jav6454
Mar 24, 01:48 PM
Probably a daft question but i'll ask anyhows so forgive my techie noobness!
With the advent of thunderbolt and its high bandwidth, will it possible for a gfx card to be sited externally in some kind of cradle and be used as the main gfx card or wouldn't the internal "plumbing" allow it to happen ?
/noob mode off
;)
It would be very well possible. Remember, Thunderbolt is derived from LightPeak. One of the reasons to develop LightPeak was to transmit data at very fast rates over a distance. Essentially, not have everything so closed together.
In other words, you can the CPU in room A and the RAM in room B which is 20 feet away and get the same result. This is one of the reasons Intel developed LightPeak. There are many other reasons for development obviously.
However, Thunderbolt in its current stage is not suited for such lengthy exchange due to its copper nature. However, say you have a GFX cradle on your desk, you could well use Thunderbolt's current implementation to feed data. However, you'd need multiple implementations of Thunderbolt in order for it to work great. Currently, many GFX solutions use PCIe 2.0 x16 interface which pretty much uses 8 GB/s bandwidth so one Thunderbolt interface will do fine and still have a nice 2GB/s overhead. However, the newer PCIe 3.0 interface pushes 16GB/s now so you'd need two Thunderbolt interfaces.
With the advent of thunderbolt and its high bandwidth, will it possible for a gfx card to be sited externally in some kind of cradle and be used as the main gfx card or wouldn't the internal "plumbing" allow it to happen ?
/noob mode off
;)
It would be very well possible. Remember, Thunderbolt is derived from LightPeak. One of the reasons to develop LightPeak was to transmit data at very fast rates over a distance. Essentially, not have everything so closed together.
In other words, you can the CPU in room A and the RAM in room B which is 20 feet away and get the same result. This is one of the reasons Intel developed LightPeak. There are many other reasons for development obviously.
However, Thunderbolt in its current stage is not suited for such lengthy exchange due to its copper nature. However, say you have a GFX cradle on your desk, you could well use Thunderbolt's current implementation to feed data. However, you'd need multiple implementations of Thunderbolt in order for it to work great. Currently, many GFX solutions use PCIe 2.0 x16 interface which pretty much uses 8 GB/s bandwidth so one Thunderbolt interface will do fine and still have a nice 2GB/s overhead. However, the newer PCIe 3.0 interface pushes 16GB/s now so you'd need two Thunderbolt interfaces.
person135
Oct 30, 03:21 PM
well the thing is to me, the only really useful thing other than the actual case itself in the Colors case is the screen protector. I could always buy a separate screen protector right?
too bad no one has a review of the FlexGrip.
too bad no one has a review of the FlexGrip.
Starbuckfsd
Mar 23, 09:23 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
You wanna know WHY they haven't gone past 64GB Flash? It's too damn expensive still....Sucks they can't bump the iPhone up to 64GB, although there are rumors to a 64GB iPhone5....we can only hope
Tony
You wanna know WHY they haven't gone past 64GB Flash? It's too damn expensive still....Sucks they can't bump the iPhone up to 64GB, although there are rumors to a 64GB iPhone5....we can only hope
garybUK
Feb 24, 03:13 AM
Hold it right there! The Kia models sold in Europe actually nowadays borrow from the current Hyundai Motor Company parts bin, and as such are way more civilized cars. Anyone who's driven the Kia Cee'd hatchback in Europe know it's a way better car than people think.
Your using Hyundai to make Kia/Chevy seem a good car?! hah, the ONLY good Hyundai is the Coupe, all the others are pretty nasty.
Most of the dealerships here lump Proton, Hyundai and Kia... why? they are cheap cars for mums and old people that goto the supermarket, they are no where near upto the quality of the big german cars. Even most jap cars are pretty rubbish to be honest, even Honda dealers are shutting down left, right and centre, GM (Opel/Vauxhall's) new Astra's and the other bigger horrible thing, seem to have just styled them on the Japanese cars... yuk! World cars do not work, different markets want different things.
Your using Hyundai to make Kia/Chevy seem a good car?! hah, the ONLY good Hyundai is the Coupe, all the others are pretty nasty.
Most of the dealerships here lump Proton, Hyundai and Kia... why? they are cheap cars for mums and old people that goto the supermarket, they are no where near upto the quality of the big german cars. Even most jap cars are pretty rubbish to be honest, even Honda dealers are shutting down left, right and centre, GM (Opel/Vauxhall's) new Astra's and the other bigger horrible thing, seem to have just styled them on the Japanese cars... yuk! World cars do not work, different markets want different things.
