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

Apple Prepping for Notebook Refresh?

iMacmatician said:
Totally agree. Grand Central will optimize performance in multi-core CPUs. According to Tallest Skil, those optimizations are significant enough for a dual-core CPU to beat a quad-core CPU.
Click to expand...

Sounds like Grand Central is going to be like the PPE is for the SPE's in Cell for Apple.

I just think it is amazing that Apple would even admit that their tools sucks so much for parallelism that they have to come out with this "new" tech to help developers with it.
 
diamond.g said:
Sounds like Grand Central is going to be like the PPE is for the SPE's in Cell for Apple.

I just think it is amazing that Apple would even admit that their tools sucks so much for parallelism that they have to come out with this "new" tech to help developers with it.
Click to expand...

I don't think that it is so surprising that the old tools suck.

Parallelism of processes is a very complex problem. It is difficult to multi-process the large number of operations and algorithms that do not benefit from parallelism or that require sequential processing for a proper result.

Basically multi-processing became necessary because computing hit a wall with clock speed.

We'll see what "Grand Central" brings to the table but I wouldn't go boasting about it yet!
 
digitalbiker said:
DON'T PANIC!

Just decide. If you are happy with the current design and performance just buy it now. You can buy with the educational discount and get a free nano or a discounted touch ipod. It's a great deal.

If you really need the latest and greatest, then wait for the release as long as you can before school starts.

Apple will come up with a coveted re-design for the MBP if it is even released at all. There have been very few times in Apple history under SJ where the new release is less desirable than the previous offering.

Many people on this board are afraid of change. That is why they put down a redesign, new keyboard, or whatever. However several years from now the Feb. 2008 MBP will look like a dinosaur. If you don't change, you become extinct.

Either way you decide, I'm sure you will be happy. A new MBP arriving in the mail always puts a smile on my face. :D
Click to expand...

AHHHHHHHH TOO LATE!!!!!! I'M ALL ABOUT THE PANIC
 
iMacmatician said:
Mac OS X's Dictionary:

"4 indicating a deadline or the end of a particular time period : I've got to do this report by Monday"
It means "Monday or before," not "Sunday or before," right? (Otherwise I may have failed a lot of reports. :D)

Will they be ahead of Grand Central?
Click to expand...

I think you are reading the definition wrong. If something is to happen by 2009, that marks the beginning of 2009 as the deadline, or the beginning of 2009 as the end of the particular time period that is being referred to. Using your example, I know that whenever I have had a project that is due by Monday, it means that I have to have it completed at the latest by Sunday night so that it can be submitted on Monday.
 
Eric S. said:
I would expect that we'll see a quad-core iMac by the time Snow Leopard is released. They'll need some platform to demonstrate the benefits of the new OS, and the Mac Pro is irrelevant to most people.
Click to expand...
It'll probably be the Mac Pro. Or they'll just use dual-core.
 
Ok, but is it possible to choose?

Say the redesign is released on August 5th. It is possible to order from apple the old design on the 6th or 7th online or even by phone? Is apple good about returning for a new model?
 
digitalbiker said:
I don't think that it is so surprising that the old tools suck.

Parallelism of processes is a very complex problem. It is difficult to multi-process the large number of operations and algorithms that do not benefit from parallelism or that require sequential processing for a proper result.

Basically multi-processing became necessary because computing hit a wall with clock speed.

We'll see what "Grand Central" brings to the table but I wouldn't go boasting about it yet!
Click to expand...

Good point. Next year is going to be fun!

Of course I'd like to think Apple saw the writing on the wall with the P4 scaling so poorly. Plus the unveiling of Cell. I mean the whole industry pretty much saw the writing on the wall. You would have thought Apple would have been at the forefront of the shift (in terms of getting tools in the hands of devs to help).
 
iMacmatician said:
It'll probably be the Mac Pro. Or they'll just use dual-core.
Click to expand...

Dual-core won't prove anything, since I'm sure they already make good use of two cores. The Snow Leopard optimizations are targeted at a larger number of cores. Very few people will care if they make the Mac Pro faster. If they want Snow Leopard's cpu utilization improvements to mean anything to the consumer, it will have to be on a consumer-level platform.
 
Eric S. said:
Dual-core won't prove anything, since I'm sure they already make good use of two cores.
Click to expand...
What is good can be made better.

Eric S. said:
If they want Snow Leopard's cpu utilization improvements to mean anything to the consumer, it will have to be on a consumer-level platform.
Click to expand...
There may be a quad-core iMac by mid-2009.

cromwell64 said:
I think you are reading the definition wrong. If something is to happen by 2009, that marks the beginning of 2009 as the deadline, or the beginning of 2009 as the end of the particular time period that is being referred to. Using your example, I know that whenever I have had a project that is due by Monday, it means that I have to have it completed at the latest by Sunday night so that it can be submitted on Monday.
Click to expand...
No. 2009 is the time period. I can do the report on Monday morning.
 
iMacmatician said:
What is good can be made better.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but improving dual-core performance still doesn't prove anything. The real test of Snow Leopard's cpu utilization will be seeing if it scales to a larger number of cores.

