Upcoming Intel Details Leak

[wizard]

I hate to break the news to you but all indications are that the latest chipsets from Intel, those support the 800MHz FSB are some of the best that Intel has come out with in a long time. Many are reporting very easy over clocking of the FSB. So it may not take a new chip set just an uprated device for themain stream market. Also realize that Intel quad pumps the bus so in realty the MHz values are actually lower that the Apple/IBM Bus.

While Apple/IBM have an interesting implementation of a FSB, it is by no means perfect. Also a fast FSB will not make up for all CPU short comeings.

Dave

Originally posted by Mosco
Oh and about the FSB on the new Pentiums, I would think they would have to release a new chipset if they wanted to come out with a FSB higher than 800Mhz. I doubt we will see a new chipset since they their current chipsets are only a couple months old.

 

[thies]

For me whatever runs a decent unix cheapest wins. G5s lose big times in that respect. 20% pricecut on G5s and I'd stop laughing.

 

[wizard]

Re: Re: Apple will never catch up in GHz, worse yet....

I doubt very much that the G5 would have much to offer at 1.2 GHz over the improved G4. The power disapation of its support circuits would be a real killer.

That does not mean that Apple should not strive to get a G5 into a laptop ASAP. The problem is that the vast majority of the market would be better served by a power conserving G4 implementation. With laptops you have really to big user groups, power users and battery users. The people who really run on batteries need all the run time they can get. They won't get that from a G5 implemented as the PowerMac has been.

Thanks
Dave

Originally posted by Abstract
Agreed, agreed, and agreed. Apple better treat other companies nicer. They're sounding a bit arrogant. I have thought this for a while now.




I agree with this as well. I have always said that while Apple seemed to have the lead in notebooks, the Centrino probably took that lead away --- and it has. The only thing I like about Apple notebooks is the iBook. It beats every notebook in it's price range, in my opinion, or it is at least competitive. But I have seen some Centrino notebooks that have simply outclassed the Powerbook line completely, and all at a price below the 15" PB.

The only thing I disagree with is that Apple will be without a G5 in their PB line until January at the earliest. Sorry, but they could just fit a 1.2GHz G5 in there and appease the masses. Nobody is asking Apple to stick in a dual proc 2.0GHz, just a 1.2GHz G5 that can compete with the Centrino. At this point, I'd settle for that, or even a 1 GHz G5. Whatever. Just get your "new" chip in your products and move them. Having them in a notebook also helps promote the G5. People who aren't looking for a desktop (like myself) don't really care if a G5 can be had in a desktop. I'm only interested in the laptops, and if notebook sales are beating out desktop sales, it is probably more important for Apple to get their notebook line up to par, than it is for them to compete with Intel machines only on Apple's tip-top-end desktops. People want notebooks.

 

[acj]

Re: Price, frequency and Intel road map

Originally posted by eric67

GHz myth : yes I agree that this the main strength for Intel, increasing the frequency makes people thinking that it goes faster, well if you look at the Prescott P4, it will top at 3.4GHz, indeed if you increase frequency you will not see any gain for performance. Just look at the gain obtained between a P4 3.0 and 3.2 GHz, it is nothing!!!!!!!!!111
So then will come Tejas, well to be able to keep going with frequency, then Intel has planed 26 steps pipeline for Tejas , the follow up, Nehalem, will have 38 steps pipeline. in other world to keep with performance, Intel will have to increase frequency, and the only way to do it is to have the smallest process coupled to high frequency. .... but the real gain on performance will of course be lower than the GHz increase. Why do you think Intel introduce hyper threading??? because they know that they are getting close to the top frequency for the P4 Northwood!!!!!!! (3.4 GHz)
so they are looking to other way to increase performance, than GHz increase.....

This just isn't true. And the new P4 core STARTS at 3.4 GHz, may top out at 4-5 GHz. And it is FASTER PER MHz than the old cores. In fact the newest available 3.2GHz is ALSO faster per MHz. Intel is indeed making more efficient CPU's, MHz-wise.

