I don't know. Some have suggested that Merom is going in to iMac since it would definately not require a redesign. I feel that conroe would be better even if a redesign is necessary. It looks like Conroe has room to grow in speed that Merom does not.
Yah I'll bite onto that. I don't think it would require a redesign on apple's part though, more intel who makes the mobo.
I think you're correct about yonah becoming the new celeron with Merom being the centrino replacement. I couldn't see intel using a cpu for 8 months then dropping it forever.
As pointed out earlier, Yonah already IS the new Celeron M and Centrino isn't a CPU, it's a platform of technologies.
Quote:
Originally posted by emig647
Yah I'll bite onto that. I don't think it would require a redesign on apple's part though, more intel who makes the mobo.
Intel don't make the motherboard and in any case, the redesign would mostly be because of a change in the thermal requirements in the case, not the motherboard, and since the 2.1Ghz G5 was pretty close to the Conroe in TDP I'd guess there's no work in the case design to be done.
Intel don't make the motherboard and in any case, the redesign would mostly be because of a change in the thermal requirements in the case, not the motherboard, and since the 2.1Ghz G5 was pretty close to the Conroe in TDP I'd guess there's no work in the case design to be done.
Who makes the motherboards and stamps intel on them then? Either way, the motherboard redesign was referring to the socket... what does the socket have to do with the case?
Who makes the motherboards and stamps intel on them then? Either way, the motherboard redesign was referring to the socket... what does the socket have to do with the case?
The socket is a side issue. The design of the iMac is limited to an extent to what's inside it. If you add a much hotter chip then the design may have to change. However, I don't believe that it does need to since the case is the same as the last rev G5 iMac.
The socket is a side issue. The design of the iMac is limited to an extent to what's inside it. If you add a much hotter chip then the design may have to change. However, I don't believe that it does need to since the case is the same as the last rev G5 iMac.
No the case is thinner. When apple went to the ICD they slimmed things up a bit and this meant we lost the ability to use VESA mounts.
I think a lot of people speculating about Mac desktops are awfully hung up about the difference between Pentium 4's, D's, and Xeons. The bottom line is that it's all about performance and heat dissipation... when Apple can build an Intel desktop that rivals their PowerPCs in performance on MacOS productivity apps they'll release'em. It doesn't really matter what used to be a Xeon or a Pentium 4 class chip.
The distinction matters in the Pro towers mainly for one primary reason: dual socket. Xeon DP cores are generally very similar if not the same basic core as the consumer counterpart, so a Xeon alone doesn't mean it is faster than it's consumer counterpart. The consumer version would have it's multiprocessor capability reduced so it can't communicate with more than one IC. The Xeon platform chipsets do occasionally offer more advanced I/O than Intel's consumer counterparts, but for compute intensive tasks, a 3GHz P4 Xeon is about as fast as a 3GHz consumer P4.
Until some time next year, the top one or two tower models will have to be Woodcrest if it they are to be a Quad. The lower one or two models might be Conroe-based. After quad core chips are released, I really don't know what would happen, maybe a dual quad, but almost none of Apple's software can currently scale beyond two processors per task, much of iLife might only effectively use single processor. Apple needs to greatly improve its software to make a worthwhile case for an eight way computer.
No the case is thinner. When apple went to the ICD they slimmed things up a bit and this meant we lost the ability to use VESA mounts.
No, they did that with the last G5 with the iSight in. Same identical case.
It's not actually any thinner either. They just made the edge thinner. The first G5 iMacs were flat backed like an iPod. The later iSight G5 and Core Duo have convex backs and thinner edges. It's a visual trick.
No the case is thinner. When apple went to the ICD they slimmed things up a bit and this meant we lost the ability to use VESA mounts.
Didn't that happen on the last rev. of the G5 iMac? I remember watching the Stevenote where he showed off Front Row and Photobooth right after highlighting the iMac's new slim form.
I reckon the iMac case as is could handle Conroe easy, and SHOULD because it's Apple's mainstream desktop.
