Intel to reach 10Ghz in 2005!

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by gaomay, Jan 29, 2003.

  1. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Location:
    Scotland, UK
    #1
  2. macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #2
    Apple might be at 3ghz by then :p

    I have faith that Apple will manage to keep up somehow...
     
  3. macrumors 68000

    hvfsl

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2001
    Location:
    London, UK
    #3
    The speed gap problems with Intel started to happen when Apple released the G3 PowerMacs. They had 350Mhz 604e PowerMacs and then went to 233Mhz G3 PowerMacs. The G3 was faster than the 604, but the G3 and G4 proccessors have not been able to keep up with Intel. They have been close and one or two times, the G3/G4 was faster than the Pentium, but because the G3/G4 do not scale very well, they have not been able to keep up with Intel recently.

    So Apple needs a Proccessor that scales well and the PPC970 does not look like it.
     
  4. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    #4
    sadly this is why Apple has to jump in bed with AMD or Intel
    otherwise they are going to get left behind farther and farther
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    iAlan

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Location:
    Location: Location:
    #5
    If Apple have to jump in bed with AMD or Intel to keep up, well why not?

    If current chip suppliers (you know who I mean) cannpt provide Apple with the best set of chips, well change suppliers.

    Apple is a business, and they need to keep pace with the competition. Sure, chip speed isn't eveything, you need a stable platform with cool software, all packaged in a nice easy to use and attractive case. Apple has the later, but no matter what 'speed test' you run (biased or otherwise) the perception from the general public is speed.

    Why would a 'switcher' buy a machine that has a slow chip speed (real or perceived) - Apple has to keep up, not just upgrading existing chips with step-ups in speed.

    Apple needs to make some tough decisions...we Mac users are making these decisions with staying with Apple...although the new monitors, pricing and new software is a great reason to stay...
     
  6. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #6
    great news

    Great, in 2005, Intel will finally have chip that is competitive with the dual G4.

    Pete :rolleyes:
     
  7. macrumors 68040

    patrick0brien

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    The West Loop
    #7
    -Hmm

    It's interesting speculation on the specs. I'd like to see how they'd do it. Intel has been concentrating so much on clock speed, they've actually achieved it.

    Problem: They are already knocking at the door with the power dissipation limits, and are experiencing much crosstalk. I've read items somewhere (can't remember, Geek.com I think) that we're actually going to see a slowdown in their rampups because of these problems. Even Andy Grove mentioned this. Just look at the current issues: 100 watts, 200 degrees farenheight (uncooled).

    I mean, holy sh**. It's a processor, and a George Foreman Grill!

    I'm sure they want to end up here, but we're awfully close to Moore's limit now. If Motorola weren't such squirrels, the PowerPC's would be pulling so far ahead due to the nature of the actual RISC architecture.

    IBM, please save us.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2001
    #8
    Oh no, not 10ghz in 2 years!! What am i going to do? I can't stand this anymore, I'm going to jump off a bridge now because the chip maker for a platform that I despise and could care less about will be a few seconds faster then the platform I use and love :(

    When does this become a pissing contest? I'd love to hear and female perspectives on this issue.
     
  9. macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #9
    Honestly I think they might be capable of reaching 10GHz by 2005 but I don't think they will. It takes a lot of money to develop faster and faster chips because by the time you are turning out a faster one the old one hasn't even paid for R&D yet. Intel said a few weeks ago that they wouldn't be pushing ther chips much over 3GHz this next year unless they got pressure from AMD.
     
  10. macrumors 68020

    howard

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    #10
    i have faith in IBM. They're a good company. Now how old is the G3?...pretty damn old. This chip is not even at its full potential (i'm sure you've all heard the rumors of it being clocked at like 1.2 1.3 ghz but not release cause it would be faster than the G4) its not at its full potential but it still is a pretty damn good chip, anyone with an ibook knows this. Now if they put in the time and invest in the 970 even more than they did with the G3 i think it will take apple and IBM to great places. And who knows what will happen in a few years. how much credit are you giving to that stupid inquirer article?
     
  11. macrumors 68000

    agreenster

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2001
    Location:
    Walt Disney Animation Studios
    #11
    Re: great news

    I dont know what planet you are from...but AMD and Intel chips are significantly faster than G4's. Its rediculous how much faster they are. (and cheaper too!)

    Lets look at some simple concepts:

    -OSX is nicer than Windows
    -Apple computers provide a significantly better user experience overall
    -Video Cards Manufacturers are the same (for the most part) across the board for PCs and Macs
    -Intel and AMD chips are faster than Motorolas, and they will probably continue to advance R+D to maintain superiority

    So, if Apple can use ATI and NVIDIA Video cards and no one bitches, why couldnt they use AMD or Intel chips? If Apple creates a proprietary system, running on an Intel or AMD (or Hell, Ill take IBM if its fast enough), why would anyone complain??

    I mean, what is it that REALLY sells Apple computers? Not speed, thats for sure. Its style, elegance, user experience, iApps, functionality, and the whole Apple goodness.

    It only makes sense that Apple, who prides themselves on quality and superiority, should offer their users the superior chip. Stop denying the fact that Motorolla really isnt cutting it. No one is really fooled. No, G4's dont SUCK, but they just arent as GOOD.

    And I dont believe that Apple doesnt have Marklar to make it all happen.

    If you can beat em, copy em! Why not reverse engineer their chips?--theve been doing it to the Mac OS for years
     
  12. macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #12
    Re: Re: great news

    I didn't write the post you are commenting on but I get the feeling that you don't really understand the use of sarcasm.
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2001
    Location:
    NJ
    #13
    Do you know when intel will move all the desktop P4's over to hyperthreading processors?
     
  14. macrumors regular

    pretentious

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Location:
    "Reality"
    #14
    10 GHZ!!! OMG!!!...Oh wait, its the Inquirer... nevermind... back to what you were doing before.

    Since when do ever put any thing from the Inquirer at face value?
    If Intel was able to make it to 10Ghz within the next two years, and this is one big IF since this from the Inquirer, what kind of cooling elements would be on that bad boy? While you consider that, who the hell would be buying a PC with what ever kind of outrages cooling that you have decided upon?
     
  15. macrumors 65816

    iAlan

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Location:
    Location: Location:
    #15
    Re: Re: great news

    I don't think it is a matter of the Mac OS running on Intel based PCs. If Apple uses Intel or AMD they will be, as agreenster said, proprietry agreements - Apple made machines with Intel chips.

    Mac OS on a PC box wouldn't cut it due to loss of integration at all stages - which is what Apple does now, and does well.
     
  16. macrumors 68000

    agreenster

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2001
    Location:
    Walt Disney Animation Studios
    #16
    Re: Re: Re: great news

    Hard to catch sarcasm sometimes when its text--I pull that comment.

    But I still think many Apple users think this way; that if it says G4, it MUST be faster.
     
  17. macrumors 6502a

    springscansing

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    #17
    Re: great news

    ... um, what? is that like triple-tier sarcasm? :)
     
  18. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    #18
    10GHz till end of 2005...
    I dont like this!!!!
     
  19. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Location:
    here, there, who knows
    #19
    Who cares

    IBM had the g3 and g4 runnig at 5+ghz but it needs liquid nitrogen to keep them cool.
     
  20. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Location:
    Canada
    #20
    Re: Who cares

    I would like a link to that information please.
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    zarathustra

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    #21
    This reminds me of Conan O'Brien:

    In the year 2005 *hums melody of "in the year 2000*...

    Cattle will run wild when cowboys realize chaps look kinda gay.

    By the year 2005 we might have only a 4 Ghz PPC970/980/990 chip, but it might have an architecture that's uncomprehensible today. It will have an insane throughput with a totally new way of doing "computer talk".

    Intel already shot themselves in the foot by accentuating the Hz rating - now they are stuck around 3.5-4 Ghz. So assuming they keep going in the same direction, just wamping up speed, but not radically redesigning the whole system, they will have a really fast, aging, unefficient chip.
     
  22. macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #22
    Agreenster,
    my iMac G3 500 runs photoshop faster than the wifes PIII 1GHZ. 1/2 the speed and it is faster at loading, running filters, etc.
    So, don't believe the hype ;)
     
  23. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Location:
    here, there, who knows
    #23
    Re: Re: Who cares

    No link got a friend in the "inside"
     
  24. macrumors 604

    MrMacMan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2001
    Location:
    1 Block away from NYC.
    #24
    Acually this is total BS.

    Lie one: Intel Chip roadmap states inless forced by AMD intel will not release a chip any, ANY higher than 3.6-4.0 GHZ.
    Look there are MANY issues dealing with the current P4's, like heat.

    Many people don't understand that as you make chips go faster and faster and don't lower the nanometers then it will give off heat.

    Sure, intel could release the 3.6 GHZ chip tommorow, but it would probably need some massive water cooling while running.

    Heck in theory (tom's hardware) too the intel 3.6 and got it up to 4 GHZ but they needs the chip to be frozen (way frozen, -52 C). This is just impossible for any consumer to accept.

    Shoot my foot if I'm wrong but a well over 6 GHZ gap in 2 years is very, very insane.
     
  25. macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #25
    I can see the January headlines for 2005=== MOTOROLA HAS JUST ANOUNCED THAT THEY HAVE BROKEN THE 2 GIG BARRIER====meanwhile on page 2 INTEL announces its been secretly working on a 15GHZ chip. sorry couldnt help myself!
     

Share This Page