Intel going to have it's cake and eat it too!?!
Desktop Dothans
I find this article a little ironic and yet it seems Intel will come out smelling like roses.
Dothan chips, for the Mac uninformed are chips part of a line that were created for minimal power use. They are part of what has gotten Intel back into the laptop game with regard to battery use. I'm no CPU expert, but I've heard this CPU described as basically a continuation and modernization of the Pentium III core.
They only run up to 2 ghz, but at that speed they still manage to match or best many of the fastest Pentium IV chips. It has the ability to use DDR memory and also two megs of level II cache.
If any of this sounds startling familiar it is because it sounds very much like the future direction of what we call the G4 under Freescale.
The current high end Intel chips have just become unmanageable heatwise. A friend of mine has one and loads of people have complained that they basically can't run at their stated speed most of the time since the heat forces the onchip throttling to activate. Intel has dropped a move to 4 ghz and instead appears to be endosing a desktop Dothan course with dual cores in the future. It also appears they will likely get there faster than IBM or Freescale.
So basically how much does this suck for us Mac users. Intel is going to have it's cake and eat it too. They win the fake megahertz war with their high heat insane power requirement chips. They also manage to get there first and change the discussion with regard to to their reasonable megahertz, powerful, low heat Dothan chips?
The article shows the first of the desktop motherboards for use with these chips. PC builders want to take these microATX boards and use the Dothan chips in them for very powerful, but very small PC desktop machines...like... you know... the Cube.
What the hell are we, as Mac users going to do when the idiotic Intel freaks are carrying around microboxes with dual-core Dothan chips telling us that our monsterous aluminum boxes with watercooling and half a dozen fans are dinosaurs and backwards thinking. Are we going to start slapping ourselves?
Sorry if I sound sour, but it is just sort of strangely ironic that basically an updated G4-type processor with DDR, possible dual-cores at the high end in a small, low power package is going to be what most want and will be able to get on the PC SIDE and we may not have something similar from Apple. In otherwords the future cube or eternally desired iCheap, headless mini-powermac, whatever you care to call it is going to be here in massive volume and all these jerkoff PC guys are going to be feeding our own arguments back to us and we will have no recourse.
Some of these SFF PC's will look like ass of course, and I have no doubt that Apple would be able to do one better, but that doesn't change the fact that if Apple doesn't do one, then I can't give them my money.
I can't find a pic of it, (and if you know where it is please post it) but around a year ago there were some pics of a mini-G5 tower. Someone took a old iMac, and fabricated a case for it out of plastic. They painted it silver and it looked just like a mini-version of the G5 tower. To my eyes, it was perfect and I was experiencing extreme techno-lust.
So to imagine that in a few months we may see that same machine in a small form factor featuring two ghz chips, possibly with dual-cores, DDR ram, small, low-heat, quiet, low power and worst of all, available as a PC just makes me sick to my stomach. It makes me want to go stick my head in a toilet and flush.
Nick
I find this article a little ironic and yet it seems Intel will come out smelling like roses.
Dothan chips, for the Mac uninformed are chips part of a line that were created for minimal power use. They are part of what has gotten Intel back into the laptop game with regard to battery use. I'm no CPU expert, but I've heard this CPU described as basically a continuation and modernization of the Pentium III core.
They only run up to 2 ghz, but at that speed they still manage to match or best many of the fastest Pentium IV chips. It has the ability to use DDR memory and also two megs of level II cache.
If any of this sounds startling familiar it is because it sounds very much like the future direction of what we call the G4 under Freescale.
The current high end Intel chips have just become unmanageable heatwise. A friend of mine has one and loads of people have complained that they basically can't run at their stated speed most of the time since the heat forces the onchip throttling to activate. Intel has dropped a move to 4 ghz and instead appears to be endosing a desktop Dothan course with dual cores in the future. It also appears they will likely get there faster than IBM or Freescale.
