G5 Rumors - Page 7

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>my new signature says it all!

[ 11-29-2001: Message edited by: NeoMac ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

:cool:

Question

The Register article claiming "The PowerPC G5 has been passed for full-scale manufacture, a source close to Apple has claimed. " was posted 11/28/01.

Some where I read that from start to finish it takes 50-60 days to manufacture microprocessors. Ass-u-me the Register article is true, then the first volume production G5's will be ready to ship when......about the end of Jan. right. Please correct me if I'm wrong, it wouldn't be the first time.

I think the source for The Register's and MOSR's articles is having a good laugh @ the expense of the MacIntosh community.

And by the way, in the MOSR article the quoted mole claimed the G5 to be "ultrascalar".

[quote]Some people have speculated that the G5 is going to be a multicored chip. This is absolutely false! The major performance enhancements of the G5 come from a totally revamped ultrascalar core design.<hr></blockquote>

Any one know what ultrascalar means?

[ 11-30-2001: Message edited by: rickag ]

And another thing, a lot of people seem to believe the G5 will be 64bit. Look at Motorola's roadmap <a href="http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/PPCRMAP.pdf" target="_blank">http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/PPCRMAP.pdf</a>

"32 & 64 bit products"

Major differences between G4 & G5 will be the
1. New Pipeline
2. Rapid I/O
and maybe on-chip non-blocking crossbar switch fabric, called OCeaN (On-Chip Network))

[ 11-30-2001: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>

Just went to Ars and some one(Billium) posted a link to Architosh

<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-11/2001a-1130-appleg5.phtml" target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-11/2001a-1130-appleg5.phtml</a>

Definitely worth the read.

[ 11-30-2001: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>

You definitely got me drooling....

[ 11-30-2001: Message edited by: Nitzer ]</p>

Da-a-a-a-amn.

If a third of that is true, it'll be great.

If the clustering rumor comes true, I called it!

Yeh, here I've been really thinking the G5 will be 6 - 9 months away, at least.

Then I noticed that the Motorola roadmap shows the G5 to be 32 bit & 64 bit parts. Basically, a G4 with a new pipeline plus Rapid I/O and HiP7 manufacturting process. Don't get me wrong, still a mean feat, but not like a 64 bit processor.

Does any one know if Archintosh has released inside type information in the past? Is this unusual for them? Seems they are more of a news format.

They almost never publish rumors, as far as I'm aware. This is unusual for them.

Considering that they deal with computationally intensive software in a PC-dominated field, I can understand their excitement, though.

Again, looking at all the "evidence", it seems likely to me that the G5 is coming.

---PPC Roadmap shows Q1 release
---No official denials
---published rumors that quite frankly, seem credible.
---job's supposed statement that the MHZ gap would be closed near the end of the year 2001

[ 12-01-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>

I think we are all being led around by the nose and we our having our legs pulled.

If we keep believing in these rumors, this MWSF will be the absolute biggest disappointment yet!

Is it a stretch to say that Raycer's 3d chip know how could be turned into a Quartz engine?

Forgive my ignorance of 2d vs 3d programming/chipset building . . .
Are there large differences between creating/designing a 2d graphics chip vs a 3d graphics chip?

It seems kinda of silly to buy a 3d company to accelerate 2d functions in Quartz. It sounds kinda like retrofitting.

I realize that 2d and 3d probably share a lot of functions or processes or whatnot - but how similar - or dissilimar are they?

Is this even a viable solution?

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>I think we are all being led around by the nose and we our having our legs pulled.

If we keep believing in these rumors, this MWSF will be the absolute biggest disappointment yet!</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah. Bigger than the Paris disappointment last October. No wait-- they cancelled it.

Bigger than the MWNY last July.

I'm a believer in the Law of Averages, so I think we're due. Whether it's a G5 or not this January remains to be seen, but there are still several Rabbits that Steve has to pull out of his Reality-Distorted Top Hat, like a new iMac.

Even if a so-called "G5" is ready by January, Steve may wait until Tokyo or Seybold if the iMac is introduced in San Francisco. (I like how I'm using "Steve" as if he's my next door neighbor.)

