or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › CPU Gurus: how fast is fast?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CPU Gurus: how fast is fast?

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
I have a question for all the CPU gurus here.

If the rumors are in fact true, how fast would a 1.6 GHz G5 be, assuming that it was supported by a mobo with ddr, 400 MHz bus, and whatnot?

Since the current 867 MHz G4 supposedly can keep up with a Pentium 4, would it be true that a 1.6 GHz G5 would be considerably faster than a Pentium 4 at virtually every task, even non-altivec optimized processing?

Is Apple about to leapfrog the competition?

If so, then what an incredible time for Apple. If they deliver on the G5, then combined with OS X, Apple is poised to gain significant marketshare!
post #2 of 26
if what has been said is true the G5 will kick everything's ass at 1.6Ghz.

1 thing I'm unsure of: Does the G5 have altivec? if so that's even juicier.

But I have learned not to get my hopes up too much
post #3 of 26
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>if what has been said is true the G5 will kick everything's ass at 1.6Ghz.

1 thing I'm unsure of: Does the G5 have altivec? if so that's even juicier.

But I have learned not to get my hopes up too much</strong><hr></blockquote>

According to the Reg, it will have Altivec. That was one of the sticking points during one of the revisions, it wasn't working well. So I guess they ironed out the 2 probs they mentioned and that's why it's rumored to be final now.
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
post #4 of 26
Thread Starter 
Yes, the G5 will have Altivec. In fact up until recent revisions, G5 altivec performance was not as good as with G4 chips. But I'd assume that this would be fixed before the chip was used in Powermacs.
post #5 of 26
any more info on raw G5 performance?
AI Member since 1998.

Founder GACmug, former Chairman.

Macintosh Specialist and Administrator, Lees-McRae College
Reply
AI Member since 1998.

Founder GACmug, former Chairman.

Macintosh Specialist and Administrator, Lees-McRae College
Reply
post #6 of 26
The only raw numbers I've seen came from the register and they were insanely high. If they are true the 1.2GHz G5 would easily beat a 2GHz P4 and the 1.6GHz would destroy anything in it's path.

My guess is that it's not that good, but is still very impressive. The G5 is supposed to be better than a G4 cycle for cycle, where the P4 is actually slower than the P3 cycle for cycle. So with a good MHz pump my guess is that the G5 will beat the P4 in almost every test thrown at it, not just photoshop. I can't wait to see the DVD encoding times on it either, the G4 I think was down to 1:1 (1 hour of video : 1 hour to compress), can we expect a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio?

I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #7 of 26
[quote]Originally posted by Slacker:
<strong>The only raw numbers I've seen came from the register and they were insanely high. If they are true the 1.2GHz G5 would easily beat a 2GHz P4 and the 1.6GHz would destroy anything in it's path.

My guess is that it's not that good, but is still very impressive. The G5 is supposed to be better than a G4 cycle for cycle, where the P4 is actually slower than the P3 cycle for cycle. So with a good MHz pump my guess is that the G5 will beat the P4 in almost every test thrown at it, not just photoshop. I can't wait to see the DVD encoding times on it either, the G4 I think was down to 1:1 (1 hour of video : 1 hour to compress), can we expect a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio?

</strong><hr></blockquote>
I will believe in this, only when i see this chip. For the moment at the exception of altivec, the PPC chips are far away from the performance of a P4 2 ghz and a AThlon XP 1800 +. I have serious doubt that in a couple of month it would be the reverse ...

<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
post #8 of 26
my brother is now buying a DUAL ATHLON 1800xp for 3d rendering.

