AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › G5 Rumors
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

G5 Rumors - Page 6

post #201 of 484
11/24/01 at 12:49am
[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>i'd just like to interject a little sense into this discussion..

G5 = not cheap, therefore, not going into iMac, also, large and very hot, therefore not going into PowerBook.

7460 "Apollo". Cool, big mhz, too expensive for iStuff. PowerBook chip.

Sahara (750FX) G3 = Cheap. Big mhz, cool. Going into iMac and iBook.</strong><hr></blockquote>


So then are you saying that the Apollo is meant for the portables? That's my belief.
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
post #202 of 484
11/24/01 at 9:27am
Apollo is .13 SOI 1-1.333 GHz and primed for the next Powerbook.
~Winner of the Official 2003 AppleInsider NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Pool~
Reply
~Winner of the Official 2003 AppleInsider NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Pool~
Reply
post #203 of 484
11/24/01 at 12:28pm
Apollo = Powerbook chip. Not iBook.. too expensive for iStuff.

Sahara = iXXX chip. Cheap, Big mhz, cool.

Apollo = .13µ, SOI, Lo-K Dielectric, etc, basically a shrunken, cooler 7450 G4. It's got Altivec. ~1-1.2 Ghz

Sahara = Revision of the G3 line. But this one's a real ass-kicker. .13µ, SOI, copper interconnects, etc. BAD ASS CHIP, and it's cheap, too. No AltiVec. ~1 Ghz

G5, who knows. 64-bit with full backwards compatibilty with 32-bit code... AltiVec. 1.2 Ghz and up.
Reply
Reply
post #204 of 484
11/24/01 at 2:07pm
Was the 7460 on <a href="http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/PPCRMAP.pdf" target="_blank">Moto's roadmap</a>? If it was, it isn't anymore.

And the 7460 is supposed to go to a .13 process, but the roadmap says the G4 has " .15µ copper process for initial G4 product (migrating to SOI)," and then the G5 has ".13µ process with SOI initial G5 product." Doesn't that suggest that the transition from .15 to .13 is they key to the transition from G4 to G5?

Hypothesis - the 7460 is released in January and called the G5.
Reply
Reply
post #205 of 484
11/24/01 at 3:28pm
I heard the G5 "will" come out in March, not January. And I am currently downloading 10.2 which is 64-bit. And Mac OS 10.2 is due out in March as I heard as well. :cool:
Regards,
Artenman
Artist & Web Developer
<a href="http://www.loamic.com" target="_blank">http://www.loamic.com</a>
Reply
Regards,
Artenman
Artist & Web Developer
<a href="http://www.loamic.com" target="_blank">http://www.loamic.com</a>
Reply
post #206 of 484
11/24/01 at 3:38pm
Is that sarcasm or real info art. Just curious.
Reply
Reply
post #207 of 484
11/24/01 at 8:53pm
[quote]Originally posted by artenman:
<strong>I heard the G5 "will" come out in March, not January. And I am currently downloading 10.2 which is 64-bit. And Mac OS 10.2 is due out in March as I heard as well. :cool: </strong><hr></blockquote>

I really find it VERY hard to believe that Apple would make very single other processor out there obsolete with a 64bit compiled version of 10.2, it makes no sense. Apple has been pushing this product, and now you can't use it?? C'mon, get real.

10 will more than likely stay at 32 bit. Maybe forever. That might be a OS 11 (or is it XI) version, but NOT 10.2. Apple just would be that stupid.
-- Mike Eggleston
-- Mac Finatic since 1984.
-- Proud Member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
-- Wii #: 8913 3004 4519 2027
Reply
-- Mike Eggleston
-- Mac Finatic since 1984.
-- Proud Member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
-- Wii #: 8913 3004 4519 2027
Reply
post #208 of 484
11/25/01 at 12:10am
Ok I may gone overboard . I will ask tomorrow or Monday about when is G5's released date just to be extra certain. And I do know the person who knows what we don't know, and need to know . As for the OS, I may have exaggerated a bit, who knows, it probably wont be released until 2 years from now (the whole 64-bit thing), because if it was released next year, it would suck for all Mac Users including me. So you're probably right. Maybe OS 11 or something, but not tomorrow.