So basically how much does this suck for us Mac users. Intel is going to have it's cake and eat it too. They win the fake megahertz war with their high heat insane power requirement chips. They also manage to get there first and change the discussion with regard to to their reasonable megahertz, powerful, low heat Dothan chips?
The article shows the first of the desktop motherboards for use with these chips. PC builders want to take these microATX boards and use the Dothan chips in them for very powerful, but very small PC desktop machines...like... you know... the Cube.
What the hell are we, as Mac users going to do when the idiotic Intel freaks are carrying around microboxes with dual-core Dothan chips telling us that our monsterous aluminum boxes with watercooling and half a dozen fans are dinosaurs and backwards thinking. Are we going to start slapping ourselves?
Sorry if I sound sour, but it is just sort of strangely ironic that basically an updated G4-type processor with DDR, possible dual-cores at the high end in a small, low power package is going to be what most want and will be able to get on the PC SIDE and we may not have something similar from Apple. In otherwords the future cube or eternally desired iCheap, headless mini-powermac, whatever you care to call it is going to be here in massive volume and all these jerkoff PC guys are going to be feeding our own arguments back to us and we will have no recourse.
Some of these SFF PC's will look like ass of course, and I have no doubt that Apple would be able to do one better, but that doesn't change the fact that if Apple doesn't do one, then I can't give them my money.
I can't find a pic of it, (and if you know where it is please post it) but around a year ago there were some pics of a mini-G5 tower. Someone took a old iMac, and fabricated a case for it out of plastic. They painted it silver and it looked just like a mini-version of the G5 tower. To my eyes, it was perfect and I was experiencing extreme techno-lust.
So to imagine that in a few months we may see that same machine in a small form factor featuring two ghz chips, possibly with dual-cores, DDR ram, small, low-heat, quiet, low power and worst of all, available as a PC just makes me sick to my stomach. It makes me want to go stick my head in a toilet and flush.
Nick
Comments
Originally posted by trumptman
What the hell are we, as Mac users going to do when the idiotic Intel freaks are carrying around microboxes with dual-core Dothan chips telling us that our monsterous aluminum boxes with watercooling and half a dozen fans are dinosaurs and backwards thinking.
Just relax.
This is the current version but with Dothan chips, this could get even smaller, while of course running cooler.
So take this, cut it in half and imagine our only headless option being the Powermac G5 tower.
More here at Asus
Nick
Intel's had Centrino's for over a year in laptops, yet Apple's PB/iBooks are still selling pretty well - in fact, I'm pretty sure better on a year over year basis. A Dothan type chip in a desktop wouldn't instantly cause some sort of Apple demise.
Suppose IBM gets dual core into the G5, and it's eventually inserted into an iMac. How much more SFF can you get?
And, just for the record, I own an Shuttle cube myself
Originally posted by trumptman
So take this, cut it in half and imagine our only headless option being the Powermac G5 tower.
There's a lot to like about this new Asus box, and after reading about it a couple of days ago I'm fairly certain that I'll be picking one up to use as a media box. I'm not too thrilled about the multi-coloured LCD display on the front but the fact that it's touch-sensitive and allows for use of the media facilities without booting into Windows is too compelling for me to pass it up.
Practically, I don't care what OS a computer runs, as long as it does what I want it to. Emotionally, I'd rather be running OSX on all of my machines.
If Apple released an updated Cube, I'd be first in line to pick one up. I don't know what the hell is holding them up. Give me a G5 in a box the size of the Asus machine.
Let me reduce the space taken up by my computers. Let me run OSX on all of my machines. Most of all, release some decent 'Digital Hub' media software that will allow me to accomplish everything that MS XP MCE provides. For as much as Apple espouses their Digital Hub solutions the hub is still missing too many spokes to fulfill the title.
One can dream, can't they?
