That article seems to imply a current Xeon processor system with a great graphics card would be just as powerful to the average user as a Nehalem system. I don't know if I would agree with this. The Nehalem has a much faster and wider memory channel. I think desktop applications that do video processing would benefit greatly on Nehalem. Games, not so much.Correct. Nehalem is big for servers and workstations. For consumers web surfing, emailing, playing games and fiddling with music and photos, they won't notice a difference, except a smaller wallet.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Intel Discusses Mobile Nehalem. Quad Core Notebooks Coming Next Month.
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
Nehalem, the latest Grail
"The average person can get by on 2-3 years with a machine before feeling the need to upgrade. "
More like 5 to 6. My 2002 Quicksilver at home (admittedly it's the dual 1 GHz G4) is still doing fine. Compressing movies is an overnight affair, but it's not like I have to watch it. Now if I was relying on the 800 Mhz single processor G4 I use for a server, I might be less satisfied.
At work I have 5 year old P4, non-hyperthreading. It's good most of the time, even with Office 2007. With Office 2003 I rarely noticed a lag. It got a memory upgrade to 2 GB, which fixed some but not all of it's issues. I am nowhere near the top of the upgrade list, so it's good that it works as well as it does. (Integrated graphics, by the way, Vista won't even think about loading, not that IT is doing anything with Vista but laughing themselves into side stitches watch it crater our vertical market apps. We can't even upgrade from IE 6 due to weird apps that absolutely must have some Active-X security hole to work at all.)
This is good news for my upgrade mantra: Nehalem AND Snow Leopard AND slots AND <$1000 (without monitor, $1200 with) ELSE Ubuntu. Target date; Labor Day 2009.
"The average person can get by on 2-3 years with a machine before feeling the need to upgrade. "
More like 5 to 6. My 2002 Quicksilver at home (admittedly it's the dual 1 GHz G4) is still doing fine. Compressing movies is an overnight affair, but it's not like I have to watch it. Now if I was relying on the 800 Mhz single processor G4 I use for a server, I might be less satisfied.
At work I have 5 year old P4, non-hyperthreading. It's good most of the time, even with Office 2007. With Office 2003 I rarely noticed a lag. It got a memory upgrade to 2 GB, which fixed some but not all of it's issues. I am nowhere near the top of the upgrade list, so it's good that it works as well as it does. (Integrated graphics, by the way, Vista won't even think about loading, not that IT is doing anything with Vista but laughing themselves into side stitches watch it crater our vertical market apps. We can't even upgrade from IE 6 due to weird apps that absolutely must have some Active-X security hole to work at all.)
This is good news for my upgrade mantra: Nehalem AND Snow Leopard AND slots AND <$1000 (without monitor, $1200 with) ELSE Ubuntu. Target date; Labor Day 2009.
Theoretically the 3.2 GHz 8-core Mac Pro is 4.9x as fast (CPU wise) as the 2.6 GHz MacBook Pro. There's no comparison.
With laptops getting thinner (*cough* MacBook Air *cough*) and desktops not, the gap will only get wider.
Desktops haven't caught up with servers in performance, so laptops won't catch up with desktops.
Amen.Once I see a quad core MBP with Bluray, this is when I will finally upgrade from my PB G4
by september bro
+1
True, but again theres always room for a better battery. open your mind more kids
Exactly. "Turbo" reminds me of my old 12 MHz 286, a fifty pound FULL TOWER monstrosity with a handle on top so you could drag it around if you were willing to pull your arm out of its socket...
Turbo is really the dumbest name, it smacks of 80s American Gladiators, and besides doesn't Intel already have "Turbo Flash memory" or something? So I'll hold out for the XTreme version, those are always more k-rad... err, i mean pimpin'.
We are replacing old desktop PC's with Macbook Pro's at my work, hopefully the new models will be out soon because we can't wait much longer.
The magnetic strip vs. pin number doesn't make that much difference. You just collect information about a victim (it is really a good idea to buy a cheap shredder and destroy any papers with your name on before you throw them away), then apply for a credit card in their name, then you get a card together with matching pin number. For good measure send a letter to the post office that your address has changed; would be stupid if the intended victim gets their credit cards instead of you. And then you start buying things.I think you mean decades not centuries... You make it sound like computers have been around for over 100 years.