[ 11-25-2001: Message edited by: artenman ]

[ 11-25-2001: Message edited by: artenman ]</p>
Regards,
Artenman
Artist & Web Developer
<a href="http://www.loamic.com" target="_blank">http://www.loamic.com</a>
Reply
Regards,
Artenman
Artist & Web Developer
<a href="http://www.loamic.com" target="_blank">http://www.loamic.com</a>
Reply
post #209 of 484
11/25/01 at 12:18am
Oh, and I am still downloading this so called 10.2 64-bit OS. Interesting.
Regards,
Artenman
Artist & Web Developer
<a href="http://www.loamic.com" target="_blank">http://www.loamic.com</a>
Reply
Regards,
Artenman
Artist & Web Developer
<a href="http://www.loamic.com" target="_blank">http://www.loamic.com</a>
Reply
post #210 of 484
11/25/01 at 11:47am
I'm not supporting claims of the next 10 release being 64bit, I think it's way too soon and little benefit unless you're playing with a lot of data.

But the claims of a 64bit version of 10 making all other processors out of date are wrong. 10/HFS allows you to combine code for different platforms into a single FAT binary. For example I could give you a FAT version of Photoshop with both PPC and x86 code and the operating system would pick the appropriate segment to load.

It's not as simple as I make it sound. Apple would have to do some tricks with the linker for 32/64bit library calls and various other components that cross the boundary. But to sum it up it's very possible for Apple to deliver a 32/64bit OS.

-Bill
Reply
Reply
post #211 of 484
11/25/01 at 7:07pm
[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>I just thought I'd get this topic going with some info I found -

Moto intros the G5 <a href="http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0009/27.mot.shtml" target="_blank">here</a>

Basic feature set of the G5 <a href="http://www.geek.com/procspec/apple/g5.htm" target="_blank">here</a>


Just some more info/juice to breath some life back into this thread </strong><hr></blockquote>

This seems to be the most credible evdience yet for a G5 release in Jan....possibly available in March.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #212 of 484
11/25/01 at 7:10pm
The other thing that is interesting is that the speeds indicated are exactly what the Register's source said: Debut at 1.2, 1.4, 1.6 and then move to 2ghz by summer.

I am starting to get giddy.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #213 of 484
11/25/01 at 7:21pm
That Geek.com info was there before The Register and MOSR got all their insider reports on the G5 too.

I think they should announce the G5 if it can ship by March. Kinda sucks that it wouldn't ship until Febuary or March but I guess I could wait a little longer.

What they could do with a 10.2 is make it a 64-bit OS but make it 32-bit backwards compatible so it would basically run as a 32-bit OS on any computer that doesn't have the G5. Or maybe it will just be 32-bit and the G5 will run software 32-bit until Apple brings out a 64-bit version of X.
~Winner of the Official 2003 AppleInsider NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Pool~
Reply
~Winner of the Official 2003 AppleInsider NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Pool~
Reply
post #214 of 484
11/25/01 at 8:58pm
[quote]Originally posted by artenman:
<strong>Oh, and I am still downloading this so called 10.2 64-bit OS. Interesting.</strong><hr></blockquote>
From where?
Reply
Reply
post #215 of 484
11/26/01 at 7:41am
<a href="http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail/0,1958,568_322_23,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail/0,1958,568_322_23,00.html</a>

If the G5 is to be in the 85XX product line, as a lot of people have been posting, I thought it was interesting that the MPC8540 won't be even sampling until " the second half of 2002."

The MPC8540 is an anounced chip with the specifications fairly well outlined. The MPC85XX - G5 has not been announced and information on it is relatively speculative.

My guess is that the G5 will come out after the MPC8540, hence, would be sampling later in the 2nd half of 2002 and introduced at the end of the year. Hope I'm wrong, but .......
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
post #216 of 484
11/26/01 at 9:47am
Think about it. When Motorola puts an 8 infront of the processor numeration, it means it will be a SOC type embedded chip. This must mean that the G5 was changed from 7500 to 8500 because it will have built-in features that were normally external to the CPU core like memory controller, ethernet, and PCI controller. This should reduce latency and provide much more bandwidth.
Reply
Reply
post #217 of 484
11/26/01 at 5:47pm
Reply
Reply
post #218 of 484
11/27/01 at 8:37am
[quote]Originally posted by AirSluf:
<strong>Product numbers are just so much marketing, and marketing departments can play hell with company or even industry conventions. 8500, 7500, neither really means anything until you can slap one on a board.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Agreed. That reference above means nothing. It could be a freakin embedded chip for all we know.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #219 of 484
11/27/01 at 3:17pm
January release can be done, but it won't.
I think Apple isn't going to release this kick-ass new chip with a 20 year old OS as a default system.
They'll surely ship it with Mac OS X preinstalled and set for default, and we all know this won't happen before March. I say we'll see G5 around 1400MHz with GeForce 4 cards at MWNY.
And forget about that Raycer thing, I doubt there will ever be a "product" based on that. Some minor chips sure, but not a graphics card or something like that.

