Multimedia
Aug 27, 02:12 AM
I still pity those guys expecting "Major" MBP performance gain by moving to Merom without Santa Rosa. They are as ignorant as those people expecting G5s with their two pound heat sinks to go in powerbooks. I'm just looking forward to see Conroe iMac and better battery life for MBPs. And iPod update off course ;)I don't give a rat's A** about Santa Rosa. What I do give a Rat's A** about is that Easy Access HD Bay. The ability to have multiple 160 GB HDs standing by for different field purposes can make for revolutionary work flow procedures.
freeny
Aug 7, 04:25 PM
I really dont give a cr@p who made what first or who stole this or that. All I care is that it works....
emotion
Jul 20, 09:13 AM
I wonder just how Apple would react to news that the next processor update is ahead of schedule. Presumably their plans are carefully laid out, and if a PC competitor can jump on Intel updates faster than they can without having to conform to a similar timeline, then Apple might get burned, if only slightly.
Remember Apple will be privvy to a lot more information that we as consumers are. They are probably on a level playing field at least with Intel compared with other PC vendors. They may even have a special relationship with Intel to get stuff slightly before people like Lenovo and Dell.
Remember Apple will be privvy to a lot more information that we as consumers are. They are probably on a level playing field at least with Intel compared with other PC vendors. They may even have a special relationship with Intel to get stuff slightly before people like Lenovo and Dell.
milo
Jul 27, 02:21 PM
Those aren't next generation version of the Core 2 just MCM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Chip_Module) of the existing Core 2.
Still, they are the successors to conroe and woodcrest. As long as they are socket compatible, they're the next generation for these machines, whether you consider them a new chip or not.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors)
It's all just rumor at this point. More than 2 computer announcments would be very unlikely, and the idea that all macs would get updated at once is ridiculous.
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
The only mac that took a step back was the iMac, and it never took advantage of any of the 64 bit advantages in the first place.
I can't figure out why it wouldn't have a 2nd slot or FW800. They're both cheap enough to add. The only problem is the 2nd slot adds some height, but not that much. This unit would be less than 5" tall. And anyway, how do you backup your CD's?
A second slot is overkill for a midline model. And Apple has obviously made the decision that FW800 is a pro feature only, if it's not in the 15 inch MBP. Not to mention that it's not included in the standard intel chipsets, so adding it is extra work for Apple.
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
And since the iMacs have never supported more than 2 gigs of ram, how is that a step back by switching them to Yonah?
Still, they are the successors to conroe and woodcrest. As long as they are socket compatible, they're the next generation for these machines, whether you consider them a new chip or not.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors)
It's all just rumor at this point. More than 2 computer announcments would be very unlikely, and the idea that all macs would get updated at once is ridiculous.
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
The only mac that took a step back was the iMac, and it never took advantage of any of the 64 bit advantages in the first place.
I can't figure out why it wouldn't have a 2nd slot or FW800. They're both cheap enough to add. The only problem is the 2nd slot adds some height, but not that much. This unit would be less than 5" tall. And anyway, how do you backup your CD's?
A second slot is overkill for a midline model. And Apple has obviously made the decision that FW800 is a pro feature only, if it's not in the 15 inch MBP. Not to mention that it's not included in the standard intel chipsets, so adding it is extra work for Apple.
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
And since the iMacs have never supported more than 2 gigs of ram, how is that a step back by switching them to Yonah?
gibbz
Apr 27, 08:13 AM
This is a lie
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad:
No it isn't. They say they are not logging your location. This is correct. If it were incorrect, they would be keeping a database of your phone's exact GPS location. Instead, as they state, they are keeping a cache of the cell towers and wifi hotspots in order to aid the A-GPS system. So, no, they are not logging your (and by your, I mean an identifiable log) exact locations and beaming it home to watch you like big brother.
As has been stated a million times, there is a likely bug that wasn't culling the cache. It was also a dumb oversight to backup the file and to do so unencrypted.
The overlord hyperbole is really silly.
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad:
No it isn't. They say they are not logging your location. This is correct. If it were incorrect, they would be keeping a database of your phone's exact GPS location. Instead, as they state, they are keeping a cache of the cell towers and wifi hotspots in order to aid the A-GPS system. So, no, they are not logging your (and by your, I mean an identifiable log) exact locations and beaming it home to watch you like big brother.
