or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › MacBidouille posts PPC 970 benchmarks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MacBidouille posts PPC 970 benchmarks - Page 8

post #281 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by RosettaStoned
From Looprumors.com:

We received word that two large shipments of Power PC 970 processors......
RosettaStoned

If true, I hope like heck they're being sent airfreight. Ummm, on second thought, maybe EXPRESS airfreight.

On further deliberation, get Mr. Steven Jobs to personally deliver them on his nice shiny jet ASAP.
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 #282 of 666
Twin bank? From what I've gleaned, it's an attempt to increase Ram performance/bandwidth without a cpu running into a feeding 'starved of data' bottleneck. ie current memory may not be fast enough in single banks to feed a 970...so you feed the cpu with 'two at a time' ie to get 'effective speed'.

I just think of roads. Bit like the M25 ring road (for all those London commuters...)... Too much traffic? Take your four lanes and 'twin bank' it on 8 lanes...and hey presto, no traffic congestion...

Still, that's the theory...but in real life, whether motorways or internet or computers...we never seem to have enough 'road space/bandwidth'...

Starts scratching armpit awkwardly...

Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #283 of 666
The Hank Files

Quote:
The [nvidia] TwinBank architecture is designed to provide a high degree of flexibility, scalability and upgradeability. Its technical benefits include:
  • Both 64-bit and 128-bit operations. In 64-bit mode, the DIMM can be located on either MC1 or MC2. In 128-bit mode, both MC1 (DIMM0) and MC2 (DIMM1 / DIMM2) are utilized.
  • Both controllers are functionally identical with all control and timing parameters independently programmable. This allows asymmetric DIMMs with different memory organization, size, and speed to be used on MC1 and MC2 and still provide the full performance benefits of the 128-bit memory system.
  • ...
  • Support for odd total memory size; eg. 64MB + 128MB = 192MB, while still taking advantage of the 128-bit TwinBank architecture.

Screed
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
post #284 of 666
Another explanation for the dual sets of memory slots might be that apple made one type of prototype board for testing two different types of memory (among other things), which might be more cost effective.

This particular "partner" was then supposed to test only one memory tech, at least this particular team at this particular time.
post #285 of 666
I like the rumour of solid shipments. Yay, Twinky Cakes..! And a few rumour sites are leaky 970 details like there's no tomorrow. No rock-solid proof...but there's alot of smoke out there... Kinda choking on it...heh...cough...a-heh...!

Somebody over at Macrumors did a spec list based on the Loop rumors stuff...

1.4 Powerbook

1.6 single Powermac
1.8 Dual.
2.0 Dual. (Speaking of which...it would be simply awesome opp' to breach the 2 gig barrier. It says, 'We're back. And how.' It's too good an opp' to miss. Bump the line upto 2.5 gig later in the year with 1.8 as the starting number...)

Now that's what I call 'the Year of the Laptop!'

I'd much prefer that. That way, Apple can boast that the cpu in their laptop pans the latest 3 gig P4!!!

Still, having four 'Power'Macs with the lowest '1.4' with a more penetrating entry point re: price would be nice. Get a Mac tower for £999 and it spits bullets at a 3 gig P4? That would be Apple getting all Medieval on the Wintel mob.

Hey, you wanna kickstart the Tower line? Got to get aggressive. New Cpu, new OS...this opportunity won't be coming their way for many, many years.

I would like £250 price coverage for each model from £999 to £2k!

I sez dey walk out de stores...

Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #286 of 666
That's what I was thinking, "1.4, 1.6, 1.8 and then 2.0 GHz Powermacs a month or so later? Wha?"

<wishful> 15.4" 1.4 GHz 970 AlBook.</wishful> Zowie!

I was going to sell my TangBook and grab an iceBook and then later a low end, single 970 Powermac. Now? Now I'm all confused. (Happily confused, mind you).

Screed
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
post #287 of 666
If all the chips are going to taiwan (foxconn) does this mean that apple will no longer make powermacs in california?
post #288 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by Leonis
Can anyone explain what TwinBank is?

TwinBank is really just a marketing buzzword for Dual Channel RAM. This allows more data throughput at the same clockspeed [think 2 pipes to the CPU rather than 1]
http://blocklevel.com
Practical Information Architecture

The Visigothe

Ideas that change the way you think are the most powerful ideas of them all
Reply
http://blocklevel.com
Practical Information Architecture

The Visigothe

Ideas that change the way you think are the most powerful ideas of them all
Reply
post #289 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by keyboardf12
If all the chips are going to taiwan (foxconn) does this mean that apple will no longer make powermacs in california?

It could be.....labour in Taiwan is way cheaper than in US
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 #290 of 666
Quote:
But, more important, there are 8 connectors of RAM on the board (probably PC3200) with which 4 are covered with enormous a "do not use" sticker on top. These 4 are cabled differently than the 4 others (no more info).

I can live with upgrading in pairs again. I suspect that they're cabled differently because they're the second channel.

Quote:
traditional heat sink.

Traditional as in Radeon 9700 heatsink (normal) or as in GeForce FX 5900/Dual G4 heatsink (space station)?

Quote:
Get a Mac tower for £999 and it spits bullets at a 3 gig P4?

The current low end PowerMac is £978 without VAT; £999 including VAT is £824 excluding VAT.

A possibly relevant article from The Register:
IBM rumoured to be building 65nm fab for AMD....
Stoo
Reply
Stoo
Reply
post #291 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by Stoo


A possibly relevant article from The Register:
IBM rumoured to be building 65nm fab for AMD....

Nice article, but

I have a hard time believing the register.
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
post #292 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by NETROMac
So what will it be:

When introduced at the WWDC:

a) PM single 1.4
b) PM dual 1.6
c) PM dual 1.8

This sounds reasonable.

Quote:
A) PowerBooks 1.4 (15" and 17") with 1ghz 12"
B) PM single 1.6
C) PM dual 1.8
D) PM dual 2.0

Powerbooks would get the low power 1.2 GHz varient of the 970. I don't think IBM mentioned a 1.4GHz low power, only 1 and 1.2 (I could be off on this one). I think the normal 1.4GHz 970 would be too much heat (I think it uses more than a G4, while the low power uses less).

Quote:
And after MWSF

0) eMac 1.2 and 1.4 G4
1) iMac 1.4 and 1.6
2) PowerBook 1.4 (12") 1.6 (15" and 17")
3) PM single 1.8
4) PM dual 2.0
5) PM dual 2.3 or 2.5
( 6) PM ultra dual 2.5)

eMac could stay G4 or go 970, so that sounds reasonable.
iMac would probably go 1.2GHz (low power, fanless ), and maybe 1.4 (a 600MHz jump is a little much for one update to an iMac).
Powerbooks wouldn't see an update so soon if they get updated at or around WWDC/MWNY, and would just progress with the low power 970's (so if new low power chips were available, the PBooks could get updated with them).
Powermacs sound reasonable schedule wise.
But you forgot iBooks I am still thinking they will move to GOBI, and then to the 850 (SIMD, rapid-io, super G3). Go IBM!!
post #293 of 666
Quote:
It could be.....labour in Taiwan is way cheaper than in US

An article a while back on Macworld said Apple was going more and more Taiwan to cut costs and be competitive with their competitors (yes, that's Wintel, folks...)

Good call, Apple. It allows cheaper prices and a chance for growth. They can't sustain the 'treading on water' and the kind of pounding their overpriced/stagnant G4s were giving their tower sales. The greater range of cpu clock the 970 offers will help broaden the tower range.

A further price cut on the tower range (with lower entry point) coupled with a 970 cpu boost will allow for a reversal of their tower sales. A cpu boost alone...nope...A further realignment of prices will be necessary. The days of £1350 entry points for an upgradable tower should be well over. If they can get just one 970 single cpu tower at £1k, they've done their job.

Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #294 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by kupan787
This sounds reasonable.

Maybe too reasonable
Quote:
Powerbooks would get the low power 1.2 GHz varient of the 970. I don't think IBM mentioned a 1.4GHz low power, only 1 and 1.2 (I could be off on this one). I think the normal 1.4GHz 970 would be too much heat (I think it uses more than a G4, while the low power uses less).

I don't think there is a special low power version of the 970. The 1.2 just has lower power consumption than the 1.6 and 1.8 and therefore is cooler. I don't know exactly how the 1.4 970 will compare with the current 1.0 G4, but they can't use that much more power.
Quote:
eMac could stay G4 or go 970, so that sounds reasonable.

Will probably stay G4 for a while, at least a bit longer than the iMac
Quote:
iMac would probably go 1.2GHz (low power, fanless ), and maybe 1.4 (a 600MHz jump is a little much for one update to an iMac).

