More than 2 Processor Support in Mac OS X?

MacRumors · Mar 9, 2005, 04:50 PM

One user submits the following:

"Apple released version 4.1.0 of their CHUD tools. CHUD is used by developer for optimizing applications. One of the components is a system preference panel called "Processor". It enables you to turn off the "Nap" function of the processors, but more importantly it allows you to turn off the second processor of a dual-processor machine.

With version 4.1.0, the interface of the "Processor" panel changed significantly. You can compare the last version (4.0.2) with the current version here.

The significance is pretty obvious. Instead of a static single/dual processor option, there is now room to view 4 processors at once, and to select how many are to be active. Maybe Apple will never actually release a quad-processor G5, but it certainly looks like there is one in development."

wrldwzrd89 · Mar 9, 2005, 04:55 PM

I take this as preparation for the inevitable arrival of dual-core Macs. I don't think it says anything significant about when those will arrive.

slooksterPSV · Mar 9, 2005, 04:58 PM

I think the PowerMacs are going to have a new family line. PowerMac G5 Quad or something like that. From reading that, is it safe to say that the L1 Cache total is 96KB? - Per Processor

daveL · Mar 9, 2005, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wrldwzrd89

I take this as preparation for the inevitable arrival of dual-core Macs. I don't think it says anything significant about when those will arrive.

Well, except it implies Apple needs this capability now, in house.

I've been unable to use the CHUD updater to get the latest version. Ever time I run it I end up force quitting it; it just sits there with a status message indicating it's attempt to contact the server, but it never succeeds. Has anyone else had this problem lately?

Chaszmyr · Mar 9, 2005, 05:03 PM

When I heard about this, I simply had to download the new version of CHUD to see for myself. It is totally set up for more than 2 processors(or cores). I can't even express how exciting the notion of a dual core dual processor powermac is

jim. · Mar 9, 2005, 05:05 PM

Did the mach core always have the ability to scale across more than two processors? It could just be a gui addition to what is already there at a low level. Whether or not it is indicative of something, we shall see....

Jim

shyataroo · Mar 9, 2005, 05:06 PM

Quad Processor G5? I doubt it.... Dual Core Dual processor G5 seems more likely... I mean first off a Quad Processor G5 would need a much larger tower enclosure to cool it, secondly the amount of processing speed increase would become more negliable with each new processor thats added on... so a Quad G5 would have like 60 or 70 or maybe 90% improvement over a Single G5 when releasing a 5Ghz G5 single processor with an assload of cooling would be better than 4 2.5Ghz processors. not only that but the power requirments would be exhorbent. Personally, I think that they need to work on getting the bus speed at 100% of processor speed and same with ram... that way there would be no bottlenecks and the G5 Processor will be able to show off its full power.

isgoed · Mar 9, 2005, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wrldwzrd89

I take this as preparation for the inevitable arrival of dual-core Macs. I don't think it says anything significant about when those will arrive.

I do think it says anything significant about when those will arrive: Soon.

RacerX · Mar 9, 2005, 05:12 PM

I seem to recall that Mac OS X was designed to work with up to four processors, there just weren't any four processor systems out there.

Also (off the topic a little) Mac OS 8/9 had support for four processors using it's asymmetric multiprocessing software Apple got from Daystar. Of course part of the reason for that software supporting up to four processors was the fact that Daystar made a four processor system (based on the PowerPC 604 processor at 150 MHz).

jsw · Mar 9, 2005, 05:12 PM

Hmmmph. Having a dual-proc BeBox in 1996, and seeing a quad-proc one in 1997, with CPU shutdown controls for n procs (true), I'm unimpressed (kidding).

Actually, no, I'm pretty excited about what this indicates: clearly, we'll be seeing dual-proc dual-core PBs at WWDC. I see no other way to interpret this.

Seriously, this is pretty exciting stuff, and I can't wait until we non-Apple folks can use it. Most people won't get much use out of it, but the possibilities really open up for some S/W segments.

mvc · Mar 9, 2005, 05:20 PM

4 Cores! - That would just the ticket for rendering video I imagine.

So will they call it the "Dual Dual"?

isgoed · Mar 9, 2005, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shyataroo

Quad Processor G5? I doubt it....

I think you forgot the xServe.

I also think it is difficult for an app to utilize more than two processors. But the XBox get's three, so why not. It could also be that a dual core processor presents itself as a single core processor. And maybe in time 4 processors become normal. Maybe you can run two Operating servers on one computer now. (Let's say a webserver and OSX). And it's also not uncommon to have 3 or more heavy duty apps open at once.

eSnow · Mar 9, 2005, 05:24 PM

Anyone noticed that "Clock Speed" has changed to "Core Freq."? I am pretty sure this means dual-core CPUs soon.

Bear · Mar 9, 2005, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isgoed

I think you forgot the xServe.

I also think it is difficult for an app to utilize more than two processors. But the XBox get's three, so why not. It could also be that a dual core processor presents itself as a single core processor. And maybe in time 4 processors become normal. Maybe you can run two Operating servers on one computer now. (Let's say a webserver and OSX). And it's also not uncommon to have 3 or more heavy duty apps open at once.

Actually how many procs an application can use depends on the application and the design o fthe application. A database engine (Sybase or Oracle for examples) will happily make use of many processors.

Right now, I have software that will pretty much suck down both processors of a Dual Proc PowerMac. So even if it was true that any given application could only use 2 processors at maximum, most of use are running multiple applications and for heavy users, they would see a nice improvement with more processors (or cores per proc).

I'm hoping a dual core/dual proc G5 is out soon.

wdlove · Mar 9, 2005, 05:27 PM

Maybe will get some leaks about this prior to the WDDC. If Apple can't achieve the 3.0 status then the dual or quad should be the goal.

AliensAreFuzzy · Mar 9, 2005, 05:30 PM

This could be going along with the XBox 2 rumors of dual, even triple core 3.0GHz PPC processors

Sun Baked · Mar 9, 2005, 05:35 PM

Who knows, there are stories that the current Alpha 2 developer kits for the XBox2 have dual cores now.

http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microso...html?fromint=1

Fukui · Mar 9, 2005, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim.

Did the mach core always have the ability to scale across more than two processors? Jim

Mach was made for way more than 4 processors...
That was one of the original design goals anyways...

Sun Baked · Mar 9, 2005, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fukui

Mach was made for way more than 4 processors...
That was one of the original design goals anyways...

Tiger is supposed to support improved SMP scalability.

Apple probably did quite a bit to finally catch up to FreeBSD 5.x and it's SMPng support.

daveL · Mar 9, 2005, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Baked

Tiger is supposed to support improved SMP scalability.

Apple probably did quite a bit to finally catch up to FreeBSD 5.x and it's SMPng support.

That's interesting, but ~loserman~ (I believe) reported in the Doom3 thread that Tiger did not improve SMP performance. Maybe it's just not in the builds we've seen. I sure hope you are correct about Tiger.

nagromme · Mar 9, 2005, 05:57 PM

Forget quad G5s. i want my quad G6!

(I once had a quad G2 Mac from DayStar at work!)

I like the "NEW" flags, BTW.

(PS. It can't have been easy to get that JPEG up to 300k

)

Sun Baked · Mar 9, 2005, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daveL

That's interesting, but ~loserman~ (I believe) reported in the Doom3 thread that Tiger did not improve SMP performance. Maybe it's just not in the builds we've seen. I sure hope you are correct about Tiger.

Was Doom3 compiled using the Tiger libraries?