As has been stated a million times, there is a likely bug that wasn't culling the cache. It was also a dumb oversight to backup the file and to do so unencrypted.
The overlord hyperbole is really silly.
greenstork
Aug 16, 11:21 PM
Video cards won't make a difference in FCP as of now if that's what you are asking performance wise. If you are using Motion/Games, anything that really feeds off the video card, then I'd go for the higher end video card.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
If Cloverton is a drop-in chip, I'd say definitely go for the 2.0 GHz as it appears to be upgradeable.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
If Cloverton is a drop-in chip, I'd say definitely go for the 2.0 GHz as it appears to be upgradeable.
asiayeah
Aug 25, 06:14 PM
In US, people get free shipping for their new batteries.
In Hong Kong, we have to visit the service providers in person TWICE! First we have to go there and give up our old battery for registration. Then we have to wait for at least 10 days and visit the service providers AGAIN to get the new battery.
It's simply poor service from Apple!
P.S. The Apple HK support staff actually told me they just know about the news on the same day as me. They also incorrectly told me that only MacBook's batteries replacements have free shippings...
In Hong Kong, we have to visit the service providers in person TWICE! First we have to go there and give up our old battery for registration. Then we have to wait for at least 10 days and visit the service providers AGAIN to get the new battery.
It's simply poor service from Apple!
P.S. The Apple HK support staff actually told me they just know about the news on the same day as me. They also incorrectly told me that only MacBook's batteries replacements have free shippings...
gnasher729
Aug 17, 10:34 AM
It doesn't matter what the tests are if you are doing it for comparison. As long as it is done the same on both machines, who cares?
That is wrong.
Lets say I wrote some Altivec code to make some function faster on a 400 MHz G4, because on that machine it made a noticable difference. After porting to Intel, with the slowest machine (1.66 GHz Core Solo) being at least six times faster, I didn't bother. If you measure that code, you won't find too much difference in speed. It is the code that matters that matters.
That is wrong.
Lets say I wrote some Altivec code to make some function faster on a 400 MHz G4, because on that machine it made a noticable difference. After porting to Intel, with the slowest machine (1.66 GHz Core Solo) being at least six times faster, I didn't bother. If you measure that code, you won't find too much difference in speed. It is the code that matters that matters.
bimmzy
Apr 6, 04:33 AM
I don't find it frustrating, in fact, it runs circles around FCP and I worked at Apple on 2 versions of the software, wrote a book and founded the first FCPUG.
As for strange bugs, please let me know what they are. Our users aren't complaining about anything strange.
If you do find something, please report it: Submit bugs to http://www.adobe.com/go/wish . More on how to give feedback: http://bit.ly/93d6NF
Best,
Kevin
Of course your not taking in to account all the fragmentation issues relating to "cross-platform" applications.
All software has bugs, especially programs ported to different operating systems and machines. The the bottom line is that FCP is popular with the editors.
BBC Broadcast Engineer.... living in the real world of media production!
As for strange bugs, please let me know what they are. Our users aren't complaining about anything strange.
If you do find something, please report it: Submit bugs to http://www.adobe.com/go/wish . More on how to give feedback: http://bit.ly/93d6NF
Best,
Kevin
Of course your not taking in to account all the fragmentation issues relating to "cross-platform" applications.
All software has bugs, especially programs ported to different operating systems and machines. The the bottom line is that FCP is popular with the editors.
BBC Broadcast Engineer.... living in the real world of media production!
Chundles
Jul 21, 06:02 AM
I'm going to start saving now for whatever the latest and greatest Mac desktop/monitor combination is in around 2010.
Then I'll post pics of me using it for Word, internet browsing and email. Maybe a bit of iTunes.
Those 16+ cores and lots of RAM will make Safari absolutely fly!!!
Then I'll post pics of me using it for Word, internet browsing and email. Maybe a bit of iTunes.
Those 16+ cores and lots of RAM will make Safari absolutely fly!!!
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 8, 09:05 PM
DoFoT:
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I have 500k burning a hole in my digital pocket, but i'm saving up for a race car. The advanced kart races have so much prize money... its awesome :D I'm loving my 458 Italia too. I dominated the MR races with it. I only spent about 40k on tuning it, and 80% of that was tires.
