Quad Processor Intel Mac?

[Frobozz]

1. You have it backwards. Cocoa apps will be the easiest to port. Carbon apps not written in Xcode will require the most effort to port.

2. The Adobe apps are still Carbon, as far as I know, so it'll take more effort than most. Adobe was pretty slow in porting their apps to OS X. I'd imagine the same for porting to Intel. There's a reason Steve demoed photoshop on Rosetta.

3. The toughest apps to port will be apps that rely on Altivec for performance. Rosetta does not run Altivec apps, nor any apps that require G4 or G5. So a lot of pro apps will need to be re-written if they are to run at all on Intel. Not a trivial task.

Doesn't Rosetta run non-altivec branches if they exist instead of simply not running an app with Altivec in it at all? This can't be signiciantly different from having a g3 (non altivec) and g4 branch of code. Or for that matter, a G5 optimized branch (ala Firefox, etc.) At that point the work load has to be about as similar to port to their vector math abstraction libraries as it would to do branch logic and two code trees, right?

 

[strydr]

I've actually used servers with PCIe x 16 riser boards in them.

Ya, but that'll be for things like RAID cards and Fibre interconnects, not video cards..

 

[Kaborka]

This is no fake, I think. It's is probably a hacked OS X version running on a quad dual Core XEON system, Hyperthreading disabled as OS X does not and will not support it. Intel did release this CPU today:
http://download.intel.com/design/Xeon/datashts/30915801.pdf

Kaborka

 

[shamino]

This is no fake, I think. It's is probably a hacked OS X version running on a quad dual Core XEON system, Hyperthreading disabled as OS X does not and will not support it.

Why do you say OS X will not support HT? Are you leaking internal information you're not allowed to disclose? Or are you just making stuff up?

 

[igetbanned]

Why do you say OS X will not support HT? Are you leaking internal information you're not allowed to disclose? Or are you just making stuff up?

Inquiring minds would like to know.......

 

[Kaborka]

Why do you say OS X will not support HT?

Simply because Intel's new CPU generations will not come with HT. No need for Apple to support it.

Kaborka

 

[strummert]

Does the ibook issus on november and there will be an new one coming or will they be updated in a week or month?

 

[ThomasJefferson]

Weel, how long till someone asks, "but is it fast enough to run photoshop?"

 

[strummert]

I have a fast xp notebook and I want to switch, but I don't want to buy something slow. Some mac users told me that it isn't a good deal -> too slow Even for normal tasks. They mentioned the slowness of the powerpc (after age).

 

[Bonte]

.=.

i think it is fake , 4 cpus ?? what will it cost ,a right rip off i bet

Dual core yes , dual Cpu yes but not quad cpu from apple

Years on end there have been persistent rumors of quad cpu powermacs i tend to believe them especially now when we see them more and more in the PC world. Pentium is far better in multi threading cpu's so maybe where in luck.

 

[AidenShaw]

2.8 GHz HT Xeon - $240

Xeons in the PMs would be a total waste of money.

Starting at $1043/each (per thousand).

That's an 'Apple Tax' for that arse.

http://www.centralcomputer.com/products.asp?pline=HCPUI

^Intel Xeon 2.8GHz, 1M Cache, 800MHz FSB, 604pin $239.95
^Intel Xeon 3.0GHz, 1M Cache, 800MHz FSB, 604pin $329.95
^Intel Xeon 3.2GHz, 1M Cache, 800MHz FSB, 604pin $359.95

 

[Alvin777]

Quad processor would be great. I hope OS X by that time will have the technology to use all that CPU where applications will not be re-written for four CPUs. Assuming that each of those quad processor is 7 or more cores, once they achieve that, it's easy to have 8 CPUs and beyond. Not only will the MacIntels have the capability to have more than 7 cores but also more than 4 CPUs. Not only that but Intel has more allowance to have a faster frequency. I hope they also create the technology again that, if you wanted to add another 4 CPU to the 4 that you already have in the upcoming MacIntel, the bus is so fast that Apple will just created an add-on card and make proper use of those express slots. That is unlimited power. All these plus efficiency in energy It's becoming clearer than Intel's more superior CPU roadmap will clearly pass the 7 core of the PowerPC (used on Playstation3, which I guess that would mean that people will think twice if they would like to hack OS X to a single 7 core Playstation3 or the other way around, hack the Playstation3 games to the Quad MacIntel. It'll be fast coz' it's not emulation at all). I believe this rumor that it is a Quad because it's Intel, it's cheaper, it'll still be priced the same as a Dual CPU PowerMac or be slightly cheaper. This is gonna' be exciting. It's a good time to save for it now.

