Intel's Penryn Chip Performance Boosts

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Intel announced (http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20070416comp_b.htm) some performance details on the upcoming Penryn processors at the Intel Developer Forum in Beijing.

Penryn (http://guides.macrumors.com/Penryn) is the next chip family based on the Core micro-architecture and will include a number of enhancements (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/03/28/intel-details-chip-roadmap/) along with a die-shrink to 45nm. The upcoming Penryn chips will be marketed under both the "Core" and "Xeon" brand names and encompass the entire spectrum of products (mobile, desktop, server).

According to Intel executive, Penryn-based computers will see the following speed improvements over the current Core 2 Extreme processors

- 15% for imaging-related
- 25% for 3-D rendering
- 40% for gaming
- 40% for video encoding (SSE4 optimized)

The comparison was made between 3.33GHz pre-production Penryn processor vs 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme processor-based desktop-class machines.

For workstations and "high-performance computing", Penryn is said to provide improvements of:

- 45% for "bandwidth intensive applications
- 25% for servers using Java

These comparisons were made between pre-production Xeon (Penryn) processor vs Xeon 5355 processor-based workstations.

Penryn chips are expected to be released later in 2007.

[diamond3]

those seem like some nice numbers. now its just a matter of how long.

[twoodcc]

those seem like some nice numbers. now its just a matter of how long.

yes they do.

can't wait to see those in some macs!

[DannyBoye]

At what point are we going to level out with these chips. I know it's great we just keep getting faster and faster chips, but damn! Every week it seems something better is out, that is **% faster than before.

[IEatApples]

I wish we could see these kinds of speed improvements in the HDs & CD/DVD players. :(

But, I always love a faster Mac! :D

[Spanky Deluxe]

The 15% performance boost in "imaging-related" tasks, i.e. probably the Photoshop and Flash programs of this world, isn't really all that impressive for a processor just under 14% faster in clock speed.

Not that I wouldn't some of these chips, that's just not a very impressive statistic to quote!!

[theheadguy]

At what point are we going to level out with these chips. I know it's great we just keep getting faster and faster chips, but damn! Every week it seems something better is out, that is **% faster than before.
and yet with all those **% faster chips, i STILL have to wait a long time for all applications to load! :p

[MacsRgr8]

yes they do.

can't wait to see those in some macs!

Now, that'll be my next Mac Pro. :cool:

[Telp]

Oh man !! 3.33GHz!! Thats amazing ! That makes me feel even worse about being on my G5, though i love it :D.

[blargh-man]

At what point are we going to level out with these chips. I know it's great we just keep getting faster and faster chips, but damn! Every week it seems something better is out, that is **% faster than before.

I believe its called progression :p

We will level out when the chips are so powerful they take over and zap us all into a substance very much like 2000 degree oxtail soup (according to Stephen Hawkings anyway) :p

[Wie Gehts]

Are their certain hardware requirements to run Leopard? Is this some kind of 64 bit OS? Does whatever hardware upgrades due for the macbooks (santa rosa, display resolution??) going to take full advantage of the new OS, or am I gonna have to put off this major purchase of mine longer?
I don't know about anything...I'm just asking. I use ten year old macs..I haven't a clue. This time around I want to be on top of the technology wave rather than behind!!

[Capstone]

So how long till these make it in an 8-core mac? Summer, Fall? Who knows? I am ready to purchase the current 8-core right now but man, after this I want to wait b/c a 25% increase in 3-D rendering and 40% in encoding...WOW...got to get back listening to the lecture at NAB! :)

[tuartboy]

and yet with all those **% faster chips, i STILL have to wait a long time for all applications to load! :p

No kidding.

With all the advances in microchips you would think we would be using something other than little disks spinning around to store and read data.

If it feels like 1950's technology, it's because it is...

[guzhogi]

I wish we could see these kinds of speed improvements in the HDs & CD/DVD players. :(

Me, too. But I'm sure a lot of it is just the connectors (SATA, Firewire, etc.) and OS not being able to keep up w/ it.

As far as CD/DVDs, one thing that prevents them from getting faster is just physics. With the discs spinning so faster, if they went any faster, they'd fly apart! But look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein-coated_disc and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc Holographic discs can (theoretically) hold 3.9 TB of data and transfer at 1 gigabit/second while Protein-coated discs can hold 50 TB (don't know what transfer speed is, though)! :eek: :D

[guzhogi]

and yet with all those **% faster chips, i STILL have to wait a long time for all applications to load! :p

I have the same feeling. The slowdown is probably b/c the OS & software isn't optimized to go so fast.

[Sunrunner]

Now, that'll be my next Mac Pro. :cool:

Same here. A High-end Mac Pro with Penryn chips and 10.5 pre-loaded. Thats my new bar for the next puchase.

No kidding.

With all the advances in microchips you would think we would be using something other than little disks spinning around to store and read data.

If it feels like 1950's technology, it's because it is...

Solid-state memory is only a few years out...

[Analog Kid]

The 15% performance boost in "imaging-related" tasks, i.e. probably the Photoshop and Flash programs of this world, isn't really all that impressive for a processor just under 14% faster in clock speed.

Not that I wouldn't some of these chips, that's just not a very impressive statistic to quote!!
Exactly my thoughts when I saw these numbers... And on Intel's own benchmarks, no less. That said, they did get the clock rate up, so the improvements will be real to the user, even if they aren't a full 15%.

The other thing I don't understand is why they're focusing on graphics related tasks when most of that work is being offloaded to the GPU. Just another reason they need to move to heterogeneous cores. Superscalar and matrix processing don't make sense locked together in a multi-core design competing with yet another processor out on an expansion bus.

Oh man !! 3.33GHz!! Thats amazing ! That makes me feel even worse about being on my G5, though i love it :D.
Yeah, I feel horrible about my dual 2.5GHz G5. If I knew 3 years ago what I know now, I'd definitely have waited for this fall...

[NtotheIzoo]

it says later 2007...anyone have any clue when we might begin seeing these in Macs???

[scrambledwonder]

Solid-state memory is only a few years out...

Yep, and as soon as somebody will sell me a 128 GB flash SSD that'll replace my laptop's drive, I'm buying it. Lower power consumption, faster read and write times. Well worth prying open my laptop.

[localoid]

The 15% performance boost in "imaging-related" tasks, i.e. probably the Photoshop and Flash programs of this world, isn't really all that impressive for a processor just under 14% faster in clock speed.

Not that I wouldn't some of these chips, that's just not a very impressive statistic to quote!!

Do you find this more impressive then? :p

Intel demonstrated its fastest multi-core processor yet at the Spring Intel Development Forum (IDF) in Beijing on Tuesday, an 80-core processor that hit a speedy 2-teraflops (trillions of floating point operations per second) in a demonstration. More... (http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=17784)

[alywa]

I don't know about you all, but when I read releases like this I am reminded about how wise the switch to Intel was. IBM was on the verge of getting absolutely flogged, and Steve was let in on that fact.

[nagromme]

My impression is that Penryn chips are expected to enter production late this year but SHIP in 2008:

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/16/HNintelbeyondsantarosa_1.html

[rxse7en]

I wonder if Apple has any Cell Processor or Power 6 based prototype Macs in their labs :D

B

[bbplayer5]

If you use your mac for games, and play at 1920x1200 or higher, these processors wont give you any performance increase. Anything that high in res is 99% video card.

[johnee]

I wonder if Apple has any Cell Processor or Power 6 based prototype Macs in their labs :D

B

no.

[NtotheIzoo]

thanx...just what i was looking for!

My impression is that Penryn chips are expected to enter production late this year but SHIP in 2008:

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/16/HNintelbeyondsantarosa_1.html

[jholzner]

At what point are we going to level out with these chips. I know it's great we just keep getting faster and faster chips, but damn! Every week it seems something better is out, that is **% faster than before.

Every week? Seems most around here are b*tching for Apple to update their product lines despite that fact that there is no new tech from intel for apple to use until May!

[roland.g]

That's nice to see though we'll be looking at Penryn based Macs with mobile variants vs. the current Merom Core 2 Duos and not the Conroe extremes. Though they did measure desktop to desktop, so it's nice to see that the Penryn outperformed the high end Conroe that well. I wonder if we will see 3.0+ghz versions of the mobile Penryns in MBs, MBPs, and iMacs...

[scrambledwonder]

What about power consumption? Will we see less power consumption?

