New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Apple Rumors and Reports Discuss what's going on with Apple in this forum

Rosetta?


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
Arichards

 
Arichards's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 14, 2005
Location: Massachusetts, United States
Posts: 221
Arichards is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: Macbook 1.83Ghz, 1GB Ram, 60GB HD. 19in. external display, bluetooth keyboard and mouse. Closed Lid.

Arichards is offline
I know all the hype about the new ibooks that "may" come out in January. However, if these new computers are forced to used the emulator Rosetta to encode all the OSX stuff to X86 stuff, wont that slow the speed down a lot. So in other words you won't really get the true performance of the intel chip.

Also, as time goes on and more applications are made for OSX with Intel technology, will the Rosetta emulator still be needed? Or will the need for it go away and the true power of the Yonah processor can be unleased?

Thanks in advance.
QUOTE Thanks
trpnmonkey41

 
Member Since: Jul 22, 2003
Location: Hamilton College
Posts: 7,003
trpnmonkey41 is a splendid one to beholdtrpnmonkey41 is a splendid one to beholdtrpnmonkey41 is a splendid one to beholdtrpnmonkey41 is a splendid one to beholdtrpnmonkey41 is a splendid one to beholdtrpnmonkey41 is a splendid one to beholdtrpnmonkey41 is a splendid one to beholdtrpnmonkey41 is a splendid one to behold
Mac Specs: 20" iMac C2D 2.16ghz, 13" MacBook 2.0ghz, 60gb iPod vid, 1gb nano

trpnmonkey41 is offline
The rosetta transcodes the code a near realtime speed, so you won't notice a slowdown.

As for how long the rosetta is needed, it depends on how long apps are developed for the G# processors.

Don't forget to use the new User Reputation System
QUOTE Thanks
damontgo
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

From what I hear the Rosetta emulation runs almost invisibly... and I don't think that it's used for all apps. I think developers are simply porting some to the x86 platform right?
QUOTE Thanks
lil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

OS X is already Intel native.

It's the applications that aren't all Intel ready, in fact most are still PPC only binaries, however Rosetta will emulate for those.

However I do not believe for one minute yet that it will be fast. I have written a fair bit on this in on other posts and I'm sure a search will yield those posts. However; knowing what I do on emulation technology, Rosetta probably isn't as fast as a lot of the hype is saying and for some time yet I believe that a native PPC machine will wallop an Intel emulating the PPC completely.

One of the big challenges is the endian swapping.

This will begin to change as more apps begin to become Intel native or PPC ones are replaced with new Intel or universal binary alternatives.

Vicky
QUOTE Thanks
homer_j

 
Member Since: Jun 26, 2005
Location: Lancashire UK
Posts: 454
homer_j will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: MBP 15 inch 1.83. iBook G4.

homer_j is offline
Didn't Steve demonstrate the mactel machine at one of the WWDC's? It showed the speed in which they ran at and how it worked with a maths program???

Just the road and my MBP.. wohoo.. No wireless networks - DOH! Oh well, wheres my ipod! :headphone
QUOTE Thanks
lil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Nothing saying those weren't Intel native...

And Mathematica was shown as was a case in point for the Intel transition and how relatively straightforward it is if you are using XCode already.

Again I await to be convinced when I see it in the flesh, if Rosetta can be so fast, how come the other way around - ie: Virtual PC at present is slow?

As I say I'll believe it when I see it, I respect Steve Jobs greatly, but it doesn't hurt sometimes to see things in the flesh than believe the marketing speak and hype.

Vicky
QUOTE Thanks
technologist

 
Member Since: Mar 30, 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 4,744
technologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 12" Apple PowerBook G4 (1.5GHz)

technologist is offline
I remember seeing some numbers that suggested Rosetta ran a PowerPC app at about 80% the speed of an Intel app.

I expect Rosetta will stay around for some time...modern Macs still ship with Classic, 5 years after OS X became the standard on new Macs. Even a Motorola 680x0 emulator is still included, eleven years after PowerPC became the standard. (Though both will be dropped with the move to Intel.)
QUOTE Thanks
sarahsboy18

 
sarahsboy18's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 30, 2005
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 1,069
sarahsboy18 is just really nicesarahsboy18 is just really nicesarahsboy18 is just really nicesarahsboy18 is just really nice
Mac Specs: Mac Pro, 8-Core 2.8Ghz, 10GB RAM, 2x1TB HDDs, iPod U2 Edition

sarahsboy18 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lil
Again I await to be convinced when I see it in the flesh, if Rosetta can be so fast, how come the other way around - ie: Virtual PC at present is slow?
Although I agree with your overall point... I'll believe 80% when I see it too..... but in the case of VPC you are emulating an entire Proc/RAM hungry OS inside of another Proc/RAM hungry OS... and then running your apps... So I don't know that this comparison is really applicable.

"If you had a friend who was a tightrope walker, and you were walking down a sidewalk, and he fell, that would be completely unacceptable." -Mitch Hedberg
QUOTE Thanks
lil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

I suppose that much is true.

