or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › MOSR: Next Powerbook has G4
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MOSR: Next Powerbook has G4 - Page 2

post #41 of 124
Quote:
From what I've been hearing, it seems as though the 750VX is a G4. I mean, it's all a G4 ever was... a G3 with a vector processing unit (altivec).

Not really (if you mean the 750x G3/74xx G4): they're both 32 bit PowerPCs but internally they're quite different. The G3 uses the same 60x bus as G1 and G2 PowerPCs, which is bandwidth impaired compared to MPX (G4) and "elastic bus" (G5), and bad for Altivec performance. The G3 would need a new bus if Altivec was added. (starts crazy dreams of a eBus G3++ with Altivec...)

Quote:
I am no CPU engineer, but isn't a twofold increase in the energy consumption over 500MHz a bit strange? Doesn't seem like a very smooth curve in power usage.

Well, you've only got 2 datapoints, so it wouldn't be that smooth.
Stoo
Reply
Stoo
Reply
post #42 of 124
Naturally; it just seemed like a spike. But after thinking about it, it really isn't. Simple way to compare -- 'd be like going from the 867 in my PowerBook now to a 1.37 GHz processor. Suppose the increase is understandable.
"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 #43 of 124
A G4 in the next Powerbook update, may be not that far from reality after all. Although the update seems minimal and may be proved problematic, it can't be excluded.

EDIT: PPCNUX has a little comment on the availability of the 7447A. Hmm...
post #44 of 124
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
A G4 in the next Powerbook update, may be not that far from reality after all. Although the update seems minimal and may be proved problematic, it can't be excluded.


Yeah, this is to another lackluster update :-/

I sure hope Apple is able to shoehorn a G5 into the Powerbooks, even if it means adding a few mm in thickness (my 1100.00 Centrino Notebook with its 3.5cm is not bulky but blows any laptop Apple has to offer out of the water speedwise) and not-so-great battery runtime because a 1.4Ghz G4 Albook is nothing I will even remotely consider buying.

Just look at the power consumption: 20W at 1.4Ghz for the 7447A - the 970FX consumes 24.5W at 2Ghz but only 12.3W at 1.4Ghz, so it should be the better mobile chip with the added capability to reduce its power hunger even further via PowerTune. Since the 970FX is produced from 1.4Ghz to over 2.0, Apple could create a lineup like:

PowerBook:
12": 1.4Ghz
15": 1.6Ghz
17": 1.8Ghz (maybe even a "best" config running at 2.0Ghz)

iBook:
12": 1.167Ghz and maybe 1.3Ghz
14": 1.42Ghz or even 1.5Ghz.

IBM spec link - scroll down to the 970/970FX section for specs.
post #45 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by Smircle
Yeah, this is to another lackluster update :-/

I sure hope Apple is able to shoehorn a G5 into the Powerbooks, even if it means adding a few mm in thickness (my 1100.00 Centrino Notebook with its 3.5cm is not bulky but blows any laptop Apple has to offer out of the water speedwise) and not-so-great battery runtime because a 1.4Ghz G4 Albook is nothing I will even remotely consider buying.

Just look at the power consumption: 20W at 1.4Ghz for the 7447A - the 970FX consumes 24.5W at 2Ghz but only 12.3W at 1.4Ghz, so it should be the better mobile chip with the added capability to reduce its power hunger even further via PowerTune. Since the 970FX is produced from 1.4Ghz to over 2.0, Apple could create a lineup like:

PowerBook:
12": 1.4Ghz
15": 1.6Ghz
17": 1.8Ghz (maybe even a "best" config running at 2.0Ghz)

iBook:
12": 1.167Ghz and maybe 1.3Ghz
14": 1.42Ghz or even 1.5Ghz.

IBM spec link - scroll down to the 970/970FX section for specs.

One 17" here please, thank you...
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
post #46 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by Smircle
Yeah, this is to another lackluster update :-/

Just look at the power consumption: 20W at 1.4Ghz for the 7447A - the 970FX consumes 24.5W at 2Ghz but only 12.3W at 1.4Ghz, so it should be the better mobile chip with the added capability to reduce its power hunger even further via PowerTune.

So, let's see what we have here: a G4 at 1.4 GHz (up to 1.5 GHz) and a much more power efficient G5 at 1.4 GHz (up to 2 GHz). What would be now the guide for Apple's choice? Are there still technological obstruction preventing the use of the G5? What became this story for the IBM SoC, meant to be used by Apple?
post #47 of 124
I suspect that the heat issue Apple has to deal with comes from more than just the processor. In the current lineup of AlBooks, the bus runs at 167MHz which means that the system controller does not generate much heat - most of the power budget in the AlBook then comes from the CPU, GPU, screen and HD - which is what gives me mediocre battery life on my 17" - but that screen is worth it :-)

Now, for a G5 PowerBook, we have to add not only a processor that consumes more power, but one that is more difficult to cool (see some of the notes at cooligy.com on cooling 90nm chips), but we also have to add in a system controller now running at around 1GHz, and if 90nm with the same cooling issues.

We have more heat to dissipate - maybe twice what we did before. We also have a lot more power being used and hence even worse battery life. If they were to use the same battery as is in the 17, then I suspect the life would be < 2 hours.

In short, I think getting the G5 into a PB is going to take a lot more engineering than we think including liquid cooling and better batteries than are currently used.

No wonder they're talking about late '04.

Quote:
Originally posted by PB
So, let's see what we have here: a G4 at 1.4 GHz (up to 1.5 GHz) and a much more power efficient G5 at 1.4 GHz (up to 2 GHz). What would be now the guide for Apple's choice? Are there still technological obstruction preventing the use of the G5? What became this story for the IBM SoC, meant to be used by Apple?

The Mad Kiwi Winemaker
Reply
The Mad Kiwi Winemaker
Reply
post #48 of 124
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
So, let's see what we have here: a G4 at 1.4 GHz (up to 1.5 GHz) and a much more power efficient G5 at 1.4 GHz (up to 2 GHz). What would be now the guide for Apple's choice? Are there still technological obstruction preventing the use of the G5? What became this story for the IBM SoC, meant to be used by Apple?

The obvious stumbling block could be the system controller chip which has a heat pipe (or was that a passive cooling block?) in the G5 desktops. Since the CPU is well within the G4 power draw ballpark, we will most likely not see an integrated CPU/controller SOC, but this "SOC" would be the controller moved from 130nm to 90nm and fabbed at IBM.

As the IBM guy talked about starting to deliver this SOC to Apple, I consider a Powerbook G5 in the next few weeks much more likely than a fall release date and an interim PowerBook G4 in between.

But I could be overly optimistic...
post #49 of 124
from :
Quote:
According to Motorola, the 1.42GHz 7447A is shipping in sample quantities to "selected customers" for $245 a go, in batches of 10,000 CPUs. Volume production was not confirmed, but is likely to be reached during Q2 or Q3, we'd say.

That gives Apple time to beef up its existing PowerBook G4 line one last time before switching to the G5 - a distinct possibility now that IBM has got the 90nm version out the door. If Apple chooses to go straight to the G5 with the next PowerBook update, the 7447A can always be used to give the iBook a performance boost.

shove it in an iBook than... and present us the powerbook G5 at wwdc 2004.

Q2-Q3 2004
man i feel so depressed
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #50 of 124
So, it looks like we get one of the same soon... .

But again, if the levels of the heat generated by the fast system bus are so high to prevent use of the G5 in a Powerbook, what is going to change so much in the engineering front from now until the end of this year, to make the G5 in a Powerbook reality?
post #51 of 124
Maybe because there is a thread of truth here. Motorola has released a product summary for the referenced chip, so at least that much is true. Along with this is the reality that the 970 and its support chips are not going into a portable any time soon - indicates that the article seems to have traction.

Thanks
Dave


Quote:
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Smirk:

And you believe them because..................
post #52 of 124
Good questions, with multiple possible answers.

The first possibility is that they produce a 970 variant with a larger cache and a reduced speed FSB. The cache could potentially make up for the slower FSB.

The second possibility is to move the memory controller on die in a manner similar to AMD's Opteron. The differrence would be to optimize for energy usage instead of performance. Here the FSB would be replaced with a hypertransport port to work along side the memory port for I/O.

The third option would be to go SOC which would be a bigger move to integration than the above thought. The little bit of information that slipped past that IBM'er a few days ago may be a hint at something here. Or it could just be a mistake in interpetation. A SOC implementation would put the vast majority of the laptops circuitry on one chip. With extensive use of serial I/O (USB, FIREWIRE, SATA and possibly PCI-Express) this could be very doable and not grossly effect pin count. You would have everything on board including the memory interface, with Hypertransport or PCI-Express driving the GPU. This is very much a possibility and has the potential to lower power usage due to level shifting.

In both of the situations above the ciruitry that would have been in the north bridge should end up simplified. These would be chips for single processor machnes only which eliminates a good portion of the complexity form the norht bridge. This provides additional power savings.


Thanks
Dave


Quote:
Originally posted by PB
So, it looks like we get one of the same soon... .

But again, if the levels of the heat generated by the fast system bus are so high to prevent use of the G5 in a Powerbook, what is going to change so much in the engineering front from now until the end of this year, to make the G5 in a Powerbook reality?
post #53 of 124
[url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/35749.html]The Register[/url is reporting that the 7447A is a reduced power version of the 7447, the G4 currently used in PowerBooks.

No L3 cache, 512KB of L2 cache
20W at 1.42GHz (7447: 21 @ 1.33), not much better than the 7447 at lower clockspeeds.

The only major new feature is on the fly clock speed adjustment. I'm a bit disappointed about 2 things. The first is that this revision of the CPU doesn't make that much progress in Hz and isn't slightly more efficient for a voltage reduction from 1.3V to 1.1V. Second, it's still using an MPX bus, at 166MHz maximum.

This seems like quite a minor revision, and it doesn't really return the G4 as a powerful and efficient laptop CPU. I was hoping for something more dramatic.
Stoo
Reply
Stoo
Reply
post #54 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by Stoo
This seems like quite a minor revision, and it doesn't really return the G4 as a powerful and efficient laptop CPU. I was hoping for something more dramatic.

Motorola have, for some time it seems, given Apple nothing but minor revisions. Why did you expect this to change now?
Pismo, Deus Ex Machina.
Reply
Pismo, Deus Ex Machina.
Reply
post #55 of 124
original c|net article and the spymac interpretation:
Quote:
Apple may not use new G4
2004/02/23 14:18 | By Amy Percival
CNET reports that Motorola has announced a new G4 processor. The new processor typically consumes 20 watts at 1.42GHz, which could make it ideal for portables. The chip may be too late to make it into new Macintosh models though. IBM's new low power G5 chips are more advanced and are likely to consume similar levels of power while outperforming the Motorola chip. Industry insiders expect G5 based PowerBooks no later than August 2004, and Apple is already using the low-power G5 chip in the Xserve G5.

G5 based powerbook no later than august 2004?
sounds fine to me.
actually, everything before december 2004 suits me
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #56 of 124
I was hoping that Motoroal had something interesting up their sleeves for desktop PowerPC. At least IBM certainly do.
Stoo
Reply
Stoo
Reply
post #57 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by gar

actually, everything before december 2004 suits me

Ditto.

When Xmas mornin' 2004 arrives I expect nothing less than a PB G5 (with 3 year warranty) in my stocking.

I just hope IBM can fab enough units so I won't have to wait until AFTER Xmas for it.
post #58 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by Stoo
I was hoping that Motoroal had something interesting up their sleeves for desktop PowerPC. At least IBM certainly do.

after all the great things ibm has done and is working on, i wouldnt touch a powermac with a 'new' motorola chip in it. ibm is the future (and now )
post #59 of 124
The question is, how much of the elegantness of the G4 PowerBook are we willing to surrender in order to have Apple quickly delivering a G5 PowerBook instead? Can Apple make it thicker, and if so, then how much thicker? And heavier, and warmer, and noisier, and power outlet dependent etc.?

Personally I adore the look of the G4 Powerbooks. I wouldn't accept much (if any) degrading of it's slimness and portability simply to stick a faster processor in there. But that's just me, maybe...
Pismo, Deus Ex Machina.
Reply
Pismo, Deus Ex Machina.
Reply
post #60 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69
The first possibility is that they produce a 970 variant with a larger cache and a reduced speed FSB. The cache could potentially make up for the slower FSB.

Are you talking about a larger cache on the CPU which would mean more transistors, more power consumption, and more heat? or are you talking about an external off chip cache?
post #61 of 124
If I saw a headline "G4 to hit 2Ghz" --- I would yawn and giggle a little, just like when I watch my 6 year old niece excited about tying a shoe for the first time.

Look, Motorola at 2ghz, isn't that CUTE?

The "wow" ability for this kind of annc ended about this time last year.

</bitterness for Moto>
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #62 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by KANE
Personally I adore the look of the G4 Powerbooks. I wouldn't accept much (if any) degrading of it's slimness and portability simply to stick a faster processor in there. But that's just me, maybe...

the 15" degraded already from 1" to a whopping 1.1"
this is a bad omen.
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #63 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by KANE
Motorola have, for some time it seems, given Apple nothing but minor revisions. Why did you expect this to change now?

Last year (it is now almost 10 months from then), Motorola said they have in the works dual core G4s. However, no roadmap was publicly available at the time, nor now I think. They could also improve the performance of the system bus and FPU. It looks like nothing of these happened. The dynamically changing clock frequency is a welcome addition though.
post #64 of 124
Well, here is the fact sheet of the new Motorola chip. Compare now the Dhrystone 2.1 MIPS benchmarks of the new G4, with the ones of the new G5 in Smircle's link. Let's see:

G4: 3000 @ 1.3 GHz
G5: 7584 @ 2.0 GHz

Now, even if we assume that the G4 performance scales lineraly with frequency, the G4 would have at 2.0 GHz a score of 4615. The G5 has 64% more at that frequency. This test is not in alignment with the common belief that a G4 performs better than a G5 at the same clock speed. Of course the comparison I made includes the 90 nm G5, but the result holds even for the 130 nm G5 (this G5 has 40% higher score than the G4 at the same frequency). Finally, the absolute difference with the available frequencies (G4 @ 1.3GHz, G5 @ 2.0GHz), is 153% . Not very encouraging for the new G4.
post #65 of 124
I'm talking about on chip cache which is a more power efficient approach than off chip. Much of the extra heat production would be balanced by slowing the FSB.

Thanks
Dave


Quote:
Originally posted by Geddoe
Are you talking about a larger cache on the CPU which would mean more transistors, more power consumption, and more heat? or are you talking about an external off chip cache?
post #66 of 124
I'm still under the impression that the power disapation of the G5, even at 90nm, is very high when maximum performance is called for. I suspect that the 970 would not run long in a Powerbook at 2GHz before it throttled back. 50 watts is a lot of power to deal with, if you can't get rid of it than your only choice is to throttle the processor.

So what I'm trying to say is that maximum performance ratings of a processor mean nothing if the processor can not sustain that performance in its enclosure. Frankly we don't know exactly how IBM, or motorola for that matter, come up with their typical power usage numbers. We do know that Apple advertises that their XServes have processors using 50 watts of power. So I suspect that average usage in a powerbook at 2GHz, will be someplace between the 24.5 watts IBM says is typical and the 50 watts Apple advertises.

If you have a work load that is atypical then you are going to have problems. I suspect that Apple has already ran tests with both porcessors in knows in detail what the performance, in portable situations, is with both of these processors.

Even after all of that testing I don't believe it will make a bit of differrence which one performs better. Apple want to take leadership in the 64 bit market, they will go with the 970 as soon as they can. If we did see this G4(a) in the next rev of laptops it will only be because Apple still has issues getting the 970 to work on the platform. Skipping 64 bits in the next PowerBook rev is not something they want to do, it could be that they will have to skip for at least one revision. It is a matter of having all the ducks in a row, the new G4 looks like a drop in processor, thus allowing a cheap refresh while working on those ducks.

Dave

Quote:
Originally posted by PB
Well, here is the fact sheet of the new Motorola chip. Compare now the Dhrystone 2.1 MIPS benchmarks of the new G4, with the ones of the new G5 in Smircle's link. Let's see:

G4: 3000 @ 1.3 GHz
G5: 7584 @ 2.0 GHz

Now, even if we assume that the G4 performance scales lineraly with frequency, the G4 would have at 2.0 GHz a score of 4615. The G5 has 64% more at that frequency. This test is not in alignment with the common belief that a G4 performs better than a G5 at the same clock speed. Of course the comparison I made includes the 90 nm G5, but the result holds even for the 130 nm G5 (this G5 has 40% higher score than the G4 at the same frequency). Finally, the absolute difference with the available frequencies (G4 @ 1.3GHz, G5 @ 2.0GHz), is 153% . Not very encouraging for the new G4.
post #67 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69
It is a matter of having all the ducks in a row, the new G4 looks like a drop in processor, thus allowing a cheap refresh while working on those ducks.

Dave

Absolutely. By the way, what became the dual core G4s Motorola talked about last year?
post #68 of 124
Yup --- I think we'll see a different PowerBook design. Some may say that's absurd (I mean, we just got the 15" G4 aluminum design), but I think it's going to have lose some of its sexiness to fit the new technology. And going back to the Pismo-level specs will not be an atrocity by any means at all. If it keeps the components going longer, then it should happen.
"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 #69 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
Absolutely. By the way, what became the dual core G4s Motorola talked about last year?

if you mean the 7457RM
moto killed the project.
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #70 of 124
7457-RM was a G4 with an onboard memory controller that talked to the rest of the board via RapidIO.

The dual core processor is something else that we won't see until the 90nm node, which Motorola (and AMD, who are using Mot's process tech for 90nm) are hoping to roll out this summer. Unless it's dual-core with an onboard memory controller or Elastic Bus, I don't think Apple will be interested.

The 7447A has "contractual obligation" written all over it. Given that it's the '47 rather than the '57 (no provision for L3 cache) it's probably an iBook/eMac CPU - and maybe, if Apple gets a lock on supply before they're publicly available (which they have before) they can go into one last PowerBook refresh. But I can only see this if Apple is paying a lot less than the insane $250/unit price Mot is asking.
"...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 #71 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by gar
if you mean the 7457RM
moto killed the project.

No, I mean the dual core G4. Motorola talked about that last year for the first time, with estimated production somewhere this year. This chip has yet to appear in any roadmap. The Register had an article about that.
post #72 of 124
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
No, I mean the dual core G4. Motorola talked about that last year for the first time, with estimated production somewhere this year. This chip has yet to appear in any roadmap.

It is a given that Moto has to integrate a fast RAM-controller into its CPUs before they can go dual-core, because else, the cores will be sitting around waiting for the 167Mhz bus to deliver data.

So: 7447A, then a true DDR-interface, then dual-core - if Apple is still buying chips from them, that is.
post #73 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by Smircle

So: 7447A, then a true DDR-interface, then dual-core - if Apple is still buying chips from them, that is.

We talk about a long time here, no?
post #74 of 124
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
We talk about a long time here, no?

Moto is spinning off its CPU division - usually not the condition where a company reaches peak performance. OTOH, implementing a faster interface cannot be that hard. I guess, we are talking about 3 month till 7447, 9 month till RapidIO or similar interface and 12 - 18 month till dual-core.
post #75 of 124
Did everyone catch this.

http://www.macdailynews.com/comments.php?id=P2216_0_1_0

I could not find it linked in any active thread.
post #76 of 124
First, before completely pooh-poohing a dual-core G4 with MaxBus, remember that PowerMacs shipped with a fairly similar arrangement (two G4s on one MaxBus) for years, and they actually did SMP pretty well.

A dual-core CPU could have much lower cache coherency penalties, since the cores wouldn't have to snoop over MaxBus the way the separate G4s did.

For a laptop it would be a pretty sweet chip. Of course, it'd be sweeter with an onboard memory controller and a higher-speed bus to RAM, but that's not necessary to see a real increase in performance.

As I've been saying for a while now, if Mot would move the memory controller on die and add an FP unit, the G4 would undergo a fairly radical transformation. Not anything to make the G5 hide in shame, but a solid performer even under load - certainly, good enough to kick the Pentium M around. Two of those in a single die and you'd have something that would own the laptop space (if not the battery-life-be-damned "portable desktop" space).
"...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 #77 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
First, before completely pooh-poohing a dual-core G4 with MaxBus, remember that PowerMacs shipped with a fairly similar arrangement (two G4s on one MaxBus) for years, and they actually did SMP pretty well.

I don't think it's the dual-core/MaxBus combination that gets people all riled up; it's the fact that Motorola put it on a roadmap and started talking about it. Still if Freescale ends up successfully shipping it, we may have something along the lines of a face off, with this new dual-core, built-in memory controller ├╝ber-G4, potentially going up against IBM's "G4".

Between those two chips and the new 90-nm 970 that everyone's talking about, it looks like the next few years are going to be very good indeed to Apple's low end.
"Do you know this company was on the brink of bankruptcy in '85? The same thing in '88, '90, and '92. It will survive. It always has."
-Former Apple CEO Michael Spindler
Reply
"Do you know this company was on the brink of bankruptcy in '85? The same thing in '88, '90, and '92. It will survive. It always has."
-Former Apple CEO Michael Spindler
Reply
post #78 of 124
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
First, before completely pooh-poohing a dual-core G4 with MaxBus, remember that PowerMacs shipped with a fairly similar arrangement (two G4s on one MaxBus) for years, and they actually did SMP pretty well.

I must confess this has slipped my mind completely. I was convinced that Apple had specifically designed an ASIC (UMA 2.5? UniNorth 2? - I don't really remember) with two MaxBus interfaces (for the CPUs) and one faster DDR interface (facing the rest of the system) to at least ease the bottleneck on duals.

I definitely remember Moto downgrading the SMP capabilities from MERSI to MESI with the 7450 translation - a tacit acknowledgement that with the growing divergence between CPU clockspeed and MPX bus capabilities, more than two CPUs would be a complete waste?

But of course - a dual-core chip G4 would be really neat in a Powerbook, even if it would be somewhat RAM-starved. However, this is unlikely to happen before they move their design to 90nm - it would be much too hot with the larger structures.
If Moto was further able to slap a second FP unit and a decent (RapidIO) RAM interface onto this chip, give it a deeper pipeline to boost the clock speed, it would give intel a run for their money.
post #79 of 124
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by oldmacfan
Did everyone catch this.

http://www.macdailynews.com/comments.php?id=P2216_0_1_0

I could not find it linked in any active thread.

Macminute has kind of a follow-up quoting Glaskowsky:
Quote:
He speculates that the new laptops could be introduced basically at any time. "I would not have been surprised to see the new PowerBook announced last month, and I won't be surprised if it doesn't come out until summer," Glaskowasky concluded.

I like the idea of "last month", but I don't believe so-called analysts have access to any information we here don't have (read: he is speculating as much as we do).
post #80 of 124
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
First, before completely pooh-poohing a dual-core G4 with MaxBus,

.....if Mot would move the memory controller on die and add an FP unit, the G4 would undergo a fairly radical transformation. ......

How many manufacturers currently offer dual core processors? I don't have anything against Motorola, but I would expect IBM to manufacture a dual core cpu for Apple before Motorola.

Seems like a mighty big if.

Hopefully Motorola's new alliances with SMT Microelectronics and Phillips will bear fruit, unless they've had a falling out?? It would only help Apple to have such a cpu design.
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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › MOSR: Next Powerbook has G4