Intel expected to tout dual-core Xeon chips on Tuesday
Intel Corp., the world's leading microprocessor maker and new supplier of chips for Apple's Macintosh computer line, will take center stage at its own developer forum this week to talk about its latest technologies, which are expected to include a couple of new dual-core server chips.
The Intel Developer Forum will kick-off on Tuesday the 7th at the Moscone West in San Francisco, Calif. and run through the 10th. Justin Rattner, the company's chief technology officer, will host the opening keynote at 8:15 a.m. Three other company execs will follow with keynotes focused on digital enterprise, mobility, and the digital home, respectively.
Among its announcements, the Santa Clara, Calif.-based company may debut a new 65-nanometer (nm) dual-core Xeon server processor code-named Dempsey, which is reportedly on track to begin shipping by the end of the first calendar quarter of the year. The chip will bridge the gap between now and the Fall, when Intel will ship Woodcrest -- its first server chip to truly address performance per Watt concerns and ideally give rival AMD's Opteron line a run for its money.
Dempsey -- which packs HyperThreading support, a 1066MHz front-side bus, and Demand Based Switching and Vanderpool Technology -- is expected to run at speeds between 2.5GHz and 3.46 GHz. The former is a rack-optomized variant at 95W dubbed Dempsey MV, while the latter is the performance version of the chip at 130W.
Intel may also unveil Sossaman, a 2.0GHz ultra-dense, low-power 32-bit server processor with 2MB of L2 cache. The chip, which consumes substantially less power at 31W, will likely replace the company's current Low Voltage and Ultra Low Voltage Xeon processors.
By early 2007, Intel will begin shipping its first processors with four cores, which will arrive first in the form another Xeon server chip dubbed "Clovertown." Therefore, it's also likely the company will use its developer forum to discuss its strategy for moving from dual-core chips to quad-core chips.
Intel may also offer additional details on its Viiv home entertainment platform and provide a glimpse at some future processors which have yet to surface on leaked company roadmaps.
The Intel Developer Forum will kick-off on Tuesday the 7th at the Moscone West in San Francisco, Calif. and run through the 10th. Justin Rattner, the company's chief technology officer, will host the opening keynote at 8:15 a.m. Three other company execs will follow with keynotes focused on digital enterprise, mobility, and the digital home, respectively.
Among its announcements, the Santa Clara, Calif.-based company may debut a new 65-nanometer (nm) dual-core Xeon server processor code-named Dempsey, which is reportedly on track to begin shipping by the end of the first calendar quarter of the year. The chip will bridge the gap between now and the Fall, when Intel will ship Woodcrest -- its first server chip to truly address performance per Watt concerns and ideally give rival AMD's Opteron line a run for its money.
Dempsey -- which packs HyperThreading support, a 1066MHz front-side bus, and Demand Based Switching and Vanderpool Technology -- is expected to run at speeds between 2.5GHz and 3.46 GHz. The former is a rack-optomized variant at 95W dubbed Dempsey MV, while the latter is the performance version of the chip at 130W.
Intel may also unveil Sossaman, a 2.0GHz ultra-dense, low-power 32-bit server processor with 2MB of L2 cache. The chip, which consumes substantially less power at 31W, will likely replace the company's current Low Voltage and Ultra Low Voltage Xeon processors.
By early 2007, Intel will begin shipping its first processors with four cores, which will arrive first in the form another Xeon server chip dubbed "Clovertown." Therefore, it's also likely the company will use its developer forum to discuss its strategy for moving from dual-core chips to quad-core chips.
Intel may also offer additional details on its Viiv home entertainment platform and provide a glimpse at some future processors which have yet to surface on leaked company roadmaps.
Comments
Woodcrest/Conroe better be good and on time.
But perhaps the Xeon could go into Apple's PowerMac?
But it would make most sense to me if the iBook 12" + 14" / PowerBook 12" were the next lines to be transitioned, perhaps in mid-April. PowerMac and PowerBook 17" (maybe also the Xserve) could be next, perhaps at WWDC06.
Originally posted by mk14
Would seem unlikely to me that Apple introduces the Intel-Xserve in the next weeks, following Intel's announcement.
But perhaps the Xeon could go into Apple's PowerMac?
But it would make most sense to me if the iBook 12" + 14" / PowerBook 12" were the next lines to be transitioned, perhaps in mid-April. PowerMac and PowerBook 17" (maybe also the Xserve) could be next, perhaps at WWDC06.
The new Xeon is probably still slower than the top G5 and certainly hotter. The low power Xeon is slower than the chips in the MacBook Pro. Both are outrageously expensive.
If there's a PowerMac replacement at WWDC, it's not the Xeon.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
If there's a PowerMac replacement at WWDC, it's not the Xeon.
