This could alleviate some folks' concerns about the upgrade path for the iMac. If all you had to do to upgrade both the graphics card and CPU was to take it into an Apple Store and let them upgrade you, I think a lot of people might suddenly have a different opinion of the iMac.
Although the hardcore DIYs are going to whine even so.
Well, that's true. There were never too many hardware DIY's for the Mac anyway.
But, here's an example of what 45 nm is going to do for our Mac laptops in 2008.
Everything I read, and everyone I speak to thinks that the move to 45 nm is one of the most important to date, even more important that the move to 65 nm.
There seems to be a threshold that was passed with 45 nm. For Intel, it's Nehalem, for example. That's something they haven't wanted to do before now. With most of the problems of 65 nm solved, 45 nm will be able to do things that were only hoped for with 65 nm, but never accomplished.
One major area is cpu speed. We're beginning to see that rise again. And to those who think that it isn't important, think again.
Let's not overlook the new memory structures that are supposed to come with Penryn MBs. I have heard that Intel is going to look more like an AMD memory set-up. Supposed to be much faster and better able to feed multiple cores.
Let's not overlook the new memory structures that are supposed to come with Penryn MBs. I have heard that Intel is going to look more like an AMD memory set-up. Supposed to be much faster and better able to feed multiple cores.
That comes with Nehalem. That will have the memory controller on the core, just as AMD has now. The chips will also bring back Hyperthreading.
For those who think that AMD will catch up with Barcleona, uh uh, it ain't gonna happen. At best, AMD will move closer, but then will fall further behind in 2008.
Just think, Intel has moved as far ahead of AMD as they have, WITHOUT using those technologies
That comes with Nehalem. That will have the memory controller on the core, just as AMD has now. The chips will also bring back Hyperthreading.
For those who think that AMD will catch up with Barcleona, uh uh, it ain't gonna happen. At best, AMD will move closer, but then will fall further behind in 2008.
Just think, Intel has moved as far ahead of AMD as they have, WITHOUT using those technologies
Oh well, I had hoped for the new memory controller on Penryn, but a Penryn Mac Pro is my next machine.
I am hoping for a November purchase, if not sooner.
I got a G4 powerbook 12". It is STILL unrivalled when it comes to mobility and design in Apple's lineup. I'm still awaiting the next compact portable from Apple, be it a notebook, tablet or whatever. The current MacBook just doesn't cut it, too big, too heavy, graphics a tad too low, glossy screen.. no thanks. I hope the release of Santa Rosa involves some new compact Mac portable that can finally replace and outshine the legendary PowerBook 12".
apple should put a DESKTOP CPU in the I-mac and come out with a headless mid-range mac as well
I have a feeling Apple has thought about that. From what I know of this chips, Apple can either had a desktop CPU in the iMac -or- make the iMac quite a bit smaller now that it currently is.
However, I have a feeling that Apple will keep with the low-power processors and make the next iMac super slim. The reasoning, I think, is that customers look at appearance and want to know if it can run their programs. To a lesser extent they look at the speed of the processor. Most people buying an iMac aren't wondering what cryptic Intel names chip is being used.
I have a feeling Apple has thought about that. From what I know of this chips, Apple can either had a desktop CPU in the iMac -or- make the iMac quite a bit smaller now that it currently is.
However, I have a feeling that Apple will keep with the low-power processors and make the next iMac super slim. The reasoning, I think, is that customers look at appearance and want to know if it can run their programs. To a lesser extent they look at the speed of the processor. Most people buying an iMac aren't wondering what cryptic Intel names chip is being used.
Apple is also thinking about "quiet". A Conro, despite all of its virtues, is not going to be as cool, use as little power, or be as quiet.
Not quite. The Core 2 family was Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest, the Core 3 will be Penryn, Wolfton, and Tigerton. I think that Nehalem will have a new name.
Great news! Better technology is coming in the future!
This kind of post always makes me laugh a bit. They could announce any upgraded processor is coming out in a year and everyone would post the exact same responses.
It's at the same time comforting that yes, the future holds smaller and faster computers and yes, apple insider posts will never change!
Not quite. The Core 2 family was Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest, the Core 3 will be Penryn, Wolfton, and Tigerton. I think that Nehalem will have a new name.
The one thing I miss about PPC is the simple naming convention IBM gave their processors.
I thought the stated goal of providing a Penryn-based quad core mobile processor that could go into a an iMac was exactly what a lot of people have been asking for, no???
Also, according to the MacWorld article:
Seems we may be seeing these things faster than many expected.