Remember also that Naked Rats said that the upcoming "G5" is not the true successor to the throne, but rather a G4 made up to look like a G5. Kind of like the Man in the Iron Mask, but without Leonardo DiCaprio.

~e

[quote]Originally posted by Scheisskopf:
<strong>
I'm a believer in the Law of Averages, so I think we're due.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Law of Averages? Maybe Law of Averages according to a chronic gambler!

Btw... that's a "clever" name...

Derek

According to some research done by an AI poster ages ago (almost a year!), Raycer (who was bought by Apple) were basically working on a z-buffer accelerator on steroids. Hardware z-sorting.

In 3D, there are 3 (actually, 4, but lets not go there) axises (typo on purpose): x, ie: horizontal, y, ie: vertical, and z, ie : depth.

Z sorting goes like this: You are rendering a house in OpenGL.
Since you are facing the house dead on, it is a waste of processing power to render a) the sides of the house, which are not visible, b) the back of the house, same reason, and everything behind the house, for the same reason.

But let's say there are windows in the house. They are semi-translucent, and allow you to see what is behind them, perhaps a wall w/ a painting on it.

Graphics calculations like these are all z-buffer calcs. You take the wall and painting, 'multiply' them by the translucency of the window, maybe overlay a little fog for atmospherics, and render this to the screen in realtime.

A z-buffer calc. accelerator, ie a hardware chip on the G5 motherboard, plows through this, offloading this from the cpu, which can focus on other tasks.

So WTF does this have to do w/ accelerating Aqua?

Translucency in Aqua. All inactive windows, menus, etc, all overlapping, all the time. Throw in a spiffy Mac OS X xterm into the mix, to maximize the eye candy and increase the jealousy in your PC-lamer friends.

All those layers of translucency, overlapping each other, requires some serious reverse-order z-buffer calculating. Take the desktop pic, add a few overlapped inactive windows, and stick an xterm on top of that, and you have 5 or six levels of partially visible stuff. If there is a chip that a) figures out what isn't visible, and throws that data out of graphics memory, and b) figures out all the multiplied layers, and what the layers overlapped should look like as a 2d surface (ie your screen), you have a very fast, very snappy GUI.

Hope this helps.

Maya ain't coming to OSX because of 400 mhz G4s, boys. They're here for the G5's coming in 2002.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: stimuli ]</p>

AirSluf wrote:

[quote]My current knowledge of OpenGL leads me to think a quartzlike engine could theoretically be made, but in a VERY Rube Goldberg like manner that would still see much of the code run in the CPU. The main issue here is how the pipeline is laid out and how the acceleration engines choose to implement portions of it for the speed gain.<hr></blockquote>

Excellent post, AirSluf. My knowledge of OpenGL is about 5 years old, so I defer.

[quote]Originally posted by dWREK67:
<strong>
Law of Averages? Maybe Law of Averages according to a chronic gambler!

Btw... that's a "clever" name...

Derek</strong><hr></blockquote>

Okay-- The Law of Really, Really Big Numbers Made by an Infinite Number of Red Necks Shooting an Infinite Number of Bullets at Street Signs to Come up with Shakespeare's Hamlet. In Braille.

BTW: Technically, it's Scheißkopf if this word existed in German. I'll have to check with the (German) girlfriend.

~e

Check out <a href="http://www.thinksecret.com." target="_blank">www.thinksecret.com.</a> What to make of this and please revist my "What Future Computer Will You Buy" thread.....will you purchase one if the posted specs come about? Will the name "G5" make a difference?

Regarding ThinkSecret:

I've been saying it all along in my signature. Why do we insist on believing in pie-in-the-sky G5 processors, when it was made clear a year ago that Apollo was the next G4 upgrade in the time-line.

I believe the 'G5' source om MOSR and TheRegister is a Wintel jerk jerking us around.

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>Regarding ThinkSecret:

I've been saying it all along in my signature. Why do we insist on believing in pie-in-the-sky G5 processors, when it was made clear a year ago that Apollo was the next G4 upgrade in the time-line.

