Updated Intel Product Pipeline Uncovered?

Discussion in 'MacRumors News Discussion (archive)' started by MacRumors, May 31, 2006.

  1. MacinDoc macrumors 68020

    MacinDoc

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Location:
    The Great White North
    #101
    Well, then, what more do we need to differentiate the MB from the MBP? With the MBP so clearly superior in 3D and Core Image rendering, only a small difference in clock speed is needed. IMO, if Merom doesn't go into all of Apple's portables and the Mini shortly after it's introduced, it will be a major disappointment, and a blow to those who claim that Apple's products are priced competetively.
     
  2. zmonster macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    #102
    No Merom in MacBook Pro This Year

    My guess is that Apple will not put the faster Merom processor in MacBook Pros this year. Some reasons are:

    - They may not want to go with a brand new and unproven architecture so quickly after it's launch.

    - The current Core Duo processors are more than fast enough for most notebook users.

    - They do not want to stifle sales of Mac desktop and Xserve machines, by keeping those machines 2-4x faster than the laptops.
     
  3. BWhaler macrumors 68030

    BWhaler

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    #103
    double the onboard memory and 40% reduction in power...these are for laptops remember.

    If this doesn't excite you, you are still drinking the megahertz myth...
     
  4. BWhaler macrumors 68030

    BWhaler

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    #104
    As am I.

    I am sure Dell will sell him a Vista compatible laptop today.
     
  5. Multimedia macrumors 603

    Multimedia

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz CA, Silicon Beach
    #105
    Merom MacBook Pros Ship in September

    zmonster, your post is astonishing! :eek: I am flabergasted you wrote it. :eek: Your GUESS is wrong.

    Merom is totally proven architecture. Apple is competing with other Intel computers.

    The goal is 64-bit almost desktop capable within mobile limits. 2.33GHz Meroms will cost the same as Yonah and run cooler, quieter and faster.

    Desktop and Mobile sales do not compete with one another. They are completely different markets. Many people have both. Mobiles will always be a little slower than contemporary desktops because of those limits.

    I can't believe I even had to write this reply. :rolleyes:
     
  6. Multimedia macrumors 603

    Multimedia

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz CA, Silicon Beach
    #106
    Merom Switch For All Mobiles Should Happen ASAP

    Boy am I with you on that point. ImAlwaysRight seems to believe Apple would rather keep MacBooks and minis crippled 'til next year. But I think you're right Doc. It's just plain gonna feel lame, dumb and wrong for Apple to hold back on a complete switch to Merom as soon as the supply is large enough to meet demand which I am thinking will be November at the latest. And they should also go to the next IG chipset G965 as well.

    The operative word here is SHOULD. Will they is anybody's guess. :)
     
  7. AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #107
    SSE has always been 128-bit

    The SSE instruction set has always worked on 128-bit data.

    The change for the new Core 2 (and Woodcrest/Tulsa) is that the internal arithmetic units are now 128-bits wide as well.

    Previous SSE chips took two cycles, sending 64-bit of the vector to the unit each cycle.

    The new Core 2 chips send 128-bits in a single cycle.
     
  8. AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #108
    Some of the G5s ran the FSB at 1/3 the CPU speed.

    Intel matches the bus to the memory speed, and speed-matches (buffers) at the CPU. The G5 bus matched the CPU speed, and buffered at the memory. 6 of 1, half-dozen of the other.

    Neither the G5 nor the AMD use HyperTransport for the FSB or memory bus. They are I/O and IPC buses.
     
  9. milo macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    #109
    That's funny, on FCS benchmarks, the MB does beat the G5 on most tests. Gaming benchmarks only matter if you're planning on playing 3d games. And I'd like to see a real world example of a real difference in Core Image performance before writing off the MB for that.

    http://www.creativemac.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=43717
     
  10. manic macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    #110
    to those people who say that its not worth waiting for merom. Id like you to think about the risks youre taking:

    apple has been tight lipped about leopard. What if leopard is a full blown 64-bit OS and theyre waiting for intel to deliver the goods to make the breakthrough announcement in august, which, by the way, is right around the corner.