Any suggestions on a race car when i get enough cash? I'd prefer something AWD unless it wont be allowed in some of the extreme races. That would limit me quite a bit, but a GTR would work if there even is a GTR Race Car. I'll have to look.
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I have 500k burning a hole in my digital pocket, but i'm saving up for a race car. The advanced kart races have so much prize money... its awesome :D I'm loving my 458 Italia too. I dominated the MR races with it. I only spent about 40k on tuning it, and 80% of that was tires.
Any suggestions on a race car when i get enough cash? I'd prefer something AWD unless it wont be allowed in some of the extreme races. That would limit me quite a bit, but a GTR would work if there even is a GTR Race Car. I'll have to look.
NoSmokingBandit
Sep 1, 11:15 AM
Idk, that just doesnt sound right...
They have higher-res models from the GT4/GTPSP artists (everything 3d is made with super high poly counts then downgraded as the game's engine requires) so i dont understand why they would use the low poly models from GT4 when it would take just as much time to export a higher res model from Maya.
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
They have higher-res models from the GT4/GTPSP artists (everything 3d is made with super high poly counts then downgraded as the game's engine requires) so i dont understand why they would use the low poly models from GT4 when it would take just as much time to export a higher res model from Maya.
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
milo
Nov 29, 11:05 AM
"I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way"
Well, I can't see why Universal wouldn't do that...getting paid money for doing nothing? Sure, I'll have some too.
But I can definitely see why Apple wouldn't do that. Universal could threaten to yank all their content from iTunes if Apple refuses but at this point that might hurt Universal more than Apple.
Well, I can't see why Universal wouldn't do that...getting paid money for doing nothing? Sure, I'll have some too.
But I can definitely see why Apple wouldn't do that. Universal could threaten to yank all their content from iTunes if Apple refuses but at this point that might hurt Universal more than Apple.
OneMike
Mar 26, 06:27 PM
No Rosetta, no sale for me. Not ready to move on.
I'm glad rosetta is going away. Maybe the dev will finally update the app.
I'm glad rosetta is going away. Maybe the dev will finally update the app.
BWhaler
Jul 14, 03:35 PM
Since apple is part of the Blu Ray consortium wouldn't you think they will use blu ray only?
Not a chance in the near future. Blu Ray and Sony are in utter shambles right now.
Not a chance in the near future. Blu Ray and Sony are in utter shambles right now.
brianus
Sep 14, 12:56 PM
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
valkraider
Apr 25, 03:48 PM
Apple has just brought us the closest we have EVER been to 1984.
Complete fail.
Mainly - you have the option to not buy or use an iPhone. Or any phone for that matter.
You have no idea how technology works, do you?
First of all, ever since the very first cell phones - anyone carrying ANY cell phone is being tracked.
Second, you are tracked HUNDREDS of ways! Credit cards, Bank accounts, store loyalty programs, car black boxes, GPS units, traffic cameras, security cameras, internet use, video game networks, etc etc...
Third: Apple is not the government. The government has to follow specific rules about tracking people (like warrants, etc). Apple is a private corporation that you WILLINGLY entered into a contractual agreement with. Every iPhone user has accepted a terms of service which says that location information will be stored. Period. There is no invasion of anything - if you activated an iPhone YOU AGREED TO IT WILLINGLY.
Fourth: NO ONE CARES WHERE YOU HAVE BEEN. So many people act like all we want in the world is to find out that you went to 7/11 last thursday and got a bag of doritos. No one but 7/11 and Doritos cares, and they already know...
Fifth: All of the people crying foul have not even looked at the real data. The real data is wildly inaccurate from a location tracking standpoint. So you are all bitching about someone knowing where you have been within a mile or two. Unless you are in rural Nevada or Wyoming, there are several other people and lots of possible "locations" in that square few miles. If you are in rural Nevada or Wyoming there are no AT&T towers there to register your location against so you are safe too.
Sixth: If you really really care, jailbreak your phone and delete the file.
Complete fail.
Mainly - you have the option to not buy or use an iPhone. Or any phone for that matter.
You have no idea how technology works, do you?
First of all, ever since the very first cell phones - anyone carrying ANY cell phone is being tracked.
Second, you are tracked HUNDREDS of ways! Credit cards, Bank accounts, store loyalty programs, car black boxes, GPS units, traffic cameras, security cameras, internet use, video game networks, etc etc...
Third: Apple is not the government. The government has to follow specific rules about tracking people (like warrants, etc). Apple is a private corporation that you WILLINGLY entered into a contractual agreement with. Every iPhone user has accepted a terms of service which says that location information will be stored. Period. There is no invasion of anything - if you activated an iPhone YOU AGREED TO IT WILLINGLY.
Fourth: NO ONE CARES WHERE YOU HAVE BEEN. So many people act like all we want in the world is to find out that you went to 7/11 last thursday and got a bag of doritos. No one but 7/11 and Doritos cares, and they already know...
Fifth: All of the people crying foul have not even looked at the real data. The real data is wildly inaccurate from a location tracking standpoint. So you are all bitching about someone knowing where you have been within a mile or two. Unless you are in rural Nevada or Wyoming, there are several other people and lots of possible "locations" in that square few miles. If you are in rural Nevada or Wyoming there are no AT&T towers there to register your location against so you are safe too.
Sixth: If you really really care, jailbreak your phone and delete the file.
rtdunham
Aug 27, 09:15 AM
I believe the 2.33 GHz Merom chip debuted at the same price as the 2.16 GHz Yonah when it was released. The prices of MBPs certainly haven't fallen. Apple has just been enjoying the extra profits from Intel's price drops of the past few months.
good information, logical thought.
do you think apple's $100M payoff to Creative*, and possible need to restate financial information for recent quarters/years because of questionable executive compensation, make the company more reluctant than might otherwise have been the case to intro new chips that are, in the beginning more costly and thus will reduce profits?
*--i know, i know, it's only 1% of apple's cash reserves. But that's not meaningless money: trust me, companies make plenty of strategic decisions that affect their products' features, support quality, whatever, over amounts far less than $100M.
good information, logical thought.
do you think apple's $100M payoff to Creative*, and possible need to restate financial information for recent quarters/years because of questionable executive compensation, make the company more reluctant than might otherwise have been the case to intro new chips that are, in the beginning more costly and thus will reduce profits?
*--i know, i know, it's only 1% of apple's cash reserves. But that's not meaningless money: trust me, companies make plenty of strategic decisions that affect their products' features, support quality, whatever, over amounts far less than $100M.
epitaphic
Aug 18, 11:46 PM
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
TheQuestion
Mar 26, 12:22 AM
Can't believe it's anywhere near GM time. Way too many bugs and inconsistencies in behavior. New networking tools in Server have to be implemented now that SMB is being canned - that's not a minor addition. Calling it a release candidate is a stretch, but calling it GM is just plain crazy.
Dagless
Aug 9, 09:06 AM
If sales are the judge of a games greatness, then Mario Kart on the Wii is the greatest racing game of all time. No doubt about it. The number of copies sold backs that up. Sorry GT.
Can't tell if you're joking or not. But the Mario Kart series has almost always been very highly rated.
Can't tell if you're joking or not. But the Mario Kart series has almost always been very highly rated.
j-traxx
Apr 11, 11:47 AM
My 3Gs contract ends in June and Apple will be pushing it's luck for me to go half a year without me being tempted to jump platforms instead of waiting for the iPhone 5.
ooh they'd better if they know what's good for them! you tell them off!
ooh they'd better if they know what's good for them! you tell them off!
patrick0brien
Jul 20, 04:05 PM
with 8 cores, the aps will show up two secs BEFORE you'll have clicked on the icon. :D
-Dave187
Tachyon processing WooHooo!
-Dave187
Tachyon processing WooHooo!
Multimedia
Jul 24, 05:54 PM
So you don't expect the Mac Pro at WWDC?? Or only a dual core version using Conroe?
I agree single Woodcrest doesn't make sense. So we have two options for Quad core - Dual Woodcrest and single Kentsfield. Of course 2xWodcrest is going to be more expensive but I wonder by how much more. I am guessing $400. But, if you do that, you have the same motherboard across the Mac Pro (and possibly shared with XServe as well) and for that $400 you also get FB-DIMM and higher RAM ceiling. Also, the same platform can be used with Clovertown to scale to 8 core workstation early Q1'07. If Kentsfield is used then 4 core is the end of the line.
