well, file this under "too good to be true" but maybe an x1300 will be in the mac mini i consider myself thoroughly spanked should this happen at macworld 2006 january.......
"The german website Chip.de has tested a beta version of the software Avivo from ATI.
This application for PC allows users of a Radeon X1x00 to turn its GPU into a powerful video encoding coprocessor.
The supported video formats range from MPEG-2 to WMV9 and include of course H.264.
During a test with a Radeon X1300, the video encoding process was accelerated 5-folds! Of course the CPU, in this case an Athlon FX 57, was also fully loaded by the process.
This result will for sure be really attractive for customers."
You know, this thread is all conjecture, but let me point out one other thing to you guys. There is one group of people who are always disappointed by Apple hardware releases. Every single time, they are disappointed. And you know who those people are? The ones who say that Apple will, or even must, use such-and-such graphics chipset/card.
From the little we really know, the probability is upwards of 90% that the machines will use Intel's shared memory video. X1300, in Apple's cheapest, crummiest computer?
From the little we really know, the probability is upwards of 90% that the machines will use Intel's shared memory video. X1300, in Apple's cheapest, crummiest computer?
Seriously, from what part of your ass are you pulling this out of? 90%?
I mean, they could use an intel shared memory card, I have no clue.
Apple, however, has specifically said their developer machines have no bearing on what products they will come out with.
You know, this thread is all conjecture, but let me point out one other thing to you guys. There is one group of people who are always disappointed by Apple hardware releases. Every single time, they are disappointed. And you know who those people are? The ones who say that Apple will, or even must, use such-and-such graphics chipset/card.
The other group of people who suffer from perpetual disappointment are those who are clueless about the realities of physics and engineering. Not everything is possible or practical to do. The X1300 is estimated to draw (and dissipate) 30-35 watts, which is not ideal for a laptop, nor a iMac mini style case.
See, there you go. Apple has never made any such statement.
Umm, I'm pretty sure they have:
Quote:
this is a development platform only. This is not a product, this will never be shipped as a product, it's just for you guys to get started in development and actually you have to return them by the end of 2006 because we don't want them floating around out there. These are not products, but we're going to get them to you now.
That's Steve Jobs at the keynote at WWDC. Seems pretty clear to me.
So, I'll ask again, what part of your ass are you pulling the "90% chance the machines will use Intel's shared memory video" again?
wow. i'm getting totally slammed on this thread to clarify i meant that perhaps given the shortages of the x1nn line ati might shift the 9nnn cards to pci express.
anyway, here's my guess on the possibility of a certain graphic card in macintel mac mini and macintel ibook, looking at ati cards only. (percentages do not add up to 100% in this estimate)
Uh, probabilities that add up to 100% are not mere "conveniences" - it's a mathematical law that they must (or less than 100%, if you have not listed the entire sample space)! You might as well write 2+4 = 12.
Yeah, because that's just what's most important to their very lowest-end machine! Not.
Ah *knocks chucker on the head* hello? recoding television and using the Mini-Mac as a core component of the 'digital lifestyle'? does that ring a bell?
Ah *knocks chucker on the head* hello? recoding television and using the Mini-Mac as a core component of the 'digital lifestyle'? does that ring a bell?
The Mac mini, at least for now, is a low-end, entry-level computer, not a "digital hub" machine. The iMac is.
(Have you compared the CPU and GPU of the Mac mini and the iMac? Or the hard drive space?)
I just want my reasonably-priced Powermac with kick-in-the-pants performance, with compenents that can be replaced. If I can get that, I'm happy.
