So, I have been wanting to jump into the Intel boat for a while now, since I have a 1 Ghz. Powerbook G4. However I have been hoping for a UPMC or similar small form portable Mac or a 12"/13" MacBook (Pro). Besides the form factor, I have been waiting for a processor upgrade (and perhaps better batteries, I value my lap!). I am currently favoring then penyrn but now with that newer architecture, I am not sure which to go with. Do you think that waiting the few extra months for the Nehalem is worth the X % boost in processing power, or is the boost only marginal? Please give me feedback, as I am desperately in need of a newer computer because the current is slowly passing to where all the good Macs go...
-S. J. Bucaro
If you don't really need a new laptop/computer, then just wait. I had an iMac G5 and it was great but it came to the point where I NEEDED to use Windows. I couldn't take it anymore, so I bought a 17" MBP C2D. I like the new things I see and it makes me excited, but I probably don't plan on buying my next MBP until late 2008, maybe mid-2009.
My MBP is perfectly fine, however, I'm keeping an eye on a refreshed Mac Mini for my little brother and a Mac Pro for the family computer... hehe, I know, an octal-core Mac Pro is kind of a lot for a family computer, but it has way more power than a iMac.
That's not really possible because it always involves a trade-off. They are basically different tunings of the same design. One tuning trades power for battery life and portability, and the other allows higher power consumption because portability isn't needed, and it's cheaper to make.
It may very well get to the point where the notebooks are just considered good enough for pretty much everything, a lot of people have already decided that for their own uses.
If you don't really need a new laptop/computer, then just wait
Agreed completely. I have a Rev D original MBP (1.83 Core Duo 1) from Spring 2006. Was planning to upgrade to the Santa Rosa model and sell my CD1 while it still has decent used value. Santa Rosa model seemed a worthy upgrade: FW 800, dual-layer superdrive, Core Duo 2, 11n, Robson, faster FSB, larger default hard drive, etc...
After reading about Penryn, it's going to take a lot of whiz-bang in the next MBP for me to not wait for Penryn, maybe MWSF 2008? By whiz-bang, I mean sexy goodness, like touchscreen, blu-ray drive, LED display, massaging wrist wrests, side-mounted fan, drink holder. And a 3-button mouse. 2-buttons is so 1990.
No doubt this is exactly why Apple is so secretive about their hardware. Now that they're in bed with the rest of the world CPU-wise (Intel), they can't control that aspect. Aside from just not using available chips, eg: quad-core.
Agreed completely. I have a Rev D original MBP (1.83 Core Duo 1) from Spring 2006. Was planning to upgrade to the Santa Rosa model and sell my CD1 while it still has decent used value. Santa Rosa model seemed a worthy upgrade: FW 800, dual-layer superdrive, Core Duo 2, 11n, Robson, faster FSB, larger default hard drive, etc...
I dont see any reason to do such minor updates. I still love my Macbook Pro, original (pre-ordered on the day they were announced), and doubt I'll even need to replace it before beginning of 2009, when it hits 3 years old. Its a fantastic machine still and its over a year old.
I've been waiting for the Mac Pro update for a while now, but ultimately I'm not going to buy an eight core model. I really value the 3.0GHz speed vs a 2.66GHz with more cores, simple because I don't really need more cores over faster speed per core and I would suppose that they will drop the price a bit on the 3.0GHz and the 4x2 2.66GHz will cost a lot more anyway. But, these future Intel processors [including Tigerton in the workstation area] make me wonder if buying an old 3.0GHz Woodcrest is really even smart at this point when all these potentially significant improvements will occur in the second half of this year.
Anyone think it's worth waiting until September or whatever it ends up being instead of buying now?
I dont see any reason to do such minor updates. I still love my Macbook Pro, original (pre-ordered on the day they were announced), and doubt I'll even need to replace it before beginning of 2009, when it hits 3 years old. Its a fantastic machine still and its over a year old.
The Santa Rosa upgrade isn't a minor one. There could possibly be a 25%, or so, improvement in computing speed with it, as well as the 64 bit system. Apple will, no doubt, add other improvements as well.
I've been waiting for the Mac Pro update for a while now, but ultimately I'm not going to buy an eight core model. I really value the 3.0GHz speed vs a 2.66GHz with more cores, simple because I don't really need more cores over faster speed per core and I would suppose that they will drop the price a bit on the 3.0GHz and the 4x2 2.66GHz will cost a lot more anyway. But, these future Intel processors [including Tigerton in the workstation area] make me wonder if buying an old 3.0GHz Woodcrest is really even smart at this point when all these potentially significant improvements will occur in the second half of this year.