[guzhogi]

Every week? Seems most around here are b*tching for Apple to update their product lines despite that fact that there is no new tech from intel for apple to use until May!

I totally agree. It seems like everyone on this board wants a new feature/faster thing every week. If that happens, they'll just turn around and complain that the computer they just got a week ago is already obsolete. Very hypocritical. Up until about April of last year, my dad used a G3 iMac he got in 1998. It served him fine until it started slowing down too much. But 1998-2006 is a long time in computer terms. If he can handle it, pretty much anyone can.

[johnee]

Every week? Seems most around here are b*tching for Apple to update their product lines despite that fact that there is no new tech from intel for apple to use until May!

people are just salivating when they see intel showing off. Its Pavlovian.

[daneoni]

Meh.....my view is people should buy the current chips based on the santa rosa platform and wait for Nehalem as the next upgrade and skip Penryn all together. The numbers just aren't all that great IMHO

[motulist]

Every now and then when I hear about a new piece of high technology, which is really just an incremental upgrade, it just makes me marvel that any of this stuff even works at all! Can you imagine how small these tiny little parts are that are doing these calculations? And isn't it amazing that these calculations which do everything, like making your printer shoot ink out in a recognizable pattern, are really all done by unfathomably small charged electrons flying around in tiny little channels of material etched into incomprehensibly complex patterns?

[guzhogi]

The Register has an interesting article about IBM developing a 3D kind of processor. Here's the link: http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/04/12/ibm_chip_stack_technique/
Pretty interesting.

[TheAnswer]

My impression is that Penryn chips are expected to enter production late this year but SHIP in 2008:

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/16/HNintelbeyondsantarosa_1.html

It's too late...the surge of high expectations have already started. Once the Macrumors main page says:

Penryn chips are expected to be released later in 2007.

We can be assured that come December, the lack of Penryn based Macs with be used by the whiners to indicate the "latest Apple betrayal".

[scrambledwonder]

Meh.....my view is people should buy the current chips based on the santa rosa platform and wait for Nehalem as the next upgrade and skip Penryn all together. The numbers just aren't all that great IMHO

Eggzonctly what I'm going to do. Erm, did. Will do. You get the picture.

[localoid]

people are just salivating when they see intel showing off. Its Pavlovian.

The masses have been trained to be "good consumers", you're saying? :p

If so, I agree. ;)

[rxse7en]

no.

Seems like PPC is still a viable option, would hate to think that Apple wouldn't have a small team keeping the dream alive.

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6124451.html

[NtotheIzoo]

Meh.....my view is people should buy the current chips based on the santa rosa platform and wait for Nehalem as the next upgrade and skip Penryn all together. The numbers just aren't all that great IMHO

can you give me some reasons why you feel this way???...im just wondering and if it'll take a while, could you just send me a few links...i've done a little bit of reading on the architectures, but am wondering your take.

thanx

[johnee]

Seems like PPC is still a viable option, would hate to think that Apple wouldn't have a small team keeping the dream alive.

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6124451.html

P6 is a beast, but it's an impressive beast. I think it would truly be overkill even for pro machines. it's got everything but the kitchen sink.

I was made painfully aware last year we don't have a relationship with apple anymore, that's pretty obvious by the current lineup.

However, if apple could get P6 into a portable, I might be impressed. :D

[Much Ado]

Who is rating this news as negative???

Why?

[FriarTuck]

but.. but... Apple was crazy to go with Intel instead of AMD!!! ;)

[rxse7en]

P6 is a beast, but it's an impressive beast. I think it would truly be overkill even for pro machines. it's got everything but the kitchen sink.

I was made painfully aware last year we don't have a relationship with apple anymore, that's pretty obvious by the current lineup.

However, if apple could get P6 into a portable, I might be impressed. :D

I think, just as Steve-O had the secret Intel division up and running, he would have the alternate PPC division still running. I wonder how difficult/profitable it would be to offer Intel and PPC. FOr the short term I highly, highly doubt we'll see a peep of PPC but as time goes by and Moore's Law starts taking a hit on the Intel side we may see PPC pop by for another visit.

Just my $.02.
B

[iJawn108]

http://www.engadget.com/2007/04/17/intel-talks-up-multi-core-larrabee-processor-powerline-ethernet/

Penryn are already old news, larabee is where it's at.

[johnee]

but.. but... Apple was crazy to go with Intel instead of AMD!!! ;)

I think apple looks for vendors by seeing which of them kisses apple's butt the best :p

[NewbieNerd]

it says later 2007...anyone have any clue when we might begin seeing these in Macs???

Well seeing how the mac mini might not ever see the C2D, Apple could very well just skip it! :rolleyes:

[johnee]

...larabee is where it's at.

yeah, it's got two turn tables and a microphone

[pgwalsh]

I wish we could see these kinds of speed improvements in the HDs & CD/DVD players. :(

But, I always love a faster Mac! :D
Improvements in hard drive speed are being driven by Solid State Drives. Once price comes down and businesses show a need, then you'll see production ramp up.

[mkrishnan]

yeah, it's got two turn tables and a microphone

:D

Larabee is not a successor to the Core architecture processors anyway. It does something quite different.

[Performa]

I believe its called progression :p

We will level out when the chips are so powerful they take over and zap us all into a substance very much like 2000 degree oxtail soup (according to Stephen Hawkings anyway) :p


When did Stephen Hawking grow that "S" on the end of his last name?

[slimp]

the important question is: how soon will we see a price drop in the current line?

[mashinhead]

are these all quad-core chips? what kind of speed will we see for the mobile processors?

[dartzorichalcos]

I think Apple delayed Leopard because they want to release Leopard and update the macs with Penryn at the same time. Apple is probably going to skip the first Santa Rosa platform update.

[Butthead]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Intel announced (http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20070416comp_b.htm) some performance details on the upcoming Penryn processors at the Intel Developer Forum in Beijing.

Penryn (http://guides.macrumors.com/Penryn) is the next chip family based on the Core micro-architecture and will include a number of enhancements (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/03/28/intel-details-chip-roadmap/) along with a die-shrink to 45nm. The upcoming Penryn chips will be marketed under both the "Core" and "Xeon" brand names and encompass the entire spectrum of products (mobile, desktop, server).

According to Intel executive, Penryn-based computers will see the following speed improvements over the current Core 2 Extreme processors

- 15% for imaging-related
- 25% for 3-D rendering
- 40% for gaming
- 40% for video encoding (SSE4 optimized)

The comparison was made between 3.33GHz pre-production Penryn processor vs 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme processor-based desktop-class machines.

For workstations and "high-performance computing", Penryn is said to provide improvements of:

- 45% for "bandwidth intensive applications
- 25% for servers using Java

These comparisons were made between pre-production Xeon (Penryn) processor vs Xeon 5355 processor-based workstations.

Penryn chips are expected to be released later in 2007.

Really? :p , I would have thought the title of the thread was going to be 'Intel's latest chips degrade performance' , lol. That's a no brainer.

What was really more interesting was what was reported about what Intel said in this link, from my post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=3554881&postcount=170) on the 'other' Penryn thread below this one- yesterday. Lol, just like the person who posted shortly thereafter, I suppose many MR readers just don't get it, kind of slooooow...like that PC guy in the Apple TV ads, "Um, what?"

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/16/HNintelbeyondsantarosa_1.html

[RedDragon870503]

I wonder if Apple has any Cell Processor or Power 6 based prototype Macs in their labs :D

B

I hope they don't... they obviously need all those engineers to be working on the iPhone!

[kiang]

lol, this means I'll wait a bit longer for my MBP :p

[nagromme]

If you use your mac for games, and play at 1920x1200 or higher, these processors wont give you any performance increase. Anything that high in res is 99% video card.

Not strictly true, as AI and physics get more advanced.

Also, people should not forget power savings. Which in turn leads to cooler, quieter, smaller machines that last longer on a battery charge for a given performance level.

[shawnce]

Intel details Penryn performance, new SSE4 extensions (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070417-intel-details-penryn-performance-sse4.html)

[shawnce]

I think Apple delayed Leopard because they want to release Leopard and update the macs with Penryn at the same time. Apple is probably going to skip the first Santa Rosa platform update.

No real reason to lock all of those together...

