Apple releases Intel based macs

Post by **Ddrak** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:42 pm

Nikore · Post by **Nikore** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 2:14 pm

Well seeing how I'm probably the one person here who uses Macs or OS X in general, I have to say I'm not entirely happy with the new Intel Macs. I think they really lost a part of what made them "cool" in my eyes, the fact that they don’t use the fuck-pile that is known as the 86 microcode (CISC). RISC is really an awesome architecture and after playing around with and usesing RISC for the last two years I don't know how or why CISC ever became the popular architecture. But still it's nice to see that the new laptops that came out from apple the other day are better then any x86 laptop you can buy on the market currently.

PS. I use Macs/OS X because I got sick of Linux’s short coming and since to do my current job I basically need a reliable UNIX desktop/laptop I bought an iBook about two years ago to try it out. After that I really wanted replace my desktop with a Mac and I did about 6months ago (after saving up for a little more then a year LOL).

Post by **Ddrak** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 4:05 pm

err... you do know the RISC v CISC debate died about 10 years ago, when the designers realized that the complexity of both systems on the CPU die was about equivalent once you went superscaler and had out of order execution?

Dd

Nikore · Post by **Nikore** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 4:15 pm

Ddrak wrote:err... you do know the RISC v CISC debate died about 10 years ago, when the designers realized that the complexity of both systems on the CPU die was about equivalent once you went superscaler and had out of order execution?

Dd

Yes I know that. Also neither use the original sets of instructions any more also. They both use some kind of hybrid of the two. But the point still stands, when it comes down to compiling and pure number crunching PPC > Intel. The point I was making is that despite IBM's shitty business practices that the PPC processor was a much better disgen then the Intel ones (where is my 64bit?!, ooh its coming I guess). Oh well at lest I can now hack OS X on too white box PCs so I don’t have to use shitty Intel processors and go with the slightly better AMD.

Post by **Ddrak** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 5:44 pm

But the point still stands, when it comes down to compiling and pure number crunching PPC > Intel.

Nah - it depends completely on the workload. Typically x86 processors have run rings around PPC in SPECint and SPECfp benchmarks but that's mainly from the insane amount of R&D that Intel has thrown into the designs. The Altivec unit was definitely superior to SSE/MMX though, for the apps it worked in. Apple was very careful to use a narrow set of benchmarks when comparing PPC to Intel simply because the two systems weren't really as far apart as Apple wanted people to believe.

No idea what you're talking about with 64 bit. I'm writing this from a 64 bit Intel (Xeon) machine, running a pure 64 bit OS. Last I looked, OS X still isn't pure 64 bit, just selected parts of the kernel.

In the end, Apple went to x86 simply because the x86 processors ran faster than the PPCs and used less power (kind of amusing given their radical anti-Pentium "burning" ads). I'll be the first to agree that the x86 instruction set needs to die a horrible and flaming death, but economies of scale and massive R&D budgets tend to win out.

I'm kinda disappointed Apple went with Intel and not AMD, but from what I understand AMD couldn't guarantee the chip production levels. Not sure how easy it will be to run on an existing PC, but dual booting a Mac to run OS X and Vista should certainly be possible (not XP though).

Dd

GINLAAN · Post by **GINLAAN** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:06 pm

In the end, Apple went to x86 simply because the x86 processors ran faster than the PPCs and used less power (kind of amusing given their radical anti-Pentium "burning" ads).

The NY times had a blurb about the amount of money this is estimated to save Apple. Jobs has wanted to be with intell for a long time now. He's stated more then once the price had to be right. I think he got a sweet deal hatched up and i am hoping to bank on it myself.

But your right on there.

Nikore · Post by **Nikore** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:54 pm

ddark, I do agree with you on a lot of points. You are right it does depend on workload. Multimedia apps (encoding decoding etc) x86 (especially AMD) kicks PPC, Sun, and etc ass ten times over. But I have run my own benchmarks using optimized for arch GCC and the PPC won in creating code quicker and neater then the x86.

