jaxstate
Jul 27, 11:15 AM
Once again, I read it and read it well. The big deal about the G5 being in Mac was that the entire system was redesigned for better performance. Go read about the G5 system architecture if apple still has it up.
You really need to read about this...these chips are just a little higher clock speed. But they have a 20%+ boost at the same clock speed. They ARE making better chip designs instead of just bumping clock speed. Intel/Apple is actually doing pretty much the opposite of what you accuse them of doing.
You really need to read about this...these chips are just a little higher clock speed. But they have a 20%+ boost at the same clock speed. They ARE making better chip designs instead of just bumping clock speed. Intel/Apple is actually doing pretty much the opposite of what you accuse them of doing.
Apple Corps
Aug 27, 09:27 AM
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.
Why are you saying the new chips will be more costly??? All reports indicate that Merom will release at the same cost as Yonah.
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.
Why are you saying the new chips will be more costly??? All reports indicate that Merom will release at the same cost as Yonah.
netdog
Aug 11, 02:51 PM
I really think the time is coming soon where any phone that does not have Wifi that is easy to switch on and off will be considered obsolete.
leekohler
Apr 27, 12:58 PM
As for the stimulus packages, Ford just reported a profit, and that company refused the stimulus money. If a company is going to fail let it do that. Let it take responsibility for its own blunders. Don't let a codependent government rescue it.
That's not "liberalism". Bush did the same thing for the banks. And when did Obama leave a baby in a room alone to die? Dude, what are you smoking today? ;)
That's not "liberalism". Bush did the same thing for the banks. And when did Obama leave a baby in a room alone to die? Dude, what are you smoking today? ;)
spillproof
Mar 22, 01:51 PM
Now it has become a battle of who will get my $500 bucks.
Let the games begin! *grabs popcorn and soda*
Let the games begin! *grabs popcorn and soda*
Multimedia
Aug 19, 12:33 PM
And I'm not convinced this is only an application problem. When I run Handbrake on the Quad G5 alone it uses just over two cores 203% @ about 100fps analysis (1st Pass of 2) speed. If I add a Toast encode while that is happening, Handbrake takes a huge hit down to below 150% @ 70-80 fps analysis while Toast can only use about 130% instead of more alone. So the Tiger OS X seems to have difficulty managing more than one multicore application's core usage allocation up to its maximum capability - IE Tiger is not so MultiCore Enabeled as it could be IE Leopard probably will be much moreso - let's hope that is one of its TOP SECRETS.
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better. Handbrake alone can analyze up to around 134fps while writing at about 107 fps using about 1.5-1.75 cores. So while not yet fully optimized for Mac Pro yet, it's already outperforming the Quad G5 significantly. Handbrake would appear to analyze files about 33% faster while writing them about 15% faster while using 1.5 to 1.75 cores. Quad G5 does analysis @ about 100fps and writes about 93 fps (2nd Pass) using up to about 2.2 cores.
Toast 7.1 UB uses Mac Pro cores much more than it does Quad cores - in the range of 280 - 310% IE about 3 cores compared to only about 1.5 cores on the Quad G5 as well as on the Dual Core G5. Unfortunately I didn't have encode times for each of the sample files I brought with me from the Quad so I don't know the real time how much faster that really amounts to. Running simultaneously on the Mac Pro, Toast would use over 2.5 cores while handbrake would use only one or less than one at best.
Together simultaneously on Mac Pro 2.66 it's
Toast/Handbrake
2.7 cores/1 core best
2.5 cores/.75 core worst
Handbrake during Toast is down to as few as 60fps but sometimes up to 100fps as well. Toast meanwhile is Still consuming up to almost 3 cores with Handbrake running at the same time. So Toast would appear to be much more optimized for the Mac Pro's MultiCores than it is for the Quad G5's Multicores. Same could be said for Handbrake - especially since it is not really fully Optimized for Mac Pro yet.
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better. Handbrake alone can analyze up to around 134fps while writing at about 107 fps using about 1.5-1.75 cores. So while not yet fully optimized for Mac Pro yet, it's already outperforming the Quad G5 significantly. Handbrake would appear to analyze files about 33% faster while writing them about 15% faster while using 1.5 to 1.75 cores. Quad G5 does analysis @ about 100fps and writes about 93 fps (2nd Pass) using up to about 2.2 cores.
Toast 7.1 UB uses Mac Pro cores much more than it does Quad cores - in the range of 280 - 310% IE about 3 cores compared to only about 1.5 cores on the Quad G5 as well as on the Dual Core G5. Unfortunately I didn't have encode times for each of the sample files I brought with me from the Quad so I don't know the real time how much faster that really amounts to. Running simultaneously on the Mac Pro, Toast would use over 2.5 cores while handbrake would use only one or less than one at best.
Together simultaneously on Mac Pro 2.66 it's
Toast/Handbrake
2.7 cores/1 core best
2.5 cores/.75 core worst
Handbrake during Toast is down to as few as 60fps but sometimes up to 100fps as well. Toast meanwhile is Still consuming up to almost 3 cores with Handbrake running at the same time. So Toast would appear to be much more optimized for the Mac Pro's MultiCores than it is for the Quad G5's Multicores. Same could be said for Handbrake - especially since it is not really fully Optimized for Mac Pro yet.
Evangelion
Sep 14, 01:14 AM
Didn't you get the memo, Hyperthreading was a joke.
At worst, it slowed performance down by few percent. At best, it gave substantial boost in performance. And multitasking-tests clearly benefitted from HyperThreading. That said, Intel dropped it, because it apparently consumed too much power. But we might see HT in some future Intel-CPU's at some point, you never know.
HT as such is not a bad idea. Sun UltraSparc T1 uses such a scheme extensively.
At worst, it slowed performance down by few percent. At best, it gave substantial boost in performance. And multitasking-tests clearly benefitted from HyperThreading. That said, Intel dropped it, because it apparently consumed too much power. But we might see HT in some future Intel-CPU's at some point, you never know.
HT as such is not a bad idea. Sun UltraSparc T1 uses such a scheme extensively.
wpotere
Apr 27, 12:59 PM
Would you call someone a moderate when he would leave a baby alone in a room to die after the baby had survived an abortion? Most people here already know that I'm against the stimulus and against "gay" rights. As for the stimulus packages, Ford just reported a profit, and that company refused the stimulus money. If a company is going to fail let it do that. Let it take responsibility for its own blunders. Don't let a codependent government rescue it.
You do realize that Bush started that right? As for Ford, their European division saved their butts and the jobs lost would have made the recession a lot worse. Yeah, good idea, let it all fail. Maybe we should let the government fail as well eh? They seem to be having monetary issues now.
You do realize that Bush started that right? As for Ford, their European division saved their butts and the jobs lost would have made the recession a lot worse. Yeah, good idea, let it all fail. Maybe we should let the government fail as well eh? They seem to be having monetary issues now.
Thor74
Apr 25, 03:55 PM
I'm fine with the data storage on my phone of where I have been based on cell tower locations. It's up to me to protect and secure my own phone.
The reason I think this media blast again Apple is mainly BS is because 3 out of the 4 explanations of WHY this data collection is so Evil or Worrisome is based on some sort of "your dating partner could track your whereabouts" example. Huh? I've seen that example recycled at least 10 times in various tech sites.
So this would be 75% (my own numbers) less a big deal if tech bloggers were less concerned about getting busted for cheating around or going to places they said they weren't?
I know it is an over simplified scenario, but still, stop cheating, stop hitting the strip club or etc if you don't want to get busted. Better yet, break up with your partner and go crazy.
I do NOT like "Big Brother" looking into my business, but it's my ass if I lie or play around and I don't blame Apple, Google or anyone else for that if I get busted.
The people that complain about this security issue need to find a better main example for this genuine (but rather minor) security flaw IMO.
The reason I think this media blast again Apple is mainly BS is because 3 out of the 4 explanations of WHY this data collection is so Evil or Worrisome is based on some sort of "your dating partner could track your whereabouts" example. Huh? I've seen that example recycled at least 10 times in various tech sites.
So this would be 75% (my own numbers) less a big deal if tech bloggers were less concerned about getting busted for cheating around or going to places they said they weren't?
I know it is an over simplified scenario, but still, stop cheating, stop hitting the strip club or etc if you don't want to get busted. Better yet, break up with your partner and go crazy.
I do NOT like "Big Brother" looking into my business, but it's my ass if I lie or play around and I don't blame Apple, Google or anyone else for that if I get busted.
