Pentium M and Yonah Processors in Upcoming Macs?

[pont]

Prey tell which pentium m review youve read. My guess is none, prooving my point, because if you HAD read one youd see it kills both pentium EE and athlon FX, which, in their turn, are faster than the fastest g5 available.
a>b>c -> a>c.

Matlab Benchmark

matlab (program for doing maths stuff (had to use it in engineering not much fun), but here are some bench marks, one second THE PENTIUM M gets OWNED even by a Power 4 running AIX 5.1, well it dosn't really get owned, but it dosn't own

But as intel goes, its sweet

Just chuck this power 5 benchmark in for the hell of it

 

[pont]

It's not a damn fine chip if you can't put the thing in any laptops & you need a liquid cooling system to keep it from burning up. I'm sure the Intel processors could keep up or pass the IBM in performances if it were over clocked to the point that it ran as hot as the IBM.

Difference being that it runs that hot and its stable you wouldn't use an over clocked intel for a server, You would use a power 5.

 

[pont]

True, but Mactel has a "cheap" and "sarcastic" sound to it like "Wintel" that Mac users have used for years to minimize PCs with Windows to a level below Apple. We as Mac users have used Wintel sarcastically for so long, because of the Windows-Intel union, that using Mactel sort of has that same effect or feel. JMO

I will always just own a "Mac" regardless of the chip inside (Moto/IBM/Intel/AMD).

LOL very true and Mac OS X is a damn fine operating system, I guess its just dissapointing that IBM couldn't make a powerpc (other then the cell) with low power consumption (sony says the cell has low power consumption it should have the power core in it isn't exceedingly powerful)

 

[AidenShaw]

I would love to know where you read this, from what I have heard microsoft does not yet have an OS for the Xbox360

Yahoo! for "xbox 360" "operating system" and you'll find the consensus that it's an evolution of the NT-based Xbox OS.

Considering the ties with XP Media Center Edition, and the need for 64-bit and SMP support - it would make sense that it's a parallel fork of the NT codebase.

My point, however, was just that Microsoft has a lot of experience with multiple hardware platforms for NT. To dismiss Windows as "stuck on x86" is silly.

 

[B_Gates]

Difference being that it runs that hot and its stable you wouldn't use an over clocked intel for a server, You would use a power 5.

How do you know that the G5 is not over clocked? It probably is since it produces so much heat that a liquid cooling system is needed at the higher clock speeds.

 

[pont]

How do you know that the G5 is not over clocked? It probably is since it produces so much heat that a liquid cooling system is needed at the higher clock speeds.

Im not talking about a G5 im talking about a POWER 5.

Originally Posted by pont
Not entirly true really

Power Mac
Power Book

so perhaps it should be called

Pentium Mac

Just to correct my self, I have an m68k powerbook in the corner of my room therefor the naming has nothing to do with the processor.

Yahoo! for "xbox 360" "operating system" and you'll find the consensus that it's an evolution of the NT-based Xbox OS.

While it hasn't been decided its definatly a fair bet, I mean they arnt about to put windows CE on it and they abandoned the win 9x codebase ages ago but i doubt it will be windows NT 4 (the last windows to run on a PowerPC) its more likly to be longhorn ported to the powerpc (I think it would be easyer to port longhorn then to attempt to uterlize an old code base and get it up to standard with a moden os)

Plus the power arch has changed alot since 1997 ? 1996 somewhere around there

My point, however, was just that Microsoft has a lot of experience with multiple hardware platforms for NT. To dismiss Windows as "stuck on x86" is silly.

Very true

 

[abluesky]

I thought this links was very interesting. It is from SETI and rates processor by efficiency. Processing efficiency is defined as the number of CPU Cycles required to perform one FLOP, abbreviated CpF, with lower numbers corresponding to higher efficiencies and vice versa.

The top three chips were all Intel. But the Intel Pentium M was third and only beaten by Intel Itanium and Intel Itanium 2.

http://www.cox-internet.com/setispy/efficiency.htm

Again, the Pentium M looks like a very high performance chip.

