Intel is still in for some tough financial times for the next 3 quarters. They have to dump millions of Pentium CPUs at some very low costs. In Q3, we could probably buy all P4 CPUs (660s, 840s, 950s) except for the EEs for under $200. There are going to be some great deals coming.
But it isn't a great thing for Intel's bottom line. They'll take back the performance crown though. Good for Apple!
Who knows, maybe the overseas markets will suck them up.
Yes I think Intel is going to have to swallow some bitter medicine and clear out the old chips at discount prices. Came across a link that shows that Intel expects 40% of the desktop chips they ship in Q1 07 to be Conroe. That looks like a pretty aggressive roll out of Conroe. I think Apple will be on that bandwagon as well. While I think Woodcrest will make an excellent high end powermac, I also think you will see Conroe on the lower end powermacs. Either both chips(Conroe and Woodcrest) are good or neither are good. Link below.
Decent read, but #1 it's totally invalid, and #2 it has nothing to do with the Nvidia SDI series.
Your wondering why I say it's invalid. The issue is with the timing on the article, what they scrutinized, and it's relevancy today, It was published in January and Nvidia did a huge update for those video cards in March to add most of the features that were talked about in the article that there weren't even drivers for when they did it. The card they used wasn't even supported, and neither were most of the areas the tests focused on until March. Talk about getting ahead of your self.
Here is a list of some of the added features to the card in the March driver update.
WHQL Certified
Adds support for GeForce 7900 GTX, GeForce 7900 GT, and GeForce 7600 GT
NVIDIA PureVideo features and enhancements.
Support for high definition H.264 hardware decode acceleration on GeForce 6 and 7 series GPUs.
Support for high definition MPEG-2 inverse telecine.
Support for high definition MPEG-2 spatial temporal de-interlacing.
Adds mixed vendor support for NVIDIA SLI.
TV-Out/HD-out support for NVIDIA SLI.
Added support for VSync on Direct3D games when running NVIDIA SLI.
Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0c and OpenGL® 2.0 support
Basically that whole write up focused on things that the card wasn't even running until March. You have to remember that anything you read on the web you have to verify for yourself, because people start listening to these clowns because they are writing on an "Extreme Tech" site; which really doesn't mean shit. If he was a good reporter #1 he should have done his research, and contacted both Nvidia, and ATI before doing the tests so they could have given him a heads up on what would, and wouldn't work using the setup he was using, and why. They (ATI, and Nvidia) would have also advised him on how to fix the problem, and in Nvidia's case they could have informed him the card he was using wasn't supported by drivers yet for 90% of the tests he was doing. They may have decided to give him a beta driver just so it would run.
And melgross, if that article is what you originally read to get you thinking that ATI was far and beyond Nvidia as the video king of all things I can see why you thought that.
If I hadn't remembered what a friend of mine in Florida (that makes TV commercials, and other related video productions) told me about how impressive his new Nvidia card got in just one driver update I probably wouldn't have thought twice about that article, and took it as total truth.
I was at a meeting tonight, where one of the guys and I were talking stocks. He has 15,000 shares of AMD, and he's convinced that AMD will smother Intel at the end of the year, and that Conroe et al is vaporware, AND that the Conroe vs. Athlon tests were fixed.
I couldn't convince him otherwise. The meeting is about once a month, so it should be interesting as the year goes on.
I think that it was Apple or IBM that invented vaporware, but I think that all of these Intel projects have been announced to Wall Street. That should be indicator enought that they are not vaporware, or they risk an FTC investigation. I doubt that Intel is that hard up, I think that the fact that the launch dead lines keep moving closer, is another sign that they are not vaporware. Probably wishful thinking on your friends part, I would probably do the same if I had that much invested in AMD. I also seem to remember that Steve said that looking at late '06 and especially '07 intel would have no competition in performance per watt, all indicators are that is it on or ahead of schedule. Good for us, I hope to buy an Intel designed MacDesk Pro.
Decent read, but #1 it's totally invalid, and #2 it has nothing to do with the Nvidia SDI series.