I believe the 'G5' source om MOSR and TheRegister is a Wintel jerk jerking us around. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Because there is other evidence.

1) No Official Denials
2) Past statements his Steveness regarding the timely closing of the MHZ gap
3) MOT's own release timetable ...Q1.
4) Many of us believe Apollo is for PB G4 and possibly iMacs. Sahara G3's may be for ibook's.
5) MOT has conceded work is progressing well on the G5.


No one knows. Although ThinkSecret's record has been pretty good to my knowledge. This does hamper the case for the G5, but does not close it.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

Because there is other evidence.

2) Past statements his Steveness regarding the timely closing of the MHZ gap
5) MOT has conceded work is progressing well on the G5. ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

If Apollo appears at 1.4Ghz at MWSF, that would constitute 'closing the gap', because we would go from being 1Ghz behind to 500+Mhz behind the P4.

Motorola did say the G5 is progressing, but they also said, don't get your hopes up so soon (paraphrase).

MOSR has 0% credibility with me. TheRegister I will have to wait and see how this pans out.

Peace.

By Law of Averages, I think he is refering to regression to the mean.

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>Regarding ThinkSecret:

I've been saying it all along in my signature. Why do we insist on believing in pie-in-the-sky G5 processors, when it was made clear a year ago that Apollo was the next G4 upgrade in the time-line.

I believe the 'G5' source om MOSR and TheRegister is a Wintel jerk jerking us around. </strong><hr></blockquote>

the fact that the G4 still has another scheduled revision due means SHIT. it really does. By using that logic we would be using a G3 750cx now just because there were more revisions left in the G3.

Apple will go to the G5 whenever its ready. If that is before or at the same time as the 7460 you can bet your money that Apple will go with the G5 over the 7460

[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>

the fact that the G4 still has another scheduled revision due means SHIT. it really does. By using that logic we would be using a G3 750cx now just because there were more revisions left in the G3.

Apple will go to the G5 whenever its ready. If that is before or at the same time as the 7460 you can bet your money that Apple will go with the G5 over the 7460</strong><hr></blockquote>


I agree, applenut. Although closing the MHZ may well be achieved with the G4 Apollo as NeoMac indicated.
BTW, NeoMac:
[quote]Motorola did say the G5 is progressing, but they also said, don't get your hopes up so soon (paraphrase). <hr></blockquote>

That's not paraphrasing, Neo...its your interpretation. To me, it could have been a dodge on pre-announcing an Apple product, which the man certainly couldn't do.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>

The TRUTH shall set us FREE in 38 days!

So I proclaim. Worship me now.

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>Regarding ThinkSecret:

I've been saying it all along in my signature. Why do we insist on believing in pie-in-the-sky G5 processors, when it was made clear a year ago that Apollo was the next G4 upgrade in the time-line.

I believe the 'G5' source om MOSR and TheRegister is a Wintel jerk jerking us around. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Because Apple needs processors for both the 'consumer'- and the 'pro'-line.

So let's put it into perspective:

The G4 was introduced at 400 (yikes!), 450 and 500 MHz, and then cut back to 350, 400 and 450 MHz; which actually was what we had with the G3 Yosemite.

By all accounts, the G3 has scaled better than the G4. The G3 was never stuck at 500 MHz for a year, the G4 was. Apple's marketing decision was to put a G3 in comsumer machines, and a G4 in Pro machines. No way in hel was Apple going to have a 'consumer' iMac at faster clock than a G4 powermac. Hence no iMacs faster than 500 MHz.

Let's assume the G5 does surface, and it goes at faster MHz than the G4 we have know (G4e). Fine and dandy, Apple get those G5's in machines once the hit the supply hot spot.

But what about the iMac then? Suppose we'll have 1; 1.2 and 1.4 (or 1.2; 1.4 and 1.6) GHz come MW; where would it leave the iMac? At 700 MHz with a G3? At 900 - 1000 MHz with a G3? Or at 900 - 1000 ( and up, but not over the G5 speeds) MHz G4 with altivec and the superdrive iMovie/ iDVD combo on selected (expensive) configurations?

