More than 2 Processor Support in Mac OS X?

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
47,548
9,365
One user submits the following:

"Apple released version 4.1.0 of their CHUD tools. CHUD is used by developer for optimizing applications. One of the components is a system preference panel called "Processor". It enables you to turn off the "Nap" function of the processors, but more importantly it allows you to turn off the second processor of a dual-processor machine.

With version 4.1.0, the interface of the "Processor" panel changed significantly. You can compare the last version (4.0.2) with the current version here.

The significance is pretty obvious. Instead of a static single/dual processor option, there is now room to view 4 processors at once, and to select how many are to be active. Maybe Apple will never actually release a quad-processor G5, but it certainly looks like there is one in development."
 

wrldwzrd89

macrumors G5
Jun 6, 2003
12,107
75
Solon, OH
I take this as preparation for the inevitable arrival of dual-core Macs. I don't think it says anything significant about when those will arrive.
 

slooksterPSV

macrumors 68040
Apr 17, 2004
3,283
128
Nowheresville
I think the PowerMacs are going to have a new family line. PowerMac G5 Quad or something like that. From reading that, is it safe to say that the L1 Cache total is 96KB? - Per Processor
 

daveL

macrumors 68020
Jun 18, 2003
2,425
0
Montana
wrldwzrd89 said:
I take this as preparation for the inevitable arrival of dual-core Macs. I don't think it says anything significant about when those will arrive.
Well, except it implies Apple needs this capability now, in house.

I've been unable to use the CHUD updater to get the latest version. Ever time I run it I end up force quitting it; it just sits there with a status message indicating it's attempt to contact the server, but it never succeeds. Has anyone else had this problem lately?
 

Chaszmyr

macrumors 601
Aug 9, 2002
4,263
76
When I heard about this, I simply had to download the new version of CHUD to see for myself. It is totally set up for more than 2 processors(or cores). I can't even express how exciting the notion of a dual core dual processor powermac is :D
 

jim.

macrumors 6502
Dec 22, 2004
308
0
C-ville, VA
Did the mach core always have the ability to scale across more than two processors? It could just be a gui addition to what is already there at a low level. Whether or not it is indicative of something, we shall see....

Jim
 

shyataroo

macrumors regular
Dec 17, 2003
150
1
Hell... Wanna join me?
Quad Processor G5? I doubt it.... Dual Core Dual processor G5 seems more likely... I mean first off a Quad Processor G5 would need a much larger tower enclosure to cool it, secondly the amount of processing speed increase would become more negliable with each new processor thats added on... so a Quad G5 would have like 60 or 70 or maybe 90% improvement over a Single G5 when releasing a 5Ghz G5 single processor with an assload of cooling would be better than 4 2.5Ghz processors. not only that but the power requirments would be exhorbent. Personally, I think that they need to work on getting the bus speed at 100% of processor speed and same with ram... that way there would be no bottlenecks and the G5 Processor will be able to show off its full power.
 

isgoed

macrumors 6502
Jun 5, 2003
328
0
wrldwzrd89 said:
I take this as preparation for the inevitable arrival of dual-core Macs. I don't think it says anything significant about when those will arrive.
I do think it says anything significant about when those will arrive: Soon.
 

RacerX

macrumors 65832
Aug 2, 2004
1,504
2
I seem to recall that Mac OS X was designed to work with up to four processors, there just weren't any four processor systems out there.

Also (off the topic a little) Mac OS 8/9 had support for four processors using it's asymmetric multiprocessing software Apple got from Daystar. Of course part of the reason for that software supporting up to four processors was the fact that Daystar made a four processor system (based on the PowerPC 604 processor at 150 MHz).
 

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,910
41
Andover, MA
Hmmmph. Having a dual-proc BeBox in 1996, and seeing a quad-proc one in 1997, with CPU shutdown controls for n procs (true), I'm unimpressed (kidding).

Actually, no, I'm pretty excited about what this indicates: clearly, we'll be seeing dual-proc dual-core PBs at WWDC. I see no other way to interpret this. ;)

Seriously, this is pretty exciting stuff, and I can't wait until we non-Apple folks can use it. Most people won't get much use out of it, but the possibilities really open up for some S/W segments.
 

mvc

macrumors 6502a
Jul 11, 2003
760
0
Outer-Roa
4 Cores! - That would just the ticket for rendering video I imagine.