 

[pont]

Alpha 21264B
Alpha 21264A

Its amazing that they are third from the top, Havent been hearing much about alpha production for years

Also quite strange that the AMD Opteron gets beaten by the AMD Athlon 64

even wearder is the fact that the Pentium Pro is apparently faster then a Pentium 4 EE seems abit suspect, Unless intel decided the pentium pro was much too powerful for 1996 and take it slow for 8 or so years ?!

 

[iMeowbot]

matlab (program for doing maths stuff (had to use it in engineering not much fun), but here are some bench marks, one second THE PENTIUM M gets OWNED even by a Power 4 running AIX 5.1, well it dosn't really get owned, but it dosn't own

A POWER4 at 1.3 GHz burns at 115 watts too. I ain't puttin' that on my lap

 

[pont]

A POWER4 at 1.3 GHz burns at 115 watts too. I ain't puttin' that on my lap

Neither would I, I would love to have a Power5 workstation (doubt I could get hold of the money) but untill the cell chip arives in the PS3 I have my duel opterons to keep me company.

If the Cell chip is as good as it is rumored, im ganna have a PS3 with linux on it

 

[pont]

Just run into the coolest google advertisment ever

Win a Mac mini and i-pod
Plus a stunning Apple display, Office for Mac, keyboard & mouse
www.microsoft.com.au/minimate

one thing i hate for mac is microsoft office, its unusable and very lame compared to its pc eqivilent

 

[Silver Apple]

About a possible name

Why not a play with the letter X as in Mac OsX and X-86

So:

Mini X
XMac
Xbook
Powerbook X
PowerMac X

Check this article about Intel's plan to release Quad Cores for late 2007!!
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23748

Also I read somewhere (will look for link) that the quad core desktop cpus planned by Intel which will use the Pentium M technology .... is targeted to consume under 140W of total power !!!! Thats less than a single core Pentium4 (160 - 200W) or a 2.7GHZ G5 (140W ??) *** Can you imagine the possibilities here for a Quad Core 64bit PowerMac with hyperthreading for a high-end workstation!!! And it won't need a friggin nuclear water tower cooler to boot!!!!

Cheers!

 

[jcgerm]

What you talkin' 'bout Willis?

The memory model presented to the programmer (32 or 64 bit) is independent of the amount of physical memory. Even when coding is assembly you still don't use physical addresses, but rather you just address the model.

Yes, but eventually some part of the system addresses the memory, and there is where you see the advantage. If you have less than 4 GB of memory, you're not going to see an advantage from explicitly having a 64 bit chip. Also, in assembly you directly access the memory. You have 64 bits of address space to work with, so if you only deal with 32 bits of the 64, there's no real reason to have 64 in the first place.

 

[pont]

Check this article about Intel's plan to release Quad Cores for late 2007!!
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23748

Does sound awsome, Im personlly looking forwald to affordable cell workstations, If there as good as they sound they could make toshiba ibm and sony alot of money and be bloody awesome, Im just hoping it turns out that way

apparently according to play.com the xbox 360 will be released on 29/11/05 witch will feature a tri core PowerPC running at 3.2ghz (www.xbox.com), I perviously heard 3.6ghz, but i think this is a farly accurate source. Microsoft have made interesting clames that this chip will be able to beat the 3.2ghz cell chip in the PS3 i am doubtful

 

[tdewey]

Its amazing that they are third from the top, Havent been hearing much about alpha production for years

Also quite strange that the AMD Opteron gets beaten by the AMD Athlon 64

even wearder is the fact that the Pentium Pro is apparently faster then a Pentium 4 EE seems abit suspect, Unless intel decided the pentium pro was much too powerful for 1996 and take it slow for 8 or so years ?!

Not faster, more efficient. P4EE has many, many, many times the clock cycles of the Pro so even though the Pro is much more efficient the P4EE still chews it up like a big dog with a new rawhide dog toy [you really need to have now or have owned a truly big dog to appreciate this metaphor].

The Alpha may be gone, but some of it lives on in the Itanium (same crew designed both, IIRC).

T

 

[Jmitch]

You know I really do think this is a good move for Apple. I think this is what needed to happen for a long time and since it finally has I think Apple is in it's best position yet. Go Apple.