ALSO: Does the new Phoenix equivalent to BIOS require a different flash of graphics cards?
hmmm.... a reasonably-priced powermac with kick-in-the-pants(ouch! kick in the ass would be less painful) replaceable components:
powermac g5 dualcore or g5 quad
cpu: hmm.. not so upgradeable but powermac g4s are very cpu upgradeable...
ram: upgradeable
hard disk: upgradeable
graphics card: upgradeable (not sli though)
optical drive: probably
audio: yes, external or (eventually? pci express internal audio expansion)
no on wireless, cooling system...
reasonably priced: probably no
the upgradeable components is okay there.... now, will apple ever make a reasonably priced powermac? i think not, ppc, intel, amd or otherwise
btw, my educated guess is that the graphics cards for macintels will not require different firmware on the graphics card themselves, its more of a matter of whether mac osx86 has drivers for your particular off-the-shelf third party card....
unless apple is extra evil and made it so that the graphics cards have special firmware to allow it to run well on mac osx86, forcing you to only buy graphics cards from apple and apple dealers... wait a minute, that's what apple is going to do !!!!!!!!! ARGHGHGHHGGHHGH
edit: which means if they do the latter, then you could get a leaked/hacked copy of the firmware for your graphics card, and then flash the third-party cheaper graphics card yourself, possibly rendering your beautifully clocked "golden sample" 7800gtx-512mb-ddr3-ram** useless should something get screwed up.
That's Steve Jobs at the keynote at WWDC. Seems pretty clear to me.
So, I'll ask again, what part of your ass are you pulling the "90% chance the machines will use Intel's shared memory video" again?
Read it carefully. That quote does not say shipping products will use a different video card, or anything else FTM, different from the developer systems.
You're just a wishful thinker like the rest of them. The single "thing" (not a product? that's pure RDF) Apple has shipped with an Intel processor in it has shared memory video. The only video chipsets Intel makes are shared memory video chipsets. Ergo, it is a near certainty that Apple will ship shared memory video, and there is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary.
You guys can be wishful thinkers if you like, I have no objection. I'm sick of pointing out to people that they're dreaming. You guys can all crash in disappointment when the products come out - like you always do.
Read it carefully. That quote does not say shipping products will use a different video card, or anything else FTM, different from the developer systems.
You're just a wishful thinker like the rest of them. The single "thing" (not a product? that's pure RDF) Apple has shipped with an Intel processor in it has shared memory video. The only video chipsets Intel makes are shared memory video chipsets. Ergo, it is a near certainty that Apple will ship shared memory video, and there is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary.
You guys can be wishful thinkers if you like, I have no objection. I'm sick of pointing out to people that they're dreaming. You guys can all crash in disappointment when the products come out - like you always do.
Seriously, did you even read my origonal post? I don't think the mini is going to have an X1300. I think it's certainly possible apple will ship a product with an intel shared memory graphics chip.
What I DON'T think is that it's a forgone conclusion, which you evidently do; pointing out the developer machines as "evidence" is a huge crock. That's just as silly as the X1300 people.
You're just a wishful thinker like the rest of them. The single "thing" (not a product? that's pure RDF) Apple has shipped with an Intel processor in it has shared memory video. The only video chipsets Intel makes are shared memory video chipsets. Ergo, it is a near certainty that Apple will ship shared memory video, and there is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary.
You are just as delusional as the people you allege to demonize.
You really think that almost all future Macs will have shared video? Do you realize just how crippled QE, Q2DE and CI/CV will be with shared video? Do you realize that even Windows Vista strongly benefits from non-shared video?
I tend to agree with your position that Intel integrated video will play a part in at least a few of Apples new machines. That or similar integrated video ship sets from other vendors.
This is something that should not upset people though. First these integrated approaches have improved vastly of recent times. Second the new hardware should provide significantly faster access to that video hardware. I suspect that people will be please with video peorformance relative to the old low cost PPC hardware.
Not really something for people to get excited about in my mind. What is exciting is the prospect for a middle of the road "MAC" that provides very good performance at a reasonable price. The potential is there lets just hope that Apple realizes there is a market there.
Dave
Quote:
Originally posted by cubist
Read it carefully. That quote does not say shipping products will use a different video card, or anything else FTM, different from the developer systems.
