Minis have been upgraded (hack via drop in) to Merom powered recently.. does that count?
Not really. We don't know if the Mini can see the 64 bit chip properly, or if the board impliments all of the lines. Necessary tests haven't been conducted.
The only problem I have with a 64 bit chip launch is how is Apple going to handle the 32 bit OS question?
Remember that the G5 was a full 32 bit chip as well in its instruction set. 100% backwards compatable.
The 64 bit Intel chips aren't!
That's why XP 32 won't work on the 64 bit machines, and visa versa.
Does anyone here know for SURE, that OS X 10.4.6 Intel will work on a 64 bit Core chip?
No quessing please! No assumptions! If you KNOW please say. If you don't, well, then you don't.
The 32 bit version of windows works fine on 64 bit intel processors. It doesn't take advantage of the additional features but it will run just fine. I expect at release Apple will be the same then with Leopard they will probably add support for the 64 bit extensions. They could package support with whatever OS they ship with new computers once the processors appear in Apple products if they so desired though.
Not really. We don't know if the Mini can see the 64 bit chip properly, or if the board impliments all of the lines. Necessary tests haven't been conducted.
Just want to point out that the MacBook uses shared memory video, as the realists predicted. The realists are batting 1000, the dreamers are batting zero. Realists still say no Woodcrest in Macs.
Just want to point out that the MacBook uses shared memory video, as the realists predicted. The realists are batting 1000, the dreamers are batting zero. Realists still say no Woodcrest in Macs.
Ahh excuse me... Who says what? I figured the new iBook would use the same graphics as the MacMini, and I know the difference between a workstation, and a Desktop. Unlike You.
Just want to point out that the MacBook uses shared memory video, as the realists predicted. The realists are batting 1000, the dreamers are batting zero. Realists still say no Woodcrest in Macs.
For the first few months. the assumption was that Apple would use Conroe in the new towers. I've been saying during that time that they SHOULD, not necessarly would, use the Woodcrest. Those very same writers are now saying that Apple will use Woodcrest. I'm not a dreamer, as anyone here can attest to.
But, the realities are such, that the toweres will be competing with Woodcrest and Opteron machines, and that Conroe will show up in $1,000 dollar PC's, and possibly, especially a short while after they come out, in $750 machines as well.
Will Apple see that as a good comparison? That is, a $3,000+ machine against a $750 machine? Even if the $3,000+ machine has two chips?
I don't think so!
Right now the PM, even the Quad, is getting plastered in video editing tests. The top of the line Xeon machines are 20$ faster, and the top of the line Opterons have been up to 40% faster.
Apple has to close, or leap over that gap. If they use Conroes, then they will again, lag behind the new Woodcrest Xeons. If the Xeons are as fast, or possibly even faster than the Opterons, Apple may lag behind both ? again!
Let me tell you, video editing, particularly on the higher end of the spectrum is not only done on Mac's. That is not a done deal. People, and companies, look at these rendering times, and count them in terms of the $200 to $2,000 an hour that it is costing them. They will switch platforms if they see a big savings based upon these render differences.
The Mac is by no means sacred here.
Don't forget that two years ago Jobs said, in an interview, that it hurt every time he wrote out a check to Dell for machines to render, for Pixar.
If he is going to write a check to Apple instead, he has to make the case that it will save them money. Now that Pixar is owned by disney, that is even more true today.
We do know what the Conroe is like. It's pretty much the SP version of a woodcrest with a slightly lesser FSB. But it wont do dual sockets. That is the Woodcrest domain. Supreme Workstation. Until Kensington/Clovertown anyway.
... Don't forget that two years ago Jobs said, in an interview, that it hurt every time he wrote out a check to Dell for machines to render, for Pixar. ...
If he's writing checks to Dell, performance isn't his top priority. He would be writing checks to Boxx. The choice of Intel over AMD shows you Apple's priority isn't performance either. Just wait and see, you guys. Be disappointed yet again.
If he's writing checks to Dell, performance isn't his top priority. He would be writing checks to Boxx. The choice of Intel over AMD shows you Apple's priority isn't performance either. Just wait and see, you guys. Be disappointed yet again.
Conroe and Woodcrest are both great processors, but I think Apple is going to be putting Woodcrest in. The Mac Pro, after all, is going to be a workstation-class machine.
Conroe and Woodcrest are both great processors, but I think Apple is going to be putting Woodcrest in. The Mac Pro, after all, is going to be a workstation-class machine.