 

[Jmitch]

I guess my main question is will Apple continue to sell PowerPC models of all their hardware? What about portables? Does this mean there will be no PowerBook G5? Does this mean the G5 will never reach the 3.0ghz line? There are so many unanswered questions...

 

[Manzana]

Why not a play with the letter X as in Mac OsX and X-86

So:

Mini X
XMac
Xbook
Powerbook X
PowerMac X

oh no! i hope this type of naming ends soon. everything is freakin x this or that trying to sound extreme. hopefully we go straight to "11" already.

 

[Underbelly]

I think you are misising the big picture. Intel has hatted Microsoft for years. Microsoft has pushed intel around. Intel plans on my Apple and together with Steve Jobs, the 2 will finally win the war on Mocrosoft. Steve wil than leave and go back to Pixar or Pixar/Sony whatever that ends up to be.

This is what Jobs has always wanted. He's still bitter about Windows even all these years later. He is also bitter about being forced out of Apple when it still had a chance of completing with Microsoft.

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050609.html

 

[MacinDoc]

Does this mean there will be no PowerBook G5?

Yes.

Does this mean the G5 will never reach the 3.0ghz line?

No. I imagine there will be some increase in the clock speed of the G5 or its successors in the next 2 years before the Power Mac switches over to Intel...

...unless IBM is so upset about losing the Apple contract that they stop all PPC development and production, in which case Apple is in trouble...

 

[pont]

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050609.html

Since this artical has was posted on slashdot yesterday i have seen it mentoned on this fourm ~4 times tis a popular one

think you are misising the big picture. Intel has hatted Microsoft for years. Microsoft has pushed intel around. Intel plans on my Apple and together with Steve Jobs, the 2 will finally win the war on Mocrosoft.

and could someone please explain how a MacOSX running on intel will
suddenly dethrown microsoft. Unless apple propose to give you a choice of hardware to run it on (not just apple boxes) it will be pritty much the same as before for maket share.

 

[jr0977]

Stella, your a joke

Here we go, 50 pages of misguided ***** of how -
- intel sucks
- intel means viruses
- people don't want macs to get over 5% market share.
- macs will be Dell quality machines
- Apple should have gone with IBM's (!!!???)
- apple making osx available on all PCs
- the final demise of Macs

plus other crap that people invent.

Very little insight and factual posts ( judging from the other posts )

Sorry, I'm being pessimistic.

You obviously know nothing about processors and computers. Chips don't create viruses, programming in operating systems do. Apple will keep producing high quality machines, they always have, this isn't changing. If anything its making it better. And last, most people do want Apple to have a larger market share. IBM wasn't doing justice for technology advancement.

 

[Photorun]

You obviously know nothing about processors and computers. Chips don't create viruses, programming in operating systems do. Apple will keep producing high quality machines, they always have, this isn't changing. If anything its making it better. And last, most people do want Apple to have a larger market share. IBM wasn't doing justice for technology advancement.

Um, dude, he was joking, reread his post, he's saying 50 pages of MISGUIDED info, he's not saying what you just responded to.

Read. Think. Post.

 

[j_maddison]

Man you need to read stuff before you spout off your dribble. No one is suggesting that the Pentium-M will be used in the power mac. Only the Pentium-M's technologies will be applied to future much more powerful chips for use in the PM's and PB's for that matter.

I disagree with you, I dont think we'll see a Pentium M derrivative in the Powermacs. I think we'll see something that has been developed from the Xeon processor line in the Powermacs. I'm sure I've read about quad cores somewhere.

The fact is the dual G5 Powermac doesnt compete against any P4 configed boxes, they compete against the Xeons and Optrons of this world. When a dual mac comes up against a P4 it kills the thing.

Personally I'm a powerbook user, so I'm all sweaty palmed at the prospect of a dual core Powerbook!! Just hope they dont screw us 12" Powerbook users over and give us some slow stripped down version of hte 15' Powerbook. I'm also hoping that the next 12" Powerbook will be ridiculously thin and weigh next to nothing!

Jay
p.s apologies for poor spelling, just did a clean install and haven't loaded word back onto my PB yet.

 

[latintraps]

Just Mac

Just keep calling it a Mac. We've never called it a Macibm. Just Mac

Just Mac
Just Mac