Pentium 4 at 2.53Ghz, 533Mhz bus

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Normally, I could care less about the doings of the Intel bunch, but a 533 Mhz bus? I would love to see Apple/Mot/IBM make some strides here......



Exerpt From CNN.com



SANTA CLARA, California (Reuters) -- Intel Corp. Monday rolled out three new microprocessors, including the speediest Pentium 4 to date, keeping up the speed race against rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc.



In addition to a Pentium 4 chip running at 2.53 gigahertz, Intel, the world's largest chipmaker, also introduced a far faster bus, which connects the processor to memory chips in a personal computer. The faster bus moves bits at 533 megahertz compared with 400 megahertz previously.



In addition to improving the performance of PCs, the faster bus also makes more room for faster Pentium 4 chips. Intel executives have said its Pentium 4 chip, and the company will be selling a Pentium 4 chip running at 3 gigahertz in the fourth quarter. .....
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 33
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    We need a G5 soon, regardless of actual performance, megahertz myth, etc etc. Even if the G5 is only 25% faster than the currnet G4, it needs to look at least 100% faster.
  • Reply 2 of 33
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    i gotta admit, i nearly choked on my coffee this morning when i saw numbers like these. jesus! a 533mhz system bus?!?! that's, what, 500% faster than the system bus in my work dual 1ghz g4???



    :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
  • Reply 3 of 33
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    Hmm. Difficult. What about:



    [quote]Yesterday G4, 1Ghz on 133 bus with 133 ram.



    Today G5, 1.2 Ghz on 400 bus with 266 ram



    Today (5/4)*1.2*(400/133)*(266/133) = 800% faster than yesterday<hr></blockquote>



    Think Fuzzy
  • Reply 4 of 33
    jasonppjasonpp Posts: 308member
    And it uses 1066MHz RAM. The RAM in the P4's runs faster than the fastest PowerPC.



    Doesn't matter if this is meaningless. It's going to count to most people these days.
  • Reply 5 of 33
    soopadrivesoopadrive Posts: 182member
    good god. 533Mhz. Im guessing IBM and Mot choked on their coffee too.
  • Reply 6 of 33
    g-newsg-news Posts: 1,107member
    I'm shocked that Cnet writes such bullshit as "runs at 533MHz vs 400MHz earlier".

    That's total bullshit, the bus runs at 133 respectively at 100MHz, but is quad pumped, ie send at the rising and falling edge of a clock cycle, with 2 cycles set apart 180° for an EFFECTIVE transfer rate of 533MHz and 400MHz.



    Still it's impressive of course

    As for the RAM: that aparently also only runs at half the speed, but is double pumped, ie not 1066MHz, but 2x533MHz.



    G-News
  • Reply 7 of 33
    x704x704 Posts: 276member
    I saw this too but with Apples server announcement coming next week I think we'll see what's most likely in store for MWNY for the PM line (I assume DDR, faster bus, etc). I wouldn't worry too much. Between Jaguar & this new hardware I assume is coming I think we'll be okay (maybe not on top but okay).
  • Reply 8 of 33
    aslanaslan Posts: 97member
    Hmm... 533 MHz...



    IMHO, this is just a bunch of number-trumping...



    Yeah I would be jealous of the Other Side with the numbers if not for the following fact:



    JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE MOVING DATA FASTER, DOESN'T MEAN YOU ARE PROCESSING IT FASTER.





    In other words, "woohoo, now we have the data bottlenecking at the processor 5 times as quickly!" Wouldn't it be nice if their CPUs could actually handle that speed...



    Now, a 533Mhz bus on the 128 bit datapath of the G4... That would be nice... At least it would be able to handle the speed bump instead of looking longingly at all the promptly bottlenecked instructions...

    <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
  • Reply 9 of 33
    odedhodedh Posts: 53member
    Pentiums have 3 kinds of Memory avilable, one is SDRAM which have a top speed of 133Mhz, that's what Apple have



    the Next is DDR-RAM which uses a bus of either 100Mhz, 133Mhz, 166Mhz has just began being sold a month ago and 200Mhz was reveleaed but not released yet. Now DDR-RAM speed is actually the Bus x2, so when you hear DDR-RAM board with 266Mhz bus it means 133Mhz bus



    now the 3rd which is RDRAM aka Rambus is the same as DDR-RAM but the Memory speed is the Bus x4, so the RDRAM that was sold until recently was 100Mhz system bus, and the new 533Mhz is actually 133Mhz bus. So the memory is faster but the bus is slower then DDR-RAM



    as for SD-RAM it should be replaced
  • Reply 10 of 33
    markjomarkjo Posts: 28member
    [quote]Originally posted by Odedh:

    <strong> now the 3rd which is RDRAM aka Rambus is the same as DDR-RAM but the Memory speed is the Bus x4, so the RDRAM that was sold until recently was 100Mhz system bus, and the new 533Mhz is actually 133Mhz bus. So the memory is faster but the bus is slower then DDR-RAM</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Ummm... No. RD-RAM and DDR are a lot more different than just douple vs quad pumped. This thread has a pretty good discussion about some of the differecnces. <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001623"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001623</a>;
  • Reply 11 of 33
    majormattmajormatt Posts: 1,077member
    And my G4 runs at 400Mhz



