Slashdot Mirror
Apple's Dev. Tools Hint @ Dual-core G5 & Quad Mac
Eug writes "Apple just released a new version of its CHUD tools, which provides clues about dual-core G5s and quad core Macs (dual dual-core).
The clues include a reference to the 970MP, which is dual-core G5 with increased L2 cache. Also, there is now support for 4 CPUs, whereas previous versions of these Mac OS X tools only supported 2.
This likely means we'll see dual-core Macs by WWDC, and possibly quad Macs based off these dual-core chips by then too."
So, while it is interesting to speculate on what Apple may be doing and where they may be going with various products, I have never really understood the rabid nature of the fan sites and rumor sites. What is the point with rumors? Can anybody explain that to me?
I am going to be practical here: It has always amazed me that people say "I am going to wait to buy XXXX until they come out with the new one". Buy what you need for the job you need it for and realize that whenever you buy something computer related, it is likely already obsolete and will be replaced with the next shiny thing in a couple of months. There are very few times where waiting will recoup your investment. Get what you need for the job and start being productive now. If something comes out that will make you more productive, then sell off the previous system and get the new one if 1) it will pay off the investment or I suppose, 2) if you simply like shiny things.
Don't get me wrong. Apple builds some sexy hardware and software, but I prefer to use their stuff for my work and research because it simply allows more productivity and is more pleasurable to work with, but somebody, please explain to me why the rumor sites are so popular? I understand why business analysts might be interested, and competitors, buy why the obsession of fans with these rumors?
Oh, and is not it time for the Slashdot Apple desktop icon to be updated to reflect the current desktop line? i.e. G5.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
i'd be willing to wait for a g5 powerbook, if i could get a dual-proc one ..
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
I can't help thinking that this is bad timing on Think-Secret's part. To raise your profile by doing (again!) the thing you're being sued for, at the very time you're being sued means that (if he loses), the penalties are going to be that much worse (reckless, showed no remorse, uncontrollable, etc. etc.). Lawyers will have a field day.
On the other hand, there's the case that if he's not doing anything wrong, why not continue doing exactly that. And let's face it, if this turns out to be true, it's definitely something that Apple would want to hide. Definitely news that Apple-lovers will want to read.
Gaah. Brain hurts.
Assuming he's right, then at least this time (apart from 'De Plume's "sources" who know a lot more about the cpu than CHUD tools would tell you), Apple only have themselves to blame regarding the release of 4-way dev tools...
Simon
Physicists get Hadrons!
Dual-Core Dual-CPU G5 will be the ultimate design powerhouse....esp if Apple/IBM can up the cores to like 2.8 or even 3GHz each, then you can have a theoretical 12GHz workstation. Even accounting for SMP overhead, a dual-core dual-cpu G5 can chunk a massively parallel job (e.g. HD movie rending) at the equivalent of 10GHz.
I'm impressed.
To get to the point where fans will scan random binaries for strings that give clues as to the features of upcoming products, write their speculations in blogs, and where these blogs then make the front page of the world's most popular news site for geeks...
I'm impressed.
Now if only I knew what CHUD, 970MP, or WWDC meant...
Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
You know, you can customize which articles you see. You can toggle off Mac articles and never be bothered by them again. Of course you'd have to actually create an account and cease anonymous cowardice.
...will they call it a Quadra? ;)
Would two dual-core CPUs be considered 4 discrete processors by the OS? It seems to me that 4-processor support in OSX probably means two physical dual-core CPUs, whereas four physical CPUs would be seen as an 8-core system. I can't wait for dual-core CPUs with hyperthreading, that's going to be mess to keep up with.
Hey, I thought Slashdot had a policy of never removing a posted story. But the dupe article on Israeli Army Bans Dungeons & Dragons Players has totally disappeared, with all the user comments!
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
4 cpu mac. Call it the Quadra.
There were plans for 4 processor g4's also, remember? Then there was a cpu shortage and they stopped at dual proc models.
music lover since 1969
Even though Apple Computer's stock is pretty high in regards to the P/E ratio (ever since the iPod got the investors' interest), I still think it might be a good buy for the future.
They seem to be sort of like Google in that they are constantly experimenting with new ideas, and coming out with new products/services and business models.