Anyone think it's worth waiting until September or whatever it ends up being instead of buying now?
I'm waiting as well. I was finally going to buy after the Macworld updates, but they never came, so I'm sitting with my dual 2GHz G5 a little bit longer.
If we wait a few more months we will see a quad 3+ GHz dual 4 core model. Intel moved it up to this year. They have already showed a 45 nm quad core running at 3.33 GHz, but the introductory version is expected to top at 3.2 GHz for starters.
How long can you wait? Since I retired, I have the time, but I realize that others don't yet have that luxury.
I'm waiting as well. I was finally going to buy after the Macworld updates, but they never came, so I'm sitting with my dual 2GHz G5 a little bit longer.
I'm tentatively waiting as well, but hoping we won't have to wait for Macworld (or beyond) for the new chips. I just about died when new Mac Pros weren't announced in January. I don't know how much longer I can hold out.
Any chance they'll actually be shipping by September, or is that unrealistic?
I'm tentatively waiting as well, but hoping we won't have to wait for Macworld (or beyond) for the new chips. I just about died when new Mac Pros weren't announced in January. I don't know how much longer I can hold out.
Any chance they'll actually be shipping by September, or is that unrealistic?
It depends on what you mean by "new". If you mean 8 core, upgraded machines, we should see something before then, without question.
If you mean 45 nm Penyrn, all I can say it that Intel has stated that they will be available the second half of this year, as opposed to the first half of next year, when they were supposed to be available.
Can Apple get them first, as they did with Yonah? Who knows? But, it's not impossible that there will be an announcement at the dev conference. Likely? I have no idea. But, Sept is certainly possible, unless Intel later states that it won't be available until the fourth quarter.
Weird name, but this sounds like they one-upped the PowerPC's "Permute" vector operation, meaning that the Penryn chips should dramatically pull away from the old PowerPC chips in multimedia operations. (While they're currently a little faster, the PowerPC's hold up surprisingly well in some areas compared to Core 2. Not anymore, I suspect.)
It doesn't one-up the VMX unit's permute, it might achieve parity. There are lots of other problems with SSE1..4, and this new chip won't fix them. They can't be fixed without breaking compatibility.
But the other architectural aspects of the chip should put the G5 clearly in its shadow. The PowerPC ship has sailed, and the Intel-based future looks bright.
Comments
So, I have been wanting to jump into the Intel boat for a while now, since I have a 1 Ghz. Powerbook G4. However I have been hoping for a UPMC or similar small form portable Mac or a 12"/13" MacBook (Pro). Besides the form factor, I have been waiting for a processor upgrade (and perhaps better batteries, I value my lap!). I am currently favoring then penyrn but now with that newer architecture, I am not sure which to go with. Do you think that waiting the few extra months for the Nehalem is worth the X % boost in processing power, or is the boost only marginal? Please give me feedback, as I am desperately in need of a newer computer because the current is slowly passing to where all the good Macs go...
-S. J. Bucaro
If you don't really need a new laptop/computer, then just wait. I had an iMac G5 and it was great but it came to the point where I NEEDED to use Windows. I couldn't take it anymore, so I bought a 17" MBP C2D. I like the new things I see and it makes me excited, but I probably don't plan on buying my next MBP until late 2008, maybe mid-2009.
My MBP is perfectly fine, however, I'm keeping an eye on a refreshed Mac Mini for my little brother and a Mac Pro for the family computer... hehe,
If 10.6 is Tom, does that make Vista 2.0 Jerry?
Zing!
That's not really possible because it always involves a trade-off. They are basically different tunings of the same design. One tuning trades power for battery life and portability, and the other allows higher power consumption because portability isn't needed, and it's cheaper to make.
It may very well get to the point where the notebooks are just considered good enough for pretty much everything, a lot of people have already decided that for their own uses.
Not in the video card / hd part.
If you don't really need a new laptop/computer, then just wait
Agreed completely. I have a Rev D original MBP (1.83 Core Duo 1) from Spring 2006. Was planning to upgrade to the Santa Rosa model and sell my CD1 while it still has decent used value. Santa Rosa model seemed a worthy upgrade: FW 800, dual-layer superdrive, Core Duo 2, 11n, Robson, faster FSB, larger default hard drive, etc...
After reading about Penryn, it's going to take a lot of whiz-bang in the next MBP for me to not wait for Penryn, maybe MWSF 2008? By whiz-bang, I mean sexy goodness, like touchscreen, blu-ray drive, LED display, massaging wrist wrests, side-mounted fan, drink holder. And a 3-button mouse. 2-buttons is so 1990.