"MHz myth" is more of a marketing strategy than "MHz." Pipeline length, etc. means squat as does MHz.

 

[nuckinfutz]

The only advantage that a G5 running at 1.2 GHz in a laptope would be the addressing capabilities, in most other ways newer 1.4 GHz G4's would beat it.

That would be assuming that the G5 is equal to the G4 in handling instruction. 8 Queue 5 dispatch and Dual FPU still means and advantage over the similary clocked G4. I don't know how you can argue otherwise.

I hate to break the news to you but all indications are that the latest chipsets from Intel, those support the 800MHz FSB are some of the best that Intel has come out with in a long time.

That still doesn't help Intel compete at the $3000 level with a Dual Gigahertz FSB. The Canterwood(875) chipset is nice. But no more than the G5 Motherboard(which is much more complex).

I doubt very much that the G5 would have much to offer at 1.2 GHz over the improved G4. The power disapation of its support circuits would be a real killer.

Again...no empirical evidence other than the profound "I doubt". You have no technical info to back up your statements at all. The burden of proof is with you .

This just isn't true. And the new P4 core STARTS at 3.4 GHz, may top out at 4-5 GHz. And it is FASTER PER MHz than the old cores. In fact the newest available 3.2GHz is ALSO faster per MHz. Intel is indeed making more efficient CPU's, MHz-wise.

Enough talk. Show us where Prescott is faster per megahertz. The IPC of the Pentium 4 has always been low. All i'm hearing is a bunch of Intel blathering conjecture with no info to back it up.

 

[Chobit]

Price?

It is supposed to cost $637 in volume quantities. How does that compare to the G4/G5/current pentiums? I thought I remembered the G4s being cheaper than that, and the G5/970/GPULs are supposed to be cheaper than the G4s. Does anyone know the actual numbers?

 

[eric67]

Re: Re: Price, frequency and Intel road map

Originally posted by acj
This just isn't true. And the new P4 core STARTS at 3.4 GHz, may top out at 4-5 GHz. And it is FASTER PER MHz than the old cores. In fact the newest available 3.2GHz is ALSO faster per MHz. Intel is indeed making more efficient CPU's, MHz-wise.

"MHz myth" is more of a marketing strategy than "MHz." Pipeline length, etc. means squat as does MHz.

Well let's make it clear.
The current P4 Northwood will top at 3.4GHz, this is clear and certain
the next P4 generation aka Prescott will top at the beginning at 3.4GHz, launching date Nov, 11th 2003; but indeed it is suppose to hit 4-5GHz at the max..... really at the max.....
Actually Intel will have to change the processor socket to be able to continue with increasing frequency future so called Socket T.
but this also mean complete different motherboard and chipset... whereas the last chipset for FSB800 is just hitting the market since few weeks.....
For sure mobo manufacturer do not have really time to optimize all components for each Intel P4 generation.....
Look, in 6 month new socket for the Prescott and the current top mobo for P4, ASUS P4P800 or P4C800 Deluxe will be completly "old".... well but let see at the real performance gain, not those CPU benchmarks.....
the Current top P4 Northwood, cost around $650 / processor for batch of 1000.....

 

[Phinius]

Originally posted by acj
Your estimates of power may be closer to the truth, however what do you mean, "starting this month?"

Motorola should already have smaller process size G4s in production and Apple will more than likely very soon announce updates to the consumer desktop along with all the notebook computers.

Besides, why would you compare a non-existent system to a top of the line system?

Because there will be much faster G4s available for Apple's consumer line starting this month. The G5 is essentially freeing up the topend G4s for the consumer line and since Motorola is moving the G4 to a smaller process there will be much faster iMacs and notebook computers announced before the end of the month.

 

[ColdZero]

Originally posted by ffakr
Huh?
the G5 maxes out at around 45 watts while the P4 currently puts out 65 watts and the Itanium is over 120 watts.

try again.

