Pentium M and Yonah Processors in Upcoming Macs?

[danielwsmithee]

The Mac's "RISC CPU" meant something to a small but very important fraction of the Mac user base. These people were on fire about PowerPC vs. x86, RISC vs. CISC, and the platform wars in general....

A lot of people have mentioned the RISC vs. CISC debates that went on not tool long ago. I think a lot has changed in the market since that time. At that time RISC processors almost always saw better performance, because compilers were never very smart at optimizing code to take advantage of the more complex instruction sets. They did a great job of compiling down to simple instructions that ran very quickly.

Since that time compiler have progressed a lot, GCC 4.0 can make any code sing on a CISC chip!!

 

[danielwsmithee]

Pentium-M... c'mon Apple give us a break. While the P-M chips may be good for ibooks, powerbooks and the minis they aint gonna cut it for the big boy powermacs.
I meany you buy a powermac because your a power user and a lame Pentium-M will not cut it im afraid. I mean all you have to do is pick up any PC mag and see that for apps which need the grunt and horsepower (i.e 3d, CAD/CAm etc) and therefore what a powermac is needed for only the regular Pentium 4s will do, the 6xx or 8xx. The P-Ms cant keep up with the regular P-4s for pure power.

Hopefully apple is going to shoot itself in the foot AGAIN by selling us under powered pocessors.

Matt

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.

 

[dieselg4]

Personally, I hope they use the Intel Pentium D processors in Macintosh desktops; the Pentium M's will work well for PowerBooks and iBooks, but the frontside bus is only 400Mhz, a far cry from the 1.35Ghz FSB of the dual 2.7Ghz G5, or even the 667Mhz FSB of the 2.0 Ghz G5 in the iMac G5.

If Apple is going to make this move to Intel work, they need to either equal their current processor speeds or increase them.

I'd rather see a desktop version of the Pentium M's successor, witha much smaller and quieter heat sink and fan (as observed from the Tom's Hardware article, P-M vs P-4 etc.)

 

[dieselg4]

Pentium-M... c'mon Apple give us a break. While the P-M chips may be good for ibooks, powerbooks and the minis they aint gonna cut it for the big boy powermacs.
I meany you buy a powermac because your a power user and a lame Pentium-M will not cut it im afraid. I mean all you have to do is pick up any PC mag and see that for apps which need the grunt and horsepower (i.e 3d, CAD/CAm etc) and therefore what a powermac is needed for only the regular Pentium 4s will do, the 6xx or 8xx. The P-Ms cant keep up with the regular P-4s for pure power.

Hopefully apple is going to shoot itself in the foot AGAIN by selling us under powered pocessors.

Matt

It would appear (according to previously posted "sources" that Apple won't be using a Pentium M in the PowerMacs, but a future Pentium M derivative.

According to several articles, including the THG post, the Penitum M can more than keep up with the P4, even on a 2 year old motherboard and a substantial mhz disadvantage.

 

[AidenShaw]

will you have an 8 GiB laptop?

If they don't support 64 bit then will they actually go in a Powerbook? It would seem to me that Apple would want 64 bit support for the Powerbook line, but Intel says they aren't going to support it until it's needed. I think it's needed now, don't you?

Powerbook sales are going to drop like a stone until the Intel chips are ready.

Most of the 64-bit benefit won't be there unless you have more than 4 GiB of RAM. Unlikely in a portable for a few more years.

 

[broken_keyboard]

Most of the 64-bit benefit won't be there unless you have more than 4 GiB of RAM. Unlikely in a portable for a few more years.

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.

 

[nhkader]

New iBook and Powerbook

Apple will make a distinction between the Mac mini, iBook and Powerbook. The way I see it and it fits with the release of the chips is:

Mac Mini - Pentium M (single core)
iBook - Pentium M (single core)
Powerbook - Pentium M (Yonah - dual core)

There will thus be a decent differentiation between the iBooks and the PBs unlike the current G4 range. The iBooks will be very competitively priced. I cannot see any need for the Powerbooks to be 64bit as Tiger is perfectly at home on the G4.

Roll on new Powerbook.

 

[~Shard~]

3) Geeks who want the latest and greatest and now think that their iMac G5s now only have a $400 resale value because Intel based Macs will be coming out.

I'm between 1 and 3 but closer to 1 (I want the latest and greatest even though I understand having the latest and greatest PPC based will be fine for years to come)

Fair enough, I'm willing to include that one as well.

 

[SiliconAddict]

You do realize that the first shipments of mactels will be june next year.

And you do realize that Steve said the first Macintels will ship BY june of ’06. Not ON June of ’06.

 

[SPUY767]

The Yonah is an Excellent Choice.

THe Pentium M is an Excellent choice. It is an extremely efficient processor, and it smites even AMD's offerings, and AM has some pretty nifty chips, as far as power usage is concerned. Don't be surprised if the lower end desktop macs get M's as well. Who knows what apple's product line will look like in 2 years, but one thing is certain, the future is bright for apple. The only thing that concerns me is the numbskulls who yammer on about how terrible of an idea getting a PPC mac would be now. IBM may hit 3Ghz in a powermac by delivery of the first intel macs. Although a .3Ghz increase would be a stretch for IBM in a years time. (Sorry, that was a shameless jab) At any rate, Apple's future is practically shimmering.

 

[Gasu E.]

Incomplete

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

You left out:

- if it had to be x86, it should have been AMD

 

[iMeowbot]

And you do realize that Steve said the first Macintels will ship BY june of ’06. Not ON June of ’06.

Sure, but he also said the first 3 GHz G5s would ship by June '04....

