Maybe some more CPU titles after G5

adildacoolset · Nov 24, 2012, 11:48 AM

Maybe we should have things like A4, A5, A5X, A6, A6X after someone has passed the G5 status. Just a suggestion. Please take it into consideration.

ChristianJapan · Nov 25, 2012, 05:21 AM

Suggest we stay with Intel CPUs afterwards ... As all CPUs from the list are Mac CPUs and not iDevices.

CoreDuo, C2D, i3, i5, i7 ...or some Xeons ...

SandboxGeneral · Nov 25, 2012, 05:34 AM

What about adding the Intel CPU designations, and dropping the required post count of some of the PowerPC designations? Then people with a G5 now would end up with an i7 designation and then carry it on backwards down the line from there?

stridemat · Nov 25, 2012, 05:37 AM

What's to say we don't already have them planned

maflynn · Nov 25, 2012, 05:45 AM

I'd like to keep the PPC designation but I'm open to new ones.

ChristianJapan · Nov 25, 2012, 05:45 AM

That would be nice to adopt a bit ... The 5000 jump in between is difficult ...

At by the way: I was wondering if that is correct ... Between 68010 and 68020 ... Only 5 ? Or is it because the 010 was not soo relevant ?

68000 => 1,505 posts
68010 => 2,000 posts
68020 => 2,005 posts
68030 => 2,500 posts

Please fix after I reached 68020

stridemat · 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChristianJapan

That would be nice ... The 5000 jump in between is difficult ...

At by the way: I was wondering if that is correct ... Between 68010 and 68020 ... Only 5 ? Or is it because the 010 was not soo relevant ?

68000 => 1,505 posts
68010 => 2,000 posts
68020 => 2,005 posts
68030 => 2,500 posts

Please fix after I reached 68020

From memory that particular processor was only used for a very short time...hence the 5 posts.

adildacoolset · Nov 25, 2012, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChristianJapan

Suggest we stay with Intel CPUs afterwards ... As all CPUs from the list are Mac CPUs and not iDevices.

CoreDuo, C2D, i3, i5, i7 ...or some Xeons ...

But the thing is that these are Apple-made chips. So, maybe we can use Apple-made chips on an Apple site??

maflynn · Nov 25, 2012, 07:54 AM

Technically they're not apple made but designed by Apple insofar that the chips are actually produced by Samsung.

I like the idea however that we use the A5/A5X/A6 for the reasons you mentioned

ChristianJapan · Nov 25, 2012, 08:34 AM

Emotionally it moves us away from the desktop/laptops and we indirect agree that Apples future is on iDevices ...

Plus it seems strange that a powerful user with a G5 have now to jump to a A4 ... CPU Geekbench would be the guidance for the continuity ...

But anyway: for me still a very long way before it comes to a "real" problem; I'm still in Motorola 68k familiy.

adildacoolset · Nov 26, 2012, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maflynn

Technically they're not apple made but designed by Apple insofar that the chips are actually produced by Samsung.

I like the idea however that we use the A5/A5X/A6 for the reasons you mentioned

Produced by Samsung as the batch manufacturer.

Honestly, this site isn't foxconnrumors. Batch manufacturers are there, but apple is the design

mrichmon · Nov 29, 2012, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adildacoolset

But the thing is that these are Apple-made chips. So, maybe we can use Apple-made chips on an Apple site??

Note that the existing titles are not Apple-made chips. Apple simply sourced the chips from existing manufacturers just like they are currently sourcing Intel chips from Intel.

Chip - Manufacturer
6802 - MOS Technology
6802a - MOS Technology
65816 - Western Design Center
65832 - MOS Technology (Not put into production)
68000 - Motorola
68010 - Motorola
68020 - Motorola
68030 - Motorola
68040 - Motorola
601 - Motorola/IBM alliance
603 - Motorola/IBM alliance
604 - Motorola/IBM alliance
G3 - IBM/Motorola (Freescale)
G4 - Freescale
G5 - IBM

adildacoolset · Nov 30, 2012, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrichmon

Note that the existing titles are not Apple-made chips. Apple simply sourced the chips from existing manufacturers just like they are currently sourcing Intel chips from Intel.

