Will the iMac get a 133Mhz bus, agp 4x?

majormattmajormatt
Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
... Or will it retain the that cruising 1999 motherboard technology?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    The iMac better get a 133MHz bus. We've waited long enough.
  • Reply 2 of 8
    thegeldingthegelding Posts: 3,230member
    yes......g





    at least by eBoy's 19th birthday....
  • Reply 3 of 8
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    I could see Apple waiting 3 more years <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
  • Reply 4 of 8
    kingofsomewherehotkingofsomewherehot Posts: 4,180member
    I'd love to see that ... at this point a faster FSB will make a more noticeable speed improvement than a slightly faster processor.



    Of course I'd also like to see a wider architecture ... 64 bit is next if i remember my numbers correctly ?
  • Reply 5 of 8
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    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).
  • Reply 6 of 8
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by Powerdoc:

    <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?
  • Reply 7 of 8
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,458member
    [quote]Originally posted by KingOfSomewhereHot:

    <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.
  • Reply 8 of 8
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,458member
    [quote]Originally posted by Powerdoc:

    <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.
Sign In or Register to comment.