To answer some questions that were raised about these topics.
The 15" PB screen is 20% brighter than before. I know some thought it wasn't brighter. The 12" screen is the same. This goes with the 46% increase for the 17".
If you put an order in before these came out, go here:
The 6600 LE - the lower end board, will let you run 1 30" display and 1 23" display at the same time. that's pushing a lot of pixels around.
Ok, I feel better now and I'm looking forward to my 6600. Now it seems the 7800 may be canceled? Wow. Glad I decided NOT to cancel my order and wait. I should have my 2.3 next week.
Ok, I feel better now and I'm looking forward to my 6600. Now it seems the 7800 may be canceled? Wow. Glad I decided NOT to cancel my order and wait. I should have my 2.3 next week.
i think you made a good choice. i know i was quite gung ho about 6600gt or 6800 7800 etc, but that's because i was desperate to try out half life 2, need for speed underground 2, and play some good ut2004 without going to an internet cafe. i am finding my 6600gt just nice for what i wanted, ie, playing some of the latest games on winxp. your 6600 with 256mb video memory with the dualcore 2.3ghz will be smooth and slick. all the best with your photoshopping
PS. I'm glad the 7800 GT had merely been 'delayed'...
But - it seems like an open-ended delay. We don't know when, which is like waiting for hardware updates from Apple. I assume we're back in the "if you need it now, buy it now, but if you can, wait..."
I'm tired of waiting and would like to order shortly. A little more information ("7800 GTs will not be available until Nov. 20", say) would be very useful.
Herm. Those 'twice as fast' figures for the Quad vs Brad's dual 2.5 figures bring a smile to my face. Very exciting to have a scene like that render in 17 secs!!! And with all that A.A on top!
Yeup. I know Max is PC only. I have it!
And I have dual Lightwave 8.x on the Mac/PC.
I also have the beautiful Vue 5 Infinite. And Poser 6...and...and...an'...
So. Polygon pushing power and rendering capability...'unlimited power' (Says in Emperor style voice...) are on my agenda.
A model with 250K polygons in it...with a few textures on top...I'd have thought a 7800 GT would have handled it with consumate ease.
I'd still like to see s Quadro vs 7800GT in action though...
The snooty Mac owner in me wouldn't mind a Quadro...but...at almost four times the cost? I question if it is four times more powerful...than a 7800GT.
25-50% better at CAD type stuff? For 300%/400% more?
I'd like to see a triangle vs triangle comparison....
Yeh, Apple could at least put a date on shipping for the 7800GT.
It's just poor having a 6600 or a Quadro. It's laughable as it is ironic. We get workstation graphics...and only Apple could goof up by not having the GT card available now...
Geeze, get Asus to source them. Don't they have a working relationship with them anyhow?
I'm hoping the move to Intel will cut out alot of this 'naff' graphics cards/waiting for gpus...poor GL drivers crap from Apple.
Herm. Those 'twice as fast' figures for the Quad vs Brad's dual 2.5 figures bring a smile to my face. Very exciting to have a scene like that render in 17 secs!!! And with all that A.A on top!
Yeup. I know Max is PC only. I have it!
And I have dual Lightwave 8.x on the Mac/PC.
I also have the beautiful Vue 5 Infinite. And Poser 6...and...and...an'...
So. Polygon pushing power and rendering capability...'unlimited power' (Says in Emperor style voice...) are on my agenda.
A model with 250K polygons in it...with a few textures on top...I'd have thought a 7800 GT would have handled it with consumate ease.
I'd still like to see s Quadro vs 7800GT in action though...
The snooty Mac owner in me wouldn't mind a Quadro...but...at almost four times the cost? I question if it is four times more powerful...than a 7800GT.
25-50% better at CAD type stuff? For 300%/400% more?
I'd like to see a triangle vs triangle comparison....
Lemon Bon Bon
I also would like to see a card or two from Nvidia that isn't as high priced. At least a mid range Quadro card would have been nice.
Is it just me or does the price difference of 500 dollars between the 2Ghz and 2.3Ghz seem a little extreme. I mean all you are getting is 300 extra mhz, a slightly bigger hard drive, and a slightly better graphics card.
300Mhz is worth no more than 300 dollars in my opinion, and the better hard drive and graphics card are worth about 100 together, thus at most the 2.3Ghz should be 400 more not 500. Honestly though, I think 400 is even pushing it. Oh well, at least apple un-crippled the low end Powermac.
Honestly apple should have dual 2.3Ghz, dual 2.7Ghz, and quad 2.5Ghz machines. I guess they are waiting to make those updates later.
Apple doesn't like to put the same speed chips in secondary machines. Most programs would run exactly the same on a dual 2.5 as a quad. They wouldn't want that.