SuperCachetes
Mar 2, 08:24 PM
I started a thread about the new Passat and Jetta a little while back. Basically, the new Jetta is bigger, costs less, and uses cheaper materials. People expecting Golf-like levels of refinement and build quality will be disappointed.
And it went from looking like nothing else to looking like everything else.
I don't find it ugly, necessarily, but when I see one, I always think "Corolla!" - until I get closer, and then I think "Kia!"
And it went from looking like nothing else to looking like everything else.
I don't find it ugly, necessarily, but when I see one, I always think "Corolla!" - until I get closer, and then I think "Kia!"
generik
Oct 14, 07:03 PM
Since I'm home for the evening and didn't see your post until now, I can't give you any specific side-by-side tests, but I can give you a rough estimate of the speeds.
Overall, the Dual G5 is faster, not by a landslide by any means, but it is faster. Of course the G5 has 1.5 gigs of RAM vs. the mini's 512K, and the G5 has a 1Ghz BUS speed vs. the 667Mhz of the mini. If I were to slap in 2 gigs of RAM in to the mini then I'm sure I would see a little more performance, but I think the G5 would still be faster.
But the mini is still very zippy, no beachballs or waiting on Apps, very fast and clean for average use. Now if I were to do some Photoshop or, say, FCP comparisons, I'm sure the G5 would clean up in those areas.
I'm really happy with the purchase though, it's perfect for what I need it to do.
Oh, I installed Windows XP via BootCamp and after having to burn an illegal copy of my legal disc (the retail disc was bad) I got it running with no problems. I must say, this mini is the fastest Windows machine I've ever had.
Ok, that is not being very fair to the mini... at all.
I have a Mini and did my own ram upgrades on it, the before and after results are very significantly different. The Mini is horrible at 512, and at 1GB it starts picking up, at 2GB it is actually pretty damned good.
Perhaps you should strip 1GB of ram off the PM and redo the comparison, also bus speeds can't be quantified the way you did... the PPC actually needs more bandwidth due to the risc architecture.
You talk about the price but I look at it this way. shore it might not be that great for the price and the difference between the hign end mini and the low end imac is not worth the hign end mini price but the point of the mini is to get people off the windows crap.I was going to switch back when the first intel mini came out but wanted something bettter for the price I ended up getting another windows one but now that the low end mini has due core and more ram I'm looking at selling my pc and getting a mac.I have been a fan of apple and the mac for many years and can see that it is not there hardware that sells the systems but there OS. I feel vista is doomed to fail and apple will be there to pick up the pieces when leopard comes out. I think Macworld 07 will be the best yet and will put windows and the pc on the down fall for good.Apple will be king in 2007 and we need to stop complaining and know apple will keep on putting the goods out.
Not really, the cheapest iMac is $999 which is $200 more than the top end Mini, and even at that price the Mini wins out with a DVD-writer and the remote. At the expense of those you get a faster processor (probably not huge improvement) and a 17" screen. Displays are pretty cheap nowadays so if you need a DVD writer you have to shell out extra to get the next higher up iMac model.
Overall, the Dual G5 is faster, not by a landslide by any means, but it is faster. Of course the G5 has 1.5 gigs of RAM vs. the mini's 512K, and the G5 has a 1Ghz BUS speed vs. the 667Mhz of the mini. If I were to slap in 2 gigs of RAM in to the mini then I'm sure I would see a little more performance, but I think the G5 would still be faster.
But the mini is still very zippy, no beachballs or waiting on Apps, very fast and clean for average use. Now if I were to do some Photoshop or, say, FCP comparisons, I'm sure the G5 would clean up in those areas.
I'm really happy with the purchase though, it's perfect for what I need it to do.
Oh, I installed Windows XP via BootCamp and after having to burn an illegal copy of my legal disc (the retail disc was bad) I got it running with no problems. I must say, this mini is the fastest Windows machine I've ever had.
Ok, that is not being very fair to the mini... at all.
I have a Mini and did my own ram upgrades on it, the before and after results are very significantly different. The Mini is horrible at 512, and at 1GB it starts picking up, at 2GB it is actually pretty damned good.
Perhaps you should strip 1GB of ram off the PM and redo the comparison, also bus speeds can't be quantified the way you did... the PPC actually needs more bandwidth due to the risc architecture.