I'm sure there will be a SP version at some point with a Conroe, but the real PowerMac/Mac Pro will be using the Woodcrest. Resale value on the SP Conroe version wont be that great shortly either. Once intel introduces the 4 way Kensington/Clovertown processors in SP, and Dual Configurations, the SP Conroe PowerMac will be in about as much demand, and as usefull as an iPod sock used as a nose warmer.
If he's writing checks to Dell, performance isn't his top priority. He would be writing checks to Boxx. The choice of Intel over AMD shows you Apple's priority isn't performance either. Just wait and see, you guys. Be disappointed yet again.
For render farms it depends on your footprint and density requirements. They probably got a decent deal on a 1,024 CPU blade cluster. At that point its usually who's offering a better bulk discount.
Hmmm...in 2003 maybe Sun was making AMD blades but I'm thinking few others. HP maybe hadn't transistioned yet from Transmeta. Dell was definately no. I recall that we couldn't get AMD blades when I got my bladeserver from IBM. Just Xeon and PPC.
If he's writing checks to Dell, performance isn't his top priority. He would be writing checks to Boxx. The choice of Intel over AMD shows you Apple's priority isn't performance either. Just wait and see, you guys. Be disappointed yet again.
Show me one large rendering farm that uses Boxx. Or one supercomputer.
Mr. melgross is correct. You wont find a large renderfarm using BOXX systems. BOXX is a pro workstation computer and that's all IMO. They make a render box, but for the most part it's only for show. Apples Xserves, Cluster nodes, Xsan, and Xserve RAID are highly praised industry wide on both platforms, and Xserve RAID is probably the best deal in town.
For us that bought a loud G4 tower a Conroe will be a different level. A "low end" prosumer tower will be plenty for many users, with the additon of a top end GPU it will be a fantastic gaming rig as well. A 8 core top of the line monster will have fwe benefits outside rendering and some few applications. Even the current G5 towers are hindered in some applications by the kernel design and file systems, especially server rellated stuff.
The last time Apple had CPUs made by a company that really wanted to make the best desktop CPU and was willing to invest in that was in 1990 with the IIfx and Motorola 68030/40 MHz
68040 failure, forced migration to PPC
601 stopgap measure
603 not impressive
604 Brifly very good compared to PII, then decent
G3 Was shining brightly in the B&W but then severly beaten
G4. Started with a flop and was allways beaten by a wide margin by Pentium III, P4 and Athlons
G5. After an impressive start it fails to keep up
The best thing with Intel is that Apple will now be able to focus on its real strength, OS X.
Apple had to to sort of port OS 7-8-9 from 68k to PPC and at the same time worry about the interest of Motorola and later IBM and Frescale to make computer CPUs.
I really have a hard time beliving that Intel do like Motorola, Freescale and IBM and lose interest in computer CPUs
A 8 core top of the line monster will have fwe benefits outside rendering and some few applications.
I assume you meant "few benefits"
We wont see that (8 core workstation) until the Kentsfield/Clovertown arrive in 2007. But the lack of an application to take advantage of SMP benefits are not because it has few benefits to offer, it's a problem with lazy developers that lack SMP programming knowledge and skills.
Apple really lead the way in SMP when the G4 was so far behind that they started developing Dual G4 Machines. I believe Apples use of Dual socket systems forced the hand of intel to do the same, and lead to intels development of HT, which in turn lead developers on both platforms to take advantage of SMP in one form or another. Now after seeing it's advantages both computer, and processor manufacturers are taking this to a whole new level. Multi core Processors will be in every computer made within a year; which in turn makes it necessary for all developers, including the ones that are late to the SMP programming game, to step up their multi processor programming skills to take advantage them or their apps will fail miserably comparatively.
I passed 70-290 with 1000/1000 today, and I can refer a good site, pass4sure.com
I am a fresh man for the certification, and my company need employee get MCSE2003 cert in 3 month, I start with some MOC books and frustrated with huge contents. and I failed at the first try for 70-290, but I met a friend who taking 70-290 also, he passed easily, and I know from him a good site named pass4sure.com, I used 70-290 from Pass4sure, every questions WORD 4 WORD was on the test. Unlike testking where you have to read huge number of questions (which more than half will never be on the test) these were easy to read b/c only about 200 even fewer questions. They also don't change any wording or layout like testking.
Conroe and Woodcrest are both great processors, but I think Apple is going to be putting Woodcrest in. The Mac Pro, after all, is going to be a workstation-class machine.
There's actually been three versions announced:
Core (Conroe)
Core Extreme (????)
Woodcrest (Core Xeon?)
Core Extreme might be better for a 2-core workstation than Woodcrest (higher clock speeds).