There may be a quad-core iMac by mid-2009.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm saying. I expect we'll see quad-core as a high-end option by the time Snow Leopard is out.
 
Eric S. said:
Maybe, but improving dual-core performance still doesn't prove anything. The real test of Snow Leopard's cpu utilization will be seeing if it scales to a larger number of cores.
Click to expand...
Like eight? ;)

Anyway, I'd be disappointed if there wasn't a quad-core iMac in 2009. But I guess I'm expecting both outcomes anyway.

Eric S. said:
That's what I'm saying. I expect we'll see quad-core as a high-end option by the time Snow Leopard is out.
Click to expand...
I wonder if Snow Leopard will optimize multiple threads as well as cores.
 
iMacmatician said:
Totally agree. Grand Central will optimize performance in multi-core CPUs. According to Tallest Skil, those optimizations are significant enough for a dual-core CPU to beat a quad-core CPU.
Click to expand...

He is wrong.

Only a fool's hopes and wishes will lead them to believe that a dual core cpu will out perform a quad core cpu amongst applications and operating systems that are already SMP enabled.

He obviously knows nothing of operating system mechanics or those of multicore process optimization.
 
iMacmatician said:
What is good can be made better.

There may be a quad-core iMac by mid-2009.

No. 2009 is the time period. I can do the report on Monday morning.
Click to expand...

Wrong again. You could do the report Monday morning assuming that it is due by a specific time on Monday. By Monday means it has to be done by the time Monday rolls around, which is midnight. By 3:00 on Monday means that it has to be done by 3:00 on Monday.

If an article states that Apple will have transitioned all their laptop displays to LED by 2009, that implies that by the time 2009 rolls around Apple will have made the transition.

Again, going back to my original example: I have to be at work by 11:00, that means no later than 11:00. It most certainly does not mean that I can show up at 11:59.
 
iMacmatician said:
Like eight? ;)

Anyway, I'd be disappointed if there wasn't a quad-core iMac in 2009. But I guess I'm expecting both outcomes anyway.

I wonder if Snow Leopard will optimize multiple threads as well as cores.
Click to expand...

More like 16 or 32 cores (32 or 64 threads)!!

Of course this is hoping Apple does 4-way for the xServe and the MacPro stays 2-way.
 
digitalbiker said:
Basically multi-processing became necessary because computing hit a wall with clock speed.
Click to expand...

You can't be serious. multicore processing became necessary because of the inherit advantage of it, especially in the server/database market where there are more than significant gains. You can bump the clock speed up to infinity and it still wont process two or more threads faster than a multicore processor.
 
Iam9376 said:
He is wrong.

Only a fool's hopes and wishes will lead them to believe that a dual core cpu will out perform a quad core cpu amongst applications and operating systems that are already SMP enabled.

He obviously knows nothing of operating system mechanics or those of multicore process optimization.
Click to expand...

Ha. Just... ha. You tell me what Grand Central will provide, then, if not a reawakening of older processors.
 
I think we are going to see an Quad Core MacBook Pro in this coming update. If I am wrong, you guys could laugh at me. If I am right, I am going to laugh at you guys who don't believe the MacBook Pro won't have an Quad Core.
 
Tallest Skil said:
Ha. Just... ha. You tell me what Grand Central will provide, then, if not a reawakening of older processors.
Click to expand...

I'll tell you what it's not going to provide.

It's not going to provide a dual core machine with a processing advantage over a quad core as you so seem to believe it shall.
 
kabunaru said:
I think we are going to see a Quad Core MacBook Pro in this coming update. If I am wrong, you guys could laugh at me. If I am right, I am going to laugh at you guys who don't believe the MacBook Pro won't have an Quad Core.
Click to expand...

I'm seriously hoping this is the case. I guess we'd expect quad core to come later on but it's still possible. Like many others I have to buy my MBP before September so if quad core comes even a couple of months after that I'll be in the classic situation of knowing I have a great machine, but it could have been THAT much greater, especially as quad core is more than just a slight Ghz bump! I'd like to think Apple will be trying to get it ready in time for the students buying in August...

Does anyone have any REAL idea? Even if it is just waiting now, really.
 
Iam9376 said:
I'll tell you what it's not going to provide.

It's not going to provide a dual core machine with a processing advantage over a quad core as you so seem to believe it shall.
Click to expand...

Really. I'm saying that a Mac with a current dual-core processor will outperform a PC with a current quad-core processor due to the optimizations of Snow Leopard. Is that really so hard to believe?

My iMac outperforms most, if not all, of the PCs at Best Buy with the same processor right now.
 
Tallest Skil said:
Really. I'm saying that a Mac with a current dual-core processor will outperform a PC with a current quad-core processor due to the optimizations of Snow Leopard. Is that really so hard to believe?

My iMac outperforms most, if not all, of the PCs at Best Buy with the same processor right now.
Click to expand...

Not only is it hard to believe. It's a logical fallacy.

You're wrong. Move on.
 
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