As for the 64 bit OS, I don't know what you are using but if its Linux (like I believe it is) you are not entirely 64 and actually your closer to the 64 that OS X is (apposed to the aborted fetus known as Windows 64). The only thing Linux is got on OS X when it comes to 64 is that most of your apps can be easily recompiled to 64bit or have been, I once was an user of Gentoo but I have moved to OS X and Ubuntu (for my work computer and my personal home server).

I do agree in the end Apple went with x86 because it can become faster then PPC (IBM blows balls and if they devoted the same cash Intel did to x86, PPC would kick much more ass then it does now) and that more importantly it would be considerable cheaper. I mean apple will no longer be making its own Mother Boards Intel is doing that. I am disappointed in the end that they didn’t go with AMD but it seems like we read the same article where AMD couldn't guarantee the chips apple need.

BTW, I am in no way an Apple fan boy, I spent most of my life actually hating Apple, but lately I have learned to like them much more and give them some more credit. As it stands no one makes a computer I actually like but so far Apple has been the closes. Though my next desktop ill probably go back to x86, AMD Opterons more likely...actually if i had a choice now i would of probably gone with the duel 280s instead of my current desktop.

OH and PS. I was implying that the Yohan core is not 64 bit and thus going from a G5 to a Yohan core is going from 64 to 32 bit. According to Intel there next chip will be EMT64 and every chip after that. And what Xeons do you have btw?

Post by **Ddrak** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:51 pm

gcc is pretty horrible at generating x86 code. MS and Intel's compilers do a lot better job for the specific chips, especially Intel (which does some ass-crazy things to get speed). It's pretty difficult to get a good code comparison just from compiling the same thing on two different machines, mainly because the compiler has to be much, much smarter on x86 to get the performance up. Yes - that's because the PPC instruction set is better.

64 bit OS - I was actually using Win2003R2 (x64), but I do dual boot to Linux (Gentoo). There's a certain amount of silliness in it for sure but most of it is the backward compatibility stuff. MS did a lot of stupid stuff with the Win32 API that made it damn hard to recompile stuff for Win64. Strange as it may seem, I actually like the NT/2k/XP kernel - just hate the bloat they run on top of it.

As far as I know, Apple still makes the motherboards, just not the chipsets (at least for now). Intel is getting spanked hard by AMD and is trying to transform into a "systems" company. I wouldn't be shocked to see Apple play Intel against AMD for a long time to come. It's only good news for them now to be in a competitive market like the x86 world.

I get anti-Apple kneejerks at times from my wife being an Apple nut and the guy I sit next to at work being an Apple nut. I'm currently looking to buy a Mac, but already have a monitor so the iMac isn't a good fit and the gap between the mini and G5 tower is just too big a hole to choose one or the other. It sucks. I really want the intel based iMac without the monitor...

Ah, makes sense on Yonah being 32 not 64. The Xeon is whatever came in the Dell work bought me when I told them I needed a 64 bit machine. Some 3GHz pos that doesn't work as well as my A64-3200 at home.

Dd

Nikore · Post by **Nikore** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 11:41 pm

Well I agree that the GCC is not as good as the Intel compiler for Intel chips, but what I like about the GCC is that its the same basic compiler for any processor and that it follows standers. Supposedly by arch optimizing the GCC you do get a little bit better code out of it. Since it’s the same basic peace of software with the same libs it makes it a pretty fair test.

64 bit OS - Well ok, the Win2003R2 (x64) aka Win Server 2003 isn’t that bad actually it’s rather nice. But It like Linux and OS X is not a pure 64bit OS it just accepts and uses the 64 bit memory addressing and allows for 64bit computations. A lot (most?) of the apps you run are still 32bit and more the likely most of the drivers are too (especially if you use a SB card...or you know something I don't). I agree also that the NT Kernel isn’t half bad but out of all the Kernels in the world my favorite is either Solaris (you simply can't crash it) or FreeBSD (a lot more stable then Linux and better designed). I think the March Kernel (OS X) is pretty poorly implemented.

