Intel

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by colosodian, Jun 4, 2005.

  1. colosodian

    colosodian Next Gen

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SF Bay
  2. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,490
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    welcome to last week... sounds like a rumor.
     
  3. IcyHot4Life

    IcyHot4Life Str8 Ballin'

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    18,151
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Inquire Within
    in all likelihood it is a partnership on a chip for an upcoming / upgraded device... e.g. video iPod.

    VERY unlikely that Apple is considering switching CPU. Though it wouldn't be that hard to do with OS X (x86 builds have been floating around cupertino forever), the overhead of getting your software makers to convert is simply ridiculous, and it would serve to erode the hardware advantage they have of a platform that is non-competing with run of the mill PC hardware.

    I'm tired but you get my point :hs:
     
  4. kilmanjaro

    kilmanjaro 6MT

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,937
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    OKC
    Some believe the talks are only talks and are really to try and motivate IBM to get off its ass and get moving on the mobile/faster G5's.
     
  5. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,490
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    chances are that we will never see a mobile g5 -- at least not with the current g5 chips. Something has to happen to reduce power consumption and heat generation.
     
  6. maczter

    maczter Life is trying things to see if they work.

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,622
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    I tend to agree with this line of thought. Similar things happen every couple of years with Dell here in Austin. Stories come out that they are considering using AMD processors in addition to Intel. Everyone at AMD wets themselves, Intel offers Dell better pricing to keep from losing business, then they come out and say they've decided to stick with Intel only. :greddy:

    ...so when it came to buy my last two pc's, i sent my business elsewhere.
     
  7. Laserbeak

    Laserbeak Remember kids! Be like Billy! BEHAVE YOURSELVES!

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Messages:
    23,226
    Likes Received:
    168
    Location:
    WA
    God help us all if they use Celerons.
     
  8. untoastytoast

    untoastytoast The Glory Days

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    10,842
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Palace of Auburn Hills
    Is this a joke? :squint:
     
  9. rpark

    rpark New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Isla Vista, California
    No one will pay for a 2000 dollar celeron computer.
     
  10. Laserbeak

    Laserbeak Remember kids! Be like Billy! BEHAVE YOURSELVES!

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Messages:
    23,226
    Likes Received:
    168
    Location:
    WA
    I wouldn't even pay $250.00 for a Celeron computer.
     
  11. rpark

    rpark New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Isla Vista, California
    My point exactly, they won't use celerons if they know whats good for them.
     
  12. Jkuao

    Jkuao New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    513
    Likes Received:
    0
    You have to ask though how much money IBM can be making from the G4 or the G5. IBM tends not to hold back on cutting off or selling underperforming divisions to keep their profits up. Just look how they sold off their PC market which they invented. Apple moves maybe 500,000 iMac's and another 200,000 G5's a quarter. Figure another 500,000 G4's through iBooks, PowerBooks, and Mini's and you're looking at a total of 1.4 million to 1.5 million processors from IBM in the 1st quarter this year. That doesn't buy a huge amount of leverage with IBM when Sony and Microsoft can probably move 10-15 million boxes a quarter worldwide between them. Of course this extra revenue for IBM's processor division could significantly help PowerPC's position for future development but it might also reduce the supply of available G5's if IBM spends all their capacity on game consoles. Remember that fab plants can cost over 100 mill these days...especially those pushing 90nm and below.

    Dell alone ships almost 9 million computers a quarter and virtually all of them are powered by Intel hardware. IBM may have serious engineering muscle but its hard to argue against Intel's R&D/fab capacity when it's their bread and butter. PC shipments hit about 170 million units per year and IBM powers approximately 6 million of those. In the end it'll be about economics. If Intel/AMD can supply comprable chips for less, you might find a high end Mac pushing a quad AMD 64 setup someday which in itself wouldn't be a bad proposition.
     
  13. maczter

    maczter Life is trying things to see if they work.

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,622
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    as low power processors go, i'd think they'd be more likely to use Pentium M's if anything.

    ...but i don't see any of this stuff really happening.

