Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Intel's Penryn Chip Performance Boosts

the important question is: how soon will we see a price drop in the current line?
 
I think Apple delayed Leopard because they want to release Leopard and update the macs with Penryn at the same time. Apple is probably going to skip the first Santa Rosa platform update.
 
Macrumors said:


Intel announced some performance details on the upcoming Penryn processors at the Intel Developer Forum in Beijing.

Penryn is the next chip family based on the Core micro-architecture and will include a number of enhancements along with a die-shrink to 45nm. The upcoming Penryn chips will be marketed under both the "Core" and "Xeon" brand names and encompass the entire spectrum of products (mobile, desktop, server).

According to Intel executive, Penryn-based computers will see the following speed improvements over the current Core 2 Extreme processors

- 15% for imaging-related
- 25% for 3-D rendering
- 40% for gaming
- 40% for video encoding (SSE4 optimized)

The comparison was made between 3.33GHz pre-production Penryn processor vs 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme processor-based desktop-class machines.

For workstations and "high-performance computing", Penryn is said to provide improvements of:

- 45% for "bandwidth intensive applications
- 25% for servers using Java

These comparisons were made between pre-production Xeon (Penryn) processor vs Xeon 5355 processor-based workstations.

Penryn chips are expected to be released later in 2007.
Click to expand...

Really? :p , I would have thought the title of the thread was going to be 'Intel's latest chips degrade performance' , lol. That's a no brainer.

What was really more interesting was what was reported about what Intel said in this link, from my post on the 'other' Penryn thread below this one- yesterday. Lol, just like the person who posted shortly thereafter, I suppose many MR readers just don't get it, kind of slooooow...like that PC guy in the Apple TV ads, "Um, what?"

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/16/HNintelbeyondsantarosa_1.html
 
bbplayer5 said:
If you use your mac for games, and play at 1920x1200 or higher, these processors wont give you any performance increase. Anything that high in res is 99% video card.
Click to expand...

Not strictly true, as AI and physics get more advanced.

Also, people should not forget power savings. Which in turn leads to cooler, quieter, smaller machines that last longer on a battery charge for a given performance level.
 
mashinhead said:
are these all quad-core chips? what kind of speed will we see for the mobile processors?
Click to expand...
Nope they aren't all quad core. Mobile space will get the SSE4 benefits, etc. and of course better power/heat profile at the same clock rate.
 
.

.

I ated they penryn berries. They taste like... burning!!!!
 

Attachments

  • Ralph.JPG
    Ralph.JPG
    4.3 KB · Views: 1,937
guzhogi said:
I totally agree. It seems like everyone on this board wants a new feature/faster thing every week. If that happens, they'll just turn around and complain that the computer they just got a week ago is already obsolete. Very hypocritical. Up until about April of last year, my dad used a G3 iMac he got in 1998. It served him fine until it started slowing down too much. But 1998-2006 is a long time in computer terms. If he can handle it, pretty much anyone can.
Click to expand...

I still use my 400MHz iMac, but it's been relegated to small integrated DVD player. It still boots quickly enough, and opens apps just fine. I'll probably never get rid of it until it dies completely. If just the HDD blows out, I'll probably just stick another in it and keep using it. I am by no means a big power user, so I'm doubtful I'd see or even care about the speed improvements of the upcoming chips. All I really care about is the ability to run more simultaneously without choking the computer, which is what my macbook does with my modest apps, and what my old Inspiron cannot.

Any improvements are a good thing though. I think the people that are rating this article a negative are soft in the head. Seriously...what gives? Did you babies want Intel to create the improbability drive or something?
 
daneoni said:
Meh.....my view is people should buy the current chips based on the santa rosa platform and wait for Nehalem as the next upgrade and skip Penryn all together. The numbers just aren't all that great IMHO
Click to expand...

lol. When core duo came out, people said they would skip that and wait for merom because core duo was just a "stop gap"... then that came out, and some core duo users, and some PPC users, said they'd just wait for penryn because that's where the real boost was. I'm sure that when Penryn comes out somebody will say to buy that and hold out for whatever comes after Nehalem because Nehalem is only x% better than Penryn...

There's always something better, but it's always just incrementally better (except the G4 --> core duo switch, which is why I bought a rev. A macbook).

edit: just looked at Power6, and good lord but it looks powerful. I bet, and hope, apple still has PPC systems kicking around.
 
I am still on my 12" PB. The G4 is certainly beginning to show its age, however my daily activities of surfing, iTunes, email, and chat is really no big deal for the little monster. Sometimes I get frustrated when the finder hangs or firefox chokes when I have 20 tabs open, but that is me just being silly. As much as I want to rush to the store and buy a Macbook with 2gig of ram I just am not sure I really need it. Now I certainly WANT it, but I have gotten more out of my Apple TV than a few faster loading apps. That is why I think Apple is so excited about their other 3 divisions. iPod, AppleTV, and iPhone are lustfull devices. For the majority of people computers are just tools, and once they move to a mac their upgrade cycle slows because they work too damn well, they don't slow down and don't crash. So how does Apple continue to grow profits as their computers reach a level where everyday tasks are computationally childs play? They sell lustfull devices that you can't help but want to the newest one. Many of my friends bought the 2nd Gen nano even though they had the 1st Gen Nano too! They just thought it was "sick". I think Leopard with Core Animation is going to be drool worthy and will drive many people like me to make the jump to some new hardware to experience the fantastical UI's we will see as a result of Core Animation.
 
+40% for video encoding (SSE4 optimized) Gets Me Interested

So I guess I'm gonna wait for that version of the 8 core Mac Pro before I pull the trigger. My Quad G5 will still serve me well enough for the rest of 2007 if need be. I'd rather keep saving more money meanwhile than buy an 8 core now that hasn't got a lot of brains behind its brawn. :)
 
The current Core 2 Duo is plenty fast (speaking solely about mobile purposes such as Macbook Pro) compared to my G4. So I dont care so much about size change as efficiency. If it can do the same or slightly less performance for a LOT less energy. I would be a lot happier. 5/6 hours for a macbook Pro. That would just be amazing. Lets see firstly how good Santa Rosa is and if Penryn will really affect it.
 
Chef Medeski said:
The current Core 2 Duo is plenty fast (speaking solely about mobile purposes such as Macbook Pro) compared to my G4. So I dont care so much about size change as efficiency. If it can do the same or slightly less performance for a LOT less energy. I would be a lot happier. 5/6 hours for a macbook Pro. That would just be amazing. Lets see firstly how good Santa Rosa is and if Penryn will really affect it.
Click to expand...

I would like that alot. Especially on the MacBook side of the fence. Better battery life at the same speeds or slightly higher would be very nice. I would still like the best of the best performance for the high end 15" and 17" MacBook Pro.
 
Digital Skunk said:
I would like that alot. Especially on the MacBook side of the fence. Better battery life at the same speeds or slightly higher would be very nice. I would still like the best of the best performance for the high end 15" and 17" MacBook Pro.
Click to expand...
A choice would be good since some people care more about battery and others about performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back