Anyways, if you are worried about PC-heads bandying about the compactness/low heat argument as a result of Dothan, perhaps the logical counterargument is the brute performance of the G5 series (assuming there is any basis for the point made above)? Do the Dothans have anything new in the area of SIMD functionality (beyond the limited implementations of the old PIII)? If not, that is another area the VMX-enabled G5 series would seriously own, along with it's inherently hyper-pipelined architecture. Then there is all the scenarios to present where you need room for card upgrades inside or whatever.
I do agree that Apple should have a new product that addresses the "compact with a handle" scene. I don't know if an updated "Cube" would be that product, either (it would look dorky with a handle). The "Cube" was more about handsome desk sculpture (and compactness), where these compact PC's with a handle would seem to suggest easy portability. In which case, you rightly mention the virtues of an iBook/Powerbook which has ultimate portability (and it doesn't even "need" a handle
So that's my 2 cts. What would I conclude from this ensuing merry-go-round debate? Go outside and get some sun and fresh air!
However, some people are suggesting that notebooks should/could be apples solution to the lacking of a SFF. However, instruct me where I can pick up a decent iBook around $500 AUD, which is what these wintel boxes are retailing for, and I'll go for it.
Admittadly, boxes like that have no periphrials, but hey, when I can pick those up for $2 each at the local discount outlet, who cares?
In short, existing laptops are not the answer, when u can pick up a SFF for $500, plug it into a TV, and be ready to go.
If apple WANTS to compete, they need to bring out an SFF, and make it priced around exisiting ones, or slightly above, as long as they give extra features.
On that note, maybe it is then suggested that potentially Apple could achieve a lower cost form of their computer if they had a "bargain line" that actually used generic parts from the PC world (again, motherboard and case design would be prime examples). I don't know how much work or if it is even possible to get a PPC chip to somehow interface/work on a cheap, generic PC motherboard. Sounds a bit far fetched, but maybe all you need is another "chipset" that actually does the talking to the motherboard's native chipset?
The case design shouldn't be too much of a problem, but it kind of blows away one of the kewler reasons to own a Mac in the first place- a distinctive, arty design vs. looking like every other PC in this world. I'm not going to argue if that is a saleable point for or against such a product- just acknowledging it as "a" point.
So if Apple was able to overcome the motherboard issue and slamdunk a choice of generic PC box case, would there be a downside? I still don't see them getting cost completely on parity, but maybe they could get into the ballpark- just enough to get more "switchers" to pick one up as a starter system? Then there would be additional logistics like would it work as well as a "native" Mac? If not, would it give a false impression of what Apple hardware has to offer, resulting in even less impetus to "switch"? Is it even worthwhile to compete in a volume market with slim to the bone margins due to the cut throat pricing? Lots of questions...and this is only in speculation.
Originally posted by Randycat99
Anybody have an idea how these updated PIII's will fare up to G5's, performance-wise, chip-for-chip, and comparable clockrates? A hunch tells me that a PIII would be no match for a G5 (by virtue of generations), but who knows? (I'm saying I don't have any more technical basis to make that argument) I do remember PIII's were quite potent for their clockrates (relative to today's P4), just like early G3/G4's were. ...but then again, maybe these new PIII's simply take the same route that later G4's did relative to the original G4- a few more steps added in the pipeline to augment clockability at the expense of some work/clock efficiency?
This article is chock full of some good Dothan info.
Dothan
I thought I had posted to it. Maybe I had a little mental slip because the motherboard pictured in this article looks just like it would be about oh... 8x8 in terms of inches. Take a look at the benchmarks and thermal tests as well. It isn't perfect in every single area, but it is pretty darn good.
Anyways, if you are worried about PC-heads bandying about the compactness/low heat argument as a result of Dothan, perhaps the logical counterargument is the brute performance of the G5 series (assuming there is any basis for the point made above)? Do the Dothans have anything new in the area of SIMD functionality (beyond the limited implementations of the old PIII)? If not, that is another area the VMX-enabled G5 series would seriously own, along with it's inherently hyper-pipelined architecture. Then there is all the scenarios to present where you need room for card upgrades inside or whatever. Of course, the discussion would inevitably distill down to the fact that these compacts with a handle are intended for a different kind of consumer/use/work demands than a G5 Powermac. :P So the point would be moot, really.
