Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
'Santa Rosa' Shipping from Intel Next Month (May)
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
X2600
for the X2600 , i can't find much information about this GPU ,
is this GPU already installed on laptops?!
for the X2600 , i can't find much information about this GPU ,
is this GPU already installed on laptops?!
Hooray! I have a disciple!
But I don't understand why people want a fast GPU that uses way too much power, and uses old technology??? I'd prefer a HD2600 to a X1900 any day. And the HD2600 will probably be faster.
And with the LED/LCD screen and low power Turbo Cache, Apple can splurge a bit in power and stick in an awesome GPU!
Then again, last time I had disciples, I was disappointed. I think it was the Merom MBP update, when I was hoping for an X1800 : (
The HD2600 (Not X2600, which has had a name change) has not been officially announced yet. Apparrently people under NDAs have been briefed on it, (like yesterday) for its official release a week or two into May.
Well that would be true if you ran them full tilt. But since Apple doesn't run the X1600 full tilt what makes you think they would run the others full tilt? That and with the added PS/VS/ROPS you probably dont even have to run full tilt to get any benefit.
The X2600 (HD2600) is also a desktop part. You guys should drop by Beyond3d.com they usually have all the good info on the new GPU's (Most of it uber technical though).
Groovy. So whats the problem? When you boot a computer and start an application it gets loaded into the computers memory ram and then runs from that, right?
All the HD drive does is to store the OS and applications prior to use. So whats the big deal about why not Apple can't store OS and apps on a memory stick and boot from that?
Episteme, my german stopped at high school too. Was ist los and In der bibliotek is about it. For the rest theres online phrase dictionaries.
I can't wait for SR. I just hope that Apple releases some products in May-July that make the wait worth it.
Since we won't see a midrange tower, here's to hoping there's a 24" iMac Pro.
2.xx (highest option available)
2GB RAM (minimum)
500GB HDD
7600GT (unless a better card is an option)
Anodized Aluminum to match Mac Pro and ACDs
Configuration available in stores so it doesn't have to be CTO'd.
Since we won't see a midrange tower, here's to hoping there's a 24" iMac Pro.
2.xx (highest option available)
2GB RAM (minimum)
500GB HDD
7600GT (unless a better card is an option)
Anodized Aluminum to match Mac Pro and ACDs
Configuration available in stores so it doesn't have to be CTO'd.
Not really. Pieces get loaded as they are needed, rather than filling RAM with the entire OS or application. Those Photoshop filters sit on the disk until you run them.
In addition, the virtual memory manager brings the pages of the apps in as they are referenced - using a filter doesn't do a monolithic load of the filter, but selectively brings in the code according to the code paths taken during that run.
In addition, if memory runs low and the virtual memory manager decides to remove pages from memory - it will realize that the read-only code pages are still in the application file. There's no need to write those to the virtual memory file, they can be re-read from the application file if needed again.
In other words, there's constant access to OS and application executable files.
Often, an application also has data to be read and written
.As long as it can read and write to the USB drive as a normal disk, it can.
Note, however, that Robson Technology is used as a large non-volatile cache - not as a solid state disk. The speedup comes from the fact that the cache does not have a moving head - the access time for blocks in cache is much faster than for blocks on the disk if the disk head has to move. The disk, however, is faster for large reads and writes. A totally flash-based system would often be slower than a hard disk system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robson_flash_memory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReadyBoost
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReadyDrive
I really don't get all these posts that seem to be claiming Apple has been dropping the ball by having an X1600 in the 15" MBP, and that it s hould have an X1800 or GeForce 7900GS.
This is ridiculous.... NO-ONE makes a 15" laptop (of any size, much less a 1" thick one) with an X1800 or GeForce 7900GS. The most powerful 15" laptop currently available is the Asus G1, with the GeForce 7700.... and that is also a behemoth of 15" laptop that is very thick and almost 7 pounds, and still runs very hot.
And the GeForce 7700 isn't THAT much more powerful than an X1600 or GeForce 7600.
Apple can only do so much with what hardware is available. But this idea that Apple is so behind the times when there aren't really that many more powerful 15" notebooks out there doesn't seem right to me.
To criticize Apple for not doing the impossible (sticking a GeForce 7900GS in a 15" screen 1" thick laptop) seems especially unfair.
If you want a more powerful GPU, wait for the upcoming DirectX 10 mobile GPU's. The GeForce 8600 Go (which will be available in 15" notebooks) is said to be on par, performance wise, with the 7900GS. Presumably there should be similar performance gains in ATI's equivalent chip.
Presumably Apple will be using one of these new parts to offer the same performance increases.
-Zadillo
This is ridiculous.... NO-ONE makes a 15" laptop (of any size, much less a 1" thick one) with an X1800 or GeForce 7900GS. The most powerful 15" laptop currently available is the Asus G1, with the GeForce 7700.... and that is also a behemoth of 15" laptop that is very thick and almost 7 pounds, and still runs very hot.
And the GeForce 7700 isn't THAT much more powerful than an X1600 or GeForce 7600.