I guess that specially designed cooling system with a whole bunch of fans is there for show. While I look over to my 3.06 P4 in a SB51G www.shuttle.com which has 2 fans in the entire system, including the processor and video card. Or that the entire enclosure has to have holes in it to move sufficient air so it doesn't overheat. P4s also are in laptops, and have been for a long time, the G5 won't be appearing in one anytime soon as stated by Apple, because of heat. Where do you find the 2.0ghz G5 specs? The highest thermal specs I have found are on the 1.8. That wattage is for the Itanium 1, what about the Itanium 2?

 

[nuckinfutz]

Originally posted by ColdZero
I guess that specially designed cooling system with a whole bunch of fans is there for show. While I look over to my 3.06 P4 in a SB51G www.shuttle.com which has 2 fans in the entire system, including the processor and video card. Or that the entire enclosure has to have holes in it to move sufficient air so it doesn't overheat. P4s also are in laptops, and have been for a long time, the G5 won't be appearing in one anytime soon as stated by Apple, because of heat. Where do you find the 2.0ghz G5 specs? The highest thermal specs I have found are on the 1.8. That wattage is for the Itanium 1, what about the Itanium 2?

LOL. Shuttle?? Please I've heard plenty of stories about the Shuttles overheating .

Do you really want me to find more?

Don't write checks your ass can't cash. I've never heard of a G4 system shutting down due to overheating and I doubt a G5 will.

 

[AhmedFaisal]

Originally posted by nuckinfutz
LOL. Shuttle?? Please I've heard plenty of stories about the Shuttles overheating .

Do you really want me to find more?

Don't write checks your ass can't cash. I've never heard of a G4 system shutting down due to overheating and I doubt a G5 will.

Besides the fact, the shuttle's are way too damn loud even with the newer heatpipe cooling system. There is similar designs (although more stereo component like) that utilize VIA Epia M 10000 boards that are passive cooled and do not have a single fan and noise insulated drives. I am using one of those in my livingroom. Hush Technologies builds such a device.
Cheers,

Ahmed

 

[MacCoaster]

Re: Re: Comparisons?

Originally posted by Waluigi
Hahahaha! I couldn't have put it better. No matter how fast intel makes their processors, they still will run windows, which completely cripples their ability to be useful.

--Waluigi

Well, Stevie's other company, Pixar, uses Intel processors and Linux. No Windows. Since when does anyone have to have Windows to run an Intel. And they're being useful, rendering kick ass films for Disney.

 

[Fredo Viola]

Originally posted by VIREBEL661
I think the next couple of years are going to be exciting for we Mac users! Stay tuned....

Thank you!!! Let's keep the chins up and eyes focused on the gorgeous potential this new hardware offers.

That said, it's probably too late for Apple to be "nicer" to the 3rd party monsters, such as Adobe. And it probably doesn't matter anyway. With FCP, DVDSP, Logic, Shake, iPhoto, iMovie, etc... they can send chocolates and flowers by the barrel to the 3rd parties. They are still the enemy for stealing away the business with excellent affordable software. It IS scary to see Adobe pull support. And I'm pretty terrified it's going to work and Apple's prof market is going to shrink even more drastically than it already has.

The last two years HAVE been embarassing, and G4s ARE NOT, and HAVE NOT BEEN fast enough to compete in these lower-high-end multi-media markets. That's the truth. Folks that say otherwise just don't know.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Yes it's sad to see Adobe catch a blackeye. However Apple said it want the Mac to be a frontrunner for Digital Video and sadly...Premiere was not helping that situation.

The important think of note is that Apple is focused on Digital Video and the Emagic purchase was along the same veing.

Back on Topic. I don't dispute that Intel has nice chips coming up but it's foolish for Wintel fans to think Intel will maintain the same type of speed advantage they've had over the last 3 years.

This is a whole new ballgame. The G5 architecture is nice and it has legs. This will help the whole Mac lineup.

 

[Java]

Re: Re: Comparisons?

Originally posted by Waluigi
Hahahaha! I couldn't have put it better. No matter how fast intel makes their processors, they still will run windows, which completely cripples their ability to be useful.

--Waluigi

I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[spercharged69]

Originally posted by AhmedFaisal
Besides the fact, the shuttle's are way too damn loud even with the newer heatpipe cooling system.