You talk about the price but I look at it this way. shore it might not be that great for the price and the difference between the hign end mini and the low end imac is not worth the hign end mini price but the point of the mini is to get people off the windows crap.I was going to switch back when the first intel mini came out but wanted something bettter for the price I ended up getting another windows one but now that the low end mini has due core and more ram I'm looking at selling my pc and getting a mac.I have been a fan of apple and the mac for many years and can see that it is not there hardware that sells the systems but there OS. I feel vista is doomed to fail and apple will be there to pick up the pieces when leopard comes out. I think Macworld 07 will be the best yet and will put windows and the pc on the down fall for good.Apple will be king in 2007 and we need to stop complaining and know apple will keep on putting the goods out.
Not really, the cheapest iMac is $999 which is $200 more than the top end Mini, and even at that price the Mini wins out with a DVD-writer and the remote. At the expense of those you get a faster processor (probably not huge improvement) and a 17" screen. Displays are pretty cheap nowadays so if you need a DVD writer you have to shell out extra to get the next higher up iMac model.
Silentwave
Jan 5, 05:20 PM
<snip>
Never happening, even though this was naturally a joke, because not only would every apple user throw themselves off the highest mountain in Cupertino, but every Windows fanboi would jump off the steepest cliff in Redmond!
Never happening, even though this was naturally a joke, because not only would every apple user throw themselves off the highest mountain in Cupertino, but every Windows fanboi would jump off the steepest cliff in Redmond!
Mal
Mar 24, 01:02 PM
Would definitely be great if they would just support off-the-shelf graphics cards. I'd be a little surprised, but I've given up saying that Apple will or won't do something just because of their prior decisions.
jW
jW
MisterK
Apr 3, 11:25 AM
I loved this ad. The voiceover reminds me of old Hal Riney commercials, where there is a reverence for the product � a person with quiet confidence telling you a "truth". When the message is a simple one, it's easier to tell a compelling story. Here's the message: when you don't notice the tech the experience feels magical.
There's nothing wrong with this. Magic is what tech is at its finest. Engineers and developers become mired in the details of how to make it work and think that's the important part, and then we get awful commercials boasting specs. When we lift abstractions and technological explanations, the things we do become more fantastic. We don't visit websites, but can see all the knowledge of the world. We don't Skype; we talk face-to-face with distant loved ones. We don't use Photoshop brushes; we create images with our fingers. Why are the details of how that happens the important part?
TBWA are the marketing geniuses that have always done Apple's stuff and I'm glad they saw this nugget of truth in Apple's iPad message. This is what we have to do in the advertising business (yes, I'm in it). I've been lucky enough to work with TBWA and can say that they are the real deal. They are true MadMen who honestly look for the most beautiful truth in the products they are asked to sell and then speak that truth more eloquently than everyone else.
People who identify this as "simply advertising" are missing the point. You're not the smartest kid in the playground when you tell everyone that Santa doesn't exist. The smart ones are the kids enjoying Christmas.
There's nothing wrong with this. Magic is what tech is at its finest. Engineers and developers become mired in the details of how to make it work and think that's the important part, and then we get awful commercials boasting specs. When we lift abstractions and technological explanations, the things we do become more fantastic. We don't visit websites, but can see all the knowledge of the world. We don't Skype; we talk face-to-face with distant loved ones. We don't use Photoshop brushes; we create images with our fingers. Why are the details of how that happens the important part?
TBWA are the marketing geniuses that have always done Apple's stuff and I'm glad they saw this nugget of truth in Apple's iPad message. This is what we have to do in the advertising business (yes, I'm in it). I've been lucky enough to work with TBWA and can say that they are the real deal. They are true MadMen who honestly look for the most beautiful truth in the products they are asked to sell and then speak that truth more eloquently than everyone else.
People who identify this as "simply advertising" are missing the point. You're not the smartest kid in the playground when you tell everyone that Santa doesn't exist. The smart ones are the kids enjoying Christmas.
Krovem
Feb 6, 12:02 AM
2002 Audi A4. 18th birthday present
That looks pretty sick. I was looking at Audi a4 or a6 (02-05), and infinity g35 sedan.
That looks pretty sick. I was looking at Audi a4 or a6 (02-05), and infinity g35 sedan.
Porco
Sep 6, 09:01 AM
Dude, the MBP was updated in late April of this year, why would you think it'll be updated four and a half months later??
Yeah, next thing you know people will saying machines could have their processors upgraded before they're even released!! Oh, wait... :p
Seriously, I think it's been widely stated that with the move to intel chips, processors are likely to be updated more regularly... don't know when the MBP will get upgraded, but if the chips are there, they need to be going in the machines ASAP for Apple to maintain a competitive line-up compared with otherwise-similarly specced PCs.