[marktesssing]

Apple is probably going to skip the first Santa Rosa platform update.

penryn is the processor and sr is the chipset. sr chipset will work with todays c2d chips as well as penryn when it comes out

[shawnce]

are these all quad-core chips? what kind of speed will we see for the mobile processors? Nope they aren't all quad core. Mobile space will get the SSE4 benefits, etc. and of course better power/heat profile at the same clock rate.

[Tattoo]

Im wondering if he wet his pants yet! :D

[GanleyBurger]

.

I ated they penryn berries. They taste like... burning!!!!

[dartzorichalcos]

penryn is the processor and sr is the chipset.
I know that
sr chipset will work with todays c2d chips as well as penryn when it comes out
The new Core 2 Duo and Penryn (the ones that are going to be included with Santa Rosa platform) processors will have different sockets than todays processors.

[kiang]

The new Core 2 Duo and Penryn (the ones that are going to be included with Santa Rosa platform) processors will have different sockets than todays processors.

sockets and chipsets aren't bound to each other :rolleyes:

[Maccus Aurelius]

I totally agree. It seems like everyone on this board wants a new feature/faster thing every week. If that happens, they'll just turn around and complain that the computer they just got a week ago is already obsolete. Very hypocritical. Up until about April of last year, my dad used a G3 iMac he got in 1998. It served him fine until it started slowing down too much. But 1998-2006 is a long time in computer terms. If he can handle it, pretty much anyone can.

I still use my 400MHz iMac, but it's been relegated to small integrated DVD player. It still boots quickly enough, and opens apps just fine. I'll probably never get rid of it until it dies completely. If just the HDD blows out, I'll probably just stick another in it and keep using it. I am by no means a big power user, so I'm doubtful I'd see or even care about the speed improvements of the upcoming chips. All I really care about is the ability to run more simultaneously without choking the computer, which is what my macbook does with my modest apps, and what my old Inspiron cannot.

Any improvements are a good thing though. I think the people that are rating this article a negative are soft in the head. Seriously...what gives? Did you babies want Intel to create the improbability drive or something?

[QCassidy352]

Meh.....my view is people should buy the current chips based on the santa rosa platform and wait for Nehalem as the next upgrade and skip Penryn all together. The numbers just aren't all that great IMHO

lol. When core duo came out, people said they would skip that and wait for merom because core duo was just a "stop gap"... then that came out, and some core duo users, and some PPC users, said they'd just wait for penryn because that's where the real boost was. I'm sure that when Penryn comes out somebody will say to buy that and hold out for whatever comes after Nehalem because Nehalem is only x% better than Penryn...

There's always something better, but it's always just incrementally better (except the G4 --> core duo switch, which is why I bought a rev. A macbook).

edit: just looked at Power6, and good lord but it looks powerful. I bet, and hope, apple still has PPC systems kicking around.

[MacGuffin]

We can be assured that come December, the lack of Penryn based Macs with be used by the whiners to indicate the "latest Apple betrayal".

We need a name for what you're doing, which is whining about whining. :rolleyes:

[AidenShaw]

P6 is a beast, but it's an impressive beast.

"P6" is the Intel Pentium Pro / PII / PIII (and therefore in a way, the current Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest chips). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_P6

I assume that you meant POWER6 ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POWER6

[05elstonc]

I am still on my 12" PB. The G4 is certainly beginning to show its age, however my daily activities of surfing, iTunes, email, and chat is really no big deal for the little monster. Sometimes I get frustrated when the finder hangs or firefox chokes when I have 20 tabs open, but that is me just being silly. As much as I want to rush to the store and buy a Macbook with 2gig of ram I just am not sure I really need it. Now I certainly WANT it, but I have gotten more out of my Apple TV than a few faster loading apps. That is why I think Apple is so excited about their other 3 divisions. iPod, AppleTV, and iPhone are lustfull devices. For the majority of people computers are just tools, and once they move to a mac their upgrade cycle slows because they work too damn well, they don't slow down and don't crash. So how does Apple continue to grow profits as their computers reach a level where everyday tasks are computationally childs play? They sell lustfull devices that you can't help but want to the newest one. Many of my friends bought the 2nd Gen nano even though they had the 1st Gen Nano too! They just thought it was "sick". I think Leopard with Core Animation is going to be drool worthy and will drive many people like me to make the jump to some new hardware to experience the fantastical UI's we will see as a result of Core Animation.

[Multimedia]

So I guess I'm gonna wait for that version of the 8 core Mac Pro before I pull the trigger. My Quad G5 will still serve me well enough for the rest of 2007 if need be. I'd rather keep saving more money meanwhile than buy an 8 core now that hasn't got a lot of brains behind its brawn. :)

[Chef Medeski]

The current Core 2 Duo is plenty fast (speaking solely about mobile purposes such as Macbook Pro) compared to my G4. So I dont care so much about size change as efficiency. If it can do the same or slightly less performance for a LOT less energy. I would be a lot happier. 5/6 hours for a macbook Pro. That would just be amazing. Lets see firstly how good Santa Rosa is and if Penryn will really affect it.

[Digital Skunk]

17 inch MacBook Pro Quad Core...

Yup! That's my next big machine... right next to my 8 Core Mac Pro...:D

Hopefully this dream will come true.

[Digital Skunk]

The current Core 2 Duo is plenty fast (speaking solely about mobile purposes such as Macbook Pro) compared to my G4. So I dont care so much about size change as efficiency. If it can do the same or slightly less performance for a LOT less energy. I would be a lot happier. 5/6 hours for a macbook Pro. That would just be amazing. Lets see firstly how good Santa Rosa is and if Penryn will really affect it.

I would like that alot. Especially on the MacBook side of the fence. Better battery life at the same speeds or slightly higher would be very nice. I would still like the best of the best performance for the high end 15" and 17" MacBook Pro.

[Chef Medeski]

I would like that alot. Especially on the MacBook side of the fence. Better battery life at the same speeds or slightly higher would be very nice. I would still like the best of the best performance for the high end 15" and 17" MacBook Pro.
A choice would be good since some people care more about battery and others about performance.

[Chef Medeski]

I think Apple delayed Leopard because they want to release Leopard and update the macs with Penryn at the same time. Apple is probably going to skip the first Santa Rosa platform update.

LOL.

So we are going to wait until Spring 2008?

[GanleyBurger]

.

Apple needs to do a little PR work. Marketing 101: What's in it for 'us?" How about giving us a free upgrade to Leopard if we buy a new computer now... or half off of an iphone with purchase... or add an Apple Care Buyers Remorse plan for $150, that if a new hardware platform comes out within 60 days of purchase, you can upgrade to the newer computer....??? Something, anything...

Do we even get Santa Rosa???:eek:

Or will they skip that... and just go with Penrym in Q4?

[polishmacuser]

great just great now its going to be the same thing with santa rosa.

[dante@sisna.com]

So I guess I'm gonna wait for that version of the 8 core Mac Pro before I pull the trigger. My Quad G5 will still serve me well enough for the rest of 2007 if need be. I'd rather keep saving more money meanwhile than buy an 8 core now that hasn't got a lot of brains behind its brawn. :)

I have reached the same decision. Worth waiting for efficiency.

[Mr. lax]

"Crosses fingers" Please be used in Imacs, Please be used in Imacs

But really though thats good news for intel and for Apple.

[EagerDragon]

Hope they get ahead of schedule on these chips. They sound sweet and powerful. 6 months ahead to hit AMD over the head would be sweet.

[MacCoaster]

Really? :p , I would have thought the title of the thread was going to be 'Intel's latest chips degrade performance' , lol. That's a no brainer.

What was really more interesting was what was reported about what Intel said in this link, from my post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=3554881&postcount=170) on the 'other' Penryn thread below this one- yesterday. Lol, just like the person who posted shortly thereafter, I suppose many MR readers just don't get it, kind of slooooow...like that PC guy in the Apple TV ads, "Um, what?"

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/16/HNintelbeyondsantarosa_1.html
That article only mentions that a mobile Penryn CHIPSET (i.e. not processor, 2nd gen Santa Rosa) is to be released in 1H2008 . Also a quad core Penryn mobile chip will be released in 2008. Penryn is available in dual core and quad core configurations for Server and Desktop as well and IIRC those will be released in late 2007.

[Stella]

These look good. Maybe I should wait until these are in a Powerbook.

Maybe after that, Intel will announce a quad core mobile processor... that I'll have to wait for.

Perhaps by that time, Apple will announce the shipping of 10.5 in 2 months time.. that I'll just have to wait for...