I think this launch of the quad Mac's actually shows the strength of the Apple/IBM partnership.
Especially in light of Intel's current situation. Reports I'm reading about Intel's new dual Xeon's. They consume too much power, are way too hot, and still don't out perform the Opteron. The Xeon and Pentium D are too hot to be paired in a quad machine. Ironic with the new power per watt moniker.
Is this the situation Apple is prepared to enter? I doubt it. I believe Jobs will want the advantages of the IBM relationship to be similar in the Intel relationship.
I think Intel's attention is really somewhere else. I don't think Intel really cares so much about the Xeon or Pentium D or EM64T. These are such obvious half hearted attempts to try and keep up with AMD.
You would think as large and cash rich as Intel they should have little trouble producing chips that beat AMD. I think its obvious their concentration is really somewhere else.
Especially in light of Intel's current situation. Reports I'm reading about Intel's new dual Xeon's. They consume too much power, are way too hot, and still don't out perform the Opteron. The Xeon and Pentium D are too hot to be paired in a quad machine. Ironic with the new power per watt moniker.
Is this the situation Apple is prepared to enter? I doubt it. I believe Jobs will want the advantages of the IBM relationship to be similar in the Intel relationship.
You do realize that Intel will roll out a major new desktop/workstation/server CPU family next year, don't you? From what I gather, it won't be Netburst-based. I think it's that family that Apple is targeting. The current G5s run HOT too.
The sad fact is that Moto and IBM can't (or won't?) produce a competitive laptop chip and it's the laptops that are driving the consumer market right now.
You do realize that Intel will roll out a major new desktop/workstation/server CPU family next year, don't you? From what I gather, it won't be Netburst-based. I think it's that family that Apple is targeting. The current G5s run HOT too.
Yeah there may have been one to maybe a couple hundred articles about Intel's next CPU family.
AMD says that new Intel family will only catch up to what AMD has now and not compete with what AMD will have over the next 12 to 18 months. This isn't too far fetched in comparison to what Intel has been doing lately.
The G5 is too hot for laptop's: the Xeon and Opeteron are too hot to put in a laptop. But the G5 is not too hot to put four of them in the same machine. That's a big difference.
Intel Merom Mobile processor, the successor to Jonah and part of the Santa Rosa platform, is expected to be released in H2 on a 65nm process. Merom is a Dual Core CPU combining the architecture of NetBurst and the Pentium-M to achieve both high performance and lower power consumption. Merom utilises the FSB and EM64T of NetBurst, but is largely based around the Pentium M architecture. The CPU is a 4-issue design (compared to the 3 issue cores of the Athlon 64 and Pentium 4 architectures) with a 14 stage pipeline - significantly shorter than that of NetBurst CPUs (from 20 in Willamette to 31 stages in Prescott). The shorter pipeline will ensure that Merom and it's derivatives will not clock as high as Precott, but it will likely clock as fast or faster than the Athlon 64 - i.e. around 3Ghz. However, the IPC of Merom is likely to be better than the Athlon 64 due to it's 4 issue superscalar design and vastly better than the P4.
Merom will feature 4MB of L2 cache shared between the two cores and will feature a direct L1 to L1 cache transfer system between the L1 caches of each of the cores to improve performance. Merom will also feature a number of enhances prefectching schemes to enhance the use of the caches.
4 Issue baby!!! I've also read Intel is actively working on improving FPU performance.
I don't quite understand the advantage of quad cores if you have to shut one down to keep them cool.
because if you don't need all the processing power all the time it makes sense to throttle down the other cores. considering even the most powerful of power users will only stress the processor for a fraction of its time, even during the day, it makes sense because the other cores are there at any time when they're needed.
chrysler is using a techology in their v8 engines call displacement on demand (cadillac does this too) where a v8 will shut off 4 cylinders while it's cruising on the highway. but i can bring the other 4 cylinders online instanteously. the benefit is that their v8's get very good gas mileage on the highway. similar concept.
a disagree. it's not as if the quad processor machine is $2000 more than the previous top of the line machine. people bought dual 2.7's in the past and it wasn't a "waste". the quad machine isn't that much more than the previous top of the line powermac. personally, i'm buying it because i make enough to justify the expense (and i need the write-off) and WHEN i need that power, it will be there. using cleaner to compress video, etc. if the quads cost significantly more than any other mac, i could see it being a waste.
that said, if the price/performance ratio doesn't make sense for other people, so be it. but to say that the quads would be a waste is a stretch.
Comments
To answer some questions that were raised about these topics.
The 15" PB screen is 20% brighter than before. I know some thought it wasn't brighter. The 12" screen is the same. This goes with the 46% increase for the 17".
If you put an order in before these came out, go here:
https://abs.apple.com/transition/index.html
This is valid if your order went in 14 days before Wednesday.