G-news
Matyoroy!
Reply
Matyoroy!
Reply
post #220 of 484
11/27/01 at 9:13pm
Reply
Reply
post #221 of 484
11/28/01 at 6:32am
[quote]SDW2001
"Agreed. That reference above means nothing. It could be a freakin embedded chip for all we know."<hr></blockquote>

The MPC8540 is an embedded chip. But so is the G4. Below is the directory for finding the G4 on Motorola's web site.

Motorola : Semiconductors : Product Catalog : 32-Bit Embedded Processors : PowerPC ISA : MPC7XXX, MPC7XX and MPC6XX Host Processors

Point is the G5 is supposed to be in the 85XX family of processors and a much less complicated chip, 8540, won't be sampling until the 2nd half of 2002.

Maybe the G5 development has been secretly accelerated beyond the 8540 and is near final design, but.........well...... this seems to be wishful thinking.

Hope I'm totally wrong, especially since I will be buying a new low end tower sometime in Jan.
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
post #222 of 484
11/28/01 at 7:23am
AirSluf wrote:

[quote]All we need from Apples raycer acquisition is that tiny little Quartz 2D chip... Let the big boys worry about 3D.<hr></blockquote>

3D acceleration is vector acceleration. Quartz is vector-based. 2D acceleration affects bitmaps.

Apple could design a chip that would accelerate Quartz, but it would be redundant. They'd be better off finding a way to rewrite Quartz to take advantage of OpenGL, and using whatever 3D acceleration the video card provides.

I have a hunch that that optimization would have less of an impact on overall performance than a few rounds of tweaking Carbon (and PowerPlant, and Finder). Quartz is already pretty efficient. On the other hand, some Carbon apps seem to spam the OS with events (AppleWorks 6.2 reportedly posts 8,000 events per second when it's idling!) and that's a performance killer right there.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #223 of 484
11/28/01 at 7:31am
Don't forget that Apple doesn't like Mot releasing info about new chips, Apple likes to be the one to introduce them in their machines. If Mot released info (legit info as in Press Release) about the G5 we would all be able to see everything it would have and figure a release date.

My guess is that the 8540 (which I've looked at for a good guess of what will be in the G5) is Mots way of saying this is what we have in the pipe without giving away the G5 release for Apple.
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #224 of 484
11/28/01 at 9:04am
The Register is again quoting a source as saying the G5 is now going into production:
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23078.html" target="_blank">the register</a> :eek:
Reply
Reply
post #225 of 484
11/28/01 at 9:16am
[quote]The Register is again quoting a source as saying the G5 is now going into production: the register :eek: <hr></blockquote>

wow... I can only hope/wish this isn't a bunch of bull...

If that source is wrong, I hope he/she is having fun, because they will never be listened to again after Jan However if they are right... everything they say from here on out will be held as gospel...

<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
wow my very own signature
Reply
wow my very own signature
Reply
post #226 of 484
11/28/01 at 9:22am
[quote]Originally posted by sawtooth:
<strong>The Register is again quoting a source as saying the G5 is now going into production:
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23078.html" target="_blank">the register</a> :eek: </strong><hr></blockquote>

Two Words: Holy Sh*t. I don't know guys, that, in conjunction with everything else sounds legit, I just hope I have the $4k to spend when it is time.

Say your prayers for the G5.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #227 of 484
11/28/01 at 9:36am
I only have one thing to say about The Register 'source':

I'll believe it when I see it!
Like, I really had something clever to say, like, you know ...
Reply
Like, I really had something clever to say, like, you know ...
Reply
post #228 of 484
11/28/01 at 10:02am
Believe it if As The Apple Turns and MacUser UK chime in with similar info. Both of those sites are batting 1000 this year.
I'm making plastics right now!
Reply
I'm making plastics right now!
Reply
post #229 of 484
11/28/01 at 10:19am
I knew the G5 would be ready in Q1-02 I just didn't think it would be in January. Guess that means no one gets a Xmas present from me this year, I'm going into full production on my G5 fund now.

So this would mean that rev 0.7 had the bugs worked out. Even if the low end is 1GHz instead of 1.2GHz I'll be very happy!!!
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #230 of 484
11/28/01 at 3:00pm
[quote]Originally posted by Slacker:
<strong>I knew the G5 would be ready in Q1-02 I just didn't think it would be in January. Guess that means no one gets a Xmas present from me this year, I'm going into full production on my G5 fund now.