I passed 70-290 with 1000/1000 today, and I can refer a good site, pass4sure.com
I am a fresh man for the certification, and my company need employee get MCSE2003 cert in 3 month, I start with some MOC books and frustrated with huge contents. and I failed at the first try for 70-290, but I met a friend who taking 70-290 also, he passed easily, and I know from him a good site named pass4sure.com, I used 70-290 from Pass4sure, every questions WORD 4 WORD was on the test. Unlike testking where you have to read huge number of questions (which more than half will never be on the test) these were easy to read b/c only about 200 even fewer questions. They also don't change any wording or layout like testking.
Comments
Originally posted by gsxrboy
Minis have been upgraded (hack via drop in) to Merom powered recently.. does that count?
Not really. We don't know if the Mini can see the 64 bit chip properly, or if the board impliments all of the lines. Necessary tests haven't been conducted.
Originally posted by melgross
The only problem I have with a 64 bit chip launch is how is Apple going to handle the 32 bit OS question?
Remember that the G5 was a full 32 bit chip as well in its instruction set. 100% backwards compatable.
The 64 bit Intel chips aren't!
That's why XP 32 won't work on the 64 bit machines, and visa versa.
Does anyone here know for SURE, that OS X 10.4.6 Intel will work on a 64 bit Core chip?
No quessing please! No assumptions! If you KNOW please say. If you don't, well, then you don't.
The 32 bit version of windows works fine on 64 bit intel processors. It doesn't take advantage of the additional features but it will run just fine. I expect at release Apple will be the same then with Leopard they will probably add support for the 64 bit extensions. They could package support with whatever OS they ship with new computers once the processors appear in Apple products if they so desired though.
Originally posted by melgross
Not really. We don't know if the Mini can see the 64 bit chip properly, or if the board impliments all of the lines. Necessary tests haven't been conducted.
It worked. Mac OS X ran. Fast.
Originally posted by cubist
Just want to point out that the MacBook uses shared memory video, as the realists predicted. The realists are batting 1000, the dreamers are batting zero. Realists still say no Woodcrest in Macs.
Ahh excuse me...
Originally posted by cubist
Just want to point out that the MacBook uses shared memory video, as the realists predicted. The realists are batting 1000, the dreamers are batting zero. Realists still say no Woodcrest in Macs.
For the first few months. the assumption was that Apple would use Conroe in the new towers. I've been saying during that time that they SHOULD, not necessarly would, use the Woodcrest. Those very same writers are now saying that Apple will use Woodcrest. I'm not a dreamer, as anyone here can attest to.
But, the realities are such, that the toweres will be competing with Woodcrest and Opteron machines, and that Conroe will show up in $1,000 dollar PC's, and possibly, especially a short while after they come out, in $750 machines as well.
Will Apple see that as a good comparison? That is, a $3,000+ machine against a $750 machine? Even if the $3,000+ machine has two chips?
I don't think so!
Right now the PM, even the Quad, is getting plastered in video editing tests. The top of the line Xeon machines are 20$ faster, and the top of the line Opterons have been up to 40% faster.
Apple has to close, or leap over that gap. If they use Conroes, then they will again, lag behind the new Woodcrest Xeons. If the Xeons are as fast, or possibly even faster than the Opterons, Apple may lag behind both ? again!
Let me tell you, video editing, particularly on the higher end of the spectrum is not only done on Mac's. That is not a done deal. People, and companies, look at these rendering times, and count them in terms of the $200 to $2,000 an hour that it is costing them. They will switch platforms if they see a big savings based upon these render differences.
The Mac is by no means sacred here.
Don't forget that two years ago Jobs said, in an interview, that it hurt every time he wrote out a check to Dell for machines to render, for Pixar.
If he is going to write a check to Apple instead, he has to make the case that it will save them money. Now that Pixar is owned by disney, that is even more true today.
http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardw...ict183765.html
Originally posted by melgross
... Don't forget that two years ago Jobs said, in an interview, that it hurt every time he wrote out a check to Dell for machines to render, for Pixar. ...
If he's writing checks to Dell, performance isn't his top priority. He would be writing checks to Boxx. The choice of Intel over AMD shows you Apple's priority isn't performance either. Just wait and see, you guys. Be disappointed yet again.
Originally posted by cubist
If he's writing checks to Dell, performance isn't his top priority. He would be writing checks to Boxx. The choice of Intel over AMD shows you Apple's priority isn't performance either. Just wait and see, you guys. Be disappointed yet again.
I can't wait to be disappointed by Conroe.
Originally posted by Placebo
Conroe and Woodcrest are both great processors, but I think Apple is going to be putting Woodcrest in. The Mac Pro, after all, is going to be a workstation-class machine.