Imagine being able to use all those CPU without special apps, being able to run Windows and Linux natively on top OS X transparently should Apple apply the technology they did with OS 9 on OS X, the no need to depend on the GPU to render things. Everybody wins, Microsoft wins, Linux wins and most especially Apple wins as I predict people will switch very quickly to OS X once they release an AppleWorks Office that is flawless with working with MS Office's file formats, specifically .xls, .mdb and .doc
2006 will definitely be Apple's collection time, Microsoft's time might be due, God is just.

Read more articles or link to pre-order your Nintendo Revolution, Playstation3 and Xbox 360. White Playstation Portable (PSP) at:

http://www.applecatholic.com



God bless,
Alvin

 

[Quartz Extreme]

they demonstrated how quickly current apps could be ported over to Intel (was it Mathematica?)

"To be fair, there is a lot of architechture in Mathematica that makes this possible, your mileage may vary. But it's pretty good when the biggest problem from your port is to figure out what to do with the rest of your weekend." - Theo Gray, WWDC 2005

Many major apps, likely including Adobe Suite, etc. have probably been ported.

"Porting the AltiVec code to Intel's SSE can be equivalent to a full rewrite -- two different code bases need to be maintained, tested, and qualified," - Dr. Markus Fest, Elgato CEO (Their capture products make extensive use of Altivec)

"Steve (Jobs) likes to trivialize the process and make it seem easy, but moving the apps over is not that easy...Getting over to MacTel is work...It's not that easy because you have to compile the app, you have to test it. If you look at most testing cycles, for any complex cycle, for any complex product, that's three or four months until it's out...I think you'll find us doing what we did with OS X, which is to enhance the product and support the new environment at the same time. If you look at our product cycles for products like Photoshop and Creative Suite, they tend to be in the 18- to 24-month cycle, which means that you're talking about either Q4 of '06 or Q1 of '07 - Bruce Chizen CEO Adobe

Rosetta will allow the slower transition apps to continue to run, so I can't agree that this is a valid argument. Sorry

Rosetta is okay for small time programs, but it will emulate at the equivalent to a low end G3. Have you seen a 3D game in Rosetta? Have you used Photoshop in Rosetta? (It did take a while to load at WWDC 2005) It smooths out the transition, but it cannot be a replacement for a real port of a mission-critical application.

Let's not sugarcoat the issue. Will some developers have an easy time? Yes. Are there are some big hurdles that need to be overcome for others? Yes. Can we make generalizations? No.

Transitions aren't easy, but I'm confident that this will continue to strengthen the Mac platform, and enable Apple to deliver some exciting new products.

 

[igetbanned]

Simply because Intel's new CPU generations will not come with HT. No need for Apple to support it.

Kaborka

'Intel also has certain processors that combine the benefits of dual-core with the benefits of HT Technology to deliver support for simultaneous execution of four threads. These include the Intel® Pentium® Processor Extreme Edition 840 that is shipping today as well as future server processors that will ship in 2006.

Intel has been working with leading software vendors to enable multithreaded code that can take full advantage of the increased capabilities of multi-core processors. As a result, we've established extensive multithreading tools, resources, and expertise that have helped drive thread-optimization across a wide range of applications. '

You're probably are just talking out of your arse.

 

[strummert]

I'm lost

 

[igetbanned]

http://www.centralcomputer.com/products.asp?pline=HCPUI

^Intel Xeon 2.8GHz, 1M Cache, 800MHz FSB, 604pin $239.95
^Intel Xeon 3.0GHz, 1M Cache, 800MHz FSB, 604pin $329.95
^Intel Xeon 3.2GHz, 1M Cache, 800MHz FSB, 604pin $359.95

Those ARE NOT the fastest chips.

Go to intel's site, there are 48 different 'Xeon' chip configurations.

It's after 5pm, but I can call my distrubutor tomorrow and see what he has to say about pricing and availability of the latest chip.

I'm going by what I read in an article. Even one of Intel's own press releases says:

'The Dual-Core Intel Xeon processor 2.80 GHz is available for $1,043 in 1,000-unit quantities. Pricing for the forthcoming dual-core server processors will be provided within the next 60 days.'

Those 'forthcoming' chips are the Xeon MP's.

 

[Kaborka]

'Intel also has certain processors that combine the benefits of dual-core with the benefits of HT Technology to deliver support for simultaneous execution of four threads. These include the Intel® Pentium® Processor Extreme Edition 840 that is shipping today as well as future server processors that will ship in 2006.

Intel has been working with leading software vendors to enable multithreaded code that can take full advantage of the increased capabilities of multi-core processors. As a result, we've established extensive multithreading tools, resources, and expertise that have helped drive thread-optimization across a wide range of applications. '

You're probably are just talking out of your arse.

Probably not. These are all P4 based systems with the names Paxville and Dempsey scheduled for 2005/06 and the last incarnation of Intel's Netburst architecture. Apple will not use them. The new generation (Yonah, Sossaman, Woodcrest and Conroe), going to appear in MacIntels, will not support HT.