So this would mean that rev 0.7 had the bugs worked out. Even if the low end is 1GHz instead of 1.2GHz I'll be very happy!!!</strong><hr></blockquote>


Yeah, for real. My fund is OK right now. I have some other priorities to fund too, right around that time. But, I'm getting there.....hopefully LCD's come down a bit as well...that will help.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #231 of 484
11/28/01 at 5:31pm
I've been commenting that the G5 won't be out until
later in the year. In fact, I sort of predicted that the apollo G4 would be announced at MWSF '02 with DDR and that the G5 would be released when OSX is officially the default OS.

Now I'm starting to believe that the G5 will be announced this coming MWSF. What is changing my mind is that one of the sessions scheduled for MWSF is called "This ain't your parents' Mac" and I can't see this panel discussion talking about the apollo G4 that is 20% faster than todays G4 AND when the G5 is so close to production. It makes sense to me that this panel discussion will be on the new G5/OSX with all the other powermac improvements.

These are just my thoughts...


- Mark

- Mark

http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/index.html
Reply

- Mark

http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/index.html
Reply
post #232 of 484
11/28/01 at 6:49pm
it was weird when the G3 was big and i heard "G4", it joust sounded weird. now G5 sound weird! :cool:
My Syte
Reply
My Syte
Reply
post #233 of 484
11/28/01 at 10:45pm
If they do appear or are announced expect the clock speed for Apple to have room to grow, for sales reasons dont expect 1.6Ghz right of the bat. My guess is like the every high end machine in the past: higher clock speed G4's with a G5 anouncement that it will ship in 6 weeks. G5 will be expesive so will SOI G4's at first.
Reply
Reply
post #234 of 484
11/28/01 at 11:21pm
lol, all this was posted at slashdot.org a long time ago.

if you want a true geeks perspective on what the G5 means to the geek community, check out this link.

<a href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/09/17/1421246&mode=thread" target="_blank">slashdot article</a>

lol, they're about as fanitical for linux as folks here are for Macs, for the most part. OSX has brought Apple a little respect in the Unix camp though. go figure.
Reply
Reply
post #235 of 484
11/29/01 at 12:17am
[quote]Originally posted by mark_19:
<strong>I've been commenting that the G5 won't be out until
later in the year. In fact, I sort of predicted that the apollo G4 would be announced at MWSF '02 with DDR and that the G5 would be released when OSX is officially the default OS.

Now I'm starting to believe that the G5 will be announced this coming MWSF. What is changing my mind is that one of the sessions scheduled for MWSF is called "This ain't your parents' Mac" and I can't see this panel discussion talking about the apollo G4 that is 20% faster than todays G4 AND when the G5 is so close to production. It makes sense to me that this panel discussion will be on the new G5/OSX with all the other powermac improvements.

These are just my thoughts...


- Mark</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Reply
Reply
post #236 of 484
11/29/01 at 5:41pm
So we've got low end guesses at 9xx, 1gig,1.2 gig and high end guesses at the rumored 1.2, 1.4 and 1.6 - with duals in the mix one way or another...so, if you had a choice, would you take duals at the lower speeds (better near-term supply) or single processors at the higher speeds (more restricted supply)?
You can't get here from there.
Reply
You can't get here from there.
Reply
post #237 of 484
11/29/01 at 5:59pm
  • Leonis
  • AI Community Dictator
[quote]Originally posted by Caler:
<strong>so, if you had a choice, would you take duals at the lower speeds (better near-term supply) or single processors at the higher speeds (more restricted supply)? </strong><hr></blockquote>

Can we have both?
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
post #238 of 484
11/29/01 at 6:39pm
[quote]Originally posted by Caler:
<strong>So we've got low end guesses at 9xx, 1gig,1.2 gig and high end guesses at the rumored 1.2, 1.4 and 1.6 - with duals in the mix one way or another...so, if you had a choice, would you take duals at the lower speeds (better near-term supply) or single processors at the higher speeds (more restricted supply)? </strong><hr></blockquote>

DPs are faster.

Andrew
Reply
Reply
post #239 of 484
11/29/01 at 6:53pm
[quote]Originally posted by amidala:
<strong>

DPs are faster.

Andrew</strong><hr></blockquote>

I guess that's my point...Apple put the emphasis on DP models back before OS X was there to take advantage of them. Now, when OS X is shaping up nicely, why not roll out a wider roster of of DP machines using relatively cheaper current gen G4s? We'd still have the higher speed next gen chips on the high end, of course. I suppose the margins are better on single chip models?
You can't get here from there.
Reply
You can't get here from there.
Reply
post #240 of 484
11/29/01 at 6:55pm
my new signature says it all!

[ 11-29-2001: Message edited by: NeoMac ]</p>
Like, I really had something clever to say, like, you know ...
Reply
Like, I really had something clever to say, like, you know ...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › G5 Rumors