I'm sorry but this is probably the most ignorant thing I've ever seen posted on these forums, and that is an accomplishment. Since the introduction of the shuttle SB52G2, my company (a large medical ASP), has almost entirely switched from expensive Dell servers to the extremely cost-effective and powerful shuttle platform. Compliment one with a RAID card and you've got yourself a rock solid server that performs on par with the offerings from the enterprise-level server manufacturers for under $1000 a piece. They only have one fan in the entire machine which is controlled by the motherboard and only spins at the lowest possible RPM to keep the internals of the shuttle within a safe operating temperatures. This fan, under even maximum load is still quieter than the drives spinning inside of the machine. It is BLAZINGLY obvious you've never even seen a Shuttle in person, much less used or heard one.

I really want a PowerBook, when the new 15 inch revisions are ready for ordering, there's nothing stopping me from buying one. This coming from a die-hard PC user/gamer. The problem I have is that I will be assimilated in to 'one of those Mac users.' This entire comments thread is CHOCK full of unbridled ignorance and one sided posts, and I will essentially be pledging my allegience to people who don't know anything about other processor platforms besides what biased Macintosh news sources have told them. I would go so far as to say 90% or greater of you have never used a P4 platform. ...Yet you all seem to be experts about how slow they are, how hot they run, etc.

Can I fry an egg onit?

Ummmm Opteron is not all that impressive.

Celeron? Let me laugh.

Whichever one runs OS X will be the one that wins.

No matter how fast intel makes their processors, they still will run windows, which completely cripples their ability to be useful.

AND THIS JUST FROM PAGE ONE! Seriously guys, I want to be a Macintosh user, I go in to the Apple store and think "THIS is what I need" when I look at Powerbooks, but the amazing amount of ignorance for anything that isn't a Macintosh that is spewed like TrueGreen on a dying front lawn is just too much to handle. You guys just need to realize that no matter how great the Apple platform is, and how much "faster" it is, with such a small market share it wouldn't matter if Apple released a computer that walked your dog and did your dishes while you used it... All this unfounded PC badmouthing just makes you look like little kids who are ready to fight at the Playground to defend the good name of their Super Nintendo because they didn't get a Sega Genesis for Christmas.

I know this post will be taken as a grain of salt, as the anti-PC snowball has already grown way too large in this train-wreck of a thread. It's just something most of you should really consider. Ah well... Such is life I suppose.

 

[LinuxGigolo]

Originally posted by nuckinfutz
I'm just hoping Apple gets their consumer line in order. Now more slow G4!!!

When, suddenly, did the G4 become slow? It was good enough 2 months ago before the G5 was introduced. The pro users wanted a new chip to replace the one that they'd been using for 4 years, but the G4 was an excellent one for iMac, eMac, ... and maybe one day iBook (sheesh... 2 gens behind the 'new'.. and what happened to Stevey Boy's 'year of the notebook'?) So now suddenly since one of the 5 machines in Apple's lineup got a new chip, all of them need to? The G4 suddenly sucks? It's suddenly not good enough for consumer machines? I mean the MHz rating does suck... but... no consumer needs (right now) the G5's architecture (and cost). Just my 50 Cent.

 

[cubist]

Originally posted by io_burn
The problem I have is that I will be assimilated in to 'one of those Mac users.' This entire comments thread is CHOCK full of unbridled ignorance and one sided posts, ... All this unfounded PC badmouthing just makes you look like little kids who are ready to fight at the Playground to defend the good name of their Super Nintendo because they didn't get a Sega Genesis for Christmas. ...

io_burn, you need to remember that Mac users get worse crap than this from ignorant PC users all the time. Ask your coworkers what they think of Macs. You're likely to hear things like "Macs are lame", "Macs are slow", "Macs can't use the Internet", "Macs don't have any software", and other blatantly stupid blanket statements, made by computer professionals who should know better.

The vast majority of PC users are sheep who know nothing about computers whatsoever. They just buy whatever everyone else buys.

This is a Mac board. Don't expect objectivity here. You wouldn't expect your kid to say nice things about schoolyard bullies, would you?

