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

There is no G5 - Page 2

post #41 of 457
[quote]If this weren't the case, you can be sure that IBM would have been fabbing G4s long ago (and we'd have broken the GHz barrier a long time ago. Sorry Moto, but it's true...<hr></blockquote>

ibm WAS fabbing the g4. the didn't change the design though, just fabbing...heard that from an apple emp at wwdc.
post #42 of 457
I recall hearing about an IBM rep complaining that they had reliable yields of 600MHz 7400's in the lab about two years ago, and their deal with Moto didn't allow them to release them marked at speeds above what Moto was able to produce, which was 500MHz at the time. Moto was scared sh!tless about being upstaged with their own chip... Apparently IBM was projecting they could get 700MHz (IIRC) out of the 7400.
post #43 of 457
I have to concur with jimmac, tcl, Slacker, et al. The fact that Moto is saying nothing about a desktop G5 processor is meaningless. We will find out about the G5 PowerMacs the day they are released (maybe the night before ). Apple certainly has embargoed all information about it so that SJ can stun us with them. When they will arrive, I don't know. Based on reports (Architosh had one early December that was very accurate for MWSF - saying G5s for MW Tokyo), I suspect it will be sooner rather than later.

Lack of evidence does not mean lack of product. Moto is talking all around their desktop microprocessors, but not about them. There's not even a listing for desktop microprocessors on their website. There's simply this huge hole that they pretend is not there. It's obvious (to me) that they've had the Fear Of Steve put in them, and short of cattle prods and branding irons no one's going to say a peep.

I have confidence in Apple that they will rectify the current performance situation soon. Whatever else they may be, they're not stupid.
"Mathematics is the language with which God has written the Universe" - Galileo Galilei
Reply
"Mathematics is the language with which God has written the Universe" - Galileo Galilei
Reply
post #44 of 457
Thread Starter 
Slacker:

Well, all of those articles you inked to were of the variety of being old, except the geek.com article, which is not dated as to their speculation on the G5. Frankly links like that give me the heebie-jeebies; the geek.com folks don't seem the types to spread information they don't believe.

Anyway, I'm still all in.

The stakes: a iPod-priced device as of 12/31/2002.

The conditions:

-if there is an 8xxx chip based on e500 specs in an Apple computer (Powermac/Powerbook/iMac/iBook exclusively; I'm not getting suckered by something new, especially a server) in an Apple computer, at 11:59:59 on 12/31/02, you win. I don't think I'm as chip-savvy as you, so I'm going to leave it up to you to define e500; just post the definitions of e500 in your acceptance.

-if not, I win.

-if the chip is an amalgamation of 7xxx and 8xxx technologies, it's a draw.

-if something comes out of leftfield (IBM, for instance), it's a draw.

-if Motorola re-defines the e500 spec, it's a draw.

-if there is a dispute, we'll have to draw up a resolution board of AI's finest to assign a winner. The board will choose bwtween the five options above. (If we seriously need to go down this path, we can work out a process for choosing board memebers later.)

-----------

I think we'll have our clearest indication coming out of Seybold or MacWorld Tokyo; if Apple doesn't come out swinging with Apollos then, they are probably gonna skip the Apollo altogether (leaving them for the 'Books and the iMac), and suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous misfortune and wait on the G5. This would indicate they think as you do; that it's coming soon enough to suffer the wait. So, we'll probably have a good indication of who's gonna win soon enough.

This is going to be fun!

SdC
My signature irritates people. However, my cat can still jump a watermelon, and the Apollo is the next chip coming to the Powermac line. Although, at this point, I'd believe that Cyrix is the next...
Reply
My signature irritates people. However, my cat can still jump a watermelon, and the Apollo is the next chip coming to the Powermac line. Although, at this point, I'd believe that Cyrix is the next...
Reply
post #45 of 457
what I want to know is, is the proc in the imac 7450 or could it be an apollo 7460? I can't find any answers to this. the imac isn't in the sopport/specifications at apple's site and it doesn't say on the imacs G4 proc section or in it's tech specs. It could possibly be an apollo but they didn't say anything bout it.

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: G-Dog ]</p>
post #46 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by G-Dog:
<strong>what I want to know is, is the proc in the imac 7450 or could it be an apollo 7460? I can't find any answers to this. the imac isn't in the sopport/specifications at apple's site and it doesn't say on the imacs G4 proc section or in it's tech specs. It could possibly be an apollo but they didn't say anything bout it.