More to follow?
Originally posted by melgross
Ok, to answer this again.
Maybe this will give you some idea.
The 6600 LE - the lower end board, will let you run 1 30" display and 1 23" display at the same time. that's pushing a lot of pixels around.
Ok, I feel better now and I'm looking forward to my 6600. Now it seems the 7800 may be canceled? Wow. Glad I decided NOT to cancel my order and wait. I should have my 2.3 next week.
Ok, I feel better now and I'm looking forward to my 6600. Now it seems the 7800 may be canceled? Wow. Glad I decided NOT to cancel my order and wait. I should have my 2.3 next week.
i think you made a good choice. i know i was quite gung ho about 6600gt or 6800 7800 etc, but that's because i was desperate to try out half life 2, need for speed underground 2, and play some good ut2004 without going to an internet cafe. i am finding my 6600gt just nice for what i wanted, ie, playing some of the latest games on winxp. your 6600 with 256mb video memory with the dualcore 2.3ghz will be smooth and slick. all the best with your photoshopping
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
PS. I'm glad the 7800 GT had merely been 'delayed'...
But - it seems like an open-ended delay. We don't know when, which is like waiting for hardware updates from Apple. I assume we're back in the "if you need it now, buy it now, but if you can, wait..."
I'm tired of waiting and would like to order shortly. A little more information ("7800 GTs will not be available until Nov. 20", say) would be very useful.
Yeup. I know Max is PC only. I have it!
And I have dual Lightwave 8.x on the Mac/PC.
I also have the beautiful Vue 5 Infinite.
So. Polygon pushing power and rendering capability...'unlimited power' (Says in Emperor style voice...) are on my agenda.
A model with 250K polygons in it...with a few textures on top...I'd have thought a 7800 GT would have handled it with consumate ease.
I'd still like to see s Quadro vs 7800GT in action though...
The snooty Mac owner in me wouldn't mind a Quadro...but...at almost four times the cost? I question if it is four times more powerful...than a 7800GT.
25-50% better at CAD type stuff? For 300%/400% more?
I'd like to see a triangle vs triangle comparison....
Lemon Bon Bon
It's just poor having a 6600 or a Quadro. It's laughable as it is ironic. We get workstation graphics...and only Apple could goof up by not having the GT card available now...
Geeze, get Asus to source them. Don't they have a working relationship with them anyhow?
I'm hoping the move to Intel will cut out alot of this 'naff' graphics cards/waiting for gpus...poor GL drivers crap from Apple.
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Herm. Those 'twice as fast' figures for the Quad vs Brad's dual 2.5 figures bring a smile to my face. Very exciting to have a scene like that render in 17 secs!!! And with all that A.A on top!
Yeup. I know Max is PC only. I have it!
And I have dual Lightwave 8.x on the Mac/PC.
I also have the beautiful Vue 5 Infinite.
So. Polygon pushing power and rendering capability...'unlimited power' (Says in Emperor style voice...) are on my agenda.
A model with 250K polygons in it...with a few textures on top...I'd have thought a 7800 GT would have handled it with consumate ease.
I'd still like to see s Quadro vs 7800GT in action though...
The snooty Mac owner in me wouldn't mind a Quadro...but...at almost four times the cost? I question if it is four times more powerful...than a 7800GT.
25-50% better at CAD type stuff? For 300%/400% more?
I'd like to see a triangle vs triangle comparison....
Lemon Bon Bon
I also would like to see a card or two from Nvidia that isn't as high priced. At least a mid range Quadro card would have been nice.
http://www.nvidia.com/page/quadrofx_family.html
It seems the PC fanboys are impressed and a bit humbled with this new Power Mac update.
Many of them complain about Intel's inability to make quad core motherboards yet.
Other's have said Intel can't because the Xenon's are too hot to fit four in the same box.
300Mhz is worth no more than 300 dollars in my opinion, and the better hard drive and graphics card are worth about 100 together, thus at most the 2.3Ghz should be 400 more not 500. Honestly though, I think 400 is even pushing it. Oh well, at least apple un-crippled the low end Powermac.
Honestly apple should have dual 2.3Ghz, dual 2.7Ghz, and quad 2.5Ghz machines. I guess they are waiting to make those updates later.
Apple can't make them if IBM doesn't make them.
But surely they will by next year.
Originally posted by TenoBell
More than likely IBM doesn't make dual 2.7 chips.
Apple can't make them if IBM doesn't make them.
But surely they will by next year.
Right. No 2.7 dual cores yet.
Apple doesn't like to put the same speed chips in secondary machines. Most programs would run exactly the same on a dual 2.5 as a quad. They wouldn't want that.