Unfortunately, I didn't get in on either stock on the ground floor, and even though they went up pretty high now I think they both might still be great buys for the future. I recommended a relative get out of MSFT buy some Apple, and he took his Microsoft dividends and put it in Apple. It's stayed pretty steady since then but hopefully for the long term it will be going up, so I am vindicated!
Maybe I can have a Uber Mini now?
That would rock.
My Blog
[quote] "Also, there is now support for 4 CPUs, whereas previous versions of these Mac OS X tools only supported 2"[/quote]
Before you work yourself into a tizzy of excitement that requires you to wipe off your keyboard, remember that quad processor mac rumors have been around for a long time.
If we ever do see A quad processor mac it will likely be in a server configuration such as the xServe, not in a PowerMac.
July 23, 2004
SteveM
blakespot
-- Heisenberg may have slept here.
iPod Hacks.com
Its like IBM in the 60s (boy I feel o-l-d) and the seventies, when all of the trade rags were committing acts of stochastic tittilation trying to perceive the direction that an elephant was going in from a point of view slightly below and in front if its tail.
/null/zero bit-bucket.
Apple is a live player and everybody who can't DO like to play at pre-guessing on ones who can as to what they're actually going to DO.
If they're right, they can claim guru-hood and if they're wrong, they bury the evidence in the
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Rumors for Nerds!
Stuff that may or may not be true!
I am convinced thay have missed the boat until now. They need to make a PC crusher at the top of their line, something that is so much faster than any PC for creative work that no one would dare say any PC is faster.
They got a lot of attention and doubting when they introed "The World's Fastest Personal Computer" when they came out with the G5. What they need to do is actually make that come true beyond anyone's doubt, and then keep up with it. To hell with what it costs - if they sold those IIfx's for 10K back in 1993 they can do the same thing today but even better for far less money.
This time, make that boast true, and shove it straight down the naysayers throats.
http://blog.thomasnesges.de/uploads/iProduct.png
Go Apple!
Can anyone tell me if a Dual-Dual-core processor box is better than a quad-single-core box? I know none are out yet so we can't do benchmarks, but I would think that there might be bottlenecks or something that would make a quad-single-core perform better.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
while it is true that computers always get better so waiting on the next thing can seem stupid, it would not be wise to buy right before a new product release or refresh.
if something new is about to hit the shelves you should wait a bit to see because even if you don't buy it you'll at least get a discount on the stuff you were just about to buy anyway.
just in the last few months there have been cases of Apple refeshing (new Powerbooks, iPod minis and iPod photos) and discounting (iBooks).
But you see, Zonk had duped Rob. Had it been Rob who had duped Zonk, then the story would not have been removed. But since Zonk is lower on the totem pole than Rob, Zonk's story (and all comments) got Zonked.
A pity - one of my comments was lost there as well.
I wonder if they will now search the database and remove the comments from each poster's comment log to furthur hide the evidence.
www.eFax.com are spammers
Yeah, design, whatever. More importantly, what about gaming? Games treat the current dual-cpu's as distinct cpu's, and usually wind up using only one of them. What a waste! Can the dual core cpu bind together and act as one cpu? Where the game passes the instructions on to the pipeline manager, or whatever, and can't actually see the distinct cpu's, but just sees one very fast cpu? I think my biggest complaint about dual (or multiple) cpus is that software has to *explicitly* talk to each cpu. So, most of the time my uber dual cpu is sitting there half unused. What use do I have for a quad if 3 cpu's sit there idling?
You had to go and post that. Now that have to kill you
I didn't really click. Instead, I copied your URL, but changed a couple digits.
/. to do the same.
I invite everyone else here at
Go get a job or something.
CHUD tools are most useful for testing products, but they happen to have some utility for those of us who want to tweak our computers at home. The latest release indicates that the developers have modularized the product and made it more adaptable when chips change.
What's likely happened is that Apple will get hot under the collar about the way these tools can inadvertantly indicate possible future plans. They used to release WWDC sessions on Quicktime CD's for free (back in 98 or 99). They used to not make developers sign their life away in non-disclosure agreements. They used to allow more access to developer docs, tools, and seeds to the dedicated hobbyist. Now these are all restricted because of leaks that have come from eager fans searching resource forks, out of context remarks, and misunderstood uses as "evidence of Apple's future plans".
If no quad processors are actually in the production pipeline, this rumor will be forgotten. If there is something that has been revealed by the Chud tools, it's more likely that Chud tools will be even more restricted and difficult to get hold of. Slowing down development as developers fear for their jobs for accidentally including a reference to a product they may know nothing about (e.g. Asteroid, a cpu number, a code name, etc.)
