I believe, that if Yonah's performance is that great, to the point where PPC applications will not see a speed hit while running under Rosetta, why would they want to waste more time with a G4 on the Powerbooks?
Because the Powerbooks have been updated last in January and Yonah is not expected before end February-March of 2006. Apple cannot let the Powerbook line without an update for 14 months, or more if something goes wrong.
With current evidence, the Powerbook will take the 7448 chip from Freescale this October (a drop-in replacement for the 7447 chip now in use), and then an Intel CPU in spring 2006. Around April I would say.
Intel won't use Petium M's in desktops and servers.
What people don't understand is that the Pentium M is LESS powerfull than Pentium 4 HT's, Pentium 4 HT Extreme Editions, Pentium Extreme Editions, Pentium D's, Pentium Xeons and Itanium II's.
The Pentium M came out after those cpu's as a low power cpu to enable battery life in notebooks of 5+ hours. The only way the Pentium M is able to achieve this long battery life is by performance taking a major hit.
Here's a rough analogy, nothing's to scale:
Pentium 4 HT = 160 HP Sedan 25 MPG
Pentium 4 HT Extreme Edition = 250 HP Sports Car 18 MPG
Pentium Extreme Edition = 245 HP Sports Car 20 MPG
Intel won't use Petium M's in desktops and servers.
What people don't understand is that the Pentium M is LESS powerfull than Pentium 4 HT's, Pentium 4 HT Extreme Editions, Pentium Extreme Editions, Pentium D's, Pentium Xeons and Itanium II's.
The Pentium M came out after those cpu's as a low power cpu to enable battery life in notebooks of 5+ hours. The only way the Pentium M is able to achieve this long battery life is by performance taking a major hit.
Here's a rough analogy, nothing's to scale:
Pentium 4 HT = 160 HP Sedan 25 MPG
Pentium 4 HT Extreme Edition = 250 HP Sports Car 18 MPG
Pentium Extreme Edition = 245 HP Sports Car 20 MPG
Pentium D = 270 HP Twin Turbo Sports Car 20 MPG
Pentium Xeon = 300 HP SUV = 12 MPG
Itanium II = 700 HP Mack Truck = 5 MPG
Pentium M = 95 HP Compact = 50 MPG
Interesting... From THG "It wasn't originally our plan to have the Pentium M and the Pentium 4 face off against each other. What was initially meant to be just a simple review of an upgrade adapter for aging mainboards turned into a victory march for the Pentium M. In the end, our results led us to a very explosive conclusion: there aren't many areas where the Pentium M isn't better than the P4. And at higher clock speeds, it even becomes powerful enough to dethrone an Athlon 64 FX."
Interesting... From THG "It wasn't originally our plan to have the Pentium M and the Pentium 4 face off against each other. What was initially meant to be just a simple review of an upgrade adapter for aging mainboards turned into a victory march for the Pentium M. In the end, our results led us to a very explosive conclusion: there aren't many areas where the Pentium M isn't better than the P4. And at higher clock speeds, it even becomes powerful enough to dethrone an Athlon 64 FX."
Maybe you're right but I don't see how a 32-bit single core cpu with with a 533Mhz system bus can compete with a dual-core 64 bit AMD cpu with a 1Ghz+ System Bus. That AMD has 3 specs. double that of the Pentium M.
Maybe you're right but I don't see how a 32-bit single core cpu with with a 533Mhz system bus can compete with a dual-core 64 bit AMD cpu with a 1Ghz+ System Bus. That AMD has 3 specs. double that of the Pentium M.
It is very efficient, I did not know much about it our own Programmer schooled me on the virtues of the P-III and anything associated with that design. Dothan is an advanced P-III, Yohna will be an advanced Dothan in a two core package. I know it sounds crazy but these things fly and they produce very little heat doing it.
So what kind of car would this be? A 300+Hp Honda Civic 42Mpg??
That?s why each G5 features two unidirectional 32-bit data paths: one traveling into the processor and one traveling from the processor, unlike previous designs. Its frontside bus works at speeds up to 1.35GHz for an astounding 10.8GBps of total bandwidth. That makes it over 280MHz faster than even the latest Intel 925XE chipset, which sputters out at 1066MHz.
-Apple.com
Quote:
To ensure maximum efficiency on dual G5 systems, each processor has its own dedicated frontside bus. The resulting bandwidth of 21.6GBps on dual 2.7GHz systems offers more than three times the 8.5GBps maximum throughput of Pentium 4-based systems.
-Apple.com
Even Apple still claims the G5 superior to Intel. I'm still not convinced.
Even Apple still claims the G5 superior to Intel. I'm still not convinced.
You may not be convinced, but lets look at x86 architecture for a second.
First off
Quote:
That?s why each G5 features two unidirectional 32-bit data paths: one traveling into the processor and one traveling from the processor, unlike previous designs. Its frontside bus works at speeds up to 1.35GHz for an astounding 10.8GBps of total bandwidth. That makes it over 280MHz faster than even the latest Intel 925XE chipset, which sputters out at 1066MHz.