Your wondering why I say it's invalid. The issue is with the timing on the article, what they scrutinized, and it's relevancy today, It was published in January and Nvidia did a huge update for those video cards in March to add most of the features that were talked about in the article that there weren't even drivers for when they did it. The card they used wasn't even supported, and neither were most of the areas the tests focused on until March. Talk about getting ahead of your self.
Here is a list of some of the added features to the card in the March driver update. WHQL Certified Adds support for GeForce 7900 GTX, GeForce 7900 GT, and GeForce 7600 GT NVIDIA PureVideo features and enhancements. Support for high definition H.264 hardware decode acceleration on GeForce 6 and 7 series GPUs. Support for high definition MPEG-2 inverse telecine. Support for high definition MPEG-2 spatial temporal de-interlacing. Adds mixed vendor support for NVIDIA SLI. TV-Out/HD-out support for NVIDIA SLI. Added support for VSync on Direct3D games when running NVIDIA SLI. Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0c and OpenGL® 2.0 support
Basically that whole write up focused on things that the card wasn't even running until March. You have to remember that anything you read on the web you have to verify for yourself, because people start listening to these clowns because they are writing on an "Extreme Tech" site; which really doesn't mean shit. If he was a good reporter #1 he should have done his research, and contacted both Nvidia, and ATI before doing the tests so they could have given him a heads up on what would, and wouldn't work using the setup he was using, and why. They (ATI, and Nvidia) would have also advised him on how to fix the problem, and in Nvidia's case they could have informed him the card he was using wasn't supported by drivers yet for 90% of the tests he was doing. They may have decided to give him a beta driver just so it would run.
And melgross, if that article is what you originally read to get you thinking that ATI was far and beyond Nvidia as the video king of all things I can see why you thought that.
If I hadn't remembered what a friend of mine in Florida (that makes TV commercials, and other related video productions) told me about how impressive his new Nvidia card got in just one driver update I probably wouldn't have thought twice about that article, and took it as total truth.
Some of what they did there will have an effect on the video, quite true, but both companies have improved their drivers since then. Both cards were the latest cards shipping when the tests were done, with the latest drivers.
There isn't much point to test with a driver update that isn't available at the time of the test, because, as you surely know, these tests are for boards, and drivers that are actually available.
ExtemeTech happens to be a well respected site, even though you were not happy with their conclusions
I don't know your "friend". My friends do the same work, as did I. We all have our preferences.
I think that it was Apple or IBM that invented vaporware, but I think that all of these Intel projects have been announced to Wall Street. That should be indicator enought that they are not vaporware, or they risk an FTC investigation. I doubt that Intel is that hard up, I think that the fact that the launch dead lines keep moving closer, is another sign that they are not vaporware. Probably wishful thinking on your friends part, I would probably do the same if I had that much invested in AMD. I also seem to remember that Steve said that looking at late '06 and especially '07 intel would have no competition in performance per watt, all indicators are that is it on or ahead of schedule. Good for us, I hope to buy an Intel designed MacDesk Pro.
Neither Apple nor IBM invented vaporware. That term was in use for a long time, and didn't refer to IBM
I sat thru a presentation last week where a Apple employee said that he ran a test on his dual G5 which took two hours (Handbrake recoding a video file from DVD) which the 20" iMac Intel chip machine did the same task in 30 minutes. That's right, one fourth of the time of a dual G5!
Don't forget that they are going to highlight things that go faster. And the reason they go faster may or may not be the processor (e.g. the chipset and memory). There are tests floating around that demonstrate that the iMac G5 outperforms the iMac Core Duo in some situations. The processors are more evenly balanced that Apple's advertising department would have you believe. The Core Duo's main advantages (in the iMac) are dual core, more efficient integer calculations, and a better chipset. Remember that Apple may have revved their PPC chipset by now.
Quote:
I believe that the reason for the "Mac Pro" (tower) timing is simply that Intel will not be releasing the chip which is intended for it until shortly before the expected release date of the "Mac Pro".
This is absolutely the case. They need to demonstrate a clear improvement over the last G5-based towers. The chips that do that are coming soon and will bring x86-64, HT, and MP support with them. These are going to be some sweet machines.
