New 45nm CPU First Look-Intel C2D E8500 4.7G On Air Cooler
:OOOOOO
That's incredible. Intel must be sandbagging on the Penryn. If AMD get anywhere near 3 gig? I suspect Intel will release 3.2-3.6 giggers. I get the feeling Intel could go all the way up to 4 gig without too much difficulty with Penryn. 45nm? Shouldn't we really be at 4 gig by now anyhow? The design of the cpu is much better and the process is much smaller and efficient...
...so how come speed grades which are essentially the same as the last generation?
I'm holding out until Macworld. San Fran. If Apple don't give me what I want by then...I guess I can always go with the iMac until Nehalem. The iMac is far from a disaster. We would have pulled our teeth for an iMac with dual 2.8 gigs back in the day... And the gpu seems to run CoX and Eve ok. I'd much prefer a Mid-tower. But it's getting ridiculous. Once the gravitational pull of the waiting game sucks you in... I just want a Mac to get some work done...
I don't delight in AMD's difficulties. Same with ATI. Competition is good. Keeps better products coming down the track. I hope AMD and ATI push their respective competition harder in 2008.
I don't delight in AMD's difficulties. Same with ATI. Competition is good. Keeps better products coming down the track. I hope AMD and ATI push their respective competition harder in 2008.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Now you're talking! Competition is the driving force behind improved products and lower prices. Where would Vista be today if Microsoft had had some real competition over the years? (<<--rhetorical question)
Now you're talking! Competition is the driving force behind improved products and lower prices. Where would Vista be today if Microsoft had had some real competition over the years? (<<--rhetorical question)
Heh. Well, it hasn't made Vista much better, heh, competing with 'X' an' all...
Heh. Well, it hasn't made Vista much better, heh, competing with 'X' an' all...
Lemon Bon Bon.
With Apple's OS market share so low, I don't see the Mac OS as being any competition for Windows over the last decade or so. I think the only reason Gates put in a 150 million dollars into Apple was to keep at least one competing OS alive so that the Federal government would perhaps go easier on Microsoft.
When, but perhaps never, Apples' OS world wide market share reaches 25 percent, then perhaps that share might be considered some competition. The number of computers running OS X (world wide) is perhaps 5 percent? Anybody got the figures?
He probably means that ANYONE who says he "heard" something from Apple will get jumped on by a bunch of AI members who'll come down on him like a pack of wolves, call him a liar and shove his face in the mud. That happened to me when I was a newbie.
You can believe I'll never tell what I hear again. I've been around Apple reps and have heard stuff I'll never repeat. You guys have cured me of that.
Don't let the flack stop you from letting the rest of us in on what you hear. What's the fun of these forums without a little hearsay?
If AMD get anywhere near 3 gig? I suspect Intel will release 3.2-3.6 giggers. I get the feeling Intel could go all the way up to 4 gig without too much difficulty with Penryn. 45nm? Shouldn't we really be at 4 gig by now anyhow?
I hope AMD and ATI push their respective competition harder in 2008.
It's quad vs dual but still, AMD don't have the products out to compete and that's what matters.
Wouldn't it be awesome if Apple were the first to use 8 x 4GHz+ chips in their machines. From Toms hardware, it looks like 4GHz might be the limit though so they'll probably step it back to ensure the chips last long enough. It would be terrible if the chips failed within Apple's Mac Pro update cycle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon.
I'm holding out until Macworld. San Fran. If Apple don't give me what I want by then...I guess I can always go with the iMac until Nehalem. The iMac is far from a disaster. We would have pulled our teeth for an iMac with dual 2.8 gigs back in the day... And the gpu seems to run CoX and Eve ok. I'd much prefer a Mid-tower. But it's getting ridiculous. Once the gravitational pull of the waiting game sucks you in... I just want a Mac to get some work done...
I sometimes consider if it would be worth just getting an iMac but I know people who have them and I simply don't like them. I'd get the old one anyway due to being able to get a matte screen and they are a decent price:
But I can't get round the fact that the screen is stuck to the machine. This actually puts me off laptops too. However, I can accept it in a laptop because the screen has to be portable with the machine.
I'd feel the same way if Apple suddenly welded a cinema display to the side of a Mac Pro. It would only offer disadvantages to me to do this.
For me it's a small tower or a cheaper Mac Pro. Penryn Mac Pros have got to bring prices down one way or another but I won't buy a Mac Pro without a warranty so it'll have to be a refurb.
I sometimes consider if it would be worth just getting an iMac but I know people who have them and I simply don't like them. I'd get the old one anyway due to being able to get a matte screen and they are a decent price.