X86 architecure (after the 386 i believe) is 64bit data paths. Frontside bus runs at 1.35ghz but its actually half of that... which is what 667mhz (quick math could be off a bit). Yes the PPC can send for data while it receives it BUT we have a memory controller problem. One memory controller for 2 cpu's... Uh Oh... they can't both send for data at the same time. So we get memory FIFO.
Anyways, we can argue #'s all day long... but for most work the intel machines are faster. You can obviously wait until the machines actually ship... then compare the machines. Watch the intel machines smoke the ppc g5s. I personally can't wait for this switch. I'm so glad to finally get the PPC monkey off of my back for coding and performance.
Anyways, we can argue #'s all day long... but for most work the intel machines are faster. You can obviously wait until the machines actually ship... then compare the machines. Watch the intel machines smoke the ppc g5s. I personally can't wait for this switch. I'm so glad to finally get the PPC monkey off of my back for coding and performance.
So the Mac goes from a unique total computer solution to just a really excellent operating system in a pretty enclosure. The hardware becomes no more powerfull than you're average PC.
How about the intergrated graphics using 24Mb of the main memory? with the latest Intel intergrated graphics you can set the amount of ram dedicated to video to just about anything.
How about the intergrated graphics using 24Mb of the main memory? with the latest Intel intergrated graphics you can set the amount of ram dedicated to video to just about anything.
Oh bugger, that's probably it Back to the alien theories
How about the intergrated graphics using 24Mb of the main memory? with the latest Intel intergrated graphics you can set the amount of ram dedicated to video to just about anything.
That system is so crappy it makes crap look like non crap.
Comments
Originally posted by ngmapple
Look how many cpu lines it now just for laptops and desktops (not including the server cpus) and soon will have.
Intel is in a transition phase.
After trashing the Pentium 4 derivates the line will look like:
Server CPUs
--------------
Pentium M
Desktop CPUs
--------------
Pentium M
Laptop CPUs
--------------
Pentium M
Originally posted by MacAficionado
I believe, that if Yonah's performance is that great, to the point where PPC applications will not see a speed hit while running under Rosetta, why would they want to waste more time with a G4 on the Powerbooks?
Because the Powerbooks have been updated last in January and Yonah is not expected before end February-March of 2006. Apple cannot let the Powerbook line without an update for 14 months, or more if something goes wrong.
With current evidence, the Powerbook will take the 7448 chip from Freescale this October (a drop-in replacement for the 7447 chip now in use), and then an Intel CPU in spring 2006. Around April I would say.
What people don't understand is that the Pentium M is LESS powerfull than Pentium 4 HT's, Pentium 4 HT Extreme Editions, Pentium Extreme Editions, Pentium D's, Pentium Xeons and Itanium II's.
The Pentium M came out after those cpu's as a low power cpu to enable battery life in notebooks of 5+ hours. The only way the Pentium M is able to achieve this long battery life is by performance taking a major hit.
Here's a rough analogy, nothing's to scale:
Pentium 4 HT = 160 HP Sedan 25 MPG
Pentium 4 HT Extreme Edition = 250 HP Sports Car 18 MPG
Pentium Extreme Edition = 245 HP Sports Car 20 MPG
Pentium D = 270 HP Twin Turbo Sports Car 20 MPG
Pentium Xeon = 300 HP SUV = 12 MPG
Itanium II = 700 HP Mack Truck = 5 MPG
Pentium M = 95 HP Compact = 50 MPG
Originally posted by ngmapple
Intel won't use Petium M's in desktops and servers.
What people don't understand is that the Pentium M is LESS powerfull than Pentium 4 HT's, Pentium 4 HT Extreme Editions, Pentium Extreme Editions, Pentium D's, Pentium Xeons and Itanium II's.
The Pentium M came out after those cpu's as a low power cpu to enable battery life in notebooks of 5+ hours. The only way the Pentium M is able to achieve this long battery life is by performance taking a major hit.
Here's a rough analogy, nothing's to scale:
Pentium 4 HT = 160 HP Sedan 25 MPG
Pentium 4 HT Extreme Edition = 250 HP Sports Car 18 MPG
Pentium Extreme Edition = 245 HP Sports Car 20 MPG
Pentium D = 270 HP Twin Turbo Sports Car 20 MPG
Pentium Xeon = 300 HP SUV = 12 MPG
Itanium II = 700 HP Mack Truck = 5 MPG
Pentium M = 95 HP Compact = 50 MPG
Interesting... From THG "It wasn't originally our plan to have the Pentium M and the Pentium 4 face off against each other. What was initially meant to be just a simple review of an upgrade adapter for aging mainboards turned into a victory march for the Pentium M. In the end, our results led us to a very explosive conclusion: there aren't many areas where the Pentium M isn't better than the P4. And at higher clock speeds, it even becomes powerful enough to dethrone an Athlon 64 FX."
Read the whole article here: http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050525/index.html
You may wish to update your cars.