While "Don't forget that..." is absolutely true, the presenter was actually saying that, although Apple likes some of the benchmark tests, users will notice (and are concerned about) changes in the performance of *applications* they use. (I couldn't agree more.) He had simply done the Handbrake comparison on his own to see how an extremely CPU intensive process performed. (If you have not run Handbrake take a look at it and you will see just how it can soak up processor power.) It really was not intended as a "scientific" test result. I found it interesting as my poor little G4 takes a lot longer than that.
Slightly off topic, but one very neat thing that was also shown was an emulator that will run (only on the Intel machines apparently) called Parallels which seemed to run Win XP rather well in the few little things that were demo'd. (It was simply shown as one possible solution to the VPC situation with the MacTels.)
Repeated for the 60th time in this thread. . Woodcrest will be the only processor available at the time of the new PowerMacs release. It is also the only workstation processor intel will have at that time. The Conroe Is a desktop Processor. The Apple desktop is the iMac. Apple insists the PowerMac is the Apple workstation. Any questions?
Repeated for the 60th time in this thread. . Woodcrest will be the only processor available at the time of the new PowerMacs release. It is also the only workstation processor intel will have at that time. The Conroe Is a desktop Processor. The Apple desktop is the iMac. Apple insists the PowerMac is the Apple workstation. Any questions?
Thank You!
I wish everyone else would get this?
I am thinking a monster workstation demoed at WWDC 2006?
I am thinking a monster workstation demoed at WWDC 2006?
Dual quad-core CPUs
Quad SLI capabilities
Mmm?
Woodcrest is not a Quad core CPU. That's Clovertown, and it wont be available until early 2007.
At some point you lost your mind. Quad SLI exits, but it's not going to be in a Mac. Apple doesn't even have SLI capability yet; let alone upgrading to Quad SLI.
Woodcrest is not a Quad core CPU. That's Clovertown, and it wont be available until early 2007.
At some point you lost your mind. Quad SLI exits, but it's not going to be in a Mac. Apple doesn't even have SLI capability yet; let alone upgrading to Quad SLI.
Didn't I see some article around recently about Intel demoing a unit with dual quad-cores in it??!?
As for quad SLI, never say never!
Could be secret Raycer-derived technologies?!
(uh, if you do see my mind, could you send it back this way??!?)
Didn't I see some article around recently about Intel demoing a unit with dual quad-cores in it??!?
As for quad SLI, never say never!
Could be secret Raycer-derived technologies?!
(uh, if you do see my mind, could you send it back this way??!?)
;^p
Yes, that was the Clovertown. It's due for next year though. They (intel) have a lot of urgent supply to meet from about 1000 computer vendors. They said they would be produced in this order. Woodcrest, Conroe, Merom, and I think they will stick to the order, but I think they will be released much closer together than earlier anticipated.
'Santa Clara (CA) - Faced with increasing competitive pressure from AMD, Intel apparently has accelerated its launch schedule of its new Core microarchitecture. While Woodcrest, which will carry the Xeon 5100-series designation, was always scheduled for a Q3 introduction, chief executive Paul Otellini on Wednesday confirmed that the company will also be announcing the desktop processor "Conroe" (Core Duo E4000 and E6000 series) as well as the mobile CPU "Merom" (Core Duo T5000 and T7000 series) in the third quarter. All three variants will be shipping "in volume."'
Didn't I see some article around recently about Intel demoing a unit with dual quad-cores in it??!?
And that's nothing. It's the Tigerton that comes after the Kentsfield that is the real kicker. This is where I hope Apple makes a break away, and makes one separate Mac pro design that uses this processor to it's fullest. *16 cores in all.
I read elsewhere that Tigerton is a Quad Core Quad Socket (*16 cores) version of the Clovertown with another **bonus, but I can't find the page again that spells it out from the beginning, The best part is Tigerton also (after intel said they were dropping it before) has brought back the **ODMC on die memory controller.
