[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: How many times must Apple make such DRASTIC architecture changes?



On 2005-06-10 04:20:25 +0300, ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> said:

In article <Cp1qe.26441$J12.21905@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>,
 Kelly Hall <khall@acm.org> wrote:

Sean Fahey wrote:
The PPC wasn't going to go where Apple needed , fast enough. The Pentium 4
is actually a pretty good processor, with better branching and latency then
the PPC. Now they've got dual cores, hyper-threading - it was a good time to
make the change. Get over it already.

Apple doesn't want Pentium 4, although perhaps the dual core versions will sell to a segment of their market. What Apple wants is the Pentium M for the notebooks.

I'm quite certain Apple also wants the later desktop chips that will be based on it. Processors that evolve from the current Pentium-M architecture are eventually going to take over Intel's entire lineup, or so say the roadmaps. Even the high-end Xeon's market segment will be filled by such chips by the end of 2007. Turns out Intel can design a pretty good chip when it's not buying into its own MHz myth (which it isn't with this architecture, unlike with the P4).

Hi,

I wonder did you ever run Pentium 4 on RDRAM setup (Rambus). The first ones came with RDRAM, I had 512mb RDRAM and it rocked here. E.g. it wasn't slower than P3 :) Slower than my g5.

Is there a hope that RDRAM is coming back with those home setups? I know its not "dead", its just moved to pro market. Oh and suing everyone around. :)

As we accept the unacceptable, lets hope they go with whatever the best available ignoring the price.

Ilgaz