Apple can only do so much with what hardware is available. But this idea that Apple is so behind the times when there aren't really that many more powerful 15" notebooks out there doesn't seem right to me.
To criticize Apple for not doing the impossible (sticking a GeForce 7900GS in a 15" screen 1" thick laptop) seems especially unfair.
If you want a more powerful GPU, wait for the upcoming DirectX 10 mobile GPU's. The GeForce 8600 Go (which will be available in 15" notebooks) is said to be on par, performance wise, with the 7900GS. Presumably there should be similar performance gains in ATI's equivalent chip.
Presumably Apple will be using one of these new parts to offer the same performance increases.
-Zadillo
better than x1600?
i haven't seen a 15" notebook with a better graphics card, but there is a 17" alienware with dual 512 mb 7900 gs.
http://www.alienware.com/product_de...-LT-AURORA-M-9700&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT#pdp-nav
But it is 1.8" thick
i haven't seen a 15" notebook with a better graphics card, but there is a 17" alienware with dual 512 mb 7900 gs.
http://www.alienware.com/product_de...-LT-AURORA-M-9700&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT#pdp-nav
But it is 1.8" thick
Macbooks need to be updated sooner than late summer!
Go!
The iMacs and minis are even more overdue. No reason why SR should not be in a new Mac within a few weeks of May 8. Apple must be a 1st tier customer of Intel and have access to all of its tech fairly early in the development cycle.
And now for something completely different. Has anyone else noticed that MR is a bit quiet lately?
There's also the GeForce Go 8400 and GeForce Go 8300, both of which might end up in some <15" Santa Rosa notebooks...
Yeah, true.... and I think they've already been seen in some lower-cost 15" Santa Rosa notebook specs (sort of like how HP uses only a GeForce 7400 in their current 15" Pavillion laptops).
It should be interesting to see what the performance level of the 8400 Go is especially; assuming it's more powerful than a 7400, but not as powerful as the GeForce Go 8600, it would be pretty nice if it offered performance somewhere along the lines of the current GeForce 7600. Frankly that would be pretty impressive, as it would allow some pretty nice performance in machines like the Sony SZ and Dell XPSM1210, for example.
OK, How about this.
I see no reason why Apple would want to put in a X1800, X1900, Go 7900, etc in the Macbook Pro of any size. There is little point.
It seems to be a choice for Apple between sticking with the proven but slow X1600, and either the Go 8600 or Mobility HD2600. These are far more likely to give really decent improvements in performance, and hopefully won't draw much more power than the X1600. They are the next generation GPU, that can run DX10. The Go7900GS can not. Perhaps Apple will use some of the new technology in some sort of Apple version of DX10?
I see no reason why Apple would want to put in a X1800, X1900, Go 7900, etc in the Macbook Pro of any size. There is little point.
It seems to be a choice for Apple between sticking with the proven but slow X1600, and either the Go 8600 or Mobility HD2600. These are far more likely to give really decent improvements in performance, and hopefully won't draw much more power than the X1600. They are the next generation GPU, that can run DX10. The Go7900GS can not. Perhaps Apple will use some of the new technology in some sort of Apple version of DX10?
I think most of the frustrations is you are getting a high end notebook with a midgrade graphics solution. To be honest if I paid 1999 for a notebook it should come with the best graphics you can find (for the price). When people point towards getting a notebook that has 2 gig of ram and a larger hard drive I get kind of confused. The midrange MBP has the 256mb X1600 which is really it's only advantage over the cheaper model (the ram and the hd can be upgraded later possibly for a cheaper price [maybe]). The graphics card? Not so easy to upgrade that (especially since Apple refuses to use MXM). Shoot even on the 17 inch MBP they could have used the X1800 to further assert Apples leetness in notebook design.
On the DX10 thing. So far there is no equivelent OGL profile to do some of the eefects, like the geometry shaders. Does Apple allow the vender to update the OGL ICD? I know there are EXT's that allow access to those special functions, but there is no universal way of doing it yet. IMHO, that (and the complete lack of the software layer) is why D3d is easier to use.
I would be interested in seeing if Apple could come up with something that the IHV's (ie AMD + Nvidia) would go for.
in the high grade notebook market there are two classes: desktop replacement and thin and light. DTRs sacrifice mobility for greater power and features and the thin and lights sacrifice features to make themselves more portable and usually better looking. Apple only offers laptops in the thin and light class.
Ah, interesting. I can see the conflicting interest there. Although in the 17" model they still could have used the 7900GS (only 3 watts more than the X1600 at stock clocks).
I don't know, there might be other reasons an X1800 couldn't be used there (assuming they would use another ATI part). I've only seen the 7900GS in the Inspiron 1705 and the Toshiba P105, both of which are much heavier and thicker than a 17" MBP. I haven't seen any 1" thick 17" laptops that feature a 7900GS.
Neither have I. Maybe Apple will blaze a trail in that arena
.EDIT:Found this link. It has a decent list of the mobile GPU solutions. Some even have power requirements listed.