Yeah, next thing you know people will saying machines could have their processors upgraded before they're even released!! Oh, wait... :p
Seriously, I think it's been widely stated that with the move to intel chips, processors are likely to be updated more regularly... don't know when the MBP will get upgraded, but if the chips are there, they need to be going in the machines ASAP for Apple to maintain a competitive line-up compared with otherwise-similarly specced PCs.
cleanup
Nov 25, 05:18 PM
Ordered a 26" white Vizio LED LCD for the wifey from Target. $209 shipped!
http://www.buypricelist.com/images_products/Vizio_M260VA_W_VIZIO_M260VA_W_26_Inch_LED_LCD_HDTV_Razor_LED_Backlighting_White.jpg
Whoa, that looks pretty awesome.
I wish Vizio was of greater availability in Canada. It sure beats all the other brands out of the water in terms of value.
http://www.buypricelist.com/images_products/Vizio_M260VA_W_VIZIO_M260VA_W_26_Inch_LED_LCD_HDTV_Razor_LED_Backlighting_White.jpg
Whoa, that looks pretty awesome.
I wish Vizio was of greater availability in Canada. It sure beats all the other brands out of the water in terms of value.
yg17
Mar 24, 12:02 PM
No trying to substitute facts and history with your own beliefs. Homosexuality is not natural, there is no natural way for reproduction which is the whole purpose of sex or the "reproduction system" as it may be classified.
So someone who is sterile due to medical reasons shouldn't be allowed to marry either? There's no natural way for them to reproduce.
So someone who is sterile due to medical reasons shouldn't be allowed to marry either? There's no natural way for them to reproduce.
DrFrankTM
Sep 1, 01:45 PM
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
I don't really know about the ideal price difference, but for some people, it wouldn't matter much. If you want a system with a lot of screen space, then you can get two 1920x1200 monitors. Sure, it will cost you, but if you need the space, then you'll go for the 23-inch. Also, to watch movies, a big screen is better than two small ones. It all depends on what you need the computer for...
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
I don't really know about the ideal price difference, but for some people, it wouldn't matter much. If you want a system with a lot of screen space, then you can get two 1920x1200 monitors. Sure, it will cost you, but if you need the space, then you'll go for the 23-inch. Also, to watch movies, a big screen is better than two small ones. It all depends on what you need the computer for...
zivilist
Apr 19, 01:36 PM
Please...Please...Please...provide a pro graphics card option (FirePro or Quadro)
Not possible: the iMac is not a workstation. Hopefully a big HD6xxx and a big hexa and quadcore are included.
I just hope that the SSD option is more affordable. For me the top chip on the 27inch is a no-brainer but the SSD turns a $2200 computer into a $2950 computer. Hell, in San Francisco I have to tack 9.5% tax on that too.
Agreed. 64 GB and 128 GB SSD option would be nice (already posted this feedback to apple).
Not possible: the iMac is not a workstation. Hopefully a big HD6xxx and a big hexa and quadcore are included.
I just hope that the SSD option is more affordable. For me the top chip on the 27inch is a no-brainer but the SSD turns a $2200 computer into a $2950 computer. Hell, in San Francisco I have to tack 9.5% tax on that too.
Agreed. 64 GB and 128 GB SSD option would be nice (already posted this feedback to apple).
Peterkro
Mar 21, 05:50 PM
Oh dear this is getting serious the French have called up the philosophers including Bernard-Henri Levy.:eek:
In case you don't think Daffy is targeting civilians:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfydO-Z-D0M
In case you don't think Daffy is targeting civilians:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfydO-Z-D0M
Kranchammer
Mar 24, 01:20 PM
Even then though...I dont think this means anything special for non-MacPro owners. Everything else gets the mGPU treatment:(
Well, that's because all of Apple's other products are constrained by power and/or space requirements.
Well, that's because all of Apple's other products are constrained by power and/or space requirements.
MacFanJeff
Mar 26, 04:00 AM
While professionals can say bye bye to nVidia's CUDA processing and PhysX.
:-(
ATI/AMD is doing what they can, developing an OpenCL driven bullet physics port to Maya but they always seem to be one step behind - announcing a plugin for Maya 2011 in the same week that Autodesk announced that nVidia Physx is being integrated directly into Maya 2012 with real time physx cloth deformation, rigid body dynamics, and physx accelerated calculations for DMM destruction.
On the windows side, 3ds Max is getting Physx integration, too. Open CL is cool but it's got some ground to make up in the application world.
If you refer to my prior post in this thread, I too am a professional 3D content creator. As things stand currently, all software I use take better advantage of nVidia compared to ATI. Most of what I use prefer "CUDA" cores and eventually more "PhysX" integration.