.... before upgrading my Powerbook.

[jesteraver]

Be sweet if Intel releases them like in October when Leopard is released :)

[Chef Medeski]

That article only mentions that a mobile Penryn CHIPSET (i.e. not processor, 2nd gen Santa Rosa) is to be released in 1H2008 . Also a [B]quad core Penryn mobile chip[/N] will be released in 2008. Penryn is available in dual core and quad core configurations for Server and Desktop as well and IIRC those will be released in late 2007.

There is no such thing as a mobile Penryn chipset. Its a chip. The next mobile chipset after Santa Rosa is Nehalem. And like Santa Rosa. It will use the Penryn processor initally then switch to a even smaller processor (tick-tock). If the mobile Penryn processor is released in 1H2008. Then expect to see it in laptops around March/April and in Macs in like May/June :p .



.

Apple needs to do a little PR work. Marketing 101: What's in it for 'us?" How about giving us a free upgrade to Leopard if we buy a new computer now... or half off of an iphone with purchase... or add an Apple Care Buyers Remorse plan for $150, that if a new hardware platform comes out within 60 days of purchase, you can upgrade to the newer computer....??? Something, anything...

Do we even get Santa Rosa???:eek:

Or will they skip that... and just go with Penrym in Q4?

Penryn in Q2 2008 at the earliest. Which means we better not skip it. Because there are a lot of benifits of Santa Rosa (personally I think the processor bump is nothing compared to Santa Rosa, Core Duo to Core 2 Duo wasnt much of a leap.) So, if they were to skip Santa Rosa, I think it would be detrimental. People already dont want to buy because they are not getting Leopard but when Santa Rosa comes rolling around next month with faster FBS, Robson caching, improved battery life, and alittle bump of speed AS well. Then I doubt Apple is going to think its a good idea to bypass the entire christmas season without one of these slick new machines.

Im buying a Santa Rosa machine. Been waiting for it (mostly for .11n and Robson, which eliminated the former) just because my PB was doing good. But now its showin its age and hopefully within 2-3 months (summer is my buying season) a new MBP will be out. Perfect. Me, wait for Penyrn, hell no. Hopefully they also use the LED screen. That would just be a great update.

[Zwhaler]

I just can't wait to see how fast the new Penryn Xeon Chips clock out at. 16 cores! :p

[Chef Medeski]

Be sweet if Intel releases them like in October when Leopard is released :)

HAHAHAHAHA. Its more likely for Q3 of 2008! than this year. Dont get your hopes up or anyone elses. You will not see Penyrn in a machine before the years out based on the current roadmap. If they jump the gun I would be quite surprised to see it even make in computers for December, let alone October.

[jesteraver]

HAHAHAHAHA. Its more likely for Q3 of 2008! than this year. Dont get your hopes up or anyone elses. You will not see Penyrn in a machine before the years out based on the current roadmap. If they jump the gun I would be quite surprised to see it even make in computers for December, let alone October.

You look familiar did you teach at Riverdale High School?

[Chef Medeski]

You look familiar did you teach at Riverdale High School?

Im in CEGEP. Ive never taught anywhere. ;)

[jesteraver]

Im in CEGEP. Ive never taught anywhere. ;)

from the small photo you have as your avatar you actually look like one of my profs back in high school lol ... guess its not ur pic ?!

Which cegep are you at?

[shawnce]

There is no such thing as a mobile Penryn chipset. Its a chip. The next mobile chipset after Santa Rosa is Nehalem. Actually Penryn (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070417-intel-details-penryn-performance-sse4.html) (Core 2 @ 45nm) and Nehalem (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070328-intel-aims-nehalem-at-amds-fusion-integrated-graphics-on-die-memory-controller-smt.html) ("Core 3" @ 45nm) are both processor families.

Santa Rosa (http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/news/110294) is the name used for the next generation mobile chipset (due out soon), related wireless chips, thermal/power specs, etc. (the whole platform). I believe the official name for the Santa Rosa related chipset will be Mobile Intel Express 965.

[Silentwave]

There is no such thing as a mobile Penryn chipset. Its a chip. The next mobile chipset after Santa Rosa is Nehalem. And like Santa Rosa. It will use the Penryn processor initally then switch to a even smaller processor (tick-tock). If the mobile Penryn processor is released in 1H2008. Then expect to see it in laptops around March/April and in Macs in like May/June :p .

Actually, that's incorrect. Although you're right, Penryn is not a chipset, neither is Nehalem! In fact, neither is Santa Rosa!

Santa Rosa = Centrino Platform with Crestline Chipset
Processors supported: Merom 800MT/s (Socket P), and Penryn (Socket P)
Santa Rosa Refresh = around beginning of 2008- for Penryn stuff

Montevina = Next Centrino Platform after Santa Rosa. Cantiga Chipset, Socket P, improved Penryn support with faster FSB (1066MT/s), improved integrated graphics, DDR3 memory likely.

Penryn= Next generation chip of Intel Core Microarchitecture, 45nm, SSE4, Socket P for mobile variants.

Nehalem = Successor to Penryn, New Architecture. Due date is around 2008, and will likely be the architecutre that sees the next die shrink to 32nm.


Penryn in Q2 2008 at the earliest. Which means we better not skip it.

I doubt it'll be that late, really. Recent reports indicated that Penryn was on track for an earlier release than expected. Apple could afford to wait on the Core 2 mobile chips, but they offered only a mild improvement and they had to milk the Core Duos for what they were worth. Penryn, however, provides just as much incentive as Santa Rosa, if not more to update the lineup when the time comes. First of all, it'll probably be near the end of the year, coinciding with the next likely update of the MBPs after the imminent Santa Rosa update. Penryn's advanced SSE4 instructions, 45nm design, and larger cache make it more attractive than just the FSB boost of the Merom-800MT/s from a processor standpoint... especially at some tasks Macs are quite often tasked to accomplish.

I may settle for Santa Rosa for my next portable, or I may hold out for Penryn refreshes or even Montevina penryns, but I know that from the pure processor capability POV, I'll be waiting for Penryn Mac Pros for sure.

[jellomizer]

These look good. Maybe I should wait until these are in a Powerbook.

Maybe after that, Intel will announce a quad core mobile processor... that I'll have to wait for.

Perhaps by that time, Apple will announce the shipping of 10.5 in 2 months time.. that I'll just have to wait for...


.... before upgrading my Powerbook.

You are getting into the Power User Trap. Power Users want the latest and greatest. But when it comes out they see the next latest and greatest is coming. About 5 months ago I Upgraded to a C2D MBP And it is is still faster then all the other systems I work with. When you realize that your old systems is too slow for your needs and you want to be a power user. Just say to yourself Ill get the next new version when it comes out.

[phillipjfry]

Every now and then when I hear about a new piece of high technology, which is really just an incremental upgrade, it just makes me marvel that any of this stuff even works at all! Can you imagine how small these tiny little parts are that are doing these calculations? And isn't it amazing that these calculations which do everything, like making your printer shoot ink out in a recognizable pattern, are really all done by unfathomably small charged electrons flying around in tiny little channels of material etched into incomprehensibly complex patterns?

Actually, I think about that everyday at work :)
Its amazing when you sit down and think about everything that has to happen in between you left clicking to remote into someone's desktop who is across the world and throw a file on there that will update a server, or a file, and report back to you in almost real time.
And people want more, how greedy :p

[nagromme]

Maybe after that, Intel will announce a quad core mobile processor... that I'll have to wait for.

They have--it's announced for 2008. But it will be for thick-and-heavy brickbooks (you know the type) and might not therefore appear in a Mac laptop. Sounds perfect for an iMac, though.

[BiikeMike]

Of course they annouce this 2 days after I buy my Mac Pro :)


Which is good, because I'll be enjoying my awesome computer whilst all of you are posting in the "waiting for Penryn" threads :)

[bmb012]

So, eh, are these still socket compatible with the Mac Pro Xeons?

[tristan]

Why can't Intel just release everything all at once? :D

Penryn is a 45nm chip, which means its smaller than the current Core 2 Duos and will likely run cooler and have better battery life, but will have basically the same architecture as a C2D. Still, a 3.33ghz Penryn Core 2 Duo with the 800 MT/s bus and max RAM (4 gig?) will be an awesome system.

If you're more or less happy with your system but planning on upgrading in six months to a year, then the Penryn Santa Rosa combo is worth waiting for IMO. It'll make last year's MBP look like your inbred cousin's busted Intellivision.

