Slashdot Mirror


Merom in MacBook and MacBook Pros in September?

Kevin C. Tofel writes "If you want to see where the computer industry is going, you often have to watch the computer component manufacturers, and that's just what DigiTimes did. AsusTek and Quanta both produce Apple notebooks and sources appear to have just revealed that September is the month for 64-bit Merom CPUs in the MacBook and MacBook Pro line."

5 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. Digitimes is not a good predictor. by hlimethe3rd · · Score: 5, Informative

    Digitimes is not a good site for this kind of thing. Historically, they've been very poor with these kinds of predictions. I'm not going to find any examples right now, but searching the archives of macrumors.com or some similar site will turn out many.

  2. TRFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Real Fabulous Article, instead of the submitters lame-ass ad page.

  3. Re:What is the deal with 64 bit? by richdun · · Score: 5, Informative

    Maybe. OS X 10.4 (Tiger) was the first version of OS X to support 64-bit, and some apps use it, but the Intel switch happened too soon for many to start using it (since the first Intel processors were only 32-bit, leaving the iMac G5 and PowerMac G5 the only 64-bit capable Macs before the Mac Pro). Leopard (OS X 10.5) will definitely use more 64-bit stuff, as the new Cocoa/Carbon libraries will be in 64-bit with native 64 and 32-bit support. At a minimum, I'd expect Apple to convert a lot of the pro and iLife apps to 64-bit, as they tend to use their own technologies pretty quickly (for obvious reasons).

    So for Windows, 64-bit may not be a big deal, but for OS X, there should be more support very soon.

  4. Re:What is the deal with 64 bit? by eturro · · Score: 5, Informative
    Sure, you can get larger memory addressing, but there aren't that many machines where 32-bit's 2GB limit has come into play.
    2^32 bits = 4GB, not 2GB.
  5. Re:What is the deal with 64 bit? by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is a big difference between 64 bit on the X86 and 64-bit on the PPC.
    To start off with the X86 architecture really does suck. It is register starved and the instruction set is miserable. It is a pig but because Intel and AMD have such a huge potential market they have thrown enough time , talent, and money to make it a very fast and cheap pig.
    The PPC didn't gain a whole lot from going to 64 bit. If a program didn't need to do 64 bit math or a 64 bit address space then it would run as fast of faster as a 32 program. BTW this is a good thing. It means that the PPC was broken to start with and didn't force programs to use 64 bit pointers if they didn't need to.
    When AMD created the Athlon 64 it fixed one of the X86s worst problems. AMD doubled the number of registers. Even if a program doesn't do 64 bit math or doesn't need more than four gigabytes of memory that will run 30% to 60% faster when compiled for 64 bit than 32 bit.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.