Intel touts power of upcoming Yonah laptop chip

135678

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 144
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross

    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?




    Of course they don't. There are shared resources. Each core isn't 75% of the power. 1 core + supporting architecture is 75%. The whole processor is slightly less than 30% more. How much it'll actually hit that 30% more figure is also somewhat debatable.
  • Reply 42 of 144
    For most people, most of the time, a 1.67Ghz G4 is faster than they need.



    I recently took up using Blender3D to do some 3D modeling, and it is extremely slow to the point of being unusable at times on my laptop. And this is only with very basic models with a few hundred vertices at most. Granted my PB is only 1.25 Ghz with 512 of RAM, but even still. I have to go to my friend's house with a dual G5 tower if I want to get any serious work done.
  • Reply 43 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Alex3917

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



    I recently took up using Blender3D to do some 3D modeling, and it is extremely slow to the point of being unusable at times on my laptop. And this is only with very basic models with a few hundred vertices at most. Granted my PB is only 1.25 Ghz with 512 of RAM, but even still. I have to go to my friend's house with a dual G5 tower if I want to get any serious work done.




    I've a 1Mhz Z80 based laptop* that's crap at 3D modelling too - that's why I only use it for word processing and leave the 3D modelling to my desktop.



    Horses for courses.







    * It does get 20 hours out of a set of 4 AA batteries though. Intel breaking the 5 hour limit - I'm impressed. ;-)
  • Reply 44 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally posted by aegisdesign

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



    How do you know?
  • Reply 45 of 144
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,570member
    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...




    Intel means that when the two cores are being stressed, the usage of each will be 25% less.



    There is almost nothing on these chips that uses significant amounts of power other than the logic units, and to a lesser extent, the cache.
  • Reply 46 of 144
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,570member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Telomar

    Of course they don't. There are shared resources. Each core isn't 75% of the power. 1 core + supporting architecture is 75%. The whole processor is slightly less than 30% more. How much it'll actually hit that 30% more figure is also somewhat debatable.



    And where did you come up with that. Considering that they aren't Intel's numbers. Intel said "core". Not "core plus supporting architecture".



    What shared resources take up enough power that it would make a difference? Both cores share the same amount of cache. No savings there. You can't properly assume that one chip is going to do most of the work. That may be true some of the time, but in a symmetric arrangement, that's not true most of the time.



    Just keep Activity Monitor on in your machine, and you will see that for the vast percentage of time, both chips, or cores track equally.
  • Reply 47 of 144
    krassykrassy Posts: 595member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sCreeD

    For the sake of my bank account, I hope they really, really suck.



    ROTFLMAO ... that was a great one :-)
  • Reply 48 of 144
    Quote:

    For the sake of my bank account, I hope they really, really suck.



    Not me. I've been wanting a new machine for a couple years now. If the first gen MacIntel laptops aren't compelling enough, my wife will just spend the money on something frivolous like furniture or carpets.



    - Jasen.
  • Reply 49 of 144
    screedscreed Posts: 1,077member
    To put my remark in context, in Spring I bought a shiny new PowerMac with a 20" Cinema Display plus Final Cut Studio and just recently Aperture (\). My 12" Powerbook has traveled with me extensively, but it's beginning to chug. (This, of course, is purely psychological since it's running the same speed that day I got it).



    Anyway, as a veteran Apple user, I know to stay clear of anything version 1.0 or revision A. This time, doubly so since this will be a revision A on a new chipset.



    Run. Fear. Hide. I expect thermal issues non-stop until revision C.



    If not, good for Apple...
  • Reply 50 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sCreeD

    and just recently Aperture (\).



    Quote:

    Anyway, as a veteran Apple user, I know to stay clear of anything version 1.0 or revision A.



  • Reply 51 of 144
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,570member
    I'd rather not be so negative about this. It has been a major transition to Express, but it has gone very well.



    This is a bigger transition, to be sure, but let's not assume that it won't go well either. Apple has a lot at stake. And it's proven technology. It isn't something new. And Apple has been working with it for some time.



    I haven't heard of many problems with the cobbled together developers machines.
  • Reply 52 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally posted by melgross

    I haven't heard of many problems with the cobbled together developers machines.



    There's not a lot to go wrong there though is there?



    It's an off the shelf Intel motherboard with integrated graphics and a BIOS in a huge aluminium case.