'Santa Clara (CA) - Faced with increasing competitive pressure from AMD, Intel apparently has accelerated its launch schedule of its new Core microarchitecture. While Woodcrest, which will carry the Xeon 5100-series designation, was always scheduled for a Q3 introduction, chief executive Paul Otellini on Wednesday confirmed that the company will also be announcing the desktop processor "Conroe" (Core Duo E4000 and E6000 series) as well as the mobile CPU "Merom" (Core Duo T5000 and T7000 series) in the third quarter. All three variants will be shipping "in volume."'
Intel needs their core processors out ASAP. Just came across this article where opteron just destroyed a paxville xeon. I don't think Intel can release the core chips soon enough. Link below
Comments
Originally posted by THT
Intel is still in for some tough financial times for the next 3 quarters. They have to dump millions of Pentium CPUs at some very low costs. In Q3, we could probably buy all P4 CPUs (660s, 840s, 950s) except for the EEs for under $200. There are going to be some great deals coming.
But it isn't a great thing for Intel's bottom line. They'll take back the performance crown though. Good for Apple!
Who knows, maybe the overseas markets will suck them up.
Yes I think Intel is going to have to swallow some bitter medicine and clear out the old chips at discount prices. Came across a link that shows that Intel expects 40% of the desktop chips they ship in Q1 07 to be Conroe. That looks like a pretty aggressive roll out of Conroe. I think Apple will be on that bandwagon as well. While I think Woodcrest will make an excellent high end powermac, I also think you will see Conroe on the lower end powermacs. Either both chips(Conroe and Woodcrest) are good or neither are good. Link below.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=1820
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
I was curious too, so I used Google.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1916966,00.asp
Mmmm, Google.
Decent read, but #1 it's totally invalid, and #2 it has nothing to do with the Nvidia SDI series.
Your wondering why I say it's invalid. The issue is with the timing on the article, what they scrutinized, and it's relevancy today, It was published in January and Nvidia did a huge update for those video cards in March to add most of the features that were talked about in the article that there weren't even drivers for when they did it. The card they used wasn't even supported, and neither were most of the areas the tests focused on until March. Talk about getting ahead of your self.
Here is a list of some of the added features to the card in the March driver update.
- WHQL Certified
- Adds support for GeForce 7900 GTX, GeForce 7900 GT, and GeForce 7600 GT
- NVIDIA PureVideo features and enhancements.
- Support for high definition H.264 hardware decode acceleration on GeForce 6 and 7 series GPUs.
- Support for high definition MPEG-2 inverse telecine.
- Support for high definition MPEG-2 spatial temporal de-interlacing.
- Adds mixed vendor support for NVIDIA SLI.
- TV-Out/HD-out support for NVIDIA SLI.
- Added support for VSync on Direct3D games when running NVIDIA SLI.
- Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0c and OpenGL® 2.0 support
Basically that whole write up focused on things that the card wasn't even running until March. You have to remember that anything you read on the web you have to verify for yourself, because people start listening to these clowns because they are writing on an "Extreme Tech" site; which really doesn't mean shit. If he was a good reporter #1 he should have done his research, and contacted both Nvidia, and ATI before doing the tests so they could have given him a heads up on what would, and wouldn't work using the setup he was using, and why. They (ATI, and Nvidia) would have also advised him on how to fix the problem, and in Nvidia's case they could have informed him the card he was using wasn't supported by drivers yet for 90% of the tests he was doing. They may have decided to give him a beta driver just so it would run.And melgross, if that article is what you originally read to get you thinking that ATI was far and beyond Nvidia as the video king of all things I can see why you thought that.
If I hadn't remembered what a friend of mine in Florida (that makes TV commercials, and other related video productions) told me about how impressive his new Nvidia card got in just one driver update I probably wouldn't have thought twice about that article, and took it as total truth.
Originally posted by melgross
I was at a meeting tonight, where one of the guys and I were talking stocks. He has 15,000 shares of AMD, and he's convinced that AMD will smother Intel at the end of the year, and that Conroe et al is vaporware, AND that the Conroe vs. Athlon tests were fixed.
I couldn't convince him otherwise. The meeting is about once a month, so it should be interesting as the year goes on.
