Intel launches dual core "Pentium D" for home desktop mark...


Mudbug

Administrator emeritus
Jun 28, 2002
3,809
1
North Central Colorado
Maybe Apple went to talk to Intel about how they did this, so they could bring a little brochure back to IBM with them and say "this is what we should be doing now... don't you think?"
 
maybe a switch to Intel wouldnt be so bad after all, especially since it appears that IBM only cares about gaming consoles. BAH!!

and while im ranting...

Those "new" powermacs are looking pretty archaic. The things are bigger than and almost as expensive as a KIA, they needs a radiator to keep them cool, still can only fit one optical drive, and has a flawed firewire bus that is slower than a powerbooks'. wtf is buying those things??

anyways, i bet we see a dualcore Mini b4 we ever find a dualcore 970 in a powermac.
 

Mr. Anderson

Moderator emeritus
Nov 1, 2001
22,407
0
VA
wow, dual cores at 2.8 to 3.2 GHz.....

Bleh, that's painful - I was really expecting that to be an Apple announcement, not Intel when it finally happened....


D :(
 

Earendil

macrumors 68000
Oct 27, 2003
1,546
0
Washington
guys guys, you're missing the bright side!!

"The Pentium D processor and supporting chips will target home computer users, particularly those who run more than one program at once or have software that is designed to take advantage of the extra computing horsepower of the chips' dual cores."


Anyone else get a laugh out of that? :D

*plays happily with his 1.25ghz G4 powerbook and his 10 apps open*

~Earendil
~Tyler
 

crap freakboy

macrumors 6502a
Jul 17, 2002
867
0
nar in Gainsborough, me duck
I'm one amongst many of Mac users out there that are hoping IBM/Apple can pull something amazing out of the bag. Then I remind myself that I'm typing this on a Powermac G4 Sawtooth 400Mhz which runs Indesign, Photoshop, all the iApps, Illustrator to mention a few, and without any major beachballing. Now I may be wrong but would a M$ PC of the same era be able to hold its head high in this G4s company?
Saying that though, the G5 is a monster....can't believe how huge it is, or probably (if I manage convince 'er indoors to upgrade to one :( ) how fast it is. One day...one day...sigh. Currently 6 apps open, transferring 8 GB to various HD's, iChatting, surfing, sorting 24000 photos, listening to iTunes, checking mail...not a beachball insight. Now thats the sort of advertising Apple need to produce but on a G5 iMac with 20 apps open.
 

TwitchOSX

macrumors 6502
May 2, 2002
496
2
Southern Oregon
More than one program?

Sheet -

We are using a DP 2.5 here and I have at the moment: 19 apps open

9 of which are hard core heavy duty graphics applications. Only slow down I really see is in Safari.. but it could be because of the desktop switching application I have running - its a beta.. who knows. Other than that - its pretty smooth sailing.
 

brap

macrumors 68000
May 10, 2004
1,701
0
Nottingham
Newsflash: Dual core Pentiums suck donkey nuts. It's the dual core offering from AMD which is really cause for concern. Those things are fa-ast.
 

macnulty

macrumors 6502
May 18, 2003
496
0
Rehoboth Beach, De
crap freakboy said:
I'm one amongst many of Mac users out there that are hoping IBM/Apple can pull something amazing out of the bag. Then I remind myself that I'm typing this on a Powermac G4 Sawtooth 400Mhz which runs Indesign, Photoshop, all the iApps, Illustrator to mention a few, and without any major beachballing. Now I may be wrong but would a M$ PC of the same era be able to hold its head high in this G4s company?
Saying that though, the G5 is a monster....can't believe how huge it is, or probably (if I manage convince 'er indoors to upgrade to one :( ) how fast it is. One day...one day...sigh. Currently 6 apps open, transferring 8 GB to various HD's, iChatting, surfing, sorting 24000 photos, listening to iTunes, checking mail...not a beachball insight. Now thats the sort of advertising Apple need to produce but on a G5 iMac with 20 apps open.
I've got Panther running on a 6 year old Lombard, with a G4 upgrade to 433, it works. I'm not leaping tall buildings in a single bound but it works quite well. In the time I've owned this PB, my neighbors ( yes plural ) have gone through 2 upgrade cycles on their Inte/MS boxes. Value, who's was better? I have added additional Macs for the kids, so not that I'm a hold out.
 