    A new production MacIntel will most likely have a new motherboard, no BIOS and a new case design.
  • Reply 53 of 144
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,570member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by aegisdesign

    There's not a lot to go wrong there though is there?



    It's an off the shelf Intel motherboard with integrated graphics and a BIOS in a huge aluminium case.



    A new production MacIntel will most likely have a new motherboard, no BIOS and a new case design.




    Right, but that's the point I was making. It's just an off the shelf system, and it still works fine.



    The case design shouldn't matter. It's only rarely that their cases have major problems, even though they get a lot of attention when they do.



    It will still be a PC mobo at this point. I doubt that Apple will, or even can, do much that's different right now. Unless Intel has some stuff that we don't know about. EFI has been around for a few years. I'm sure Apple has been wringing it out.



    I prefer to be positive. There might be some trivial issues, but it's not likely, with all they have at stake here, that there will be a showstopper.
  • Reply 54 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally posted by aegisdesign

    A new production MacIntel will most likely have a new motherboard, no BIOS and a new case design.



    There is no reason to believe it will be an Apple custom built motherboard. I would be surprised if it were. That being the case, there wouldn't be any more or less motherboard/cpu related problems than with the Yonah laptops sold by HP, Dell, etc. aside from whether they use BIOS or EFI.



    I really think that Apple will use Intel motherboard designs (Yonah + Napa) that Apple crafts for their form factor (and maybe stick some little chip onto that OS X requires).



    Basically, what I am trying to say is that it won't be a first-generation device, it will be the same multi-generation intel technology that other makers will be shipping.
  • Reply 55 of 144
    screedscreed Posts: 1,077member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gene Clean







    I said "I know," not "I always do." I admit I got sucked by the eye pr0n.



    Anyway, no board in any recent line was "off the shelf" because of them being for a PowerPC. Even for an Intel chip, I just can't see Apple trusting an OEM and letting go of that control.



    [Exit clause] Let me amend that a wee bit. Maybe-- what if-- Apple had influence in the Viiv specs. Hm, that'd be something.
  • Reply 56 of 144
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Here's another report about no Intel Mac's in January. Take with with the amount of salt of your choosing.



    Quote:

    "Apple says not to expect Intel at Macworld, in fact don?t expect any new computer hardware. I have contact with someone that works for Apple at a higher level, when asked if they were attending Macworld he said he [was] told that they shouldn?t go," Derek Picone reports for TechWB. "Typically if there is a big announcement they are expected to attend."



    Picone reports, "This means that for anyone hoping for the new Intel computers your out of luck, no hardware will be announced except for maybe the normal speed boosts since those wouldn?t be any reason for them to attend. The only announcements will be coming from the other non computer hardware departments such as new iPods, iSight, Monitors, Programs, and other software and accessories."



    http://derekpicone.blogsome.com/2005...l-at-macworld/
  • Reply 57 of 144
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,570member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TenoBell

    Here's another report about no Intel Mac's in January. Take with with the amount of salt of your choosing.







    http://derekpicone.blogsome.com/2005...l-at-macworld/




    Aah, who knows anymore.
  • Reply 58 of 144
    screedscreed Posts: 1,077member
    This is ArsTechnica's take on the "news":

    Quote:

    Well if that ain't solid, I dunno what is, folks! </sarcasm>



    The reason I am required to be highly suspicious of this particular rumor (not that I necessarily believe the Intel ones either, mind you) is because I know from my engineering friends at Apple that the folks over at 1 Infinite Loop (Apple Corporate Headquarters, for those of you behind in the times) are extremely secretive, even (or especially?) among its own employees, about what kinds of things may or may not be announced and it seems extremely unlikely for a bunch of Apple execs to just tell some random AppleCare tech that there's no Intel announcement.



  • Reply 59 of 144
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    A new production MacIntel will most likely have a new motherboard, no BIOS and a new case design.



    There is no reason to believe it will be an Apple custom built motherboard. I would be surprised if it were.



    I really think that Apple will use Intel motherboard designs (Yonah + Napa) that Apple crafts for their form factor (and maybe stick some little chip onto that OS X requires).



    Basically, what I am trying to say is that it won't be a first-generation device, it will be the same multi-generation intel technology that other makers will be shipping.



    At this point there really is no way of knowing any of this.



    Apple has given no indication of anything. All we can say for sure is they will be using Intel processors by June.
  • Reply 60 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sCreeD

    This is ArsTechnica's take on the "news":



    LOL...AssTechnica.
Sign In or Register to comment.