It's not like these strings tell you any useful information. Since Apple has a lengthy design, testing and production pipeline all it really says is we might have some new tech in a couple of years if it seems like a good marketing move. There's no pricing, case design, release dates, or anything marketing related in these leaks. In fact, since Apple is strongly dependent on a suprising and innovative marketing aura these leaks and speculations probably worsen that marketability.
One other example: the rumors sites have seen some "evidence" in seed releases that Apple will be making a push to release OS X on x86 chips. That may be the case, but more than likely they're confusing efforts to make a Window's user's transition to a Mac easier as "evidence" that Apple is moving to x86. All that happens is that OS X users will be disappointed that future releases don't run on the x86 line as their speculative "evidence" promised.
Get over the obsession with the rumors; you're only setting youreself up for disappointment.
I missed the article the first time, you insensitive clod!
People become addicted to Apple rumors because they tend to be first to market for a lot of stuff.
If you have an interest in where desktop computing is going, it's good to know what Apple's got in the oven.
...They'll be enterprise-class 4-way XServes. Hopefully with dual power-supply available.
Really, these two features are the last things keeping Xserves out of my datacenter... (Our corporate IT policy is that all servers have dual-PS.) You can't imagine how much it sucks to have the Macs for the design team saving data to Windows servers, because Microsoft's AFP implementation blows, and so does Apple's SMB implementation. I know you can't see, but I'm doing the happy dance now.
Tough day? How about a free Mac mini?
Maybe this is just the push the industry needs to make more apps multi-cpu aware.
Pretty Pictures!
Well done my friend.
Maybe, but XServes have trailed desktops on performance, and servers really need lots of I/O bandwidth more than lots of CPU grunt. I suspect a dual-dual config will hit the desktop at least as soon as it hits the rack, and probably sooner.
Whats the big deal? multi-core processors seems to be the "next big thing" to achieve faster speeds, smaller sizes, yada yada.. AMD is doing it .. Intel is doing it .. IBM has been doing it for a while .. so Apple is going to do it.
I don't understand why a rumor about yet another chip going dual core is news. It makes a LOT of sense. Multi-processor machines are more responsive, apps that need the speed are designed (generally) to utilize multiple processors and a dual core processor provides the benefits of a SMP machine in a physically smaller situation. Great for 1U servers.
If they were NOT working on a dual core (4-way) machine, they would risk their power users (read: higher profit margin users) -- I think many of these users, while adaquately swayed by Job's reality distortion field, are cognizant of the industry and will jump ship if it allows them to get their job done faster/better/quicker/whatever..
if you write the API correctly (which I expect Apple will do when all CPUs are dual core) making the app work well in multi threaded environments should not be hard.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
nt
BTW.. having 2 CPUs does not mean the second is idle. the second CPU is running other processes that the other processor is not running. that means that each CPU can spend more time per processes, equaling a faster system when there is multiple processes running, and in todays OS world there is more than one process always running.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
I take personal offense! Quadra is a perfectly acceptable name!
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
time period of legal mac clones, there was a 4 processor machine out there, I remember reading about it and how nutso expensive it was, but still wanting it of course. I don't recall which processor it used though, 601 maybe? If I could remember I'd go look on ebay see if any are still around. Maybe someone here remembers that machine. IIRC it was around 15 grand or so.
Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers, you insensitive clod!
www.imdb.com
the kicka-you-a$$a! That's what they should call the dual-dual G5.
stuff |
...with Intel coming out with dual-core IA64 chips, Apple/IBM has to come out with both dual-core PPCs and dual-processor-dual-core machines to keep ahead.
Although dual-CPU Intel machines are nothing new, they've not really had much penetration of the Intel desktop market in comparison to Apple's dual CPU machines in the Mac market; that barrier of the more expensive dual-CPU-motherboard has been lifted for Intel machines, and the possibilty of a significant number of new Intel machines being dual-(core)-CPU is serious competition for Apple's USP in this domain.
[Slightly-OT] Why doesn't Apple start producing a Power (as opposed to PowerPC) version of the XServe for the high end? What's the price differential? What's the performance differential? How difficult would it be to port 64-bit Darwin/MacOS X to Power?