 

[amd_rules_ok]

I think that the worst part about pc's is that while they are great for getting work done, playing games, tweaking, etc., It's just so hard to find a case that matches my drapes.

I remember one time my stupid pc using friend was over and he tried to turn on my imac, thinking it was a lamp. I lol'd pretty hard.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Originally posted by LinuxGigolo
When, suddenly, did the G4 become slow? It was good enough 2 months ago before the G5 was introduced. The pro users wanted a new chip to replace the one that they'd been using for 4 years, but the G4 was an excellent one for iMac, eMac, ... and maybe one day iBook (sheesh... 2 gens behind the 'new'.. and what happened to Stevey Boy's 'year of the notebook'?) So now suddenly since one of the 5 machines in Apple's lineup got a new chip, all of them need to? The G4 suddenly sucks? It's suddenly not good enough for consumer machines? I mean the MHz rating does suck... but... no consumer needs (right now) the G5's architecture (and cost). Just my 50 Cent.

The G4 has been slow. If you want a date its when the REST of the industry move to 130nm while Moto stayed at 180(and is still there until Q4 of THIS year!).

Didn't the AE creaming of the Dual 1.42Ghz hit home with Mac users? When I say "slow" G4 I mean sub 1Ghz. I'm perfectly fine with a G4 at the 1.25Ghz level and above. I'm not going to put my head in the sand and truly believe a 700Mhz G4 eMac won't get pasted against a an $800 PC.

I love Apple but they're digging themselves out of wholes that they created years ago and they can ill afford mistakes and half assed consumer lineups.

 

[Nemesis]

Re: Apple will never catch up in GHz, worse yet....

Originally posted by websterphreaky
Apple will never catch up in GHz, worse yet, they are in their new arrogant attitude driving away the major software developers that once stuck by the platform when the '90s dark days nearly claimed the platform.

There is NO chance there will be any G5 faster than 2GHz by year end and Jobs knows it. The Media certainly knows and is chiding Apple already. Now the press is making hey with the MS and Adobe Mac defections.

Their additionally RUDE behavior in statements, such as with the announcement of no Mac Premier "With the announcement of the new Power Mac G5 and the innovations in Final Cut Pro 4, there has never been a better time for Premiere customers to make the switch.", only show the companies (and I'm assuming Steve Jobs) insulant juvenile behavior.

At less than 2.6% market share, and no sign of a turn around, Apple needs to stop being a (software/OS) monopolistic smart ass. Otherwise, we'll all be using Windoze PC's whether we like it or not.

No mate, you're wrong. And you live in some kind of deep coma.
It is Adobe who trashed Premiere development and support to Mac platform, simply because they have inferior product and want to take monopoly on PC market in digital video. Premiere can't compare with FCP. Period.

Furthermore, it is good to be proud. You obviously have problems diferentiating pride from stupidity. Apple is pride of its platform, its incredible OS, its new remarkable new machines. Even if big shots like Adobe abaondons some of their product. It's not because Apple is inferior company, but rather opposite -- it's small, but extremely productive and vigorous.

If you have some problem with that, you can always jump into lake.

 

[wizard]

Well the argument is pretty easy to make once you realize that Floating Point isn't high on everybodies list of requirements. The G5 clock per clock does not perform all that much better than a G4. So running a G5 at 1.2 GHz when faster G4's are available does not make sense. This is especially the case if those G4's are low power. Now if Apple/IBM can deliver a low power 970 at 1.6 or 1.8 GHz that would be another story.

So you have extended addressing capabilities and floating point as the G5's advantages. Along with this you have all of its disadvantages. What I'm realy wondiering about now is if Apple can take advantage of the extended addressing capabilities of the G4 to allow us access to more memory? With the new version of OS/X handling process spaces of 4GB that would be very interesting.

Canterwood is a very interesting chip set, and form all appearance to date is one of Intels better efforts. Much of Apples advantages are with support of Hyper Transport. The interesting thing is the flexibility that the motherboard manufactures have on the Intel side, many capable mother boards exist or are coming on line for Canterwood.

