Intel widens the gap - System Bus at 533MHz

Discussion in 'Hardware Rumors' started by blackpeter, Apr 16, 2002.

  1. blackpeter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2001
    #1
    One chipset, the 850(e), will feature a 533MHz system bus--the main conduit between the processor and memory--that will deliver higher performance than the 400MHz system bus found on Pentium 4 computers today.

    cNet Article


    Why am I still at 133MHz? Come on Apple... :confused:
     
  2. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #2
    and where here stuck at 133
    this sucks
    I want IBM to ake chips for us they would be a better choice than motorola
     
  3. Vilacr macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    #3
    We need something better a.s.a.p. Apple is falling farther and farther behind. I would like to purchase a new tower but, not with apple's towers being so far behind. The wintel world is humming along along nicely.
     
  4. Mr. Anderson Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #4
    The pressure is even greater now. Apple HAS to do something soon, or MHz myth or not, they just won't be able to compete with the PCs. Even now they're behind enough, to add this little boost in performance its almost like a slap to the face.
     
  5. Ifeelbloated macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    some God forsaken place
    #5
    Don't worry. I'm sure that Steve has an ace up his sleeve. Remember, he's a showman as well as a technophile.
     
  6. sjs macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2002
    Location:
    GA
    #6
    The first thing Apple should do is bite the bullet and discontinue ANY chip less than 1ghz no later than MWSF, preferably by MWNY.

    Some will probably give me mutiple reasons why this is not possible. I have one response: it IS possible and it will take guts to do it, and from a marketing standpoint it would be a home run.

    By MWSF (remember, thats 8 1/2 months) I'll bet Intel is offering nothing less than 1.8 ghz. The durn Celeron is at 1.3 ghz!! Their fastest chips will be at 3 ghz by then.

    If by MWSF Apple offers anything below 1 ghz it will be an outright embarassment.
     
  7. ftaok macrumors 601

    ftaok

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    Location:
    East Coast
    #7
    Hmmm, as far as I know, no IBM chip in a Mac runs on a system bus faster than 100mhz. How does switching to IBM help Apple on the system bus front?
     
  8. Rower_CPU Moderator emeritus

    Rower_CPU

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #8
    <praying to the Gods of FSB repeat="infinity">
    Oh, please
    Oh, please
    Oh, please
    Give us the DDR!

    Oh, please
    Oh, please
    Oh, please
    Give us the DDR!
    </praying to the GOds of FSB>
     
  9. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #9
    IBM has more resources and time to make CPUs
    motorola should stick to phones
     
  10. Mr. Anderson Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #10
    Another well faught arguement!:rolleyes:

    Motorola has the fastest chip for the Macs right now. Who knows what will happen in the future. There's so much speculation on the G5, but IBM has some novel chip development means. If IBM wanted to they could build a better chip than the G4, why haven't they?
     
  11. buffsldr macrumors 6502a

    buffsldr

    Joined:
    May 7, 2001
    #11
    I have never seen so many chicken littles. Everyone just relax. Apple's marketing strategy is not as heavily dependent on hardware as intel's. Why? Because Intel makes chips, and apple well, doesnt.
     
  12. Rower_CPU Moderator emeritus

    Rower_CPU

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #12
    It's not about marketing strategy, it's about having hardware that compares to what has been available for PCs for nearly a year...

    Motorola is way behind in terms of FSB and memory throughput. Since Apple depends on Motorola to provide the hardware, Apple is way behind too.
     
  13. GeeYouEye macrumors 68000

    GeeYouEye

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2001
    Location:
    State of Denial
    #13
    Two possibilities for MWNY

    1. Steve gives us nothing, save a small speed bump in all the lines,a price drop on the iPod, and possibly one new digital hub device.

    2. Steve gives us EVERYTHING, G5 @ 2.2 GHz, DDR RAM, 500MHz bus, Blue-laser Superdrives, new speakers, no products below 1.5 GHz, ATA 133, 17" iMac, new digital camera, iWalk, etc.

    Most unfortunately, the first possibility is more likely, though I can't think of a single person who would complain if the second happened (except maybe Bill Gates, Mike Dell, and the CEO of Intel).
     
  14. buffsldr macrumors 6502a

    buffsldr

    Joined:
    May 7, 2001
    #14
    How can you say its not about marketing strategy? Apple lags behind harley in design of motorcycles, doesnt that concern you? No it doesnt, bro. Its all about marketing strategy. It may not be effective, but its apples call. I will buy the best comp I can find... and for me that is apple, regardless of proc speed. I am chillin with a 466 chip. Do you know how lame that sounds to my buds? But ask me if I care. No. I dont. I am running the best comp I have ever run and it is old technology (if you want to call it that). My buds at work dont care about how fast word or excel opens, they want an ipod.
     
  15. Rower_CPU Moderator emeritus

    Rower_CPU

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #15
    Dude, we're not talking MHz here, we're talking FSB and data transfer on the mobo...

    Besides, it's tough to win a Photoshop "bakeoff" using hi-res images and memory sapping filters when you don't have the throughput to crunch the numbers...
     
  16. buffsldr macrumors 6502a

    buffsldr

    Joined:
    May 7, 2001
    #16
    Yeah, I guess you're right. Macs are not the fastest computers available for consumers or professionals. And your point is?
     
  17. Rower_CPU Moderator emeritus

    Rower_CPU

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #17
    My point is that moving to DDR and whatever form of RapidIO Motorola has up their sleeve will help to put the Mac back on top. I want to watch those P4 owners squirm!!!
     
  18. buffsldr macrumors 6502a

    buffsldr

    Joined:
    May 7, 2001
    #18
    I can understand your enthusiasm too. I would like a piece of indepedently documented evidence I can take to the pc freaks on my block and tell them "See, I told you macs are better." I think i need to be more like eyelikeart in the meantime. Just chill out and let the clones ask questions
     
  19. Rower_CPU Moderator emeritus

    Rower_CPU

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #19
    I'm too impatient for that, unfortunately...
    eye' has been around so long that nothing impresses him...kinda like those old guys who talk about how "everything was better in their day"...;)
     
  20. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #20
    Did you guys see the top story tonight? Faster Graphics card, fastest on the planet even, but if you read the linked story you'll get some insight on what's in the pipeline. We haven't seen the G5 yet, but there is a mention of a possible G5 test box that was seen earlier this year, and already been there for a while. Hmmmm, if this is true, then there is already a G5 but it isn't released. Why would that happen? If they need to create more than just a fast chip. The G5 gives Apple the chance to debut more than just a fast chip, but a faster IO, faster graphics card, who knows...maybe something so truly revolutionary that the PC's will never be able to compete let alone catch up.
    Macs were the fastest machines out there very recently, and even if they don't speed up more than a few megahertz the mac will still be my choice to do what I do, video, DVD, and graphics with a machine that does all this quite well. If the G5 comes out this summer and is much faster than I will have less money in the bank and a nice new G5 on my desk. Either way I'm still working, creating, enjoying the opportunities that my Mac allows me.
     
  21. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #21
    Oh yeah, even if the PC's are faster on paper, would you want one just for that?
    Ooooh I have the fastest motherboard available this month.
    Do you have iTunes? iPhoto? OSX? FCP? iDVD? DVDSP?
    Thought so.
     
  22. sjs macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2002
    Location:
    GA
    #22
    Is 3.5% market share enough for Apple to succeed?

    If you think it is, then you fail to realize that one of the reasons we lag behind in the chip speed, bus speed, memory, etc is VOLUME. How can Motorola keep pace technologically with Intel when they produce about 1/20th the chips and hence 1/20th the revenues, which are needed for R & D? The same applies to software.

    The underlying theme, and Steve knows it, is that Apple will be better off as soon as they can double their marketshare. So it IS all about marketing, and marketing is all about perception...getting people to perceive the quality and value you offer.

    Unfortunately the vast majority of computer buyers are not selecting their computer on the basis of Photoshop speed and whatever isolated examples where Apple is faster. Nearly everone has been trained to select their new computer purchase on the basis of a) price, b) processor speed, c) software compatibility.

    On price Apple can compete, and more and more people are perceiving the value of the iApps. On software compatibility they can port to x86 if they want, but that's their decision. That leaves SPEED, an that is a problem Apple should bite the bullet on asap and get rid of all chips below 1ghz. The public seems to realize that any processor over 1ghz is quite adequate and will not be detered from buying if that criterion is met. That would help catapult Apple sales enough to achieve the doubling of their sales, which will generate the volumes necessary to help Motorola and all the other hardware and software suppliers keep pace with the PC world.

    So please, don't say its not about marketing and you are happy with your Apple just as it is. This isn't about you...you're already in the fold. Its about the future of a major corporation in the most competetive, fastest changing business in the world.
     
  23. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #23
    The current state of play is alittle worrying isn't it.....:rolleyes:

    And it would seem that Apple is beginning to fall behind alittle, but I think with the G4 beginning to reach the end of the line with the Power Mac range, I think the G5 will be something very, very special although it's going to have to be a huge performance jump over the current G4's to really get people off on one!!

    SPG I hear ya mate!! and I agree with you!!

    I think most people are concerned that while PC technology is moving along nicely, with performance increases being released quite regularly, that Apple aren't keeping up......... that they are too slow incorporating new technology to improve the performance off their machines, I know they innovate with superdrives and nivida cards, which is really cool, but by what I'm reading on here and tech sites, Apples motherboard specs just aren't cutting it and that they need to work on not only releasing the G5 with supa-duper technology but also keeping up with emerging technology as and when it's released.....

    I think alot of Mac users aren't going to leave the platform just because they're are lagging in certain performance areas, but we have to face facts that PCs are beginning to pull ahead interms of RAW performance...... Apple need to and I have no doubt in my mind are addressing this at this very second in time..... But they could have problems convincing people to move over to the Mac, when the machines are over 1 Ghz slower, with a bus speed at 1/4 of the speed, lacking DDR etc etc...... of a PC......

    I just can't wait to see the new specs when the G5 is released........

    Va Va Vroom!!!
     
  24. cb911 macrumors 601

    cb911

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Location:
    BrisVegas, Australia
    #24
    i agree, Apple should get rid of all their chips that are below 1GHz. but if they could do that wouldn't they have already done it? perhaps as soon as the G5 is released we'll see at least all 1GHz and up in the TiBooks and Powermacs. Apple also might be able to grab more customers with this new video card i hear they've been working on. twin GPU with 128MB DDR RAM in each GPU..... sounds just like what Apple needs!
     
  25. sjs macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2002
    Location:
    GA
    #25
    if they could do it, why haven't they?

    There are two reasons why they still have chips below 1ghz:

    1 - slower chips are cheaper;

    2 - trying to keep adequate distance between top of line and bottom of line products.

    However, from a marketing standpoint Apple has gotten so far behind in the perception of speed that they need take steps to correct the problem in a way that the public understands.

    As just one example, by MWNY Apple should have the new iMac with just one chip for all three machines: 1ghz G4. Then the product diferrentiation would be based on RAM, HD and CD-type. That would get that product over the psychological hump of chip speed.

    By MWNY Power Mac should be at 1 ghz up to 1.4 ghz.
    Power Books should be like the iMac: all 1 ghz chips.
    iBooks and old iMacs, if continued in their present form, should also contain 1 ghz G3s. (Don't say they can't make 1 ghz G3s: they have just been held back by Apple so as not to encroach on the other machine's maximum chip speeds.)

    Don't get me wrong - I LOVE my slow Mac and I perceive the value because I am already a user. The problem isn't you aor me...it's the perceptions of the "other 95%" and yes, we need some of them to see the light if Apple is to have the volume that will allow bus speed improvements and everything else you want from our suppliers.
     

Share This Page