Chip - Manufacturer
6802 - MOS Technology
6802a - MOS Technology
65816 - Western Design Center
65832 - MOS Technology (Not put into production)
68000 - Motorola
68010 - Motorola
68020 - Motorola
68030 - Motorola
68040 - Motorola
601 - Motorola/IBM alliance
603 - Motorola/IBM alliance
604 - Motorola/IBM alliance
G3 - IBM/Motorola (Freescale)
G4 - Freescale
G5 - IBM

What I really meant was that A6 and that are all progressive chips in number, whereas i7 and i5 and i3 remain the same throughout generations. So having the number increasing with each generation can signify a greater number of posts, and experience.

GGJstudios · Nov 30, 2012, 11:29 AM

They've already stated what comes next, in the current naming scheme:

Quote:

G3 => 20,000 posts
G4 => 25,000 posts
G5 => 30,000 posts
etc....

I'm a big fan of the "etc." title!

It appears they've either decided to use G5 for all post counts above 30K, or they haven't decided on what to use next, or they've increased the post count increment required for the next level. At any rate, it's interesting trivia about the history of processors Apple has used, but not much more. Whatever they elect to use is fine.

alphaod · 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SandboxGeneral

We're looking at various options regarding the user title arrangement in the back room. If you or anyone else has any ideas we'd like to hear them for consideration.

After G5:

51xx (Woodcrest)
53xx (Clovertown)
54xx (Harpertown)
55xx (Gainstown)
56xx (Gulftown)

Obviously it would be just the numbers.

If you wanted to really drag it out:

5130
5150
5160
X5365
E5462
E5472
X5482
E5520
X5550
X5570
E5620
E5645
X5650
X5670
X5675

This ought to get you guys to 110,000 before needing new titles! Hopefully by then we would have a new Mac Pro to pick processor numbers from.

(The W3xxx series are technically valid, but they're for uniprocessor configuration only)

Mr. Retrofire · Nov 25, 2012, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adildacoolset

Maybe we should have things like A4, A5, A5X, A6, A6X after someone has passed the G5 status. Just a suggestion. Please take it into consideration.

The G5 was a processor for non-mobile workstations and servers. The A4 and so on are processors for mobile platforms.

theSeb · Nov 26, 2012, 05:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adildacoolset

Maybe we should have things like A4, A5, A5X, A6, A6X after someone has passed the G5 status. Just a suggestion. Please take it into consideration.

Please don't take this into consideration.

----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChristianJapan

Suggest we stay with Intel CPUs afterwards ... As all CPUs from the list are Mac CPUs and not iDevices.

CoreDuo, C2D, i3, i5, i7 ...or some Xeons ...

Please take this into consideration instead.

SandboxGeneral · Nov 26, 2012, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theSeb

Please don't take this into consideration.

Why not?

AQUADock · Nov 26, 2012, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SandboxGeneral

Why not?

Because everything is so iOS these days, Intel processor names would be better imo.

theSeb · Nov 26, 2012, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SandboxGeneral

Why not?

AquaDock answered it for me. This is Mac Rumours and I feel that the names should be referencing CPUs used in Macs, not in iOS devices. There are already too many annoying posts on this forum where people complain about the iSimplification or iPadification or iInsert_your_own_smart_made_up_word when they to prove the "iToys are ruining OS X" conspiracy theory. I think using iOS CPU device identifiers would upset that particular user group even more.

Hellhammer · Nov 27, 2012, 08:00 AM

The problem with Intel titles is that things like i3 and i5 do not refer to the generation, they are product categories. Ivy Bridge is the third generation to use the same product categories, which makes things confusing because an Ivy Bridge i5 can be a lot faster than a Nehalem i7. The same goes with Xeons, it's just a branding for Intel's server/workstation CPUs.

To stick with the same titles as with PPC, we would have to use codenames like Nehalem and Sandy Bridge but I don't think that's a good idea. A5/A5X/A6/etc would be the easiest to implement.

stridemat · Nov 27, 2012, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hellhammer

The problem with Intel titles is that things like i3 and i5 do not refer to the generation, they are product categories. Ivy Bridge is the third generation to use the same product categories, which makes things confusing because an Ivy Bridge i5 can be a lot faster than a Nehalem i7. The same goes with Xeons, it's just a branding for Intel's server/workstation CPUs.

To stick with the same titles as with PPC, we would have to use codenames like Nehalem and Sandy Bridge but I don't think that's a good idea. A5/A5X/A6/etc would be the easiest to implement.

I was of the differing opinion until I just read your explanation. Now I am thinking it would make more sense.