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: G-Dog ]</strong><hr></blockquote>


I'm pretty sure it'll be the 7440. That's a 7450 w/o L3 cache controller & tags.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #47 of 457
suckfuldotcom,

I agree and concur with what you laid out for the ground rules. Any disputes to be settled here in our forum, The People's Court, er' I mean AppleInsider.

I would add that the bet not be paid (if one of us wins) until Jan 03'. I think it only fair that if I win you not have to pay up until I would have to pay up if I lose. Guess I better start setting aside $13 per paycheck just in case (about 339 for an iPod in a year?).

The reason I used the older links was to show this is approx the right time (doesn't mean anything in the realworld though). I'm hedging my bets on Steve J lighting a fire under Moto's a$$ due to the slow ramping of the G4.

Let's not say the G5 require the e500 core itself but does contain some of the same specs. It's very hard to lay down some definate specs but let's try.

I think we can safely agree that if a 64bit varation is available it will definately be a new class G5 processor and not a modified G4.

Anyone feel free to criticize, agree with, or add to this list before we lock it in stone.

Short of a 64 bit variant let's look for things such as a new bus structure (possibly backwards compatible, but natively uses the new bus). I believe the current buses are the 60X and MPX (however I don't think they are using a full implementation of the MPX).

The true G5 (as originally posted in the older links) is supposed to have a 10 pipeline stage (help me someone if I'm wrong) and I think Apollo will only have 7 (I know I'm too lazy to verify myself right now).

Someone help me on this issue, but I believe it will have an all new FPU because the G4's isn't that spectacular?

Also look for much faster bus, DDR support, either Rapid I/O or HyperTransport (probably R I/O).

I know they could release a new G4 with a faster bus and support for new RAM but we will easily be able to tell the difference between a G4 hyped as a G5 and a true next Generation Chip. I think most of the regulars on the forum could easily settle any questions of a G4 pretending to be a G5 and the real deal. If they can't come to a consensus on a disagreement than I guess we just keep our savings and buy ourselves iPods!!!

Should make for a fun year, now that I've got something riding on a bet I don't want them to release a G5 right away and take the fun out of it. I can just picture us both sweating it out in Oct, Nov, and Dec.

Let me know what you think. Everyone else please weigh in to help us out. Should we move this to another category now? Oh yeah, sometimes I take a little time away from the rumor sites, so if you don't see me for two or three weeks don't worry I always come back.
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #48 of 457
Because I'm using The Register, Motorola, the Microprocessor Forum, and other reputable sources to assert my claim that Apollo is coming.

I don't get it. This link is to the Register-in fact they were the ones who got the G5 rumor ball rolling: <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23078.html" target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23078.html</a>

And speaking of a source that pretty much hit things spot on: <a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-11/2001a-1130-appleg5.phtml" target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-11/2001a-1130-appleg5.phtml</a>
post #49 of 457
Thread Starter 
Sounds good.

The specs I'll agree are musts:

-64 bit implementation
-10 stage pipeline

and at least some of the following

-new bus structure
-DDRRAM support
-faster bus

Anyone else wanna jump in, and give some others absolute determinations of 8xxx generation-hood?

SdC
My signature irritates people. However, my cat can still jump a watermelon, and the Apollo is the next chip coming to the Powermac line. Although, at this point, I'd believe that Cyrix is the next...
Reply
My signature irritates people. However, my cat can still jump a watermelon, and the Apollo is the next chip coming to the Powermac line. Although, at this point, I'd believe that Cyrix is the next...
Reply
post #50 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Slacker:
<strong>Should make for a fun year, now that I've got something riding on a bet I don't want them to release a G5 right away and take the fun out of it. I can just picture us both sweating it out in Oct, Nov, and Dec.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You BASTARDS! If you make us wait that long....

Hey, good luck you two. I'd just like to say that the G4 was originally a bigger project then it turned out to be. I remember it was supposed to have multiple cores.

So, when the G5 arrives, I could see it missing a big feature, like 64-bitness, or multiple cores, or something. Obviously if it's missing multiple hyped features, it's probably just a G4 in drag.

Let the games begin?
"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 #51 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by suckfuldotcom:
<strong>
Anyone else wanna jump in, and give some others absolute determinations of 8xxx generation-hood?

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Don't you guys have to spit-shake now or something?
post #52 of 457
G5 powermacs before MWNY.

Current powermacs are a joke, Apple knows it, and they didn't even touch them at this expo. They will be updated soon for sure.

The question is, do they get the Apollo or the G5.

Since this expo was for consumer products, (iBook, iMac), this suggests that the next event will be for "professional" products, i.e., the Titanium and the Powermacs.

The titanium will get the Apollo G4, running nice and cool without draining too much juice.

The Powermacs will get the G5, clocked to insane speeds, and generating enough heat for stir fry.

Case? Expect the case to carry over, but with some minor changes. Apple will not add another drive expansion bay until their Firewire patent expires. Until then, the El Capitan case is primo--no reason to change it.

So why not Apollo in the Powermacs? Because

1. The Apollo won't clock beyond 1.2 GHz or so. That's nowhere near enough speed for the Powermacs to remain competitive. Jobs said that Apple was going to close the MHz gap in 2001...well they didn't, because G5 development lagged behind schedule. But very soon, Apple will live up to Jobs' promise of closing the MHz gap. Note that 1.2 GHz would not close the MHz gap, it would merely maintain the gap, with Powermacs clocked to roughly half the MHz of Craptel boxes. But a 1.4-1.6 G5 powermac, that would narrow the Mhz gap significantly. And of course, the performance gap would remain, albeit in a reversed state.

2. The iMac now is powered by a G4. Yes, for almost a year, the imac and powermacs both used G3 processors. However, this was before the current product matrix and its concrete castes of consumer and pro products. Furthermore, the G3 iMac was clocked lower than the G3 powermacs, but the G4 iMac is clocked as fast as a high end powermac. Jobs likes to clearly differentiate the consumer and pro products based on CPU, he's very proud of his product matrix. For example, consider the effort put into making the Powerbook a G4 model. A G3 powerbook wouldn't fit in the matrix. Thus, the product matrix is currently unbalanced, but it will not remain so for long. A Powermac G5 will bring balance to the force, er, product matrix, and all will be well again.

3. The reports from MOSR and the Register could be total BS. However, it's difficult to dismiss the Archintosh report of sealed powermacs running at dizzying speeds that could not be explained my a modest MHz speed bump. Maybe this could just be the result of 1.2 GHz Apollo G4s with 266 MHz bus and DDR RAM, but I think it makes more sense that these sealed boxes were in fact G5s, clocked to what the rumor sites reported, about 1.6 GHz. These boxes have been in testing for about 5-6 months now.

4. If the register is correct, then the G5 is being fabbed right now and Apple is stockpiling enough chips to meet demand for G5 powermacs. Release of these powermacs is thus imminent. In the event of a serious production bug, MWNY is the latest that we will see these bitchin' new Macs.

5. The G5 has been in development for a long-ass time, longer than the Apollo G4. As soon as it became apparent that the G4 was poorly designed and would not scale readily, extreme measures were taken by Apple. The decision was not to bang their heads against the wall on G4 development, but to begin work on the G5 in parallel with G4 work. So we are seeing the fruits of G4 development, with several new versions of the chip that finally exceed the orginal 7400 chip's clockspeed. However, aside from one embedded chip, the G5 has been shrouded in mystery, and is possibly Apple's best-kept secret. Notice that Motorola used to discuss the G5 when it was a FUTURE chip, as in, so far away that discussing it didn't mean squat for any new Apple products. Now that the G5 is ready for Powermacs, Moto's tune has changed, and we have heard nothing from them about the G5 for a very long time. This is because, as soon as the G5 started testing, Apple, aka Steve Jobs, slammed an iron curtain around the G5 project. Expect that curtain to fall real soon.

There's plenty more reasons to expect G5 Powermacs soon, but I'm tired. Suffice to say that the future is bright, if the Powermac G5 is here soon, and Steve Jobs knows it. And he was one happy dude at MWSF!

So bookmark this thread, because you'll see that I'm right and everyone else is CRAZY!

G5 by MWNY, or it's a bust: Apple is doomed without the G5, if I'm wrong about the CPU then sell all shares of Apple stock and sink the money into a new Wintel system...otherwise your mac will be a dinosaur within three years.

Ha! I should start my own rumor site, call it The Junkyard! All the hits, ads, and my crystal ball predictions would turn me into a rich coke-snortin', ho beatin' DAWG!!! I'd have a whole "farm" of Powermacs, but they wouldn't be for rendering, they would be for porn: a "Porn Farm". Mac sluts would pay good money just to get a chance to suck on my big...oh, well it's getting late, I'd better hit the sack.

More news for the Junkyard coming soon...
post #53 of 457
Hello, just wanted to say that the G5 does exist. ATAT ( <a href="http://www.appleturns.com" target="_blank">http://www.appleturns.com</A> ) had an interesting article a while back about some incontestible evidence of the existence of the G5 processor. It links to a page which, to this date, still warns of VueScan's incompatibility with the new chip ( <a href="http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html" target="_blank">http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html</A> ). This has been up for a fairly long time and I don't think it is a joke... But if it isn't a joke then where are the G5s? Well I am sure than you guys have all heard of the generic-looking test boxes (sealed to prevent tampering) that are supposed to contain G5 processors. These machines were supposedly sent out to a few other companies. If you look around on The Register ( <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk" target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk</A> ) you can find several articles about the G5 and the 1Ghz (Sahara?) G3. It is one of the G5 articles ( <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/22677.html" target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/22677.html</A> ) that is most interesting, though. It tells of some of the alleged G5 boxes being used by Adobe, and outperforming the P4. Of course Adobe makes image editing software and those images have to come from somewhere. If Adobe is using OS X (which they probably are, and taking their sweet time on PS X) they would want a good scanning program to get images with excellent color, good resolution and compatibility with the high-end scanners that I am sure they have. They might try to get a little piece of software called VueScan. Sadly, they wouldn't be able to get the demo to work on their G5, as mentioned on the viewscan site ( <a href="http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html" target="_blank">http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html</A> ). All to say that it seems to me at least that the G5 test boxes are out there and running, and that Adobe (or someone doing graphics that requires a scanner) has some of them. If this is the case then the G5 is a lot closer to production than some people *cough*suckfuldotcom*cough* seem to think. I would say that there will be a new Power Mac G5 definitely before 2003, possibly in the summer of 2002. Which will mean the end, finally, of the G3, and Apple's work with IBM. But that's another story.

Sayyad

[ 01-10-2002: Message edited by: Beige G3... ]</p>
"The box said Windoze 95 or better, so I bought a Mac"
Reply
"The box said Windoze 95 or better, so I bought a Mac"
Reply
post #54 of 457
some of my thoughts:

- the g5 apple will use will probably be a 64 bit processor. development of the g5 started over two years ago (as far as i know), with the ia64 architecture in mind.

- i don't think the G5 will support both rapid io and hypertransport, as this doesn't make much sense.

- the fact that the g4 now offers much lower clock speeds then intel/amd cpus does not mean that the g5 won't offer much higher clock speeds. the g4 cannot be clocked very high because of it's pipeline design, but the g5 pipeline has probably been designed with speed in mind.

- risc processors have always been faster than cisc processors, in terms of clock speed and performance. this only changed within the last few years. there are financial reasons (larger market share for intel/amd compared to alpha, sparc, mips,..., ) for this as well as technological reasons (cisc cpus now use a risc core an can be clocked as high as common risc cpus).

- the powerpc architecture can offer the same performance than the x86 architecture using only half the number of logic transistors.

- the g5 is definately behind schedule, i'm sure it was originally intended to be available in 2000 already. i think this is due to the fact that more engineers were needed to work on the g4 design. the 7450 featured a complete redesign of the pipeline (from 4 to 7 stages). another point is that the g4 fiasco may have lead to a redesign of the g5 core in 1999/2000.

- i hope that most engineers are now working on the g5. therefore i don't think the 7460 (apollo) will have new features except what has already been said, like soi, 0.13 micron and a larger internal bus.

- if the next powermacs will use apollo we will probably not see a new motherboard will new features. i even don't think apollo will support ddr. as i already said, i hope most engineers are working on the g5, if apple introduces a totally new motherboard with apollo this would be a sign that the g5 would be far away.
post #55 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by suckfuldotcom:
<strong>Sounds good.

The specs I'll agree are musts:

-64 bit implementation
-10 stage pipeline

and at least some of the following

-new bus structure
-DDRRAM support
-faster bus

Anyone else wanna jump in, and give some others absolute determinations of 8xxx generation-hood?

SdC</strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't think I can agree with the must be 64bit chip. If I'm not mistaken they said both 32 and 64 bit flavors. What I meant was if it was 64 bit we would know for sure that it was G5, but by being a 32 bit would not mean it was or wasn't. If it's 32 bit it would really depend on what's in it to know if it's G5 or G4.

Mot's roadmap says for the G5
32 & 64 bit products, backwards compatibility
Extensible architecture
New Pipeline
New Bus topology, Rapid I/O

What if it's more than 10 stage pipeline? <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />

I would agree to your last post, minus the must be 64 bit.
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #56 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Beige G3...:
<strong>It links to a page which, to this date, still warns of VueScan's incompatibility with the new chip ( <a href="http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html" target="_blank">http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html</a> ). This has been up for a fairly long time and I don't think it is a joke... </strong><hr></blockquote>

Oh please, don't bring up the stupid comment on VueScan's page. That guy has a chip on his shoulder about Apple, and posting something like that is exactly the kind of thing he would do. They probably did not give him a prototype and he's bitter about it, so he has just posted that message because he can't test against the machine he only knows about due to the same rumours the rest of us read. Everybody knows that something called the G5 is coming eventually, so anybody could put up a oneliner on their webpage that says it won't work with the G5.

I'll go do that right now...


WARNING: this page may not be viewable or fully compatible with Macintoshes based on the G5 processor.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #57 of 457
Despite junkyard's colorful view of reality I do agree with the idea that ( even though I don't know or have proof ) the G5 is coming soon. Call it a gut feeling.
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 #58 of 457
I don't understand why some people seem the think that the current QS case matches the new pro mouse and keyboard. It doesn't. The mouse and keyboard are now white, the case needs to be changed to match, maybe something as simple as changing the sides from lt grey/silver to white, but it will be changed. I can't imgine the design intelect that Ives has would allow a QS case to ship with a white keyboard and mouse.
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
post #59 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>I don't understand why some people seem the think that the current QS case matches the new pro mouse and keyboard. It doesn't. The mouse and keyboard are now white, the case needs to be changed to match, maybe something as simple as changing the sides from lt grey/silver to white, but it will be changed. I can't imgine the design intelect that Ives has would allow a QS case to ship with a white keyboard and mouse.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Are you sure that the white keyboard isn't just shipping with the iMac? The pages for pro mouse and keyboard still show the usual ones. It looks to me like they just modified the two to match the imac, but it doesn't really look too good, more like a quick fix. I would expect a redesigned keyboard even if the Power Mac went white. In other words, I see no indication that the keyboard and mouse shipping with the QS are white, and in fact it appears to be the opposite.
post #60 of 457
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Slacker:
<strong>

I don't think I can agree with the must be 64bit chip. If I'm not mistaken they said both 32 and 64 bit flavors. What I meant was if it was 64 bit we would know for sure that it was G5, but by being a 32 bit would not mean it was or wasn't. If it's 32 bit it would really depend on what's in it to know if it's G5 or G4.

Mot's roadmap says for the G5
32 & 64 bit products, backwards compatibility
Extensible architecture
New Pipeline
New Bus topology, Rapid I/O

What if it's more than 10 stage pipeline? <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />

I would agree to your last post, minus the must be 64 bit.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Ok, so the standards for 8xxx-ness are:

-10+ stage pipeline

and at least some of the following:

-64 bit implementation w/32 bit backwards compatibility
-new bus topology
-DDRRAM support
-faster bus
-extensible architecture

How many is 'some'? I'm gonna say it should be at least 4 of them, just because the must column is so short.

Whaddya think?

SdC
My signature irritates people. However, my cat can still jump a watermelon, and the Apollo is the next chip coming to the Powermac line. Although, at this point, I'd believe that Cyrix is the next...
Reply
My signature irritates people. However, my cat can still jump a watermelon, and the Apollo is the next chip coming to the Powermac line. Although, at this point, I'd believe that Cyrix is the next...
Reply
post #61 of 457
In fact I think the whole 10 stage pipeline thing may be underestimeted. Before the MOSR and Register reports came out (doubious at best) I heard reliable quotes from other sources (like eetimes and other Motorola insiders) that it (the G5) was supposed to work on a 14 stage pipeline. 2 more than the Athlon. Twice that of the 7450. With SOI, 130nm process, 14 stager, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the G5 was TWICE the MHz of the 866MHz G4... That's over 1.7GHz. At launch.
post #62 of 457
Keep hope alive!
post #63 of 457
Yeah, but isn't there an inherent short-coming to making processors that use longer pipelines (a la the MHz myth animation thing Jobs did last July)? That is, with the shorter pipelines, current G4 chips greatly outpace Intel and AMD chips at similar clock speeds (and even moderately higher clock speeds), because they use much longer pipelines. So if we go in that direction with the G5, aren't we basically shooting ourselves int he foot...creating faster clock speeds at the expense of real-world performance?

Someone help me with this one because i thought I read that the Itanium thing from Intel is going in the reverse direction...lower clock speeds, but shorter pipeline and therefore better performance. Why would we then go in the opposite direction? Seems Intel is playing into our hands by reducing the focus on clock-speed...so why not take advantage of that fact?

[ 01-10-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #64 of 457
Sure sounds good enough for me. No matter what happens (if something is released as a G5), we'll start a thread "Is this really a new class of chip or a G4 pretending to be a G5" and get the help of our fellow gossip hounds here. I can't hold you to your word, and you can't hold me to mine. One of us could always disagree so I think we let the EXPERTS here that have knowledge of chips be the deciders.

Tomorrow is Payday, I'm setting aside that 1st $13.
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #65 of 457
Yeah, but isn't there an inherent short-coming to making processors that use longer pipelines (a la the MHz myth animation thing Jobs did last July)? That is, with the shorter pipelines, current G4 chips greatly outpace Intel and AMD chips at similar clock speeds (and even moderately higher clock speeds), because they use much longer pipelines. So if we go in that direction with the G5, aren't we basically shooting ourselves int he foot...creating faster clock speeds at the expense of real-world performance?

This is true... to a point. But the G5 compensates by adding a bigger cache, faster bus, and more execution units and also by processing more per cycle. Look at it this way: you give some you lose some. I think over all the G5 will be at almost parity with the G4 when it comes to MHz for MHz processing power. The G5 will just have the high Mhz advantage.
post #66 of 457
When you say do more per cycle, do you mean in the sense of processing data in 64 bit chunks, or something else?
Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #67 of 457
The long vs short pipeline has to do with "branch prediction". That's when the code hits a branch in the code and has to do one of two things based on the out come of an "if" statement for example.

The CPU tries to guss which branch it will take and load it up for the pipeline. It has to guess because it may be waiting on the result of a proceding instrcution in the pipeline. If it guesses right then no problem. If it's wrong then it had to clear the pipe and load up the other branch. Longer pipes take longer to clear and load.

Intel overcomes that with fancy ass "branch prediction units" BPU that are better than most at gussing the correct branch. Of course that uses up more space on the CPU and cost more power and is larger and not very RISC like.

Apple/Mot/IBM deal with it by having shorter pipes.

[ 01-10-2002: Message edited by: Scott H. ]</p>
post #68 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Moogs ?:
<strong>When you say do more per cycle, do you mean in the sense of processing data in 64 bit chunks, or something else?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Think of washing dishes: You could have a 1-stage "pipeline," in which the entire process of washing a dish were done by one person in one sink. Contrast that with a 3 stage pipeline, where one person washed, one person rinsed, and one person dried. Each person would be doing (roughly) one third the work, and dishes could be washed (roughly) three times faster, because a new dish could be introduced into the pipeline in the time it took to complete one of the three tasks.

That metaphor doesn't work apart from illustrating what's meant by "doing more per cycle" - for instance, dishwashers will rarely run across a conditional branch.
"...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 #69 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>
That metaphor doesn't work apart from illustrating what's meant by "doing more per cycle" - for instance, dishwashers will rarely run across a conditional branch. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Well? Just write on something "If this is a cup dry the blue plate next." When the next thing is a fork the toss the fork and whatever the person washing has (lets say a spoon) in the trash. The only way to do that is to pass them down to the dryer. The the washer has to grab the blue plate and the rinser and dryer sit there and do nothing.

[ 01-10-2002: Message edited by: Scott H. ]</p>
post #70 of 457
I think I follow what you two are saying. Sorta. So what then is the biggest reason for increasing the number of pipeline stages, beyond just clock speed? I mean, are we asking this processor to do so much more than the G4, that it *requires* more stages, or are we just trying to be good marketers?
Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #71 of 457
AMD plans to release the Athlon "Hammer" in late 2002 (or early 2003). They say it will reach 1400 SpecInt2000 @ 2ghz - twice as fast as the current P4. Intel will probably have a 3ghz Pentium by then.

The (rumored) G5 specs are really great now, but will they still be up to date when the chip is finally shipping???
post #72 of 457
post #73 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by giant:
<strong>

Are you sure that the white keyboard isn't just shipping with the iMac? The pages for pro mouse and keyboard still show the usual ones. It looks to me like they just modified the two to match the imac, but it doesn't really look too good, more like a quick fix. I would expect a redesigned keyboard even if the Power Mac went white. In other words, I see no indication that the keyboard and mouse shipping with the QS are white, and in fact it appears to be the opposite.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I reach my conclusions based on the fact that Apple has never shipped 2 different sets of keyboard and mouse. If they did or have, then yes, I can see the old style black/clear plastic remaining. But, because they have never had 2 sets, I think the current black/clear plastic is done and we will see a case to match the white keyboard & mouse.
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
post #74 of 457
post #75 of 457
uhh.

how about 5 different colors?

I dont see that a couple interchangable plastic parts and a whole lotta keys are much more complex that several interchangable parts in 5 different translucent colored plastics.

I'm betting that the new PowerMac is gonna be pretty badass looking.

Chromy dark, dark cloudy plastics to match THE KEYBOARD of all things.

I hope.


HAL9000, here we come.
post #76 of 457
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Slacker:
<strong>Sure sounds good enough for me. No matter what happens (if something is released as a G5), we'll start a thread "Is this really a new class of chip or a G4 pretending to be a G5" and get the help of our fellow gossip hounds here. I can't hold you to your word, and you can't hold me to mine. One of us could always disagree so I think we let the EXPERTS here that have knowledge of chips be the deciders.

Tomorrow is Payday, I'm setting aside that 1st $13.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sounds like we're on. I'm putting a couple of bucks away even as we speak.....Now where is that damn shoe box.....

SdC
My signature irritates people. However, my cat can still jump a watermelon, and the Apollo is the next chip coming to the Powermac line. Although, at this point, I'd believe that Cyrix is the next...
Reply
My signature irritates people. However, my cat can still jump a watermelon, and the Apollo is the next chip coming to the Powermac line. Although, at this point, I'd believe that Cyrix is the next...
Reply
post #77 of 457
It's officially a bet now....

shoe box is my vegas money, maybe I can stuff the money in my iomega zip 250, I never put disks in the damn thing anyway.
I'm not really here.
Reply
I'm not really here.
Reply
post #78 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>
I reach my conclusions based on the fact that Apple has never shipped 2 different sets of keyboard and mouse. If they did or have, then yes, I can see the old style black/clear plastic remaining. But, because they have never had 2 sets, I think the current black/clear plastic is done and we will see a case to match the white keyboard & mouse.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well either your memory is short, or you are too young, or you weren't paying attention in '89 through '94 or so. The Apple Standard and Apple Extended keyboards were both available. I wish this was still the case because the standard keyboards are too small for me.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #79 of 457
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>

Well either your memory is short, or you are too young, or you weren't paying attention in '89 through '94 or so. The Apple Standard and Apple Extended keyboards were both available. I wish this was still the case because the standard keyboards are too small for me.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, I am niether that young nor is my memory that short, simply my mac history has a gap during that period. I learned on a mac in HS about 88-89 and then didn't touch a computer until 97 or so. So, I had no idea that had offered 2 verisons of keyboards. OF course I notice you didn't mention the mouse. So, I am still partly right
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
post #80 of 457
Is not the Apollo Chip for the NeXT Ti?So with
Apple Engineers working on the 8500 chip...awhile now.It should be ready.They have the Technology,they will rebuild a Powerful WorkStation.It has to look different to differentiate it from the QuickSilver.It will probably be short and wide...like an oven of yesteryear.The hype about the G-5 is all over the news and the web.The first revision of the chip should be out in less than three months.I will probably be White.Sherwin-Williams probably gave Apple a contractors discount price.Lets all make a toast to the NeXT PowerMac.Its coming....
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