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.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Maybe some more CPU titles after G5
- Thread starter adildacoolset
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
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 ...
CoreDuo, C2D, i3, i5, i7 ...or some Xeons ...
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?
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
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
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.
Last edited:
But the thing is that these are Apple-made chips. So, maybe we can use Apple-made chips on an Apple site??
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.
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.
The G5 was a processor for non-mobile workstations and servers. The A4 and so on are processors for mobile platforms.
Please don't take this into consideration.
----------
Please take this into consideration instead.
Because everything is so iOS these days, Intel processor names would be better imo.
Produced by Samsung as the batch manufacturer.
Honestly, this site isn't foxconnrumors. Batch manufacturers are there, but apple is the design
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.
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.
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.
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.
Boy howdy.
Also, I've always been a bit disappointed in the rewarding of post whores.
A scheme that takes into account post quality as well as quantity would be nice. Yes, difficult - but better.
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
I think you should just keep it as it is. If i had that many posts, I'd rather be a G5 than a A4 or whatever.