*DAMN R6 Forum

*DAMN R6 Community => Tech Talk => Topic started by: BTs_Mysterio on March 12, 2005, 06:00:58 pm



Title: Future Powermacs: Recent Quad evidence (read post before voting)
Post by: BTs_Mysterio on March 12, 2005, 06:00:58 pm
Recent Apple released a update to their CHUD tools. These developer tools track the speed and number of processors in a computer. The update was version 4.1, now pulled by Apple. The update allowed a selection of up to 4 CPUs (instead of 2). There is also now a change in wording from Clock Speed --> Core Frequency as well as Bus Speed --> Bus Frequency. There is also support in this new CHUD update for dual core processors.

If you want to see images of the pulled update, you can see the full topic on Apple Insider Forums:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52013&perpage=40&pagenumber=1

On a side note, the XBOX NEXT is confirmed to have a modified PPC with three cores. This multi-core design is applicable (so they say) to a PPC970 (Perhaps MP version as macrumros said). With all these hints what do you think WWDC will hold.

(I voted Quad 3.0)


Title: Re: Future Powermacs: Recent Quad evidence (read post before voting)
Post by: *DAMN Mauti on March 12, 2005, 06:03:49 pm
Lol you may should change your poll from powerbook to powermac ;-) We can be glad if they next powerbooks pass the 2.0 Ghz border at all.

Bye,

Mauti


Title: Re: Future Powermacs: Recent Quad evidence (read post before voting)
Post by: BTs_Mysterio on March 12, 2005, 06:14:37 pm
Lol you may should change your poll from powerbook to powermac ;-) We can be glad if they next powerbooks pass the 2.0 Ghz border at all.

Powerbook, what ;)? Anyway Powerbooks may get their own G4 dual core 64bit... if only freescale actually followed their own roadmaps for the G4 mobile processor.


Title: Re: Future Powermacs: Recent Quad evidence (read post before voting)
Post by: BFG on March 12, 2005, 06:26:24 pm
2x Dual Core G5 based Powermacs. I can't see us getting those in April... but id love to


Title: Re: Future Powermacs: Recent Quad evidence (read post before voting)
Post by: :MoD:Shade on March 12, 2005, 06:27:59 pm
I say dual 2.8GhZ.  Don't think Apple is ready to jump up to quad processors yet, they will either release the Dual 2.8 for this Expo or the 3 for this expo.


Title: Re: Future Powermacs: Recent Quad evidence (read post before voting)
Post by: BTs_Mysterio on March 12, 2005, 06:31:28 pm
2x Dual Core G5 based Powermacs. I can't see us getting those in April... but id love to

June*


Title: Re: Future Powermacs: Recent Quad evidence (read post before voting)
Post by: BTs_GhostSniper on March 12, 2005, 06:34:40 pm
I voted Dual 3.0GHz.  That's all I want, it's all I've been screaming for since I bought my current G5.  If they do Dual 3.0GHz G5's, I'll be the first in line and trade in my Single-1.8GHz G5 in a heartbeat.  I doubt the next release will do Quad-G5's...that's stretching it considering we are almost a year behind having the 3.0GHz G5 out yet.


Title: Re: Future Powermacs: Recent Quad evidence (read post before voting)
Post by: BTs_Mysterio on March 12, 2005, 06:41:40 pm
Although I do agree, i feel dualcore is a needed thing for processors. With unreal engine 3 supporting dual cores it will be a good boost for gamers. Intel is very near their own dual core chips as well as AMD. The question of Quad isn't so much of a design issue, as it is a issue of them doing multi core chips like the rest of the industry hopes in 2005. Though it wasn't so much of a thing, Apple did lead with 90nm chips.


Title: Re: Future Powermacs: Recent Quad evidence (read post before voting)
Post by: crypt on March 12, 2005, 11:28:53 pm
I voted Dual 3.0GHz.  That's all I want, it's all I've been screaming for since I bought my current G5.  If they do Dual 3.0GHz G5's, I'll be the first in line and trade in my Single-1.8GHz G5 in a heartbeat.  I doubt the next release will do Quad-G5's...that's stretching it considering we are almost a year behind having the 3.0GHz G5 out yet.

You know exactly where to send it.