Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel Demos 45nm Penryn Processors, Due by end of 2007
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Do you realise that just by sitting down and continuing to live you are generating over 100W of heat? Where does that energy come from? Plants, one way or another. Dead plants mean less chlorophyll to soak up carbon dioxide. So we are all contributing to global warming, and a lot more than the power savings Penryn will bring.
Do you really think that even a decked out Mac Pro would generate more heat and waste as much energy in a typical day's use than your standard person? How about the energy wasted when you run to catch the bus, or even the raised body temperature when you're watching a particularly exciting movie or sport? <Insert rigorous use of large amounts of energy in daily life here>
What's my point? Any completely unselfish person would kill themselves immediately.
Now how to do it? Jump off a cliff? Uses too much energy to climb it. Feed ourselves to random hungry carnivore? Encourages the continuing existence of a different energy wasting vessel. Shoot ourselves? Too much energy used making the neccessary parts. Etc.
What's my actual point? Energy usage is a normal part of life, and any power savings moving from Merom to Penryn are completely insignificant. There is only a problem because of the method of getting that power. There would be no issue if this was from solar, wind, tidal, nuclear fission/fusion etc. Deal with it, and don't waste your energy attacking the product rather than the source.
YEAH! Thats the spirit,my man!!
I think I am gonna go to my Hummer, drive the 300m to the Radioshack in heavy traffic,and go turn on some televisions.
After that´ll drive around for a while,search for that Al Gore hippy so I could stone and mock him,then drive slowly back home,fire up some electric heaters just for the fkuck of it. You know, just to keep the hungry carnivores at bay.
Dem be spooky.
If everybody will pledge to eat two 50-watt chickens per week, we can beat this thing. The eight-piece family bucket at KFC will do the trick.
OK, I may have gone a tad over the top, BUT the point is...
Normal, or even abnormally large energy usage, does not damage the environment in any noticable way.
Some methods of power generation damage the environment and screw us over. This is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT to how much energy we use.
So would we be having this argument if we were all using solar/wind/nuclear power? No. It would not matter how much energy we used, because energy generation would not impact on the environment.
So you can happily drive your Hummer as long as it runs on Hydrogen, and turn on as many televisions and electric heaters as you want, as long as the juice they use is generated from environmentally friendly sources.
If you want to throw stones at Al Gore, if that's how you feel, I guess I won't be able to stop you. Although somewhat less effective, a simple rally and march is far less illegal.
Good idea about the chickens man.
So... In conclusion, stop complaining about power wasting computer chips, and start complaining to the government about coal, oil and gas burning power stations.
Normal, or even abnormally large energy usage, does not damage the environment in any noticable way.
Some methods of power generation damage the environment and screw us over. This is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT to how much energy we use.
So would we be having this argument if we were all using solar/wind/nuclear power? No. It would not matter how much energy we used, because energy generation would not impact on the environment.
So you can happily drive your Hummer as long as it runs on Hydrogen, and turn on as many televisions and electric heaters as you want, as long as the juice they use is generated from environmentally friendly sources.
If you want to throw stones at Al Gore, if that's how you feel, I guess I won't be able to stop you. Although somewhat less effective, a simple rally and march is far less illegal.
Good idea about the chickens man.
So... In conclusion, stop complaining about power wasting computer chips, and start complaining to the government about coal, oil and gas burning power stations.
A few years back, I was channel surfing and found an engineering forum on advanced materials. One of the longer topics dealt with semi-conductor materials and where the major breakthroughs would come from. Of particular interest was a dissertation of what lay ahead of us when we could actual manufacture in outer space. Many of the panel chimed in with examples of how metallurgy was going to completely change when we can mix alloys in a pure vacuum, with zero gravitational restraint and completely void of contaminates. Rumor has it that much experimental work is currently being done at the space station. There, engineers can do experimental work, which is cost prohibitive on 'big blue'.
Great stuff. But...
We're still waiting for Clovertown in the Mac Pro. The pessimist in me thinks we might find we are waiting until WWDC2008 to get 45nm Mac Pros. The optimist says this opens the way for Apple to release 45nm iMacs and Macbook/pros at MWSF2008.
Still think Leopard, Santa Rosa and new 8-core, R600XTX Mac Pros at WWDC2007 in June.
As our wonderful user Multimedia has beaten to death... Stoakley-Seaburg is probably what's holding the Mac Pro's update back. I'm not pessimistic to say that WWDC 2007 is the next Mac Pro update.
With the next update I expect a DirectX 10 compatible video card for the Mac Pro (even if OS X doesn't do DirectX). My money is on NVIDIA over ATi. ATi has pushed back their release until May but it's possible to see an update then.
I also expect all mobile chipset based Apple computers to see an update when the Santa Rosa platform comes out. Penryn at MWSF 2008.
I don't know but AMD's Barcelona looks interesting. Now if they can make the price competitive to Core 2. Core 2 still has a lot of room to be clocked up at stock TDP's.
A Tad? When's the last time you generated Carbon MONOXIDE or Sulfur Dioxide because you had a coal-fire power plant providing your body heat.
Metabolic processes are VASTLY different than industrial power. This might surprise you but burning sulfurous coal or nuclear fusion is not part of the natural carbon cycle.
Thermal output has NOTHING do do with the topic of responsible energy usage. The problem is wasted thermal output that is the end product of electricity. When I spend 18 hours converting video on a CPU that wastes 80W vs. 30 minutes on a new cpu that consumes 65W.. I'm saving a lot of ELECTRICTY. Where does that come from? It comes from nuclear, natural gas, or (near me) coal fire power plants.
The issue isn't about 1 cpu either. It's about a million cpus. If we saved 20W on 1 Million computers, that's a power reduction of 20 GigaWatts. Think of it this way, I've got 115 AC service rated to 100Amps at my breaker box. My house, at the absolute most, could pull 11,500W off the grid though useage is probably closer to 200-1000W at any given time depending on what's running [tv, lights, fridge, stove..]
The environmental point with chip thermals is big picture. If I consume 1000W for my household.. simply using a slightly more efficient processor in 1 Million computers would essentially take 20,000 house holds off the power grid.
(screams)
stop worrying about ENERGY USAGE and focus on HOW it is GENERATED please read my post before commenting otherwise you are likely to make a FOOL of yourself.
It seems you have taken some of the things I have argued for in my posts, taken what others have said, and twisted them into a wierd hybrid argument that is somehow intended to destroy my argument, along with berating me about things I didn't say.
Now that's done,
Energy from nuclear power, wind, solar, etc. does not exacerbate the greenhouse effect. Yes, it is not part of the natural carbon cycle. I can't think of any good similes, but of course they aren't part of the natural carbon cycle, because they have nothing to do with any kind of carbon cycle.
Raw heat does not affect the overall temperature of the earth. This is what I meant about large energy usages not damaging the environment. The Earth is a big place, with a large surface area. Heat is dissipated quickly. Global warming is directly related to generation of carbon, and has absolutely nothing to do with waste heat.
Any notion that energy usage in itself is bad is ill advised. Energy can be harvested from many sources that have negligable environmental impact.
If I run a total of a megawatt of computer equipment off nuclear or solar power, I will still have next to zero effect on the environment. If EVERYONE in the world wasted a few tens of kilowatts each, or most likely much more, using nothing but green power, global warming would decrease, because carbon dioxide wouldn't be being produced.
The concept, or even slightest suggestion, that any type of nuclear power, ESPECIALLY fusion, generates carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide or carbon dioxide is absurd.
Energy usage is not bad. It is where the energy comes from that is the problem, and it wouldn't be a problem if we used nuclear power, solar power, wind power, tidal power, etc.
The Amiga was so cool for its day. I so wanted to upgrade from my C-64, but by the time I could afford it Commodore had already imploded.
I agree,
2008 will bring quite a few Crazy 8's!
8 Cores, Logic 8, ProTools 8 and a full 8 hours notebook battery life etc.
(hopefully sooner), but should be in full swing for 2008.
This was also my plan when I purchased my 2.0 DP G5 (8DIMM)
2008 will bring quite a few Crazy 8's!
8 Cores, Logic 8, ProTools 8 and a full 8 hours notebook battery life etc.
(hopefully sooner), but should be in full swing for 2008.
This was also my plan when I purchased my 2.0 DP G5 (8DIMM)
Oh Erasmus, you're arguing over symantecs, yet again
. If Hydrogen Fuel Cell isn't a practical, viable option then why is Honda test marketing Hydrogen Fuel Cell vehicles developed with solar-panel hydrogen harnessed from H20 in California? Why are Military owned GM Hydrogen Fuel Cell vehicles running in upstate NY thanks to the efforts of Senator Hillary Clinton and others? When it comes down to it, research and development into alternative energy sources coupled with the desire, the actual desire, of the general public to want change to avoid global catastrophe is the only way we'll get off oil and the 100 year old combustible engine. Hydrogen CAN be hanressed from the environment without taxing other power sources, and utilizing solar power (recent strides in solar power panel's that harness more energy per square inch have been recently developed demonstrating the capacity for future application AND the huge market that has yet to be tapped into, if only more money was spent on more research and development), and hydrogen can be compressed and stored safely for automotive travel yielding 400 miles per tank in recent tests, producing nothing but drinkable water. Also, as hyrdogen fuel cells utilize less moving parts, automobiles can run faster and longer on hydrogen then fossil fuels. It's sad to think of the huge efforts and strides that have been made in the personal computing industry and microprocessors while the human race is still using the same technology (minus the subtle improvements, I know how you love to jump on minor details) that was developed by Henry Ford and his ilk over 100 years ago. Money talks and currently oil has the floor...My original point was that we seem to be more concerned about speed and power in processors rather than energy efficiency and/or alternative materials that are environmentally friendly. Similar to corporate America's obssession with faster muscle cars (which obviously burn more fossil fuels but keep the oil and automotive industry very happy), and less focus on the already PRESENT alternative sources of energy and their application. Apple is currently selling Quad core and Octo core Mac Pros (yes, for professionals but even the average professional photographer doesn't need eight core systems, that's exteme). This marketing desire to make consumers more speed conscious is ludicrous when what we SHOULD be focusing more on is the same issue that is perplexing the automotive industry, alternative materials and energy efficiency. Not a difficult concept to grasp and certainly not one that is arguable...
Now, about your nit-picking of energy consumption. Who cares about symantecs when we all seem to be on the same page that using a computer (no matter what level of efficiency) wastes the energy that is being produced?
We are such arrogant creatures to believe that arguing over energy consumption on some pointless mac blog is crucial in wasting energy and polluting, cause in the end mass quantities of individuals doing something "innocent" as such is what is the problem at hand. Arrogance and ignorance WILL be and ARE the downfall of the human species. In the end, who cares about what processor went into which system, Mother Nature only needs to flick us off her planet for the disrespect and discourtesy we have shown......and for the record, Nuclear Energy???? You on crack again, Whitney? lol Bush was laughed out of the Kyoto Conference for his proposal to build more nuclear power plants. Why? It produces more waste. Oh, I forgot, you don't mind e-waste; wires, silicon, circuit boards, etc all filling up our landfills and producing glorious amounts of awesome drinkable water and farmland, right?
Quadcore a bit off in the future, too soon to say whether or not it would be used in an Apple Laptop, what the design parameters might be?
Other links today, Intel notes:
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/16/HNintelbeyondsantarosa_1.html
Penryn an drop in replacment for Santa Rosa based systems to be released May, woot; this means an updated 2k res. MBP 17in before WWDC, maybe?
"Santa Rosa -- which Eden described as "Core 2 Duo on steroids" -- hits store shelves in May...For this market, Intel is preparing a mobile chip for gamers that allows overclocking...The chip is unlikely to find its way into most notebooks for some time.
"You'll see it at the high-end, but I don't see it running so fast into the mainstream because I don't believe there will be enough threaded applications that will justify the tradeoffs," Eden said.".
So why wait for Penryn in late 2007 (though if they're showing a prototype running on this chip now, one wonders if they are ahead of schedule???), just buy the Santa Rosa update now, drop in a Penryn later...overclocking too?
Intel says they will hit the store shelves in MAY! So will Apple release the updated Santa Rosa MBP's in May also???
Here's a map:
http://img.hexus.net/v2/internationalevents/idf2007/idf_large_21.jpg
And in an I told you so moment, "Intel will release an add-in WiMAX card, Dana Point, early next year and launch a combo card with WiFi and WiMAX, dubbed Echo Peak, with Centrino Montevina - the next refresh."
Rocketman
I wish MM would fixate on "Echo Peak" which presumes Santa Rosa.
http://img.hexus.net/v2/internationalevents/idf2007/idf_large_21.jpg
And in an I told you so moment, "Intel will release an add-in WiMAX card, Dana Point, early next year and launch a combo card with WiFi and WiMAX, dubbed Echo Peak, with Centrino Montevina - the next refresh."
Rocketman
I wish MM would fixate on "Echo Peak" which presumes Santa Rosa.
You just got Clovertown (65nm). Unless you mean the server 45nm DP quads, Harpertown.
---
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38961
---
Um. What?