PDA

View Full Version : Intel launches dual core "Pentium D" for home desktop mark...


MacBytes
May 27, 2005, 09:39 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: 3rd Party Hardware
Link: Intel launches dual core "Pentium D" for home desktop market. (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20050527103925)

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

iGary
May 27, 2005, 09:41 AM
IBM needs to get their **** together.

Mudbug
May 27, 2005, 10:01 AM
Maybe Apple went to talk to Intel about how they did this, so they could bring a little brochure back to IBM with them and say "this is what we should be doing now... don't you think?"

sillycybin
May 27, 2005, 11:00 AM
maybe a switch to Intel wouldnt be so bad after all, especially since it appears that IBM only cares about gaming consoles. BAH!!

and while im ranting...

Those "new" powermacs are looking pretty archaic. The things are bigger than and almost as expensive as a KIA, they needs a radiator to keep them cool, still can only fit one optical drive, and has a flawed firewire bus that is slower than a powerbooks'. wtf is buying those things??

anyways, i bet we see a dualcore Mini b4 we ever find a dualcore 970 in a powermac.

ham_man
May 27, 2005, 11:05 AM
The ball is now officially in IBM's court...

combatcolin
May 27, 2005, 11:12 AM
IBM

GET ON WITH IT

If i may quote the holy scriptures of Python...

PlaceofDis
May 27, 2005, 11:16 AM
Freescale, IBM get your butts in gear!!!

MacSA
May 27, 2005, 11:35 AM
.......... :( so Apple fall even further behind.

iMeowbot
May 27, 2005, 11:37 AM
There's another fun new feature in those Pentium D chips, Microsoft DRM (http://www.digitmag.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=4915). Maybe waiting a little while longer for that 970MP isn't so bad.

Mr. Anderson
May 27, 2005, 11:40 AM
wow, dual cores at 2.8 to 3.2 GHz.....

Bleh, that's painful - I was really expecting that to be an Apple announcement, not Intel when it finally happened....


D :(

Earendil
May 27, 2005, 11:56 AM
guys guys, you're missing the bright side!!

"The Pentium D processor and supporting chips will target home computer users, particularly those who run more than one program at once or have software that is designed to take advantage of the extra computing horsepower of the chips' dual cores."


Anyone else get a laugh out of that? :D

*plays happily with his 1.25ghz G4 powerbook and his 10 apps open*

~Earendil
~Tyler

Dont Hurt Me
May 27, 2005, 12:00 PM
Not a word about AMDs dual core? anyone with a socket 939 is in luck :D

crap freakboy
May 27, 2005, 12:33 PM
I'm one amongst many of Mac users out there that are hoping IBM/Apple can pull something amazing out of the bag. Then I remind myself that I'm typing this on a Powermac G4 Sawtooth 400Mhz which runs Indesign, Photoshop, all the iApps, Illustrator to mention a few, and without any major beachballing. Now I may be wrong but would a M$ PC of the same era be able to hold its head high in this G4s company?
Saying that though, the G5 is a monster....can't believe how huge it is, or probably (if I manage convince 'er indoors to upgrade to one :( ) how fast it is. One day...one day...sigh. Currently 6 apps open, transferring 8 GB to various HD's, iChatting, surfing, sorting 24000 photos, listening to iTunes, checking mail...not a beachball insight. Now thats the sort of advertising Apple need to produce but on a G5 iMac with 20 apps open.

TwitchOSX
May 27, 2005, 12:59 PM
Sheet -

We are using a DP 2.5 here and I have at the moment: 19 apps open

9 of which are hard core heavy duty graphics applications. Only slow down I really see is in Safari.. but it could be because of the desktop switching application I have running - its a beta.. who knows. Other than that - its pretty smooth sailing.

brap
May 27, 2005, 01:10 PM
Newsflash: Dual core Pentiums suck donkey nuts. It's the dual core offering from AMD which is really cause for concern. Those things are fa-ast.

pontecorvo
May 27, 2005, 01:14 PM
Anyone else get a laugh out of that? :D
No.

*plays happily with his 1.25ghz G4 powerbook and his 10 apps open*
Are you implying that someone on an Intel-based laptop couldn't do the same? :mad:

macnulty
May 27, 2005, 08:48 PM
I'm one amongst many of Mac users out there that are hoping IBM/Apple can pull something amazing out of the bag. Then I remind myself that I'm typing this on a Powermac G4 Sawtooth 400Mhz which runs Indesign, Photoshop, all the iApps, Illustrator to mention a few, and without any major beachballing. Now I may be wrong but would a M$ PC of the same era be able to hold its head high in this G4s company?
Saying that though, the G5 is a monster....can't believe how huge it is, or probably (if I manage convince 'er indoors to upgrade to one :( ) how fast it is. One day...one day...sigh. Currently 6 apps open, transferring 8 GB to various HD's, iChatting, surfing, sorting 24000 photos, listening to iTunes, checking mail...not a beachball insight. Now thats the sort of advertising Apple need to produce but on a G5 iMac with 20 apps open.