I would love a quad laptop wih Santa Rosa and would be willing to get it even if it tick off the wife. Don't mind sleeping on the couch for a week to get this baby. LOL
Its not the code, its the re-education of the developer. They need to think in a different way in order to break the problem in such a way that they can take advantage of multiple threats of execution. Thats the hardest part and then testing the code. Developing the code is not as hard most of it is the selection of the correct design. every paradine requires re-programming the brain.
Like Merom, Penryn is the code name of the family design, and the mobile chip.
Merom family:
Mobile: Merom
Desktop: Conroe
Workstation: Woodcrest
Penryn family:
Mobile: Penryn
Desktop: ?
Workstation: ?
Uh... no. There was no "Merom" family. Merom was always only the Mobile chip for what throughout 2006 was referred to first as the "Next Generation Microarchitecture" and then simply "Core 2". Those were the names for the family of chips that consisted of Merom, Conroe, Woodcrest, Kentsfield and Clovertown.
And until last month, every reference to Penryn you could find online said that it was the refresh of Merom, the mobile processor -- not the overarching name for an entire family of refreshes. So yes, this is new, and a change (maybe this is what Intel had intended all along, but if so, all the websites with info on Penryn got it wrong).
Quote:
Napa: current platform, Merom 65nm mobile processor
Santa Rosa platform: first half of 2007, Merom 65nm mobile processor
Santa Rosa platform refresh: first half of 2008, Penryn 45nm mobile processor
+ quad-core Penryn mobile processor to be released in 2008
New microarchitecture: 2008, Nehalem family, 45nm mobile processor.
Exactly, that's what I'm saying -- previously, until Intel started releasing more details last month, Penryn was supposed to be a mobile chip to be released in 2007, alongside a desktop chip with another name; now it's a "family" whose mobile variant will be released in 2008. Furthermore, that mobile Penryn, its later quad-core brother, and Nehalem, a completely new architecture, are going to all be squeezed into that one year. It just seems strange to me, enough so that I'm starting to think that the Mobile version of Nehalem will have to wait for 2009. I would point out that the very fact that mobile Penryn is coming out in '08 is a blow to the whole 2-year "tick-tock" cycle Intel has been hyping. The last "tick" was in 2006, so the "tock" was expected in 2007, but no more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
This isn't sudden. Penyrn has always stood for their first iteration of their 45 nm process. Just the way that Core, and then Core 2 stands for the 65 nm chips, exzcept for the very new, and end of process cycle 4 core chips.
No; Core and Core 2 are the marketing names for two different architectures, whereas Penryn is a codename, like Yonah. Presumably Penryn will be marketed as Core 2 as well, since this is just a die shrink and not a new architecture. But no, as I indicated above, Penryn didn't always stand for the entire 45nm line, it had previously been just one of the chips in that line. Likewise, back when Core was the current model, we knew Intel had plans for a new microarch with three codenames, one for each chip in that line.
Quote:
Nehalem will be for the newer chips coming out somewhere in the first half of next year. The two will be around, and share developement for a while.
Everything I've read indicates mid-late 2008 for Nehalem. What I'm saying is that it seems strange that they would squeeze both the (mobile) die shrink, the quad core of that die shrink, and the brand new arch into the first let's say 9 months of 2008, yet release virtually no new mobile processors in 2007 besides a speed bump when Santa Rosa comes out (2.33GHz to 2.4.. big whoop). It's just a little disappointing and confusing is all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerseyj
Seems like a perfect fit for the iMac where battery life is no concern but high performance in a small package is.
I agree, but Apple apparently doesn't; they could have quad-core, 2.93GHz iMacs now if they wanted, but they prefer to stick with Merom for some reason. If it's just pin compatibility, then maybe they will upgrade when this new processor comes out. On the other hand, if they really are excessively concerned with fan noise and/or not letting their consumer desktop outperforming their pro laptop, then no.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theapplegenius
Not quite. The Core 2 family was Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest, the Core 3 will be Penryn, Wolfton, and Tigerton. I think that Nehalem will have a new name.
This would be spot on based on what the hardware sites were reporting a few months ago, but they've now changed it and the Penryn name now covers the entire gamut of 45nm processors. Doesn't make any sense based on past precedents, but there you have it.
Are you sure Penryn will be Core 3, though? I would think they'd stick with the Core 2 brand since Penryn is just a shrunken Core 2.
Comments
Let's hope Apple decides to surprise us.
This could alleviate some folks' concerns about the upgrade path for the iMac. If all you had to do to upgrade both the graphics card and CPU was to take it into an Apple Store and let them upgrade you, I think a lot of people might suddenly have a different opinion of the iMac.
Although the hardcore DIYs are going to whine even so.
Well, that's true. There were never too many hardware DIY's for the Mac anyway.