AQUADock · Nov 27, 2012, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hellhammer

The problem with Intel titles is that things like i3 and i5 do not refer to the generation, they are product categories. Ivy Bridge is the third generation to use the same product categories, which makes things confusing because an Ivy Bridge i5 can be a lot faster than a Nehalem i7. The same goes with Xeons, it's just a branding for Intel's server/workstation CPUs.

To stick with the same titles as with PPC, we would have to use codenames like Nehalem and Sandy Bridge but I don't think that's a good idea. A5/A5X/A6/etc would be the easiest to implement.

But I think it would be cool to be called Macroumours Santa Rosa or Harpertown and so on. But whatever if the majority want boring names like A4 and A5 then so be it.

dukebound85 · Nov 29, 2012, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hellhammer

The problem with Intel titles is that things like i3 and i5 do not refer to the generation, they are product categories. Ivy Bridge is the third generation to use the same product categories, which makes things confusing because an Ivy Bridge i5 can be a lot faster than a Nehalem i7. The same goes with Xeons, it's just a branding for Intel's server/workstation CPUs.

To stick with the same titles as with PPC, we would have to use codenames like Nehalem and Sandy Bridge but I don't think that's a good idea. A5/A5X/A6/etc would be the easiest to implement.

There were multiple iterations of the g3, g4, and g5 too.

I would rather stick to cpu chips as that is what all the other rankings are. You do not see cpus associated with a newton or ipods as rankings

There will be a time when intel is not using the i3, i5, i7 moniker and will be on to something else

Keep it with cpu brandings imo

core solo/ core duo/ core 2 duo/ core i3/ core i5/ core i7 seems pretty easy to implement to me

Nov 24, 2012, 11:48 AM	#1
adildacoolset macrumors 6502a Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Lusaka, Zambia(If you know where it is)	Maybe some more CPU titles after G5 Maybe we should have things like A4, A5, A5X, A6, A6X after someone has passed the G5 status. Just a suggestion. Please take it into consideration. __________________ Last edited by adildacoolset; Tomorrow at 09:42 AM. Reason: grammar error
	0

Nov 25, 2012, 05:34 AM	#3
SandboxGeneral Demi-God (Moderator) Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: The New World	What about adding the Intel CPU designations, and dropping the required post count of some of the PowerPC designations? Then people with a G5 now would end up with an i7 designation and then carry it on backwards down the line from there? __________________ Twitter \| Website \| ♫ Free iTunes Music ♫ *Random Access Memories* ~ daft punk
	2

Nov 25, 2012, 05:37 AM	#4
stridemat Demi-God (Moderator) Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: UK	What's to say we don't already have them planned __________________
	0

Nov 27, 2012, 08:00 AM	#21
Hellhammer Demi-God (Moderator) Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Helsinki, Finland	The problem with Intel titles is that things like i3 and i5 do not refer to the generation, they are product categories. Ivy Bridge is the third generation to use the same product categories, which makes things confusing because an Ivy Bridge i5 can be a lot faster than a Nehalem i7. The same goes with Xeons, it's just a branding for Intel's server/workstation CPUs. To stick with the same titles as with PPC, we would have to use codenames like Nehalem and Sandy Bridge but I don't think that's a good idea. A5/A5X/A6/etc would be the easiest to implement. __________________ SSD Editor for AnandTech You can also follow me in Twitter!
	0

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Nov 25, 2012, 05:21 AM	#2
ChristianJapan macrumors 68030 Join Date: May 2010 Location: /home	Suggest we stay with Intel CPUs afterwards ... As all CPUs from the list are Mac CPUs and not iDevices. CoreDuo, C2D, i3, i5, i7 ...or some Xeons ...
	2

Nov 25, 2012, 05:45 AM	#5
maflynn Demi-God (Moderator) Join Date: May 2009 Location: Boston	I'd like to keep the PPC designation but I'm open to new ones.
	0

Nov 25, 2012, 07:54 AM	#9
maflynn Demi-God (Moderator) Join Date: May 2009 Location: Boston	Technically they're not apple made but designed by Apple insofar that the chips are actually produced by Samsung. I like the idea however that we use the A5/A5X/A6 for the reasons you mentioned
	0

Nov 25, 2012, 08:34 AM	#10
ChristianJapan macrumors 68030 Join Date: May 2010 Location: /home	Emotionally it moves us away from the desktop/laptops and we indirect agree that Apples future is on iDevices ... Plus it seems strange that a powerful user with a G5 have now to jump to a A4 ... CPU Geekbench would be the guidance for the continuity ... But anyway: for me still a very long way before it comes to a "real" problem; I'm still in Motorola 68k familiy.
	1