Considering the prize of PC 2100 memory, the next I mac should recieve DDR memory with a 133 mhz bus with AGP 4X (AGP 8 X does not bring any performances improvements with today applications).
<strong>Considering the prize of PC 2100 memory, the next I mac should recieve DDR memory with a 133 mhz bus with AGP 4X (AGP 8 X does not bring any performances improvements with today applications).</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's too much of a performance increase for Apple. Come on powerdoc, what were you thinking?
<strong>I'd love to see that ... at this point a faster FSB will make a more noticeable speed improvement than a slightly faster processor.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This really depends on what you use your iMac for. An L3 cache would help too, but its awfully expensive. A bump to 133 MHz + DDR + AGP4x would help Quartz Extreme significantly though.
<strong> [quote]Of course I'd also like to see a wider architecture ... 64 bit is next if i remember my numbers correctly ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
That happens with the PowerPC 970 from IBM. We won't see that in an iMac for a while yet.
<strong>(AGP 8 X does not bring any performances improvements with today applications)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually it would probably make Quartz Extreme a bit faster, but would you notice? Those hardware review sites which claim that AGP 8x doesn't help aren't testing using a GUI that is continuously using the GPU to read window backing store buffers out of main memory. On the other hand, Apple's current memory architecture may not be able to feed AGP 8x any better than it can feed AGP 4x... we'll likely see AGP 8x in a Mac when it can.
Comments
at least by eBoy's 19th birthday....
Of course I'd also like to see a wider architecture ... 64 bit is next if i remember my numbers correctly ?
<strong>Considering the prize of PC 2100 memory, the next I mac should recieve DDR memory with a 133 mhz bus with AGP 4X (AGP 8 X does not bring any performances improvements with today applications).</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's too much of a performance increase for Apple. Come on powerdoc, what were you thinking?
<strong>I'd love to see that ... at this point a faster FSB will make a more noticeable speed improvement than a slightly faster processor.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This really depends on what you use your iMac for. An L3 cache would help too, but its awfully expensive. A bump to 133 MHz + DDR + AGP4x would help Quartz Extreme significantly though.
<strong> [quote]Of course I'd also like to see a wider architecture ... 64 bit is next if i remember my numbers correctly ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
That happens with the PowerPC 970 from IBM. We won't see that in an iMac for a while yet.
<strong>(AGP 8 X does not bring any performances improvements with today applications)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually it would probably make Quartz Extreme a bit faster, but would you notice? Those hardware review sites which claim that AGP 8x doesn't help aren't testing using a GUI that is continuously using the GPU to read window backing store buffers out of main memory. On the other hand, Apple's current memory architecture may not be able to feed AGP 8x any better than it can feed AGP 4x... we'll likely see AGP 8x in a Mac when it can.