Edit: wow as soon as I've posted I see I'm third out of 3 put downs on that one!
It's finally really exciting to know that Apple CAN expand their product lines with Intel's coming technological lineup. Who's brilliant now? The jump has already proven to be the smartest move since OS-X.
Steve knew where he wanted to go more then 5 years ago and we are just now witnessing some of his visions. Can't wait to see what's around the corner from my fav company. We ALL know what a master Apple is at creating truley innovative stuff and it just looks wide open for them to do whatever they want.
Apple lust is already starting to build! Where will Apple be a couple years from now?
Steve knew where he wanted to go more then 5 years ago and we are just now witnessing some of his visions. Can't wait to see what's around the corner from my fav company.
I'm sure Jonathan Ive has a few things up his sleeve now that Steve has given him the green light with the MacBook. 8)
It seems the plan was to release conservative (read: little modified) industrial designs at first (MBP and iMac) in order to emphasise that these Intels are still 100% Mac at heart. Then once we and the general public were cool with that, unleash the new models!
It's finally really exciting to know that Apple CAN expand their product lines with Intel's coming technological lineup. Who's brilliant now? The jump has already proven to be the smartest move since OS-X.
I wouldn't be so sure.
So far the MacBook(Pro)s are running a lot hotter than expected and need bigger batteries to get decent battery life. If you were paying attention, Freescale actually released their Dual Core G4 8641D with built in DDR2 memory controller and a bunch of other stuff in it. It's been running at 2Ghz too.
Then their was PA Semi and who knows where IBM would be up to if the rug wasn't pulled last year. And there were various rumblings of technology from the consoles being offered to Apple. And now AMD are pushing the envelope with Coherant Hypertransport - a technology Apple could have used in it's G5s.
I don't think PowerPC is actually in that bad a shape just now but I don't think the switch was entirely about hardware.
So far the MacBook(Pro)s are running a lot hotter than expected and need bigger batteries to get decent battery life. If you were paying attention, Freescale actually released their Dual Core G4 8641D with built in DDR2 memory controller and a bunch of other stuff in it. It's been running at 2Ghz too.
Then their was PA Semi and who knows where IBM would be up to if the rug wasn't pulled last year. And there were various rumblings of technology from the consoles being offered to Apple. And now AMD are pushing the envelope with Coherant Hypertransport - a technology Apple could have used in it's G5s.
I don't think PowerPC is actually in that bad a shape just now but I don't think the switch was entirely about hardware.
The G5's had this same problem though and the next chips to hit the MBP are already more efficient so the heat issue and battery longevity should be under control don't you think?
I really liked the idea of Freescale but Steve felt they were too slow in developing competitive chips and had issues with meeting supply demands.
Like Fuyutsuki suggests new case designs are immenent and will be in line with what's needed for these chips. Along with this Intel is on the move with more efficient chips so the question is... Where will it all take us, the consumer. I'm betting we go to cooler places with Intel!
I don't think PowerPC is actually in that bad a shape just now but I don't think the switch was entirely about hardware.
The race between Intel and AMD is now to Apple's favour like it is Dell and the rest. IBM and Motorola's historical (and continuing) difficulties to honour their roadmaps have been Apple's private bane for years and years. Now that problem is over, and Apple are playing the same ballgame as their competitors.
This isn't to say that the PPC architecture is now dead and buried. The consoles have pushed it in a new direction (and profitable from IBM's perspective). Integrated systems continue to dominate the actual number of chips produced. And I expect development to continue of course. BUT the platform's desktop credentials are set to decline even further now. Clockspeeds won't increase as strictly incrementally and regularly as AMD and Intel will achieve. It is, alas, a market which was already drifting away from Apple's needs long before the transition.
And never forget that AMD are a viable alternative now for Apple, a few years down the transition when the Intel name is no longer louder than "PowerPC" used to be.
PPC is not in bad shape when it comes to G5 vs. Netburst/Pentium. Pentium is dead, Core 2 is coming, and PPC vs. Core 2 won't look so good.
Meanwhile, G4 vs. Core 1 (or even Pentium M which is related) ALREADY is in bad shape. Which is why Macs don't have G4s anymore.
PS, to add to wish lists:
Let's see a broad range of Mac Pros:
* A new low-end lower-COST model (maybe smaller, maybe same size) that lacks a DVD burner (and/or uses a smaller HD) and uses a low-end Core 2 Duo Conroe, but allows gamers to BTO a really high-end GPU. Bingo! A mid-range headless at last!
* And then moving up the line, various Conroe AND Woodcrest models, topping out at quad cores.
PPC is not in bad shape when it comes to G5 vs. Netburst/Pentium. Pentium is dead, Core 2 is coming, and PPC vs. Core 2 won't look so good.
Meanwhile, G4 vs. Core 1 (or even Pentium M which is related) ALREADY is in bad shape. Which is why Macs don't have G4s anymore.
PS, to add to wish lists:
Let's see a broad range of Mac Pros. A new low-end model (maybe smaller, maybe same size) that lacks a DVD burner and uses a low-end Core 2 Duo Conroe, but allows gamers to BTO a really high-end GPU. Bingo! A mid-range headless at last! And the moving up the line, various Conroe AND Woodcrest models, topping out at quad cores.
Comments
Originally posted by backtomac
I don't know. Some have suggested that Merom is going in to iMac since it would definately not require a redesign. I feel that conroe would be better even if a redesign is necessary. It looks like Conroe has room to grow in speed that Merom does not.
Yah I'll bite onto that. I don't think it would require a redesign on apple's part though, more intel who makes the mobo.
Originally posted by emig647
I think you're correct about yonah becoming the new celeron with Merom being the centrino replacement. I couldn't see intel using a cpu for 8 months then dropping it forever.
As pointed out earlier, Yonah already IS the new Celeron M and Centrino isn't a CPU, it's a platform of technologies.
Originally posted by emig647
Yah I'll bite onto that. I don't think it would require a redesign on apple's part though, more intel who makes the mobo.
Intel don't make the motherboard and in any case, the redesign would mostly be because of a change in the thermal requirements in the case, not the motherboard, and since the 2.1Ghz G5 was pretty close to the Conroe in TDP I'd guess there's no work in the case design to be done.
The Xeon 5160 (Woodcrest 3Ghz) just dominated Sun's T1 8-core proc and Opteron system.
Should there be any doubt that Apple's high end Mac Pro should be a SMP Xeon 5160?
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Intel don't make the motherboard and in any case, the redesign would mostly be because of a change in the thermal requirements in the case, not the motherboard, and since the 2.1Ghz G5 was pretty close to the Conroe in TDP I'd guess there's no work in the case design to be done.
Who makes the motherboards and stamps intel on them then? Either way, the motherboard redesign was referring to the socket... what does the socket have to do with the case?
Originally posted by emig647
Who makes the motherboards and stamps intel on them then? Either way, the motherboard redesign was referring to the socket... what does the socket have to do with the case?
The socket is a side issue. The design of the iMac is limited to an extent to what's inside it. If you add a much hotter chip then the design may have to change. However, I don't believe that it does need to since the case is the same as the last rev G5 iMac.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
The socket is a side issue. The design of the iMac is limited to an extent to what's inside it. If you add a much hotter chip then the design may have to change. However, I don't believe that it does need to since the case is the same as the last rev G5 iMac.
No the case is thinner. When apple went to the ICD they slimmed things up a bit and this meant we lost the ability to use VESA mounts.
Originally posted by Booga
I think a lot of people speculating about Mac desktops are awfully hung up about the difference between Pentium 4's, D's, and Xeons. The bottom line is that it's all about performance and heat dissipation... when Apple can build an Intel desktop that rivals their PowerPCs in performance on MacOS productivity apps they'll release'em. It doesn't really matter what used to be a Xeon or a Pentium 4 class chip.
The distinction matters in the Pro towers mainly for one primary reason: dual socket. Xeon DP cores are generally very similar if not the same basic core as the consumer counterpart, so a Xeon alone doesn't mean it is faster than it's consumer counterpart. The consumer version would have it's multiprocessor capability reduced so it can't communicate with more than one IC. The Xeon platform chipsets do occasionally offer more advanced I/O than Intel's consumer counterparts, but for compute intensive tasks, a 3GHz P4 Xeon is about as fast as a 3GHz consumer P4.
Until some time next year, the top one or two tower models will have to be Woodcrest if it they are to be a Quad. The lower one or two models might be Conroe-based. After quad core chips are released, I really don't know what would happen, maybe a dual quad, but almost none of Apple's software can currently scale beyond two processors per task, much of iLife might only effectively use single processor. Apple needs to greatly improve its software to make a worthwhile case for an eight way computer.
http://mactree.sannet.ne.jp/~kodawar...c_intel03.html
Originally posted by hmurchison
No the case is thinner. When apple went to the ICD they slimmed things up a bit and this meant we lost the ability to use VESA mounts.
The loss of the VESA mount capability started with the iSight G5 iMac, not the Core Duo iMac.
Originally posted by hmurchison
No the case is thinner. When apple went to the ICD they slimmed things up a bit and this meant we lost the ability to use VESA mounts.
No, they did that with the last G5 with the iSight in. Same identical case.
It's not actually any thinner either. They just made the edge thinner. The first G5 iMacs were flat backed like an iPod. The later iSight G5 and Core Duo have convex backs and thinner edges. It's a visual trick.
Originally posted by hmurchison
No the case is thinner. When apple went to the ICD they slimmed things up a bit and this meant we lost the ability to use VESA mounts.
Didn't that happen on the last rev. of the G5 iMac? I remember watching the Stevenote where he showed off Front Row and Photobooth right after highlighting the iMac's new slim form.
I reckon the iMac case as is could handle Conroe easy, and SHOULD because it's Apple's mainstream desktop.
Edit: wow as soon as I've posted I see I'm third out of 3 put downs on that one!
It's finally really exciting to know that Apple CAN expand their product lines with Intel's coming technological lineup. Who's brilliant now? The jump has already proven to be the smartest move since OS-X.
Steve knew where he wanted to go more then 5 years ago and we are just now witnessing some of his visions. Can't wait to see what's around the corner from my fav company. We ALL know what a master Apple is at creating truley innovative stuff and it just looks wide open for them to do whatever they want.
Apple lust is already starting to build! Where will Apple be a couple years from now?
Sheesh memory's beginning to slip in my old age. I shan't mention that piece of misinformation again. As always you guys got my back.
Regards
Originally posted by NVRsayNVR
Intel's kicking some BUTT!
Steve knew where he wanted to go more then 5 years ago and we are just now witnessing some of his visions. Can't wait to see what's around the corner from my fav company.
I'm sure Jonathan Ive has a few things up his sleeve now that Steve has given him the green light with the MacBook. 8)
It seems the plan was to release conservative (read: little modified) industrial designs at first (MBP and iMac) in order to emphasise that these Intels are still 100% Mac at heart. Then once we and the general public were cool with that, unleash the new models!
The MacBook is just the first of a bold new wave.
Originally posted by NVRsayNVR
Intel's kicking some BUTT!
It's finally really exciting to know that Apple CAN expand their product lines with Intel's coming technological lineup. Who's brilliant now? The jump has already proven to be the smartest move since OS-X.
I wouldn't be so sure.
So far the MacBook(Pro)s are running a lot hotter than expected and need bigger batteries to get decent battery life. If you were paying attention, Freescale actually released their Dual Core G4 8641D with built in DDR2 memory controller and a bunch of other stuff in it. It's been running at 2Ghz too.
Then their was PA Semi and who knows where IBM would be up to if the rug wasn't pulled last year. And there were various rumblings of technology from the consoles being offered to Apple. And now AMD are pushing the envelope with Coherant Hypertransport - a technology Apple could have used in it's G5s.
I don't think PowerPC is actually in that bad a shape just now but I don't think the switch was entirely about hardware.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I wouldn't be so sure.
So far the MacBook(Pro)s are running a lot hotter than expected and need bigger batteries to get decent battery life. If you were paying attention, Freescale actually released their Dual Core G4 8641D with built in DDR2 memory controller and a bunch of other stuff in it. It's been running at 2Ghz too.
Then their was PA Semi and who knows where IBM would be up to if the rug wasn't pulled last year. And there were various rumblings of technology from the consoles being offered to Apple. And now AMD are pushing the envelope with Coherant Hypertransport - a technology Apple could have used in it's G5s.
I don't think PowerPC is actually in that bad a shape just now but I don't think the switch was entirely about hardware.
The G5's had this same problem though and the next chips to hit the MBP are already more efficient so the heat issue and battery longevity should be under control don't you think?
I really liked the idea of Freescale but Steve felt they were too slow in developing competitive chips and had issues with meeting supply demands.
Like Fuyutsuki suggests new case designs are immenent and will be in line with what's needed for these chips. Along with this Intel is on the move with more efficient chips so the question is... Where will it all take us, the consumer. I'm betting we go to cooler places with Intel!
"Think Alike... BE Different!"
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I don't think PowerPC is actually in that bad a shape just now but I don't think the switch was entirely about hardware.
The race between Intel and AMD is now to Apple's favour like it is Dell and the rest. IBM and Motorola's historical (and continuing) difficulties to honour their roadmaps have been Apple's private bane for years and years. Now that problem is over, and Apple are playing the same ballgame as their competitors.
This isn't to say that the PPC architecture is now dead and buried. The consoles have pushed it in a new direction (and profitable from IBM's perspective). Integrated systems continue to dominate the actual number of chips produced. And I expect development to continue of course. BUT the platform's desktop credentials are set to decline even further now. Clockspeeds won't increase as strictly incrementally and regularly as AMD and Intel will achieve. It is, alas, a market which was already drifting away from Apple's needs long before the transition.
And never forget that AMD are a viable alternative now for Apple, a few years down the transition when the Intel name is no longer louder than "PowerPC" used to be.
Meanwhile, G4 vs. Core 1 (or even Pentium M which is related) ALREADY is in bad shape. Which is why Macs don't have G4s anymore.
PS, to add to wish lists:
Let's see a broad range of Mac Pros:
* A new low-end lower-COST model (maybe smaller, maybe same size) that lacks a DVD burner (and/or uses a smaller HD) and uses a low-end Core 2 Duo Conroe, but allows gamers to BTO a really high-end GPU. Bingo! A mid-range headless at last!
* And then moving up the line, various Conroe AND Woodcrest models, topping out at quad cores.
Originally posted by nagromme
PPC is not in bad shape when it comes to G5 vs. Netburst/Pentium. Pentium is dead, Core 2 is coming, and PPC vs. Core 2 won't look so good.
Meanwhile, G4 vs. Core 1 (or even Pentium M which is related) ALREADY is in bad shape. Which is why Macs don't have G4s anymore.
PS, to add to wish lists:
Let's see a broad range of Mac Pros. A new low-end model (maybe smaller, maybe same size) that lacks a DVD burner and uses a low-end Core 2 Duo Conroe, but allows gamers to BTO a really high-end GPU. Bingo! A mid-range headless at last! And the moving up the line, various Conroe AND Woodcrest models, topping out at quad cores.
N i c e...8)
Originally posted by hmurchison
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2772&p=1
The Xeon 5160 (Woodcrest 3Ghz) just dominated Sun's T1 8-core proc and Opteron system.
Should there be any doubt that Apple's high end Mac Pro should be a SMP Xeon 5160?