I think that it was Apple or IBM that invented vaporware, but I think that all of these Intel projects have been announced to Wall Street. That should be indicator enought that they are not vaporware, or they risk an FTC investigation. I doubt that Intel is that hard up, I think that the fact that the launch dead lines keep moving closer, is another sign that they are not vaporware. Probably wishful thinking on your friends part, I would probably do the same if I had that much invested in AMD. I also seem to remember that Steve said that looking at late '06 and especially '07 intel would have no competition in performance per watt, all indicators are that is it on or ahead of schedule. Good for us, I hope to buy an Intel designed MacDesk Pro.
Originally posted by onlooker
You keep blathering on about this but you can not show me one shred of evidence.
You blather pretty well yourself.I've had this bookmarked, so I'll link it. If you're not happy with it, you can find more.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1916993,00.asp
As far as I'm concerned, though, we've been going on about this long enough.
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
I was curious too, so I used Google.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1916966,00.asp
Mmmm, Google.
That's funny. I didn'r realise that you posted the same article, or I wouldn't have bothered.
Originally posted by onlooker
Decent read, but #1 it's totally invalid, and #2 it has nothing to do with the Nvidia SDI series.
Your wondering why I say it's invalid. The issue is with the timing on the article, what they scrutinized, and it's relevancy today, It was published in January and Nvidia did a huge update for those video cards in March to add most of the features that were talked about in the article that there weren't even drivers for when they did it. The card they used wasn't even supported, and neither were most of the areas the tests focused on until March. Talk about getting ahead of your self.
Here is a list of some of the added features to the card in the March driver update. WHQL Certified
Adds support for GeForce 7900 GTX, GeForce 7900 GT, and GeForce 7600 GT
NVIDIA PureVideo features and enhancements.
Support for high definition H.264 hardware decode acceleration on GeForce 6 and 7 series GPUs.
Support for high definition MPEG-2 inverse telecine.
Support for high definition MPEG-2 spatial temporal de-interlacing.
Adds mixed vendor support for NVIDIA SLI.
TV-Out/HD-out support for NVIDIA SLI.
Added support for VSync on Direct3D games when running NVIDIA SLI.
Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0c and OpenGL® 2.0 support
Basically that whole write up focused on things that the card wasn't even running until March. You have to remember that anything you read on the web you have to verify for yourself, because people start listening to these clowns because they are writing on an "Extreme Tech" site; which really doesn't mean shit. If he was a good reporter #1 he should have done his research, and contacted both Nvidia, and ATI before doing the tests so they could have given him a heads up on what would, and wouldn't work using the setup he was using, and why. They (ATI, and Nvidia) would have also advised him on how to fix the problem, and in Nvidia's case they could have informed him the card he was using wasn't supported by drivers yet for 90% of the tests he was doing. They may have decided to give him a beta driver just so it would run.
And melgross, if that article is what you originally read to get you thinking that ATI was far and beyond Nvidia as the video king of all things I can see why you thought that.
If I hadn't remembered what a friend of mine in Florida (that makes TV commercials, and other related video productions) told me about how impressive his new Nvidia card got in just one driver update I probably wouldn't have thought twice about that article, and took it as total truth.
Some of what they did there will have an effect on the video, quite true, but both companies have improved their drivers since then. Both cards were the latest cards shipping when the tests were done, with the latest drivers.
There isn't much point to test with a driver update that isn't available at the time of the test, because, as you surely know, these tests are for boards, and drivers that are actually available.
ExtemeTech happens to be a well respected site, even though you were not happy with their conclusions
I don't know your "friend". My friends do the same work, as did I. We all have our preferences.
I think we can lay this to rest.
Originally posted by Brendon
I think that it was Apple or IBM that invented vaporware, but I think that all of these Intel projects have been announced to Wall Street. That should be indicator enought that they are not vaporware, or they risk an FTC investigation. I doubt that Intel is that hard up, I think that the fact that the launch dead lines keep moving closer, is another sign that they are not vaporware. Probably wishful thinking on your friends part, I would probably do the same if I had that much invested in AMD. I also seem to remember that Steve said that looking at late '06 and especially '07 intel would have no competition in performance per watt, all indicators are that is it on or ahead of schedule. Good for us, I hope to buy an Intel designed MacDesk Pro.