I've got Panther running on a 6 year old Lombard, with a G4 upgrade to 433, it works. I'm not leaping tall buildings in a single bound but it works quite well. In the time I've owned this PB, my neighbors ( yes plural ) have gone through 2 upgrade cycles on their Inte/MS boxes. Value, who's was better? I have added additional Macs for the kids, so not that I'm a hold out.

jsw
May 27, 2005, 09:48 PM
Are you implying that someone on an Intel-based laptop couldn't do the same? :mad:I think that the implication is that OS X does better task switching than XP. My experience on numerous OS X and XP systems is that using multiple apps more or less "simultaneously" is smoother on a Mac. Not terribly smoother, but noticeably so. Plus, organization and navigation of multiple apps and multiple windows within apps is easier in OS X. I use both OS's daily, so, while this is just my opinion, it's an educated one.

poundsmack
May 27, 2005, 10:02 PM
Freescale, IBM get your butts in gear!!!


freescale has its but in gear. its e600 is avalible dual core, unfortunatly it is not in a single apple computer.

Bakey
May 28, 2005, 02:44 AM
Not a word about AMDs dual core? anyone with a socket 939 is in luck :D

"Next month, Intel rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) is expected to launch its first dual-core chips for mainstream desktop computers. AMD has already launched a dual-core chip for servers."

It's right there fella!!!

Besides, personally I'm more interested in what AMD has to offer than Intel, and is it not right that AMD & IBM have fairly close ties, eg. IBM fab labs produce AMD chips, or ex-AMD engineers now work for IBM... something like that!! :rolleyes:

solvs
May 28, 2005, 03:02 AM
Are you implying that someone on an Intel-based laptop couldn't do the same? :mad:
Can it be done? Sure. Is it done very well? Not really. More of a Windows issue than Intel. Though those AMDs are pretty nice. Not sure I'd want OS X running on x86, but I'm sure Apple is keeping their options open for PPC providers.

iceDogg
May 28, 2005, 09:55 AM
I used to find every single app on my iBook 900MHz G3 which was around 66 (DVD was also playing along with two gameboy advance emulators) and run them all at the same time. This made my dock touch both sides of the screen. Then I would do an Expose of all the windows open and laugh at my wintel friends :D

Abstract
May 28, 2005, 10:36 AM
I'll start to get worried when Intel and AMD have these things announced for 4-6 months, but IBM has not yet announced them. Until then, I'm not too concerned. :)

WHat's the main difference between a P4 with HT, and a dual core P4? Isn't it very easy for programs written that take advantage of HT also to take advantage of dual-core?

SPUY767
May 28, 2005, 11:17 AM
I'll start to get worried when Intel and AMD have these things announced for 4-6 months, but IBM has not yet announced them. Until then, I'm not too concerned. :)

WHat's the main difference between a P4 with HT, and a dual core P4? Isn't it very easy for programs written that take advantage of HT also to take advantage of dual-core?

In a word. No. Basically, hyperthreading is a way of switching between process threads in an efficient manner. Unfortunately, Windows is anything but efficient, and HT often ends up slowing things down more than up b/c it makes windows go ape. Dual Core processors, require specifically written multithreaded applications. These applications must be complete rewrites. There are add-ons, a la Photoshop for the daystar machines back in the mid 90s, but that only accelerates certain processes. Oh, and multithreaded programming is a bitch. Furthermore, I will guarantee you that most of the excrement factories that embody the greater portion of wintel developers will not invest the effort in Multithreaded Application programming for a long time, so this advent is nigh on useless ATM.

dubbz
May 28, 2005, 05:54 PM
Not really very interested in Intel's dual core offerings. They're "slow" and too hot. The only thing they have going for them is that they're available at a lower price point than AMD offerings, if you don't need the speed.
I'm interested in a relatively quiet system and good gaming performance, so AMD has the advantage... and the DRM thing doesn't exactly help Intel's cause.

rosalindavenue
May 28, 2005, 07:18 PM
Here's another thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=129103) concerning the Pentium D DRM-- conclusively demonstrates the evil of wintel--

Earendil
May 29, 2005, 12:39 AM
No.


Are you implying that someone on an Intel-based laptop couldn't do the same? :mad:

No, I'm pointing out that the article was implying that.

SiliconAddict
May 29, 2005, 02:43 AM
Can it be done? Sure. Is it done very well? Not really..

Bullcrap.

solvs
May 29, 2005, 05:12 AM
Bullcrap.
I'll remember that the next time I'm using Windows when some program starts taking up 99% of my 2GHz AMD CPU Usage (1GB PC2700 RAM, 64MB GF4, 7200RPM hard drive) and I have to wait to do anything else. You can do multiple high-end apps in Windows, I just said OS X can do it better. Occasional multiple dock bounces and spinning beach balls notwithstanding. :p

Happens at work with our 3GHz Dells as well, but I guess I can blame some of it on our network.

Earendil
May 29, 2005, 09:58 AM
Bullcrap.

No, really. And I mean that in a kind and gentle manner :)

But, it all depends on the person and the environment in which the person is trying to work.

I can write code, and it matters little which OS I'm working in, because I tend to (at my level) only use a single application. The application varies, but I don't interact with the OS that much.

Web dev though I tend to have about 10-15 apps open (depending on if I have PS open as well) and actively use 6-8 in the process of writing HTML and building a site. To me, it feels claustrophobic to work under windows. Even alt-tabbing is nothing like expose.

Now there are those that don't like using expose, or people that aren't yet able to utilize it very well. But I'm quite adapt at using my 4 button (with 2 more combo buttons) to manipulate my screen, or two screens, with ease using Expose. Under XP this experience isn't nearly so great. And this isn't a one time deal, I've taken both CS classes as well as internet application dev class. I had to spend entire semesters dealing with windows and the environment. To clarify real fast, I don't tell you that to lord my Windows experience over you, because I'm aware you have more, but to qualify my own experience with the two operating systems.

Now, of course I feel the same way about jaguar too, so the issue I bring up here is really only a brand new one.

And windows machines can't multi-task unless all the virus/spyware is removed...
I don't mean that as the "same old Windows jab", but that my gf just about through her computer to the ground last night because it took over a minute to start up firefox. her 2 year old dell laptop is buggered, and it's sad. It would be funny if the solution to spyware was just to make the computers faster :D
^^ A Joke ^^

Anyhoo...

~Tyler
~Earendil

SiliconAddict
May 30, 2005, 04:55 PM
I'll remember that the next time I'm using Windows when some program starts taking up 99% of my 2GHz AMD CPU Usage (1GB PC2700 RAM, 64MB GF4, 7200RPM hard drive) and I have to wait to do anything else. You can do multiple high-end apps in Windows, I just said OS X can do it better. Occasional multiple dock bounces and spinning beach balls notwithstanding. :p

Happens at work with our 3GHz Dells as well, but I guess I can blame some of it on our network.

:rolleyes: Yes and next you will tell me the DVD in your DVD drive spins up faster because its running OSX....
That's just FUD pure and simple. And I'm telling you this as someone who has worked with windows since 3.11. Used Windows 95, 98, 98SE, 2K, XP, 2K Server, 2003, and is currently beta testing Longhorn in our office. I'm certified in Windows 2000 Pro and Advanced Server and just finished my certs for Windows XP. I've got my A+ cets my security+ certs, and work in the IT industry and can tell you that what you are saying is unfiltered complete and total BS. Apple is NO better about opening apps you are basing your observations on what? Pure observation? What OS's are you running? What OS at home? What OS at work? What type of NOS are you running at work? Is it a managed environment? What deployment tools do they use if any? What do you have connected on IDE chain with your hard drive. Anything? That can impact performance. What type of AMD CPU? How do you have your motherboard configured? What patches have you applied to your systems? Etc, etc, etc.
If you want a rebuttal then explain why all the single CPU systems at the Apple store take a good 10+ seconds to open apps? Explain why I can drum my fingers at least 5 times waiting for iTunes to open. Then you have CPU usage. Explain why after a reboot that clears memory the CPU spikes with iTunes, iPhoto, Garage Band? Every OS spikes when opening up an application. If you system takes an abnormally long time to open apps I’d suggest that there is something wrong with your computer. My referb Dell 2.8Ghz, 1.5GB RAM, 120GB HD opens most apps within 5 seconds with the exception of Adobe’s bloatware and iTunes.

solvs
May 31, 2005, 03:33 AM
:rolleyes: Yes and next you will tell me the DVD in your DVD drive spins up faster because its running OSX....
Actually, that does take longer for some reason. And sometimes, the CD/DVD comes out hot. Didn't say OS X was perfect, or that you couldn't multi-task in Windows. I just think it's better on OS X.

I also work in IT, have all the same certs you do, used all Windows versions from 3.1 - XP, Macs from 7 to 10.4. OS 9 and sooner sucked at multi-tasking, worse than Win95, but since 10.2 (maybe even 10.1) it's been better on the Mac. Maybe not on the minis, definitely not on the ones at the Apple Stores (I have no idea why they are so slow, but they are). But my I do know friend got a 20" 1.8GHz G5 iMac, and it is way faster than the ones I played with in the store, especially when we added another 512MB. Everything is near instantaneous, no matter what I threw at it (Photoshop being the exception, but even that was surprisingly fast). I wouldn't say my upgraded Beige G3 was a speed demon, but it was remarkably stable running 10.2.8. Can't say the same for most of the Windows machines I've worked on, but I guess I am biased, since I do IT and happen to see a lot of the worst of Windows. I could tell you stories.

I don't know what to tell you, this all just my opinion based on the experiences I've had with computers. YMMV.

swheeler
May 31, 2005, 03:34 AM
I used to find every single app on my iBook 900MHz G3 which was around 66 (DVD was also playing along with two gameboy advance emulators) and run them all at the same time. This made my dock touch both sides of the screen. Then I would do an Expose of all the windows open and laugh at my wintel friends :D

Consider yourself an inspiration:
http://img82.echo.cx/img82/8997/picture24bh.th.jpg (http://img82.echo.cx/my.php?image=picture24bh.jpg)
Several programs running, with every artist folder in my music folder open.