*i* hope that the g5 is an uncompromissed 64bit-part.
post #9 of 26
[quote]*i* hope that the g5 is an uncompromissed 64bit-part. <hr></blockquote> It is supposed to be a 64 bit chip. But Mac OS X (and every mac app out there) is still 32 bit. There are bits of good news here tho. First, the G5 (unlike the itanium 64 bit) runs 32 bit code at full speed. Second, only a simple recompile is needed to convert 32 bit apps (and OSes ) to 64 bit.
::Imagines RC5 64 bit on quad 1.6 GHz G5::
:: pees pants::
[edit st00pid auto smilies]

[ 11-29-2001: Message edited by: discstickers ]</p>
"It's not like Windows users don't have any power; I think they are happy with Windows, and that's an incredibly depressing thought." -Steve Jobs
Reply
"It's not like Windows users don't have any power; I think they are happy with Windows, and that's an incredibly depressing thought." -Steve Jobs
Reply
post #10 of 26
[quote]
::Imagines RC5 64 bit on quad 1.6 GHz G5::
:: pees pants::
[edit st00pid auto smilies]

[ 11-29-2001: Message edited by: discstickers ][/QB]<hr></blockquote>
Take your pills !

post #11 of 26
you can never have too much speed


Ideally if I can render a very complex radiosity scence @ print resolution in less than 10 seconds I would say it's fast enough
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 #12 of 26
[quote]Originally posted by powerdoc:
<strong>
I will believe in this, only when i see this chip. For the moment at the exception of altivec, the PPC chips are far away from the performance of a P4 2 ghz and a AThlon XP 1800 +. I have serious doubt that in a couple of month it would be the reverse ...

<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

What's so hard to believe about it, it's an entirely new chip!! It's not a modified or updated G4. Are you saying it's hard to believe that AMD came out of no where and trumped the mighty Intel???

I'm not saying the performance WILL be better, I'm saying if it's even close to what is claimed it will be better, if the numbers are BS than so is the performance. I'm basing it on the only numbers I've seen and I stated that.

For you to have serious doubt that it's possible is kind of foolish, in my opinion anyway.
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #13 of 26
[quote]Originally posted by Slacker:
<strong>

For you to have serious doubt that it's possible is kind of foolish, in my opinion anyway.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I did not say i have serious doubt it's possible, i said i have serious doubt to see this chip will come in some month.
From where i live we said that impossible is not french, one other sort of foolish, in my opinion

post #14 of 26
Thread Starter 
[quote] The G5 is supposed to be better than a G4 cycle for cycle <hr></blockquote>

Wow, if this turns out to be true, then what an amazing engineering feat, considering that the G5 has a deeper pipeline than the G4. Hot damn, if Motorola pulls this off they will once again rank as one of the worlds top CPU developers.

What the hell did Steve Jobs do--spike Moto's drinking water with methaphetamines? This G5 is shaping up to be wicked fast! As in, too fast for normal, everyday usage. Users are going to start doing more than just piss their pants

[ 12-01-2001: Message edited by: Junkyard Dawg ]</p>
post #15 of 26
junkyard dawg:

for as long as i can remember you have been posting the most retarded threads and replies to peoples honest posting.

you are an idiot. and stop creating a new thread every 5 minutes. i look down the list of thread creators and your name repeats over and over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
post #16 of 26
Thread Starter 
[quote]
for as long as i can remember you have been posting the most retarded threads and replies to peoples honest posting.

you are an idiot. and stop creating a new thread every 5 minutes. i look down the list of thread creators and your name repeats over and over. <hr></blockquote>

I thought this was a rather interesting thread, but to each their own...

Why are you spamming the boards with the same post in several threads? The reason my name repeats on the list of thread creators is that you keep nudging my threads to the top with the same reply to every thread!

so, SameOldShit, what sort of performance do you think the G5 will have, relative to other processors from Intel and AMD? Do you have any idea or is this too "retarded" for you?

And BTW, calling people "retards" is about as sensitive as calling them "fags" or "niggers". Why do you have to insult a whole group of people when putting me down? What did mentally handicapped people ever do to you?

Think about it.
post #17 of 26
SHUT DOWN!

Introducing the new and improved Junkyard Dog! Now with rebuttals that make sense!

*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
post #18 of 26
I believe a G5 has a x4 more efficient FPU & Integer units than a G4 and is also up to twice the speed, so I'd say its possible for a g5 to be about 3-5 times more powerful than a G4.

I've also had an interesting thought. Alot of space on the die's of AMD & Intel chips is due to the x86 emulation, G4's are much smaller than x86 chips, so if G5 were an x86 size die, there is the potential for Moto to seriously laepfrog the competition.
post #19 of 26
[quote]Originally posted by MacAddict:
<strong>SHUT DOWN!

Introducing the new and improved Junkyard Dog! Now with rebuttals that make sense!

</strong><hr></blockquote>
LOL, so true.
"It's not like Windows users don't have any power; I think they are happy with Windows, and that's an incredibly depressing thought." -Steve Jobs
Reply
"It's not like Windows users don't have any power; I think they are happy with Windows, and that's an incredibly depressing thought." -Steve Jobs
Reply
post #20 of 26
[quote]Originally posted by Slacker:
<strong>

Are you saying it's hard to believe that AMD came out of no where and trumped the mighty Intel???

</strong><hr></blockquote>

They didn't, it took 4-5 years to bring the K7 to market from conception to shipment. In the meantime they lost large amounts of money building the infrastructure to support it and shipped 2 intermediate products the K5 and K6. AMD started plotting its revenge against Intel as soon as Intel filed the lawsuit to keep AMD from producing x86 parts, the one that took 9 years of litigation.
post #21 of 26
Go, Junks!
post #22 of 26
SameOldSht said:
[quote] junkyard dawg:
for as long as i can remember you have been posting the most retarded threads and replies to peoples honest posting.

you are an idiot.
<hr></blockquote>

to which Junkyard Dawg replied:
[quote] And BTW, calling people "retards" is about as sensitive as calling them "fags" or "niggers". Why do you have to insult a whole group of people when putting me down? What did mentally handicapped people ever do to you?

<hr></blockquote>

and markjo couldn't help but to add his $.02:

SameOldSht did not call you a retard, (s)he called you an idiot. (S)he called you posts and replies retarded. But, then again, you could be right -- calling you a retard (or idiot) probably is an insult to mentally handicapped people
post #23 of 26
[quote]Originally posted by markjo:
<strong>But, then again, you could be right -- calling you a retard (or idiot) probably is an insult to mentally handicapped people </strong><hr></blockquote>
I do not agree with you but from a pure artistic view:

***SMACK*** ***SLAM*** ***BAM***

And junkyard dawg is down on a TKO :cool:

[ 12-08-2001: Message edited by: Anders ]</p>
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #24 of 26
Thread Starter 
Markjo: That's a nice play on semantics you've got there.

By your logic, it would be fine if I walked up to a gay man and told him that he was wearing f"ag-clothing", and that his comments are all "gay". And following your reasoning to its conclusion, I would not have called him a "fag" or slandered gays.

Interesting perspective you have there.

It's unfortunate that you cannot understand my posts. When I try to make a point more often than not it's intelligent and close to the mark. When I try to be funny I sometimes succeed...and there's few things more rewarding to me than making someone laugh, it's some of the best therapy around for lifting someone out of the doldrums.

On the other hand not a single post of yours has ever made the slightest impression on me....they are just too bland and boring to work themselves into my conciousness. Now you finally caught my attention by playing referee, but who the hell remembers any of the refs unless they made a bad call?
post #25 of 26
You must get an awful lot of exercise jumping to so many conclusions

[quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:
<strong>Markjo: That's a nice play on semantics you've got there.

By your logic, it would be fine if I walked up to a gay man and told him that he was wearing f"ag-clothing", and that his comments are all "gay". And following your reasoning to its conclusion, I would not have called him a "fag" or slandered gays.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I niether said nor implied any such thing. I did not endorse SameOldSht's insult to you, I just pointed out that you misidentified it.
post #26 of 26
ok, um, er, ah oh yes... I also hope the G5 is a really fast processor. I almost forgot what this thread was about. For a minute I thought I had walked into a party after the third keg went dry.
Lets get GRASS native on osX!
Reply
Lets get GRASS native on osX!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › CPU Gurus: how fast is fast?