Intel touts power of upcoming Yonah laptop chip

245678

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 144
    boogabooga Posts: 1,082member
    MacNN pointed out a fascinating fact... Apple has a bunch of developer videos on the devleoper site:

    http://developer.apple.com/transition/index.html



    In the video "An Introduction to Universal Binaries" posted on 13-Dec-2005, 1 minute and 35 minutes into the video the speaker says "The Universal Programming Guidelines is your best friend for the next couple of weeks." Kind of a vague statement, but doesn't it strongly hint at a verification of the January Intel release?
  • Reply 22 of 144
    ready to drop serious cash come the end of january.





    i'm going all out this time.





    i've waited long enough,





    i deserve it.
  • Reply 22 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Booga

    MacNN pointed out a fascinating fact... Apple has a bunch of developer videos on the devleoper site:

    http://developer.apple.com/transition/index.html



    In the video "An Introduction to Universal Binaries" posted on 13-Dec-2005, 1 minute and 35 minutes into the video the speaker says "The Universal Programming Guidelines is your best friend for the next couple of weeks." Kind of a vague statement, but doesn't it strongly hint at a verification of the January Intel release?




    I dont think hes speaking in a date-sensitive context, but rather speaking in a project timeline sensitive context, ie "These will be your best friend whilst you tweak your code for a universal binary over the next weeks"
  • Reply 24 of 144




    Yeah, the Yonah in a Mac IS a very good thing, major improvement over the G4 SlowestBook!



    Thanks sunilraman for the Anandtech article, I found it somewhat interesting (by that I mean that nothing much has changed WRT using a Pentium M for superior B-life versus using an AMD CPU for superior FP performance). I wonder how the dual core Turion (due 1st QTR '06) will compare to the Yonah, in terms of both FP and B-life (sorry Telomar, but IMHO if B-life is all important (which may be the case for most people) then Yonah is clearly the way to go, but if FP is all important (in my case) than Turion is clearly the way to go)? Oh, and don't forget that Turion IS 64-bit versus the 32-bit Yonah? So having said that, could someone wake this RVW when there is a MacTel that has an integrated memory controller AND a dual core 64-bit CPU, I do believe that then, and only then, will I even consider a MacTel lappy! These CPU wars ARE mighty interesting, what with IBM still being in the shadows with AMD and all!



  • Reply 25 of 144
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    If floating point calcs are all important I'd be buying a desktop and have a separate laptop. That's me though. I'm not a big fan of luggables. For the AMD watchers though.
  • Reply 26 of 144
    HERE COMES THE HAMMER...................... 8)
  • Reply 27 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Booga

    MacNN pointed out a fascinating fact... Apple has a bunch of developer videos on the devleoper site:

    http://developer.apple.com/transition/index.html



    In the video "An Introduction to Universal Binaries" posted on 13-Dec-2005, 1 minute and 35 minutes into the video the speaker says "The Universal Programming Guidelines is your best friend for the next couple of weeks." Kind of a vague statement, but doesn't it strongly hint at a verification of the January Intel release?




    Nope. It's just that it'll take you a couple of weeks to get acclimatised to the Dev Kit and that's what you'll be reading for the first couple of weeks transitioning your software.
  • Reply 28 of 144
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,573member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Chucker

    Um, newsflash, batteries degrade. The battery life of a 2-years-old laptop hardly counts. Your capacity has probably drained by at least a third, if not 50%.





    You got to it already. There are better batteries out there than the ones Apple offers.
  • Reply 29 of 144
    25% less power usage, that would be one core compared to the Pentium M processor right? So it still uses 50% more CPU compared to a single processor.
  • Reply 30 of 144
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,573member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch

    25% less power usage, that would be one core compared to the Pentium M processor right? So it still uses 50% more CPU compared to a single processor.



    Yes, you are correct.



    I had posted that anandtech article before in the Intel for January thread, and I remember the same issues about power coming up.



    As was mentioned by Booga, that was total system power.



    This article, while not tecnical like the Anandtech one is, does give the power figure. As can be seen, it's pretty low. Much lower than the power used by the 7447a, under the same conditions of use.



    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1901460,00.asp



    EDIT: Just remembered this one. It's a critique of the Anand article by ARs "Hannibal" Who is a cpu arcitecture specialist:



    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051201-5662.html



    I'll add others if I find something relevant.
  • Reply 31 of 144
    boogabooga Posts: 1,082member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross

    This article, while not tecnical like the Anandtech one is, does give the power figure. As can be seen, it's pretty low. Much lower than the power used by the 7447a, under the same conditions of use.





    To me, one of the most fascinating ways that the Yonah saves power is by being faster. According to Intel, given the excellent sleep states that Yonah supports, it's often more power efficient to go all-out on a problem for a very short period, then go back to sleep instead of operating at slow/low power for longer. (Kind of like the way a traditional internal combustion engine actually gets its best acceleration efficiency with a wide-open throttle.)
  • Reply 32 of 144
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,573member
    Here's an interesting one. Not directly related, but partly so. Look to the comments about a handhelp computer.



    Scroll past the article about the XBox, unless you're interested, of course.



    http://www.mdronline.com/watch/watch...105&on=1#item2



    I wish I could link to some of the paid articles (I subscribe), but I've tried that and it doesn't work.
  • Reply 33 of 144
    chuckerchucker Posts: 5,089member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross

    There are better batteries out there than the ones Apple offers.



    Yes, but they're the same basic technology, so even they will hardly have more than 75% capacity left after 2 years of use.
  • Reply 34 of 144
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,573member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Chucker

    Yes, but they're the same basic technology, so even they will hardly have more than 75% capacity left after 2 years of use.



    That's true, but they offer more at the start. More Amp hours, so you still end up with more.



    It's like the iPod battery makers. They offer more Amp hours as well.
  • Reply 35 of 144
    sjksjk Posts: 603member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by aegisdesign

    Nope. It's just that it'll take you a couple of weeks to get acclimatised to the Dev Kit and that's what you'll be reading for the first couple of weeks transitioning your software.



    Yep, I'd say the "new couple weeks" refers to the transition time after you've watched that video, not the time from when it was posted (13-Dec-2005).
  • Reply 36 of 144
    sjksjk Posts: 603member
    coconutBattery is handy for checking and saving a history of battery capacity.
  • Reply 37 of 144
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch

    25% less power usage, that would be one core compared to the Pentium M processor right? So it still uses 50% more CPU compared to a single processor.



    Not actually 50%... Closer to 30%.
  • Reply 38 of 144
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,573member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Telomar

    Not actually 50%... Closer to 30%.



    Well, if it's 75% for each core, and we add two cores together, that's 150%



    Unless you're saying that two cores don't scale in a linear fashion regarding power usage. Is that so?
  • Reply 39 of 144
    most of the time, while "on the go", one CPU will be more than enough...

    and a dual core does not use two times the power of a single core! there are a lot of stuffs shared by the two core...
  • Reply 40 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally posted by belzebuth

    most of the time, while "on the go", one CPU will be more than enough...

    and a dual core does not use two times the power of a single core! there are a lot of stuffs shared by the two core...




    For most people, most of the time, a 1.67Ghz G4 is faster than they need.



    They only need the Dual-core 2+Ghz chips of pissing contests in forums.
Sign In or Register to comment.