My money is on a G5 in the powermacs, and apollo G4's in iMacs, with superdrives. If there's one line Jobs would love to utter, it'd be 'DVD burning, now for the consumer, thanks to Apple.'

Apple should be ready for a big jump come January, and I think (and hope, for Apple's sake), that they will deliver.

We'll see soon enough.

A lot of interesting stuff coming forward. The report on Architosh is interesting and another piece of evidence. Also, Motorola just updated their PPC processor roadmap. These signs lead me to believe something big is about to happen. Let's just hope.

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>MOSR has 0% credibility with me. TheRegister I will have to wait and see how this pans out.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/29/index.html" target="_blank">The Register</a> and <a href="http://199.105.116.91/MOSR/" target="_blank">MOSR</a> both have the same anonymous source supplying them with alleged G5 info.

I've checked out the new PowerPC roadmap, and its G5 information seems in line with the rumours we've been hearing.

Some concerns, though: the roadmap has no mention of AltiVec on the G5, and clockspeeds are stated as beginning at 800 MHzrespecatable, if the chip is as fast as rumours claim, but far from the 1.21.6 GHz everyone is expecting.

Right now I'm certain that we'll see G5 Power Macs in January, but what form they'll take is anyone's guess.

Here's the latest info <a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1201-g5moto-info.phtml" target="_blank">Architosh</a>

Basically states that the G5 we believe in might not be the G5 that we get. But it didn't mention anything about a G4 being the G5. So it looks like we will get G5s in Jan or at least new Power Macs.

Update at <a href="http://www.thinksecret.com." target="_blank">www.thinksecret.com.</a> pretty much says we're stickin with G4's, but FAST G4's-

[quote]December 3, 2001

No True G5 Power Mac for Macworld, Sources Say
By Nick dePlume, Publisher and Editor in Chief

While Apple will not release a Power Mac in January based on the G5 microprocessor, recent reports on the web have elements of truth to them, sources said.

The new pro desktops, believed to ship at Macworld Expo/San Francisco next month, will reportedly ship with a PowerPC 7460 G4 chip, code-named Apollo. While details of the chip have been available since the G4's release years ago, the 7460 has comprised the top of the G4 line and no Apple hardware has shipped with one as of yet.

The new Power Mac G4s will have blazing speed: The lowest-end model will be just under a gigahertz, while the high-end units will come in at 1.4 gigahertz, easily surpassing the "gigahertz barrier."

Other features on board the new Power Macs will include 266MHz DDR SDRAM, a 256K L2 cache and a 2MB L3 cache on the high-end, and upgraded FireWire connectivity, possibly IEEE 1394b. They will not ship with USB 2, however. Additionally, sources said that Apple is planning to begin bundling more software with its pro hardware -- for example, not all PowerBook owners purchase Microsoft Office, and many need a functional productivity application like AppleWorks.

The source of the recent G5 confusion may be the fact that Apple has considered marketing the unit as a Power Mac G5. This development was first reported by MacEdition's NMR Report early last month, but it is unknown as to whether Apple still has such plans.

As Macworld nears, more accurate information will be obtained, so check back for the latest "dirt."<hr></blockquote>

Yea but the Architosh article came out today as well. So we have no way of knowing who is getting the correct info so we are still at square one. I believe the Architosh article that will will have a G5 in jan just not the real G5, more like it's cousin chip. That is in contradiction to the ThinkSecret article but yet really close. They say a G4 as a G5 and Architosh says G5 cousin as G5.

