Intel retires "tick-tock?"

[pat500000]

I just ran into this article from yahoo.
http://arstechnica.com/information-...ent-model-extending-the-life-of-each-process/

Does this imply that future mac pros (let's assume they will have refresh) will keep getting delayed further down the road? Rather than having 400-600 days from each update, it will be 1k days to 2k days?

Will this affect majorly on mac pros?

 

[fusionid]

forget the macpro. All computer models will run into delayed updates or new cycles as the case maybe.

It is a fallacy approach at best. Intel should only make a new dye diameter per cycle. What would be the speed benefit from skylake to kaby lake? 2%? What a waste of R&D

 

[pat500000]

forget the macpro. All computer models will run into delayed updates or new cycles as the case maybe.

It is a fallacy approach at best. Intel should only make a new dye diameter per cycle. What would be the speed benefit from skylake to kaby lake? 2%? What a waste of R&D

Everything will be delayed, huh? Pretty sad IMO.

 

[cruisin]

There will still be 400-600 days between updates for Intel, there will just be 3 releases instead of 2 per process size. The real question is when will Apple update. The current iMac has Skylake based CPUs but Apple didn't add the new Skylake features like Thunderbolt 3.

If a new CPU is released and Apple does't like it they will skip it. Considering that the current Pro (codename Trashcan) is still using the original parts from 2013 while 3 newer Xeons exist means that the Pro is on a weird update cycle.

 

[pat500000]

There will still be 400-600 days between updates for Intel, there will just be 3 releases instead of 2 per process size. The real question is when will Apple update. The current iMac has Skylake based CPUs but Apple didn't add the new Skylake features like Thunderbolt 3.

If a new CPU is released and Apple does't like it they will skip it. Considering that the current Pro (codename Trashcan) is still using the original parts from 2013 while 3 newer Xeons exist means that the Pro is on a weird update cycle.

So, intel is ready for mac pro then, right? With the recent news in regards to macbook...it's giving me the willie as it's not too far away for WDCC. Also, when they release 3 rather than 2...that must be a good sign then.

 

[fastlanephil]

It sounds like a SJ reality distortion field maneuver.

 

[pat500000]

It sounds like a SJ reality distortion field maneuver.

Huh? what do you mean by that?

 

[thefredelement]

There will still be 400-600 days between updates for Intel, there will just be 3 releases instead of 2 per process size. The real question is when will Apple update. The current iMac has Skylake based CPUs but Apple didn't add the new Skylake features like Thunderbolt 3.

If a new CPU is released and Apple does't like it they will skip it. Considering that the current Pro (codename Trashcan) is still using the original parts from 2013 while 3 newer Xeons exist means that the Pro is on a weird update cycle.

It's not like the e5-v2 has been pulled off the shelves, or that the v4 has been easily available for mass production. Idk what's it's status is today but a few months ago they were hard to get.

 

[pastrychef]

I guess it's tic-tac-toe now.

 

[G4DPII]

I think Larry, Curly and Moe, would be more adapt names at the moment.

Still doesn't make sense to upgrade the CPU, yet not bring everything it can offer long with it. Unless Intel want more money for using TB3 instead of TB3.

 

[fusionid]

I should also clarify that necessary upgrades not coupled to CPU net speed and power include USB 3 and C type adapters, thunderbolt 3, faster video cards, better display (for Imac), better SDD and access speeds.

The issue is consumerism. Intel is unable to keep the pace but knows needs a new model once a year to keep luring new comers and investors. same thing as buying a brand new car when design has not changed in 3 years.

 

[AidenShaw]

I think Larry, Curly and Moe, would be more adapt names at the moment.

Still doesn't make sense to upgrade the CPU, yet not bring everything it can offer long with it. Unless Intel want more money for using TB3 instead of TB3.

But TB3 isn't in the Xeon chipset.... Why don't people understand that.

 

[G4DPII]

I wasn't refering to the Mac Pro specifically. I would imagine all the but those under a stone have given up on it ever being a cutting edge machine again.

I meant in generall, Apple now seem to take two or three steps back when it comes to CPU's used in products.

 

[mattspace]

But TB3 isn't in the Xeon chipset.... Why don't people understand that.

The TB3 situation is further complicated by Intel exercising their rights to control certification for TB3 - in other words, even if Apple could put together a system with a Broadwell Xeon and Alpine Ridge chipset to make TB3 work, they can't release it without Intel's blessing. So far, it seems Intel's attitude is that TB3 is a Skylake feature.

*if* they do a Broadwell / Fiji / TB2 update... it's going to be fun watching Phil try to bluster about how TB3 is really only necessary for external graphics processing (which they'll whitelist to their just-powerful-enough-to-drive-the-screen eGPU-based 5k monitor until Skylake Xeons ship) and the new machine doesn't need that because it's "new" graphics cards are so "pro", and anyway TB2 is good enough on some synthetic storage test, plus here's some obscure multilinked TB2 enclosure that aggregates the bandwidth to be just as fast as TB3, so pay no attention to the man behind the curtain....