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

There is no G5 - Page 9

post #321 of 457
Check out the latest article from the register


<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/24018.html" target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/24018.html</a>
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 #322 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>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.</strong><hr></blockquote>

...all of which is exactly what I've been saying, without wishing to blow my own trumpet too much!
post #323 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by lineker:
<strong>

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

And have a good sleep! </strong><hr></blockquote>

Thanks but the sleep was lousy Deadline to meet and I've been wasting time doing the wrong things *whoops*

<a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/05020208.htm" target="_blank">Future Pentiums</a>

That is roughly what I'd heard. 3GHz has been pushed back a little but it fits.

The AMD stuff comes from two sources. The first was a presentation (by AMD) from a while back that I can't find any internet sources on. It basically had AMD beginning speeds sub 3GHz and aiming for 3GHz early 2003 with the hammer. Might have been pushed back though since there have been roadmap changed since then.

The second source is just a little common sense tied in with AMDs naming scheme. They have planned a release of a super duper 4000 (ok so it won't be called a super duper but naming isn't yet decided just the rating it receives) for H1 2003 subtract 25% and you get 3GHz.

It may end up being that the 4400 or something slightly below is the 3GHz version now and it has changed since the hammer was pushed back slightly.
"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 #324 of 457
Ah, yes. I see the Register article has already made it to this thread. Where are the G5 TinkerBells now?!?!?

Just twisting the knife a little.....

SDA
post #325 of 457
This is just to distract us that the G5 is coming.
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #326 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Telomar:
<strong>

That is roughly what I'd heard. 3GHz has been pushed back a little but it fits.

The AMD stuff comes from two sources. The first was a presentation (by AMD) from a while back that I can't find any internet sources on. It basically had AMD beginning speeds sub 3GHz and aiming for 3GHz early 2003 with the hammer. Might have been pushed back though since there have been roadmap changed since then.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thanks for the link Telomar - Mike MacGee has good Intel contacts so I've no doubt that the documents he cites are authentic, although I think the company may be being somewhat optimistic. To my mind more worrying than the 3GHz clock speed is the 533MHz FSB - that's an area that Apple has to keep up with. A fast Pentium 4 - even one with a clock speed lower than 3GHz - would fly nicely with that speed FSB.

It's sure run Linux nicely. Might even be capable of running Win XP at faster-than-glacial speeds...
post #327 of 457
This <a href="http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020117S0086" target="_blank">EETimes page</a> about multiprocessing with the 8540 bodes rather well for our G5 I think. The 8540 appears to be exceedingly multi-processor friendly, so I can only assume that the G5 will be too.

Perhaps quad-processor G5s will be commonplace in a year's time. Here's hoping!

:cool:

[ 02-14-2002: Message edited by: boy_analog ]</p>
post #328 of 457
heya!

anyway this is the original SdC or SdA or whoever I was when I started this thread, and I just wanted to add this piece of news:

Stop me if you've heard this one before, but it finally happened to me!

I met a guy who allegedly knows someone at Apple and he told me that the G5 that is going into Powrmacs will be going out the door at MW Jan 2003.

Now, I know this all sounds distressingly familiar to the vague rumors that people post here constantly, and I'm not posting it as a rumor in that sense.

But I am posting it because I never thought anyone would actually ever give me a piece of insider info.

Of course, I would advise everyone to take it with a grain of salt, because I can offer no more proof than anyone else who posts a "CONFIRMED" thread, but it was just kind of amusing nonetheless.

As for who this guy is, well he was a guy who worked on the original wireless 802.whatever standard that became Airport, and I can confirm that much. Other than that, I can't confirm anything else. FWIW, he had told me about the relaese of the 1 GHz Powermacs, but it was only a few weeks before that happened and the rumor mill was already flying, so I tendd not to think much of his prediction.

Anyway, this is the first time that any reasonable (to me; YMMV) bit of insider info came my way, so I thought I'd share, especially because it bolsters my chances of winning an iPod!

Peace out, folks.

TING5
Suckfuldotwhatever, dude.

