or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Rumor: Disaster at MWNY... :(
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: Disaster at MWNY... :( - Page 2

post #41 of 267
I've been planning on buying a Mac after MWNY and this is good news to me. I've been planning on getting the "middle" model and I would be SO FREAKING happy if they offered it as a dual. Shoot... even if they kept it at 933 it would still be a HUGE performance gain (especially if there are motherboard improvements).

My only concern is that SpyMac released the rumor. This means it's probably a load of crap

Well see.
wow my very own signature
Reply
wow my very own signature
Reply
post #42 of 267
Thread Starter 
Your reply proves that you cannot handle being wrong.

I'm not a "spec freak". My system proves it. In fact I'd be willing to bet that your system is superior to mine in performance.

So who's the one obsessed with specs again?
post #43 of 267
Hmmm.

<a href="http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/query.cgi?cputype=all&arch=2&contest=rc5" target="_blank">http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/query.cgi?cputype=all&arch=2&contest=rc5</a>

Power PC 7450/7455 G4 1600 16,991,648

Record id CPU Name MHz OS Client Speed
8437 Power PC 7450/7455 G4 1600 MacOS X 10.1 2.8016 RC5 16,991,648

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply
post #44 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:
<strong>Your reply proves that you cannot handle being wrong.

I'm not a "spec freak". My system proves it. In fact I'd be willing to bet that your system is superior to mine in performance.

So who's the one obsessed with specs again?</strong><hr></blockquote>

How am I wrong? Am I wrong that you are chronic whining twit who has little better to do that cry the "sky is falling"? Am I wrong in claiming you have some weird neurosis about things of which you have no control? Or was I wrong in calling your punk ass out as a punk?

Ah, well. Rail away at the world, JYD. That gnawing sound in your brain won't go away nomatter how many times you post to FH.

FWIW, my Athlon would spank your G4, but it doesn't run FCP3 (which I covet), so who has the better system?

ting5

[ 06-26-2002: Message edited by: There is no g5 ]</p>
Suckfuldotwhatever, dude.

It's the FSB, not the proc speed that is the problem. Your fire engine isn't worth sh:t no matter how big the pump is if it uses a garden hose to put out fires. Let's at...
Reply
Suckfuldotwhatever, dude.

It's the FSB, not the proc speed that is the problem. Your fire engine isn't worth sh:t no matter how big the pump is if it uses a garden hose to put out fires. Let's at...
Reply
post #45 of 267
now where in heavens is either moki or

dorsal?
post #46 of 267
While I don't know what is exactly getting measured here, the 1.6GHz PPC seems to kick a 1.6Ghz Athlon MP all over the place. Hopefully someone here can shead more light.


AMD Athlon MP
1610 MHz
6,100,852 Speed
<a href="http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/query.cgi?cputype=all&arch=0&contest=rc5" target="_blank">distributed.net Client Speeds- x86</a>


PowerPC
7450/7455 G4
1600 MHz
16,991,648 Speed (MacOS X 10.1)
<a href="http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/query.cgi?cputype=all&arch=2&contest=rc5" target="_blank">distributed.net Client Speeds-Power PC</a>

My question is whether the mobo issues will be resolved.

[ 06-26-2002: Message edited by: tink ]</p>

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply
post #47 of 267
So you guys don't think that Apple needs to compete with the 2.5 GHZ Pentium 4 systems out there?

Hell Intel can't even compete with themselves. Itanium 2 will start at about 1GHz.
post #48 of 267
Thank you, Busyman. Even if it wasn't yours to begin with, that was the best post I've read in this forum in a long time.

Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #49 of 267
nobody cares about dnet benchmarks. the g4 still licks donkey-nuts at pretty much any meaningful task.
post #50 of 267
Where did the 1.6GHz G4 come from?
Kappa Rho Alpha Theta Zeta Omega Nu Epsilon
Reply
Kappa Rho Alpha Theta Zeta Omega Nu Epsilon
Reply
post #51 of 267
I will probably get Sh!t for this but you talk about apple not having to worry about MHz, you say no one should care about MHz. Well this is true, IF you are a graphix pro working with photoshop and movie editing. Not if you are an average user. The g4 is like a motor, it has alot of tork but not too much speed. Things like opening programs or doing simple finder tasks are not done as fast because there arn't as high MHz. I'm not saying other processors are better then the G4, although AMD is my favorite besides the G4. The following i'm not sure about but please correct me if i'm wrong, cuz i might be...but the finder isn't very complicated tasks, and the processor can't handle it well, thats why OS X has a slower feel then 9, even though it can do more thigns its a slower feel, but if you give the graphix card a sustained job...like GRAPHIX, then you sold the problems...and that is what they are doing in 10.2. Why not use the graphix card for graphix all the time, its not like u have multiple screens, well if u do u have my respect. AOL IM = ast3r3x, tell me problems u have what i said or if u just think im an *******. I like apple, just playing devil advocate
0 People Found This Reply Helpful
Reply
0 People Found This Reply Helpful
Reply
post #52 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by detah:
<strong>nobody cares about dnet benchmarks. the g4 still licks donkey-nuts at pretty much any meaningful task.</strong><hr></blockquote>

TROLL! Get lost. What purpose does it serve to slam the CPU? You're so wrong though. BUS AND MEMORY. SO MANY TIMES I MUST SAY IT! Powermacs are now only limited by....

SYSTEM BUS AND MEMORY!!!!

The G4 is vastly superior.
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
post #53 of 267
Here is my problem with Spymac....(besides the iWalk annoyance).

They spout off an amazing number of rumors - which is fine, that is what you do on a rumor site.

But what is silly is that they generate tons of rumors, and then when something is right (or, usually, vaguely right), they invariably start their article off with "As we predicted" or similar drivel. It seems so self-congratulatory, and misses the point that they are usually wrong.

I used to go there just for their links and summaries of other sites on the front page, but those have been outdated recently, so I have quit visiting.

As for the duals rumor - wow, a dual 1.2, if it had the new rumored mobo, would rock.


Fish
post #54 of 267
first off id like to say, welcome busyman. i wish i had quoted that guy, a brilliant verbal riposte on his part, take a bow sir where ever you are.

JYD such hostility, im going to guess your here for a fight. good, that's why we come to online forums such as this, is it not. now to get to the intellectual fisticuffs of it.


you mention benchmarks, where intel P4s blow a G4 out of the water, or something to that effect. oh please give us a link to 'em, especially if your going to base your position on benchmarks. by the way does any one know how many gigaflops P4 does, ive never been able to find that one out, and if you know JYD then please share with us unenlightened old sods.

the system bus, is the biggest short coming in our beloved macs. whining for 2 GHz G5s on a 133 MHz bus is like wanting to drop a ferrari engine in a steam roller. if you want something to look forward to at MWNY, then make it faster mother boards.

if your going to compare PC's to macs you have to remember frequency isn't an appropriate benchmark. x86 chips have to run faster because of how they parse data, small chunks. powerPC chips can handle larger chunks of data, that translates into not having to operate as fast to do the same load of work. this has several benefits in other arenas such as power consumption and thermal byproduct.

if you really were a x86 aficionado id think you would be thumping on the AMD bible, those opteron's will be the chips to watch in my opinion.

you know i wonder why so many Macrosoft users are always hanging around in mac forums, is it cause they realize that they have been paying good money to be fed sh*t.
sure im an expert, of what i cant remember.
Reply
sure im an expert, of what i cant remember.
Reply
post #55 of 267
My sincere thanks tink for contributing some real information!
post #56 of 267
Thread Starter 
That just points out the sad state of affairs in the Mac community. I bring some bad news, and some of you start calling me a PC user. Whatever. I have no intention of switching to windows, which is why I'd like to see Apple kicking ass instead of dragging their ass like they're doing now.

And if any of you really believe that the dual gig Powermac is faster than a high end wintel box, well you're in deeper than I thought. Thee's a thing called reality, accept it, please.
post #57 of 267
some one does seem to have a size matters complex.
sure im an expert, of what i cant remember.
Reply
sure im an expert, of what i cant remember.
Reply
post #58 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by Da sinister:
<strong>first off id like to say, welcome busyman. i wish i had quoted that guy, a brilliant verbal riposte on his part, take a bow sir where ever you are.

JYD such hostility, im going to guess your here for a fight. good, that's why we come to online forums such as this, is it not. now to get to the intellectual fisticuffs of it.


you mention benchmarks, where intel P4s blow a G4 out of the water, or something to that effect. oh please give us a link to 'em, especially if your going to base your position on benchmarks. by the way does any one know how many gigaflops P4 does, ive never been able to find that one out, and if you know JYD then please share with us unenlightened old sods.

the system bus, is the biggest short coming in our beloved macs. whining for 2 GHz G5s on a 133 MHz bus is like wanting to drop a ferrari engine in a steam roller. if you want something to look forward to at MWNY, then make it faster mother boards.

if your going to compare PC's to macs you have to remember frequency isn't an appropriate benchmark. x86 chips have to run faster because of how they parse data, small chunks. powerPC chips can handle larger chunks of data, that translates into not having to operate as fast to do the same load of work. this has several benefits in other arenas such as power consumption and thermal byproduct.

if you really were a x86 aficionado id think you would be thumping on the AMD bible, those opteron's will be the chips to watch in my opinion.

you know i wonder why so many Macrosoft users are always hanging around in mac forums, is it cause they realize that they have been paying good money to be fed sh*t.</strong><hr></blockquote>


WOW! Thank you Da sinister!!!

Finally someone willing to agree with me on the Mobo issue--and so exactly too. I like the Ferrari engine steamroller part....pure gold.

He's right thought. We're sitting on the greatest chip out there right now (see my earlier post on MTOPs performance) but all we're doing is throwing a trickle of instructions at it. Yes, all we should hope for is a drastically improved bus/memory system, which Dorsal M promises in another thread, but what I've been saying is that Apple will do BOTH! Dorsal M also says that the new G4 will scale nicely to 1.5 Ghz by summer. What have I been saying? Hint hint folks.....
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
post #59 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by Bodhi:
<strong>Don't know how much weight can be thrown at that rumor considering that Spymac says it's not from trusted sources, it's from an anonymous tipster (could be Meader for all we know), and then the other part that is just ridiculous is that they base part of the rumor on the fact that an Apple rep said to do video and graphics work on a dual machine. :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>

We need another WorkerBee.
post #60 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by There is no g5:
<strong>sounds good. the important question is whether they break the fsb bottleneck.

something like:

2x800
2x1 Ghz
2x1.2 Ghz

would rock.

ting5</strong><hr></blockquote>
umm some people dont get it it goes 800mhz 933mhx THEN IT IS 2x1000 mhz which equals 2000 mhz
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
post #61 of 267
Granted, JYD usually comes across pessimistic and all, but here's something I'd like everyone to consider. Apple is a large company, dedicated to making a profit (obvious, huh). Now, if you could sell old, proven H/W technology for a premium cost, high profit margins to a marginally adequate niche group; as opposed to leading edge H/W technology with minimal profit margins to that same niche group (but with "possible" growth potential) ... which would you do (moneywise)? My point is that Apple, like lots of other companies, is controlled by the "Bean Counters". Fast Profit is the name of the game to them (in general). Now, if we, as consumers, are COMPLACENT in our acceptance of old H/W technology (shown by our purchases of said technology, just so Apple can make more of a profit), then wouldn't the "Bean Counters" suggest "milking" the trend as long as possible to make more profits? Given, JYD spouts off alot more often than most about Apple being doomed, it appears he has to, because it appears that it is easier for folks to just accept inaction, than to have the desire for Apple to maintain Research and Development in bettering their product (another side effect is maintaining that marginal niche group segment, percentage wise, and possibly growing it). When you read JYD's posts, yes, accept them as an extreme side of things, but also be wary of the other extreme ... COMPLACENCY! As consumers, we can help Apple realize that the company has to maintain R & D to develop their product (thus keeping Apple around for us to enjoy the product, IT IS A BALANCE). A kick a$$ O/S is useless, unless you have something to run it on, and I'm sure we all want the most bang for our buck (or what ever currency is being charged us).

Sorry for rambling folks, but it kinda bothered me that people were getting personal and not taking the time to see things from "the other person's" point of view (there isn't enough of that in the world as it is, and Mac IS supposed to be a "Better World"). Me, I'm waiting to get a new Mac, and I hoping that Apple comes up with somthing I wanna buy come MWNY there abouts.

If you read this, thanks for reading.
post #62 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by neocitron:
<strong>
umm some people dont get it it goes 800mhz 933mhx THEN IT IS 2x1000 mhz which equals 2000 mhz
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

Someone want to tell me what in the heck this guy is talking about?

Sorry for being a dick....I'm just totally lost as to the point of your post...and 2x 1000 Mhz not equal 2000 Mhz, btw.

[ 06-26-2002: Message edited by: The All Knowing 1 ]</p>
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
post #63 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by Busyman:
<strong>Well, I did not write this myself, but I found it some time ago over at MacNN and it describes nicely my point of view about the theme
Greetings,

Martin</strong><hr></blockquote>

Vielen Dank', Martin!

That really does sum it up.
If yer gonna bother with thinking different, swing for the fences.
Reply
If yer gonna bother with thinking different, swing for the fences.
Reply
post #64 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by MacJedai:
<strong>Granted, JYD usually comes across pessimistic and all, but here's something I'd like everyone to consider. Apple is a large company, dedicated to making a profit (obvious, huh). Now, if you could sell old, proven H/W technology for a premium cost, high profit margins to a marginally adequate niche group; as opposed to leading edge H/W technology with minimal profit margins to that same niche group (but with "possible" growth potential) ... which would you do (moneywise)? My point is that Apple, like lots of other companies, is controlled by the "Bean Counters". Fast Profit is the name of the game to them (in general). Now, if we, as consumers, are COMPLACENT in our acceptance of old H/W technology (shown by our purchases of said technology, just so Apple can make more of a profit), then wouldn't the "Bean Counters" suggest "milking" the trend as long as possible to make more profits? Given, JYD spouts off alot more often than most about Apple being doomed, it appears he has to, because it appears that it is easier for folks to just accept inaction, than to have the desire for Apple to maintain Research and Development in bettering their product (another side effect is maintaining that marginal niche group segment, percentage wise, and possibly growing it). When you read JYD's posts, yes, accept them as an extreme side of things, but also be wary of the other extreme ... COMPLACENCY! As consumers, we can help Apple realize that the company has to maintain R & D to develop their product (thus keeping Apple around for us to enjoy the product, IT IS A BALANCE). A kick a$$ O/S is useless, unless you have something to run it on, and I'm sure we all want the most bang for our buck (or what ever currency is being charged us).

Sorry for rambling folks, but it kinda bothered me that people were getting personal and not taking the time to see things from "the other person's" point of view (there isn't enough of that in the world as it is, and Mac IS supposed to be a "Better World"). Me, I'm waiting to get a new Mac, and I hoping that Apple comes up with somthing I wanna buy come MWNY there abouts.

If you read this, thanks for reading.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Good post.

See my point here: Apple has been doing this (selling marginal HW at high profit) for a few years with the Powermac. THey haven't been that up to date since the 500s, and maybe the Dual 500 (mystic). So its time for them to up the ante again. It's a cycle. Apple uses blah hardware for a while, then releases a product that makes all drool....like the original G4. Its time for the next jump. Bean counters realize also that a good practice is to occasionally release something FANTASTIC to create a buzz, and thus, new markets, etc.

BUT you make a valid point. This is exactly why I'm so pessimistic about iMac updates at MWNY (see the LCD iMac thread) because the iMac JUST got its wow-ness and can now cruise for another 6 months. It only makes sense.

But Powermacs WILL get a big update. Hear my words. Let them sink in.
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
post #65 of 267
its not 2000 Mhz., its 2 at 1000 Mhz. you dont just add them together, there is too much going on in a dual processor conifiguration for you to simply sum it up in such a manner. but this of course is all semantics anyway.
sure im an expert, of what i cant remember.
Reply
sure im an expert, of what i cant remember.
Reply
post #66 of 267
i like the way everyone around here rags on spymac for having one really big fiasco rumor (iwalk), yet even appleinsider has devolved into a forums-only site, since apple is tighter than a drum. oh, and let's not forget the whole "disney buys apple" fiasco that appleinsider published back in the fall of '98, i believe, which shot to hell ai's credibility and nearly brought down the whole site.

just trying to add some perspective here. unfortunate thing is, those who won't listen never will. and those who will listen already know.
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
post #67 of 267
Ok, if true then Apple will be bumping the towers by 200mhz at once.

When was the last time Apple bumped 200 mhz? OR better yet, when has Apple ever bumped more then 200mhz?
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
post #68 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by The All Knowing 1:
<strong>

Good post.

See my point here: Apple has been doing this (selling marginal HW at high profit) for a few years with the Powermac. THey haven't been that up to date since the 500s, and maybe the Dual 500 (mystic). So its time for them to up the ante again. It's a cycle. Apple uses blah hardware for a while, then releases a product that makes all drool....like the original G4. Its time for the next jump. Bean counters realize also that a good practice is to occasionally release something FANTASTIC to create a buzz, and thus, new markets, etc.

BUT you make a valid point. This is exactly why I'm so pessimistic about iMac updates at MWNY (see the LCD iMac thread) because the iMac JUST got its wow-ness and can now cruise for another 6 months. It only makes sense.

But Powermacs WILL get a big update. Hear my words. Let them sink in.</strong><hr></blockquote>


First off, Thanks ... on many counts. And yes you are right. I'm just trying to keep optimism/pessimism in check concerning the "Pro" line updates (I would really like to get a new Mac, but also want to spend wisely). On the good side, we have the upgrade houses offering up to 1GHz cards/ Apple's lid on Security/ IBM's Power4 rumors/ an initial intro of DDR/ and all the subtle hints going on; on the DOWN SIDE ... Moto's track record. I lurk alot on the boards, but have posted a little more often. Usually not alot I can contribute rumorwise (with credibility).

Very informational though, and I appreciate that.
post #69 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by rok:
<strong>i like the way everyone around here rags on spymac for having one really big fiasco rumor (iwalk), yet even appleinsider has devolved into a forums-only site, since apple is tighter than a drum. oh, and let's not forget the whole "disney buys apple" fiasco that appleinsider published back in the fall of '98, i believe, which shot to hell ai's credibility and nearly brought down the whole site.

just trying to add some perspective here. unfortunate thing is, those who won't listen never will. and those who will listen already know. </strong><hr></blockquote>

The difference being that AI already had a decent amount of credibility when the Disney thing came out. But most of us always took AI with a grain of salt anyways. Spymac did their fake and went ALL OUT in the ultimate visitor-attractive hoax ever. Spymac lured all the visitors there, and note how they now have a lovely store. They are out there to make money. Sure we all are in some way, but thats lame what Spymac represents.
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
post #70 of 267
Okay guys, I have to apologize. I sent that rumour to spymac, knowing that they'd publish it shamelessly. I was just hoping to bring everyone's expectations in line for MWNY, rather than letting them go wild like at MWSF. Its a good bet that we'll get at least a 0.2 GHz bump, and if the prices of the 1 GHz units have dropped enough for the accelerator companies then Apple might be able to afford putting two in every PowerMac. I didn't expect to cause such a ruckus here. I'm truly very sorry for this.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #71 of 267
Worst case for MacWorld New York 2002:

Apple PowerMac G4 MP Workstation

Dual 1.2GHz G4 CPUs
512KB on-die 1:1 L2 cache per CPU
4MB backside 2:1 (DDR SRAM) L3 cache per CPU
166MHz Front Side Bus
2GB PC2100 DDR SDRAM (4 @ 512MB CL2 DIMMs)
Three (3) ATA100 interfaces - two devices per interface, two interfaces grouped with hardware RAID support
SuperDrive2
CD-R drive (finally, a second optical drive from Apple...)
Four (4) ATA100 120GB/7,200rpm/8MB cache HDDs - hot-swappable/removable sleds - RAID Level 0
AGP Pro110 8x graphics slot
Apple/nVidia Quartz Extreme graphics card; dual 600MHz GPUs, 256MB DDR SDRAM, dual ADC ports
Four (4) PCI-X expansion slots; 128bit/133MHz; grouped two slots per bus
Four (4) USB2 ports; 480Mbps; two front panel, two back panel
Four (4) FireWire2 ports; 800Mbps; two front panel, two back panel
Airport
BlueTooth
Wireless Keyboard
Wireless Mouse


Now, if we could replace the dual 1.2GHz G4 with quad 1.5GHz G4s...

And bump the system bus up to a 533MHz RapidIO implementation...

And pop the RAM up, both in speed (say, 333MHz sticks...) and capacity/density (8GB from 8 @ 1GB DIMMs)...

And switch the OpenGL/video/graphics interface from AGP to HyperTransport tied directly to the main memory controller; offloading ALL OpenGL/2D operations from the CPU... and double the RAM while we're at it... (512MB DDR SDRAM!)

Bump the ATA interface up to ATA133, and we'll call it good...

Cheers!

<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> Maya for Mac OS X <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #72 of 267
I disagree -- the minimum we will see at MWNY is no change to the PowerMac lineup. This actually wouldn't be the worst case scenario ... it would likely mean that they were just holding off until some new technology is ready. A more likely minimum is the current machines with a 10-20% higher clock rate. Even that isn't the end of the world, however, as the next machines in the pipeline could come along in the fall.

Worst case scenario would be a 2 GHz G5, DDR333 w/ RapidIO machine that is only 10% faster than the current machines. That would be bad.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #73 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by MacRonin:
<strong>Worst case for MacWorld New York 2002:

Apple PowerMac G4 MP Workstation

Dual 1.2GHz G4 CPUs
512KB on-die 1:1 L2 cache per CPU
4MB backside 2:1 (DDR SRAM) L3 cache per CPU
166MHz Front Side Bus
2GB PC2100 DDR SDRAM (4 @ 512MB CL2 DIMMs)
Three (3) ATA100 interfaces - two devices per interface, two interfaces grouped with hardware RAID support
SuperDrive2
CD-R drive (finally, a second optical drive from Apple...)
Four (4) ATA100 120GB/7,200rpm/8MB cache HDDs - hot-swappable/removable sleds - RAID Level 0
AGP Pro110 8x graphics slot
Apple/nVidia Quartz Extreme graphics card; dual 600MHz GPUs, 256MB DDR SDRAM, dual ADC ports
Four (4) PCI-X expansion slots; 128bit/133MHz; grouped two slots per bus
Four (4) USB2 ports; 480Mbps; two front panel, two back panel
Four (4) FireWire2 ports; 800Mbps; two front panel, two back panel
Airport
BlueTooth
Wireless Keyboard
Wireless Mouse


Now, if we could replace the dual 1.2GHz G4 with quad 1.5GHz G4s...

And bump the system bus up to a 533MHz RapidIO implementation...

And pop the RAM up, both in speed (say, 333MHz sticks...) and capacity/density (8GB from 8 @ 1GB DIMMs)...

And switch the OpenGL/video/graphics interface from AGP to HyperTransport tied directly to the main memory controller; offloading ALL OpenGL/2D operations from the CPU... and double the RAM while we're at it... (512MB DDR SDRAM!)

Bump the ATA interface up to ATA133, and we'll call it good...

Cheers!

<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> Maya for Mac OS X <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

FINALLY
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

Someone with some class! Now this is a rumor! This is what is supposed to be going on less thana month from Macworld, not this pessimistic BS.
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
sudo rm -rf /*/*microsoft*
REMOVE ALL TRACES!
Reply
post #74 of 267
Yeah, now that I look at it...

That was a pretty silly post, specs are all outta balance...

I could go back and edit, but who cares?!?

But put me on the list for the Quad-Core Quad CPU G5s...

Mmmm...G5s...

<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> Maya for Mac OS X <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #75 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:
<strong>Douglass Adams was a Mac freak. Now he's dead.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Wow. That was a great post. I just can't understand why people give you a hard time. Really, I just don't get it.

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
post #76 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by sizzle chest:
<strong>If they went with 933DP / 1ghz DP / 1.2ghz DP, all with DDR, and the top 2 with Superdrives, at the current Powermac price points, that wouldn't be too bad. I'd probably pick one up. A dual 1.2 w/ DDR would be substantially faster than the current dual 1.0.ghz</strong><hr></blockquote>

...i'd wait for some benchmarks before assuming a "substantial" speed improvement. given the xserve's DDR supprt the improvement is likely to be minor.
post #77 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by MacRonin:
<strong>Worst case for MacWorld New York 2002:

Apple PowerMac G4 MP Workstation

Dual 1.2GHz G4 CPUs
(all kinds of crazy specs)

And switch the OpenGL/video/graphics interface from AGP to HyperTransport tied directly to the main memory controller; offloading ALL OpenGL/2D operations from the CPU... and double the RAM while we're at it... (512MB DDR SDRAM!)
</strong><hr></blockquote>

And once AI comes back up twenty people will be posting that Apple sucks because you can't upgrade the video card. "Man, I thought Apple was sticking to Industry standards."
"Moo" said the chicken
"Cluck" said the cow
Dr. Frankenstein rubbed his hands together with glee
Reply
"Moo" said the chicken
"Cluck" said the cow
Dr. Frankenstein rubbed his hands together with glee
Reply
post #78 of 267
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>Okay guys, I have to apologize. I sent that rumour to spymac..........</strong><hr></blockquote>

ARE YOU SERIOUS?! <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" /> <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />

Maybe I should send them what I have heard about G6 from my source

[ 06-27-2002: Message edited by: Leonis ]</p>
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 #79 of 267
To
pey/coy-ote

- Cheers!


To bauman

[quote] Where did the 1.6GHz G4 come from? <hr></blockquote>

Obviously to me, unless I'm mistakin the 1.6GHz Power PC 7455 @ 1600 is out and they're cranking away. My source is from distributed.net. Here is the page where they post their speeds for the rc5 projects. The info most likely should be under NDA, but woops. Scroll down the list of PPC until ...Bingo!

<a href="http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/query.cgi?cputype=all&arch=2&contest=rc5" target="_blank">http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/query.cgi?cputype=all&arch=2&contest=rc5</a>


From their speed page.

<a href="http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/" target="_blank">http://n0cgi.distributed.net/speed/</a>

[quote] Speed Pages

To satisify the curiosity of users that want to see the performance difference between different processors and architectures, we provide these data tabulation pages listing client processing rates that have been reported to us by other users.

The recommended way for obtaining reliable computation rates from your client's benchark is to run the "long" client benchmark 3 times, and taking the best rate of the three. Also, when possible, it is best to run the clients in as similar an environment as possible. Not all UNIX/multiuser machines have that luxury, so there may be some fluctuation between measured and actual speed. <hr></blockquote>

Once again, if anyone can shed some light on what these tests are, etc.

Thanks

-tink


[ 06-27-2002: Message edited by: tink ]</p>

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply
post #80 of 267
[quote] ...i'd wait for some benchmarks before assuming a "substantial" speed improvement. given the xserve's DDR supprt the improvement is likely to be minor. <hr></blockquote>

<a href="http://www.xinet.com/benchmarks/benchmarks.2002/index.html" target="_blank">Not necessarily...</a>
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Rumor: Disaster at MWNY... :(