Especially in light of Intel's current situation. Reports I'm reading about Intel's new dual Xeon's. They consume too much power, are way too hot, and still don't out perform the Opteron. The Xeon and Pentium D are too hot to be paired in a quad machine. Ironic with the new power per watt moniker.
Is this the situation Apple is prepared to enter? I doubt it. I believe Jobs will want the advantages of the IBM relationship to be similar in the Intel relationship.
I think Intel's attention is really somewhere else. I don't think Intel really cares so much about the Xeon or Pentium D or EM64T. These are such obvious half hearted attempts to try and keep up with AMD.
You would think as large and cash rich as Intel they should have little trouble producing chips that beat AMD. I think its obvious their concentration is really somewhere else.
Originally posted by TenoBell
Especially in light of Intel's current situation. Reports I'm reading about Intel's new dual Xeon's. They consume too much power, are way too hot, and still don't out perform the Opteron. The Xeon and Pentium D are too hot to be paired in a quad machine. Ironic with the new power per watt moniker.
Is this the situation Apple is prepared to enter? I doubt it. I believe Jobs will want the advantages of the IBM relationship to be similar in the Intel relationship.
You do realize that Intel will roll out a major new desktop/workstation/server CPU family next year, don't you? From what I gather, it won't be Netburst-based. I think it's that family that Apple is targeting. The current G5s run HOT too.
The sad fact is that Moto and IBM can't (or won't?) produce a competitive laptop chip and it's the laptops that are driving the consumer market right now.
You do realize that Intel will roll out a major new desktop/workstation/server CPU family next year, don't you? From what I gather, it won't be Netburst-based. I think it's that family that Apple is targeting. The current G5s run HOT too.
Yeah there may have been one to maybe a couple hundred articles about Intel's next CPU family.
AMD says that new Intel family will only catch up to what AMD has now and not compete with what AMD will have over the next 12 to 18 months. This isn't too far fetched in comparison to what Intel has been doing lately.
The G5 is too hot for laptop's: the Xeon and Opeteron are too hot to put in a laptop. But the G5 is not too hot to put four of them in the same machine. That's a big difference.
Conroe- Dual-Core 4MB shared L2 consuming 65-70 watts.
This in conjunction with the ability to shut a core down should allow for quad systems without the need to water cool them. Bring it on baby.
http://www.mikeshardware.co.uk/RoadmapQ406.htm
Intel Merom Mobile processor, the successor to Jonah and part of the Santa Rosa platform, is expected to be released in H2 on a 65nm process. Merom is a Dual Core CPU combining the architecture of NetBurst and the Pentium-M to achieve both high performance and lower power consumption. Merom utilises the FSB and EM64T of NetBurst, but is largely based around the Pentium M architecture. The CPU is a 4-issue design (compared to the 3 issue cores of the Athlon 64 and Pentium 4 architectures) with a 14 stage pipeline - significantly shorter than that of NetBurst CPUs (from 20 in Willamette to 31 stages in Prescott). The shorter pipeline will ensure that Merom and it's derivatives will not clock as high as Precott, but it will likely clock as fast or faster than the Athlon 64 - i.e. around 3Ghz. However, the IPC of Merom is likely to be better than the Athlon 64 due to it's 4 issue superscalar design and vastly better than the P4.
Merom will feature 4MB of L2 cache shared between the two cores and will feature a direct L1 to L1 cache transfer system between the L1 caches of each of the cores to improve performance. Merom will also feature a number of enhances prefectching schemes to enhance the use of the caches.
4 Issue baby!!! I've also read Intel is actively working on improving FPU performance.
AMD says that new Intel family will only catch up to what AMD has now and not compete with what AMD will have over the next 12 to 18 months.
For desktop/server lines. The Centrino based laptops are pummeling AMD. People like the Turion 64 laptops until they see the battery life.
This in conjunction with the ability to shut a core down should allow for quad systems without the need to water cool them. Bring it on baby.
I don't quite understand the advantage of quad cores if you have to shut one down to keep them cool.
Originally posted by TenoBell
I don't quite understand the advantage of quad cores if you have to shut one down to keep them cool.
because if you don't need all the processing power all the time it makes sense to throttle down the other cores. considering even the most powerful of power users will only stress the processor for a fraction of its time, even during the day, it makes sense because the other cores are there at any time when they're needed.
chrysler is using a techology in their v8 engines call displacement on demand (cadillac does this too) where a v8 will shut off 4 cylinders while it's cruising on the highway. but i can bring the other 4 cylinders online instanteously. the benefit is that their v8's get very good gas mileage on the highway. similar concept.
I would only have quad cores if I needed to do some serious work.
If they sat idle most of the time then its a waste of money.
that said, if the price/performance ratio doesn't make sense for other people, so be it. but to say that the quads would be a waste is a stretch.