Remember, you have to recompile in order to take advantage of the new libraries.

zedster · Mar 9, 2005, 06:02 PM

Come on people this is a page two article lets not confine our speculations to only four proccesors. How about IBM's new PowerPC Cell proccessor? It has 9 cores running at >4Ghz! Times that by 2

Sure it's radical but as I said, it's Page two!
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...208015407.html

Some_Big_Spoon · Mar 9, 2005, 06:04 PM

i'm no expert in the least, but seems like this is for dual-core, dual processor systems.

The ability to turn on/off one or more of the cores, or set them to turn on/off as needed, etc. would make perfect sense. Lends itse'f to far better power/heat management, and makes a lot of sense for mobile computing as well. Just as we have energy saver settings for the 'books now, this would give greater control if/when the DC G4/G5's make it to mobile.

Enough with the /'s already :-)

Some_Big_Spoon · Mar 9, 2005, 06:05 PM

for tiger? it wasn't even optimised for PPC.. we're lucky it's playable on the platform at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Baked

Was Doom3 compiled using the Tiger libraries?

Remember, you have to recompile in order to take advantage of the new libraries.

Mar 9, 2005, 04:50 PM	#1
MacRumors macrumors bot Join Date: Apr 2001	More than 2 Processor Support in Mac OS X? One user submits the following: "Apple released version 4.1.0 of their CHUD tools. CHUD is used by developer for optimizing applications. One of the components is a system preference panel called "Processor". It enables you to turn off the "Nap" function of the processors, but more importantly it allows you to turn off the second processor of a dual-processor machine. With version 4.1.0, the interface of the "Processor" panel changed significantly. You can compare the last version (4.0.2) with the current version here. The significance is pretty obvious. Instead of a static single/dual processor option, there is now room to view 4 processors at once, and to select how many are to be active. Maybe Apple will never actually release a quad-processor G5, but it certainly looks like there is one in development."

Mar 9, 2005, 04:55 PM	#2
wrldwzrd89 macrumors 601 Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Solon, OH	I take this as preparation for the inevitable arrival of dual-core Macs. I don't think it says anything significant about when those will arrive. __________________ Proud iMac and iPod touch owner Successfully upgraded iMac to 1TB HDD

Mar 9, 2005, 04:58 PM	#3
slooksterPSV macrumors 68030 Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Nowheresville	I think the PowerMacs are going to have a new family line. PowerMac G5 Quad or something like that. From reading that, is it safe to say that the L1 Cache total is 96KB? - Per Processor __________________ AMD Phenom 9600, 4GB RAM, 250GB HDD, ATI Radeon 4670, Vista Home Premium 64-bit

Mar 9, 2005, 05:05 PM	#6
jim. macrumors 6502 Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: C-ville, VA	Did the mach core always have the ability to scale across more than two processors? It could just be a gui addition to what is already there at a low level. Whether or not it is indicative of something, we shall see.... Jim __________________ Sometimes there is knowledge in my ramblings. me, more or less

Mar 9, 2005, 05:06 PM	#7
shyataroo macrumors regular Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Hell... Wanna join me?	Quad Processor G5? I doubt it.... Dual Core Dual processor G5 seems more likely... I mean first off a Quad Processor G5 would need a much larger tower enclosure to cool it, secondly the amount of processing speed increase would become more negliable with each new processor thats added on... so a Quad G5 would have like 60 or 70 or maybe 90% improvement over a Single G5 when releasing a 5Ghz G5 single processor with an assload of cooling would be better than 4 2.5Ghz processors. not only that but the power requirments would be exhorbent. Personally, I think that they need to work on getting the bus speed at 100% of processor speed and same with ram... that way there would be no bottlenecks and the G5 Processor will be able to show off its full power. __________________ Watch Zeitgeist: Addendum http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...05277695921912

Mar 9, 2005, 05:03 PM	#5
Chaszmyr macrumors Demi-God Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Boulder, CO	When I heard about this, I simply had to download the new version of CHUD to see for myself. It is totally set up for more than 2 processors(or cores). I can't even express how exciting the notion of a dual core dual processor powermac is

Mar 9, 2005, 05:12 PM	#9
RacerX macrumors 65832 Join Date: Aug 2004	I seem to recall that Mac OS X was designed to work with up to four processors, there just weren't any four processor systems out there. Also (off the topic a little) Mac OS 8/9 had support for four processors using it's asymmetric multiprocessing software Apple got from Daystar. Of course part of the reason for that software supporting up to four processors was the fact that Daystar made a four processor system (based on the PowerPC 604 processor at 150 MHz).