Hey I still doubt it. Until more information is available (if it is ever available) on Apples chip set I have to say that power will be a problem. That doesn't mean that Apple could not implement a laptop with dramaticaly differrent 970 Support to deal with these concerns. The other key indicator is that I've yet to see an Opteron system in a note book.

The statement about Prescott must have been somebodies elses. I must admit though that some of the material I've seen on line comparing the G5 and Prescott has been garbage. Considering that, and other more reliable information, one will have to expect that Prescott will be a significant performer. Actually I think Intel has no choice other than to go with a dramatic increase in performance to deal with the AMD issue. All this being said really doesn't affect my perception of the G5 which is that it is a parity machine, and might not even be that once it is in users hands. But don't take that as a negative comment, I would not be surprised at all to see Apple drop a 500 MHz rev on us around the end of the year.

A lot of my opinion comes from the publicly available information that Apple has presented. There seemed to be an effort to limit expectations for an immediate 970 laptop release. Now many reasons for that effort could be floating around One Infinet Loop, but I suspect that the 970 laptops are a ways off. I could be grossly wrong here, but the G5 does represent a major engineering project, I'm sure Apple wants everything to go right with the G5 though.

Thanks
Dave

Originally posted by nuckinfutz
That would be assuming that the G5 is equal to the G4 in handling instruction. 8 Queue 5 dispatch and Dual FPU still means and advantage over the similary clocked G4. I don't know how you can argue otherwise.




That still doesn't help Intel compete at the $3000 level with a Dual Gigahertz FSB. The Canterwood(875) chipset is nice. But no more than the G5 Motherboard(which is much more complex).




Again...no empirical evidence other than the profound "I doubt". You have no technical info to back up your statements at all. The burden of proof is with you .



Enough talk. Show us where Prescott is faster per megahertz. The IPC of the Pentium 4 has always been low. All i'm hearing is a bunch of Intel blathering conjecture with no info to back it up.

 

[Nemesis]

Originally posted by thies
For me whatever runs a decent unix cheapest wins. G5s lose big times in that respect. 20% pricecut on G5s and I'd stop laughing.

Linux is just fine sorta Unix and it runs nicely on 80486. That's cheap enough for you, mate.
So stop complaining for nothing.

 

[Nemesis]

Originally posted by wizard
Now many reasons for that effort could be floating around One Infinet Loop, but I suspect that the 970 laptops are a ways off. I could be grossly wrong here, but the G5 does represent a major engineering project, I'm sure Apple wants everything to go right with the G5 though.

Thanks
Dave

Uff, do people really believe that Apple would kill their laptop sale by announcing G5 in a Powerbook in 3-4 months? Who would in hell buy anything before that?
Jeeez, some people are unbeleivable. Just use your heads, mates. Think! Think!

 

[wizard]

It is really up to the consumer to decide what is fast enough. Even for home use there are somethings that would be best handled by extremely fast machines. Machines that honestly aren't on the market yet, nor will they be anytime soon.

Your statement about consumer machines smack of comunism. It makes about as much sense as the people who complain about pickup trucks and SUV's. Some of us can't fit into a Saturn literally and some of us need more that a G5 to get our work done.

So don't run around trying to fit a limited vision of reality on the rest of us. Faster PC's or Macs are needed by many of us at home and the reality is the professional applications are unbounded.

Dave

Originally posted by LinuxGigolo
When, suddenly, did the G4 become slow? It was good enough 2 months ago before the G5 was introduced. The pro users wanted a new chip to replace the one that they'd been using for 4 years, but the G4 was an excellent one for iMac, eMac, ... and maybe one day iBook (sheesh... 2 gens behind the 'new'.. and what happened to Stevey Boy's 'year of the notebook'?) So now suddenly since one of the 5 machines in Apple's lineup got a new chip, all of them need to? The G4 suddenly sucks? It's suddenly not good enough for consumer machines? I mean the MHz rating does suck... but... no consumer needs (right now) the G5's architecture (and cost). Just my 50 Cent.