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,817
37
Andover, MA
pontecorvo said:
Are you implying that someone on an Intel-based laptop couldn't do the same? :mad:
I think that the implication is that OS X does better task switching than XP. My experience on numerous OS X and XP systems is that using multiple apps more or less "simultaneously" is smoother on a Mac. Not terribly smoother, but noticeably so. Plus, organization and navigation of multiple apps and multiple windows within apps is easier in OS X. I use both OS's daily, so, while this is just my opinion, it's an educated one.
 

poundsmack

macrumors 6502
Apr 28, 2005
287
0
PlaceofDis said:
Freescale, IBM get your butts in gear!!!

freescale has its but in gear. its e600 is avalible dual core, unfortunatly it is not in a single apple computer.
 

Bakey

macrumors 6502
Oct 6, 2003
441
0
O Donny Boy
Dont Hurt Me said:
Not a word about AMDs dual core? anyone with a socket 939 is in luck :D
"Next month, Intel rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) is expected to launch its first dual-core chips for mainstream desktop computers. AMD has already launched a dual-core chip for servers."

It's right there fella!!!

Besides, personally I'm more interested in what AMD has to offer than Intel, and is it not right that AMD & IBM have fairly close ties, eg. IBM fab labs produce AMD chips, or ex-AMD engineers now work for IBM... something like that!! :rolleyes:
 

solvs

macrumors 603
Jun 25, 2002
5,693
1
LaLaLand, CA
pontecorvo said:
Are you implying that someone on an Intel-based laptop couldn't do the same? :mad:
Can it be done? Sure. Is it done very well? Not really. More of a Windows issue than Intel. Though those AMDs are pretty nice. Not sure I'd want OS X running on x86, but I'm sure Apple is keeping their options open for PPC providers.
 

iceDogg

macrumors newbie
Feb 20, 2004
19
0
I used to find every single app on my iBook 900MHz G3 which was around 66 (DVD was also playing along with two gameboy advance emulators) and run them all at the same time. This made my dock touch both sides of the screen. Then I would do an Expose of all the windows open and laugh at my wintel friends :D
 

Abstract

macrumors Penryn
Dec 27, 2002
24,378
110
Location Location Location
I'll start to get worried when Intel and AMD have these things announced for 4-6 months, but IBM has not yet announced them. Until then, I'm not too concerned. :)

WHat's the main difference between a P4 with HT, and a dual core P4? Isn't it very easy for programs written that take advantage of HT also to take advantage of dual-core?
 

SPUY767

macrumors 68020
Jun 22, 2003
2,018
112
GA
Abstract said:
I'll start to get worried when Intel and AMD have these things announced for 4-6 months, but IBM has not yet announced them. Until then, I'm not too concerned. :)

WHat's the main difference between a P4 with HT, and a dual core P4? Isn't it very easy for programs written that take advantage of HT also to take advantage of dual-core?
In a word. No. Basically, hyperthreading is a way of switching between process threads in an efficient manner. Unfortunately, Windows is anything but efficient, and HT often ends up slowing things down more than up b/c it makes windows go ape. Dual Core processors, require specifically written multithreaded applications. These applications must be complete rewrites. There are add-ons, a la Photoshop for the daystar machines back in the mid 90s, but that only accelerates certain processes. Oh, and multithreaded programming is a bitch. Furthermore, I will guarantee you that most of the excrement factories that embody the greater portion of wintel developers will not invest the effort in Multithreaded Application programming for a long time, so this advent is nigh on useless ATM.
 

dubbz

macrumors 68020
Sep 3, 2003
2,284
0
Alta, Norway
Not really very interested in Intel's dual core offerings. They're "slow" and too hot. The only thing they have going for them is that they're available at a lower price point than AMD offerings, if you don't need the speed.
I'm interested in a relatively quiet system and good gaming performance, so AMD has the advantage... and the DRM thing doesn't exactly help Intel's cause.