So I don't expect Mac Pro to exclusively use Conroe/Kentsfield. Either two different boards - Conroe/Kentsfield on the low end and Woodcrest/Clovertown on the high end. Or Woodcrest/Clovertown across the board. Given the reasons above, I expect it will be the latter.
Conroe deserves to be in the Apple lineup. I expect it will be in the upgraded (perhaps a larger i.e. 23") iMac. Apple may also release another desktop to fill the gap between the Mini and the Pro. That option has been discussed here as well.Not really. Yorkfield is the 8 core follow on to Kentsfield in the Conroe class motherboard. Should be shipping by next Spring.Next Spring??? Can you please point me to the source of that information.
I don't believe Intel can go to 8 core chip before going to a true 4 core instead of 2 dual cores on the MCM. That may have to wait till the process moves to 45nm and they have the Common System Interface worked out i.e. towards the end of 2007. This is all an educated guess on my part ... nothing concrete.It's in the roadmap listed to follow Kentsfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_Microarchitecture).
"Yorkfield, eight-core MCM, 45 nm, 12 MiB L2, successor to Kentsfield"
Since Kentsfield is due Fall I IMAGINED Yorkfield would be ready to roll by Spring 2007. Maybe later? OK maybe later. I have no idea. Just feeling optimistic about Intel's accelerated rollout luck lately.
Well at the very least we will have pairs of Tigertons providing 8 cores by Spring 2007 as a stop-gap on a Woodcrest motherboard. Won't we?
My point wasn't so much exactly when Yorkfield will arrive as much as it was that Kentsfield is not THE END of increasingly more cores on the Conroe front as you had stated as fact.
Anyone else having confusion with all these -field, -town and -ton processor name suffixes? Aparently even the moderators here are. They have mispelled Clovertown in the original news story and post as well as on this forum's web page titles.
I agree single Woodcrest doesn't make sense. So we have two options for Quad core - Dual Woodcrest and single Kentsfield. Of course 2xWodcrest is going to be more expensive but I wonder by how much more. I am guessing $400. But, if you do that, you have the same motherboard across the Mac Pro (and possibly shared with XServe as well) and for that $400 you also get FB-DIMM and higher RAM ceiling. Also, the same platform can be used with Clovertown to scale to 8 core workstation early Q1'07. If Kentsfield is used then 4 core is the end of the line.
So I don't expect Mac Pro to exclusively use Conroe/Kentsfield. Either two different boards - Conroe/Kentsfield on the low end and Woodcrest/Clovertown on the high end. Or Woodcrest/Clovertown across the board. Given the reasons above, I expect it will be the latter.
Conroe deserves to be in the Apple lineup. I expect it will be in the upgraded (perhaps a larger i.e. 23") iMac. Apple may also release another desktop to fill the gap between the Mini and the Pro. That option has been discussed here as well.Not really. Yorkfield is the 8 core follow on to Kentsfield in the Conroe class motherboard. Should be shipping by next Spring.Next Spring??? Can you please point me to the source of that information.
I don't believe Intel can go to 8 core chip before going to a true 4 core instead of 2 dual cores on the MCM. That may have to wait till the process moves to 45nm and they have the Common System Interface worked out i.e. towards the end of 2007. This is all an educated guess on my part ... nothing concrete.It's in the roadmap listed to follow Kentsfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_Microarchitecture).
"Yorkfield, eight-core MCM, 45 nm, 12 MiB L2, successor to Kentsfield"
Since Kentsfield is due Fall I IMAGINED Yorkfield would be ready to roll by Spring 2007. Maybe later? OK maybe later. I have no idea. Just feeling optimistic about Intel's accelerated rollout luck lately.
Well at the very least we will have pairs of Tigertons providing 8 cores by Spring 2007 as a stop-gap on a Woodcrest motherboard. Won't we?
My point wasn't so much exactly when Yorkfield will arrive as much as it was that Kentsfield is not THE END of increasingly more cores on the Conroe front as you had stated as fact.
Anyone else having confusion with all these -field, -town and -ton processor name suffixes? Aparently even the moderators here are. They have mispelled Clovertown in the original news story and post as well as on this forum's web page titles.