 

[Quartz Extreme]

2006
iBook, Mac mini, eMac - Pentium M
PowerBook - Yonah/Jonah, Dual Core Pentium M
2007
iMac - Conroe, a 64-bit Yonah
PowerMac - Shavano, 64-bit, Dual-core

 

[AidenShaw]

but you forget

That's my hope. Because wouldn't it be funny if intel went the way IBM did for apple, and IBM took it's console expertise and turned it into an awesome PC chip, but microsoft couldn't support anything but X86?

You forget that Microsoft is running an NT-based system on the PowerPC Xbox 360....

You forget that Microsoft's NT-based Windows CE is supported on ARM, MIPS and x86 processors....

You forget that NT has been sold and supported for MIPS, PowerPC and Alpha processors....

You forget that XP and Windows 2003 are currently sold and supported on x86, x64 and Itanium processors....

Microsoft has always had NT running on multiple platforms.

Don't you suspect that somewhere in Redmond there are Windows XP systems running on PowerMac G5 systems? The expense of keeping these alternate architectures running would be a drop in the bucket for Microsoft....

 

[stockscalper]

A lot of revisionist history and reviewing going on with the Pentium class of chips. It's nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig. Pentium chips still equal crap no matter what kind of spin is put on them. Why do you think they aren't used in workstation mini frame computers? Why do you think Microsoft and Sony dumped Intel for their upcoming game stations?

You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

 

[Yebot]

A consumer will not be willing IMO to spend hundreds more for the Apple/OS X experience.

I disagree.

The average user only has one alternative to Mac - and that is Windows. I still think that Linux, while enjoying a sizable install-base, its still a non-alternative to the average soccer-mom.

By now, there are legions of PC users who aren't interested in daily, weekly, monthly and yearly fights against Windows virii, spyware and adware. [NOTE: Virii, spyware and adware attack the Windows OS, not Intel chips.] They wan't a machine that 'just works' and since you don't buy Macs from ill-informed BestBuy or CircuitCity salespeople anymore, the truth about OSX's superiority can be clear to the average consumer's visit to an Apple Store.

Icing on the cake: Apple has said that there <is/will be> no reason why people couldn't install Windoze on one of the new ApTel Macs.

So, for an extra C-note or two, the soccer-moms can get a computer that is better-looking, harder-working, easier-to-use AND will jump into 'Windows-Mode' to run a familar application if need be.

 

[ebunton]

I just realised that Apple can basically no longer compare their hardware performance to PC's, since they will be using the same hardware!

 

[Jmitch]

I'm actually down with this whole thing. I see no reason for Apple to not utilize Intel's chips and I see nothing wrong with Intel's chips. But what does this mean for Microsoft? I mean Windows will be able to run natively right on the Macintel. What does this all mean? Will Apple release a Mac OS X that is fully compatible with all Intel chips?

 

[Veldek]

I just realised that Apple can basically no longer compare their hardware performance to PC's, since they will be using the same hardware!

And they won't have a need to do so anymore!

 

[Mr Maui]

All Apple has to do to distinguish the new PB line from the old PB line is to slap an Intel Inside or Centrino sticker on it.

I'm betting that the Intel Inside sticker DOES NOT wind up on Apples. It would take away from the sleek, refined, professional appearance and I bet Steve worked that out in his deal with them.

 

[broken_keyboard]

It's nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig.

Haha! That's great, I'll remember that one. However the IA32 architecture isn't complete crap, it's quite clever how th3y added the 32-bit stuff without breaking anything. Of course it will never be as clean as something designed as 32-bit from scratch.

 

[broken_keyboard]

I'm betting that the Intel Inside sticker DOES NOT wind up on Apples. It would take away from the sleek, refined, professional appearance and I bet Steve worked that out in his deal with them.

Exactly. Macs will still be Macs, but they will also be available as a sleek type of hardware for PC users like Alienware. Alienware don't use stickers I believe...

 

[broken_keyboard]

I just realised that Apple can basically no longer compare their hardware performance to PC's, since they will be using the same hardware!

Ja... but since it is the same hardware, it will be pretty clear which OS imposes the highest overhead on apps. And I suspect it will be OS X, as a consequence of it's extra security. However that is a price I'm willing to pay...

 

[Mr Maui]

as a public company doesnt apple have to ask its shareholders before doing something like this?

and if they think it will make their stock collapse for next year or so, cant they tell apple to reverse this decision?

i just dont know what percentage of apple is publiclly owned these days, can anyone answer that?

A public company does not have to ask the shareholders if they can change the direction or initiative of the company any more than the government has to ask taxpayers if they can increase their taxes. If stockholders do not like the new direction of the company ... then SELL ... in the same way that if Citizens do not like the job that the government is doing ... ELECT someone else. It is the job of the Board of Directors to decide the direction of the company and the goal is to keep making money for the stockholders. Are bad decisions ever made? Of course. But I doubt they are made with the desire to kill the company and destroy the stockholders (and I'm not talking about deceptive accounting like Enron and the like).

 

[Platform]

You forget that Microsoft is running an NT-based system on the PowerPC Xbox 360....

You forget that Microsoft's NT-based Windows CE is supported on ARM, MIPS and x86 processors....

You forget that NT has been sold and supported for MIPS, PowerPC and Alpha processors....

You forget that XP and Windows 2003 are currently sold and supported on x86, x64 and Itanium processors....

Microsoft has always had NT running on multiple platforms.

Don't you suspect that somewhere in Redmond there are Windows XP systems running on PowerMac G5 systems? The expense of keeping these alternate architectures running would be a drop in the bucket for Microsoft....

OFFT

How did you get your 'tar' to be 110x129 Pixles I want too