Unfortunately I cannot find the article right now (been looking for a couple of hours now) but I read one that said that Apple was going to have Intel to manufacture the motherboard and processor all together (kind of integrated them in too one). Especially for the PowerMac (or i guess soon to be Mac Pro) Line. If I find the article I will post it and there is a chance that it’s not true (I hope its not personally). And yeah AMD is spanking Intel hard; I still really wish Apple had gone with AMD regardless of supply problem.

Despite of the fact I use an Apple I get a lot of anti-Apple kneejerks as well especially when the elitist fags come out bashing everything. And again I agree with you the iMac is not a very good gap filler, I men what if I have the awesome new Dell 30", I wouldn't want to give that up for a 20" (which is what I really have=p) but then again I wouldn’t want a mac mini. Apple needs to come out with an iMac with out the monitor but I highly doubt it will ever happen. So either build your own box and hack OS X on it (need an EFI Motherboard) or get a PowerMac (Mac Pro?).

Yonah is 32bit supposedly the next core (Merom) will be 64bit and should offer 3gig speeds along with being dual core and what not. According to Intel Merom should be out late 2006 early 2007 (just in time for the Mac Pro).

My personal desktop is one of the new quads, I had purchased an old G4 PowerMac to hold me over until I got the quad (ordered one with the 7800 Ultra the day they where released) and I love it FAR FAR better then my shitty ass P4. My first Apple was an iBook, which has been the best laptop I have ever used or owned.

It also seems like our jobs are similar (I’m a UNIX Network admin that writes basic UNIX CLI apps and drivers. I also write some web shit mostly PHP).

Post by **Ddrak** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 12:13 pm

Just a small correction - 64 bit windows won't run any 32 bit drivers. Everything at kernel level has to be pure 64 bit. Most apps are still 32 bit though, which causes its own special breed of problems. My swipe at OS X was because the graphics system was still 32 bit only (pure 64 bit apps have to be console only, not GUI). It's less of a deal on the PPC though because unlike the x86 you can actually use 64 bit instructions in 32 bit mode.

Know of any EFI boards for x86 machines? I had a quick look around and couldn't see any. That's going to be the biggest problem with hacking OS X onto a random PC, as far as I can tell.

My job is a plain old software dev. Do most of my work writing stuff for Windows in C++ but toss in C# and random scripting languages when I can.

Dd

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 2:11 pm

Bill Gates: Did you see that thread over at the FU site?

Stephen Jobs: Yeah man, that was somethng else.

Bill Gates: Fucking geeks give us a bad name.

Stephen Jobs: Werd.

Nikore · Post by **Nikore** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:15 pm

I though the Windows kernel API allowed it to run (read: emulate) 32 bit drivers, huh guess I'm wrong on that (i have very little experience with the 64bit versions of windows, i just know the Windows XP 64 is really really buggy and runs like a pig).

With OS X, Quartz (main graphics rendering engine) is 32-bit but both the OpenGL libs and the new Core Image libs have 64 bit versions so it depends on what your doing I guess. But like with Windows (and Linux) most of the apps you run are 32-bit anywise (damn its depressing). I also though that AMDs had the same ability of PPC to run the 64 bit instructions in 32 bit mode? I know that the Intel chips don't have this ability (or at least they didn't before, with Intel using parts of AMD's 64 bit instructions it might now).

There are no EFI boards for x86 yet, but I guarantee there will be in time for Windows Vista. One of Vistas new and kind of cool features is that it supports both BIOS and EFI. Since EFI is superior to BIOS in every way I'm sure Mobo manufactures will put out an EFI board when Vista comes out. Though I do have one concern with EFI, according to the white papers on EFI it has the ability to connect to the Internet before even booting an OS, that seems like a HUGE security risk to me but well see.

I do a lot of C programing and ton of bash script and python script programing. But most of that is only so i can automate or simplify some of the networking administration and security auditing I have to do. I have started to learn Mono which is like C#...kinda but with out the same windows.fourm support.

And Embar, BAH I'm 20x the geek they ever were!=P

PS. I left out the debate on DRM in EFI because well, where I strongly disagree with the uses of DRM and TPM so far I do think some of the functions of TPM in the EFI is kinda cool. Like being able to have digitally signed drivers and libarys to make sure that they arnt hacked or altered in a bad way.