Most of the MMORPGs out there have players doing the same thing. Heck, players have written tools to automate the process for Asheron's Call -- I assume the same is true of other games.
Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
You have to do a click-through NDA just to get the -current- version ( 4.0.1 ) of the CHUD tools, I don't want to think about where this guy got his clearly pre-release copy of CHUD 4.1.0.
Are there sites that show off pre-release Microsoft software covered by NDAs? Where can you get the unannounced plans for Intel's next big thing? Why is it that people don't expect Apple to sue their pants off when they report this stuff ??
Don't get me wrong, I'm big on freedom of speech, press, and just about anything else, but... if it was my company whose not-publicly-announced-plans were being outed all over the internet, I'd be pissed, and probably suing, if just to find the source of the leak and fire someone.
Clearly, Apple's not going to make too big a deal out of this, since it's info in an app that anyone can download ( after creating a free account and clicking past an NDA ) , but still... I certainly wouldn't put this kind of stuff up on *my* website without a sure way to keep the lawyers at bay. On the other hand, since the noted version isn't actually available _yet_, they might sue... maybe it wasn't going to go out until after Apple announced quad-processor plans. Given Apple's recent lawsuits ( and court victories ) in this area, I'd think people would be a *little* more careful what they blog, but I guess not. Eug looks pretty annon, I don't know what you have to do to get an EverythingApple blog going, maybe he feels that Apple just can't get to him. For his sake, I hope he's right.
In any event, it'll be interesting to see how long AnythingApple can keep this page up, and I am definitely keeping my eye out for a new CHUD update...
quad G5s?? Damn, I almost forgot to drool about that !! 64-bit number-crunching goodness!!
I emailed the editor about five seconds before the article left The Mysterious Future (I'm a subscriber, God knows why). As such I claim full responsibility for the posting and subsequent retraction of the discussion.
Posting anonymously to spare myself your anger...
This guy just asked some questions. How is that interesting?
CHUD = Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller.
I thought everyone knew that. I also have reservations about the direction Apple is going with this new CHUD thing they're doing. I presume this has something to do with the word "lickable".
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Heh. Can't get processor speeds up fast enough? Just keep stacking more of them in there!
I can see it now, five years from now we'll STILL be waiting for the G5 to hit 3Ghz, but we'll have these nifty 24 CPU 2.5Ghz G5's and go on and on about how it's the same as having a 60Ghz processor.
Note: It's a joke, not a flame. I'm a Mac user.
I have always felt uncomforable with Apple's use of this acronym.
s a- d/chud.htm
It was taken years ago, baby.
http://www.1000misspenthours.com/reviews/review
The only way multiple CPUs could help for gaming would be if you were doing software rendering.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
You say that most of the time your dual CPU is sitting there half unused.
Of all of your CPU time, how much time is spent on audio-video manipulation, scientific calculation, or 3D rendering?
Because that's the domain of uber CPUs, not gaming, word-processing, or the internet.
I can't really complain that my V8 is just sitting in the parking lot while I sit at my desk.
(your sig is nice, but i think you want to compare women to coffe, not the other way around)
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
... do their ramblings make their way onto Slashdot?
That's the genius!
Maybe Apple will do a 2U XServe?
I'd like that. I wanted to use XServes in a colo, but they're too deep for the cabinets at that site so I ended up with Intel boxes. A 2U wouldn't need to be as deep as the 1U boxes, and I might be able to upgrade...
how many rumor articles slashdot could serve with a beowulf cluster of these?
moderators who do not know what the fuck they are talking about should be shot.
"but the reality is that Apple is not trying to limit what blogs report"
Now you can of course be of the opinion that what Apple is doing is right, but your statement is simply ridiculous. Trying to limit what blogs report is exactly what Apple is doing.
CHUD 4.1
i am sure they all applaud you for your "buy now" attitude.
on a serious side, i guess it's more home users that fear buying a machine and then the new one coming out 2 weeks later. not that their machine is slower, but they have some distance in their pissing contest.
as for prices dropping as new hardware comes out, Apple offers a degree of price protection for that.
there are sites that offer some idea of what hardware is older and maybe due for an upgrade... but i guess the real fuel to the fire of the rumor sites is rabid Apple fandom. it is not all people poised with Visa cards in hand to buy something.