I'm sure there will be a SP version at some point with a Conroe, but the real PowerMac/Mac Pro will be using the Woodcrest. Resale value on the SP Conroe version wont be that great shortly either. Once intel introduces the 4 way Kensington/Clovertown processors in SP, and Dual Configurations, the SP Conroe PowerMac will be in about as much demand, and as usefull as an iPod sock used as a nose warmer.
Originally posted by cubist
If he's writing checks to Dell, performance isn't his top priority. He would be writing checks to Boxx. The choice of Intel over AMD shows you Apple's priority isn't performance either. Just wait and see, you guys. Be disappointed yet again.
For render farms it depends on your footprint and density requirements. They probably got a decent deal on a 1,024 CPU blade cluster. At that point its usually who's offering a better bulk discount.
Hmmm...in 2003 maybe Sun was making AMD blades but I'm thinking few others. HP maybe hadn't transistioned yet from Transmeta. Dell was definately no. I recall that we couldn't get AMD blades when I got my bladeserver from IBM. Just Xeon and PPC.
Vinea
Originally posted by cubist
If he's writing checks to Dell, performance isn't his top priority. He would be writing checks to Boxx. The choice of Intel over AMD shows you Apple's priority isn't performance either. Just wait and see, you guys. Be disappointed yet again.
Show me one large rendering farm that uses Boxx. Or one supercomputer.
Good luck.
The last time Apple had CPUs made by a company that really wanted to make the best desktop CPU and was willing to invest in that was in 1990 with the IIfx and Motorola 68030/40 MHz
68040 failure, forced migration to PPC
601 stopgap measure
603 not impressive
604 Brifly very good compared to PII, then decent
G3 Was shining brightly in the B&W but then severly beaten
G4. Started with a flop and was allways beaten by a wide margin by Pentium III, P4 and Athlons
G5. After an impressive start it fails to keep up
The best thing with Intel is that Apple will now be able to focus on its real strength, OS X.
Apple had to to sort of port OS 7-8-9 from 68k to PPC and at the same time worry about the interest of Motorola and later IBM and Frescale to make computer CPUs.
I really have a hard time beliving that Intel do like Motorola, Freescale and IBM and lose interest in computer CPUs
Originally posted by DrBoar
A 8 core top of the line monster will have fwe benefits outside rendering and some few applications.
I assume you meant "few benefits"
We wont see that (8 core workstation) until the Kentsfield/Clovertown arrive in 2007. But the lack of an application to take advantage of SMP benefits are not because it has few benefits to offer, it's a problem with lazy developers that lack SMP programming knowledge and skills.
Apple really lead the way in SMP when the G4 was so far behind that they started developing Dual G4 Machines. I believe Apples use of Dual socket systems forced the hand of intel to do the same, and lead to intels development of HT, which in turn lead developers on both platforms to take advantage of SMP in one form or another. Now after seeing it's advantages both computer, and processor manufacturers are taking this to a whole new level. Multi core Processors will be in every computer made within a year; which in turn makes it necessary for all developers, including the ones that are late to the SMP programming game, to step up their multi processor programming skills to take advantage them or their apps will fail miserably comparatively.
I am a fresh man for the certification, and my company need employee get MCSE2003 cert in 3 month, I start with some MOC books and frustrated with huge contents. and I failed at the first try for 70-290, but I met a friend who taking 70-290 also, he passed easily, and I know from him a good site named pass4sure.com, I used 70-290 from Pass4sure, every questions WORD 4 WORD was on the test. Unlike testking where you have to read huge number of questions (which more than half will never be on the test) these were easy to read b/c only about 200 even fewer questions. They also don't change any wording or layout like testking.
Originally posted by Placebo
Conroe and Woodcrest are both great processors, but I think Apple is going to be putting Woodcrest in. The Mac Pro, after all, is going to be a workstation-class machine.
There's actually been three versions announced:
Core (Conroe)
Core Extreme (????)
Woodcrest (Core Xeon?)
Core Extreme might be better for a 2-core workstation than Woodcrest (higher clock speeds).
Originally posted by bell
I passed 70-290 with 1000/1000 today, and I can refer a good site, pass4sure.com
I am a fresh man for the certification, and my company need employee get MCSE2003 cert in 3 month, I start with some MOC books and frustrated with huge contents. and I failed at the first try for 70-290, but I met a friend who taking 70-290 also, he passed easily, and I know from him a good site named pass4sure.com, I used 70-290 from Pass4sure, every questions WORD 4 WORD was on the test. Unlike testking where you have to read huge number of questions (which more than half will never be on the test) these were easy to read b/c only about 200 even fewer questions. They also don't change any wording or layout like testking.
Uh oh, here we go again!