These are the things I want to see for the MBP in Sept:
1. Updated case/keyboard
2. Upgraded gpu
3. Faster/more efficient cpu
4. Bluer-Ray option
1. Updated case/keyboard
2. Upgraded gpu
3. Faster/more efficient cpu
4. Bluer-Ray option
1. Maybe
2. Obviously
3. You can't really get more efficient than Apple's current standard
4. 1-upping everyone else? "New from Apple, it's BLUER-RAY!"
We won't see Blu-ray.
What key areas are they not improving on? Nehalem improves speed, core count, power management, bandwidth, improved and expanded instruction set and other things like the Radix-16 divider that can really improve scientific computing. These things will be improved upon generation after generation and Larabee is just the start of specialized cores. If the only thing that would interest you is a complete change in processor technology then good luck to you.Core(s), Cores(s) and, more Core(s). The madness will never end. For the manufactures its a means to an end to sell you they technology even if it or will not benefit you in any way or form.
For the consumer they are either blinded by the marketing hype and jump on anything with multiples of or they conservatively sit on the side-lines watching the madness unravel.
It has already been predicted that the number of core(s) will reach and hit a wall, however the manufactures are still heading in that direction full speed ahead without trying to improve other key areas.
When will Crystal and Diamond based CPU be introduced, that will not only remove the GHz barriers and other limitations. This all seems like stale news to me the talk of smaller and multiple cpu. Wake me up when some great breakthrough is obtained. ::Yawn::
As for hitting a wall core wise, we are a long way off that yet.
When things like the Pervasive Parallelism Laboratory at Stanford, the Universal Parallel Computing Research Centers at Berkeley and the University of Illinois and and even Apple's Snow Leopard then mtulicore will come in to it's own. Those issues are likely to be solved long before we crystal or diamond replace silicon in consumer processors.
Pretty Sure the MacPro and the xServe are the same in performance.
Cell say Hi!
I'd rather have the quad-core and carry an extra battery. This is a Pro machine, not a Macbook air. I would be happy with 2 hours. Besides, its not like it is going to run all 4 cores at full capacity 24/7, it will be smart about powering down unnecessary components. I bet battery life, if anything, will only suffer a tiny bit under load.
it has the new shut down core thing going for it so hopefully if your just running word and other small things it wont use that much power.
they should give an option to turn off cores as you please.
oh: if you have 1 core running at 100%, compared to 4 cores running at 25% each it is going to use MUCH less power. so you never know it might have a lot more battery life with low processing things!!
People, I am talking laptop vs desktop - not laptop vs servers. And besides a mac pro is just way overkill, unless you are running it as a server or doing massive video production (which hogs CPU and memory while rendering) as in running a studio. Would I love a mac pro, yes - but it is way over kill for my needs. I would love a lexus or cadillac - but for needs my Hyundai Elantra does just fine. I won't bring my wife's car into the picture - Honda Fits may be inexpensive, but they are snappy and versitle.
For most persons a macbook or macbook pro has enough power to do everything an imac can. A mini - well a baseline has a lower CPU but with the way OSX operates I have yet to have any complaints out of it. But my macbook is faster. And besides we are talking apple technology.
If we were talking about Windows PC's. Well, then it is up in the air. really. Most lower end PC laptops stink and you can barely run 2 apps without the thing coming to a crawl. the mid to higher end laptop PC's will get you some good performance. Desktop PC's are the same way. Lower end desktops are actually worse than a higher end laptop in performance.
I know, I had been using PC's since the 1980's. the first computer I was introduced to in school was an Apple IIe and it blew away the then IBM compatible Zeniths we were using (graphics and apps - anyone remember visicalc for spreadsheets) or the trash 80's by radio shack. I even wanted an apple back then.
But along came commodore 64, and the whole MS windows explosion. You could not find an apple computer anywhere and anyone who had one complained they were slow and the apps were lacking. I know someone who has been using Apple for the last 10-12 years (maybe more). he said before OSX, Apples were just pathetic. Now, they are the best computer you can buy.
Now in 2008, Apple makes it so that I do not need a desktop. Personally, I think the imac/mini of a desktop. to me the mac pro is a low end server or a way over the top tower needed to run studios.
I guess 28 yrs of dealing with Windows/PC technologies has warped my mind (I started playing with computers when I was 12). Don't worry a year or so dealing with Apple and my mind will be strait again. Atleast I will never see another BSOD just from plugging in a drive or a USB peripheral.
my lacie USB HD sometimes GraySOD's my computer when i plug it in.. so i commonly have to put up with it!!
With four cores going at full speed I can't imagine the heat that would be generated by one of these laptops. People complained about the heat dissipation issues with a dual-core laptop!