Hey, if Apple can get a 1.4 ghz processor into the iMac they will even if it is a 600 mhz increase in clockspeed. The iMac is a premium machine and deserves a premium processor. Right now it looks like a Porsche but has a engine of a Lada
Quote:
Powerbooks wouldn't see an update so soon if they get updated at or around WWDC/MWNY, and would just progress with the low power 970's (so if new low power chips were available, the PBooks could get updated with them).

Waybe they will get the 970+
Quote:

Powermacs sound reasonable schedule wise.
But you forgot iBooks I am still thinking they will move to GOBI, and then to the 850 (SIMD, rapid-io, super G3). Go IBM!!

Gobi is very likely I think. Hope we'll see them soon.
Former WWDC Watchdog.
Reply
Former WWDC Watchdog.
Reply
post #295 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by keyboardf12
If all the chips are going to taiwan (foxconn) does this mean that apple will no longer make powermacs in california?

Aren't they just assembling them in California and Ireland?
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #296 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by keyboardf12
If all the chips are going to taiwan (foxconn) does this mean that apple will no longer make powermacs in california?

It probably just means that motherboard production is in Taiwan (is any PC motherboard made in the US?). Final assembly will probably still be done in Apple's own plants.
"...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 #297 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by NETROMac
Maybe too reasonable
I don't think there is a special low power version of the 970. The 1.2 just has lower power consumption than the 1.6 and 1.8 and therefore is cooler.

I could have sworn there was a special low power varient running at 1 and 1.2 GHz. I could be wrong, but I could have sworn....

Quote:
I don't know exactly how the 1.4 970 will compare with the current 1.0 G4, but they can't use that much more power.

The G4@1 GHz uses something like 15-22 Watts. A 970@1.4GHz uses about 24 W. So a little hotter, but not as bad as I thought...
post #298 of 666
??

Maybe someone with apple friends in the Sacramento area can chime in?
post #299 of 666
Good call on Taiwan. Better for Apple to grow their marketshare on the backs of slave laborers than to employ Californians, and there's always the extra benefit of doing more complex designs in Taiwan, because the children workers can fit their hands in places adults can't reach!
post #300 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by kupan787
I could have sworn there was a special low power varient running at 1 and 1.2 GHz. I could be wrong, but I could have sworn....



The G4@1 GHz uses something like 15-22 Watts. A 970@1.4GHz uses about 24 W. So a little hotter, but not as bad as I thought...

I think what you might be refering to was the voltage setting for the 1.2's, and wattage that they will consume. The info dosnt state that there is a seperate low power design for the chip.

Quote:
At 1.8GHz, the PowerPC 970 will consume 1.3-volts and dissipate 42-Watts. At 1.2 GHz, the PowerPC 970 will consume 1.1-volts and dissipate only 19-Watts. For comparison, a 1GHz G4 consumes 1.6-volts and dissipates 21.3-Watts.

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2002/10/16/ibm/

As for the predictions for the new lin-up. The rumours on Mother Boards suggest that there are 2 seperate designs, one for singles and one for duals. If this is true, and the second design isnt for another product, such as the iMac or Cube successor, then I would imagine that there will be more singles, possibly extending through the entire speed range. I could see Apple spending the extra money to produce a special board for the high end where they have a higher margin, but not in the low end where price pressures keep their margins lower.
post #301 of 666
This combined with that rumor we had a few weeks ago about Apple having chosen final motherboard designs with Hon Hai (one DP, the other single) makes me wonder if we have some great things coming for notebooks before year-end; I wouldn't expect them before November or December, though.

People pointed out that Hon Hai was typically the chosen manufacturer for PBs/iBooks, and now that we might know where Power Mac components are being built, it could turn out those two MBs were for the 'books. It would be pure gold for Steve to be able to debut a dual-970 17" PowerBook alongside a 970-powered 15" and 12". But I wouldn't count on seeing either til the smaller die process 970 rolls around -- which could be before the first quarter of Apple's fiscal year.
"Be entirely tolerant or not at all; follow the good path or the evil one. To stand at the crossroads requires more strength than you possess."

"Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments...
Reply
"Be entirely tolerant or not at all; follow the good path or the evil one. To stand at the crossroads requires more strength than you possess."

"Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments...
Reply
post #302 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by Leonis
Can anyone explain what TwinBank is?

It just means a dual channel memory system, similar to what the Tsunami series machines had (and IIRC some of the 680x0 machines in the distant past). Typically DIMMs have to be installed in pairs, although more advanced memory controllers can deal with non-pair DIMMs you just don't get full performance.

A dual channel memory system typically divides memory across two banks of DIMMs in some way such as all the even bytes in one and all the odd bytes in another. Since most (all?) reads & writes are of far more than 1 byte at a time this nets you double the bandwidth. A DDR400 memory system with two channels should approach 6.4 GB/sec of bandwidth.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #303 of 666
"At 1.8GHz, the PowerPC 970 will consume 1.3-volts and dissipate 42-Watts. At 1.2 GHz, the PowerPC 970 will consume 1.1-volts and dissipate only 19-Watts. For comparison, a 1GHz G4 consumes 1.6-volts and dissipates 21.3-Watts."

This statement from MacCentral is poorly worded. A processor does not "consume" the voltage it is operating at. Voltage is like an electrical force, and the power supply keeps it constant. Power dissipation follows the law P = VI, where "I" is the electrical current drawn by the device. At higher clock rates the processor draws more current to do the work, and hence power goes up. To reduce power, therefore, the CPU can be operated at a lower clock rate so it draws less current. At lower clock rates the operating voltage can also be set lower, so power goes down even more. Both V and I are less. At 1.1 Volts and 1.2 GHz, the 970 will draw about 17.27 Amperes and dissipate 19 Watts.
post #304 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
"At 1.8GHz, the PowerPC 970 will consume 1.3-volts and dissipate 42-Watts. At 1.2 GHz, the PowerPC 970 will consume 1.1-volts and dissipate only 19-Watts. For comparison, a 1GHz G4 consumes 1.6-volts and dissipates 21.3-Watts."

This statement from MacCentral is poorly worded. A processor does not "consume" the voltage it is operating at. Voltage is like an electrical force, and the power supply keeps it constant. Power dissipation follows the law P = VI, where "I" is the electrical current drawn by the device. At higher clock rates the processor draws more current to do the work, and hence power goes up. To reduce power, therefore, the CPU can be operated at a lower clock rate so it draws less current. At lower clock rates the operating voltage can also be set lower, so power goes down even more. Both V and I are less. At 1.1 Volts and 1.2 GHz, the 970 will draw about 17.27 Amperes and dissipate 19 Watts.

Could you run that by me again? It was my understanding that there would be no math.
PB 17" 1.67Ghz
1.5 GB/ 100GB
Dell 2405FPW
Reply
PB 17" 1.67Ghz
1.5 GB/ 100GB
Dell 2405FPW
Reply
post #305 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
"... At 1.1 Volts and 1.2 GHz, the 970 will draw about 17.27 Amperes and dissipate 19 Watts.

17.27 amps seems high to me, just asking. I'm mean that will drive a pretty hefty sized electric motor in our plant. Color me confused.
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 #306 of 666
I think someone's got their units badly mistaken.
"Be entirely tolerant or not at all; follow the good path or the evil one. To stand at the crossroads requires more strength than you possess."

"Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments...
Reply
"Be entirely tolerant or not at all; follow the good path or the evil one. To stand at the crossroads requires more strength than you possess."

"Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments...
Reply
post #307 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by rickag
17.27 amps seems high to me, just asking. I'm mean that will drive a pretty hefty sized electric motor in our plant. Color me confused.


That's just what the equations show. It's worse at 1.8 GHz and 1.3 Volts, where it draws 32.3 Amperes and dissipates 42 Watts. It is surprising to me too, as I never did the math til now. They will need large gauge wire from the power supply for that, like number 10 or bigger. I haven't verified the 1.3 Volts from another source, but if it is incorrect the current will be a different value. I know the 42 Watts is correct.

The big difference between motors and CPUs is the operating voltage. At 120 Volts and 17 Amperes for example, the power would be about 2000 Watts. On AC sources there is something called power factor, which makes the math more messy. Power is not exactly current times voltage.
post #308 of 666
Um, the typical full-sized household vacuum cleaner draws 11 amps. A 32-amp laptop would probably have about 30 seconds of battery life before it melted through whatever it was sitting on.

'Course, having a combination laptop and arc welder would be something completely different. Let's see Dell compete with that!

(Edited to get *my* units correct. Jeez, now everyone's doing it!)
You can never justify the cost of building a bridge by counting the number of people swimming across the river.
Reply
You can never justify the cost of building a bridge by counting the number of people swimming across the river.
Reply
post #309 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by Voxapps
Um, the typical full-sized household vacuum cleaner draws 11 amps. A 32-amp laptop would probably have about 30 seconds of battery life before it melted through whatever it was sitting on. . .



The laptop would be 17 Amperes, and 19 Watts. Your 11 Ampere vacuum cleaner is about 1300 Watts. It is the Watts, the power dissipation, that determines the amount of heat generated, not the current. High current requires good size conductors however. If a 1.1 Volt DC source supplies 1 Ampere to the load, that is only 1.1 Watts. The 970 is said to dissipate 19 Watts at 1.1 Volts.
post #310 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
That's just what the equations show. It's worse at 1.8 GHz and 1.3 Volts, where it draws 32.3 Amperes and dissipates 42 Watts. It is surprising to me too, as I never did the math til now. They will need large gauge wire from the power supply for that, like number 10 or bigger. I haven't verified the 1.3 Volts from another source, but if it is incorrect the current will be a different value. I know the 42 Watts is correct.

Huh?

The current G4's electrical specs call for 6.4A max current. You're trying to tell us that the PPC970 will more than triple the maximum current (at the high end)? I don't think so. I don't know what formula you're using, but I doubt your figures.
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
Reply
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
Reply
post #311 of 666
can anybody provide a link ( for newbies ) for this electric things

don´t get me wrong, I am a newbie !!!!!


faxe
post #312 of 666
I.L.R.W.* ?

from macrumors message board:

http://www.spymac.com/forums/showthr...5&pagenumber=3

(Is Loop Rumors Wrong)
post #313 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by keyboardf12
I.L.R.W.* ?

from macrumors message board:

http://www.spymac.com/forums/showth...15&pagenumber=3

(Is Loop Rumors Wrong)

just get an error message when i try to access this link



faxe
post #314 of 666
try again. sorry. i fixed it.
post #315 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Huh?

The current G4's electrical specs call for 6.4A max current. You're trying to tell us that the PPC970 will more than triple the maximum current (at the high end)? I don't think so. I don't know what formula you're using, but I doubt your figures.

The G4 CPU at 1 GHz actually draws 13.3 Amperes, since it is said to operate at 1.6 Volts and dissipates 21.3 Watts. The 6.4 Amperes Maximum on the back of your Mac refers to the most line current it will draw from a 120 VAC power source. That would seem like the Mac dissipates over 700 Watts but it really does not. The max amps on a product is for UL listing. First, it draws the highest current only at low line voltage conditions. Second, there is a power factor, which means the actual power is less than the number you get by multiplying RMS current by the line voltage. Third, the product makers almost always state the number a little high. The number of amps is meant to guide people on what load there will be on the building's electrical circuits.
post #316 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by faxe_tv
can anybody provide a link ( for newbies ) for this electric things

don´t get me wrong, I am a newbie !!!!!


faxe

I don't have a link, but what we are talking about is how to calculate power, using the formula:

power = current X voltage

If you look at that formula you will notice something. If the voltage is low, it takes more current for the same power you would get at a higher voltage. If you compare the currents of household devices, which operate at 120 V, to currents of automotive devices, which operate at 12 V, you will see a big difference. Now, when we get down to something like 1.3 V or 1.1 V in the 970 CPU, the difference is even bigger.
post #317 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by keyboardf12
I.L.R.W.* ?

from macrumors message board:

http://www.spymac.com/forums/showthr...5&pagenumber=3

(Is Loop Rumors Wrong)

Very interesting thread. I for one believe the Powerjack (MacWhispers guy) to be legit. He just sounds too serious to be BS-ing. Besides, he should know if he screws around with us with lies no one will buy his prodcuts to be released later this year.

So it looks like 970 around August, so maybe announced at MWNY and shipping immediately or within weeks.
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
post #318 of 666
Just a reminder about powerjack's rumor credibility track record and alleged fishy business:

Macintouch reader reports

I thought this might be helpful to those blinded by rumors.
post #319 of 666
I'm aware of his business dealings. Kid red does bring up a good point about him being accountable now that he has a more high profile company.

He's nailed a couple of things and we should know by WWDC what his long term prospects as a rumor monger are.
post #320 of 666
Quote:
Originally posted by KidRed
Very interesting thread. I for one believe the Powerjack (MacWhispers guy) to be legit. He just sounds too serious to be BS-ing. Besides, he should know if he screws around with us with lies no one will buy his prodcuts to be released later this year.

So it looks like 970 around August, so maybe announced at MWNY and shipping immediately or within weeks.

Well sounds like were back to the original schedule August-September release and maybe pre-order in July or at WWDC
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › MacBidouille posts PPC 970 benchmarks