All the user comments to a D&D story? Why is this worth mentioning?
the 970MP is a G5 chip, and according to the story there was info related to that chip. the new panel shows support for up to 4 processors. they also dug up references to the 970MP. in theory it would be possible for 4 physical processors to be supported i guess... but odds are the 2 x dual core 970MP is what we will see first.
the powerbooks were just updated, so they won't be touched till fall at the soonest. Apple stuff is rarely updated in less than 200 days. if they dropped this support in now, it might be safe to guess it is for something sooner.
Right, it was a good little thread and now it's all gone silly....
The revolution will NOT be televised.
hey that's a bargin..... the single processor Mac IIfx cost $10,000 in 1990 and it was not even powerPC. it had a 40 MHz 68030 chip.
http://www.lowendmac.com/ii/iifx.shtml
i have one somewhere in a closet, i got it for free.
Now the Mac's will really rock as a game system!!!
Actually it would be nice if they could have the Quad Mac running at 4 GHz...
Then your Mac would be a 4x4
- an off-road ready system
All Apple would have to do to get people into a tizzy is to provide a new set of CHUD tools that support a completely different processor family and stick it in some obscure download area of their web site. Imagine how much of a fuss people would make if someone at Apple released (for example) some tools which showed processor cycle times for various Pentium-M instructions...
Apple lately has been more on par with top of the line PC systems, and some PC's can beat the fastest mac at everything.
It's time Apple took the lead again and came out with a system that smokes the rest of the PC world...
....at least in AMD's case, the dual core CPUs appear AS hyperthreading to the kernel, even though it is not really the same thing internally to the CPU. Look for CMP in the 2.6.11 changelog. AMD uses the hyperthreading ID bit as the CMP bit.
Please do not ever buy an apple computer, they are not gamming CPU's they are computer CPU's. i know in your small uneducated world a CPU is only meant for gamming but in the real world high end computers are actually used for ( perish the thought) work if you want a gamming machine, get an amd, if you want an audio video scientific workstation get a G5
Can the dual core cpu bind together and act as one cpu?
Only if they were forged by the dark lord himself, using the One Core.
One Core to rule them all
One Core to find them
One Core to bring them all
And in the darkness bind them
Next CPU from freescale with dual core version
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
http://www.articasemi.com/page1.html
Specifically the Image is: http://www.articasemi.com/files/1_1.png
(your sig is nice, but i think you want to compare women to coffe, not the other way around)
Could be worse, he could want his coffee ground up in a can
Sure, even a power user's CPU spends the vast majority of its time in an idle loop waiting for the next keypress or mouse movement. But when you finally execute that Final Cut Pro render, and see the "estimated time: 4 hours" you will be dying to buy a quad G5.
I used to explain this with an automotive analogy. You may burn a lot less gas with that tiny V4 engine, but someday you'll wish you had a powerful V8 when you try passing an 18 wheeler on a two lane road and there's an oncoming car you didn't see and there's nowhere to go except to try to power past the truck before the oncoming car hits you.
Nobody will ever need more than 6.4 GHz.
Actually, with the Jobs RDF installed, the two dual-cores are actually recognized as 5 CPUs. The entire interface will appear snappier!
Proper link.
Hyperlinks, motherfucker! Have you heard of them?
<a href="http://example.com">Link text</a>
Learn it. Use it.
This is especially important when Slashdot chops up long words, making your posted-as-text URLs useless.
One hundred million billion dollars!
Try eMusic. DRM free, legal, MP3 downloads.
This is not a rumor about another dual-core chip. There is no mention of a chip at all. Apple uses IBM chips,and, as you mention, "IBM has been doing it for a while."
This is about Apple's diagnostic and performance tools supporting more than 2 CPU cores. The implication is, whatever prototypes Apple's working on needs these tools *right now.*
Further, Apple is not much of a server vendor. XServe is great, sure, but it's not how Apple makes its money. You can bet that, if Apple's going 4-way, it's going to have 4-way desktops or workstations.
Windows XP, on the other hand, does not yet support more than two logical CPUs. So any dual-core chip used on an XP box would be by itself...a two-way box. 4-way or larger Windows boxes would have to run Server 2003. Windows Server is not usually blessed for use on personal machines. (Though plenty of people do it.)
