“We recently got in touch with a few Intel Corp. partners and learned that the much anticipated processor from Intel, codenamed Yonah, is expected to debut early next year on January 6th,” Varun Dubey reports for CoolTechZone.
“The launch venue is expected to be India. However, we are not able to confirm if there are going to be more simultaneous launches or if this is going to be an exclusive launch. Knowing that the Consumer Electronics Show (CES 2006) will take place in Las Vegas, Nevada around the same timeframe, it makes sense for Intel to do a simultaneous launch in the U.S. as well,” Dubey reports. “Intel’s Yonah is a dual-core chip based on the 65nm fabrication process. Yonah will also mark the first launch with Intel’s new strategy in place – performance per watt.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Apple CEO Steve Jobs is scheduled to deliver the keynote address at Macworld Expo San Francisco 2006 on January 10th 9:00am PST. On June 9, 2005, we reported that a higher-performance version of the Pentium M, “Yonah,” a new, dual-core version of the chip was to be due in late 2005 and may well be the processor that powers the first Intel-based small desktop Apple Macs and PowerBooks.
Advertisements:
• The New iPod with Video. The ultimate music & video experience on the go. From $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.00.
• The New iMac G5. Built-in camera and remote control. From $1299. Free shipping.
• Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using your dial-up service. $49.00.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
It’s official: Apple CEO Steve Jobs to deliver Macworld San Francisco 2006 keynote address – December 01, 2005
Citigroup: Intel-based PowerBook in January, Apple target price raised to $71 – November 30, 2005
Intel: no comment on Apple participating in ‘Viiv’ entertainment platform – November 30, 2005
Intel starts up internal ‘Apple group’ – November 22, 2005
RUMOR: Intel-based Apple iBooks coming in January with extremely low price tags – November 17, 2005
Will future Intel-based Apple Macs offer multiple OS worlds via virtualization? – November 16, 2005
Intel-based Macs dominate January’s Macworld Expo 2006 rumor mill – November 14, 2005
JupiterResearch analyst wouldn’t be shocked to see Intel-based Mac debut in January 2006 – November 09, 2005
UBS: Apple to unveil Intel-based Mac mini in January; AAPL share price target raised to $74 – November 07, 2005
Apple patent application describes Intel-based Macs that run Mac OS X and Microsoft Windows – November 05, 2005
RUMOR: Apple’s Intel-based Macs coming in first quarter 2006 – November 04, 2005
Intel to renovate desktop processor line in 2006 with transition from 90 nm to 65 nm (Yonah) – July 15, 2005
Apple-bound Intel ‘Yonah’ processor prices revealed – June 09, 2005
Analysts think ‘Yonah’ Pentium M may power Apple’s first Intel-based Mac – June 08, 2005
Apple to use Intel microprocessors beginning in 2006, all Macs to be Intel-based by end of 2007 – June 06, 2005
Good news. I guess now is not good time to buy a DELL for Christmas. EPP @ 18% off for old technology.
Come on baby, chips and gravy!
Well well it can survive in the belly of a whale too!
These things are nearly a match for Athlon64 X2 chips at the same Ghz. Mac OS X is going to really shine on YonahBooks.
what I would like to see though, is macs getting BETTER chips than other PCs, not the same chips.
for once powerbooks will actually have POWER
for once powerbooks will actually have POWER
The Powerbooks have always had POWER! Heck a few years ago a friend and I had our own laptop showdown with Adobe Photoshop; he had me beat with nearly twice the clockspeed and I had him beat with twice the amount of RAM. Needless to say that I put the smack down on his HP Pavilion with my trusty Tibook G4 (by a big margin) and he has been a Powerbook user ever since.
bwahahaha, now I can have more POWER to rule the world !!!
Now where are those sharks with friggin laser beams attached to their heads
Cool, now the Apple hardware benchmarks are going to be right up there with every other $599 Dell & Gateway. Impressive!
The superiority of the Mac is in the: 1) USE of the same basic hardware components to create a better-designed whole, and 2) OS X and other Apple software. It’s unrealistic, almost bordering on silly, to think Macs could maintain a long-term advantage in hardware components created by other manufacturers. Apple has to play to its strengths (design & software)! SJ has gotten craftier in his middle age…Mac fans should as well.
Go Apple!
Jake
“for once powerbooks will actually have POWER”
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
i’ve had a Powerbook(1G) for 2 years and still i don’t think i need to upgrade. it works like a charm. of course except for a Yonah Powered one
before that i had a Dell!!! i needed to upgrade after just one month
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />))))))
I would love it if new Macs had same processors, similar price, and ability to run windows on it if one so desired..like all other PC boxes. Then we could finally have a real conversation in our society about design, usability, and computing.