    Youll end up with the capable yonah that, however, will be outdated for not supporting the better features of the brand new update to OSX. its a pretty big risk given its not so far away. Even if leopard is not announced as a 64 bit OS, youll not lose because youll get the 20% speed gain AND will be better futureproofed for when that 64bit OS comes. College students wanting to hang to their laptops for 4 years, consider this
     
  11. milo macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    #111
    Who cares if Leopard is 64 bit? On most apps it will make little difference if any. What "better features" do you imagine there will be that won't run on Yonah, much less PPC? And the 20% speed gain isn't any different than a chip shipping with 20% higher clock speed. Chips get faster all the time, so ANY machine you buy will be superceded by a faster one. I don't think merom makes any difference in terms of future proofing. To look at the analogous situation, are there any OS versions or apps that run on G5 but not G4? After all, in theory the G5 is way more "future proof", right?
     
  12. Multimedia macrumors 603

    Multimedia

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz CA, Silicon Beach
    #112
    MacBook Does Usually Beat Dual 2GHz G5 On Final Cut Studio 5.1 Tests

    You're right. I forgot. I guess it's really a mixed bag so far.
     
  13. AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #113
    The real "future" issue is software support.

    When true 64-bit OSx64 ships, developers will need to make "even more universal binaries" to get the extra speed from 64-bit.

    At some point, probably not too far down the road, these developers will decide that there weren't enough 32-bit MacIntels sold to justify the expense of including 32-bit MacIntel code in the universal binaries. (Some that are making new ports or software for Apples will decide to skip x86 and only ship PPC and x64.)


    20% faster is pretty big, especially for the pro apps. And especially if your competitor is shipping x64 and you're not.

    The difference is that PPC OSX is a 32-bit operating system, with extremely limited support for restricted 64-bit apps.

    OSx64 will be true 64-bit, where any app can get the extra speed or memory space of 64-bit.
     
  14. Multimedia macrumors 603

    Multimedia

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz CA, Silicon Beach
    #114
    Yorkfield, eight-core MCM, 45 nm, 12 MiB L2, successor to four core Kentsfield

    I'm smelling a Yorkfield, eight-core MCM, 45 nm, 12 MiB L2, successor to Kentsfield Mac Pro Q1 2008. I think short term a pair of Clovertowns will make the first 8 core Mac Pro Q2 2007 :eek:
     
  15. milo macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    #115
    We'll see what happens with 64 bit support. Based on what happened with G4 and G5, I'll be surprised if we see many (if any) apps that don't have 32 bit support. Do you know of any specifically that will skip 32 and only do 64 as you say? And what additional work is required to do a 32 bit build in addition to 64?

    Sure, 20% faster is a big deal. But you can also get a 20% gain by waiting for chips at a 20% faster clock speed. In either case, it's the same as things have always been, you can always wait and get something faster. I don't see a 20% boost as a huge reason for waiting to buy a machine.
     
  16. Multimedia macrumors 603

    Multimedia

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz CA, Silicon Beach
    #116
    Apple Pushing Intel In New Directions - New Thread

    Apple Pushing Intel In New Directions. New Thread mentions Intel will announce new processors tomorrow. Woodcrest or something else? :)
    I guess tomorrow was today in Japan. Wonder why MacRumors didn't post a feature on the cover about this? Seems cover feature worthy. Very interesting. Makes waiting for Core 2 Duo even more logical than ever.
     
  17. AvSRoCkCO1067 macrumors 65816

    AvSRoCkCO1067

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2005
    Location:
    CO
    #117
    They announced them today: http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1791

    Woodcrest sounds fast - 3.2 GHz Core 2 Duo Extreme...:)

    And they unveiled some low-wattage processors as well. Is this what you were talking about, or am I completely confused??? :confused: :D
     

Share This Page