1.5 ~= 1.67 on 167 Mhz bus

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
i'm planning to buy one of the speedbumped 15" powerbooks. given their track record, i'm assuming the thinksecret prediction of 1.5/1.67 is correct.



question, then: 1.67 is 11% faster than 1.5. but assuming the 167 mhz bus and 512K L2 cache don't change, what's the real-world difference between the two speeds for apps that process more than 512K of data? if any?



i'll probably get the 1.67 model anyway (logic below), but but at the 10:1 chip/bus speed ratio, it just seems pointless to market two models with an 11% cpu spread. am i missing something here? or is apple just banking on the general consumer not having a clue about the bus speed issue?



and in balance, what's the consensus of the difference in heat generation? ie: i've heard that the 1.5's are already pretty hot. so 1.67 will just be hotter, with potentially no major performance increase, since a lot of those mhz are already spent waiting for data.



----



re: my rationale for paying $500 more for 1.67 over 1.5:



i definitely want the superdrive and backlit keyboard, BTO us$270. and if TS is right, the 128MB GPU + 5400rpm drive make the extra $200 for the 1.67 worthwhile.



btw, re: other TS prediction subnotes, DVD+R and BT 2.0 are definitely nice perks over the current models, and at least for me, more welcomed than the slight speed increase.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 4
    algolalgol Posts: 833member
    Others are more knowledgeable than me in regard to hardware, but I've heard around 5% improvement if the bus speed stays the same.
  • Reply 2 of 4
    Quote:

    Originally posted by imiloa

    i've heard that the 1.5's are already pretty hot. so 1.67 will just be hotter, with potentially no major performance increase, since a lot of those mhz are already spent waiting for data.



    definitely want the superdrive and backlit keyboard, BTO us$270. and if TS is right, the 128MB GPU + 5400rpm drive make the extra $200 for the 1.67 worthwhile.



    btw, re: other TS prediction subnotes, DVD+R and BT 2.0 are definitely nice perks over the current models, and at least for me, more welcomed than the slight speed increase.




    All models might get the VRAM and HD boost. With options opening up for a 7200 RPM HD if we're lucky. The Radeon 9800 is probably too big and hot for PBs and other video cards are PCI express which probably won't occur until e600 or G5 chips so the VRAM boost for no extra cost is the only way to improve GPU performance.



    DVD+R is enabled for most recent model Apple computers with the installation of iLife '05.



    The 7447a is a little bit cooler then the 7447 (I believe, don't have time to dig around in Freescale's PDF collection) so the 7447b might be a little cooler again.



    Real world performance is little different between 1.5 and 1.67, ~5% or so.





    As an aside,

    Does anyone else wish Apple had started their own chip design team a few years ago and just contracted for fab work?
  • Reply 3 of 4
    imiloaimiloa Posts: 187member
    5% is scant, but still more than i expected. unless they bump up the L2 cache, it seems 512K is a pretty small memory slice for modern media apps, not to mention an OS juggling so many threads.



    re: 9800 mobility, agreed. i don't expect to see that card in any apple laptop unless it gets significantly trimmed down.



    re: apple chip design, i'm not sure that'd be a good use of their resources. i remember the debate here a few years back on the topic, and there were good points on both sides.



    but given the R&D costs on bleeding-edge chip design, it seems better for apple to focus on their forte of software/hardware design, leaving chips to the deep pockets of IBM.



    despite the process snafus of 2004, i'm quite happy with the IBM's designs and direction for the PPC. my sense is that when they finally deliver the next gen, they'll put a smile on all our faces.
  • Reply 4 of 4
    maccrazymaccrazy Posts: 2,658member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by imiloa

    or is apple just banking on the general consumer not having a clue about the bus speed issue?





    Apple isn't helping itself here, go the PowerMac G5 page and click on the G5 processor and they slag off the 167MHz system bus of the G4. Why do they do this when it's in half their computers!
Sign In or Register to comment.