The people that complain about this security issue need to find a better main example for this genuine (but rather minor) security flaw IMO.
Kwill
Mar 22, 12:49 PM
Meanwhile, Apple is drowning in orders and battling light leaks (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/22/buyers.complain.of.multiple.faulty.replacements/) in displays. If the quality cannot be improved expeditiously, would-be customers may investigate the competition. :(
jamesW135
Aug 19, 10:16 PM
Whoa! I'm amazed at how it compared to the G5 in the Photoshop Speed test. If it was this fast now. Imagine PS once it's a UB!!:eek:
Zadillo
Aug 27, 06:04 AM
Damn PowerPC fans.
Apple is INTEL now. We Love Intel Because Stevie Tells Us So.
We hate AMD and IBM. Should Apple ever move to another CPU provider, we will seamlessly transition to hating Intel again. This is the Way of the Mac.
What's so good about G5's anyway? They are slow, too hot, and skull juice.
Why do we love Intel? Because Steve says to, and Core 2 Duo is powerful, cool, not permanently drunk, allows us to run Windows and helps Apple increase its market share.
We love ATi because just like Intel, their products are the best at the moment. We still love nVIDIA because their GPUs are in the Mac Pro.
We love Israel because they make our Core 2 Duos and we love China because they make our Macs. We love California because that's where Our Lord Stevie J is (Don't particularly care about the rest of the US, sorry guys).
We love our Big Cats because they run so fast and look so clean and powerful (Hmmm... Mystery of OS codenames revealed?) and of course because they are not Windows, which are susceptible to breaking...
People who live in Windows shouldn't throw Viruses?
Off track...
Anyway, Rawr to all you PowerPC fanboys (And girls)
Intel 4EVER!
I know this is just a joke, but even so it's stupid, because the implication is that the only reason anyone here might like the chips Intel is coming out with is because they have been brainwashed into liking them now that Apple uses them (i.e. if Apple was still using PowerPC chips, or had switched to AMD, we would all be sitting here talking about how crappy the Core 2 Duo chips are).
I'm sure there are some people like that, but it is insulting to plenty of people here who actually do know something about the various chips that Intel and AMD make and base their opinions on them just on their actual merits and weaknesses.
-Zadillo
Apple is INTEL now. We Love Intel Because Stevie Tells Us So.
We hate AMD and IBM. Should Apple ever move to another CPU provider, we will seamlessly transition to hating Intel again. This is the Way of the Mac.
What's so good about G5's anyway? They are slow, too hot, and skull juice.
Why do we love Intel? Because Steve says to, and Core 2 Duo is powerful, cool, not permanently drunk, allows us to run Windows and helps Apple increase its market share.
We love ATi because just like Intel, their products are the best at the moment. We still love nVIDIA because their GPUs are in the Mac Pro.
We love Israel because they make our Core 2 Duos and we love China because they make our Macs. We love California because that's where Our Lord Stevie J is (Don't particularly care about the rest of the US, sorry guys).
We love our Big Cats because they run so fast and look so clean and powerful (Hmmm... Mystery of OS codenames revealed?) and of course because they are not Windows, which are susceptible to breaking...
People who live in Windows shouldn't throw Viruses?
Off track...
Anyway, Rawr to all you PowerPC fanboys (And girls)
Intel 4EVER!
I know this is just a joke, but even so it's stupid, because the implication is that the only reason anyone here might like the chips Intel is coming out with is because they have been brainwashed into liking them now that Apple uses them (i.e. if Apple was still using PowerPC chips, or had switched to AMD, we would all be sitting here talking about how crappy the Core 2 Duo chips are).
I'm sure there are some people like that, but it is insulting to plenty of people here who actually do know something about the various chips that Intel and AMD make and base their opinions on them just on their actual merits and weaknesses.
-Zadillo
Bill McEnaney
Apr 29, 09:40 AM
Yes, the same people who noticed that there was something "fishy" about Obama's short form birth certificate.
For me, the birth certificate issue is a dead issue.
For me, the birth certificate issue is a dead issue.
tumblebird
Nov 28, 11:30 PM
That Doug Morris is a slimeball. Who's to say I even own any Universal music. I listen to Indie, primarily. I buy all my music, most of it on CD which I digitize, or via the iTunes Music Store. Who is Universal to demand my dollar? Or three for that matter, one for each iPod I have purchased. There are a lot of labels out there. They can't all get a portion. Apple owes them NOTHING. Did they get music from Sony for the Walkman? How many of us listened to mix tapes from friends on those? I know that most of my tapes were mixes from records and CDs. Universal is off base and greedy. Don't let this happen, Mr. Steve Jobs! You're in the right.
63dot
Aug 18, 09:26 AM
i'm in
we can start today
you take everything east of kansas and i will take the western region of the usa
when we have enough money, i can go raid asia and australia/new zealand for old G5s and you can go after europe and the middle east
when we are done we will be rich and could sit on the same oil board as bin laden, dick cheney, and several of the bush family members
and based on who is taller, one of us could be dr. evil and the other one will be mini me
sound good?
we can start today
you take everything east of kansas and i will take the western region of the usa
when we have enough money, i can go raid asia and australia/new zealand for old G5s and you can go after europe and the middle east
when we are done we will be rich and could sit on the same oil board as bin laden, dick cheney, and several of the bush family members
and based on who is taller, one of us could be dr. evil and the other one will be mini me
sound good?
CalBoy
Apr 11, 05:00 PM
Apple can create Christmas any day of the year.
Well that's just it; Apple usually relies on two Christmases per year for each of it's major products.
The first is the initial launch and the second is the Christmas shopping season.
The reason for this is two-fold. The first is so supplies are not constrained for an extended period at one time and the second is so Apple can make use of multiple news cycles to get free press.
If the iPhone 5 is launched just before Christmas it would wreak havoc on Apple's ability to supply the market of not only the US, but also the world. Apple usually uses the downtime from late summer to Christmas to shore up production and supplies for Christmas. There just isn't a good basis for this rumor.
Well that's just it; Apple usually relies on two Christmases per year for each of it's major products.
The first is the initial launch and the second is the Christmas shopping season.
The reason for this is two-fold. The first is so supplies are not constrained for an extended period at one time and the second is so Apple can make use of multiple news cycles to get free press.
If the iPhone 5 is launched just before Christmas it would wreak havoc on Apple's ability to supply the market of not only the US, but also the world. Apple usually uses the downtime from late summer to Christmas to shore up production and supplies for Christmas. There just isn't a good basis for this rumor.
basesloaded190
Apr 6, 11:03 AM
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
You obviously don't know how powerful SB actually is compared to C2D
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
You obviously don't know how powerful SB actually is compared to C2D
puggles
Jun 15, 01:50 PM
Well I went to RS around 2 EST and she couldn't get it to go through but she just called me and said im all set... Not holding my breath though. I have a backup preorder at apple...it would be way easier to just go to RS though.
fivepoint
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
Precisely. The UN mandate is to enforce a no-fly zone, amongst other things, tasks that are particularly suited for certain nations. I'm no gung-ho supporter of this action in Libya, but it strikes me as similar to Bosnia, with the real political pressure coming particularly from France for very real reasons.
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
No he did not. It was a mistake then, it is a mistake now. The only difference is, I oppose it in all circumstances, regardless of who's president. You only oppose it when it's a Republican in office.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
Reacent Post
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
No he did not. It was a mistake then, it is a mistake now. The only difference is, I oppose it in all circumstances, regardless of who's president. You only oppose it when it's a Republican in office.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
SuperCachetes
Mar 4, 09:17 PM
Logic is my source. Society needs people, no people means no society. If there were no more babies society would eventually collapse.
Wow. Does your logic also tell you that 100% of society is gay? Do you think that only gay males were posting here, asking for a source?
Your example has no relevance to the actual world we live in. Even if every single homosexual on Earth decided not to raise a child (which is far from the truth), we do not all have to make/raise babies to propagate the species.
Wow. Does your logic also tell you that 100% of society is gay? Do you think that only gay males were posting here, asking for a source?
Your example has no relevance to the actual world we live in. Even if every single homosexual on Earth decided not to raise a child (which is far from the truth), we do not all have to make/raise babies to propagate the species.
gregor.hoch
Apr 6, 11:32 AM
13" MBP uses SV chips, i.e. standard voltage (35W). Before it used MV (medium voltage, 25W) chips but Sandy Bridge does not offer CPUs like that. LV (25W) and ULV (17W) chips have not been released yet but will be released shortly like the article says.
