for money. That's why the Mac Pro can't last. People buy them for 3+ years and they are already outperformed within 12 months by a cheaper machine that comes with a free 27" IPS display.
don't you ever answer your messages Marvin?
don't you ever answer your messages Marvin?
If you mean PMs, I haven't got any new ones. If you sent one maybe it went to the wrong person. Try sending it again.
They have it in for NVidia. They are now dissing their GPUs with the video encoding, they hold an NVidia GPU up at 0:53...
The Anandtech review showed some very impressive transcoding (Quick Sync) that whips Nvidia in performance and quality. CUDA transcodes can be fast but aren't very pretty sometimes. So yeah, some real sucker punches to Nvidia from IGP to chipset to transcoding.
With PC gaming slowly fading away, the need for a powerful GPU on a Windows desktop or laptop is slowly fading too.
Overall Sandy Bridge looks impressive for CPU and transcoding. On the GPU side, nothing worthwhile as we all can conclude.
Just one fly in the ointment with Quick Sync:
"There’s just one hangup to all of this Quick Sync greatness: it only works if the processor’s GPU is enabled. In other words, on a desktop with a single monitor connected to a discrete GPU, you can’t use Quick Sync. This isn’t a problem for mobile since Sandy Bridge notebooks should support switchable graphics, meaning you can use Quick Sync without waking up the discrete GPU"
In any case I've decided, I will probably not replace my Windows desktop tower, I'll see what life it can give me in 2011, after that it's Xbox360. No more big hot desktop towers for me anymore.
I might get a Sandy Bridge MacBook Pro 15" if and when that comes out, or I may just skip this cycle and go straight to Ivy Bridge.
Intel will continue to dominate CPU and now APU, AMD will sweep up the low-end CPU market, luckily they have ATI and Fusion too. Nvidia will have it's discrete desktop and laptop GPUs and thankfully ARM stuff.
Well, 2011 will be an interesting year...!
They have it in for NVidia. They are now dissing their GPUs with the video encoding, they hold an NVidia GPU up at 0:53:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pICA4JmQUo
They also show how low their aims are for IGPs. They expected 2010 GPUs to be 10x faster than 2006 but hit 25x. Imagine if they only managed to meet the expectations
Just imagine where Intel would be without the threat of a fast AMD GPU in the fusion line up. AMD combined with NVidia must have caused Intel to wake up to the importance of a GPU. Even then only a modest effort at catching up.
And they have a demo trying to impress women (in the video we have Rhonda) by rendering 50,000 polygons - that's right folks, fifty thousand polygons - in real-time. Wow, Rhonda is so creative, let's give it up for Rhonda (I'm quoting here).
I'm always impressed at how easy it is to sway those with limited mental capacity. The fact is that the pool of humanity that knows better shrinks every year. Intel has nothing to loose by going after ignorance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNN1-eZWaCM
Intel has nothing to loose. Especially considering that more people likely understood technology in 1994 than they do today. In fact it seems to gave gotten worst over the last couple of years if forums are any indication. It simply doesn't take much these days to bambozzal the average person.
I'm not sure they will. I really think they will drop the Macbook down a notch like they did when they went from the Radeon 9200 down to the GMA at the Intel switch. This hardware decoding and encoding stuff is all Apple needs as well as to match the 320M GPU performance.
Very possible and at a reduced rate.
The Intel GPU isn't as good in medium quality demos but it's enough that they can switch.
Sure they can switch but will customers? That pretty much sums it up.
I reckon we will see the MBA go to SB ULV, I think they will drop the white Macbook, the MBP will go SB no GPU, same with the Mini. The iMac and MBP will be SB + Radeon cards and the Mac Pro update won't come for a while.
The Anandtech review showed some very impressive transcoding (Quick Sync) that whips Nvidia in performance and quality. CUDA transcodes can be fast but aren't very pretty sometimes. So yeah, some real sucker punches to Nvidia from IGP to chipset to transcoding.
CUDA transcodeed are all about software. Thus they can be improved and upgraded.
With PC gaming slowly fading away, the need for a powerful GPU on a Windows desktop or laptop is slowly fading too.