So will they call it the "Dual Dual"?
 

isgoed

macrumors 6502
Jun 5, 2003
328
0
shyataroo said:
Quad Processor G5? I doubt it....
I think you forgot the xServe.

I also think it is difficult for an app to utilize more than two processors. But the XBox get's three, so why not. It could also be that a dual core processor presents itself as a single core processor. And maybe in time 4 processors become normal. Maybe you can run two Operating servers on one computer now. (Let's say a webserver and OSX). And it's also not uncommon to have 3 or more heavy duty apps open at once.
 

eSnow

macrumors regular
Feb 23, 2004
164
0
Anyone noticed that "Clock Speed" has changed to "Core Freq."? I am pretty sure this means dual-core CPUs soon.
 

Bear

macrumors G3
Jul 23, 2002
8,089
4
Sol III - Terra
isgoed said:
I think you forgot the xServe.

I also think it is difficult for an app to utilize more than two processors. But the XBox get's three, so why not. It could also be that a dual core processor presents itself as a single core processor. And maybe in time 4 processors become normal. Maybe you can run two Operating servers on one computer now. (Let's say a webserver and OSX). And it's also not uncommon to have 3 or more heavy duty apps open at once.
Actually how many procs an application can use depends on the application and the design o fthe application. A database engine (Sybase or Oracle for examples) will happily make use of many processors.

Right now, I have software that will pretty much suck down both processors of a Dual Proc PowerMac. So even if it was true that any given application could only use 2 processors at maximum, most of use are running multiple applications and for heavy users, they would see a nice improvement with more processors (or cores per proc).

I'm hoping a dual core/dual proc G5 is out soon.
 

wdlove

macrumors P6
Oct 20, 2002
16,568
0
Maybe will get some leaks about this prior to the WDDC. If Apple can't achieve the 3.0 status then the dual or quad should be the goal.
 

Fukui

macrumors 68000
Jul 19, 2002
1,617
6
jim. said:
Did the mach core always have the ability to scale across more than two processors? Jim
Mach was made for way more than 4 processors...
That was one of the original design goals anyways...
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
Fukui said:
Mach was made for way more than 4 processors...
That was one of the original design goals anyways...
Tiger is supposed to support improved SMP scalability.

Apple probably did quite a bit to finally catch up to FreeBSD 5.x and it's SMPng support.
 

daveL

macrumors 68020
Jun 18, 2003
2,425
0
Montana
Sun Baked said:
Tiger is supposed to support improved SMP scalability.

Apple probably did quite a bit to finally catch up to FreeBSD 5.x and it's SMPng support.
That's interesting, but ~loserman~ (I believe) reported in the Doom3 thread that Tiger did not improve SMP performance. Maybe it's just not in the builds we've seen. I sure hope you are correct about Tiger.
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,546
1,195
Forget quad G5s. i want my quad G6! :)

(I once had a quad G2 Mac from DayStar at work!)

I like the "NEW" flags, BTW.

(PS. It can't have been easy to get that JPEG up to 300k :) )
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
daveL said:
That's interesting, but ~loserman~ (I believe) reported in the Doom3 thread that Tiger did not improve SMP performance. Maybe it's just not in the builds we've seen. I sure hope you are correct about Tiger.
Was Doom3 compiled using the Tiger libraries?

Remember, you have to recompile in order to take advantage of the new libraries.
 

Some_Big_Spoon

macrumors 6502a
Jun 17, 2003
855
0
New York, NY
i'm no expert in the least, but seems like this is for dual-core, dual processor systems.

The ability to turn on/off one or more of the cores, or set them to turn on/off as needed, etc. would make perfect sense. Lends itse'f to far better power/heat management, and makes a lot of sense for mobile computing as well. Just as we have energy saver settings for the 'books now, this would give greater control if/when the DC G4/G5's make it to mobile.

Enough with the /'s already :)
 

Some_Big_Spoon

macrumors 6502a
Jun 17, 2003
855
0
New York, NY
for tiger? it wasn't even optimised for PPC.. we're lucky it's playable on the platform at all.

Sun Baked said:
Was Doom3 compiled using the Tiger libraries?

Remember, you have to recompile in order to take advantage of the new libraries.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.