If the clock speed and other specs are the same, then the performance is the same. ULV and LV chips are only separated by the TDP which causes the ULV to have lower clock speed. Otherwise they are the same chips.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
If the clock speed and other specs are the same, then the performance is the same. ULV and LV chips are only separated by the TDP which causes the ULV to have lower clock speed. Otherwise they are the same chips.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
Kebabselector
Mar 22, 12:53 PM
Competition is great, but they market the playbook as a Professional Tablet - which is fine, but if it's a Professional tablet why have so many pictures of it running games?
MacRumors
Jul 27, 09:34 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Intel announced (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php) the long anticipated Core 2 Duo processors today. Intel announced 10 new chips including 5 designed for latops (Merom) and 5 for desktops (Conroe).
Core 2 Duo runs at slower clock speeds than Pentium-era chips, but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle, said Sean Tucker, a product manager at HP. Thanks to that slower speed, Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4�s 95 watts and Pentium D�s 130 watts.
Intel has already started shipping Core 2 Duo chips to manufacturers, so the first Core 2 Duo Desktop machines should reach consumers in early August. Meanwhile Core 2 Duo laptops will reach consumers by the end of August.
Conroe and Merom are successors to the Core Duo processor which was introduced by Intel early this year. The Core Duo (Yonah) was the first Intel chip used in Apple's switch to intel earlier this year.
At present Apple's lineup is as follows:
Intel: MacBook, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac mini: Core Duo or Core Solo (Yonah)
PowerPC: PowerMac, Xserve: PowerPC 970 (G5)
Newer processors from Intel sharing a new architecture now include:
Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom)
Core 2 Duo desktop (Conroe)
Xeon 5100 (Woodcrest)
Woodcrest is rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) to be used in the Mac Pro, which is expected be released at WWDC 2006. Apple's use of the Core 2 Duo is not yet clear, but the Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom) is pin compatible (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060613185240.shtml) with the current Core Duo (Yonah). This means that Apple could easily upgrade the existing Intel-based Macs to the newer processor with no design changes.
Intel announced (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php) the long anticipated Core 2 Duo processors today. Intel announced 10 new chips including 5 designed for latops (Merom) and 5 for desktops (Conroe).
Core 2 Duo runs at slower clock speeds than Pentium-era chips, but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle, said Sean Tucker, a product manager at HP. Thanks to that slower speed, Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4�s 95 watts and Pentium D�s 130 watts.
Intel has already started shipping Core 2 Duo chips to manufacturers, so the first Core 2 Duo Desktop machines should reach consumers in early August. Meanwhile Core 2 Duo laptops will reach consumers by the end of August.
Conroe and Merom are successors to the Core Duo processor which was introduced by Intel early this year. The Core Duo (Yonah) was the first Intel chip used in Apple's switch to intel earlier this year.
At present Apple's lineup is as follows:
Intel: MacBook, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac mini: Core Duo or Core Solo (Yonah)
PowerPC: PowerMac, Xserve: PowerPC 970 (G5)
Newer processors from Intel sharing a new architecture now include:
Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom)
Core 2 Duo desktop (Conroe)
Xeon 5100 (Woodcrest)
Woodcrest is rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) to be used in the Mac Pro, which is expected be released at WWDC 2006. Apple's use of the Core 2 Duo is not yet clear, but the Core 2 Duo mobile (Merom) is pin compatible (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060613185240.shtml) with the current Core Duo (Yonah). This means that Apple could easily upgrade the existing Intel-based Macs to the newer processor with no design changes.
ugp
Jun 9, 03:03 PM
Went down to Radio Shack today. They are doing a trade in but you're never gonna get the max price they offer unless it's out of the box new. My 3gs has normal wear over the year so they will only give 230 for it.
And I have a feeling trading in prices will drop when the iPhone 4 drops.
Yeah it sucks because we have no way of knowing if the trade in values will drop on launch day or should we trade in the day before. So far employees have no word on them doing so but Radio Shack is notorious for not keeping them in the loop when it comes to important information like this.
And I have a feeling trading in prices will drop when the iPhone 4 drops.
Yeah it sucks because we have no way of knowing if the trade in values will drop on launch day or should we trade in the day before. So far employees have no word on them doing so but Radio Shack is notorious for not keeping them in the loop when it comes to important information like this.
0 comments:
Post a Comment