[gugy]

So I guess I'm gonna wait for that version of the 8 core Mac Pro before I pull the trigger. My Quad G5 will still serve me well enough for the rest of 2007 if need be. I'd rather keep saving more money meanwhile than buy an 8 core now that hasn't got a lot of brains behind its brawn. :)

Amen brother! ;)

[carlos700]

a 3.33ghz Penryn Core 2 Duo with the 800 MT/s bus

well, I believe the 3.33GHz would be for desktop and would run on a 1.33GHz bus. It wouldn't be possible to have 3.33GHz on an 800MHz bus.

[freiheit]

Really? :p , I would have thought the title of the thread was going to be 'Intel's latest chips degrade performance' , lol. That's a no brainer.

I'm guessing you weren't in the PC world when the Pentium 4 was released. Even a slower-clocked Pentium III outperformed it in 5 out of 8 tests run by Tom's Hardware Guide. :) I've never been an Intel fan, I like competition, but I am glad to see they turned things around so completely with the Core and Core 2 chips. Very impressive.

[oxygen8]

.

Apple needs to do a little PR work. Marketing 101: What's in it for 'us?" How about giving us a free upgrade to Leopard if we buy a new computer now... or half off of an iphone with purchase... or add an Apple Care Buyers Remorse plan for $150, that if a new hardware platform comes out within 60 days of purchase, you can upgrade to the newer computer....??? Something, anything...

Do we even get Santa Rosa???:eek:

Or will they skip that... and just go with Penrym in Q4?

why should they? you'll still buy it. you'll spend as much as you can afford. :apple:

[mahonmeister]

Sounds like steady progress. I might upgrade after my Applecare runs out in mid 2008. Hopefully Apple will have a Mac with a desktop processor by then.:p

[EvilDoc]

After being a pc guy for so long, i have gotten use to intel vomiting up performance #'s before the chips released. I have no doubt that these chips will be faster, but come on...

[Analog Kid]

You are getting into the Power User Trap. Power Users want the latest and greatest. But when it comes out they see the next latest and greatest is coming. About 5 months ago I Upgraded to a C2D MBP And it is is still faster then all the other systems I work with. When you realize that your old systems is too slow for your needs and you want to be a power user. Just say to yourself Ill get the next new version when it comes out.
Nah, he's just gone full circle. When you get hooked, you've got two choices-- lament about each new revision being better than what you have and spend a fortune trying to keep up, or get yourself so hyped up on each new rumor that you save a fortune always waiting for the next big thing.

[GanleyBurger]

why should they? you'll still buy it. you'll spend as much as you can afford. :apple:

Apple should decide what they want. I assume that they want every home and business and pro out there owning a Mac computer. Look how much money they are spending on advertising for the new ads (Get a Mac). Look at how much floor space is dedicated to computers in the Apple stores (I know, ipods are probably floating the rent). But they could have stores half their size if they were just selling ipods, etc.... which they could use to hire more people/programers :D

Yet, Apple has nothing exciting for the average Joe right now. Even with the release of the 8 core option, most people on this site (pros) will wait for Penrym, Leopard, and/or possibly new designs (2008?).

Since Apple dropped computer from thier name, and only has 5% of the computer market, something has got to get thier core-base/fans excited, which will translate into word-of-mouth promotion. Case and point: I am ready to buy a Mac ($3,300 budget) and now my little cousin, collegebound, is sold on them, and she's ready to buy a 15" MBP ($2,500 budget). We don't want to buy now if they'll update hardware in 8 weeks. It would be wise to wait. But....

A little incentive would be the least Apple could do right now when they won't tell us how long, or if, they will reslease Santa Rosa in June. But with all of the delays, problems, and people taken off of OS X for the iphone (so to speak)... give us something!!!:

[brooker]

Someone mentioned something about heterogeneous processors... Would that be a multi-core/chip setup with some of the processors design-optimized for specific tasks? Like... an 8 core setup with 4 regular cores, and maybe a dedicated h.264 encoder/decoder core, an SSE4 core, a dedicated floating point core, etc? Could that work? Would software have to be rewritten to make use, or could good OS scheduling do the trick?

in the new multi-core world, this seems like the way to go! I love the idea. are there any production systems that do this successfully out there? How long 'til it makes it into a Mac, 2010?

[oxygen8]

Apple should decide what they want. I assume that they want every home and business and pro out there owning a Mac computer. Look how much money they are spending on advertising for the new ads (Get a Mac). Look at how much floor space is dedicated to computers in the Apple stores (I know, ipods are probably floating the rent). But they could have stores half their size if they were just selling ipods, etc.... which they could use to hire more people/programers :D

Yet, Apple has nothing exciting for the average Joe right now. Even with the release of the 8 core option, most people on this site (pros) will wait for Penrym, Leopard, and/or possibly new designs (2008?).

Since Apple dropped computer from thier name, and only has 5% of the computer market, something has got to get thier core-base/fans excited, which will translate into word-of-mouth promotion. Case and point: I am ready to buy a Mac ($3,300 budget) and now my little cousin, collegebound, is sold on them, and she's ready to buy a 15" MBP ($2,500 budget). We don't want to buy now if they'll update hardware in 8 weeks. It would be wise to wait. But....

A little incentive would be the least Apple could do right now when they won't tell us how long, or if, they will reslease Santa Rosa in June. But with all of the delays, problems, and people taken off of OS X for the iphone (so to speak)... give us something!!!:

just get a machine dude. no matter what apple does or doesn't do should not effect your personal agenda. if you need it, get it. if you don't need it, don't worry about it untill you need it.

do you really think your cousin would notice a speed bump from 2.16 GHz to 2.33 on the low end MBP? i really doubt it.

[tristan]

Case and point: I am ready to buy a Mac ($3,300 budget) and now my little cousin, collegebound, is sold on them, and she's ready to buy a 15" MBP ($2,500 budget). We don't want to buy now if they'll update hardware in 8 weeks. [/I][/B]

C'mon Apple... please give us an update... if not for us, then for the poor little children with no MacBook Pros to keep them warm... :D

[Compile 'em all]

I have the same feeling. The slowdown is probably b/c the OS & software isn't optimized to go so fast.

Nope. The main reason is IO (i.e reading from disk), which for that specific operation (opening a program) becomes the bottle neck. As hinted a couple of posts earlier, as long as we keep using mechanical disks don't expect to see much speed-up in that area.

[rolandf]

Intel is build and optimised for the MS-World. Using those chips brings you sooner or later down to that level.

This is a challenge also for Apple. If you look at e.g., SUN Solaris 10, then you see what others can already offer software wise. 3D desktop was a SUN initiative, the new ZFS file system is also from them.

By just using mainstream hardware, in the long run you will loose your best people in the company, as that is not challenging work for them.

The future Intel offerings are architecture-wise just aiming at replicating what others already do, e.g., Cell. So-far they just played their fabrications capabilities which are at the moment (still) ahead of the rest.

I hope Apple is reasonable enough to realise that.

[granex]

At what point are we going to level out with these chips. I know it's great we just keep getting faster and faster chips, but damn! Every week it seems something better is out, that is **% faster than before.

I just saw Intel's European head on CNN and he said that Intel is on track to keep pace with Moore's law for the foreseeable future. He says that in order to compete with AMD, they have shifted from a three year product cycle to a two year product cycle. In the first year, they release the more powerful chip and in the second year, they shrink its size. Then they release a new chip, shrink, etc. When questioned about how they can keep getting faster, he said that reduced size and power consumption reduces electron leakage across the chip, allowing things to keep rolling along.

In other words, no backing off for now. For the moment it appears that Apple is finally riding the right horse.

[MacCoaster]

There is no such thing as a mobile Penryn chipset. Its a chip. The next mobile chipset after Santa Rosa is Nehalem. And like Santa Rosa. It will use the Penryn processor initally then switch to a even smaller processor (tick-tock). If the mobile Penryn processor is released in 1H2008. Then expect to see it in laptops around March/April and in Macs in like May/June :p .