But, hey, we wil get faster towers in Jan one way or another

Well, maybe it IS the G5 as in PowerPC 8500 G5, but isn't the same as it was originally planned to be. The G5 was talked about as being 64-bit and multi core, however sources say no multi core and the Motorola road map says 32-bit AND 64-bit. Also, maybe some of the originally planned architectural features are not present, or at least won't be initially. I think that since Motorola's road map has 32-bit and 64-bit, we will get a 32-bit G5. Will Rapid IO be there? Who knows, but the G5 will be one hell of a processor that's for sure.

kidred i think this is what your referring to as the mix up, or atleast i hope its that simple

[quote]The source of the recent G5 confusion may be the fact that Apple has considered marketing the unit as a Power Mac G5. This development was first reported by MacEdition's NMR Report early last month, but it is unknown as to whether Apple still has such plans.<hr></blockquote>

[quote]Originally posted by CapnPyro:
<strong>kidred i think this is what your referring to as the mix up, or atleast i hope its that simple

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well I think that is one take on it. From what I've read on every rumor site and concluded with is this-

-We will get new power macs that are fast in Jan

Now for the g5-g4 thing. There are 3 stories-

1) The G5 will debut
2) The G5 will actually be a souped up G4
3) The G5 will debut but is not the original G5. It's actually the 32bit at a lower clock speed. (refer to tigerwoods post)

So, everything says yes to G5. The confusion is- is it a new G4 that will be called a G5 or is it a G5 but not the G5 we thought.

I think it's the 32 bit G5 ranging from 800mhz -1.4 ghz but not the G5 on all the rumor sites-ie. 1.6-2.4ghz 64 bit.

[quote]Originally posted by Daver:
<strong>
Some concerns, though: the roadmap has no mention of AltiVec on the G5, and clockspeeds are stated as beginning at 800 MHz</strong><hr></blockquote>

G5 is a series of chips, not a single design. For example, the 8540 is a G5 class chip, but isn't really suitable for a PowerMac -- I saw no fpu in the technical documents, but there was a vector unit.

Anyway, some G5 class chips will be designed for embedded purposes, where as others will be more suitable for PCs.

Hrm, well I personally believe the g5 will debut at MWSF, My reasonings are mainly due to the fact that we've had the g4 forquite some time now(plus or nearing to 2 years I believe) and before that the g3 was strong for about 2 years) I had forgotten about the g5 for a long time(the last Time I thought about it until just recently was about the time the dual g4s were released)

The fact that Jobs' stated that apple would "close the mhz. gap" by the end of 2001, also helps the cause for g5 believers, however it is still very true that this could be a big hoax,I wish I could know but alas that is impossible.
my neighbor is an ex-apple exec, I'm sure he knows something about this, he left to live in so. cal like two months ago, and if the g5 was in strong development back then(which I'm sure it was) he would probably know if it would be released sometime soon or sometime not soon, I wonder If I should ask him, But I think he's away for a few weeks, oh well major bummer.

Is the g5 a 64 bit processor or not?
if so, is it the first 64 bit? for desktop computing at least?
or has intel had 64 bit and beyond for a long time?

<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1201-g5moto-info.phtml" target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1201-g5moto-info.phtml</a>

I think the part that speaks of "[four months of testing in prototypes]" is most encouraging.

These are some truly wild rumors. I still think G5 is coming "offcially"....but have my doubts as well.

[ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]

[ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>

And The Register says
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23158.html" target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23158.html</a>

new update in the wacky world of rumors.

can anyone say "backtracking"

[ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
<strong>And The Register says
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23158.html" target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23158.html</a>

new update in the wacky world of rumors.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Now that is a confusing article. It seems like they are pretty sure IMO, but don't want to go out on limb. I am believer in the principle of "the best answer tends to be the simplest explanation." To me, putting a G5 is the pro line and Apollos in the PB and iMac line makes sense. The G3 can be used to make sure the ibook keeps up with clock speed.

This is truly the most juicy set of rumors I have heard in two years on these boards.

Lets see if I can try to summarize everyones points of view here:

Hard-Core Mac users: Want badly, but would live with faster G4's

Average user: Would be nice...

Pro-user: If it makes my rendering faster...

Low end user: Don't care

Hard Core PeeCee user: Don't care

Possible wintel convert: Almost required.

Rumor sites: G5's, and fast ones!

Non-rumor news sites: *Silence*

Motorola: "In progress". Would be nice to release ASAP, but not of top importance.

Apple Marketing: G5 or death.

Apple Sales: "G5? what's that? a desktop? We got this nifty iPod to show you..."

Me: "Couldn't possibly afford another computer (just got a QS 733), bragging rights would be nice tho."