Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intrinsity Claims 2.2 Ghz Chip

Posted by Hemos on from the believe-when-i-see-it dept.

PowerMacDaddy writes "Over at SiliconValley.com there's an article about an Ausin, TX startup named Intrinsity that has unveiled a new chip that utilizes a new logic process with conventional fab processes to acheive a 2.2GHz clock rate. The company is headed by former Texas Instruments and Apple Computer microprocessor developer Paul Nixon. The real question is, is this all FUD, will the real-world performance be part of The Megahertz Myth, or is this thing for real?"

1 of 308 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Why is everything non-Apple a myth? by gig · · Score: 5, Interesting

    > Why don't they benchmark the mac with anything
    > other than PS, ever, ever, ever, ever?

    They also benchmark with Media Cleaner Pro, which is a very widely-used media encoding application. At this past Macworld Expo NY, a Mac with a G4/867 in it took a Spiderman movie trailer from tape to Web, and then played the result, well before the similar Intel machine (1.7GHz P4) could even finish encoding the clip. Same task, same media, same application, same RAM, same hard disk, same graphics adapter. Only thing that's different is Mac OS / Windows, G4 / P4 and the mobo. The machines even end up being equivalently-priced (I think they use Compaq workstations for these tests).

    > How could anyone question the validity of an

    > application that has always been primarily a mac
    > application?

    Photoshop has been running on both Mac and Windows platforms for years and years now. It is optimized for Intel with the assistance of Intel engineers. It is optimized for the Mac by Adobe engineers all on their own.

    I work in music and audio, and it is very performance intensive ... all of your processing is done in realtime. The Mac runs music and audio apps faster, too. I get incredible performance in Cubase 5.0 on a PowerMac G4/733. You can fill up all of Cubase's plug-in slots and still have CPU power left over (there's a CPU meter built-into Cubase ... that's how CPU intensive it is). Latency is also better on the Mac, and that's very important in audio.

    Video, music and audio, graphics, encoding and encryption ... the Mac is the best-performing machine for all of these. These are the tasks that Macs are BUILT FOR. It just so happens that everybody wants to do these things now, thanks to digital camcorders, cameras, MP3's and security. Doesn't magically make Intel machines any better than they are, no matter what the clock speed of the CPU.