You're just a wishful thinker like the rest of them. The single "thing" (not a product? that's pure RDF) Apple has shipped with an Intel processor in it has shared memory video. The only video chipsets Intel makes are shared memory video chipsets. Ergo, it is a near certainty that Apple will ship shared memory video, and there is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary.
You guys can be wishful thinkers if you like, I have no objection. I'm sick of pointing out to people that they're dreaming. You guys can all crash in disappointment when the products come out - like you always do.
I tend to agree with your position that Intel integrated video will play a part in at least a few of Apples new machines. That or similar integrated video ship sets from other vendors.
Integrated chipsets, sure. But he's actually talking about integrated chipsets with shared memory. Shared memory means dramatically lower performance, unless you have a vastly different implementation than what's traditionally used (and even then, shared memory definitely does not mean an advantage, other than cost-cutting, compared to separate CPU and GPU memory).
I can see shared video happening on the Mac mini; perhaps even the iBook or whatever new low-end laptop they'll have. I'd hate to see it happen but it wouldn't be unrealistic. However, on the vast majority of Macs, I absolutely don't see shared video. As for integrated video chipsets, that's another matter altogether; in many ways, they will probably be more than good enough.
Do you realize just how crippled QE, Q2DE and CI/CV will be with shared video? Do you realize that even Windows Vista strongly benefits from non-shared video?
How do you know? Do you have any data or personal experience to back up your statements?
The main "issue" people have with integrated graphics is that, quite frankly, they used to suck. Big time!
Recently, that has started to change. For an entry level machine, there is no good reason not to save money by using integrated graphics with shared video memory. That could allow Apple to introduce a cheaper iBook based on the general cost savings of the graphics system and power consumption.
And let's get real, if you're buying an iBook for *pulling number out of my ass* $700, do you really care whether you can run all the latest games? What you're going to care about is whether it runs Mac OS X, iLife, Microsoft Office and less demanding games fine. If it does, all is good. If you needed more, you would have purchased a more expensive laptop with dedicated PCIe graphics.
Comments
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2005-12-02/#4818
"The german website Chip.de has tested a beta version of the software Avivo from ATI.
This application for PC allows users of a Radeon X1x00 to turn its GPU into a powerful video encoding coprocessor.
The supported video formats range from MPEG-2 to WMV9 and include of course H.264.
During a test with a Radeon X1300, the video encoding process was accelerated 5-folds! Of course the CPU, in this case an Athlon FX 57, was also fully loaded by the process.
This result will for sure be really attractive for customers."
From the little we really know, the probability is upwards of 90% that the machines will use Intel's shared memory video. X1300, in Apple's cheapest, crummiest computer?
Originally posted by cubist
From the little we really know, the probability is upwards of 90% that the machines will use Intel's shared memory video. X1300, in Apple's cheapest, crummiest computer?
Seriously, from what part of your ass are you pulling this out of? 90%?
I mean, they could use an intel shared memory card, I have no clue.
Apple, however, has specifically said their developer machines have no bearing on what products they will come out with.
Originally posted by Flounder
... Apple, however, has specifically said their developer machines have no bearing on what products they will come out with.
See, there you go. Apple has never made any such statement.
Originally posted by cubist
You know, this thread is all conjecture, but let me point out one other thing to you guys. There is one group of people who are always disappointed by Apple hardware releases. Every single time, they are disappointed. And you know who those people are? The ones who say that Apple will, or even must, use such-and-such graphics chipset/card.
The other group of people who suffer from perpetual disappointment are those who are clueless about the realities of physics and engineering. Not everything is possible or practical to do. The X1300 is estimated to draw (and dissipate) 30-35 watts, which is not ideal for a laptop, nor a iMac mini style case.
Originally posted by cubist
See, there you go. Apple has never made any such statement.
Umm, I'm pretty sure they have:
this is a development platform only. This is not a product, this will never be shipped as a product, it's just for you guys to get started in development and actually you have to return them by the end of 2006 because we don't want them floating around out there. These are not products, but we're going to get them to you now.