Neither Apple nor IBM invented vaporware. That term was in use for a long time, and didn't refer to IBM
Originally posted by RBR
I sat thru a presentation last week where a Apple employee said that he ran a test on his dual G5 which took two hours (Handbrake recoding a video file from DVD) which the 20" iMac Intel chip machine did the same task in 30 minutes. That's right, one fourth of the time of a dual G5!
Don't forget that they are going to highlight things that go faster. And the reason they go faster may or may not be the processor (e.g. the chipset and memory). There are tests floating around that demonstrate that the iMac G5 outperforms the iMac Core Duo in some situations. The processors are more evenly balanced that Apple's advertising department would have you believe. The Core Duo's main advantages (in the iMac) are dual core, more efficient integer calculations, and a better chipset. Remember that Apple may have revved their PPC chipset by now.
I believe that the reason for the "Mac Pro" (tower) timing is simply that Intel will not be releasing the chip which is intended for it until shortly before the expected release date of the "Mac Pro".
This is absolutely the case. They need to demonstrate a clear improvement over the last G5-based towers. The chips that do that are coming soon and will bring x86-64, HT, and MP support with them. These are going to be some sweet machines.
While "Don't forget that..." is absolutely true, the presenter was actually saying that, although Apple likes some of the benchmark tests, users will notice (and are concerned about) changes in the performance of *applications* they use. (I couldn't agree more.) He had simply done the Handbrake comparison on his own to see how an extremely CPU intensive process performed. (If you have not run Handbrake take a look at it and you will see just how it can soak up processor power.) It really was not intended as a "scientific" test result. I found it interesting as my poor little G4 takes a lot longer than that.
Slightly off topic, but one very neat thing that was also shown was an emulator that will run (only on the Intel machines apparently) called Parallels which seemed to run Win XP rather well in the few little things that were demo'd. (It was simply shown as one possible solution to the VPC situation with the MacTels.)
Cheers8)
It's funny, after reading nothing but Conroe, Conroe, we are now reading Woodcrest.
Hmm! Would be strange if it turned out that I started the whole thing in January.
http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/...25714F000230BC
Originally posted by onlooker
Repeated for the 60th time in this thread. . Woodcrest will be the only processor available at the time of the new PowerMacs release. It is also the only workstation processor intel will have at that time. The Conroe Is a desktop Processor. The Apple desktop is the iMac. Apple insists the PowerMac is the Apple workstation. Any questions?
Thank You!
I wish everyone else would get this?
I am thinking a monster workstation demoed at WWDC 2006?
Dual quad-core CPUs
Quad SLI capabilities
Mmm?
Originally posted by MacRonin
Thank You!
I wish everyone else would get this?
I am thinking a monster workstation demoed at WWDC 2006?
Dual quad-core CPUs
Quad SLI capabilities
Mmm?
Woodcrest is not a Quad core CPU. That's Clovertown, and it wont be available until early 2007.
At some point you lost your mind. Quad SLI exits, but it's not going to be in a Mac. Apple doesn't even have SLI capability yet; let alone upgrading to Quad SLI.
Originally posted by onlooker
Woodcrest is not a Quad core CPU. That's Clovertown, and it wont be available until early 2007.
At some point you lost your mind. Quad SLI exits, but it's not going to be in a Mac. Apple doesn't even have SLI capability yet; let alone upgrading to Quad SLI.
Didn't I see some article around recently about Intel demoing a unit with dual quad-cores in it??!?
As for quad SLI, never say never!
Could be secret Raycer-derived technologies?!
(uh, if you do see my mind, could you send it back this way??!?)
;^p
Originally posted by MacRonin
Didn't I see some article around recently about Intel demoing a unit with dual quad-cores in it??!?
As for quad SLI, never say never!
Could be secret Raycer-derived technologies?!
(uh, if you do see my mind, could you send it back this way??!?)
