PDA

View Full Version : Intel moving all lines to dual/multi core


Daveway
Sep 8, 2004, 07:42 PM
I read at zdnet today that by 2005 Intel will start implementing dual core processors into all lines, includeing desktop, workstation, server, and portables. There forecast is 50% dual/multicore computers by the end of 2005.

I really hope IBM is working to counter there actions. With these dual cores i can see the performance gaps closing with the dual G5s.

Do you think we will here an annoncement of dual core G5s soon?

Chaszmyr
Sep 8, 2004, 07:49 PM
MacOSRumors.com predicts that the dual core G5 (Codenamed Antares) will make its debut in early 2005.

I very much hope this is true, but take it with a huge grain of salt because MOSR tends not to be the most accurate site on the block...

broken_keyboard
Sep 8, 2004, 08:23 PM
I'm sure IBM will come up with a design, the question is: Will it be a design they can manufacture in quantity?

spaceballl
Sep 9, 2004, 02:24 AM
Dual core is the future. 64 bit is too, to a certain extent. 64 bit technology requires re-written software to really utilize while dual core just needs SMP aware operating systems.

AMD demonstrated last week a dual core system.
Intel demonstrated dual core CPUs today/yesterday.
IBM is working on it.
Motorola is working on it.

Due to 90nm technology, it's getting more and more difficult to ramp up clock speeds so dual core technology is the next big thing to increase performance.

-Kevin

AmigoMac
Sep 9, 2004, 05:36 AM
3GHz Dual Core - Dual Processor G5 ... 30" Display, 8 GB RAM, 1TB HD

That would be a setup ;)

Little Endian
Sep 9, 2004, 07:29 AM
It's already September 2004 and apple is still having severe problems shipping it's Dual Processor Single core 2.5Ghz PowerMacs yet there are still people out there who claim that we will see Dual Core PowerPC G5 in the first half of 2005. Worse yet there are People who also claim that these Dual core chips will be clocked at 3Ghz per core and will still be based on the 90nm 970FX. I'm not saying I don't believe IBM has a dual core PowerPC in the works, what I question is the timeframe. I have a feeling we will see dual core chips in 2005 but probably won't be shipping in any signifigant quantity until late 2005.

wPod
Sep 9, 2004, 08:34 AM
It's already September 2004 and apple is still having severe problems shipping it's Dual Processor Single core 2.5Ghz PowerMacs yet there are still people out there who claim that we will see Dual Core PowerPC G5 in the first half of 2005. Worse yet there are People who also claim that these Dual core chips will be clocked at 3Ghz per core and will still be based on the 90nm 970FX. I'm not saying I don't believe IBM has a dual core PowerPC in the works, what I question is the timeframe. I have a feeling we will see dual core chips in 2005 but probably won't be shipping in any signifigant quantity until late 2005.

i think dual core chips are feasable. but not at 3GHz. the cooling for the 2.5 is too much to handle, i couldnt imagine what it would take to cool dual core 3GHz chips. . . its seems more feasable to make a dual core G4 chip or if they do get the 90nm G5 dual core then it would be a lot slower like the 1.6 or 1.8 GHz.

spaceballl
Sep 9, 2004, 09:34 AM
i think dual core chips are feasable. but not at 3GHz. the cooling for the 2.5 is too much to handle, i couldnt imagine what it would take to cool dual core 3GHz chips. . . its seems more feasable to make a dual core G4 chip or if they do get the 90nm G5 dual core then it would be a lot slower like the 1.6 or 1.8 GHz.
One of the reasons that dual core is popular is because it increases the surface area of the CPU while increasing heat, but not exponentially. The CPU puts off less watts per area than it does as a single core chip (but more total watts). It is easier to cool. Also, keep in mind that IBM's single core chips are cooler than intel's single core chips.

nuckinfutz
Sep 9, 2004, 10:53 AM
Geez man where have some of you all been. We've had good info on IBMs Dual Core options since July.

http://www.thinksecret.com/news/antares.html

and before the Thinksecret article

http://forums.applenova.com/showthread.php?t=999&page=1&pp=30

MacOSRumors.com predicts that the dual core G5 (Codenamed Antares) will make its debut in early 2005.

MOSR doesn't know ****. They didn't start spouting off about Antares until after AppleNova/Thinksecret gave up the details. MOSR is pure entertainment folks don't rely on them for anything but a few chuckles


It's already September 2004 and apple is still having severe problems shipping it's Dual Processor Single core 2.5Ghz PowerMacs yet there are still people out there who claim that we will see Dual Core PowerPC G5 in the first half of 2005.

Well that would make sense. IBM has to fab the chips and stockpile them to send to Apple. This means Apple's delays are likely caused by yield issues that date back to the beginning of this year. IBM is probably humming along trying to catch up with demand. To assume that these problems will somehow prevent the dual cores from shipping is rather pessimistic. Read the links above if they are true Apple is sampling the 970MP right now. Volume production wouldn't commence until January. That's 4 months from today. That places a mid 2005 launch as being plausible.