I'd be surprised if we see any sort of Intel PowerMac before the release of Photoshop that runs natively on Intel processors... or at least, I would expect that Apple would keep the G5 on until that time. That said, Apple probably isn't really focused on the PowerMacs (or at least they shouldn't be). Most of their sales come from the consumer-level iMac and the Powerbook-turned-MacBoook Pro...
My guess:
iBook - April
WWDC - 10.5 Preview
PowerMac - September/October
XServe - very late 2006 or early 2007 (MacWorld?), maybe even held to 10.5
Gotta believe the duo/quad core chips are going to be toasters in the PM/XServes. I see 10+ GHz marketing claims coming with their introduction.
Originally posted by nagromme
These Xeon's are Netburst's last gasp. Goodbye and good riddance
Amen.
How do they get away with it when AMD is rox0ring their box0rz with such extreme prejudice?
Even for cheap and mid-range machines AMD is still better.. it's kind of sad.
Originally posted by Mr. Dirk
I'd be surprised if we see any sort of Intel PowerMac before the release of Photoshop that runs natively on Intel processors... or at least, I would expect that Apple would keep the G5 on until that time. That said, Apple probably isn't really focused on the PowerMacs (or at least they shouldn't be). Most of their sales come from the consumer-level iMac and the Powerbook-turned-MacBoook Pro...
Steve's committed to Intel across the board before the end of the year. Universal Photoshop won't be available until 2007.
Originally posted by Mr. Dirk
I'd be surprised if we see any sort of Intel PowerMac before the release of Photoshop that runs natively on Intel processors... or at least, I would expect that Apple would keep the G5 on until that time. That said, Apple probably isn't really focused on the PowerMacs (or at least they shouldn't be). Most of their sales come from the consumer-level iMac and the Powerbook-turned-MacBoook Pro...
Well, Apple has said all lines will be Intel by the end of the year.
Adobe is sitting on their ass with Photoshop. Probably be January at bet before we see it.
Apple can transition all their lines to Intel faster than freakin Adbobe can do a universal binary of photoshop.
Sad.
Originally posted by msantti
Well, Apple has said all lines will be Intel by the end of the year.
Adobe is sitting on their ass with Photoshop. Probably be January at bet before we see it.
Apple can transition all their lines to Intel faster than freakin Adbobe can do a universal binary of photoshop.
Sad.
Having done some very small scale programming and very small scale hardware design, I can understand why it is this way. The short answer is that advancing legacy software is harder than wiring together chips to the design specification.
Relatively speaking, I think it is a lot easier for Apple to switch architectures than it is for Adobe to go from (assumed) Codewarrior code base and code that partly dates back to MacOS 7 to Xcode & Universal Binary for presumably hundreds of thousands of lines of code, if not millions.
On Apple's side, parallel builds of the software has been maintained behind the scenes all along, so they've had a leg up in architecting the code properly for a potential transition. The hardware is relatively easy because all of the chips are already made for them, Intel did most of the work there, the enclosure is almost a given with minor tweaks, and circuit board work is more or less wiring which there are relatively easy tools to use to validate that the circuit design is to spec. On top of that, Apple has even farmed out the board layout work to Intel for at least some projects.
What's worse, they released After Effects 7 in January and Photoshop Elements in February with no Universal Binary in site. Since Adobe works on an 18-24 month product cycle, and won't supply an update to provide Intel support, it's going to be another 18-24 month wait for Elements and After Effects users. There's no excuse why Universal Binaries didn't make the cut in this round of updates. Adobe stood on stage last June and said how excited they were about the transition, which they surely had even further prior knowledge of.
I'm not ranting at you directly, JeffDM, it's just that the thought of using After Effects through Rosetta for two years makes me furious.
Originally posted by atavistic
Xserve still a ways off since 'Server' is not yet Universal (can't run on Intel chips). Getting Server ported will take some work. Don't think it's been the highest software priority in the past few months.
My guess:
iBook - April
WWDC - 10.5 Preview
PowerMac - September/October
XServe - very late 2006 or early 2007 (MacWorld?), maybe even held to 10.5
Gotta believe the duo/quad core chips are going to be toasters in the PM/XServes. I see 10+ GHz marketing claims coming with their introduction.
Sounds good to me..!
Originally posted by msantti
Adobe is sitting on their ass with Photoshop.
Maybe they were sitting on their ass but I strongly doubt they are now. Have you read:
Inside Mac interview with Photoshop Product Manager John Nack
... starting at On progress toward Universal Binary versions of Adobe product?