So what's the point? The point is, four cores on your desk, not in your closet.
but somewhat questionable nowadays. The iPod was not the first of it's kind by any means, merely the most commerically successful. OSX is based on UNIX; good for it, a smart and useful move, but, well, this is slashdot, y'all know how long unix-based OSes have existed. Apple was not the first to field a 64-bit CPU, though it did beat out AMD's offering, but AMD's chips beat out all the existing 64-bit CPUs and was a far more exciting leap in processing power. When Apple does succeed, nowadays at least, they don't succeed by being first, but by doing it with enough polish that it beats out what might've been awkward implementations that existed prior.
I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
Anyword on a G5 Powerbook? A dual core G5 Powerbook perhaps?
i'm still waiting for a http://rumors.slashdot.org/ section!!
Hyper-Threading is a marketing term for a perfectly legitimate microarchitectural feature more generally known as simultaneous multithreading (SMT).
SMT has nothing to do with "dual input pipes" and absolutely requires more than "a single execution unit." The essential features include storage for more than one processor state (data and status registers, program counter, etc.), the ability to mix instructions from multiple threads within the CPU, and multiple execution units.
The Pentium 4 processor with Hyper-Threading has all of those things, including SEVEN execution units that can operate in parallel (but very rarely all at the same time). HT is a simple version of SMT, but it was also fairly inexpensive to add, giving a 20%-30% performance boost for just a few percent more die area.
Yes, a true dual-core processor without SMT can achieve much better throughput on some code than a single-core SMT processor. But that dual-core processor will be almost twice the size of a single-core SMT processor. Dollar for dollar, SMT is a much better way to get more performance than a multi-core design.
The best designs will use both-- SMT within the core because it's such a big win in cost and power efficiency, and multiple cores because that's the most practical way to take advantage of the high transistor counts available in current semiconductor manufacturing processes.
. png
maybe with 4 physical CPU's they can compete in games.... not that anyone plays games on Macs?
Average is dumb
Look, I haven't really read up on IBM's dual core plans, so excuse me if this is a stupid question, but... could those four checkboxes really map to four processor cores on two different processors, not four separate processors??
Does the chip do the per-core scheduling, or the OS ?
Now why did these*nice* sites stop displaying people's email addresses?
And all I was going to do was set things up so that he can be contacted by all these nice Nigerian business men who are offering $10,000.00(TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS) left by their recently deceased father! Then he could afford to buy one, thus not needing to rely on MLM schemes and spamming referral links.
Okay - so when the slashdot story hit, the update was available, and now (as of 2005.03.11, 1830 CST) the update is no longer available...
...
Maybe those multi-CPU tabs were NOT supposed to be seen after all
Assuming he's right, then at least this time (apart from 'De Plume's "sources" who know a lot more about the cpu than CHUD tools would tell you), Apple only have themselves to blame regarding the release of 4-way dev tools...
To download the current CHUD tools, you have to have an Apple Developer Connection account, which requires you to be under NDA. In theory (purely theory, of course, as any ol' riff raff can sign up for an account at the free level and rebelliously blow off the NDA), nobody with access to the CHUD tools should be talking about the number of CPUs they support.
Now for the wild-assed guessing:
Having essentially four processors would be overkill for most desktop applications, and most organizations needing that kind of power probably won't want it on employees' desks. While everyone else is going batty about "OMG!!! New Power Mac G5s!", my guess is dual-core will show up in the Xserve line.
Apple's making inroads especially in high-performance computing using the Xserves, and this would only further boost the amount of power you could fit in a 1U box for prices lower than the competition.
Xserve Extreme, anyone?
mac is fastest (www.top500.org)
16 billion multiply+Adds per SECOND on a mac form over a years ago, and now much faster macs exist.
www.top500.org shows how few slow AMDs exist (cost per gigaflop is the reason) macs are cheaper.
www.top500.org does not lie, its based on contract offers
macs are for real computation
I work on dualcores on a for spec part : snag this before we are ordered to pull via Jobs's rage
http://www.articasemi.com/page1.html
Dual Front Side Bus (FSB)
DDR2 SDRAM 533/667 Controller
- Configurable as 64/72 or 128/144-bit bus
- ECC option with Chip Kill
32 Lane PCI Express Root Complex supports combinations of 1x, 4x, 8x and 16x lane PCI Express slots
PLL Clock Generator for CPUs, SDRAM, PCI-Express, external PHYs
SATA/SAS 3.0 Gbps (4 ports)
- Hardware RAID acceleration
- Supports external multiplexers for unlimited drive expansion
10/100/1000BaseT Ethernet (2 ports)
- RDMA & iSER extensions
Firewire (2 ports)
USB 2.0 (8 ports) supports a wide range of internal & external peripherals
- WiFi(TM) wireless modem
- Bluetooth(TM) wireless modem
- V.92 modem
- Audio (Analog, Digital & Optical)
- Trackpad/Keyboard (laptops)
- Serial (servers)
SPI (40 Mbps) supports Open Boot Firmware FLASH
I2C (400 Kbps) for System & Power Management Controllers
===
www.top500.org shows PowerPC dominating AMD for over 12 months (per dollar for certain!) and now it will continue for many more months.
