Author: Darrel Briley
Date: 09:45:36 06/05/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 05, 2005 at 04:38:34, Darrel Briley wrote:
>As has been rumored previously.
>
>Apple to switch to Intel chips starting in '06-CNET
>Reuters - 6 hours ago
>SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Apple Computer Inc. (AAPL.O: Quote, Profile, Research)
>plans to announce on Monday that it will switch ...
>http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=technologyNews&storyID=8697271
>
>Coming on Monday: Intel-Based Macs?
>PC World - Jun 3, 2005
>One of PC World's esteemed competitors (hint: Its initials are News.com) is
>reporting that Steve Jobs will announce at Monday's Apple World Wide Developer
>...
>http://blogs.pcworld.com/techlog/archives/000706.html
>
>Apple to ditch IBM, switch to Intel chips
>ZDNet - Jun 3, 2005
>Apple Computer plans to announce Monday that it's scrapping its partnership with
>IBM and switching its computers to Intel's microprocessors, CNET News.com has
>...
>http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-5731398.html
>
>
>
>And Finally...
>http://news.com.com/Apple+to+ditch+IBM%2C+switch+to+Intel+chips/2100-1006_3-5731398.html?tag=nefd.lede
>Apple to ditch IBM, switch to Intel chips
>Published: June 3, 2005, 5:08 PM PDT
>Last modified: June 3, 2005, 5:11 PM PDT
>By Stephen Shankland
>Staff Writer, CNET News.com
>
>TrackBack Print E-mail TalkBack
>update Apple Computer plans to announce Monday that it's scrapping its
>partnership with IBM and switching its computers to Intel's microprocessors,
>CNET News.com has learned.
>
>Apple has used IBM's PowerPC processors since 1994, but will begin a phased
>transition to Intel's chips, sources familiar with the situation said. Apple
>plans to move lower-end computers such as the Mac Mini to Intel chips in
>mid-2006 and higher-end models such as the Power Mac in mid-2007, sources said.
>
>The announcement is expected Monday at Apple's Worldwide Developer Conference in
>San Francisco, at which Chief Executive Steve Jobs is giving the keynote speech.
>The conference would be an appropriate venue: Changing the chips would require
>programmers to rewrite their software to take full advantage of the new
>processor.
>
>IBM, Intel and Apple declined to comment for this story.
>
>Related Story
>Apple and Intel: film stars?
>The high-powered pairing could set
>the stage for a Hollywood ending. The Wall Street Journal reported last month
>that Apple was considering switching to Intel, but many analysts were skeptical
>citing the difficulty and risk to Apple.
>
>That skepticism remains. "If they actually do that, I will be surprised, amazed
>and concerned," said Insight 64 analyst Nathan Brookwood. "I don't know that
>Apple's market share can survive another architecture shift. Every time they do
>this, they lose more customers" and more software partners, he said.
>
>Apple successfully navigated a switch in the 1990s from Motorola's 680x0 line of
>processors to the Power line jointly made by Motorola and IBM. That switch also
>required software to be revamped to take advantage of the new processors'
>performance, but emulation software permitted older programs to run on the new
>machines. (Motorola spinoff Freescale currently makes PowerPC processors for
>Apple notebooks and the Mac Mini.)
>
>The relationship between Apple and IBM has been rocky at times. Apple openly
>criticized IBM for chip delivery problems, though Big Blue said it fixed the
>issue. More recent concerns, which helped spur the Intel deal, included tension
>between Apple's desire for a wide variety of PowerPC processors and IBM's
>concerns about the profitability of a low-volume business, according to one
>source familiar with the partnership.
>
>Over the years, Apple has discussed potential deals with Intel and Advanced
>Micro Devices, chipmaker representatives have said.
>
>One advantage Apple has this time: The open-source FreeBSD operating system, of
>which Mac OS X is a variant, already runs on x86 chips such as Intel's Pentium.
>And Jobs has said Mac OS X could easily run on x86 chips.
>
>The move also raises questions about Apple's future computer strategy. One basic
>choice it has in the Intel-based PC realm is whether to permit its Mac OS X
>operating system to run on any company's computer or only its own.
>
>IBM loses cachet with the end of the Apple partnership, but it can take
>consolation in that it's designing and manufacturing the Power family processors
>for future gaming consoles from Microsoft, Sony and Ninendo, said Clay Ryder, a
>Sageza Group analyst.
>
>"I would think in the sheer volume, all the stuff they're doing with the game
>consoles would be bigger. But anytime you lose a high-profile customer, that
>hurts in ways that are not quantifiable but that still hurt," Ryder said.
>
> Previous Next Indeed, IBM has a "Power Everywhere" marketing campaign to
>tout the wide use of its Power processors. The chips show up in everything from
>networking equipment to IBM servers to the most powerful supercomputer, Blue
>Gene/L.
>
>Intel dominates the PC processor business, with an 81.7 percent market share in
>the first quarter of 2005, compared with 16.9 percent for Advanced Micro
>Devices, according to Dean McCarron of Mercury Research. Those numbers do not
>include PowerPC processors. However, Apple has roughly 1.8 percent of the
>worldwide PC market, he added.
>
>Apple shipped 1.07 million PCs in the first quarter, and its move to Intel would
>likely bump up the chipmaker's shipments by a corresponding amount, McCarron
>added.
>
>CNET News.com's Michael Kanellos and Richard Shim contributed to this report.
>
>Maybe in 2006 or 2007 Intel will have an answer to AMD's overall performance
>lead...maybe not.
There's a nice writeup at Anandtech comparing OSX and Linux workstation/server
performance. Well worth a read.
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2436
Some quotes:
"To test the branch prediction, we used the benchmark " Queens". Queens is a
very well known problem where you have to place n chess Queens on an n x n
board. The catch is that no single Queen must be able to attack the other. The
exhaustive search strategy for finding a solution to placing the Queens on a
chess board so they don't attack each other is the algorithm behind this
benchmark, and it contains some very branch intensive code.....At 2.7 GHz, the
G5 was just as fast as the Xeon. It is pretty clear that despite the enormous 31
stage pipeline, the fantastic branch predictor of the "Xeon Pentium 4" is
capable of keeping the damage to a minimum. The Opteron's branch predictor seems
to be at the level of G5's: the branch misprediction penalty of the G5 is 30%
higher, and the Opteron does about 30% better."
"Ever heard about the famous English Plum pudding? That is the best way to
describe the MySQL performance on the G5/ Mac OS X server combination.
Performance is decent with one or two virtual client connecting. Once we go to 5
and 10 concurrent connections, the Apple plum pudding collapses."
"Performance is at that point only 1/10th of the Opteron and Xeon. We have
tested this on Panther (10.3) and on Tiger (10.4.1)"
"The new OS, Tiger doesn't help: the 2.7 GHz (10.4.1) is as fast as the 2.5 GHz
on Panther (10.3). More importantly, Apache shows exactly the same picture as
MySQL: performance is 10 times more worse than on the Xeon (and Opteron) on
Linux. Apple is very proud about the Mac OS X Unix roots, but it seems that the
typical Unix/Linux software isn't too fond of Apple."
Basically it comes down to this...workstation yes, server no.
So, has Dell's continued flirtation with AMD driven the jealous Intel into
seeking out a new love? Perhaps they believe Apple can deliver a platform that
will highlight Intel's future chips to best advantage? Does Apple see the
writing on the wall, and realize if it doesn't jump on either the Intel or AMD
multi-core ship, they'll be stuck onshore with IBM? Who knows. Interesting
times...
DB
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.