or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › There is no G5
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

There is no G5 - Page 8

post #281 of 457
Take a look at the bottom of Motorola's current roadmap. it says:

6xx, 7xx, 7xxx - high performance microprocessor targeting computing and high end embedded.
8xx, 8xxx - integrated processor targeting the communications and consumer markets.
5xx, 5xxx - integrated processor targeting the transportation market.

The G5, otherwise known as 85xx, is targeted towards the communications market, NOT the desktop computing one. Instead expect Apple to use faster and upgraded 74xx chips well into next year.
post #282 of 457
About the liberal media bias...

It has been well documented that what has actually happened in the past 20 years is that the right has moved farther to the right, the center and left has stayed pretty much the same. So, from the vantage point of the right, the center looks much farther away (left) than it used to.

The "fiscal" or "moderate" republican has all but disappeared. The democratic party is almost completely run by centrists. There was a push early on by anti-abortionists, christian fundamentalists to take over the lower levels of the party.

As for a liberal bias to the news I have to say, as a liberal, that the mass market news is not at all liberal. 95% of radio talk shows are conservative (including all of AM radio). Most newspaper editorial sections are either centrist or conservative.
post #283 of 457
Well the Motorola site says the 7XXX processor is for high performance computing, they didn't say the 74XX, denoting G4 class processos. Motorola has taken out the 7500 designation that was previously used to denote the G5 class desktop process, that much is true. but did they specifically stste that 7500 would NOT be used? Perhaps they removed it from the roadmap to help Apple and their secrecy plans. By using 7XXX instead of 74XX, this tells me that they have plans for the future of the 7000 series of model numbers. Desktop G5 may very well be the 7500.
post #284 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>Perhaps they removed it from the roadmap to help Apple and their secrecy plans.</strong><hr></blockquote>

From some Motorola guy in an article on Maccentral...

"In working with them [Apple], we had to be sure that we didn't steal Apple's thunder. When a customer is as strategic and important as Apple, we don't mind helping their publicity efforts," said Swearingen.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #285 of 457
Keep. Politics. Out. Of. Future. Hardware.

You do not have to get the last word in.
"...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 #286 of 457
no G5?

hey wwwork, come to appleoutsider, we need some well rounded, reasoning individuals over there. come on!!!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #287 of 457
It's me again!

So far, it looks like Apollo, smells like Apollo, and probably is Apollo.

choice quotes from ATAT:

[quote]New Buffy! New Buffy! Oh, thank heaven... we didn't think we'd make it. Just another 86 minutes to go...

(snip)

Rest assured, though, those 800 MHz, 933 MHz, and 1 GHz chips shipping in Apple's latest pro desktops are indeed Apollos, at least according to Will Swearingen, Motorola's Director of Strategic Communications, as quoted by MacCentral.

(snip)

Because if history is any indication, whatever it was is probably going to wind up at the heart of an Apple product roughly a year from now, right? Thus, we spent a little time digging around for clues, and came up with this: an official Motorola press release from MPF2001 describing the MPC8540, the company's "first e500 integrated host processor to employ RapidIO interconnect technology." Apparently it's a "Book E"-based PowerPC chip that will run between 600 MHz and 1 GHz and was "designed for high-speed networking applications" and other "embedded market" uses, such as "communications, automotive, and consumer applications."

So there you have it, folks: come Macworld Expo San Francisco 2003, we'll all be gaping in awe as Steve takes the wraps off Apple's first high-performance router. Or maybe a line of digital-hub kitchen appliances, or possibly a car. But you can be sure that whatever it is, it'll have an e500 at its core and not a G5, because history always repeats itself. Without fail. Yup.<hr></blockquote>

Straight from the horses mouth at Moto:

<a href="http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0201/29.motorola.php" target="_blank">http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0201/29.motorola.php</a>

Anyway, anyone STILL believe we'll see an e500/85xx/G5/whatever before 1/2003?

Seems the last three proccies were revealed in Octoober, then 15 months later released.....Anyone know of anything Moto hyped LAST October?

Hint: It rhymes with "matey-five morty"

SdA, aka SdC
post #288 of 457
G5 this year, guaranteed.
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #289 of 457
I will say that the dividing line is probably around the end of the year......it's going to be close.

SDA

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: suckfuldotagain ]</p>
post #290 of 457
Slacker is going to win . I just have a gut feeling this is the last time we will ever see a G4 as the high end tower....
post #291 of 457
Gut feeling? Could be gas.

Anyway, since this Apollo is still at .18 microns, I think we'll see a .15 micron Apollo by MWNY. Combined with the natural maturation process, I'd be willing to bet that 1.4-1.6 GHz G4 is not unreasonable by then.

I'm still very interested to know who's gotta make the next move to get DDR: Apple's mobo or Moto's chip. And since they waited so long, how about just skipping straight to 333 (166x2) DDR?

SDA
post #292 of 457
Gas... <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />

There will be a G5 this year, if not I will buy Suckfuldotcom an iPod....Oh wait, we already agreed to that.

I just think there has to be a new chip on the horizon. Especially with the release of Apollo and the fact it really doesn't support anything new, it's just faster. Apple has to increase the bus speed, move to faster RAM and make a few other overall system enhancements. Since it's not in the Apollo and their are no future G4 variations (that we're aware of) in the pipeline, I have to assume G5 (or some super top secret program no one else is aware of).

<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #293 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>Well the Motorola site says the 7XXX processor is for high performance computing, they didn't say the 74XX, denoting G4 class processos. Motorola has taken out the 7500 designation that was previously used to denote the G5 class desktop process,</strong><hr></blockquote>

Oh, there's no doubt that Apple will use G5's in the future - but not this year. Only when its clock speed pulls ahead of that of the G4 will the G5 become the standard chip for Apple - and that's not going to be until the middle of 2003.

G4's will be at 1.5GHz in September, and 2Ghz by the end of the 1st quarter of 2003. I think that will be the last iteration of G4 that Apple uses - so we're talking at the earliest Summer 2003 for G5.

And you know what? It doesn't matter. Intel is struggling to push Pentium 4 much beyond 2.2GHz, and its next generation of chips is a disaster area. I can't see Intel getting much beyond 2.8GHz by the time PowerPC reaches 2GHz+, which means the clock speed difference will be majorly shrinking - and the Mac's performance advantage will be set in stone.
post #294 of 457
intel is not struggling to push the P4 at all. The northwoods should easily clock beyond 3 GHz.
post #295 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by lineker:
<strong>And you know what? It doesn't matter. Intel is struggling to push Pentium 4 much beyond 2.2GHz, and its next generation of chips is a disaster area. I can't see Intel getting much beyond 2.8GHz by the time PowerPC reaches 2GHz+, which means the clock speed difference will be majorly shrinking - and the Mac's performance advantage will be set in stone.</strong><hr></blockquote>

PIVs can easily break the 3GHz mark and AMDs hammer series will definitely be speedy if it meets expectations.

Sorry to break it to you but the PC world's processors aren't hitting an end to their MHz push they are really only just warming up.
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
post #296 of 457
As I said before, Apple needs faster G4s for use in future portables and iMacs. Just because the G4 can make it to 1.6 Ghz doesn't mean they will wait until the G4 maxes out to release the G5s. That just doesn't make sense. What would they put in the portables and iMacs then? For example, lets say the G5 starts at 1.2 to 1.6 Ghz in new PowerMacs this summer. At that point they could put a 1 Ghz G4 in the PowerBook and iMacs. Later when the G5 gets even faster they could put faster G4s in the rest of the line. This can continue until the G4 can go no further and they switch over entirely to the G5 or perhaps by then the G6 will be out for the PowerMacs. The point is, the G4 does not have to hit its speed limit before G5s are introduced.
Stuck in an infinite loop waiting for an Apple PDA...

apple.otaku
Reply
Stuck in an infinite loop waiting for an Apple PDA...

apple.otaku
Reply
post #297 of 457
Apple has to release the G5 soon, because otherwise like aaple.oktau wrote, the G4 will be used in the new iMacs rather than the PowerMacs because introducing the 800Mhz iMac in just insane if they don't intend to use the apollo for it soon.

This is because you have to have enough head room, for the iMac to have speed bumps for around 2 years.
As well as for saying the apollo is faster in Mhz at the moment than the G5, that is just nonsense, as the apollo is based upon the G5 core (10 pipelines etc), so don't you think that the G5 is much more scalable than the G4?? Of course it is, so it wouldn't be shocking to see at least a 1.8Ghz G5 in a few months.

[ 02-01-2002: Message edited by: mattyj ]</p>
Abhor the Stereotype, respect the Individual.
1.33Ghz 15" Powerbook: 80GB HD, 1GB RAM, OSX.4.7, Soundsticks II, 320GB LaCie FW800 EXT HD, iPod 20GB 4G
Reply
Abhor the Stereotype, respect the Individual.
1.33Ghz 15" Powerbook: 80GB HD, 1GB RAM, OSX.4.7, Soundsticks II, 320GB LaCie FW800 EXT HD, iPod 20GB 4G
Reply
post #298 of 457
Historically everything points to the G5 being ready before MacWorld NY.

Motorola has been putting out host versions of their processors BEFORE microcontroller versions (7540 before 8240, etc..).

The first microcontroller based on the e500 core (G5 architecture, see: <a href="http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20010522S0055)" target="_blank">http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20010522S0055)</a> is due shortly. Given the differences between the G4 and G5, the two chips must have had very concurrent development schedules, so it is not a .18µm SOI G4 then .15µm SOI G4 before .13µm SOI G5. Those come from separate fabs running at separate paces. The G4 and G5 come from different production lines.
post #299 of 457
I guess all the G5 speculation died? No real "proof" as of late? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
post #300 of 457
July seems like a long ways away. If there is something going on (such as a G5 machine being prepped), Apple is going to work harder than they ever have to control the inforomation flow. All this speculation with only bits and pieces of information only builds the overall excitement level. Steve loves this stuff you know he does. He'll let this and other forums churn and burn right up until the event if he can. I somehow doubt they will use a disinformation tactic (ie. iWalk) this time. Just painful silence.
"Death awaits you all with big nasty pointy teeth" the mighty Tim
Reply
"Death awaits you all with big nasty pointy teeth" the mighty Tim
Reply
post #301 of 457
[quote]*l++
"Historically everything points to the G5 being ready before MacWorld NY." <hr></blockquote>

Also from EE Times
Apple debuts lamp-like iMac as consumer digital hub
By Rick Merritt

"The company also held off adopting G5 PowerPCs made in a 0.13-micron process. Those chips will sport a longer pipeline and hit speeds up to 1.4 GHz, but are not expected to be available in volume from Motorola until midyear."

<a href="http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020108S0030" target="_blank">http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020108S0030</a>

The link may not work, so go to <a href="http://WWW.eetimes.com" target="_blank">WWW.eetimes.com</a>
do a search for G5 and you'll find the article.

If the G5 will not be available until midyear, whatever that means(June/July). Will that be enough time for Apple to recieve the chips, do any final testing, and manufacture computers and announce it @ MWNY?

[ 02-06-2002: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>
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 #302 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by lineker:
<strong>G4's will be at 1.5GHz in September, and 2Ghz by the end of the 1st quarter of 2003. I think that will be the last iteration of G4 that Apple uses - so we're talking at the earliest Summer 2003 for G5.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm no engineer, but obviously you aren't either. If you talk to sources who understand the design and technologies currently being put into play by MOT, there is agreement that there is NO WAY the G4 design will reach 2 GHz. Perhaps 1.2 - 1.4 GHz, but not more without a significant redesign.

Of course if you can cite a logical reason why MOT would sink millions into redesinging an existing chip when they've already toiled on the G5, I'm all ears.

We may end up using G4's for another year yet, but that's NOT because the G4 will magically scale another 1000MHz in one year when it basically took three to go the first 1000.

Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #303 of 457
It doesn't really matter what MOTO's timetable is or what IBM or anyone else are planning technology wise. The only way we will ever see a G5 is if his steveness decides to use it. I don't think that this will happen in a hurry. Jobs is currently obsessed with the consumer market and sees the G4 as ideal for it. It is also apple's way of holding back on any gamble during lean times for the computer industry as a whole.

I think pro users are far far down apple's list - something that the likes of Adobe, Macromedia and Quark have now realised (Alias must be weeping - all that R&D).

Bu the time we get a G5 the wintel world will be at 2GHz Itanium, DDR2 et al.

Every mac user I know (and I know hundreds - we've had our own poll over email) has resisited the urge to buy the new imac or the G4s as we are waiting for the G5. Even if it doesn't come out - the rumours are so big (fuelled in many ways by apple themselves) that they will never get the kind of sales they might have expected from the current crop of QS towers.

lets face it - its the G5, not the Mhz, that are the myth.
Greatly Insane
Reply
Greatly Insane
Reply
post #304 of 457
[quote]If the G5 will not be available until midyear, whatever that means(June/July). Will that be enough time for Apple to recieve the chips, do any final testing, and manufacture computers and announce it @ MWNY?
<hr></blockquote>

I think what this means is that the G5 won't be available in quantities for sale by Motorola. But Moto can still supply Apple with prototypes of the chips so that they can design Powermacs around them. Otherwise Moto would have new CPUs all ready for sale but Apple wouldn't buy them for 6-9 months because they have to design new mobos around them...not a very efficient design strategy.

Moto can supply Apple with plenty G5s for testing purposes..in fact they could probably give Apple enough 2.4 GHz G5s for testing, but these are chips from an inefficient fab. By midyear, Moto will be pumping out G5 chips efficiently and in quantity, so the price will be reasonable.

If the reports from Architosh are to be believed, then we'll be seeing Powermac G5s soon, as the field testing phase is coming to a close.

<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-02/2002b-0201-futurg5.phtml" target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-02/2002b-0201-futurg5.phtml</a>

post #305 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by spooky:
<strong>Jobs is currently obsessed with the consumer market and sees the G4 as ideal for it.

I think pro users are far far down apple's list - something that the likes of Adobe, Macromedia and Quark have now realised (Alias must be weeping - all that R&D).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Jobs currently has the means to do something about the consumer market, which frankly was in a worse state than the PowerMacs are.

He isn't the sort of person who is open about unannounced developments so it is impossible to say how he feels towards the pro market.

From what I have seen though Apple is very aware and interested in the pro market but simply not ready to deliver.

It would be a safe assumption to assume the execs at Alias knows something you don't.
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
post #306 of 457
Spooky&gt;I think pro users are far far down apple's list

(apple's main source of revenue rates down the bottom?)

Now this is another entry on my list of moronic things uttered on rumor forums
(i can't remember all of them ad verbatim, but if you please


1) "There is no G5", often linked with "It's all up to Motorola" (or similar)

(sure, Apple's just sitting on their hands, doing nothing wrt a next generation processor.)


2) "There's no G5 soon because Apple doesn't listen."

(Apple isn't your spouse, in case you haven't noticed yet; if they can
release something to maximise revenue, believe me, they will. Corporations
are not impetuous humans [all the moto-killed-ppc-dev-out-of-spite theory
fans please take excruciatingly detailed note]; rather, they work to
please their owners, out of necessity [please, nothing about `Apple's
stock price tanking'; Apple's market cap is irrelevant).


3) The third of the existing doesn't take the form of a cutnpaste quote,
but rather the general sentiment that a desktop G5 isn't imminent because
Motorola has already announced their first Book E compliant processor will
be released in the second half of the year (usually followed by
something about `ruling out a G5 release until SF03').

Now there's a number of ways around this: pure BS (out of contractual
secrecy with Apple), semantic escapology such as the G5 Apple uses not being
from `Motorola' but instead from `Apple'; an `Apple G5', for example.

[the reasons for a desktop G5 development being conducted by Apple rather
than Motorola is obvious and has been discussed in depth already.]

&gt;Bu the time we get a G5 the wintel world will be at 2GHz Itanium, DDR2 et al.

The Itanium isn't going anywhere near 2 Ghz. The maximum clockspeed of
McKinley is 1 GHz (taken from Kins Collins' CPUs.html page -- can't find
it right now), and it's possible that the even the third in line won't be
near 2 Ghz max, I suppose.


&gt;lets face it - its the G5, not the Mhz, that are the myth.[/QB][/QUOTE]

Does this qualify as 1)? I believe it does, as (given that `G5' is the
name given to Apple's next-generation processor) it boils down to "the
G5... [is] the myth".

(Yes, you're correct, Apple's not doing anything at all with regard to
future processor development. They'd rather forsake the largest chunk of
their revenue and a large part of their installed base. Indeed, Apple
would forgo such revenues... *sarcasm off*)

All flames welcome and will be replied to in turn. Constructive opinion
also welcome.

/me steps into flame-proof suit
post #307 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by mslee:
<strong>intel is not struggling to push the P4 at all. The northwoods should easily clock beyond 3 GHz.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The 2 and 2.2GHz P4 is based on the northwood core, is it not? The fact that the best improvement in clock speed intel could get from shifting from .18 micron with Williamette to .13 micron with Northwood was a mere 10% should tell you everything about how scalable Northwood really is.

Even Intel internal roadmaps show Northwood only hitting 2.53GHz by the end of 2002 - and that's with Northwood B, rather than the current version.

And by the end of the year, G4's (yes, G4, not G5) will be at 1.5GHz (conservative estimate) and possible 2GHz (less likely, but possible). That gap is closing.

[ 02-07-2002: Message edited by: lineker ]</p>
post #308 of 457
If the pro market is so far down on Apple's list than why did they just buy Nothing Real. This is expensive high end software. I'm sure parts of it can be incorporated into consumer level software but this has "Major Final Cut Pro Upadate" written all over it if not something in addition to FCP.

Another thing. Don't go looking too hard on Moto's web site for clues. They probably wouldn't publish incorrect information but there's no rule that says they have to tell you everything that they plan to realease.
"Death awaits you all with big nasty pointy teeth" the mighty Tim
Reply
"Death awaits you all with big nasty pointy teeth" the mighty Tim
Reply
post #309 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by lineker:
<strong>
The 2 and 2.2GHz P4 is based on the northwood core, is it not? The fact that the best improvement in clock speed intel could get from shifting from .18 micron with Williamette to .13 micron with Northwood was a mere 10% should tell you everything about how scalable Northwood really is.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

They are getting a 10% increase now, on a brand new 130nm process.

That doesn't mean a lot in regard to future scaling.

The Original Athlon began shupping at 500MHz IIRC, and scaled up to 1GHz during the following years without any design change. Still, they obviously couldn't get it to clock that high right from the start.

The same is most likely true for the P4 now.

And besides, why would Intel make huge clock speed advancements at once, when it's much more economical to increase it step-wise?

Bye,
RazzFazz
post #310 of 457
Also it doesn't matter how much Northwood CAN scale, only how much Intel will LET it scale. Intel will only bump up the processors to be ahead of the competition. If by the end of the year AMD is only at 1.8GHz, then why would Intel be at 3.0GHz? They would have to update almost 100MHz every month. Intel will milk every step for as long as they can and continue to be competitive. 2.5GHz by the end of the year. I think Intel is a schizophrenic company. On one hand they have a wildly high GHz but inefficient processor called the P4 and put emphesis on more MHz= power. But they want to replace it with a low MHz design (and McKinley will scale less than the modern G4. It has a huge die size even though its on 130nm process and only 7, yes seven, pipeline stages. Very un-intel-like.). All the power to them.
post #311 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by lineker:
<strong>
The 2 and 2.2GHz P4 is based on the northwood core, is it not? The fact that the best improvement in clock speed intel could get from shifting from .18 micron with Williamette to .13 micron with Northwood was a mere 10% should tell you everything about how scalable Northwood really is.

Even Intel internal roadmaps show Northwood only hitting 2.53GHz by the end of 2002 - and that's with Northwood B, rather than the current version.

And by the end of the year, G4's (yes, G4, not G5) will be at 1.5GHz (conservative estimate) and possible 2GHz (less likely, but possible). That gap is closing.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The PIV is plenty scalable (with standard cooling overclocking to 2.6GHz isn't too hard of the Northwood chips) and will be well past 2.5GHz come 2003. If not they stand to lose substantial marketshare to AMD who will break the 3GHz mark by early 2003.

Take into account they also make more efficient chips and Intel would truly be a long way behind. That simply isn't going to happen.

Edit: I need sleep. Lots of errors to correct.

[ 02-07-2002: Message edited by: Telomar ]</p>
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
post #312 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by RazzFazz:
<strong>

They are getting a 10% increase now, on a brand new 130nm process.
</strong>

And everyone was laying into Motorola for getting a 15% instant increase moving to SOI on the 7455. 15% sure looks better than 10% in a single jump, does it not?


<strong>
That doesn't mean a lot in regard to future scaling.
</strong>

Agreed. So why are people assuming that Northwood will "easily" scale to 3GHz?

<strong>
The same is most likely true for the P4 now.

</strong>

There's no reason to suppose that P4 can/will follow the same path as Athlon. The two are very different chips, made by very different companies, with very different strengths and weaknesses.

<strong>
And besides, why would Intel make huge clock speed advancements at once, when it's much more economical to increase it step-wise?
</strong>

Because unlike in the old days, it now has a formidable competitor - Athlon - on its tail. Make no mistake, in order to keep ahead of AMD, Intel can and will scale the P4 as fast as it can.

<hr></blockquote>
post #313 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Telomar:
<strong>
The PIV is plenty scalable (with standard cooling overclocking to 2.6GHz isn't too hard of the Northwood chips) and will be well past 2.5GHz come 2003. If not they stand to lose substantial marketshare to AMD who will break the 3GHz mark by early 2003.

Edit: I need sleep. Lots of errors to correct.

[ 02-07-2002: Message edited by: Telomar ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Can you give any sources for your claim that either Intel or AMD will be beyond 3GHz by 2003?

And have a good sleep!
post #314 of 457
Someone in this thread on this page said the G4 wouls scale to 1.5Ghz in summer and 2Ghz by the end of the year...
FORGET IT
First of all 2Ghz would already require a major overhaul, most certainly 0.13 micron and deeper pipelines.
Then: Have you ever seen a PPC chip, or any other chip for that matter, scale 1000MHz in less than a year?

FORGET IT.

G-News
Matyoroy!
Reply
Matyoroy!
Reply
post #315 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by RazzFazz:
<strong>

They are getting a 10% increase now, on a brand new 130nm process.

That doesn't mean a lot in regard to future scaling.

The Original Athlon began shupping at 500MHz IIRC, and scaled up to 1GHz during the following years without any design change. Still, they obviously couldn't get it to clock that high right from the start.

The same is most likely true for the P4 now.

And besides, why would Intel make huge clock speed advancements at once, when it's much more economical to increase it step-wise?

Bye,
RazzFazz</strong><hr></blockquote>

I recall that the K7 was 500-700 MHz and the K75 550-1000 MHz, although I'm not sure as to what the differences are.
post #316 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by lineker:
<strong>Agreed. So why are people assuming that Northwood will "easily" scale to 3GHz?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Because increases like this during the life span of a processor revision have been very common in the x86 world.

[quote]<strong>
There's no reason to suppose that P4 can/will follow the same path as Athlon. The two are very different chips, made by very different companies, with very different strengths and weaknesses.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

The same has also been true for the P3, the P2 before that, and the 250nm P1.
Basically, with the exception of the PPro, any recent x86 processor has almost doubled it's clock rate during its life cycle.


[quote]<strong>
Because unlike in the old days, it now has a formidable competitor - Athlon - on its tail. Make no mistake, in order to keep ahead of AMD, Intel can and will scale the P4 as fast as it can.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

No. They will scale it just enough to stay ahead of AMD. Anything more would be both unnecessary and economically unreasonable.

Bye,
RazzFazz
post #317 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Mac Sack Black:
<strong>
I recall that the K7 was 500-700 MHz and the K75 550-1000 MHz, although I'm not sure as to what the differences are.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Wasn't the K75 the so-called Thunderbird, i.e. the chip w/ on-die cache? I seem to remember there were, at least at one point, GHz versions w/ off-die cache (clocked at 1/3 core freq. IIRC). I might be wrong, though.

EDIT: Just checked it. The first (march 2000) chip to break the GHz barrier was an Athlon w/ off-die L2 cache, i.e. the original one. The Thunderbird core was only introduced in april 2000.

Bye,
RazzFazz

[ 02-10-2002: Message edited by: RazzFazz ]</p>
post #318 of 457
Well, if I'm to believe the article on MacCentral than I will be losing my G5 bet. However I think this is just a way to get people to buy G4's and stop waiting for the G5.

I've been holding off for over a year now, and will continue to do so (I don't NEED a faster computer, I just choose to wait for my next purchase to be a G5).

Apple is like the CIA, full of mis-information about products and releases, I think we will see the G5 before years end.
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #319 of 457
Well, in the MacCentral article it said " for the coming months ". What the hell does that mean? MWNY is 5 and a half months away. We are still very early in the year. Coming months to me means 3 to 4 months. No new hardware for spring. That doesn't say anything about the middle of summer. Plus I can imagine they want to have a set hardware plan, so they can finish up OS X without the unpredictability of having to support new options.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #320 of 457
Since it doesn't seem to have been mentioned in this thread yet, I'll do it: The Register has just posted an article about G4 enhancements that are coming soon. The 7460, 7470, and 7500. These variously include a faster MPX, higher clock rates, longer pipelines, and RapidIO. The chips described could be substantial improvements over the current G4, and for that last one it wouldn't bother me if they called it a G5. This article seems in line with the recent MacCentral article, and it could explain the substantially faster test boxes that have been rumoured.

I'd buy one.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › There is no G5