Worse yet there are People who also claim that these Dual core chips will be clocked at 3Ghz per core and will still be based on the 90nm 970FX

Why is that so hard to believe? The 970fx hits 2.5Ghz without the use of tech like Low K Dielectric and I'm sure IBM has some new tricks to roll out with their SOI tech.

Low K and Strained Silicon Directly on Insulator (http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2004/Sep/1071408.htm)

"They have been reported to be qualifying low-k during the last few months, and we are expecting to see low-k product soon. We want to compare it with the other low-k processes that we have analyzed."

Low K Dielectics = more expensive chips but better heat dissipation and potentially yields. SSDOI..I'm not sure if IBM is using this or not. The article is vague on this. As the article states if Apple needs this then they can pay for it. It's an option.



think dual core chips are feasable. but not at 3GHz. the cooling for the 2.5 is too much to handle, i couldnt imagine what it would take to cool dual core 3GHz chips.

Again you're making an assumption based on today's chips. You are also making an error. Here's the most appropriate analogy. On a hot sunny day your skin dissipates the heat because your epidermis is large however just like with a magnifying glass If I focus the sun's rays at a small part of your skin that areas gets very hot and unbearable. Apple is facing the same problems. The 970fx is 60+^2 mm and must dissipate up to 100 watts on that surface area. The 970MP would be 150mm^2, double the surface area of today's 2.5Ghz. And that is not adding any new tech to the core. The 970MP may utilize low k D or an advanced SSDOI process to further reduce the heat buildup and increase the yields. We cannot take what we know about today's CPU, extrapolate and apply that to the 970MP. It's a different core and likely to have a few new tweaks.

Ooops Spaceball I see you have basically hit the same point. Well done.

I expect to see a mild PM refresh next spring with the PM line going to a max of 2.8Ghz and then the late summer line moving to dual core. They "will" hit 3Ghz at that time for sure.

jayscheuerle
Sep 9, 2004, 11:13 AM
Because Word and iPhoto are slow as hell on my G5...

This is all nice, evolution-wise, but it's way past overkill for 99% of the computer needs out there. Notice I said "needs", not "wants". Do you know what slows down your present computer these days? (hint: it's not an Apple product) It's YOU!! (you, me, all of us for the most part).

The processor companies move forward because it's the only direction to go, but in effect, computers are pretty close to being appliances now, with little need to replace them in the next 5-10 years (providing they don't break). It's been a great technological ride, but we're pretty much where microwave ovens were in the 80s. From here on out, they'll get smaller, prettier and cheaper for the most part, though there will always be room for the units with the meat thermometer, carousel and browning option...

broken_keyboard
Sep 9, 2004, 11:38 AM
Because Word and iPhoto are slow as hell on my G5...

This is all nice, evolution-wise, but it's way past overkill for 99% of the computer needs out there. Notice I said "needs", not "wants". Do you know what slows down your present computer these days? (hint: it's not an Apple product) It's YOU!! (you, me, all of us for the most part).

The processor companies move forward because it's the only direction to go, but in effect, computers are pretty close to being appliances now, with little need to replace them in the next 5-10 years (providing they don't break). It's been a great technological ride, but we're pretty much where microwave ovens were in the 80s. From here on out, they'll get smaller, prettier and cheaper for the most part, though there will always be room for the units with the meat thermometer, carousel and browning option...

Absolutely right. No one will ever need more than 640k ram. :)

jayscheuerle
Sep 9, 2004, 11:44 AM
Absolutely right. No one will ever need more than 640k ram. :)

640k? Is that what all Macs ship with these days? I knew everyone was saying the standard configuration didn't have enough RAM, but jeez.... :D

spaceballl
Sep 9, 2004, 07:11 PM
Ooops Spaceball I see you have basically hit the same point. Well done.

:)
something I would recommend for MacRumors readers who want to get a bit more technical... read PC stuff like www.anandtech.com. Companies like Intel and AMD and Dell roadmap their stuff and give sneak peaks. Figure that IBM is either a bit ahead or a bit behind the other CPU companies as they're a competitor. By reading up on some of the PC technologies, you can be sure you'll know the tech stuff about the new Apple tech. Anywho, good technological PC sites that you guys might wanna check out:
www.anandtech.com
www.techreport.com
There's other ones too, but these two are my faves. Anandtech has a brand new article about Intel CPUs. It roadmaps future technologies like 65nm, dual core CPUs, advanced lithography, etc. It's a good read, and just figure that IBM is doing something similar.
And a last bit of knowledge... for those who may not know, AMD has a technology agreement w/ IBM and they collaborate a lot to make AMD Athlon 64s. Athlons and Opterons were announced to be using things like low-K dielectrics and strained silicon before the IBM chips were... but if you make certain deductions, because of the AMD/IBM relationships, it's clear to see that these technologies will come to the PowerPC.

Sorry about the long post...

