Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

800 MHz bus a reality!

It isn't truly an 800MHZ bus, and it may not do much in the real world if the hardware cannot function at the high speed.

Seems to me that they took a 200MHZ bus and 4x it. I'll be interested to see how much it improves speed, because the 533 FSB speed wasn't that impressive to me. Anyhow, if it's running 400DDR then what is the point? My brother, a computer engineer, thinks most of this stuff is just "number inflation" by Intel. They keep doing doubles, triples, etc - and will be shafted at some point for doing it.
 
It's not really an 800MHz bus - it's a "quad-pumped" 200MHz bus. There isn't anything on the bus which is actually moving at 800MHz, just as there isn't anything inside the P4 which is actually moving at 2.4GHz.
 
The only thing this would help with is memory access to the processor. No other components on the computer operate that fast. It'd be a waste of money to have that hooked up to your HD's, PCI slots, and everything else...
 
I know it's a quad pumped 200MHz...

If you guys think it makes no difference then explain this:

sandra_2003_memory.gif


875p_sandramem.gif


http://www.mbreview.com/cwood-8.php

sanda-bandwidth.gif


cachemem-bandwidth.gif


xmpeg.gif


http://tech-report.com/reviews/2003q2/intel-875p/index.x?pg=6

http://tech-report.com/reviews/2003q2/intel-875p/index.x?pg=6
 
Originally posted by G4scott
The only thing this would help with is memory access to the processor. No other components on the computer operate that fast. It'd be a waste of money to have that hooked up to your HD's, PCI slots, and everything else...
Click to expand...
Also supports Serial ATA...

My point is the target for Apple just moved.
 
who cares if it is quad pumped. the reality is that it is faster. now the question is if its much faster than 533.

iJon
 
OK, this is kinda funny. The 970 is announced with a double pumped 450MHz bus and mac users go insane over it. The Pentium 4 is announced with a quad pumped 200MHz bus, and everyone goes "oh, it's not actually 800MHz, it doesn't matter". Also, what's with the comment about hooking hard drives to it? Since when does the HD hook up to the system bus? About hooking DDR400 to it: they use dual channel DDR400, so that it matches the "800MHz" bus.
 
"OK, this is kinda funny. The 970 is announced with a double pumped 450MHz bus and mac users go insane over it. The Pentium 4 is announced with a quad pumped 200MHz bus, and everyone goes 'oh, it's not actually 800MHz, it doesn't matter'. "

agreed. whatever it is technically, what it is for apple is another lost step in the speed wars.
 
Pumped

Sheesh. If something is dual or quad pumped it's effectively that much better since it moves that much more data compared to a regular bus. Removing the memory bottlenecks is a good thing, and it is one of Apples biggest problems currently.
 
i think intel makes great processors, i didn't switch to apple because the G4 is faster, it's not, i switched because of the OS, and the beauty of the machine. I say, if you're going to get a machine that does pretty much the same thing as everyone else's machine (to a degree), you might as well make it pretty right? Cause my new mac can go online, I can type up papers, i can do pretty much everything a PC can do, and it's eye candy too!... so back to my point, i don't see why everyone bashes intel. They make great processors which are reliable, stable, and fast. Yes, i know that they suck clock for clock with an athlon, or a G4... but they're still the fastest non-server chip on the market. So back off of intel, they a great company. Microsoft isn't!
 
Originally posted by mgargan1
i think intel makes great processors, i didn't switch to apple because the G4 is faster, it's not, i switched because of the OS, and the beauty of the machine. I say, if you're going to get a machine that does pretty much the same thing as everyone else's machine (to a degree), you might as well make it pretty right? Cause my new mac can go online, I can type up papers, i can do pretty much everything a PC can do, and it's eye candy too!... so back to my point, i don't see why everyone bashes intel. They make great processors which are reliable, stable, and fast. Yes, i know that they suck clock for clock with an athlon, or a G4... but they're still the fastest non-server chip on the market. So back off of intel, they a great company. Microsoft isn't!
Click to expand...

That would explain why they've stopped production on these processors until they figure out what went wrong. Then, there's the fact that most Intel processors, upon release, couldn't divide correctly. Yeah, that's a great company. They do restrict the market as well so compatible processor manufacturers have trouble getting their foot in the door. Yeah, that's great too, and not at all like Microsoft. :(
 
Originally posted by bousozoku
Then, there's the fact that most Intel processors, upon release, couldn't divide correctly. Yeah, that's a great company. :(
Click to expand...

That would explain why most intel based computers wouldn't opperate when they came out. Oh, except this didn't happen.

Originally posted by bousozoku
They do restrict the market as well so compatible processor manufacturers have trouble getting their foot in the door. Yeah, that's great too, and not at all like Microsoft. :(
Click to expand...

Are you talking about Apple? Sounds like it, except they restrict more than processors. Your argument is flawed.
 
How anyone could ever justify buying a PowerMac nowadays is totally beyond me. It would be a complete waste of cash.

I think it's embarrassing. The 970 better come out in June, and Hypertransport had better rock hard, or it will be downright humiliating. And unless I have a misunderstanding about what Hypertransport it, it still won't address our BUS speed woes between hardware components. :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by acj
That would explain why most intel based computers wouldn't opperate when they came out. Oh, except this didn't happen.
Click to expand...

I never said that they didn't operate, only that they didn't operate correctly when dividing. I suppose that accuracy isn't important to you, as you're displaying.


Are you talking about Apple? Sounds like it, except they restrict more than processors. Your argument is flawed.
Click to expand...

Apple don't make processors, so they couldn't restrict a company making compatible processors. This would make your response flawed.
 
Originally posted by bousozoku
I never said that they didn't operate, only that they didn't operate correctly when dividing. I suppose that accuracy isn't important to you, as you're displaying.
Click to expand...

Define "Correctly." If the average user doesn’t notice the problem, is it really a problem? And please, if accuracy is so important, prove that MOST Intel processors did not divide correctly.

I agree Intel chips have a lot of errata, but many chips do, and most are worked around so that the end user does not see any problem.

Originally posted by bousozoku
Apple don't make processors, so they couldn't restrict a company making compatible processors. This would make your response flawed.
Click to expand...
Well, you got me here. I was commenting on the fact that Apple restricts markets. I didn't mean to sound like I was referring to processors. By “more than processors” I meant the whole system. They don’t really allow competition, do they?
 
Originally posted by e-coli
How anyone could ever justify buying a PowerMac nowadays is totally beyond me. It would be a complete waste of cash.
Click to expand...


I can justify it because I needed a new Mac right now to do work (up from a g3 powerbook). Please don't knock my DP 1.25 Ghz PowerMac. On the contrary, be happy that idiots like me keep buying them so we can tide Apple over with cash to please little whinos. ;)
 
i think the powermac is a great machine. very powerful, out of hte box you can put up to 5 hard drives in the computer, easy open case for installing extra stuff, combined with os x its great.

iJon
 
Originally posted by acj
Define "Correctly." If the average user doesn’t notice the problem, is it really a problem? And please, if accuracy is so important, prove that MOST Intel processors did not divide correctly.

I agree Intel chips have a lot of errata, but many chips do, and most are worked around so that the end user does not see any problem.
Click to expand...

I started Windows and Delphi to show you a workaround that all x86 compiler writers had to make for the Pentium divide problem. You'll see it in the screenshot: "Pentium-safe FDIV This is by far the most famouse of Intel's manufacturing goofs. Country by country, the word leaked out that there was again a divide problem. They denied it for a few weeks, later to confirm it.


Well, you got me here. I was commenting on the fact that Apple restricts markets. I didn't mean to sound like I was referring to processors. By “more than processors” I meant the whole system. They don’t really allow competition, do they?
Click to expand...

You're right about Apple not liking competition, they were even taken to court about it once, and from that, Claris was born.
 

