Apple Wants Intel Chips Early?

[jhu]

If anyone can convince Intel to release the chips early it will be Steve Jobs. The most important thing is the Apple remains on schedule.

no, actually it would be michael dell.

 

[AidenShaw]

Intel 945GM

I recently saw the new integrated ATI PCI Express GPU, the Xpress 200m being discussed. might that be what the Yona prototype contained? That would be a good iBook GPU, but I think that a Mobility X600/X700/X800 GPU would be more appropriate for the Powerbook line.

The Intel folks were clear that the system contained a Calistoga 945GM Intel graphics engine. The ATI is a discreet chipset - the Calistoga has the graphics in the northbridge;

(previous generation chipset)


I agree that discrete PCIexpress graphics would be nice in the "cost no object" Powerbooks.

But trimming cost, watts, heat, size for the iBook and MiniMac by using reasonable 3D (read "Core Image Accelerated") integrated graphics is also good.

Also note that many of the Intel Integrated Graphics systems actually support PCI Express as well - it's a BIOS option whether to use integrated or PCIe (or both, for dual-head).

 

[Stella]

Some motherboards come with ATI 9600 embedded GPU.

I wouldn't call them "CRAP".

"Integrated graphics" generally means "crap", but if the upcoming integrated graphics can compete with current cards then obviously they are viable.

I recently saw the new integrated ATI PCI Express GPU, the Xpress 200m being discussed. might that be what the Yona prototype contained? That would be a good iBook GPU, but I think that a Mobility X600/X700/X800 GPU would be more appropriate for the Powerbook line.

 

[AidenShaw]

"integrated" != "embedded"

Some motherboards come with ATI 9600 embedded GPU.

I wouldn't call them "CRAP".

"Integrated" and "embedded" mean two very different things....

"Integrated" means that the graphics engine is part of (usually) the northbridge of the CPU chipset - where it has great access to the system memory through the memory controller itself. It may be an AGP or PCIe graphics engine, but it's on the bus inside the northbridge.

"Embedded" (or "discrete") means that the graphics chips are separate from the north/south bridges, but are part of the motherboard. Logically, they're on AGP or PCIe busses, but physically they're soldered to the mobo rather than on replaceable cards.

The main difference between the two is that "integrated' usually uses the main RAM for graphics memory, and embedded has dedicated (usually faster) video ram on the mobo.

Integrated has the advantage that very large amounts of main RAM can be used for video memory - so that applications that need a lot of VRAM run well (although if they need super-fast access to VRAM they might be in trouble). Embedded has the advantage of faster VRAM - so that applications that need fast access to VRAM do well (although if they need lots of VRAM they're in trouble).

 

[840quadra]

I just left a demonstration where Intel was showing a dual-core Yonah laptop (a Fujitsu prototype) compared to Dothan single-core systems. The chips are sampling....

The most interesting demo was a FPS 3D game - the Yonah with the integrated graphics 3D ("Calistoga" is the codename) creamed the Dothan with a discrete graphics chipset. (the discrete chipset wasn't identified)

Maybe some MacIntels will have integrated graphics after all - and why not if the Yonah/Calistoga combination can beat other "cards"? Reduce cost, reduce size, reduce power consumption....

Note that this isn't a fair graphics test - the Yonah has two processors with better floating point performance (and SSE3) compared to the Dothan - but in the end does it matter where the frames-per-second come from?

The Calistoga is also reported to support up to 4 GiB of DDR2 667 MHz memory, on a 667 MHz bus.

That would be great for the iMac and possibly the powerbook line (yeah i have BIG hopes for them), as in those cases the systems do not currently have "replaceable" video components. This would give those systems quite an edge in both size and performance. But then again, what would that leave the ibook and mini with lesser components, something I hope they move up market in some ways.


Has their been an official press release for this new chipset?

 

[AidenShaw]

Has their been an official press release for this new chipset?

Not yet - it's not a released product yet. If you Yahoo! for "calistoga intel" or 945GM you'll see lots of stories, including many about public demonstrations by Intel.

 

[Hattig]

http://www.ppcnux.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5707

Motorola delayed the dual Core G4's till 2q 06. Looks like we won't be seeing a dual core G4 powerbook, maybe apple decided to move its roadmap up!

That, or they'll simply release an SMP based laptop, with two 7448s inside. They're low power enough at around 1.5GHz to get away with this type of solution, although two processors sharing a 200MHz FSB would kinda suck.

Freescale really haven't impressed me, it seems like they've forgotten how to make products.

 

[Hattig]

And guess what, in 4 months, intel will be at 65nm and AMD will still be at 90nm.

6 months after that, intel will be 65nm and 64bit.

And yes, for the 1 millionth time, AMDs are cheaper than intels.

No need to repeat that again.

The reason being, is that AMD is SUPPOSED to be cheaper than intel, otherwise, they wouldn't be in buisness at all.

AMD boards use schwag controllers, that have crap drivers, and a short lifespan.

Furthermore, with Dell selling laptops for under $500, the fact that AMD is 'cheaper' means very little at that price point.

AMD won't be more than 6 months behind Intel for 65nm, and that is fine for them, Intel needs it more because of their rather poor 90nm process (except for sub 2GHz transistors anyway).

Merom will be out in 12 months time, and will allow Intel to catch up to where AMD will be in 6 months time. Now it isn't worth talking about Merom being better, because Prescott was meant to be better than Northwood, and it wasn't in any way. Intel have a lot of prove in the next 18 months - that they have turned around from a few years of not performing. Sadly the first step - releasing the new dual-core Itanium 2, has been further delayed with features being cut and speed reduced.

AMD aren't in business to be cheaper than Intel. If AMD didn't exist we'd be sucking up $1000 for 3GHz Pentium 4s right now, and Apple computers would be competitively priced. AMD are doing really well with their Opteron processor, which is now available at 2.8GHz single core, and 2.4GHz dual core, and it makes all Xeons look really weak.

And as for "AMD boards use schwag controllers, that have crap drivers, and a short lifespan." - that's just uninformed FUD of the highest order.

 

[JoeBeCrazy]

for the Operating System

Wow, you are so bitter.

People buy Apple for the OSX, not so much the hardware. PPC isn't that much better than current x86 processors these days.

I totally agree with that... Apple's main focus is always on the Computer as a whole. They think they got the better operating system. The switch is a major marketing move. I'm sure Mac's are like "why do people need Pentium 4 3.4ghz on their PCs??? We'll make sure that technology will be used full forced. And with Apple's advancement in the Operating System, iLife apps, etc., they truly need that speed. iMovie and iDVD... way too slow right now... even with the iMac G5! So i'm really ready too see a hardware boost to really make apple apps fly like no other.

I kind of wondered why Apple didn't jump on the intel bandwagon before. What i mean by before is before the release of the G5. Now new PowerMacs won't seen an upgrade until Intel's 64-bit chip is fully able to beat the current PowerPC G5 chip. So i sense a Dual-Core G5 coming out really soon and Intel better promise something kick ass. Also 64-bit systems are still not needed right now.

The new G4 chips by freescale looks really really good... but too bad apple jumped on the intel wagon... i really picture the dual-core G4's to be an awesome machine... maybe G5 worthy...