AMD beats Apple on 64-bit Mobile CPU for laptops
http://www.amd.com/us-en/0,,3715_12676,00.html
apologies if this is covered somewhere else, do you think this now puts a *HUGE* amount of pressure on "G5 powerbook" strategy at Apple?
i shure shure hope IBM and Freescale have their ass in gear and hope Steve's riding them pretty hard
edit: title should read
"AMD beats Apple on 64-bit Mobile CPU for laptops???"
question marks because i'm not sure if laptops with Turion are shipping
apologies if this is covered somewhere else, do you think this now puts a *HUGE* amount of pressure on "G5 powerbook" strategy at Apple?
i shure shure hope IBM and Freescale have their ass in gear and hope Steve's riding them pretty hard
edit: title should read
"AMD beats Apple on 64-bit Mobile CPU for laptops???"
question marks because i'm not sure if laptops with Turion are shipping
Comments
http://www.newsfactor.com/hardware/s...egory=hardware
So long as Apple can get a next-gen PB (whether it be G5, dual core G4, pigeon-powered, whatever) out within the next 6 months with sizable performance and technology improvements, I think they'll be okay.
Originally posted by sunilraman
edit: title should read
"AMD beats Apple on 64-bit Mobile CPU for laptops???"
question marks because i'm not sure if laptops with Turion are shipping
I am not sure either, but I know that laptops with 64-bit AMD processors started ship a few only months ofter the G5 introduction (autumn 2003). There are too other 64-bit laptops from other vendors already for some years now. What comes in mind are the Tadpole ones, with some impressive specifications.
Originally posted by tonton
(Tadpole Bullfrog)
SYSTEM DIMENSIONS
Size
14.9" (W) x 12.8" (D) x 3.9" (H)
Weight
Approximately 20.5 lbs
HOLY SHYT!
Yeah, that's why there is a dual processor version of this one, with memory that not only the comparable iMac G5 but even the Power Mac G5 cannot physically hold (for now): 16 GB!
Originally posted by wmf
Good thing 64-bit doesn't matter for 99% of users.
The chatter on the "Future Hardware" section of the forum says otherwise... the whole forum seems to be clamouring for a 64-bit Powerbook (not sure why but whatever...)
Originally posted by sunilraman
http://www.amd.com/us-en/0,,3715_12676,00.html
apologies if this is covered somewhere else, do you think this now puts a *HUGE* amount of pressure on "G5 powerbook" strategy at Apple?
i shure shure hope IBM and Freescale have their ass in gear and hope Steve's riding them pretty hard
edit: title should read
"AMD beats Apple on 64-bit Mobile CPU for laptops???"
question marks because i'm not sure if laptops with Turion are shipping
Look, the real advantage to 64 bit computing is the ability to address far more RAM, (somewhere in the 40-ish terabyte range iirc) the 32 bit maxes out at 4 gigs - show me an amd laptop with more than 4 gigs of ram today! What apple really needs to do, even if they cannot do a laptop g5 is do something to speed up the bus on the g4 to take advantage of the DDR ram throughput...but then in a year or two, this will all be accedemic with the introduction of the cell proc in end-user workstations and no doubt portables.
Originally posted by mikef
Bigger numbers sell more product... just ask Intel, they've been playing that game for years.
AMEN, If you are not doing science or hi-end video work, a 1.5 ghz cpu will be fine, people are suckers, they say "this 1.8 gghz unit is slow, Ineed a new one" when all they really need is to increase the RAM to say 1 gb from the stock 128 or 256 and toss in a cheap 8x agp vid card with atr least 32 mb ram and turn off the real proformance killer - integrated video processiing and mem shareing.
Originally posted by a_greer
AMEN, If you are not doing science or hi-end video work, a 1.5 ghz cpu will be fine, people are suckers, they say "this 1.8 gghz unit is slow, Ineed a new one" when all they really need is to increase the RAM to say 1 gb from the stock 128 or 256 and toss in a cheap 8x agp vid card with atr least 32 mb ram and turn off the real proformance killer - integrated video processiing and mem shareing.
TESTIFY, brother...!
Originally posted by wmf
Apple has marketed themselves into a box. They have sold 64-bit and the faithful have bought it. And now the faithful do not want 32-bit, even if it is the best thing for them.
Actually, Apple could have hyped 64-bit a lot more than they did. But you're right, those who know how computers work know that 64 bit means jack to 99.9% of users, but ever since the Playstation and whatnot bragged about bandwidth and video depth with "bitness" wars, then the market is convinced that 64 can move twice as much at a time as 32 can, or something like that, and they want it.