But, here's an example of what 45 nm is going to do for our Mac laptops in 2008.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...s-in-2008.html
Everything I read, and everyone I speak to thinks that the move to 45 nm is one of the most important to date, even more important that the move to 65 nm.
There seems to be a threshold that was passed with 45 nm. For Intel, it's Nehalem, for example. That's something they haven't wanted to do before now. With most of the problems of 65 nm solved, 45 nm will be able to do things that were only hoped for with 65 nm, but never accomplished.
One major area is cpu speed. We're beginning to see that rise again. And to those who think that it isn't important, think again.
Let's not overlook the new memory structures that are supposed to come with Penryn MBs. I have heard that Intel is going to look more like an AMD memory set-up. Supposed to be much faster and better able to feed multiple cores.
Let's not overlook the new memory structures that are supposed to come with Penryn MBs. I have heard that Intel is going to look more like an AMD memory set-up. Supposed to be much faster and better able to feed multiple cores.
That comes with Nehalem. That will have the memory controller on the core, just as AMD has now. The chips will also bring back Hyperthreading.
For those who think that AMD will catch up with Barcleona, uh uh, it ain't gonna happen. At best, AMD will move closer, but then will fall further behind in 2008.
Just think, Intel has moved as far ahead of AMD as they have, WITHOUT using those technologies
That comes with Nehalem. That will have the memory controller on the core, just as AMD has now. The chips will also bring back Hyperthreading.
For those who think that AMD will catch up with Barcleona, uh uh, it ain't gonna happen. At best, AMD will move closer, but then will fall further behind in 2008.
Just think, Intel has moved as far ahead of AMD as they have, WITHOUT using those technologies
Oh well, I had hoped for the new memory controller on Penryn, but a Penryn Mac Pro is my next machine.
I am hoping for a November purchase, if not sooner.
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/04...nta_rosa_ramp/
Now everyone waiting for Santa Rosa Macs have reason to wait further.
apple should put a DESKTOP CPU in the I-mac and come out with a headless mid-range mac as well
I have a feeling Apple has thought about that. From what I know of this chips, Apple can either had a desktop CPU in the iMac -or- make the iMac quite a bit smaller now that it currently is.
However, I have a feeling that Apple will keep with the low-power processors and make the next iMac super slim. The reasoning, I think, is that customers look at appearance and want to know if it can run their programs. To a lesser extent they look at the speed of the processor. Most people buying an iMac aren't wondering what cryptic Intel names chip is being used.
I have a feeling Apple has thought about that. From what I know of this chips, Apple can either had a desktop CPU in the iMac -or- make the iMac quite a bit smaller now that it currently is.
However, I have a feeling that Apple will keep with the low-power processors and make the next iMac super slim. The reasoning, I think, is that customers look at appearance and want to know if it can run their programs. To a lesser extent they look at the speed of the processor. Most people buying an iMac aren't wondering what cryptic Intel names chip is being used.
Apple is also thinking about "quiet". A Conro, despite all of its virtues, is not going to be as cool, use as little power, or be as quiet.
Like Merom, Penryn is the code name of the family design, and the mobile chip.
Merom family:
- Mobile: Merom
- Desktop: Conroe
- Workstation: Woodcrest
Penryn family:- Mobile: Penryn
- Desktop: ?
- Workstation: ?
According to this Intel slide.Not quite. The Core 2 family was Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest, the Core 3 will be Penryn, Wolfton, and Tigerton. I think that Nehalem will have a new name.
This kind of post always makes me laugh a bit. They could announce any upgraded processor is coming out in a year and everyone would post the exact same responses.
It's at the same time comforting that yes, the future holds smaller and faster computers and yes, apple insider posts will never change!
Not quite. The Core 2 family was Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest, the Core 3 will be Penryn, Wolfton, and Tigerton. I think that Nehalem will have a new name.
The one thing I miss about PPC is the simple naming convention IBM gave their processors.
The one thing I miss about PPC is the simple naming convention IBM gave their processors.
PPC970FX, PPC970MP, 7407?
That's hard. Bonus points if you can name the processors "Apple name".
PPC970FX, PPC970MP, 7407?
That's hard. Bonus points if you can name the processors "Apple name".
I should have made myself clear. I'm referring to the marketing names, not the internal naming convention.
I should have made myself clear. I'm referring to the marketing names, not the internal naming convention.
Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad, Xeon.
I just think what you said is wrong.
MacWorld has an aritcle with a bit more info on the new chips and Santa Rosa platform for those who are interested.
You can get it here.
I thought the stated goal of providing a Penryn-based quad core mobile processor that could go into a an iMac was exactly what a lot of people have been asking for, no???