www.Top500.org does not lie. Macs are the fastest per dollar for clusters.
same site, lowend mac, after googling and getting turned onto the name from an old slashdot reference thread from years ago, oddly enough.
Daystar Genesis 2 or 4 processor, supposedly some upgrade cards made for them as well. Probably still an interesting machine in 4 processor maxed out memory mode. They claim 12 grand for the 4 processor model when it came out.
Me, still in the inventory here, a 512k, an LC, quadra (600? dang if I can remember now a nice one though, was GFs), (2) IIci, PB280, PB1400. All stick work fine, although the batts on the PBs are more or less totally gone. I keep the 1400 right here next to me in fact, rock solid get on the intarweb if needed, *securely* too. Beats the pants off of everyone else in that regard, heh.. Still can surf with iCab and listen to mp3 net streams with soundjam perfectly. 166 with 64 ram.
That possibility was mentioned in the article or the Slashdot "editorial".
So how many cores will be the maximum number of cores? This statement is really confusing:
Also, there is now support for 4 CPUs, whereas previous versions of these Mac OS X tools only supported 2. This likely means we'll see dual-core Macs by WWDC, and possibly quad Macs based off these dual-core chips by then too."
Does this mean 8 cores in one mac?
Have you even looked at that list?
Intel #5
Apple #7
After that, there are several Intel/AMD clusters, but no more Apples.
Sorry for the leading subject line, but this is an honest question. What benefits does a "dual core" processor have compared to a single core processor? What do the structures which are (presumably) doulbed in a dual core proc do?
4 cores max for now it seems, not 8. ie. 2 x dual-core.
I had seen this way back and had commented here. Although the specs are nice, I'm not sure if it was just his desired future quad Mac or if it's a real product design.
IIRC, Freescale has stated that the e600 MPC8641D dual-core with IMC will not sample until the second half of 2005. Indeed, we have not even seen products based off the G4 7448 yet, and that's supposed to precede the e600 MPC8641D. The 7448 should compensate partially for the bandwidth problem too, since it gets a 200 MHz and 1 MB L2. Most importantly though, it's a direct drop-in replacement for the current 7447A, and thus is a no-brainer upgrade. Interestingly, references to the G4 7448 have already shown up in Apple's CHUD tools.
You can download CHUD thru MacUpdate. Well, at least you could. It seems the ftp link may have been pulled now.
Why rumors? For the same reason you post at Slashdot. Cuz it's a great way to kill time.
Why don't buy a PS3 that has 4 CELL?
They are 4 CPUs and 32 APUs running 4.2GHz each!!!
open4free ©
Two 64-bit *multi gigahertz* dual core CPUs. On your desktop. Running OS X.
You forgot that each core should be multi-threaded as well. This results in the following change to your statement:
Two 64-bit *multi gigahertz* dual core, multithreaded CPUs. On your desktop. Running OS X. That is 8 hardware threads running in tandem, baby!
The reason that it can be true that 1+1 > 2 is that very peculiar nonzero value of the + operator
I'd be very surprised if such a dual-core chip got SMT too. People have been talking about shared L2 cache, SMT, integrated memory controller, POWER5 derivation, etc., but I see the 970MP as really "just" a dual-core 970FX (which is derived from POWER4) with a few tweaks and extra L2 cache. Indeed, that's what the original rumours suggested last year too, and those rumours were quite specific. (eg. Die size 11.629 mm x 13.225 mm.) So, each "CPU" the OS will see for the time being will likely be a true physical core. Eug
Gee what am i going to do with all that power on my new g5! wow itunes is going to run so fast... to bad there nothing usefull i can do on this OS. guess ill just read some more rumor pages with my super stylin machine.
Why would anyone not want to see exiting new mac news! its sooooo coool! get a life homo