I can't help myself, but I actually like the new iMacs. I know all the slams, but every time I am in an Apple Store and I play with them, they really are very good computers.
If there is no new Mac Pro at MWSF, then I will order an iMac I guess. I can't wait any longer than that and for the graphics work I do, it will be OK. I have to keep external hard drives around for back-ups anyway, so a few more to augment the storage requirements won't kill me.
ANd if they give us that blamed Mid_tower we can pass the 10% mark quicker...
Lemon Bon Bon.
We have been measuring OS X against Windows. That's one computer against many Windows machines. Has anyone figured Mac against individual PC's. Mac vs. Dell; Mac vs. HP; Mac vs. Gateway; etc?
I'm sure that figure would be higher than 8.1% . Does anyone have any figures on 1 to 1 comparison?
When a regular consumer desktop just won't serve your demanding computing needs, it's time to go workstation, and Dell's got a pair of new quad-core-packin' models that are spec'ed to be some of the fastest on the planet. Both the Precision T7400 and T5400 are available with either one or two of Intel's newest 45-nanometer Xeon Processors (up to a 3.20GHz X5482 on the 7400), as many as two 1.5GB nVIDIA Quadro FX5600 graphics cards (capable of driving four 30-inch monitors), up to 4GB of RAM (with a whopping 128GB promised using a memory riser card chassis when 8GB DIMMs become available) and either three (5400) or five (7400) hard drives for up to 3TB of storage -- all topped off with a little Blu-ray action. Available immediately, the new rigs start at just $1,600 and $1,850, but for a configuration that meets your ridiculous specifications, expect to shell out well north of ten grand.
We have been measuring OS X against Windows. That's one computer against many Windows machines. Has anyone figured Mac against individual PC's. Mac vs. Dell; Mac vs. HP; Mac vs. Gateway; etc?
I'm sure that figure would be higher than 8.1% . Does anyone have any figures on 1 to 1 comparison?
But the question was about OS X giving competition to Windows. If one is going to buy a Windows machine (excluding the current Mac Intels), is there a great deal of difference between the a Dell, HP, Gateway, etc PC? Isn't it all about the OS X experience versus the Windows experience? Would you buy a Mac Pro if it would only run Windows?
Maybe emig thinks that an update might be announced at Mac World San Francisco. Usually pro hardware updates are announced around pro expos, MWSF is a consumer one, but I think one PMG5 update was announced at an MWSF event.
Maybe emig thinks that an update might be announced at Mac World San Francisco. Usually pro hardware updates are announced around pro expos, MWSF is a consumer one, but I think one PMG5 update was announced at an MWSF event.
I think that has been disproved by numerous posts showing introductions of pro related hardware at MWSF.
I think that has been disproved by numerous posts showing introductions of pro related hardware at MWSF.
What? I did not say "always". I said usually. Usually is correct, and you made no worthwhile case otherwise. Maybe 20% of pro machines updates coincide with MWSF.
That link is not that useful for making your case. It's almost worthless unless I want to check every entry of every model, it's more work than necessary.
Check the "Mac Pro" entry. One out of nine entries was MWSF. MacBook Pro entry shows three out of ten update entries that coincided with a MWSF. The rest of the dates are mostly around NAB, WWDC and a couple around photo shows.
What? I did not say "always". I said usually. Usually is correct, and you made no worthwhile case otherwise. Maybe 20% of pro machines updates coincide with MWSF.
That link is not that useful for making your case. It's almost worthless unless I want to check every entry of every model, it's more work than necessary.
Check the "Mac Pro" entry. One out of nine entries was MWSF. MacBook Pro entry shows three out of ten update entries that coincided with a MWSF. The rest of the dates are mostly around NAB, WWDC and a couple around photo shows.
If you're saying apple is going to wait until NAB or "photo shows" I highly disagree. The next event after MWSF is usually in March or April. Apple can't go that long without releasing. Apple has updated these machines on normal days in the passed, but I don't see any reason for apple to release these machines between now and MWSF... and I can't imagine they go much passed MWSF.
I am beginning to think new Mac Pros will be announced after Macworld, but sooner than NAB or WWDC. I assume they will be in new enclosures at that time.
Steve will probably spend half of the keynote on Leopard (how many they've sold, update today, etc.), new Mac stores, revenue, another look at iLife, iTunes with a new update. Then if they introduce some new product, a consumer/prosumer device, that will eat up the rest of the time. Then a close with an up and coming musician. Unfortunately, we won't be seeing new Pro macs at MacWorld.
After macworld would be insanity... The mac pro specs haven't been touched since August 2006... Why wouldn't they announce it at MacWorld if it's ready? It's free Press.