That's Steve Jobs at the keynote at WWDC. Seems pretty clear to me.
So, I'll ask again, what part of your ass are you pulling the "90% chance the machines will use Intel's shared memory video" again?
Originally posted by sunilraman
wow. i'm getting totally slammed on this thread
anyway, here's my guess on the possibility of a certain graphic card in macintel mac mini and macintel ibook, looking at ati cards only. (percentages do not add up to 100% in this estimate)
Uh, probabilities that add up to 100% are not mere "conveniences" - it's a mathematical law that they must (or less than 100%, if you have not listed the entire sample space)! You might as well write 2+4 = 12.
Originally posted by Chucker
Yeah, because that's just what's most important to their very lowest-end machine! Not.
Ah *knocks chucker on the head* hello? recoding television and using the Mini-Mac as a core component of the 'digital lifestyle'? does that ring a bell?
Originally posted by kaiwai
Ah *knocks chucker on the head* hello? recoding television and using the Mini-Mac as a core component of the 'digital lifestyle'? does that ring a bell?
The Mac mini, at least for now, is a low-end, entry-level computer, not a "digital hub" machine. The iMac is.
(Have you compared the CPU and GPU of the Mac mini and the iMac? Or the hard drive space?)
The XServers, future PowerMacs and perhaps the phantom XStation might get folks interested other than the same dungheap of low cost laptop shit.
Nothing like being stuck in a noisy coffee shop with a laptop. Gee I really get a ton of really productive work done now!
ALSO: Does the new Phoenix equivalent to BIOS require a different flash of graphics cards?
I just want my reasonably-priced Powermac with kick-in-the-pants performance, with compenents that can be replaced. If I can get that, I'm happy.
ALSO: Does the new Phoenix equivalent to BIOS require a different flash of graphics cards?
hmmm.... a reasonably-priced powermac with kick-in-the-pants(ouch! kick in the ass would be less painful) replaceable components:
powermac g5 dualcore or g5 quad
cpu: hmm.. not so upgradeable but powermac g4s are very cpu upgradeable...
ram: upgradeable
hard disk: upgradeable
graphics card: upgradeable (not sli though)
optical drive: probably
audio: yes, external or (eventually? pci express internal audio expansion)
no on wireless, cooling system...
reasonably priced: probably no
the upgradeable components is okay there.... now, will apple ever make a reasonably priced powermac? i think not, ppc, intel, amd or otherwise
btw, my educated guess is that the graphics cards for macintels will not require different firmware on the graphics card themselves, its more of a matter of whether mac osx86 has drivers for your particular off-the-shelf third party card....
unless apple is extra evil and made it so that the graphics cards have special firmware to allow it to run well on mac osx86, forcing you to only buy graphics cards from apple and apple dealers... wait a minute, that's what apple is going to do !!!!!!!!! ARGHGHGHHGGHHGH
edit: which means if they do the latter, then you could get a leaked/hacked copy of the firmware for your graphics card, and then flash the third-party cheaper graphics card yourself, possibly rendering your beautifully clocked "golden sample" 7800gtx-512mb-ddr3-ram** useless should something get screwed up.
**http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...0gtx_gs/1.html
Originally posted by Flounder
Umm, I'm pretty sure they have:
That's Steve Jobs at the keynote at WWDC. Seems pretty clear to me.
So, I'll ask again, what part of your ass are you pulling the "90% chance the machines will use Intel's shared memory video" again?
Read it carefully. That quote does not say shipping products will use a different video card, or anything else FTM, different from the developer systems.
You're just a wishful thinker like the rest of them. The single "thing" (not a product? that's pure RDF) Apple has shipped with an Intel processor in it has shared memory video. The only video chipsets Intel makes are shared memory video chipsets. Ergo, it is a near certainty that Apple will ship shared memory video, and there is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary.
You guys can be wishful thinkers if you like, I have no objection. I'm sick of pointing out to people that they're dreaming. You guys can all crash in disappointment when the products come out - like you always do.