This is total BS and implies that those GPUs are only used for games. I really hope you don't believe that. In any event consider some of the uses for a high performance GPU:
CAD.
Matlab.
3D imaging.
Any of a number of engineering codes, that analyze structures, flows or other physical properties.
2D graphics programs.
Safari and other web browsers.
Many of the Macs libraries.
Even Windiws can now use GPU acceleration.
In any event the list can go on and on. The point is, especially with Macs, that gaming isn't always a justification for a good GPU. In many cases gaming has nothing to do with it. A high performance GPU these days can be an excellent place to accelerate the performance of a machine.
Overall Sandy Bridge looks impressive for CPU and transcoding. On the GPU side, nothing worthwhile as we all can conclude.
Yep a mixed bag. However focusing to much on SB's CPU performance can be misleading as GPU performance has a bigger impact for many users. A GPU makes for a snappy GUI and is what is used to accelerate certain operations in web browsers. I don't want to dismiss the importance of the CPU performance increase as it can be very useful, it is just that for most users it doesn't help with the overall feel. AIRs are a good example of where focusing on other elements of the design, out side of the CPU, can lead to very acceptable results.
So the big question is, is SB good enough. To that end I'd have to say no for pro machine without a descrete GPU.
Just one fly in the ointment with Quick Sync:
"There?s just one hangup to all of this Quick Sync greatness: it only works if the processor?s GPU is enabled. In other words, on a desktop with a single monitor connected to a discrete GPU, you can?t use Quick Sync. This isn?t a problem for mobile since Sandy Bridge notebooks should support switchable graphics, meaning you can use Quick Sync without waking up the discrete GPU"
In any case I've decided, I will probably not replace my Windows desktop tower, I'll see what life it can give me in 2011, after that it's Xbox360. No more big hot desktop towers for me anymore.
Won't a gaming platform be very limited? I'm not a big gamer so maybe this is an alien position but I see gaming boxes as a waste of money. Besides they are hot boxes themselves.
I might get a Sandy Bridge MacBook Pro 15" if and when that comes out, or I may just skip this cycle and go straight to Ivy Bridge.
It depends, the new machines could be very compelling. Since I'm dual core now I will probably wait for a quad core in a MBP that is reasonably cool running.
Intel will continue to dominate CPU and now APU, AMD will sweep up the low-end CPU market, luckily they have ATI and Fusion too. Nvidia will have it's discrete desktop and laptop GPUs and thankfully ARM stuff.
I don't think it is a given that Intel will walk away with the market here. You assume that everyone is focused on CPU performance which I have to say is wrong. All AMD really needs to do is offer up a really competitive GPU that does OpenCL well. These days the CPU can't be counted upon to deliver the user experience people expect.
Well, 2011 will be an interesting year...!
Yes it will be. Hopefully we will see some long awaited technology surface. More importantly I hope Apple will fill a few gaps in it's product line up. I'd absolutely love to see a AMD based Mini tower. That is a taller Mini to accomodate more storage. A machine that can act as a true server or HTPC with a high performance GPU. xMac!
I wonder when Apple will release a version of FileVault that uses AES-NI instructions. Hardware en/decryption, if it really is fast, would go a long way towards improving the usability of FileVault.
Sandy Bridge has hardware video encoding, but it remains to be seen how good the quality is. As anybody who has seen a bad DVD or Blu-ray can attest, having the right encoder can make all the difference between a reference-quality presentation and something with the horrible black crush and the life smeared out of it.
Like everything SB related I'd take a wait and see attitude! First off most of the testing has been done on Windows machines so you have no idea if the results will translate to Apple software. Bad encoding does suck but proof is in the pudding. Besides we don't know yet if Apple will even use the facility as these features often go unused for years.
I wonder when Apple will release a version of FileVault that uses AES-NI instructions. Hardware en/decryption, if it really is fast, would go a long way towards improving the usability of FileVault.
Speaking of features going unused, I have to wonder myself how soon Apple will start to use a hardware assist. Knowing Apple they won't tell us when the hardware is implemented into FileVault. Somebody will just say one day, gee that is fast!
In any event you highlight other reasons for people to wait on the new SB hardware. That is we don't know how good it is nor do we know if Apple has a plan to use any specific feature of SB.