Cool, now the Apple hardware benchmarks are going to be right up there with every other $599 Dell & Gateway. Impressive!
How is losing performance benchmark greatness (with the Intel switch) compared cheap Dell or Gateway a good thing? So instead of being ahead in the performance curve, we now line up side by side 🙁
I mean, PowerPC has always dominated x86 when comparing clock for clock; the secret is in the RISC sauce
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Dudemac,
Photoshop is far more hungry for RAM than CPU. That would have been a far more meaningful test with the same amount of ram. I tried the same sort of thing with my old Tibook 867 against a Sony Vaio P4 1.6ghz. The Sony had a much beefier video card as well as twice the clock. With the same amount of ram the Ti just squeaked ahead—but only by a few seconds, almost a dead heat.
DudeMac,
The problem is the G4 architecture has hardly advanced at all, while the Intel and AMD world have been working their asses off trying to beat each other. The G5 would have been a great product, if IBM put enough money into developing it, unfortunately, with only one major customer, Apple, that didn’t give them a good enough incentive to keep up.
After more than 2 years, we’re still waiting for 3GHz chips and 2.7GHz could only be obtained using liquid cooling! Now IBM is more interested in producing Xenon PPCs for Microsoft and Cell processors for Sony and Toshiba. The G5 product line is small potatoes for them now. Apple saw the writing on the wall.
PowerPC for desktop and notebook computers is dead. Get over it. Mac OS X is already screaming on Intel developer machines, according to reports from developers. Intel based Macs will scream because the OS is better–and they’ll get cheaper, which is a great thing.
It’ll be like Carly Fiorina and HP. They announce at CES, and Apple announces at MacWorld.
Yeah baby! I see 2 Mac mini’s in my future. One to put in the den and connect to my TV and stereo. And the other to run Linux and be my home server.
“PowerPC has always dominated x86 when comparing clock for clock; the secret is in the RISC sauce.”
RISC and CISC don’t have much difference these days. They’ve both moved toward each other and just about landed in a middle ground. You are right about the PowerPC chips being more efficient than current and past x86 chips, but the future is what Apple bought into. The future of PowerPC looks pretty much like it does today, while the future of x86 looks pretty exciting.
My accountant insists I use Quickbooks for the PC to be compatible, so we have a KVM switch between our old dual 500MHz G4 (used for backup) and a homemade PC built by my brother. Since the PC is ONLY for Quickbooks, it’s not THAT horrible an existence living with it.
But no offense to my brother, Windows is soooooo “rickety” that it always feels as though it’s going to implode before I finish with the day’s receipts. Plus, just having it on the same desk as the G4 makes me feel as though I’m insulting the Mac.
Ohhhhh how great it will be to one day get an iMac on Intel to replace that PC monstrosity. To run the PC Quickbooks on a Mac will be sweet — and I’ll free-up desk space too!
Hey Chuncky Monkey
There’s a Quickbooks for Mac OS X that is file-compatible with the Windows version. You may find it easier just to use the Mac OS X version and forget about having to log into Windows at all.
Uh, Chunky Monkey… why can’t you use Quickbooks for Mac? The files are compatible.
Intel & AMD CPU’s were *always* smoked by PowerPCs on distributed net testing. dnet is used for code breaking (for example)… this is why the G4 was considered a weapon years ago.
The only strong point of PowerPC was not about RISC, it was about the vector processor (AltiVec, aka “Velocity Engine”) slapped onto the ‘RISC’ architecture. The problem was that it was too hard to code AltiVec (poor compiler support as well – basically had to hand-tweak it), so it was rarely supported. Applications that made good use of AltiVec made the G4 and G5 look REALLY good. Without AltiVec, there was nothing special about the G4 and G5. For example, iTunes converts audio files into MP3 using AltiVec, which gives a G4 about a 70% performance advantage over a similarly-clocked G3 when I tested it a year or two ago.
Yonah is going to kick the crap out of the G4. It has a far superior memory interface and bus, quadruple the L2 cache, it has nicely developed compiler support for its SSE,SSE2 and SSE3 instruction sets (gimpy versions of AltiVec), it uses less power than G4 and it’s dual core.
If Chunky Monkey is in Canada then he can’t use Quickbooks for the Mac as Intuit Canada has a completely different version on the Mac. This is the reason I still have a windows box on my desk as well (darned accountants!!)
I’m in USA, but I can’t use Quickbooks for Mac because Intuit refuses to make it feature-compatible.
Last time I checked, you couldn’t have separate “classes” within a single business on the Mac version (though that may have changed), and the big clincher is that the payroll feature for the Mac version is sorely lacking, even with the recent so-called improvements.
That’s the feature that really makes it tough for us to use the Mac version (though I’d really love to).