Also, according to the MacWorld article:
Seems we may be seeing these things faster than many expected.
I would love a quad laptop wih Santa Rosa and would be willing to get it even if it tick off the wife. Don't mind sleeping on the couch for a week to get this baby. LOL
Seems like a perfect fit for the iMac where battery life is no concern but high performance in a small package is.
My laptop spends 98 percent of it time connected to a power source, if I need more battery I can get an extra one. CPU POWER is king.
C'MON DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS!
Get your multi-threaded butts in gear!
Its not the code, its the re-education of the developer. They need to think in a different way in order to break the problem in such a way that they can take advantage of multiple threats of execution. Thats the hardest part and then testing the code. Developing the code is not as hard most of it is the selection of the correct design. every paradine requires re-programming the brain.
Like Merom, Penryn is the code name of the family design, and the mobile chip.
Merom family:
- Mobile: Merom
- Desktop: Conroe
- Workstation: Woodcrest
Penryn family:Uh... no. There was no "Merom" family. Merom was always only the Mobile chip for what throughout 2006 was referred to first as the "Next Generation Microarchitecture" and then simply "Core 2". Those were the names for the family of chips that consisted of Merom, Conroe, Woodcrest, Kentsfield and Clovertown.
And until last month, every reference to Penryn you could find online said that it was the refresh of Merom, the mobile processor -- not the overarching name for an entire family of refreshes. So yes, this is new, and a change (maybe this is what Intel had intended all along, but if so, all the websites with info on Penryn got it wrong).
- Napa: current platform, Merom 65nm mobile processor
- Santa Rosa platform: first half of 2007, Merom 65nm mobile processor
- Santa Rosa platform refresh: first half of 2008, Penryn 45nm mobile processor
- + quad-core Penryn mobile processor to be released in 2008
- New microarchitecture: 2008, Nehalem family, 45nm mobile processor.
According to this Intel slide.Exactly, that's what I'm saying -- previously, until Intel started releasing more details last month, Penryn was supposed to be a mobile chip to be released in 2007, alongside a desktop chip with another name; now it's a "family" whose mobile variant will be released in 2008. Furthermore, that mobile Penryn, its later quad-core brother, and Nehalem, a completely new architecture, are going to all be squeezed into that one year. It just seems strange to me, enough so that I'm starting to think that the Mobile version of Nehalem will have to wait for 2009. I would point out that the very fact that mobile Penryn is coming out in '08 is a blow to the whole 2-year "tick-tock" cycle Intel has been hyping. The last "tick" was in 2006, so the "tock" was expected in 2007, but no more.
This isn't sudden. Penyrn has always stood for their first iteration of their 45 nm process. Just the way that Core, and then Core 2 stands for the 65 nm chips, exzcept for the very new, and end of process cycle 4 core chips.
No; Core and Core 2 are the marketing names for two different architectures, whereas Penryn is a codename, like Yonah. Presumably Penryn will be marketed as Core 2 as well, since this is just a die shrink and not a new architecture. But no, as I indicated above, Penryn didn't always stand for the entire 45nm line, it had previously been just one of the chips in that line. Likewise, back when Core was the current model, we knew Intel had plans for a new microarch with three codenames, one for each chip in that line.
Nehalem will be for the newer chips coming out somewhere in the first half of next year. The two will be around, and share developement for a while.
Everything I've read indicates mid-late 2008 for Nehalem. What I'm saying is that it seems strange that they would squeeze both the (mobile) die shrink, the quad core of that die shrink, and the brand new arch into the first let's say 9 months of 2008, yet release virtually no new mobile processors in 2007 besides a speed bump when Santa Rosa comes out (2.33GHz to 2.4.. big whoop). It's just a little disappointing and confusing is all.
Seems like a perfect fit for the iMac where battery life is no concern but high performance in a small package is.
I agree, but Apple apparently doesn't; they could have quad-core, 2.93GHz iMacs now if they wanted, but they prefer to stick with Merom for some reason. If it's just pin compatibility, then maybe they will upgrade when this new processor comes out. On the other hand, if they really are excessively concerned with fan noise and/or not letting their consumer desktop outperforming their pro laptop, then no.
Not quite. The Core 2 family was Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest, the Core 3 will be Penryn, Wolfton, and Tigerton. I think that Nehalem will have a new name.
This would be spot on based on what the hardware sites were reporting a few months ago, but they've now changed it and the Penryn name now covers the entire gamut of 45nm processors. Doesn't make any sense based on past precedents, but there you have it.
Are you sure Penryn will be Core 3, though? I would think they'd stick with the Core 2 brand since Penryn is just a shrunken Core 2.