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

It's the FSB, not the proc speed that is the problem. Your fire engine isn't worth sh:t no matter how big the pump is if it uses a garden hose to put out fires. Let's at...
Reply
post #329 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by There is no g5:
<strong>heya!

anyway this is the original SdC or SdA or whoever I was when I started this thread, and I just wanted to add this piece of news:

Stop me if you've heard this one before, but it finally happened to me!

I met a guy who allegedly knows someone at Apple and he told me that the G5 that is going into Powrmacs will be going out the door at MW Jan 2003.

Now, I know this all sounds distressingly familiar to the vague rumors that people post here constantly, and I'm not posting it as a rumor in that sense.

But I am posting it because I never thought anyone would actually ever give me a piece of insider info.

Of course, I would advise everyone to take it with a grain of salt, because I can offer no more proof than anyone else who posts a "CONFIRMED" thread, but it was just kind of amusing nonetheless.

As for who this guy is, well he was a guy who worked on the original wireless 802.whatever standard that became Airport, and I can confirm that much. Other than that, I can't confirm anything else. FWIW, he had told me about the relaese of the 1 GHz Powermacs, but it was only a few weeks before that happened and the rumor mill was already flying, so I tendd not to think much of his prediction.

Anyway, this is the first time that any reasonable (to me; YMMV) bit of insider info came my way, so I thought I'd share, especially because it bolsters my chances of winning an iPod!

Peace out, folks.

TING5</strong><hr></blockquote>

There is no end to my hatred for shorthand...what does YMMV mean?
post #330 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Spart:
<strong>

There is no end to my hatred for shorthand...what does YMMV mean?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Your mileage may very.

However, I've never gotten the FWIW thing.

Little help?
The people are so happy now, their heads are caving in.
Reply
The people are so happy now, their heads are caving in.
Reply
post #331 of 457
FWIW

for what its worth....
semper ubi sub ubi
Reply
semper ubi sub ubi
Reply
post #332 of 457
If you mean this thread, very little....

Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #333 of 457
I think us mac supporters should join some of the pc forums out there and start rumors about a super-duper ultrasecret P5 (or AMD) chip coming soon with unbelievable computational power.

Payback is a b$tch...
post #334 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by sc_markt:
<strong>I think us mac supporters should join some of the pc forums out there and start rumors about a super-duper ultrasecret P5 (or AMD) chip coming soon with unbelievable computational power.

Payback is a b$tch...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, except that it would be true.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #335 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>

Yeah, except that it would be true.</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
This is not 38, this is old 97!
Reply
This is not 38, this is old 97!
Reply
post #336 of 457
Double <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> !
post #337 of 457
"Thanks for the link Telomar - Mike MacGee has good Intel contacts so I've no doubt that the documents he cites are authentic, although I think the company may be being somewhat optimistic. To my mind more worrying than the 3GHz clock speed is the 533MHz FSB - that's an area that Apple has to keep up with. A fast Pentium 4 - even one with a clock speed lower than 3GHz - would fly nicely with that speed FSB."



It's the perception that Apple is so far behind.

Even Apple's PR machine is going to have to go some to fight a 500 bus with 3 gig clock speeds.

Mind you. In using a 1.6 xp Athlon and having played on a dual 1 gig...not that much to choose tween 'em. Save thousands of pounds...

Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
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 #338 of 457
[quote] I met a guy who allegedly knows someone at Apple and he told me that the G5 that is going into Powrmacs will be going out the door at MW Jan 2003.
<hr></blockquote>

Too bad if that's true. Apple needs G5 powermacs this summer, not next year.

G5s at MWSF will only be playing the catch up game. The GHz gap will persist.
post #339 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon:
<strong>"
Mind you. In using a 1.6 xp Athlon and having played on a dual 1 gig...not that much to choose tween 'em. Save thousands of pounds...

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

Yeah, and you get to run WinXP too! Oh boy!!
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 #340 of 457
Intel releases P4@2.4GHz
<a href="http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2002q2/pentium4-2.4/index.x?pg=1" target="_blank">http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2002q2/pentium4-2.4/index.x?pg=1</a>

There is no way that Intel wont be at 3GHz by the end of this year and AMD will be close to or have released theit 64bit CPU.

And there are no G5
-uhu
Reply
-uhu
Reply
post #341 of 457
I'm pretty sure we'll see the G5 before the year is out...
"We're not gonna stop."
- Steve Jobs
Reply
"We're not gonna stop."
- Steve Jobs
Reply
post #342 of 457
Still around, still believing....

[ 04-02-2002: Message edited by: Slacker ]</p>
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #343 of 457
Read it. With a gig lead the Pentium 4 is 'barely' ahead. In terms of sitting down and looking at two monitors and seeing which is faster...I'd wager the perceptive difference is almost negligable.

Hmm. The x86 are doing a compelling job of defeating the mhz myth without Apple's help.

Yeesh. Not that big a difference between a 1.7 gig Athlon and a 2.8 overclocked Pantium 4.

What a laugh. Sure, if you're the kind of guy that does day(S) long renders you may save yourself some minutes here or there...

I can't wait until Apple releases the G5. It's gonna eat these guys alive.

I'll take a dual 1.6 gig G5 over any dual 3 Gig P4 from what I've seen so far.

Seems to me the Dual Gig G4 is holding its own for now...

But psychologically...we need that G5.

<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

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 #344 of 457
Intel seems confident they will be able to ship a 3 Ghz P4 before year end:

<a href="http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020402/20313_1.html" target="_blank">http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020402/20313_1.html</a>

"This leadership in manufacturing technology results in desktop microprocessors with the highest clock rates and performance in the industry. Intel's design and manufacturing improvements will help the company as it seeks to meet its target of shipping Pentium 4 processors at 3 GHz by year's end. "

Sure, marketing stuff. Still..

And, this May, expect to see the first P4 computers with 533 Mhz Rambus, and AMD PCs use 266 mhz DDR-sdram.

On the other hand, we got Apple. Still using a 5 y. old chip ( The G3), the majority of the mac shipped still got a 100 mhz sdram bus(!!!). He**, Apple is still selling a computer with 66 mhz bus!!!

But Apple is a very innovative company, designing round motherboards.
post #345 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by blabla:
<strong>Intel seems confident they will be able to ship a 3 Ghz P4 before year end:

<a href="http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020402/20313_1.html" target="_blank">http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020402/20313_1.html</a>

"This leadership in manufacturing technology results in desktop microprocessors with the highest clock rates and performance in the industry. Intel's design and manufacturing improvements will help the company as it seeks to meet its target of shipping Pentium 4 processors at 3 GHz by year's end. "

Sure, marketing stuff. Still..

And, this May, expect to see the first P4 computers with 533 Mhz Rambus, and AMD PCs use 266 mhz DDR-sdram.

On the other hand, we got Apple. Still using a 5 y. old chip ( The G3), the majority of the mac shipped still got a 100 mhz sdram bus(!!!). He**, Apple is still selling a computer with 66 mhz bus!!!

But Apple is a very innovative company, designing round motherboards. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually, there are AMD boards out there that can use the DDR 2700/333 MHz Bus (ASUS model A7V333, reference URL usa.asus.com/mb/socketa/a7v333/overview.htm), and there are already motherboards out to accept the 533 MHz FSB of the upcoming P4s (another ASUS product Model P4S533, reference URL usa.asus.com/mb/socket478/p4s533/overview.htm). VIA also just announced a new P4 chipset, the P4X333, that has provisions for AGP 8x, USB 2.0, and several other niceities (sp?). Sorry for the non-linked URLs, gotta figure out how to do it. Any help would be appreciated.
post #346 of 457
Yeah, Intel also said they would have the 64bit Merced CPU out in 1999 too... or was it '98?
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
"We're not gonna stop."
- Steve Jobs
Reply
"We're not gonna stop."
- Steve Jobs
Reply
post #347 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Tarbash:
<strong>Yeah, Intel also said they would have the 64bit Merced CPU out in 1999 too... or was it '98?
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

I remember something like that, not sure of the dates though. Guess we shouldn't believe the "roadmaps" of the processor manufacturers (Moto is a great example there ... huh). My earlier post is just an example that the motherboards can be out there, and the chip isn't ready (maybe the mobo has to be out there for the chip manufacturer to take action, Apple ... hope you read that last bit &lt;hint, hint&gt . The nice thing about the PC mobo is that a DDR chipset can still use PC133. And no, I'm not a PC person, just kinda "turned to the Darkside recently", to learn more about architecture / design / etc (built myself a P4/DDR system to learn). I still use my Mac primarily. The PC wasn't nearly as frustrating to build as I anticipated, but "windoes" still bites. JYD has a point, Apple has got to get off its @$$ and do something quick (like yesterday), but the solution is alot more complex than alot of us notice or give credit to (the AIM alliance, contractual obligations etc). When does the contractual obligation end for that alliance (so Apple can have the processors built by someone other than Moto)? I think that is the holdup, and that will be when we see some new equipment (or slightly before)... I hope (for Apple's Sake!)
post #348 of 457
"On the other hand, we got Apple. Still using a 5 y. old chip ( The G3), the majority of the mac shipped still got a 100 mhz sdram bus(!!!). He**, Apple is still selling a computer with 66 mhz bus!!!

But Apple is a very innovative company, designing round motherboards."



I feel your pain.

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 #349 of 457
"There is no G5"

This thread may have been much more prophetic than anyone realized.
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 #350 of 457
I have to agree. I love this thread!
post #351 of 457
I think this is a great thread no bump! I am sooo sick of reading about the G5 nonsense.
post #352 of 457
I've got an iPod riding on this thread. :eek:
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #353 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
<strong>"There is no G5"

This thread may have been much more prophetic than anyone realized.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, it may turn out that there is indeed no G5. However, I'm sure Apple will be updating the powermac line with a new processor (or next generation G4) now that the G4 is in both the low end iMac and eMac.
post #354 of 457
"However, I'm sure Apple will be updating the powermac line with a new processor (or next generation G4) now that the G4 is in both the low end iMac and eMac."

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

sorry I couldn't help myself.
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 #355 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by sc_markt:
<strong>

Well, it may turn out that there is indeed no G5. However, I'm sure Apple will be updating the powermac line with a new processor (or next generation G4) now that the G4 is in both the low end iMac and eMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, but when? My bet's on MWNY... Any takers for a date prior to that?

Steve
post #356 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
<strong>"However, I'm sure Apple will be updating the powermac line with a new processor (or next generation G4) now that the G4 is in both the low end iMac and eMac."

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

sorry I couldn't help myself. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Rickrag,

No problem. I deserved it.

I guess I should have been a little more specific. When I said next gen G4, I did not mean one that is just a faster G4 than in the iMac. I meant one that is faster and different (such as coming with RapidIO or whatever).
post #357 of 457
At this point I wouldn't necessarily be mad if the G5 didn't come out for awhile, provided Apple releases a new mobo config with ddr ram, and a really fast bus speed. Then if they stuck with the dual G4 1ghz in that new mobo, I would get one.
MacBook Pro 15" (Unibody)/2.4GHz Core 2 Duo/2 GB RAM/250GB HD/SuperDrive
iMac 20"/2 GHz Core 2 Duo/2 GB RAM/250 GB/SuperDrive
PowerBook G4 12"/1 GHz/1.25 GB RAM/60GB/Combo
iMac G3 333 MHz/96 MB...

Reply
MacBook Pro 15" (Unibody)/2.4GHz Core 2 Duo/2 GB RAM/250GB HD/SuperDrive
iMac 20"/2 GHz Core 2 Duo/2 GB RAM/250 GB/SuperDrive
PowerBook G4 12"/1 GHz/1.25 GB RAM/60GB/Combo
iMac G3 333 MHz/96 MB...

Reply
post #358 of 457
sc_markt . glad to see you have a good sense of humor, I really wish more people did. Sometimes, people take these boards much too seriously.

Here's hoping the powermacs get a significant cpu(0.13ยต process) and motherboard(DDR sdram) upgrade soon, very soon.

sssshhhhhh, be wary, wary quiet, we're hunting wabbits.
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 #359 of 457
I'm still feeling like a winner on the original bet.....

G5 in 2003 (if ever).

TING5
Suckfuldotwhatever, dude.

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

It's the FSB, not the proc speed that is the problem. Your fire engine isn't worth sh:t no matter how big the pump is if it uses a garden hose to put out fires. Let's at...
Reply
post #360 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by There is no g5:
<strong>I'm still feeling like a winner on the original bet.....

G5 in 2003 (if ever).

TING5</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes I take the same bet G5 in 2003.
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