Penryn in Q2 2008 at the earliest. Which means we better not skip it. Because there are a lot of benifits of Santa Rosa (personally I think the processor bump is nothing compared to Santa Rosa, Core Duo to Core 2 Duo wasnt much of a leap.) So, if they were to skip Santa Rosa, I think it would be detrimental. People already dont want to buy because they are not getting Leopard but when Santa Rosa comes rolling around next month with faster FBS, Robson caching, improved battery life, and alittle bump of speed AS well. Then I doubt Apple is going to think its a good idea to bypass the entire christmas season without one of these slick new machines.
From the website:
The update to Santa Rosa will be based on a mobile Penryn processor, the name given to the upcoming 45-nanometer shrink of Intel's current chip designs. The first Penryn chips will be produced later this year and the updated version, or refresh, of Santa Rosa will hit the market during the first half of 2008.
Emphasis mine. That's what I mean by chipset. It specifically says first Penryn chips will be produced later this year, with an updated Santa Rosa platform chipsets and mobile Penryn processor in 1H2008. Also it states later in 2008, a quad core mobile Penryn processor will be available.

[jeremyrader]

After being a pc guy for so long, i have gotten use to intel vomiting up performance #'s before the chips released. I have no doubt that these chips will be faster, but come on...

Keep in mind that these are not just fantasy numbers though. Penryn may not be in full scale production yet (3 factories slated for 45nm within the next year, right?), but there are bound to be plenty of engineering samples for benchmarking. I'd expect those numbers to get even better as the factories get up to speed and the process evolves/improves.

Clarification time:
- A chipset is not a processor nor a "platform". It'll be either a memory controller or a combined memory/graphics controller.
- A processor is just, well, the processor... for now... Expect Intel to be putting out mainstream systems on a chip (SOC) within the next few generations (as put out at the Beijing IDF yesterday).
- A platform is a group of products designed to sell, er... work together - a processor, a chipset, and a wireless component for example.

And for those dreaming of putting "oh so powerful desktop processors" in their skimpy wimpy laptops, Intel also announced plans to reduce power consumption by a factor of 10 by 2010. That's huge! Wish granted... eventually.

[Compile 'em all]

Intel is build and optimised for the MS-World.

:rolleyes:

[driver.joe]

just get a machine dude. no matter what apple does or doesn't do should not effect your personal agenda. if you need it, get it. if you don't need it, don't worry about it until you need it.

do you really think your cousin would notice a speed bump from 2.16 GHz to 2.33 on the low end MBP? i really doubt it.

Listen up I'm so sick of the just buy it dude crap. GanleyBurger, Me and most newbies want the latest. Is that too hard to understand? I think apple is just trying to get rid of the old stuff myself. I say just wait and don't settle. Let them get Stuck with old line maybe then we'll get something out of apple!

[ffakr]

The 15% performance boost in "imaging-related" tasks, i.e. probably the Photoshop and Flash programs of this world, isn't really all that impressive for a processor just under 14% faster in clock speed.

Not that I wouldn't some of these chips, that's just not a very impressive statistic to quote!!

Actually, that is a very impressive number. There isn't a chip made.. ever.. that increases performance at a rate that scales faster than clock speed increases. If you take a 2 GHz Core2 and clock it to 3GHz it won't be 50% faster. There are too many other bottlenecks.
The very fact that Penryn performance is scaling faster than clock at 3+ GHz is huge. The memory bus is less than 1/3 the clock speed of that processor and it still scales faster than clock increase over the previous revision of the same processor [family].

Of course, you also picked the weakest benchmark to complain about.

Granted, this isn't a huge shift in computing but we're talking about a revision of the same design. With a die shrink and some modifications to the current generation of chips [which are already the the best consumer processors around] Intel has pulled more performance out with less power draw.. more performance per MHz even. It's a very impressive feat.

ffakr.

[AidenShaw]

Listen up I'm so sick of the just buy it dude crap. GanleyBurger, Me and most newbies want the latest. Is that too hard to understand? I think apple is just trying to get rid of the old stuff myself. I say just wait and don't settle. Let them get Stuck with old line maybe then we'll get something out of apple!

But, honestly, "buy what you need when you need it" is pretty good advice.

Look at Intel's roadmap - you can see what's planned for the next couple of years, with increasing clarity as the date gets closer to today.

Intel will always be teasing - don't you expect that by the time Penryn is ready to ship that Intel will have shown Nehalem running at an IDF?

Ask yourself if the incremental improvement in the next chipset is worth putting up with your old system for how many more months....

My "old system" is a Napa64, so I don't really need a Santa Rosa on day 1 - but a Penryn Santa Rosa is in my forecast.
_______________________________________________________

Look at poor MultiMedia - he was drooling over the prospect of a octo-core, but then he heard of the next Stoakley-Seaburg chipset. Suddenly, the octo is untenable, and he needs an SS. I wouldn't be surprised if, after this IDF, he decides the SS is just a stopgap, and he should wait for a Penryn octo-core with "real" quad chips.

Don't fall into the trap that's claimed MultiMedia !!

[shiftmx05]

lol, this means I'll wait a bit longer for my MBP :p

yea me too... once they have a mbp with santa rosa, blu-ray drive, leopard and higher res LED screen im buying it!! http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/smilies/smile.gif
:)

[excalibur313]

Maybe it is because I just finished a thesis on scanning tunneling microscopy, but 45 nm is absurdly small. Does the die size mean that the entire chip is 45 nm x 45 nm, or that the smallest feature size is 45 nm? I wouldn't think that it could be the former, because that would mean that the length of the chip is only about 200 atoms. Does anyone know the smallest die size that has been done in the lab? Is this it or are they working on yet smaller versions that are just not in a preproduction phase?

[Diatribe]

This makes an upgrade of the current MBP line even more imminent. The longer they wait the closer they come to the Penryn release. My bet is on May or June for the new MBPs and February 08 for the Penryn MBPs.

[Diatribe]

Maybe it is because I just finished a thesis on scanning tunneling microscopy, but 45 nm is absurdly small. Does the die size mean that the entire chip is 45 nm x 45 nm, or that the smallest feature size is 45 nm? I wouldn't think that it could be the former, because that would mean that the length of the chip is only about 200 atoms. Does anyone know the smallest die size that has been done in the lab? Is this it or are they working on yet smaller versions that are just not in a preproduction phase?

If I am not mistaken it refers the average feature size. But it is incredible by 2009 they will be at 30nm. :eek:

[nplima]

Maybe it is because I just finished a thesis on scanning tunneling microscopy, but 45 nm is absurdly small. Does the die size mean that the entire chip is 45 nm x 45 nm, or that the smallest feature size is 45 nm? I wouldn't think that it could be the former, because that would mean that the length of the chip is only about 200 atoms. Does anyone know the smallest die size that has been done in the lab? Is this it or are they working on yet smaller versions that are just not in a preproduction phase?

LOL

the CPU is some 5cm wide. it's the transistors that are tiny.

[guzhogi]

Nope. The main reason is IO (i.e reading from disk), which for that specific operation (opening a program) becomes the bottle neck. As hinted a couple of posts earlier, as long as we keep using mechanical disks don't expect to see much speed-up in that area.

That's true, too. I think I said that in a previous post somewhere. I'm sure the IO & the software are both bottlenecks. Which one is more, I'm not quite sure.

[AidenShaw]

LOL

the CPU is some 5cm wide. it's the transistors that are tiny.

The socket and package are about 5cm wide, the chip is much smaller.

A Merom chip is 143mm², or about 12mm square. 241 million transistors on a die about the size of a fingernail.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessors

[Eidorian]

The socket and package are about 5cm wide, the chip is much smaller.

A Merom chip is 143mm², or about 12mm square. 241 million transistors on a die about the size of a fingernail.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessorsCorrect! The rest of it is just socket space for those giant pins (or lack therefore of on the processor for LGA775). :D

~desu

[gnasher729]

The socket and package are about 5cm wide, the chip is much smaller.

And it has to be, because at 3 GHz speed of light is only 10 cm per cycle. And electrical signals don't move at speed of light. These five cm are about one processor cycle at the speed of an electrical signal.

[cgmpowers]

shuddup...

some of us still have G4s....dabnabbit...

Oh man !! 3.33GHz!! Thats amazing ! That makes me feel even worse about being on my G5, though i love it :D.


lol, all in fun.. Actually I am expecting my MacPro 8core to be supposedly delivered tomorrow--a few days late because evidentually FedEx pilots wont take off in the rain over in China--boo hoo..heh.

[Diatribe]

There is some interesting stuff coming out the next year. Just a couple of examples (don't have the links handy but they are all over the net):

- Blu-Ray burners
- High capacity NAND flash HDs 64-128GB
- 802.11n "final" spec products
- high res LED screens
- 300GB HDs
- Harware encryption of data within the HD itself
- etc.