Actually the PC heads will be able to toss about both arguments which is what will suck. If they want a melt the case type machine, they can go with AMD64, or the current Pentium IV line. We've always managed to convince ourselves that even if we couldn't compete clock for clock, we were more efficient, cooler, etc. But this chip destroys that argument as well.
Just think about it from a reverse perspective. Imagine having a high end G5 that could have multiple drive bays (you know like Apple won't do) RAID arrays, insanely PCI-e graphic cards in SLI configuration. Then imagine that you could also choose a dual core, single DVD-R, single high RPM serial ATA drive (of say 250 gigs or so) with one seriously kick ass graphic card that fit in an 8x8 box with various media readers, USB/Firewire ports in the front, etc.
We Mac users would be drooling. Instead we will be the ones having to deal with the gap in Apple's line up.
Nick
Originally posted by Randycat99
What? A G5 iMac isn't good enough for ya???
I don't want a 20" monitor permanently attached to my computer. I like the monitor I currently have.
As for this topic, the one notion you can always rely on when being "challenged" by some PC nut is that the whole Dothan deal is undeniably Intel's ultimate backtrack after dogmatically chasing the Mhz bunny and inevitably being stopped by a wall.
Originally posted by trumptman
Just think about it from a reverse perspective. Imagine having a high end G5 that could have multiple drive bays (you know like Apple won't do) RAID arrays, insanely PCI-e graphic cards in SLI configuration. Then imagine that you could also choose a dual core, single DVD-R, single high RPM serial ATA drive (of say 250 gigs or so) with one seriously kick ass graphic card that fit in an 8x8 box with various media readers, USB/Firewire ports in the front, etc.
We Mac users would be drooling. Instead we will be the ones having to deal with the gap in Apple's line up.
Nick
Nick - while I agree with you on some points, I still don't see why Dothan changes everything all of a sudden. While Dothan certainly extends the life of the SFF segment for greater CPU power down the line, PC users have had the ability to get a very powerful PC in an SFF for quite a while. Want a Shuttle with an Athlon 64, Geforce 6800, 250GB SATA, GigE, media readers, FW, etc? No problem, it's been available for months.
This argument could be used by PC users for quite a while. Dothan has nothing to do with this.
A cube would be nice, I will say that
Originally posted by Randycat99
Honestly, I don't think you can consider your predicament as the "mainstream". I'm guessing a lot of people don't have larger/fancier LCD panels lying around than a 20".
Well, in my opinion, the barrier to entry on a G5 system is the LCD.
I'm not speaking about me, especially considering that I'm a CRT lover. Although the horse has been beaten to a hairs breadth from death I'm still not convinced that Apple isn't helmed by more than a few short-sighted and/or stubborn folk.
I don't care if it's a cube, or a really skinny tower, or a pizza box. I'd just like to replace my desktop PC with a single processor G5 machine that doesn't take up noticably more room than the Windows tower that it would replace (unlike the current low-end PowerMac). I'd also like it to cost slightly more than what a 20" iMac G5 would cost without the LCD. Somewhere between $799 and $899 seems reasonable to me, unless the margins on the displays are much lower than I think.
Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised in mid-January.
Originally posted by audiopollution
I don't care if it's a cube, or a really skinny tower, or a pizza box. I'd just like to replace my desktop PC with a single processor G5 machine that doesn't take up noticably more room than the Windows tower that it would replace (unlike the current low-end PowerMac). I'd also like it to cost slightly more than what a 20" iMac G5 would cost without the LCD. Somewhere between $799 and $899 seems reasonable to me, unless the margins on the displays are much lower than I think.
Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised in mid-January.