Myth1184 · Post by **Myth1184** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:40 pm

People arguing about CPUS....people..if Intel was so crappy as you guys put it out ot be..it wouldnt control 98% of the CPU market. I love my Pentium4.

Post by **Ddrak** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:42 pm

64 bit XP is... esoteric. I find it gives be slightly better game performance than 32 bit XP on the same machine, but it's really questionable as to whether some of the hassles are really worth it. Finding 64 bit drivers can be a real pain but things are improving slowly (still no TV card decoder though). The crud that has gone into the system to make it seamlessly compatible with 32 bit apps is pretty crazy as well, and can be pretty damn confusing at times (the directory structure is slightly different if you're running a 32 bit app). The fact that crap is gonna be in Windows for the next 10 years depresses me.

All x86-64 chips (Athlon and Intel) are unable to use either the full 64 bits of then registers or the 8 extra registers unless running in a 64 bit process under a 64 bit OS. It's a hardware limitation that AMD put into the chips to make them easier to make as far as I can tell.

EFI is definitely a nice boot architecture. I'm kinda ambivalent about it being able to connect to the internet, but the whole TPM system worries me. TPM is awesome for businesses but sucks for the end consumer (do you really want all your programs, music and videos tied to your particular motherboard?). One day I'll get bored and write a blog post on it.

Funny thing about Steve Jobs is the story Scott McNealy tells about going to his place to visit him and finding him reading "How to build a nuclear weapon" in the back yard. That's all we need: iNuke.

Dd

UltraBurz · Post by **UltraBurz** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:49 pm

I liked the SNL bit about apple and the iPod a few weeks ago on weekend update where every minute they revealed a new, better, ipod...finally ending with the "iPod Inviso".

Nikore · Post by **Nikore** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 10:24 pm

Ill let you win on the windows thing=) I honestly don't know much about the 64 bit versions of the windows systems. I do know that Windows 64 (both server and XP) support EFI where regular server2003 and XP do not.

I know about crazy shit when it comes to making 32bit work in 64 bit. Linux is probably the worst, when you compile a library (lets say glibc) it complies two versions a 32bit and a 64 bit...one goes in too /usr/lib32 and /lib32 and the other goes in too /usr/lib64 and /lib64. It really gets confusing and if you want run a 32 bit program you have run linux32 before the command, IE linux32 mplayer. With OS X the few 64 bit apps that I have (mostly CLI stuff I complied by hand IE nmap) I don’t have to worry about that shit I can seamlessly run 32 and 64 together matter of fact I’m doing it at the moment. This is mostly because of mixing of the micro/monolith kernel that OS X (that also give it a slow as a dead pig RPC interface).

EFI is a grate boot architecture and it should of came out years ago and should of taken the PC market by storm. The whole TPM thing does worry me but its a thing of if used this way it can be used for evil or if used this way it can be used for good. The fundamental idea of TPM (taking out DRM music so we don’t steal it shit) is a very good idea. The TPM chip is like an encryption co-processor and with that you can generate things like MD5 file checks on the fly or have better point-to-point encryption on the web. Or it can be used to tie software, music everything to one computer and if your computer crashes and you louse all your files OH WELL! But to pull a line from the Interweb what DRM scheme hasn’t been cracked? DRM its self is fundamentally flawed and with the root-kit debacle people are more aware of how bad it can get.

I don't know about you, but I pretty much could build a nuclear bomb right now if I had the Uranium or Plutonium. The are a plethora of how-tos on the Internet and my college physics book had some detailed designs in it a well. So building a nuclear bomb isn’t something that’s hard to do =P and actually its kind of a neat concept to learn about.

Burz: Hell yeah that SNL skit is like the only skit i have found funny in the last 6 - 8 years. I can't wait for my iPod Inviso!

Well back to watching sci-fi Friday with my girl friend like all young geeks in love!

UltraBurz · Post by **UltraBurz** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 2:16 am

Lazy Sunday was their best in years...aired on the 18th of last month. Fantastic Cronicles of Narnia.