2008 is definitely going to be an interesting year hardware-wise not just because of Penryn. :)

[Clive At Five]

shuddup...

some of us still have G4s....dabnabbit...

And some of us still run G4s in the MHz... Like my rockin'-awesome 800MHz G4 iMac. Man that thing is a beauty. She's slowin' down though...

-Clive

[Multimedia]

Look at poor MultiMedia - he was drooling over the prospect of a octo-core, but then he heard of the next Stoakley-Seaburg chipset. Suddenly, the octo is untenable, and he needs an SS. I wouldn't be surprised if, after this IDF, he decides the SS is just a stopgap, and he should wait for a Penryn octo-core with "real" quad chips.

Don't fall into the trap that's claimed MultiMedia !!Exactly right. I want all the brains that the 8 cores of power need and I'd rather have that bigger 12MB cache in Penryn as well now that Leopard is delayed.

I fully respect your superior knowledge on all things technical Aiden. Are you saying that the confusion that Bare Feats finds among those cores in the "new" 8 core MP won't be mollified with SS & Leopard to a significant degree of improvement? I'm thinking that the delay in shipping Leopard is reason enough to wait for SS with Penryn as it will be shipping before end of year about the same time as Leopard. Is that stinkin' thinkin'? :confused: :eek:

[AidenShaw]

Exactly right. I want all the brains that the 8 cores of power need and I'd rather have that bigger 12MB cache in Penryn as well now that Leopard is delayed.

I'm thinking that the delay in shipping Leopard is reason enough to wait for SS with Penryn as it will be shipping before end of year about the same time as Leopard. Is that stinkin' thinkin'? :confused: :eek:

What I'm saying is that you may be far better off getting the current system and crunching at high speed, rather than poke along on your quad for a year waiting for Penryn Xeons.

Cinebench scores from BF:

Quad G5: 1105
Quad Xeon: 1601
Octo Xeon: 2323

The current octo is 2.1 times faster than the quad. By January or so, there may be a Penryn that's 2.3 or 2.4 times faster. (I'd suspect on your multi-threaded workflow, Clovertown would do pretty well - so that Penryn would be less of a boost.)

You have to decide whether it's better to wait a year at 1X, or run 2.1X faster for that year.

If you don't push the buy button, I can only assume that you really don't need the added speed. Otherwise, you'd buy.

http://www.barefeats.com/mvdcpc.html
http://www.barefeats.com/octopro1.html

[guzhogi]

- 300GB HDs


What are you talking about? I bought a 300 GB hard drive years ago. The biggest ones today are 750 GB (I think I even heard of a 1 TB drive being available).

[Maccus Aurelius]

What are you talking about? I bought a 300 GB hard drive years ago. The biggest ones today are 750 GB (I think I even heard of a 1 TB drive being available).

I think he meant for laptops.

[Digital Skunk]

What are you talking about? I bought a 300 GB hard drive years ago. The biggest ones today are 750 GB (I think I even heard of a 1 TB drive being available).

Yes.... by Hitachi... going to order two of them when I get my MacPro with 8 cores.

[Konradx]

Hopefully we'll be seeing product refreshes soon. Jobs went from Core Duos to Core 2 Duos pretty fast, but there hasnt bee anything since. Hoping with new iMac looks come fast processors..whenever that happens.

[commander.data]

Exactly right. I want all the brains that the 8 cores of power need and I'd rather have that bigger 12MB cache in Penryn as well now that Leopard is delayed.

I fully respect your superior knowledge on all things technical Aiden. Are you saying that the confusion that Bare Feats finds among those cores in the "new" 8 core MP won't be mollified with SS & Leopard to a significant degree of improvement? I'm thinking that the delay in shipping Leopard is reason enough to wait for SS with Penryn as it will be shipping before end of year about the same time as Leopard. Is that stinkin' thinkin'? :confused: :eek:
I think what Bare Feats refers to as a memory bandwidth bottleneck is not a FSB bottleneck as people tend to point to but a memory controller bottleneck. In truth, a 1333MHz FSB is perfectly sufficient for all but the most extreme cases for a quad core chip. If you compare a 1.8GHz E4300 on a 800MHz FSB to a 1.86GHz E6300 on a 1067MHz FSB, there is actually very little performance difference despite the smaller FSB. Similarly, even comparing a 667MHz Merom to a comparable clock speed 1067MHz FSB Conroe yields very similar results. The Merom architecture is simply a lot more memory bandwidth agnostic than Netburst was and the 4MB L2 cache certainly helps.

The problem though is with the FB-DIMMs. They have terrible scaling and tests have shown that a quad channel DDR2 533 FB-DIMM setup with 4-4-4 timings performs like a dual channel DDR2 667 setup with 5-5-5 timings. This is why Conroes tend to outperform Woodcrests in dual threaded applications despite Woodcrest having a bigger FSB.

Seaburg will introduce a 2nd gen MC that should improve things. Sadly, there won't be DDR2-800 FB-DIMMs so any performance increase will have to be from the architecture. Intel has stated that they've been focusing on reducing memory latency which is good. Their tests have shown that Seaburg provides a 5% performance increase using the exact chips compared to Blackford/Greencreek. Seaburg also has a larger snoop filter optimized for quad cores to reduce cache coherency traffic which will help.

Penryn will bring 1600MHz FSBs, but in light of the memory controller bottleneck that will still remain with Seaburg, I don't see that as being a big feature. Besides, with only quad channel DDR2 667 FB-DIMM support, there isn't enough theoretical bandwidth to fill dual 1600MHz FSBs anyways. I'm not sure how beneficial the bigger caches will be anyways. Intel's actually skimping since they're only going with a 50% increase instead of the usual doubling so that already limits improvements. The major benefit of Penryn though ironically seems to be SSE4. The Divx demo they used that was rewritten with SSE4 support shows Penryn more than doubling the performance of Kentsfield. I'm sure most video applications will add support for SSE4 whether on Mac or PC, so that will definitely provide a nice boost.

[shawnce]

Hopefully we'll be seeing product refreshes soon. Jobs went from Core Duos to Core 2 Duos pretty fast, but there hasnt bee anything since. ..because other then Quad-Core processors not much new stuff is available at this time... soon.

[drumforfun19]

Hopefully we'll be seeing product refreshes soon. Jobs went from Core Duos to Core 2 Duos pretty fast, but there hasnt bee anything since. Hoping with new iMac looks come fast processors..whenever that happens.

Not totally true, the Mac Pros went from quad core's to 8 cores. But I dunno if that's what you're talking about...

still new proccessor = bada$$.

[Analog Kid]

What I'm saying is that you may be far better off getting the current system and crunching at high speed, rather than poke along on your quad for a year waiting for Penryn Xeons.

Cinebench scores from BF:

Quad G5: 1105
Quad Xeon: 1601
Octo Xeon: 2323

The current octo is 2.1 times faster than the quad. By January or so, there may be a Penryn that's 2.3 or 2.4 times faster. (I'd suspect on your multi-threaded workflow, Clovertown would do pretty well - so that Penryn would be less of a boost.)

You have to decide whether it's better to wait a year at 1X, or run 2.1X faster for that year.

If you don't push the buy button, I can only assume that you really don't need the added speed. Otherwise, you'd buy.

http://www.barefeats.com/mvdcpc.html
http://www.barefeats.com/octopro1.html
There are other factors that enter in though-- cost and software being two of the big ones. You're quoting the Cinebench test results, but MM seemed most interested in video encoding performance. The BF tests show no improvement on Quicktime export performance between the 4 and 8 core machines (unless you're running 6 simultaneous jobs exporting the same file to the same format...).

I don't know what's holding up QT, it's probably the applications' treading performance, but it doesn't make sense to pull the trigger on an upgrade until the new system does better at what you want to use it for. Rather than dumping a chunk of cash and then waiting for the software to catch up, or finding that there's a critical bottleneck in the system preventing it from performing your task efficiently, sometimes it's better to wait. The hardware will keep advancing while the software people make the changes they need to.

[Konradx]

Not totally true, the Mac Pros went from quad core's to 8 cores. But I dunno if that's what you're talking about...

still new proccessor = bada$$.

