or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by 9secondko

No. A disappointment to those who wanted a super-affordable, widescreen notebook from Apple. Even Dell's lowest grade notebook is widescreen.
iBooks have been updated as much as they can without sacrificing the powerbook. I suspect the PBs are next for update. Probably at Paris Expo. No widescreen iBook is a dissapointment, but there is room for a third model to join the lineup. I hope the next powerbook has higher resolution and better color saturation. Couple that with a faster CPU and better graphics card and it would be about as good as it gets realistically as can be hoped for before the Intel...
First the early Intel announcement and now this: http://money.cnn.com/2005/07/22/tech...ex.htm?cnn=yes When CNN starts getting into the "ooohh. Apple is going to come out with new stuff!", you know Apple is the hottest thing going. Amazing.
I would expect that these are due very soon. Probably at Paris Expo. A while back a rumor site with a poor track record listed a manufacturer as being contracted to produce G5 based iBooks and Powerbooks. With the recent announcements of IBM low pwer 970 FX CPUs in conjunction with Thinksecret's announcement of new iBooks, I would think that indicators point to the (simultaneous) release of new Powerbooks AND new iBooks very soon. The iBooks will probably have 1.4...
Yonah is an all new chip. it will handily outperform the mobile G5. Bank on that. Tonah is desinged around the Pentium M core, with changes. The floating point performance is a main target point of Yonah. The Pentium M already whips the G5 at integer and next it will beat in in floating point. The Pentium M already keeps pace with the G5 in applications from Adobe and Macromedia. The Yonah will only serve to leap ahead. After Yonah, there are a few others in...
The difference is 1.6 is the highest closked low power G5, while 1.66 is the lowest clocked Yonah. So even the lowest Yonah is faster than the highest "G5 M".
Actually, a 2 GHZ G5 is more like a 2 GHZ Pentium M. And the 2 GHZ Pentium M has been proven to be a match for a P4 at 3.6 GHZ. Only the 3.8 P4 is slightly faster. A 1.6 G5 would get smoked by a Pentium M. Even the original bottom end Powermac 1.6 left much to be desired. The key to the 970 was that it could clock high. Yes, it is efficient like Athlon 64 and close to Pentium M, but not quite. The fact is a 2.1 GHZ Pentium M our NOW (not to mention what will be available...
The low powre G5 is a face save for IBM. very last minute. They just handicapped a 970 FX to get the power down. sure, it consumes watts just a little less efficienct than Centrino, but then angain, the Centrino is just as fast, clock for clock as the G5. Add to that the fact that 2.1 GHZ Centrinos are out NOW and the idea of a mobile G5 just looks terrible - especially considering that the next G4 may outperform it on average. Low Power consumation, but low power output...
Whoever said MHZ is everything? The fact is that a 2 GHZ chip will handily outperform a 1.6 GHZ chip of the same architecture. MHZ mythology aside, that is simply a fact. Get over it. 2 GHZ is greate than 1.6. Fact. Not myth. Remember, we are speaking of the SAME chip, not differing architectures. And the differing archtitectures Intel is providing are more efficient for mobile applications. A 1.6 G5 notebook is underpowered now. Especially for Apples...
Um, in the case of the G5, it is already common knowledge that the AMD Athlon 64 keeps up very well and the Pentium M destroys the G4. The G5 does better than G4 at many things, but requires at least a certain amount of clock speed to be effective. I would say 1.8 at minimum (yes, I am aware of the Powermacs low end debut at 1.6 and that was quite a shame in the benchmarks wasn't it?). A current 2.1 GHz Pentium M would probably outperform it. I hate to say this as I have...
New Posts  All Forums: