What chip do YOU think apple will put in their intel powermacs

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Macmadant, Jan 28, 2006.

  1. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    #1
    what intel chip will apple use in their intel powermac i can't guess i don't have a clue what intel chips are out there the only one i've heard the name of is pentium, any ideas:)
     
  2. macrumors 68020

    ChrisBrightwell

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Location:
    Huntsville, AL
    #2
    Intel has some dual-core hyperthread-enabled chips coming down the pipe this year. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see those show up in the new PowerMac.

    Imagine having four cores, each with two threads.
     
  3. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    #3
    I can imagine, but....

    It's only gonna be useful if you can split your program into threads. The software needs to take advantage of all this multi-core business - unless its programmed to - the code will only use one core. rendering the others to do jack.

    F
     
  4. macrumors 68030

    risc

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
  5. macrumors 6502a

    solaris

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    #5
    Intel "Conroe" - 64-bit desktop processor.
    Expected late 2006
     
  6. macrumors 68030

    risc

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #6
    The Woodcrest is the SMP version of the Conroe, I hope they go with the Woodcrest over the Conroe I'd hate to see no more dual CPU (whatever they end up calling the) Power Macs. The Woodcrest is the Server/Workstation version of the Conroe, like the Xeon compared to the Pentium IV at the moment.
     
  7. macrumors 6502a

    Laser47

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2004
    Location:
    Maryland
  8. macrumors 68020

    ChrisBrightwell

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Location:
    Huntsville, AL
    #8
    Software can all run on one thread, but the OS can balance different processes on different threads.

    Additionally, stuff like Final Cut is already multi-processor aware. I'm not sure that it would scale to 8 threads, but you never know.
     
  9. macrumors 68030

    Catfish_Man

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2001
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #9
    I'll be curious to see if it's Woodcrest or Conroe. Intel has historically artificially overpriced their SMP capable chips, at least when selling them directly to consumers. A dual woodcrest system will be crazy-fast, though :D
     
  10. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    #10
    I see the new Powermacs getting Conroe, as well as the next iMac revision. The next MacBook Pro will get the 4MB Cache Merom, and the new iBook will see a 2MB Cache Merom with a lower clock.
     
  11. macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
  12. macrumors 65816

    MacTruck

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Location:
    One Endless Loop
    #12
    a jalepeno pringle
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    #13
    The iMac and MacBook will maintain parallelism with regards to chips. I expect both of them to get upgraded to Merom once it becomes available. Conroe has an estimated 65w TDP which is probably too high for the iMac's form-factor, which I expect to get even smaller.
     
  14. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #14
    I kinda think there will be Conroe - slow, conroe - fast, and for the top line, possible the conroe XE, which will be like a Pentium Extreme edition. I'm not sure if i can see apple using server grade chips from intel in their power mac. Just exhorbiantly expensive for what you get. .02
     
  15. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    #15
    Using Merom will drive up the cost of the iMac. Conroe will allow for lower cost. Using Merom could make the iMac more costly to produce than a Powermac.
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    #16
    Mac OS uses Mach kernal, unlike Windows, it can balance tasks and calculations up between processors. It goes, "cool two processors, I'll get one to do some calculations, and get the other one to do some others, I'll get their results and put them together to come out with the outcome". NT kernal just goes "who's the second processor?".
     
  17. macrumors 65816

    yankeefan24

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Location:
    NYC
    #17
    i agree 100%. Woodcrest will be Intel's most powerfull chip this year which is designed for multiple processors linked together. Conroe is for single processor solutions.
     
  18. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    #18
    Exactly. Not to mention the fact that Apple have have dual processor machines in their main line up for ages now, so most software companies should be writing code to make use of it. Using multiple threads in code is very common these days, for example my Safari is currently using 34 threads.
     
  19. macrumors 68030

    Catfish_Man

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2001
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #19
    Oh please. NT runs just fine on dual dual-core hyperthreaded boxes (gasp! 8 threads!). Mach is a nice enough kernel, but it ain't magic. 10.4 has improved the situation a great deal with regard to multithreading in the kernel, actually. It used to be pretty ugly in places. Still has a ways to go to catch up to the commercial *nixes and linux, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's as good or better than NT now.
     
  20. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    #20
    No need to stretch the truth

    Mac OS X is a perfectly fine OS, but it isn't magic. Both NT and OS X are limited to scheduling one thread on a single processor core at a time - the basic concepts of these modern OSes are identical. Apple's advantages have more to do with the way they apply modern technology, not inherent advantages in the technology itself.

    The real breath of fresh air with OS X is that Apple is no longer behind the technology curve the way they were with OS 9 - in essence they're no longer competing with one hand tied behind their back.
     
  21. macrumors 68000

    RichP

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Location:
    Motor City
    #21
    made with the new 45nm process...
     
  22. macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #22
    Hey! don't laugh but a long time ago I had a dual P-2 400 MB and it was pretty darn strong for puters back then.;)
     
  23. iDM
    macrumors 6502a

    iDM

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2005
    Location:
    The Commonwealth of PA/The First State-DE
    #23
    What speeds are these Woodcrest and Conroe chips? Ghz Wise?

    Maybe a link pointing me in the right direction with info?
     
  24. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #24
    It will be a combination of Conroe and Woodcrest. The single processor, dual core will be Conroe. Then if you need some serious computing power, you can get the dual dual based on Woodcrest. Woodcrest will then go into the xServes.

    - Kelson
     
  25. macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #25
    My gues: Intel's "Operon-killer"

    I was very much surprized when Apple said they were going to Intel. I expected the move would be to "Intel Architecture" which would have allowed for AMD chips. Had they done that it would be easy to guess.

    I expected the new MacPros to look just like this:
    http://tinyurl.com/8cyoq
    It even looks like a clunkly version of a power mac

    The above is just an "entry level" Sun desktop machine
    For more money they offer an four chip, eight core Opteron 880
    based system. It comes with 16GB RAM and 10,000rpm SCSI
    disks for about $28k

    Could Apple sell these at a lower price than Sun? I doubt it.
    So at hose prices there'd be a pretty small market

    All that said I'd guess Itel is trying hard to design an "opteron killer" and it will that yet un released chip that Apple will use. The only other option is a dual oe quad Xeon system.
     

Share This Page