Originally posted by Cory Bauer
JeffDM, Maxon's Cinema 4D, which has been around since 1993, was made available as a Universal Binary for current version 9.5 customers free of charge on January 30th. That's a major 3D application that is as complex as Adobe's applications, if not much more so. There's no excuse for Adobe to not have their Universal Binaries ready, or close to it. Maintaining and cleaning up twenty years of old code is something they should constantly be doing, not just when it's deemed necessary by the arrival of a new Operating System or Hardware. It absolutely blows my mind that Adobe's going to make us wait another year for Universal Binaries of the Creative Suite, and when they do arrive they're going to charge us $400 for them.
What's worse, they released After Effects 7 in January and Photoshop Elements in February with no Universal Binary in site. Since Adobe works on an 18-24 month product cycle, and won't supply an update to provide Intel support, it's going to be another 18-24 month wait for Elements and After Effects users. There's no excuse why Universal Binaries didn't make the cut in this round of updates. Adobe stood on stage last June and said how excited they were about the transition, which they surely had even further prior knowledge of.
I'm not ranting at you directly, JeffDM, it's just that the thought of using After Effects through Rosetta for two years makes me furious.
To be fair, is not C4D coded in Xcode...?
As for Adobe, they are wankers who have been dragging their heels for awhile, refusing to switch over to Xcode when Apple told everyone to...
I wish Apple would come out with a product that could totally replace the Adobe DTP collection...
We all know they are really close to negating the entire Adobe video collection...
Gotta mix Shake & Motion just so... Now fold gently into Final Cut Studio...
;^p
Originally posted by sjk
Maybe they were sitting on their ass but I strongly doubt they are now. Have you read:
Inside Mac interview with Photoshop Product Manager John Nack
"We're really starting to look into this whole Universal Binary thing. We think it's going to be a big hit with our Mac customer base. We did a pretty piss poor job of moving the Adobe apps over to OS X six years ago, and we never did get around to moving our applications to that whole Xcode thing over the course of the last five years while Apple continuously warned us how crucial it was. So this whole Intel thing is going to be a lot of work for us. I think James is going to start rewriting Photoshop sometime in August - he's the after-hours security officer. In the meantime, we suggest you try using the Lightroom beta for organizing your photos!" - Adobe Product Manager
More or less.
Originally posted by Cory Bauer
......I'm not ranting at you directly, JeffDM, it's just that the thought of using After Effects through Rosetta for two years makes me furious.
Ditto. Perhaps it's time for Apple to really plow some man hours into Motion and give the mud brick boys a run for their money. Take away motion graphics like they took away video editing.
Yes, I realize that you really don't want a cycle of market poaching and retaliation with one of your main software developers, but hell, if Adobe is just going to treat the platform like an afterthought Apple would do well to start thinking about replacements for CS.
I use CS all the time and am pretty comfortable with it, but I think there is a lot of room for improvement in the UI, going in the direction of Motion and Aperture.
Originally posted by MacRonin
[snip]I wish Apple would come out with a product that could totally replace the Adobe DTP collection... [and snipsnip]
;^p
I hope not.
The problem I encounter with graphic designers is that they have IndesignCS2 in the box and using Xpress6.5 because they know the latter.
Although they complain about how Xpress6.5 sucks in day to day use they don't switch.
In old europe you pay a whopping 1,500 euro for a copy of Quark Xpress.
Adobe CS2 premium is about the same.
Cost-effectively they should switch to IndesignCS but the fact that they have to learn to work with that programm keeps them from doing so.
There is also a huge percentage of graphic designers who still use Xpress4.1 in Classic.
So I don't think a lot of graphic pros will rave about an Apple DTP collection.
a) It won't be very crossplatform compatible.
b) It's bad for bussiness, because it costs time and money to learn to use another set of tools. Time in which the graphic designer is not productive.
ah well, we'll see what happens.
Originally posted by addabox
Ditto. Perhaps it's time for Apple to really plow some man hours into Motion and give the mud brick boys a run for their money. Take away motion graphics like they took away video editing.
Yes, I realize that you really don't want a cycle of market poaching and retaliation with one of your main software developers, but hell, if Adobe is just going to treat the platform like an afterthought Apple would do well to start thinking about replacements for CS.
I use CS all the time and am pretty comfortable with it, but I think there is a lot of room for improvement in the UI, going in the direction of Motion and Aperture.
I would looooove an upgraded MotionPro that would hit AE head on for market share. Any effort in that direction would be great. 8)
Originally posted by atavistic
Xserve still a ways off since 'Server' is not yet Universal (can't run on Intel chips). Getting Server ported will take some work. Don't think it's been the highest software priority in the past few months.
Aren't most of the server admin tools java based? How much difference between the client and server codebases can there be?