Originally posted by cubist
Read it carefully. That quote does not say shipping products will use a different video card, or anything else FTM, different from the developer systems.
You're just a wishful thinker like the rest of them. The single "thing" (not a product? that's pure RDF) Apple has shipped with an Intel processor in it has shared memory video. The only video chipsets Intel makes are shared memory video chipsets. Ergo, it is a near certainty that Apple will ship shared memory video, and there is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary.
You guys can be wishful thinkers if you like, I have no objection. I'm sick of pointing out to people that they're dreaming. You guys can all crash in disappointment when the products come out - like you always do.
Seriously, did you even read my origonal post? I don't think the mini is going to have an X1300. I think it's certainly possible apple will ship a product with an intel shared memory graphics chip.
What I DON'T think is that it's a forgone conclusion, which you evidently do; pointing out the developer machines as "evidence" is a huge crock. That's just as silly as the X1300 people.
Originally posted by cubist
You're just a wishful thinker like the rest of them. The single "thing" (not a product? that's pure RDF) Apple has shipped with an Intel processor in it has shared memory video. The only video chipsets Intel makes are shared memory video chipsets. Ergo, it is a near certainty that Apple will ship shared memory video, and there is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary.
You are just as delusional as the people you allege to demonize.
You really think that almost all future Macs will have shared video? Do you realize just how crippled QE, Q2DE and CI/CV will be with shared video? Do you realize that even Windows Vista strongly benefits from non-shared video?
This is something that should not upset people though. First these integrated approaches have improved vastly of recent times. Second the new hardware should provide significantly faster access to that video hardware. I suspect that people will be please with video peorformance relative to the old low cost PPC hardware.
Not really something for people to get excited about in my mind. What is exciting is the prospect for a middle of the road "MAC" that provides very good performance at a reasonable price. The potential is there lets just hope that Apple realizes there is a market there.
Dave
Originally posted by cubist
Read it carefully. That quote does not say shipping products will use a different video card, or anything else FTM, different from the developer systems.
You're just a wishful thinker like the rest of them. The single "thing" (not a product? that's pure RDF) Apple has shipped with an Intel processor in it has shared memory video. The only video chipsets Intel makes are shared memory video chipsets. Ergo, it is a near certainty that Apple will ship shared memory video, and there is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary.
You guys can be wishful thinkers if you like, I have no objection. I'm sick of pointing out to people that they're dreaming. You guys can all crash in disappointment when the products come out - like you always do.
Originally posted by wizard69
I tend to agree with your position that Intel integrated video will play a part in at least a few of Apples new machines. That or similar integrated video ship sets from other vendors.
Integrated chipsets, sure. But he's actually talking about integrated chipsets with shared memory. Shared memory means dramatically lower performance, unless you have a vastly different implementation than what's traditionally used (and even then, shared memory definitely does not mean an advantage, other than cost-cutting, compared to separate CPU and GPU memory).
I can see shared video happening on the Mac mini; perhaps even the iBook or whatever new low-end laptop they'll have. I'd hate to see it happen but it wouldn't be unrealistic. However, on the vast majority of Macs, I absolutely don't see shared video. As for integrated video chipsets, that's another matter altogether; in many ways, they will probably be more than good enough.
Do you realize just how crippled QE, Q2DE and CI/CV will be with shared video? Do you realize that even Windows Vista strongly benefits from non-shared video?
How do you know? Do you have any data or personal experience to back up your statements?
Recently, that has started to change. For an entry level machine, there is no good reason not to save money by using integrated graphics with shared video memory. That could allow Apple to introduce a cheaper iBook based on the general cost savings of the graphics system and power consumption.
And let's get real, if you're buying an iBook for *pulling number out of my ass* $700, do you really care whether you can run all the latest games? What you're going to care about is whether it runs Mac OS X, iLife, Microsoft Office and less demanding games fine. If it does, all is good. If you needed more, you would have purchased a more expensive laptop with dedicated PCIe graphics.