BrianKonarsMac
Sep 9, 2004, 07:22 PM
is anyone else even AWARE of the fact that Intel and IBM are partnering to develop 65nanometer chips? they also mention they are working together on a slew of new tech. including multi-core chips.

this shows 2 things:

1. the move to 90nm was far more difficult than anyone anticipated, thus to avoid a fiasco like the previous one, it requires the R&D of the two largest chip designers in the world (?).

2. Intel and IBM will be developing processor technology in tandem, thus you can expect to see both releasing products with similar capabilities, albeit for different markets (or will they?).

the future is looking sweet.

BrianKonarsMac
Sep 9, 2004, 07:29 PM
Because Word and iPhoto are slow as hell on my G5...

This is all nice, evolution-wise, but it's way past overkill for 99% of the computer needs out there. Notice I said "needs", not "wants". Do you know what slows down your present computer these days? (hint: it's not an Apple product) It's YOU!! (you, me, all of us for the most part).

The processor companies move forward because it's the only direction to go, but in effect, computers are pretty close to being appliances now, with little need to replace them in the next 5-10 years (providing they don't break). It's been a great technological ride, but we're pretty much where microwave ovens were in the 80s. From here on out, they'll get smaller, prettier and cheaper for the most part, though there will always be room for the units with the meat thermometer, carousel and browning option... you know he is absolutely correct. i mean just the other day i was burning a dvd, listening to iTunes on my 5.1 (upscaled), playing WoW, and d/ling mad porn, when I thought to myself...Man this computer is just too fast, who needs this much power? Then my computer came to a halt and told me my HD's were full (those damn uncompressed CD's and DVD's).

We are NOWHERE near the end of computer's being satisfactorily equipped. A G5 couldn't handle all of the multitasking I would throw at it. You are absolutely correct that the slowest part of a computer is you, because my computer does everything instantly, in the blink of an eye, no questions asked. Someone give my my pimp cane, this fool needs to get beat.

x86isslow
Sep 9, 2004, 07:53 PM
you know he is absolutely correct. i mean just the other day i was burning a dvd, listening to iTunes on my 5.1 (upscaled), playing WoW, and d/ling mad porn, when I thought to myself...Man this computer is just too fast, who needs this much power? Then my computer came to a halt and told me my HD's were full (those damn uncompressed CD's and DVD's).

We are NOWHERE near the end of computer's being satisfactorily equipped. A G5 couldn't handle all of the multitasking I would throw at it. You are absolutely correct that the slowest part of a computer is you, because my computer does everything instantly, in the blink of an eye, no questions asked. Someone give my my pimp cane, this fool needs to get beat.

chill, chill. no fool. not everybody does that kind of multitasking, in fact, most people dont utilize anything close to the full power of their systems. and what does your filling hard drives with data have to do with processors?

superbovine
Sep 9, 2004, 08:35 PM
I read at zdnet today that by 2005 Intel will start implementing dual core processors into all lines, includeing desktop, workstation, server, and portables. There forecast is 50% dual/multicore computers by the end of 2005.

I really hope IBM is working to counter there actions. With these dual cores i can see the performance gaps closing with the dual G5s.

Do you think we will here an annoncement of dual core G5s soon?

It already been posted,but here is another article.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1627892,00.asp

IBM's Microprocessor division is readying a dual-core version of its PowerPC 970 processor, called the PowerPC G5 by Apple Computer Inc. According to sources, the new chip, code-named Antares, will make its way into workstations and servers sometime next year.

DrBoar
Sep 10, 2004, 02:07 AM
One spinoff of this dual core stuff ought to be that future PC games will be more SMP. That is good for the mac gamer that mostly feeds of pc games ported to the mac. Were the dual problem has been the weak CPUs on the mac as well as the low usage of the second CPU that quite often has been present since the days of dual 450 MHz G4s :rolleyes:

wrldwzrd89
Sep 10, 2004, 06:51 AM
One spinoff of this dual core stuff ought to be that future PC games will be more SMP. That is good for the mac gamer that mostly feeds of pc games ported to the mac. Were the dual problem has been the weak CPUs on the mac as well as the low usage of the second CPU that quite often has been present since the days of dual 450 MHz G4s :rolleyes:
"Weak CPUs on the Mac" WAS a problem with the PPC G4, but not with the PPC G5...and now iMac users as well as PowerMac users can get them. You are correct that most Mac games these days (which are usually PC ports) don't make much use of the second CPU on dual-processor Macs. I'm not much of a gamer, but anything that improves the experience for some section of the Mac user market, no matter how small, is good in my book.

oingoboingo
Sep 10, 2004, 07:40 AM
Because Word and iPhoto are slow as hell on my G5...

I suspect you're being sarcastic, but iPhoto and MS Office v.X are slow on my G5.

Maybe you have a beta copy of iPhoto 5 somewhere that you're not telling us about...

Abstract
Sep 10, 2004, 07:51 AM
It's been a great technological ride, but we're pretty much where microwave ovens were in the 80s. From here on out, they'll get smaller, prettier and cheaper for the most part, though there will always be room for the units with the meat thermometer, carousel and browning option...

Have you seen the new dual-oven microwave pics at www.microwaverumors.com!!! :eek: I've been waiting for years!!!