    LOL
  • Reply 12 of 33
    Coming from a background in Personal Crap, it has been hard to make the switch. Less stuff available, more expensive, and generally programs that take a while in the PC world to finally be produced for Apple (although with OSX things are flowing quite nicely I should say). But we've all done it. We've all switched because we like a computer that runs smoothly, a computer that?s so far beyond the PC world, it?s hard for outsider's to understand. It's the difference between buying a Lexus and a BMW, from the efficient, cheap, and still somewhat copied luxurious perks of the Lexus, to the real luxury of German engineering, with perfection you just can't get anywhere else. Constant technology firsts, hand picked fabrics and leather, multiple engines and variations, it's all right there for you in the BMW. IMHO I think it's the same for us in the Mac world. We have to remember that Steve Jobs knows what he is doing, he is a perfectionist, he doesn't copy anyone, he has a goal in mind and creates what he wants down to the exact detail. He would have lost the company a long time ago to Microsoft or some other giant (similar to what almost did happen before they hired Jobs back) including the general public if he didn't know exactly what he intended to do. I do think it's ridiculous that we don't know what?s going on with production, everyone else announces products such as USB 2.0, months and months before release to get people excited and stockholders jumping. I also agree with you that the speed is just stupid right now Macs. Although our setups are faster, more capable, and far more exacting machines (running OSX at least), they do require updates all the time, which we often never see as it gets spread so thin the users like ourselves start getting a little pissy. But just remember, SJ knows what he is doing, and comparing PC's to Mac's is like apples to oranges and Lexus to BMW. They can always boast faster speeds or cheaper cars, but when it comes down to it, I?ve never seen a desktop PC surpass a Mac, and that?s including a new XP / 2.2GHz / 400MHz / 512MB RD machine running Photoshop against a dual 500MHz G4 with OSX. So, although it is depressing to look at their numbers compared to ours, and the fact that I have the money and need a new machine, I am vowing to wait until Steve comes through for us. Whatever he comes out with will most likely be innovative and still faster than the fastest desktop PC, even if the numbers don?t make sense, and the time lingers on until MWSF? such is the price for perfection.
  • Reply 13 of 33
    junkyard dawgjunkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member
    [quote]Originally posted by Aslan:

    <strong>

    JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE MOVING DATA FASTER, DOESN'T MEAN YOU ARE PROCESSING IT FASTER.



    <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>



    I believe that's the purpose of the 2.5 GHz P4, to be bumped up to 3 GHz by the end of the year.



    That's 3X the speed of a G4. Altivec cannot make up for that sort of speed difference.
  • Reply 14 of 33
    timortistimortis Posts: 149member
    To all these people going on and on about how it's not 533 "really" but 4x133 and 1066 Mhz RDRAM is 2x533 etc.



    Who fscking cares?



    The fact, the simple fact is that the pentium 4 bus provides 4 times more bandwidth than the G4 memory bus and the memory it uses also has 4 times the bandwidth. That's what matters. Whether it's 4x133 or 1x533 is irrelevant.



    It may make you feel better when you say "well, it's not really 4 times as fast as my Mac, it's just 133x4" but that's just it, go ahead and feel better, that don't change a thing.



    [ 05-08-2002: Message edited by: timortis ]</p>
  • Reply 15 of 33
    g-newsg-news Posts: 1,107member
    yes it changes your feelings...

    duude.



    G-news
  • Reply 16 of 33
    bigcbigc Posts: 1,224member
    [quote]Originally posted by G-News:

    <strong>yes it changes your feelings...

    duude.



    G-news</strong><hr></blockquote>



    right-on, you gettin' a Dell?
  • Reply 17 of 33
    soopadrivesoopadrive Posts: 182member
    One concept to consider: If Apple Computers wasn't the only company who produced Macs (which would result in more competition), maybe we wouldn't be so far behind in processor and bus speeds compared to say Intel? I'm not saying Apple is doing a poor job in terms of providing faster CPUs and so forth because I understand they are working as hard as they can on this issue. Just a thought...
  • Reply 18 of 33
    g-newsg-news Posts: 1,107member
    Bigc: save your trolling efforts for another forum. I was just joking and pointing out that it DOES change something. That's got nothng to do with me not liking Apple or even getting a Dell. But you should probably get a little chill and some sense of humor.



    G-News
  • Reply 19 of 33
    [quote]Originally posted by SoopaDrive:

    <strong>One concept to consider: If Apple Computers wasn't the only company who produced Macs (which would result in more competition), maybe we wouldn't be so far behind in processor and bus speeds compared to say Intel? I'm not saying Apple is doing a poor job in terms of providing faster CPUs and so forth because I understand they are working as hard as they can on this issue. Just a thought...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    The issue isn't competition so much as marketshare (or market size). One company with three times the current marketshare of Apple producing Macs would do a lot more for PowerPC than three companies producing the current marketshare of Apple.





    More units sold =&gt; more money to Motorola =&gt; more money for R and D =&gt; faster processors



    Intel isn't ahead because there are x zillion PC companies, but because the total size of those companies is so large.
  • Reply 20 of 33
    lemon bon bonlemon bon bon Posts: 2,383member
    "I am vowing to wait until Steve comes through for us. Whatever he comes out with will most likely be innovative and still faster than the fastest desktop PC, even if the numbers don’t make sense, and the time lingers on until MWSF… such is the price for perfection. "



    I second your whimsy.







    Lemon Bon Bon
Sign In or Register to comment.