Comments
New 45nm CPU First Look-Intel C2D E8500 4.7G On Air Cooler
:OOOOOO
That's incredible. Intel must be sandbagging on the Penryn. If AMD get anywhere near 3 gig? I suspect Intel will release 3.2-3.6 giggers. I get the feeling Intel could go all the way up to 4 gig without too much difficulty with Penryn. 45nm? Shouldn't we really be at 4 gig by now anyhow? The design of the cpu is much better and the process is much smaller and efficient...
...so how come speed grades which are essentially the same as the last generation?
I'm holding out until Macworld. San Fran. If Apple don't give me what I want by then...I guess I can always go with the iMac until Nehalem. The iMac is far from a disaster. We would have pulled our teeth for an iMac with dual 2.8 gigs back in the day...
Lemon Bon Bon.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I don't delight in AMD's difficulties. Same with ATI. Competition is good. Keeps better products coming down the track. I hope AMD and ATI push their respective competition harder in 2008.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Now you're talking! Competition is the driving force behind improved products and lower prices. Where would Vista be today if Microsoft had had some real competition over the years? (<<--rhetorical question
Now you're talking! Competition is the driving force behind improved products and lower prices. Where would Vista be today if Microsoft had had some real competition over the years? (<<--rhetorical question)
Heh. Well, it hasn't made Vista much better, heh, competing with 'X' an' all...
Lemon Bon Bon.
Heh. Well, it hasn't made Vista much better, heh, competing with 'X' an' all...
Lemon Bon Bon.
With Apple's OS market share so low, I don't see the Mac OS as being any competition for Windows over the last decade or so. I think the only reason Gates put in a 150 million dollars into Apple was to keep at least one competing OS alive so that the Federal government would perhaps go easier on Microsoft.
When, but perhaps never, Apples' OS world wide market share reaches 25 percent, then perhaps that share might be considered some competition. The number of computers running OS X (world wide) is perhaps 5 percent? Anybody got the figures?
25 percent
Well, it's currently 8.1 %?
US?
ANd if they give us that blamed Mid_tower we can pass the 10% mark quicker...
Lemon Bon Bon.
He probably means that ANYONE who says he "heard" something from Apple will get jumped on by a bunch of AI members who'll come down on him like a pack of wolves, call him a liar and shove his face in the mud. That happened to me when I was a newbie.
You can believe I'll never tell what I hear again. I've been around Apple reps and have heard stuff I'll never repeat. You guys have cured me of that.
Don't let the flack stop you from letting the rest of us in on what you hear. What's the fun of these forums without a little hearsay?
If AMD get anywhere near 3 gig? I suspect Intel will release 3.2-3.6 giggers. I get the feeling Intel could go all the way up to 4 gig without too much difficulty with Penryn. 45nm? Shouldn't we really be at 4 gig by now anyhow?
I hope AMD and ATI push their respective competition harder in 2008.
I think they'll have to start pushing soon:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...aster_than_amd
It's quad vs dual but still, AMD don't have the products out to compete and that's what matters.
Wouldn't it be awesome if Apple were the first to use 8 x 4GHz+ chips in their machines. From Toms hardware, it looks like 4GHz might be the limit though so they'll probably step it back to ensure the chips last long enough. It would be terrible if the chips failed within Apple's Mac Pro update cycle.
I'm holding out until Macworld. San Fran. If Apple don't give me what I want by then...I guess I can always go with the iMac until Nehalem. The iMac is far from a disaster. We would have pulled our teeth for an iMac with dual 2.8 gigs back in the day...
I sometimes consider if it would be worth just getting an iMac but I know people who have them and I simply don't like them. I'd get the old one anyway due to being able to get a matte screen and they are a decent price:
http://store.apple.com/Apple/WebObje...LID?nplm=FA589
But I can't get round the fact that the screen is stuck to the machine. This actually puts me off laptops too. However, I can accept it in a laptop because the screen has to be portable with the machine.
I'd feel the same way if Apple suddenly welded a cinema display to the side of a Mac Pro. It would only offer disadvantages to me to do this.
For me it's a small tower or a cheaper Mac Pro. Penryn Mac Pros have got to bring prices down one way or another but I won't buy a Mac Pro without a warranty so it'll have to be a refurb.
I sometimes consider if it would be worth just getting an iMac but I know people who have them and I simply don't like them. I'd get the old one anyway due to being able to get a matte screen and they are a decent price.
I can't help myself, but I actually like the new iMacs. I know all the slams, but every time I am in an Apple Store and I play with them, they really are very good computers.