Kaborka

 

[igetbanned]

Probably not. These are all P4 based systems with the names Paxville and Dempsey scheduled for 2005/06 and the last incarnation of Intel's Netburst architecture. Apple will not use them. The new generation (Yonah, Sossaman, Woodcrest and Conroe), going to appear in MacIntels, will not support HT.

Kaborka

'shipping today as well as future server processors that will ship in 2006.'

Hmmmmmmm.

 

[Kaborka]

'shipping today as well as future server processors that will ship in 2006.'

Hmmmmmmm.

iBooks & Power Book & Mini: Yonah (Q1/06, no HT)
Power Mac: Conroe (2H06, no HT)
Xserve: Sossman Q1/06 (Server version of Yonah) or Woodcrest (2H06, no HT)

Kaborka

 

[HiRez]

It's the special Pixar edition. I bet this never ships but just as a prototype to see that it is possible. The price between a 2 CPU motherboard and 4 CPU motherboard is huge (granted it was years ago when I last checked). Makes those 30 inch displays look cheap.

Sure, but is it cheaper than two separate, dual CPUs? Probably not, that's the point. Also, let's say I'm doing 3D rendering in Cinema4D. It supports network rendering, however as soon as I go to multiple boxes, I have to set up each box with client rendering node software, deal with IP addresses and networking, wait for finished frames to be collected and assembled, etc. Plus, it's more efficient to set up a separate machine as the master render server, rather than using my "work" machine for that. It gets complicated. Not only that but certain kinds of renders can't be done using network rendering, and some don't work reliably (GI/radiosity). But, if all my render CPUs are on one machine, it's pretty much a one-click process and I don't have to think about it. So even though quad CPUs aren't for everyone, I'd much rather have one quad-processor Mac than two duals or four singles.

 

[digitalbiker]

"To be fair, there is a lot of architechture in Mathematica that makes this possible, your mileage may vary. But it's pretty good when the biggest problem from your port is to figure out what to do with the rest of your weekend." - Theo Gray, WWDC 2005



"Porting the AltiVec code to Intel's SSE can be equivalent to a full rewrite -- two different code bases need to be maintained, tested, and qualified," - Dr. Markus Fest, Elgato CEO (Their capture products make extensive use of Altivec)

"Steve (Jobs) likes to trivialize the process and make it seem easy, but moving the apps over is not that easy...Getting over to MacTel is work...It's not that easy because you have to compile the app, you have to test it. If you look at most testing cycles, for any complex cycle, for any complex product, that's three or four months until it's out...I think you'll find us doing what we did with OS X, which is to enhance the product and support the new environment at the same time. If you look at our product cycles for products like Photoshop and Creative Suite, they tend to be in the 18- to 24-month cycle, which means that you're talking about either Q4 of '06 or Q1 of '07 - Bruce Chizen CEO Adobe



Rosetta is okay for small time programs, but it will emulate at the equivalent to a low end G3. Have you seen a 3D game in Rosetta? Have you used Photoshop in Rosetta? (It did take a while to load at WWDC 2005) It smooths out the transition, but it cannot be a replacement for a real port of a mission-critical application.

Let's not sugarcoat the issue. Will some developers have an easy time? Yes. Are there are some big hurdles that need to be overcome for others? Yes. Can we make generalizations? No.

Transitions aren't easy, but I'm confident that this will continue to strengthen the Mac platform, and enable Apple to deliver some exciting new products.

Well said. Great Post!

I think too many forum posts buy in to the SJ company line and try to minimize the effort invloved in any transition.

Sure, it will be very simple for some developers. Especially the small shop small niche sales application. However the really big pro software Application houses will most likely be a lot slower. They have more of a user base to support, likely more compex/ larger code base, and probably a lot more testing.

There is no way we can know how difficult it will be to port which applications unless we work evryday with the development and maintenance of all those applications.

 

[hyperpasta]

Exactly

if it's dual core, the software would probably count each core as a physical processor, since they pretty much are. the hyperthreading would show up as non-physical.

so this system (if not fake) is likely a dual core, dual processor, hyperthreading intel mac

Exactly. This makes perfect sense and I bet we'll see it. Two dual-core processors are logical. Add hyper-threading to the mix, and the computer sees.. 8 processors.

 

[javiercr]

Graphics card?

I bet you it still has a Radeon 9600

 

[AidenShaw]

Those ARE NOT the fastest chips.

You didn't specify the "fastest" model

BTW, what's the price point of a 2.5GHz 970MP? All things are relative, you know....

 

[SiliconAddict]

OK I'm kinda freaked out now. I haven't been to Macrumors since this morning and as soon as I get here and see the quad CPU story The Imperial March (Darth Vadar's Theme) starts playing on iTunes. Its a sign damn it!!