This is why I can no longer use Apple at all in my work, I can not come close to getting what I can from a pair of 580 GTX factory OC cards in SLI for a Mac Pro. In fact, most of what Apple offers is still behind the curve.
It is the single area where Apple fails and I know from attending conferences that most of the big names simply don't care because they do not have enough users on that platform to matter. Don't get me wrong, I still think Apple is great for most all other areas and I recommend them to family and friends. But for the 3D professional market, there is no way I can use Apple without making many sacrifices.
:-(
ATI/AMD is doing what they can, developing an OpenCL driven bullet physics port to Maya but they always seem to be one step behind - announcing a plugin for Maya 2011 in the same week that Autodesk announced that nVidia Physx is being integrated directly into Maya 2012 with real time physx cloth deformation, rigid body dynamics, and physx accelerated calculations for DMM destruction.
On the windows side, 3ds Max is getting Physx integration, too. Open CL is cool but it's got some ground to make up in the application world.
If you refer to my prior post in this thread, I too am a professional 3D content creator. As things stand currently, all software I use take better advantage of nVidia compared to ATI. Most of what I use prefer "CUDA" cores and eventually more "PhysX" integration.
This is why I can no longer use Apple at all in my work, I can not come close to getting what I can from a pair of 580 GTX factory OC cards in SLI for a Mac Pro. In fact, most of what Apple offers is still behind the curve.
It is the single area where Apple fails and I know from attending conferences that most of the big names simply don't care because they do not have enough users on that platform to matter. Don't get me wrong, I still think Apple is great for most all other areas and I recommend them to family and friends. But for the 3D professional market, there is no way I can use Apple without making many sacrifices.
Stella
Jun 22, 01:13 PM
Sounds OK - run the apps on your apple mobile as your desktop.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 12, 09:29 PM
I hope this means we will eventually see a 64bit version of iMovie ;)
archer75
Apr 19, 11:33 AM
desktops are slowly but surely dying out. Notebooks are becoming more and more powerful and portable so what will an iMac offer that MacBooks won't have? Larger screen?
Larger screen and still more powerful. I don't like working on notebooks. Trackpads slow me down. And the only place I use a notebook is in my house so I don't really need the portability. Desktops, depending on what we're talking about, are more upgradeable, more cutting edge.
For serious work and gaming I still go to my desktop.
If I had a macbook i'd have to connect a keyboard and mouse, monitor, desktop speakers, USB hub, etc. and then put up with a weak mobile video card. What's the point? I just don't need the portability.
If I did i'd still have a powerful desktop and then just get a weaker macbook.
Larger screen and still more powerful. I don't like working on notebooks. Trackpads slow me down. And the only place I use a notebook is in my house so I don't really need the portability. Desktops, depending on what we're talking about, are more upgradeable, more cutting edge.
For serious work and gaming I still go to my desktop.
If I had a macbook i'd have to connect a keyboard and mouse, monitor, desktop speakers, USB hub, etc. and then put up with a weak mobile video card. What's the point? I just don't need the portability.
If I did i'd still have a powerful desktop and then just get a weaker macbook.
Lloyd Christmas
Nov 24, 10:15 PM
Removed Satchel
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.[/QUOTE]
i was thinking more along the lines of Alan from The Hangover.
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.[/QUOTE]
i was thinking more along the lines of Alan from The Hangover.
Kashchei
Aug 27, 05:36 PM
finally a rumor!
after weeks of speculation on the forums, a front page rumor feels fact!
holding my thumbs for a conroe imac! (a swedish expression...i think?)
"Hold your thumbs" is a French expression as well. I had no ideas the Swedes held their thumbs as well, but I'll be doing the same thing since I can't wait to see the new minis as well.
after weeks of speculation on the forums, a front page rumor feels fact!
holding my thumbs for a conroe imac! (a swedish expression...i think?)
"Hold your thumbs" is a French expression as well. I had no ideas the Swedes held their thumbs as well, but I'll be doing the same thing since I can't wait to see the new minis as well.
twoodcc
Apr 17, 12:32 AM
We need a 6 digit thread :p
I have in 2 weeks folded what took me nearly a year to do on my iBook G4. I should be at 100k soon which is very exciting for me. Who else is trying to achieve a 6 digit score :cool:
hey go ahead and start one if you want. i know what you mean though. i never thought i'd get to 1 million points when i first started. now i'm almost at 7 million!
I have in 2 weeks folded what took me nearly a year to do on my iBook G4. I should be at 100k soon which is very exciting for me. Who else is trying to achieve a 6 digit score :cool:
hey go ahead and start one if you want. i know what you mean though. i never thought i'd get to 1 million points when i first started. now i'm almost at 7 million!