Nah. I am curious how you think it will compare to whatever Intel is offering at the time. I.E. will they "blow away" the 970?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Intel doesn't have nor seems to not have anything in the class of IBM's 970. Intel's Itanim series, including Macaroni and Deerfield have about TWICE as many transistors than the 970. The P4 has close to the same transistor count but uses 1/3 more power(watts) and is for a 32 bit operating system. Makes comparisons very hard. But to quote Intel we will blow.
Nah. I am curious how you think it will compare to whatever Intel is offering at the time. I.E. will they "blow away" the 970?</strong><hr></blockquote>
probably not. there will be much gnashing of teeth and wailing in the forums about how good life was under old MOTO (snigger).
I sincerely hope the 970 will blow ANYTHING else away. apple needs it. just keeping up is not something I've really gotten used to about the new apple
So, assuming the 970 is in the PowerMacs this fall, will it's competition from intell then be the P4? And/or what will succeed the P4 in ("lowend", or whatever competes with the PowerMac) pro x86 desktops if not Itanium?
<strong>So, assuming the 970 is in the PowerMacs this fall, will it's competition from intell then be the P4? And/or what will succeed the P4 in ("lowend", or whatever competes with the PowerMac) pro x86 desktops if not Itanium?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm, can't wait for that as the competitive landscape.
Given Itanic's alledgedly awful 32-bit characteristics, I can't see a 64-bit desktop offering being a reality without a 64-bit OS and a portfolio of 64-bit aware applications to go with it.
Then you have to examine the potential for market confusion - Itanic is currently a hot, big and expensive chip, that's two challenges to delivering it to the desktop and three to delivering it to a laptop.
So what do you do, run Itanic for servers and workstations, P4 for desktops, P4-M for laptops, and PIII for tablets, and now you have the worst of all worlds if you are MS, because you now have to maintain two separate code bases and it's even worse for an ISV who have to do the same.
It's not good for Intel either, PIII can't disappear until P4-M has better power consumption characteristics, and it appears that the tablets are popular so you can't cancel it until P4-M can fit into tablets.
You'd probably prefer to unify the P4-M and P4 lines into one product, but you can't because a P4 in a tablet will require the consumer to wear a pair of asbestos gloves. So now, you're maintaining one set of processors at 3GHz+ whilst pushing the megahertz myth, but you've got another set of 'pro' products (Itanic) running at half the clock speed and the same is true of PIII. So now it becomes a full-time job just keeping your marketing messages straight.
Meanwhile, Apple could go 64-bit everywhere it wants with a massively broad FSB, seemingly excellent power consumption characteristics, and a great OS. Leave K-12 on 32-bit, with the G4 and the only hole in the offering is a PDA/Tablet which may be OS X based if the hardware can be packaged correctly, with the right CPU and everything else.
Whilst breaking the hegemony of Wintel is a challenge, I can see the next two years being key to a change in the dynamics of the marketplace - there is too much diversity in the Wintel world, and you can see the potential fault lines starting to appear if you look closely enough.
<strong>So, assuming the 970 is in the PowerMacs this fall, will it's competition from intell then be the P4? And/or what will succeed the P4 in ("lowend", or whatever competes with the PowerMac) pro x86 desktops if not Itanium?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think the P4 is the only Intel competition, not is specs but in the fact that it's a desktop chip. Thing is, the 970 is unlike any desktop chip. So while the P4 is technically competition, I don't think it will be any competition for the 970
[quote]It's not good for Intel either, PIII can't disappear until P4-M has better power consumption characteristics, and it appears that the tablets are popular so you can't cancel it until P4-M can fit into tablets.<hr></blockquote>Banias, aka Centrino platform, aka Pentium-M.
Comments
<strong>
Nah. I am curious how you think it will compare to whatever Intel is offering at the time. I.E. will they "blow away" the 970?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Intel doesn't have nor seems to not have anything in the class of IBM's 970. Intel's Itanim series, including Macaroni and Deerfield have about TWICE as many transistors than the 970. The P4 has close to the same transistor count but uses 1/3 more power(watts) and is for a 32 bit operating system. Makes comparisons very hard. But to quote Intel we will blow.
<strong>
Nah. I am curious how you think it will compare to whatever Intel is offering at the time. I.E. will they "blow away" the 970?</strong><hr></blockquote>
probably not. there will be much gnashing of teeth and wailing in the forums about how good life was under old MOTO (snigger).
I sincerely hope the 970 will blow ANYTHING else away. apple needs it. just keeping up is not something I've really gotten used to about the new apple
<strong>So, assuming the 970 is in the PowerMacs this fall, will it's competition from intell then be the P4? And/or what will succeed the P4 in ("lowend", or whatever competes with the PowerMac) pro x86 desktops if not Itanium?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm, can't wait for that as the competitive landscape.
Given Itanic's alledgedly awful 32-bit characteristics, I can't see a 64-bit desktop offering being a reality without a 64-bit OS and a portfolio of 64-bit aware applications to go with it.
Then you have to examine the potential for market confusion - Itanic is currently a hot, big and expensive chip, that's two challenges to delivering it to the desktop and three to delivering it to a laptop.
So what do you do, run Itanic for servers and workstations, P4 for desktops, P4-M for laptops, and PIII for tablets, and now you have the worst of all worlds if you are MS, because you now have to maintain two separate code bases and it's even worse for an ISV who have to do the same.
It's not good for Intel either, PIII can't disappear until P4-M has better power consumption characteristics, and it appears that the tablets are popular so you can't cancel it until P4-M can fit into tablets.
You'd probably prefer to unify the P4-M and P4 lines into one product, but you can't because a P4 in a tablet will require the consumer to wear a pair of asbestos gloves. So now, you're maintaining one set of processors at 3GHz+ whilst pushing the megahertz myth, but you've got another set of 'pro' products (Itanic) running at half the clock speed and the same is true of PIII. So now it becomes a full-time job just keeping your marketing messages straight.
Meanwhile, Apple could go 64-bit everywhere it wants with a massively broad FSB, seemingly excellent power consumption characteristics, and a great OS. Leave K-12 on 32-bit, with the G4 and the only hole in the offering is a PDA/Tablet which may be OS X based if the hardware can be packaged correctly, with the right CPU and everything else.
Whilst breaking the hegemony of Wintel is a challenge, I can see the next two years being key to a change in the dynamics of the marketplace - there is too much diversity in the Wintel world, and you can see the potential fault lines starting to appear if you look closely enough.
<strong>So, assuming the 970 is in the PowerMacs this fall, will it's competition from intell then be the P4? And/or what will succeed the P4 in ("lowend", or whatever competes with the PowerMac) pro x86 desktops if not Itanium?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think the P4 is the only Intel competition, not is specs but in the fact that it's a desktop chip. Thing is, the 970 is unlike any desktop chip. So while the P4 is technically competition, I don't think it will be any competition for the 970