Attachments

  • fdiv.jpg
    fdiv.jpg
    78.5 KB · Views: 516
Originally posted by e-coli
How anyone could ever justify buying a PowerMac nowadays is totally beyond me. It would be a complete waste of cash.
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
'cos I wanted one...good enough reason for me;) And it was a dual 1GHz with a superdrive and I got it for £1300. It also goes quite fast enough for me. When the mythical 970 does appear machines with them aren't gonna be as 'cheap' as they are now. Apple will wring every last cent out of new adopters.

The pentium FDIV bug I think only existed in the original pentiums. Everything that ran on pentiums had to have a workaround for it. I think (tho' I'm not sure) that' it's fixed now. All new processors have bugs when they come out. The 970 probably will. Mostly they can be fixed using microcode updates that are loaded when the machine is booted.
 
Re: 800 MHz bus a reality!

Originally posted by yzedf
But not for the Mac :(

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/04/14/1111233&mode=nested&tid=118&tid=137

Of note is the massive improvement in memory access speeds over the previous architecture (2nd graph):

http://www17.tomshardware.com/mainboard/20030414/i875p-22.html

When is the 970 coming? It had better be soon...
Click to expand...


One more thing!

from ZDnet

Intel puts last-minute hold on 3GHz chips
By John G. Spooner
CNET News.com
April 14, 2003, 6:45 AM PT

A possible glitch with a new processor has thrown a monkey wrench into Intel's plans to bring out new silicon for high-performance chips for top-of-the-line PCs.
Intel delivered a new chipset on schedule, but delayed a matching Pentium 4 processor at the last minute, causing a raft of new PCs to be without a processor, for at least a while.
The chipmaker had planned to deliver its new 875P chipset and a matching new 3GHz Pentium 4 processor on Monday, paving the way for a number of new desktop and workstation models from PC makers including Dell Computer, Hewlett-Packard and Gateway.
But a possible problem with the 3GHz Pentium 4, discovered at the last minute, forced the company to delay the chip late on Sunday. During tests, Intel found anomalies with the new chips and decided not to deliver any more of them to PC manufacturers.
Intel has "seen some anomalies, and we're going to put (the 3GHz Pentium 4) on ship hold, temporarily," said George Alfs, a company spokesman. "We're investigating (the problem) and hope to be shipping soon."
These problems do not affect current chips, such as the 3.06GHz Pentium 4, which has been shipping since November, he said.
PC makers have inventory of the new 3GHz chip, but it is unlikely any of the chips have gotten to end customers yet. Intel is still talking with PC makers about what to do with the 3GHz chips that are in the field.
Launches of complicated new processors, chipsets and other chips are subject to delays, but problems associated with Pentium 4 chips have been fairly rare. Intel postponed the introduction of the original Pentium 4 by about a month because of a minor chipset bug. The last holdup that Intel faced for a major desktop processor launch came during an intense clock-speed battle with chip rival Advanced Micro Devices, when Intel announced and then recalled its 1.13GHz Pentium III.
AMD has had its share of delays as well. The most recent pushed the introduction of the Athlon 64, the company's next generation of desktop processors, out until September.
Click to expand...

Hope This delays the new 3Ghz chip for at least a month. NEW POWER MAC WILL BE OUT in the next few months though, we shall see THEN!!!!!!
 
Originally posted by caveman_uk
....

The pentium FDIV bug I think only existed in the original pentiums. Everything that ran on pentiums had to have a workaround for it. I think (tho' I'm not sure) that' it's fixed now. All new processors have bugs when they come out. The 970 probably will. Mostly they can be fixed using microcode updates that are loaded when the machine is booted.
Click to expand...
Actually, the FDIV did not begin with the Pentium. It actually began with the 486. Some only assume that problem has been fixed. It is difficult to get real information because people's jobs are threatened when they publicize problems in Intel chips.

The most reliable workaround to the bugs in Intel's floating point unit is to do all mission-critical floating point calculations using integer arithmetic. One of the many nice things about the PowerPC is that it does floating-point reliably in hardware.

How many people on this forum know that CAD drawings using an Intel-based computer will be visibly different from a drawing generated by the same CAD file from a similarly configured AMD-based computer? Which one is correct? Well, you pay your money and you take your chances. But I don't gamble; I use a Power Mac.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back