No doubt this is exactly why Apple is so secretive about their hardware. Now that they're in bed with the rest of the world CPU-wise (Intel), they can't control that aspect. Aside from just not using available chips, eg: quad-core.
Agreed completely. I have a Rev D original MBP (1.83 Core Duo 1) from Spring 2006. Was planning to upgrade to the Santa Rosa model and sell my CD1 while it still has decent used value. Santa Rosa model seemed a worthy upgrade: FW 800, dual-layer superdrive, Core Duo 2, 11n, Robson, faster FSB, larger default hard drive, etc...
I dont see any reason to do such minor updates. I still love my Macbook Pro, original (pre-ordered on the day they were announced), and doubt I'll even need to replace it before beginning of 2009, when it hits 3 years old. Its a fantastic machine still and its over a year old.
Anyone think it's worth waiting until September or whatever it ends up being instead of buying now?
I dont see any reason to do such minor updates. I still love my Macbook Pro, original (pre-ordered on the day they were announced), and doubt I'll even need to replace it before beginning of 2009, when it hits 3 years old. Its a fantastic machine still and its over a year old.
The Santa Rosa upgrade isn't a minor one. There could possibly be a 25%, or so, improvement in computing speed with it, as well as the 64 bit system. Apple will, no doubt, add other improvements as well.
I've been waiting for the Mac Pro update for a while now, but ultimately I'm not going to buy an eight core model. I really value the 3.0GHz speed vs a 2.66GHz with more cores, simple because I don't really need more cores over faster speed per core and I would suppose that they will drop the price a bit on the 3.0GHz and the 4x2 2.66GHz will cost a lot more anyway. But, these future Intel processors [including Tigerton in the workstation area] make me wonder if buying an old 3.0GHz Woodcrest is really even smart at this point when all these potentially significant improvements will occur in the second half of this year.
Anyone think it's worth waiting until September or whatever it ends up being instead of buying now?
I'm waiting as well. I was finally going to buy after the Macworld updates, but they never came, so I'm sitting with my dual 2GHz G5 a little bit longer.
If we wait a few more months we will see a quad 3+ GHz dual 4 core model. Intel moved it up to this year. They have already showed a 45 nm quad core running at 3.33 GHz, but the introductory version is expected to top at 3.2 GHz for starters.
How long can you wait? Since I retired, I have the time, but I realize that others don't yet have that luxury.
I'm waiting as well. I was finally going to buy after the Macworld updates, but they never came, so I'm sitting with my dual 2GHz G5 a little bit longer.
I'm tentatively waiting as well, but hoping we won't have to wait for Macworld (or beyond) for the new chips. I just about died when new Mac Pros weren't announced in January. I don't know how much longer I can hold out.
Any chance they'll actually be shipping by September, or is that unrealistic?
I'm tentatively waiting as well, but hoping we won't have to wait for Macworld (or beyond) for the new chips. I just about died when new Mac Pros weren't announced in January. I don't know how much longer I can hold out.
Any chance they'll actually be shipping by September, or is that unrealistic?
It depends on what you mean by "new". If you mean 8 core, upgraded machines, we should see something before then, without question.
If you mean 45 nm Penyrn, all I can say it that Intel has stated that they will be available the second half of this year, as opposed to the first half of next year, when they were supposed to be available.
Can Apple get them first, as they did with Yonah? Who knows? But, it's not impossible that there will be an announcement at the dev conference. Likely? I have no idea. But, Sept is certainly possible, unless Intel later states that it won't be available until the fourth quarter.
Your wishes for AMD don't seem to be coming true...
Just as well for me... I've owned INTC for some time. Hopefully it roars back with a vengeance.
Ooow!
More skinny on the AMD announcement.
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31562/137/
Ooow!
More skinny on the AMD announcement.
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31562/137/
That's all fine and dandy but I'm ready for Intel to break out. This $19-20 range is frustrating.
That's all fine and dandy but I'm ready for Intel to break out. This $19-20 range is frustrating.
At least it hasn't deflated like AMD has.
A friend of mine has a lot of AMD stock, and he's been plastered since he bought it two years ago.
Weird name, but this sounds like they one-upped the PowerPC's "Permute" vector operation, meaning that the Penryn chips should dramatically pull away from the old PowerPC chips in multimedia operations. (While they're currently a little faster, the PowerPC's hold up surprisingly well in some areas compared to Core 2. Not anymore, I suspect.)
It doesn't one-up the VMX unit's permute, it might achieve parity. There are lots of other problems with SSE1..4, and this new chip won't fix them. They can't be fixed without breaking compatibility.
But the other architectural aspects of the chip should put the G5 clearly in its shadow. The PowerPC ship has sailed, and the Intel-based future looks bright.