Originally posted by Brendon
Interesting... From THG "It wasn't originally our plan to have the Pentium M and the Pentium 4 face off against each other. What was initially meant to be just a simple review of an upgrade adapter for aging mainboards turned into a victory march for the Pentium M. In the end, our results led us to a very explosive conclusion: there aren't many areas where the Pentium M isn't better than the P4. And at higher clock speeds, it even becomes powerful enough to dethrone an Athlon 64 FX."
Read the whole article here: http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050525/index.html
You may wish to update your cars.
Maybe you're right but I don't see how a 32-bit single core cpu with with a 533Mhz system bus can compete with a dual-core 64 bit AMD cpu with a 1Ghz+ System Bus. That AMD has 3 specs. double that of the Pentium M.
Originally posted by ngmapple
Maybe you're right but I don't see how a 32-bit single core cpu with with a 533Mhz system bus can compete with a dual-core 64 bit AMD cpu with a 1Ghz+ System Bus. That AMD has 3 specs. double that of the Pentium M.
It is very efficient, I did not know much about it our own Programmer schooled me on the virtues of the P-III and anything associated with that design. Dothan is an advanced P-III, Yohna will be an advanced Dothan in a two core package. I know it sounds crazy but these things fly and they produce very little heat doing it.
So what kind of car would this be? A 300+Hp Honda Civic 42Mpg??
Super Civic!
That?s why each G5 features two unidirectional 32-bit data paths: one traveling into the processor and one traveling from the processor, unlike previous designs. Its frontside bus works at speeds up to 1.35GHz for an astounding 10.8GBps of total bandwidth. That makes it over 280MHz faster than even the latest Intel 925XE chipset, which sputters out at 1066MHz.
-Apple.com
To ensure maximum efficiency on dual G5 systems, each processor has its own dedicated frontside bus. The resulting bandwidth of 21.6GBps on dual 2.7GHz systems offers more than three times the 8.5GBps maximum throughput of Pentium 4-based systems.
-Apple.com
Even Apple still claims the G5 superior to Intel. I'm still not convinced.
Originally posted by ngmapple
Even Apple still claims the G5 superior to Intel. I'm still not convinced.
You may not be convinced, but lets look at x86 architecture for a second.
First off
That?s why each G5 features two unidirectional 32-bit data paths: one traveling into the processor and one traveling from the processor, unlike previous designs. Its frontside bus works at speeds up to 1.35GHz for an astounding 10.8GBps of total bandwidth. That makes it over 280MHz faster than even the latest Intel 925XE chipset, which sputters out at 1066MHz.
X86 architecure (after the 386 i believe) is 64bit data paths. Frontside bus runs at 1.35ghz but its actually half of that... which is what 667mhz (quick math could be off a bit). Yes the PPC can send for data while it receives it BUT we have a memory controller problem. One memory controller for 2 cpu's... Uh Oh... they can't both send for data at the same time. So we get memory FIFO.
Anyways, we can argue #'s all day long... but for most work the intel machines are faster. You can obviously wait until the machines actually ship... then compare the machines. Watch the intel machines smoke the ppc g5s. I personally can't wait for this switch. I'm so glad to finally get the PPC monkey off of my back for coding and performance.
Originally posted by emig647
Anyways, we can argue #'s all day long... but for most work the intel machines are faster. You can obviously wait until the machines actually ship... then compare the machines. Watch the intel machines smoke the ppc g5s. I personally can't wait for this switch. I'm so glad to finally get the PPC monkey off of my back for coding and performance.
Amen!
Originally posted by ngmapple
The hardware becomes no more powerfull than you're average PC.
And, more importantly, no less powerful either.
Originally posted by Existence
[B]http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=428812
Check out Pic No4, How can you get 488MB of memory?
Originally posted by cybermonkey
Check out Pic No4, How can you get 488MB of memory?
256 + 128 + 64 + 32 + 8
... unlikely
Originally posted by slughead
256 + 128 + 64 + 32 + 8
... unlikely
Extremely especially as it's in a notebook
Originally posted by cybermonkey
Extremely especially as it's in a notebook
How about the intergrated graphics using 24Mb of the main memory? with the latest Intel intergrated graphics you can set the amount of ram dedicated to video to just about anything.
Originally posted by Thereubster
How about the intergrated graphics using 24Mb of the main memory? with the latest Intel intergrated graphics you can set the amount of ram dedicated to video to just about anything.
Oh bugger, that's probably it
Originally posted by Thereubster
How about the intergrated graphics using 24Mb of the main memory? with the latest Intel intergrated graphics you can set the amount of ram dedicated to video to just about anything.
That system is so crappy it makes crap look like non crap.
Originally posted by slughead
That system is so crappy it makes crap look like non crap.
Originally posted by emig647
Actually, it's the fact that it sucks, I'm not even going to scrounge up benchmarks for this one, you can do that yourself.
Take my word for it though, it's not pretty.
Originally posted by slughead
Actually, it's the fact that it sucks, I'm not even going to scrounge up benchmarks for this one, you can do that yourself.
Take my word for it though, it's not pretty.
Benchmarks? Um... this processor isn't even released yet! I googled for benchmarks.... I didn't see shit... so please provide them.