Originally posted by a_greer
Look, the real advantage to 64 bit computing is the ability to address far more RAM, (somewhere in the 40-ish terabyte range iirc) the 32 bit maxes out at 4 gigs - show me an amd laptop with more than 4 gigs of ram today! What apple really needs to do, even if they cannot do a laptop g5 is do something to speed up the bus on the g4 to take advantage of the DDR ram throughput...but then in a year or two, this will all be accedemic with the introduction of the cell proc in end-user workstations and no doubt portables.
64 bit systems can address 16 exabytes. Few laptops can handle 4 gigs of ram, but now these can handle > 4 gig page files.
I think Sparc beat AMD on a 64bit laptop anyway.
Originally posted by a_greer
AMEN, If you are not doing science or hi-end video work, a 1.5 ghz cpu will be fine, people are suckers, they say "this 1.8 gghz unit is slow, Ineed a new one" when all they really need is to increase the RAM to say 1 gb from the stock 128 or 256 and toss in a cheap 8x agp vid card with atr least 32 mb ram and turn off the real proformance killer - integrated video processiing and mem shareing.
yup, in any case for those 'suckers' the extra ghz or ram all used up by virus/spyware/malware/anti-virus/anti-spyware/anti-malware
i got sick of all the norton/mcaffee internet secuirty settings and questions about 'do you want this program to run' and all that bloatware bullocks on my folks old circa 1997 pentium2. i've just got a fresh install of win2000sp4, firefox, thunderbird, and they'll be using dial-up with a USRobotics old 56k modem about an hour everyday (for when they need to check email/surfing and i'm hogging our wireless broadband iBook)
so we'll see what happens to that pee cee
Originally posted by wmf
Good thing 64-bit doesn't matter for 99% of users.
I agree with that. Joe Dumbass won't care. He'll still be in circuit city on Saturday morning "cause my daughter needs a laptop for college and I heard circuit city will cut me a deal".
Originally posted by mikef
Bigger numbers sell more product... just ask Intel, they've been playing that game for years.
That came back and bit them in the ass. That worked when a 800mhz machine was faster than a 400MHZ one...and noticeably so. Now, no one cares about a 2.8ghz vs. a 2.5ghz. No one cares about 64 bit because no one really knows what it means.
It's also questionable that those new systems are any faster for daily tasks such as Word, Excel, internet, e-mail, some games, etc.
Seriosuly, think about the people that you see in the local chain store. They buy a laptop for $900 and tell everyone how great it is.
Originally posted by SDW2001
That came back and bit them in the ass. That worked when a 800mhz machine was faster than a 400MHZ one...and noticeably so. Now, no one cares about a 2.8ghz vs. a 2.5ghz. No one cares about 64 bit because no one really knows what it means.
It's also questionable that those new systems are any faster for daily tasks such as Word, Excel, internet, e-mail, some games, etc.
Seriosuly, think about the people that you see in the local chain store. They buy a laptop for $900 and tell everyone how great it is.
you know, i don't know what computing experience this sort of people get, i mean, maybe i'm just spoilt from macs, or maybe i've wasted WAY too many years in front of a dos/windoze cheapo piece-of-crap, and i've learnt my lesson. if others can deal with windoze on a cheapo laptop, more power to them....
my poor neighbour, his centrino mid-price Acer laptop has problems now with our brand new Dlink router, my iBook w. Airport Extreme has no problems, and 1 or 2 months ago he had to completely wipe and reinstall due to virus or somethin', and this guy is pretty savvy and runs fairly recent antivirus/firewall, etc.... and he has his business (elec/mechanical engineering) depend on his laptop....
Originally posted by mikef
The chatter on the "Future Hardware" section of the forum says otherwise... the whole forum seems to be clamouring for a 64-bit Powerbook (not sure why but whatever...)
The clamouring is for a Powerbook G5, not necessarily 64 bit. The 64-bitness claims are misinformation. The 970 chip, the G5, has higher performance than a G4 by virtue of its higher clock rate, better floating point capabilities and better FSB. So, the clamouring is the usual clamouring. More performance, more performance, more performance.
Originally posted by THT
The clamouring is for a Powerbook G5, not necessarily 64 bit.
Although I understand what you say, this one is the trap for Apple.
Originally posted by THT
The clamouring is for a Powerbook G5, not necessarily 64 bit.
Consider the title of this thread...