;^p
Yes, that was the Clovertown. It's due for next year though. They (intel) have a lot of urgent supply to meet from about 1000 computer vendors. They said they would be produced in this order. Woodcrest, Conroe, Merom, and I think they will stick to the order, but I think they will be released much closer together than earlier anticipated.
linky
'Santa Clara (CA) - Faced with increasing competitive pressure from AMD, Intel apparently has accelerated its launch schedule of its new Core microarchitecture. While Woodcrest, which will carry the Xeon 5100-series designation, was always scheduled for a Q3 introduction, chief executive Paul Otellini on Wednesday confirmed that the company will also be announcing the desktop processor "Conroe" (Core Duo E4000 and E6000 series) as well as the mobile CPU "Merom" (Core Duo T5000 and T7000 series) in the third quarter. All three variants will be shipping "in volume."'
Originally posted by MacRonin
Didn't I see some article around recently about Intel demoing a unit with dual quad-cores in it??!?
And that's nothing. It's the Tigerton that comes after the Kentsfield that is the real kicker. This is where I hope Apple makes a break away, and makes one separate Mac pro design that uses this processor to it's fullest. *16 cores in all.
I read elsewhere that Tigerton is a Quad Core Quad Socket (*16 cores) version of the Clovertown with another **bonus, but I can't find the page again that spells it out from the beginning, The best part is Tigerton also (after intel said they were dropping it before) has brought back the **ODMC on die memory controller.
Tigerton
Which leads me to believe that this will trickle down into every other new processor after the Tigerton.
Originally posted by onlooker
'Santa Clara (CA) - Faced with increasing competitive pressure from AMD, Intel apparently has accelerated its launch schedule of its new Core microarchitecture. While Woodcrest, which will carry the Xeon 5100-series designation, was always scheduled for a Q3 introduction, chief executive Paul Otellini on Wednesday confirmed that the company will also be announcing the desktop processor "Conroe" (Core Duo E4000 and E6000 series) as well as the mobile CPU "Merom" (Core Duo T5000 and T7000 series) in the third quarter. All three variants will be shipping "in volume."'
Intel needs their core processors out ASAP. Just came across this article where opteron just destroyed a paxville xeon. I don't think Intel can release the core chips soon enough. Link below
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2745
Originally posted by melgross
Neither Apple nor IBM invented vaporware. That term was in use for a long time, and didn't refer to IBM
OK Apple was the first company to go to court and to then have the terms of what is and is not Vaporware revised so they can be properly found guilty.
Google->Vaporware Apple SEC
On May 30, 1991, a jury in northern California found that Apple
Computer, Inc., while promoting its Lisa computer and Twiggy disk drive
to potential consumers, had made overly optimistic statements that misled
investors under the federal securities laws. The verdict the jury rendered
would have resulted in damages exceeding $100 million. 2 Although the
trial judge ultimately set the verdict aside, 3 the point was made: potential-
ly huge securities liability can arise from statements made by corporate
officials to promote their companies' products. Nothing in the judge's
decision to set aside the verdict changed the fact that at another time and
place a jury could render an equally large verdict on similar facts.
Most securities litigation arises from securities filings describing
corporate earnings and projected financial performance. In light of Apple,
plaintiffs' class action attorneys who have previously combed annual
reports, 10-Qs, 8-Ks, etc. for overly optimistic statements following a
reported drop in earnings, now have a similarly powerful incentive to
scrutinize earlier product announcements and product press releases when
product performance does not measure up to product hype or when
products do not hit the market when promised. ~9 Even before Apple was
litigated, computer-related and other high-tech firms were more frequently
the target for securities class action suits than companies in other
industries, 2° perhaps because of the ubiquitous vaporware problem. 2t The
ruling in the Apple case thus demands that a new set of guidelines be
drawn up for the evaluation of the permissible boundaries of this product
hyping.
Originally posted by onlooker
?Quad Core Quad Socket (*16 cores)?
?ODMC on die memory controller?
Mmm?
(I could swear I posted this once already??!? Did we have a database failure here??!?)