Was mainly talking about the iMac's and Mini's. But lookin on how fast we got the Core 2 Duo's and Octo cores, we should be get these chips aswell pretty fast (lets hope). I wonder if the iMac & mini refreshes could be tied in when they processors come out

[drumforfun19]

Was mainly talking about the iMac's and Mini's. But lookin on how fast we got the Core 2 Duo's and Octo cores, we should be get these chips aswell pretty fast (lets hope). I wonder if the iMac & mini refreshes could be tied in when they processors come out

yeah the mini is looooooooooooong overdue for a proccessor upgrade. They should have put the core 2 duo in it! maybe they'll just put a quad core xenon in it!! haha.

[k2k koos]

I wonder if Apple has any Cell Processor or Power 6 based prototype Macs in their labs :D

B

You can count on that. Just as they always had secret intel macs, they will have prototypes running on any other significant processor, AMD included.
As soon as one of the technologies is proving to be better than the current intel roadmap, then we could well expect another 'transition'.

Hence, it will not happen overnight, Apple will look for the bigger picture, and need to know a roadmap that is worth investing in, not just for 2 years and we switch again, it will have to be solid info, worth at least 5 years if not longer.:apple:

[Diatribe]

I think he meant for laptops.

I thought that was obvious when I said 300GB, when we're at 1TB for 3.5" HDs :D but thanks for clarifying. :)

[AidenShaw]

..., but MM seemed most interested in video encoding performance. The BF tests show no improvement on Quicktime export performance between the 4 and 8 core machines (unless you're running 6 simultaneous jobs exporting the same file to the same format...)..

MM's typical task is multiple parallel rip/encode/decode jobs.... The 8 simultaneous jobs (or four that can do 2-way threading) is what he'll be doing.


Rather than dumping a chunk of cash and then waiting for the software to catch up, or finding that there's a critical bottleneck in the system preventing it from performing your task efficiently, sometimes it's better to wait. The hardware will keep advancing while the software people make the changes they need to.

This makes sense, as long as you don't need the performance.

If you *need* the performance, then you hit the buy button regardless.

For example, if it takes you 28 hours to encode a day's worth of video work - you hit the buy button. If it takes 20 hours, then you can contemplate different purchase choices.
_________

Anyone who is considering waiting for Stoakley doesn't need the performance. Anyone who considers waiting for Penryn clearly doesn't need a Penryn.

They might want the extra performance, or some extra longevity - but they don't *need* the few extra percent.

On the other hand, though, I'm going to hit a big "buy button" when Stoakley arrives, because I have some projects that *need* VT-d and PCIe.V2. These can't even start until the new systems show up.

[EagerDragon]

This makes an upgrade of the current MBP line even more imminent. The longer they wait the closer they come to the Penryn release. My bet is on May or June for the new MBPs and February 08 for the Penryn MBPs.

Agree but I add one more month, Santa Rosa is available in May, so Apple may adopt it for Jun, July.

For the Penryn I would add 2 months, say April 2008.

[EagerDragon]

Maybe it is because I just finished a thesis on scanning tunneling microscopy, but 45 nm is absurdly small. Does the die size mean that the entire chip is 45 nm x 45 nm, or that the smallest feature size is 45 nm? I wouldn't think that it could be the former, because that would mean that the length of the chip is only about 200 atoms. Does anyone know the smallest die size that has been done in the lab? Is this it or are they working on yet smaller versions that are just not in a preproduction phase?

Not an expert on this but I saw claims of 32 or 34 nm for the next round of chips.

To my knowledge that is the process size and not the size of the chip. Intel has the actual chip size on their web site under their technical specifications.

No need to correct me, I know I know little to nothing about this subject, just quoting stuff I read previously (and probably badly at that).

[Chef Medeski]

from the small photo you have as your avatar you actually look like one of my profs back in high school lol ... guess its not ur pic ?!

Which cegep are you at?

LOL. Nope its the pianist/organist of my favorite band.

Im at Vanier. Are u in university?

[Chef Medeski]

Actually, that's incorrect. Although you're right, Penryn is not a chipset, neither is Nehalem! In fact, neither is Santa Rosa!

Santa Rosa = Centrino Platform with Crestline Chipset
Processors supported: Merom 800MT/s (Socket P), and Penryn (Socket P)
Santa Rosa Refresh = around beginning of 2008- for Penryn stuff

Montevina = Next Centrino Platform after Santa Rosa. Cantiga Chipset, Socket P, improved Penryn support with faster FSB (1066MT/s), improved integrated graphics, DDR3 memory likely.

Penryn= Next generation chip of Intel Core Microarchitecture, 45nm, SSE4, Socket P for mobile variants.

Nehalem = Successor to Penryn, New Architecture. Due date is around 2008, and will likely be the architecutre that sees the next die shrink to 32nm.




I doubt it'll be that late, really. Recent reports indicated that Penryn was on track for an earlier release than expected. Apple could afford to wait on the Core 2 mobile chips, but they offered only a mild improvement and they had to milk the Core Duos for what they were worth. Penryn, however, provides just as much incentive as Santa Rosa, if not more to update the lineup when the time comes. First of all, it'll probably be near the end of the year, coinciding with the next likely update of the MBPs after the imminent Santa Rosa update. Penryn's advanced SSE4 instructions, 45nm design, and larger cache make it more attractive than just the FSB boost of the Merom-800MT/s from a processor standpoint... especially at some tasks Macs are quite often tasked to accomplish.

I may settle for Santa Rosa for my next portable, or I may hold out for Penryn refreshes or even Montevina penryns, but I know that from the pure processor capability POV, I'll be waiting for Penryn Mac Pros for sure.
Errr.... my bad.

But you are right from a purely processor standpoint Penryn is worth more overall, but as a general update I think Santa Rosa will allow for faster speeds even if just on a processor bases Penyrn will be better.

[Cult Follower]

I love Intel, they are soo fast when it comes to updating, but then it makes my MB CD look slow, but i love it anyway.

[Konradx]

I love Intel, they are soo fast when it comes to updating, but then it makes my MB CD look slow, but i love it anyway.

They are NOW. After AMD kicked their butt Athlons, they finally woke up and realized that people werent going to buy their crappy, uneffecient P4's.

[Chef Medeski]

They are NOW. After AMD kicked their butt Athlons, they finally woke up and realized that people werent going to buy their crappy, uneffecient P4's.
Well there is a reason competition is the forbearer of our economy. It works.

[shawnce]

They are NOW. After AMD kicked their butt Athlons, they finally woke up and realized that people werent going to buy their crappy, uneffecient P4's.

Competition good? Unconceivable! :D

[jesteraver]

There is some interesting stuff coming out the next year. Just a couple of examples (don't have the links handy but they are all over the net):

- Blu-Ray burners
- High capacity NAND flash HDs 64-128GB
- 802.11n "final" spec products
- high res LED screens
- 300GB HDs
- Harware encryption of data within the HD itself
- etc.

2008 is definitely going to be an interesting year hardware-wise not just because of Penryn. :)

WiFi boring now its all about WiMax.

300GB HD will probably be SSD which will be great.

One thing I hope Apple starts using the Raptor 10k hard drives.

HD LED screens will rock

[FriedApple]

Be sweet if Intel releases them like in October when Leopard is released :)

I would be willing to agree with that. MacPros with Penryn and Leopard in October 07.

[Cojack]

Hey, I looked at Buyer's Guide and counted when the macbook is supposedly to be upgraded. And guess what?...... For that Santa Rosa thing...... The Day od Upgrade hits right on Memorial Day..... So I would keep waiting until memorial day if i were you

[localoid]

Hey, I looked at Buyer's Guide and counted when the macbook is supposedly to be upgraded. And guess what?...... For that Santa Rosa thing...... The Day od Upgrade hits right on Memorial Day..... So I would keep waiting until memorial day if i were you

You needed to post the same exact message (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=3566578#post3566578) in two different threads, because...???

[retroneo]

Nope. The main reason is IO (i.e reading from disk), which for that specific operation (opening a program) becomes the bottle neck. As hinted a couple of posts earlier, as long as we keep using mechanical disks don't expect to see much speed-up in that area.

With Santa Rosa, this won't be so much of a problem because of the flash HD accelerator.

Hopefully the Santa Rosa laptops won't be delayed because Apple now has to back port the software supporting these new features from Leopard to Tiger (because of Leopard's delay).

[bit density]

We need a name for what you're doing, which is whining about whining. :rolleyes:

blogging