I'm just not sure where the quantum leap in speed will come from in terms of emulation. JIT emulation technologies are very good and probably is what Rosetta uses instead of the old 68k emulators transcription method.

The other things is, 80% is quoted but 80% of what. 80% of the speed of the Intel chip in it, ie: 2GHz -> 1.8GHz PPC; but then, MHz myths and all that, or 80% the speed of a PPC 750?

I think for the time being the best way to run PowerPC applications (ones that haven't made the transition to universal binary or you can't afford to upgrade to the new version which is a universal binary) will be on a PPC native machine.

Especially in the case of the Power Mac G5; we have read for a couple of years now how that machine batters Dual Xeon set-ups, and hence probably why it will be on of the last to undergo the ppc->x86 transition.

Vicky
QUOTE Thanks
Amen-Moses

 
Member Since: Apr 25, 2003
Location: The home of the free and the land that did for Braveheart.
Posts: 1,301
Amen-Moses is just really niceAmen-Moses is just really niceAmen-Moses is just really niceAmen-Moses is just really nice
Mac Specs: 24"iMac, 15"MB-Pro, MacBook, G4 iMac, PM G5 2x2Ghz, G4 iBook & Some PCs

Amen-Moses is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lil
Especially in the case of the Power Mac G5; we have read for a couple of years now how that machine batters Dual Xeon set-ups, and hence probably why it will be on of the last to undergo the ppc->x86 transition.
As I said on another thread, the only PC that can currently match a quad G5 is the HP quad Opteron which is $3000 more expensive.

Nothing from intel currently even comes close.

Amen-Moses
QUOTE Thanks
Pierre

 
Pierre's Avatar
 
Member Since: Nov 19, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 320
Pierre will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: White 2ghz Core Duo Macbook, 2ghz RAM, 60gb Hard drive, SuperDrive

Pierre is offline
Think of this though.

With rosetta running, and intel processors, there will be a gap between that and PPC. I don't know how to phrase it. If Rosetta is fast enough, and so is the Processor, then wouldn't it overpass anyway. The Intel would have to be just that much faster, or better phrasing, the PPC would have to be that much slower.

I do agree, though, since the g5quad is so fast, the intel wouldn't catch up (while running rosetta). Hopefully, when the powermac goes intel, rosetta won't be needed.

But remember, we're talking about single core g4's here.. not quadg5s. I think that a dualcore yonah w/ Rosetta would not only close the gap, but make it noticeably faster

Guess we'll see, really soon (hopefully)

Pierre

Macbook: 2ghz Core Duo, 2gb Ram

Don't forget to use the User Reputation System
QUOTE Thanks
Meyvn

 
Meyvn's Avatar
 
Member Since: Nov 24, 2004
Posts: 726
Meyvn will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: Black Colorware PowerBook 1.67 GHz G4, 2 GB DDR2, 100GB 7200 RPM

Meyvn is offline
The real issue I have here is the problem of universal binaries. Programs that are UBs won't have ANY processor optimization, theoretically "flatlined" in that area, whereas many of the programs that we now enjoy are sped up because of optimization that comes with being native to only one processor. Unless of course, the "dual coding" allows optimization for both processors? I don't know enough about it, but it seems like they'd really be crippled in that area.

'cause when it rains, you know it pours.
QUOTE Thanks
kingcrowing2
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

well, if you have a 2GHz intel running at 70% speed, that would be 1.7GHz, and you had that in an iBook, that would be a ~350MHz speed boost. and then again for native apps (safari, iChat, mail, iPhoto, iMovie, DVD player etc) it would run at 100% speed because you wouldnt need rosetta... so I think because the intels are avialable at a much higher clock speed (I've heard the new yohnas are starting at dual cre 1.66GHz) that it will make up for the speed lost in emulation of certian apps
QUOTE Thanks
thoughtCoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

I am guessing that apps would have to be optimized to take advantage of the dual-coreness of the Yonah's too..
QUOTE Thanks
technologist

 
Member Since: Mar 30, 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 4,744
technologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 12" Apple PowerBook G4 (1.5GHz)

technologist is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meyvn
The real issue I have here is the problem of universal binaries. Programs that are UBs won't have ANY processor optimization, theoretically "flatlined" in that area, whereas many of the programs that we now enjoy are sped up because of optimization that comes with being native to only one processor. Unless of course, the "dual coding" allows optimization for both processors?
A universal binary can be as optimized as an ordinary executable. Most apps will be optimized sufficiently by the compiler.

Sometimes compiler optimization is not enough; Photoshop for example is heavily optimized by hand both for AltiVec on the Mac (and SSE on Windows.)This is still possible with a UB; the existing AltiVec code can be used, and probably some of the SSE code can be brought over from the Windows version. This does require some serious effort by the developers; probably only compute-intensive software will get this sort of attention.
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« thinksecret: 13.3" ibook - 12" powerbook to be dropped | Intel Yonah processor to be released 3 days before macworld expo »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Speed of Apple Intel dev systems impress developers jram Apple Rumors and Reports 15 01-12-2006 10:50 PM
Rosetta Stone aantoine90 OS X - Apps and Games 1 11-22-2005 05:46 PM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?