    ...though I agree that the Athlon 64's and/or Opterons would be nice.
     
  14. IcyHot4Life

    IcyHot4Life Str8 Ballin'

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    18,151
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Inquire Within
    :love: I hate Dell
     
  15. Laserbeak

    Laserbeak Remember kids! Be like Billy! BEHAVE YOURSELVES!

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Messages:
    23,226
    Likes Received:
    168
    Location:
    WA
    [​IMG]

    :o
     
  16. Laserbeak

    Laserbeak Remember kids! Be like Billy! BEHAVE YOURSELVES!

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Messages:
    23,226
    Likes Received:
    168
    Location:
    WA
    The Pentium M is about the only Intel CPU I have any respect for. The P4 desktop version just feels so...dated IMHO.
     
  17. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,490
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    yea, because a 3.6GHz EMT64 is "dated" :rofl:
     
  18. Laserbeak

    Laserbeak Remember kids! Be like Billy! BEHAVE YOURSELVES!

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Messages:
    23,226
    Likes Received:
    168
    Location:
    WA
    AMD will always be > Intel for the sheer fact that they are more innovative in terms of their R&D IMO, and you get more bang for the buck.

    I know! Let's just keep raising the frequency instead of, gasp, actually putting effort into increasing efficiency and finding a better way to do things across the board first! Sound like a familiar argument to you? :hsugh:

    Call me an AMD fanboy if you wish, but I prefer to be able to do the same thing on my computer (if not more) without paying up the ass to support a company's advertising campaign to a general populous that takes everything they hear some random ock (read: salesman) tell them as gospel.
     
  19. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,490
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    If you price out two comprable, high-end machines, Intel and AMD are the same price.

    And if you do content creation, you can't beat a P4's performance for the money.
     
  20. Laserbeak

    Laserbeak Remember kids! Be like Billy! BEHAVE YOURSELVES!

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Messages:
    23,226
    Likes Received:
    168
    Location:
    WA
    I was looking at more of a business-class computer with a long useful life and low TCO in mind myself.

    In the environment I support, the last time we had a heterogenous CPU environment, the AMD desktops outlasted the Intel desktops by a landslide (at least in computer years), were better performing for the money, more responsive to system and hardware optimizations, and more reliable in the long run.

    The Intel boxes just don't seem to last very long here before needing upgrades and/or replacements. :sad2:
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2005
  21. teh noob

    teh noob New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    UK
    I don't think they'll do it. They'll have to make a new Mac OS X that runs on an intel processor... the new OS has only just come out too. Then you'd have two seperate operating systems to look out for... you'd have to make separate software for each one, it would be too much trouble. I doubt it will happen.
     
  22. Peyomp

    Peyomp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    If Intel were to make processors for Apple, I'd expect them to make a PowerPC for the next line of Apple notebooks, and I'd expect them to have been working on it for some time... so that they can release within a year.

    It will be interesting to see if this actually turns into truth in some form, tomorrow, or is just another bullshit rumor.
     
  23. teh noob

    teh noob New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    UK
    Yah, I'm all up for them making a similar processor. It's just, Apple wouldn't be stupid enough to go onto a brand new processor when there have been recent Pbook/iBook/iMac/eMac/Powermac/Mac mini updates... and of course, the new OS.

    I read somewhere about usign the PS3 Cell Chip (PPC variation) as the Powerbook G5 processor...
     
  24. untoastytoast

    untoastytoast The Glory Days

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    10,842
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Palace of Auburn Hills
    Well, we'll probably find out about all of this in roughly 23 hours. :anxious:
     
  25. diranged

    diranged New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,399
    Likes Received:
    0
    OS X has been ported to X86 since day #1... at least the core OS (Darwin) and most of their proprietary GUI. The real trick is driver support and how they will do hardware support. I suspect they may build their own BIOS (or an OpenFirmware for X86) that will be required to boot OSX -- so that people still have to buy THEIR hardware in order to get the OS. Then again, thats OK with me :p
     

Share This Page