If there is no new Mac Pro at MWSF, then I will order an iMac I guess. I can't wait any longer than that and for the graphics work I do, it will be OK. I have to keep external hard drives around for back-ups anyway, so a few more to augment the storage requirements won't kill me.
Still, I would very much prefer the Mac Pro.
Well, it's currently 8.1 %?
US?
ANd if they give us that blamed Mid_tower we can pass the 10% mark quicker...
Lemon Bon Bon.
We have been measuring OS X against Windows. That's one computer against many Windows machines. Has anyone figured Mac against individual PC's. Mac vs. Dell; Mac vs. HP; Mac vs. Gateway; etc?
I'm sure that figure would be higher than 8.1% . Does anyone have any figures on 1 to 1 comparison?
http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/27/d...-workstations/
Snipping from Engadget too:
When a regular consumer desktop just won't serve your demanding computing needs, it's time to go workstation, and Dell's got a pair of new quad-core-packin' models that are spec'ed to be some of the fastest on the planet. Both the Precision T7400 and T5400 are available with either one or two of Intel's newest 45-nanometer Xeon Processors (up to a 3.20GHz X5482 on the 7400), as many as two 1.5GB nVIDIA Quadro FX5600 graphics cards (capable of driving four 30-inch monitors), up to 4GB of RAM (with a whopping 128GB promised using a memory riser card chassis when 8GB DIMMs become available) and either three (5400) or five (7400) hard drives for up to 3TB of storage -- all topped off with a little Blu-ray action. Available immediately, the new rigs start at just $1,600 and $1,850, but for a configuration that meets your ridiculous specifications, expect to shell out well north of ten grand.
And here is the info page from Dell:
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/t...=us&l=en&s=gen
Up to 8 cores for the new workstations as well.
Guess we'll have to wait till Jan :-/
/sigh
Guess we'll have to wait till Jan :-/
has a date been set in jan?
We have been measuring OS X against Windows. That's one computer against many Windows machines. Has anyone figured Mac against individual PC's. Mac vs. Dell; Mac vs. HP; Mac vs. Gateway; etc?
I'm sure that figure would be higher than 8.1% . Does anyone have any figures on 1 to 1 comparison?
But the question was about OS X giving competition to Windows. If one is going to buy a Windows machine (excluding the current Mac Intels), is there a great deal of difference between the a Dell, HP, Gateway, etc PC? Isn't it all about the OS X experience versus the Windows experience? Would you buy a Mac Pro if it would only run Windows?
has a date been set in jan?
Maybe emig thinks that an update might be announced at Mac World San Francisco. Usually pro hardware updates are announced around pro expos, MWSF is a consumer one, but I think one PMG5 update was announced at an MWSF event.
Maybe emig thinks that an update might be announced at Mac World San Francisco. Usually pro hardware updates are announced around pro expos, MWSF is a consumer one, but I think one PMG5 update was announced at an MWSF event.
I think that has been disproved by numerous posts showing introductions of pro related hardware at MWSF.
Check out:
http://www.apple-history.com/
I think that has been disproved by numerous posts showing introductions of pro related hardware at MWSF.
What? I did not say "always". I said usually. Usually is correct, and you made no worthwhile case otherwise. Maybe 20% of pro machines updates coincide with MWSF.
Check out:
http://www.apple-history.com/
That link is not that useful for making your case. It's almost worthless unless I want to check every entry of every model, it's more work than necessary.
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
Check the "Mac Pro" entry. One out of nine entries was MWSF. MacBook Pro entry shows three out of ten update entries that coincided with a MWSF. The rest of the dates are mostly around NAB, WWDC and a couple around photo shows.
What? I did not say "always". I said usually. Usually is correct, and you made no worthwhile case otherwise. Maybe 20% of pro machines updates coincide with MWSF.
That link is not that useful for making your case. It's almost worthless unless I want to check every entry of every model, it's more work than necessary.
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
Check the "Mac Pro" entry. One out of nine entries was MWSF. MacBook Pro entry shows three out of ten update entries that coincided with a MWSF. The rest of the dates are mostly around NAB, WWDC and a couple around photo shows.
If you're saying apple is going to wait until NAB or "photo shows" I highly disagree. The next event after MWSF is usually in March or April. Apple can't go that long without releasing. Apple has updated these machines on normal days in the passed, but I don't see any reason for apple to release these machines between now and MWSF... and I can't imagine they go much passed MWSF.
Steve will probably spend half of the keynote on Leopard (how many they've sold, update today, etc.), new Mac stores, revenue, another look at iLife, iTunes with a new update. Then if they introduce some new product, a consumer/prosumer device, that will eat up the rest of the time. Then a close with an up and coming musician. Unfortunately, we won't be seeing new Pro macs at MacWorld.