Intel VP: Apple should've used our chips Intel VP: Apple should've used our chips

that guy sucks,

what exactly is centrino, i thought it was just wireless in wintel laptops?
 
"Centrino" is a combination of 3 technologies: the Pentium M CPU (Pentium 3 core with 1 MB L2 or L3 cache, I forget, and SSE2), Intell 855 (?) chipset whatever that's good for (? again) and the built-in wireless chipset.

Of course the VP of Intel will make such a remark, because Apple switching to x86 CPUs will kill the company and apparently that's what Bonzo there wants.
 
Reminds me of the 'old' discussions. Back when Steve Jobs made that famous remark: "Then we'll have options, and we like to have options." Apple chose the PowerPC 970. The Intel guy's remark totally ignores the points of _why_ one (Steve Jobs) would choose the PowerPC in General and the PowerPC 970 specifically. (Of course, he does...)

1.) PowerPC processors are generally more efficient than the CISC/RISC mixture Intel is doing (more 'calculations' per wattage used). This is better for notebooks especially.

2.) IBM has worked closely with Apple on the G5 processor, which Intel would _not_ have done. Apple would be a rather small (although sexy) fish.
 
Originally posted by fryke
1.) PowerPC processors are generally more efficient than the CISC/RISC mixture Intel is doing (more 'calculations' per wattage used). This is better for notebooks especially.

2.) IBM has worked closely with Apple on the G5 processor, which Intel would _not_ have done. Apple would be a rather small (although sexy) fish.
Click to expand...
Forgive me for being Devil's Advocate for a moment here:

Re #1:
True, PPC may be more energy efficient, but lets not forget the OS being compared here: For decent UI responsiveness and smoothness, there needs to be a video card to support Quartz Extreme. On the otherhand Windows XP does not need such acceleration provided by a video card. So it is possible to get away with putting a cheap video card in PC laptops whereas an Apple laptop would need an OpenGL supported video card and still needs more video RAM than what's being delivered right now. Having a more powerful video card results in more battery power useage.

Re #2:
Just out of curiosity, I've heard many references of Apple (supposedly) working "closely" with IBM on the G5 (and possibly other things). Where is this information coming from and what exactly is the role Apple played in the development of the G5? Motherboard designs?
 
the apple.com site states that apple worked "closely" with IBM on the design of the 970 chip eventhough the chip is the derivative of the POWER4 chip. the website also (I think) states that apple designed the motherboard and are using IBM's advanced plant in Fishkill to make the chipset (at least the system controller is made with 0.13 microns process or 130 nanometers)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top