That's a much more reasonable request. Of course, Apple would likely find a way to design the thing aesthetically so that it costs a boatload to make the case/mobo, thus making the thing > $1000. In any event, I'm not sure it will ever happen.
Originally posted by Randycat99
What? A G5 iMac isn't good enough for ya???
I don't think it is a passing fad. I think in the future it could become the norm. Most of the consumer type machines have already moved to mini-ATX for their low end. This allows something the same or smaller for the high end.
As for this topic, the one notion you can always rely on when being "challenged" by some PC nut is that the whole Dothan deal is undeniably Intel's ultimate backtrack after dogmatically chasing the Mhz bunny and inevitably being stopped by a wall.
I don't think anyone will care that it is a "backtrack" when they have the equipment available and we don't.
What nobody really sees yet is that these Dothan chips are JUST NOW, getting started in the desktop form. Intel has only recently decided this will be the desktop future. They get the SFF packages you see to work with AMD64 and PIV chips which give off a ton more heat than this chip. The thermal tests in that article showed that the Dothan chip at full load for 30 minutes only managed to heat up to 95 degrees F while being cooled with a small fan at only 1800 RPM. Additionally Dothan has not had the full Intel might working for it yet. It is sitting on older chipsets for example and still manages to match highest end PIV and most AMD64 in most instances. It isn't at the ceiling yet. It hasn't had even smaller form factors put to use yet. It is doing all these with basically table scraps.
Nick
Originally posted by MCQ
Nick - while I agree with you on some points, I still don't see why Dothan changes everything all of a sudden. While Dothan certainly extends the life of the SFF segment for greater CPU power down the line, PC users have had the ability to get a very powerful PC in an SFF for quite a while. Want a Shuttle with an Athlon 64, Geforce 6800, 250GB SATA, GigE, media readers, FW, etc? No problem, it's been available for months.
This argument could be used by PC users for quite a while. Dothan has nothing to do with this.
A cube would be nice, I will say that
The reason it changes the game is because now, Dothan is the future where as before it was a novelty. Most cheaper PC's already come in the mini-ATX format because they can save on size and materials where the chips are running cooler. Well Dothan runs around 30 degrees coolers without even doing any real engineering.
That engineering is part of what keeps these SFF boxes more expensive. Now imagine that instead of heatpipes, a couple small high speed LOUD fans, etc. you slap a fan on it the size of what was on the 486 and call it a day. Take a look at this...
The board is powered by a standard 20-pin ATX and a 4-pin +12V CPU connector, meaning any "Pentium 4" class power supply will work fine with this board. Since power consumption of these CPU's is so ridiculously low, the Pentium-M is a perfect candidate for a fanless power supply. Even power supplies as low as 250W would be plenty for a system configuration such as this, even with a GeForce 6800-class graphics card installed. The CPU only is consuming peak levels of 28W for pete's sake!
As compared to this...
Pro - Low Power, Low Heat - Intel officially rates all of their Pentium-M processors at 21W TDP (Thermal Design Power). In compression, AMD's top Athlon64's are just hitting 100W+ TDP ratings and Intel's top Pentium 4 processors are pushing levels near to 110W TDP. While we don't entire believe that Intel's entire Pentium-M Dothan family (ranging from 1.5 GHz to 2.1 GHz) runs at the exact same thermal/power levels, it certainly can be said that Pentium-M "Dothan" processors run quieter and consume less power compared to any other modern CPU architecture currently shipping.
We are talking about a chip that needs 80% less electricity and less heat to get rid of while keeping and soon gaining even more desktop power.
Don't we remember all those great discussions where we talked about how great it would be to have computers like the cube with full desktop power? Only when Apple and Moto got the CPU's up to 1.42 ghz, they had become practically overclocked high heat monsters. Intel is now arriving and their chips can be practically passively cooled. That hasn't shown up in all the engineering and currently available machines for even the general public yet, but it will soon.
Nick