Geek.com: "8500 processor may never arrive"
I don't know how accurate Geek.com is in regards to processor rumors but I noticed that on their G5 page, it says
"Motorola's PowerPC G5 / 8500 processor may never arrive."
Here is the link.
<a href="http://www.geek.com/procspec/apple/g5.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geek.com/procspec/apple/g5.htm</a>
I hope this site gets their information from the same people who supply Spymac with information.
"Motorola's PowerPC G5 / 8500 processor may never arrive."
Here is the link.
<a href="http://www.geek.com/procspec/apple/g5.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geek.com/procspec/apple/g5.htm</a>
I hope this site gets their information from the same people who supply Spymac with information.
Comments
1.There already is at least one version of the 8500 series - the 8540.
2. The desktop version of the 8500 class that Apple would use would be a 7500, if it follows current numbering schemes.
<strong>I don't know how accurate Geek.com is in regards to processor rumors but I noticed that on their G5 page, it says
"Motorola's PowerPC G5 / 8500 processor may never arrive."
Here is the link.
<a href="http://www.geek.com/procspec/apple/g5.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geek.com/procspec/apple/g5.htm</a>
I hope this site gets their information from the same people who supply Spymac with information.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Strange, they said that this chip will never arrive and they give a lot of precise specifications of this chip, including watt consumption, size of L1 and L2 cache, various speeds ... I mean according to this rumor, the chip is near achievement but will never be release.
He did share some interesting info in the email. If anybody is curious, I'd suggest writing an email to geek.com.
<strong>I know ....Apple's going X86(Hammer)</strong><hr></blockquote>
And your source(s) is/are??
J :cool:
<strong>I emailed geek.com about this and got a response this morning. He said he has more info to post but is waiting for approval from his source.
He did share some interesting info in the email. If anybody is curious, I'd suggest writing an email to geek.com.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay dude, you're just being cruel, plain and simple. Spit it out or PM everybody. :eek:
<strong>
And your source(s) is/are??
J :cool: </strong><hr></blockquote>
Jamie...don't be so jaded. My source is none other than my own intuition. That and 50 cents will buy you a cup of coffee
<strong>
Jamie...don't be so jaded. My source is none other than my own intuition. That and 50 cents will buy you a cup of coffee
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Happily Jobs said just this week that they not going x86 (check ThinkSecret for a great quote).
Going x86 is a dumb idea, but there's no reason why a CPU can't have a PPC instruction set but not be built by Motorola or IBM...
Catch up style G4's and Mobo at New York and probably the 'G5/7500' at San Fran' next year.
If that's the case. I'm waiting. Been waiting years...
Might as well wait the rest.
Hmmm.
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>I know ....Apple's going X86(Hammer)</strong><hr></blockquote>
It is time for a big move from apple on the prosumer side. For them to cut into microsoft's market share and to stay on top of technology this would be the move.
Imagine OS X 10.2, x86 compatable and able to run power pc apps.
low-fi
<strong>
Going x86 is a dumb idea, but there's no reason why a CPU can't have a PPC instruction set but not be built by Motorola or IBM...</strong><hr></blockquote>
I know, but try getting some of the 'I'm so cool because I pretend I'm important and know stuff' residents of these here forums to listen.
Barto
PS I think I'm going to use your post as my sig
[ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: Barto ]</p>
<strong>
Jamie...don't be so jaded. My source is none other than my own intuition. That and 50 cents will buy you a cup of coffee
</strong><hr></blockquote>
50 cents?? You can't get a decent cup of coffee for less than £1.50 over here <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
J :cool:
<strong>
It is time for a big move from apple on the prosumer side. For them to cut into microsoft's market share and to stay on top of technology this would be the move.
Imagine OS X 10.2, x86 compatable and able to run power pc apps. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Prosumer = a teenage kid that likes to play games and reads Ars.
If you're talking about Professionals, then realize that Apple is doing quite well. Most of the professional AV communities are pro-Apple. If you're talking about geeks, most of them are at least interested in Apple due to OSX, and many are pro-Apple now. Really, when you look at it, there aren't many professionals who use Windows.
Why I don't like the x86 roadmap:
- Very uncertain future
- Ugly instruction set means hell for EE's
- Poor mobile capacity
- Causes PPC group to stupidly raise pipelines, clock speeds, in order to maintain marketabiliey. Higher clock speed is not the way to go.
<strong>
Prosumer = a teenage kid that likes to play games and reads Ars.
If you're talking about Professionals, then realize that Apple is doing quite well. Most of the professional AV communities are pro-Apple. If you're talking about geeks, most of them are at least interested in Apple due to OSX, and many are pro-Apple now. Really, when you look at it, there aren't many professionals who use Windows.
Why I don't like the x86 roadmap:
- Very uncertain future
- Ugly instruction set means hell for EE's
- Poor mobile capacity
- Causes PPC group to stupidly raise pipelines, clock speeds, in order to maintain marketabiliey. Higher clock speed is not the way to go.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree, the way to go is bandwidth, multiprocessors and software that can use mp.
I've heard it said that two out of three ain't bad <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />