PDA

View Full Version : Which Intel Processors will Apple use?


k2k koos
Jun 10, 2005, 03:03 PM
Just curious, after all the G5 hype about high speed frontside busses, true 64 bitness etc etc, which Intel processor could compete with that? What does Intel have in the pipe line to make the switch for Apple such that it seems no step backwards? EG: the Xeon processor is 64 bit, but has a 800 Mhz FSB, unlike our G5's, which have fsb at half the cpu speed.
If apples propaganda is to be believed, a fast fsb matters more than even the cpu speed.

Anyone?

risc
Jun 10, 2005, 03:48 PM
Not too sure about the PowerBooks but the Conroe (or Woodcrest) would be the Intel processor I'd love to see in the new Power Mac, and the Conroe should be in full swing by the time the Power Macs are released in 2007 so heres hoping! :)

MacTruck
Jun 10, 2005, 04:10 PM
Here is a pretty good forecast:

http://arstechnica.com/columns/mac/mac-20050608.ars

risc
Jun 10, 2005, 05:12 PM
Thanks for the link, I'm glad to see Arstechnica believe the Conroe may be the processor for the new Power Mac x86s, it'll be a nice update from my dual 1.8!

Fun times ahead!

Crikey
Jun 10, 2005, 05:37 PM
I have a sinking feeling that Apple will choose to power its "consumer" line of Macs with Intel's "consumer" line of CPUs, the Celerons. That will widen the performance gulf between the iBooks and PowerBooks, and between the iMacs and "professional" desktops. Right now I think the iBook is a good deal, outmoded G4 CPU and all.

The only consolation is that a 2007 Celeron will hopefully be faster than a 1.5GHz G4, which is what Apple would probably still be using if they stayed with PowerPC.


Crikey

Jason Vene
Jun 12, 2005, 09:14 AM
If Apple had stayed with the PowerPC line, it would have been dragged into one of IBM's recurring themes (and already had to some degree). IBM has a history of creating a new industry or technology, dominating for a while, then managing to make itself irrelevant in that industry.

Now Sony and Microsoft and manage to endure the same legacy in the game console business, and Apple can move on without the baggage.

Dreadnought
Jun 12, 2005, 03:14 PM
It's a bit weird isn't it, Apple going with Intel and M$ going with IBM powerpc chips (for the Xbox atleast). Hell has really frozen over! :D

law guy
Jun 12, 2005, 10:20 PM
Some interesting links regarding Intel's Merom - the chip scheduled to replace Yohah. Multiple cores and 4 MB of L2 cache. As opposed to PPC, it's nice to "see the future" a bit with Intel. These are slated, apparently for later '06 introduction.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23055 - details the 64 bit dual cores for desktop and notebooks and the 4-core Xeon member of the family.

"There are three chips. Merom, the mobile part, Conroe, the desktop, and Woodcrest, the Xeon. They will be followed by Whitefield, essentially a four core follow on to Woodcrest. All of them, except Whitefield, will be dual core from the start.

All of these parts will be completely new from the ground up. The talk of them being Pentium M based is complete bull because these are next generation "brains of the computer". They have all of the features of the current chips, all the *Ts (Socket Ts), and a few more, and of course are 64 bit. The most surprising bit is that they will not have on die memory controllers on Merom and Conroe. Woodcrest will be FBD (fully buffered DIMM) enabled, so look for the potential to have stupidly large amounts of RAM on it."

***


" If you are wondering about the rather anaemic 65 nanometre Pentium 4 based dual core offerings, wonder no more. This is all because all the engineers were pulled off the projects to make Merom a smashing success. The PRs were gagged. The early word is all thumbs up and ahead of schedule. The 65 nanometre process, it appears, is well beyond healthy, and has some surprises lurking.

The chips will be "out" starting in late 2006 with Merom, followed by Conroe, then Woodcrest. We expect them to be publicly shown at the next Spring IDF, and perhaps Chipzilla will lift the veil and show off a couple of early early samples at Fall IDF, if there is one. Nut Intel may not have functional silicon by then."


http://www.endian.net/details.asp?ItemNo=3883

http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/ has a good roundup of recent Intel articles a bit down the page.