Mar 9, 2005, 05:12 PM	#10
jsw Demi-God (Moderator) Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Andover, MA	Hmmmph. Having a dual-proc BeBox in 1996, and seeing a quad-proc one in 1997, with CPU shutdown controls for n procs (true), I'm unimpressed (kidding). Actually, no, I'm pretty excited about what this indicates: clearly, we'll be seeing dual-proc dual-core PBs at WWDC. I see no other way to interpret this. Seriously, this is pretty exciting stuff, and I can't wait until we non-Apple folks can use it. Most people won't get much use out of it, but the possibilities really open up for some S/W segments. __________________ You'll be the one moaning for me to give you some. - THC(taken out of context)

Mar 9, 2005, 05:20 PM	#11
mvc macrumors 6502a Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Outer-Roa	4 Cores! - That would just the ticket for rendering video I imagine. So will they call it the "Dual Dual"? __________________ If Apple really wanted to secure their OS to their own hardware, they might have tried something stronger than limmericks

Mar 9, 2005, 05:24 PM	#13
eSnow macrumors regular Join Date: Feb 2004	Anyone noticed that "Clock Speed" has changed to "Core Freq."? I am pretty sure this means dual-core CPUs soon.

Mar 9, 2005, 05:27 PM	#15
wdlove macrumors 604 Join Date: Oct 2002	Maybe will get some leaks about this prior to the WDDC. If Apple can't achieve the 3.0 status then the dual or quad should be the goal. __________________ First MacRumors "Contributor"

Mar 9, 2005, 05:30 PM	#16
AliensAreFuzzy macrumors Demi-God Join Date: May 2004 Location: Madison, WI	This could be going along with the XBox 2 rumors of dual, even triple core 3.0GHz PPC processors

Mar 9, 2005, 05:35 PM	#17
Sun Baked macrumors 603 Join Date: May 2002	Who knows, there are stories that the current Alpha 2 developer kits for the XBox2 have dual cores now. http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microso...html?fromint=1 __________________ May you be plagued by images of Richard Simmons flouncing through you brain, and squat thrusting his way though all waking thoughts.

Mar 9, 2005, 05:57 PM	#21
nagromme macrumors 601 Join Date: May 2002 Location: Blinking blue dot	Forget quad G5s. i want my quad G6! (I once had a quad G2 Mac from DayStar at work!) I like the "NEW" flags, BTW. (PS. It can't have been easy to get that JPEG up to 300k ) __________________ nagromme Would you like a treatment?

Mar 9, 2005, 06:02 PM	#23
zedster macrumors newbie Join Date: Jul 2002	Why only four? Come on people this is a page two article lets not confine our speculations to only four proccesors. How about IBM's new PowerPC Cell proccessor? It has 9 cores running at >4Ghz! Times that by 2 Sure it's radical but as I said, it's Page two! http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...208015407.html

Mar 9, 2005, 06:04 PM	#24
Some_Big_Spoon macrumors 6502a Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Seattle.. just plain ol' wet whitebread Seattle	i'm no expert in the least, but seems like this is for dual-core, dual processor systems. The ability to turn on/off one or more of the cores, or set them to turn on/off as needed, etc. would make perfect sense. Lends itse'f to far better power/heat management, and makes a lot of sense for mobile computing as well. Just as we have energy saver settings for the 'books now, this would give greater control if/when the DC G4/G5's make it to mobile. Enough with the /'s already :-)

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