zapchud
About
- Username
- zapchud
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- -
- Roles
- member
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 844
Reactions
Comments
-
Quote: Originally posted by The One to Rescue I don't agree... The price of a quad config is high merely because you actually have to buy the 4 CPUs! Design costs are not the main obstacle. Unless you are able to prove that the 4 CPUs are so c…
-
Quote: Originally posted by The One to Rescue I'm not either. I'm buying the "heat issues", "overpriced" You do realize that the "overpriced" issue is connected with the "complexity" and "research" issue?
-
Quote: Originally posted by tonton A quad processor Power PC Mac system exists already. I don't buy the "complexity" and "research" excuses. So ... when are you placing your order?
-
Yes, the chicken has sort of been here since 2000, when the dual processor PowerMacs entered the market and stayed there. The egg begun to grow noticeably when OS X was released, at least for the mac side. Many apps, which exist on both the Mac and …
-
I think there is four reasons we've not seen quad processor macs (yet): 1) North-bridge complexity. The complexity for controlling and distributing memory bandwidth for four processor chips is huge and requires a lot of research and development. …
-
I don't mind the looks of the labels in OS X (they look much better than in OS 9), but I don't have squat to use them for.
-
Courtesy of Jeremy Reimer (poster at arstechnica).
-
Quote: Originally posted by wizard69 Even if they don't expand the instruction set I think everyone does agree on one thing, that is that we would love to see effort put into ratcheting up vector performance on the 970. Of course.
-
Quote: Originally posted by wizard69 [B]Unlike some here, I don't see this as an additional burden. Developers already have to do this for PPC without AltVec or they phase out support for older processors. It is not an issue. They already …
-
Quote: Originally posted by MarcUK I dont understand, if a new Altivec was fully backwards compatible with the old ISA, why would it be a bad thing if the were new instructions for doubles? Existing Altivec code still runs fine, but new code …
-
1) Dual 1GHz G4, 1280MB RAM, expanded to have 4 HDDs (the original IBM one died this summer though), Radeon 9000 Pro, SCSI PCI card (unused). 2) Using it for some lighter gaming (mostly Quake 3, Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3, but once in a while a mode…
-
That the hell are you talking about? OS 9?
-
14 MB? I'm getting 34,6 over here.
-
And that's how it will have to run on the iMac. And I'm sure Apple will find a way to brag about it.
-
I seriously hope Apple plans to bump the CPU and GPU before february 2005 then. If not it'll be even more embarrassing.
-
I believe you must attach a monitor to it. Monitor or keyboard or something like that, for some reason.
-
Quote: Originally posted by The Woodman I still maintain that Programmer really has no credibility when he says that he is designing "hopelessly CPU bound" software that the Mac can't handle, when he doesn't even "work on the Mac" to begin with. …
-
Agreed. I can't really imagine the pimping is useful to any other purpose than setting up a proper RDF.
-
Quote: Originally posted by Programmer My specific reasons for wanting the next Mac are to work with a highly-SMP machine that has huge vector processing and 64-bit addressing capabilities. The current 2 - 2.5 GHz clock rate is fine, but I want …
-
Quote: Originally posted by Programmer Me too. Of course my current Mac is only 3 years old (dual 1 GHz G4) and I typically wait for a solid 6x performance increase before upgrading. 2.5 GHz x 2 SMT cores ought to do just fine. Chances are …