What about the portables?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wouldn't expect that anytime soon. The main considerations why are cost and heat. Heck, I would be happy to see these chips at the end of next summer.
Interestingly, I seem to recall that pcWeek said that the chip was Celeron sized. This would imply a small die size which might make portables somewhat more possible.
Taken off the roadmap, NMR reporting that Apple pulled out, and the 85xx being produced at the best chip plants instead of Motorola's high-end (G4) CPU...
x86 Macs? Not low end. x86 chips are more expensive than PowerPC chips. The only possible use is in business machines (where businesses want the option of running windows). Possibly an IBM partnership
However, my source has said that Mac OS X x86 is a back-up plan. The people in charge at Apple only wants ONE Macintosh platform operating at any one time. Although there is a faction that wants the whole computing world to be able to run X, but they're not in charge.
If Apple starts buying IBM chips (possibly other products) for its entire line, then IBM benifits if Apple gains market share, then it's in IBM's interest to switch its business customers to Macs.
This is your dreamlist? Four grands plus for a GPUL?? Come on, like that the great magic GPUL could never measure with cheap, cheap P4/4GHz for some hundred bucks a score...
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> Quoting IBM, the GPUL is addressed to consumers, workstations and low-end servers -- so $4k+ is surely not in the cards! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
[quote] This is your dreamlist? Four grands plus for a GPUL?? Come on, like that the great magic GPUL could never measure with cheap, cheap P4/4GHz for some hundred bucks a score...
Quoting IBM, the GPUL is addressed to consumers, workstations and low-end servers -- so $4k+ is surely not in the cards! <hr></blockquote>
I think I'd venture to say that the GPUL would enter at 2ghz and would SMASH a P4 4ghz.
Dual 1.6-1.8Ghz G4 with full DDR Busses should keep the midrange competitive enough.
[jackass mode] LOCK this thread already! There's already a 50 page thread on the EXACT same topic on pages 33-42 inclusive! WTF, why don't you go read those 50 pages and then write a reply based on the background text in that thread? ARe you stoopid? Why can't you read? HUH! Mods, LOCK THIS THREAD!!! [/jackass mode]
GPUL doesn't excite me one bit, you know why? Because it won't be out for over a year and a half! By that time the GPUL may be just enough to keep up with Intel's performance. Sure if it debuted at MWSF2003 it might be something to write home about, but 2004? Who cares?
If Apple has to limp along on the G4 for another year and a half, I hate to think of what will happen. The G4 already get's slaughtered by x86 on any computationally intensive tasks, and Intel/AMD aren't STAGNATING at 1.25 GHz. So if we're lucky, Motorola MIGHT give Apple 1.5 GHz sometime in the next year, on the same damn 166 MHz FSB.
If the GPUL isn't ready sooner than this article is predicting, I fear Apple will lose significant market share in the very niches they are courting: multimedia and graphics, 3d animation, etc.
Now here's what I don't understand...perhaps someone with more tech knowledge can answer it. Why will it take IBM so damn long to get their sh!t together on the GPUL? The fab is up and running, they are manufacturing test CPUs that Apple is using to run OS X, so what is the holdup? Why is it going to take a year to go from working prototypes to full scale production?
[quote] Now here's what I don't understand...perhaps someone with more tech knowledge can answer it. Why will it take IBM so damn long to get their sh!t together on the GPUL? The fab is up and running, they are manufacturing test CPUs that Apple is using to run OS X, so what is the holdup? Why is it going to take a year to go from working prototypes to full scale production? <hr></blockquote>
Come to think about 2003/2004... Whaddayathink about this:
The GPUL will step in for future PowerMacs (or new workstations), we all agree on that. But, then Apple will still have a dog-slow G3 in its best-selling portable -- the iBook -- plus there will remain relatively (compared to GPUL) slow G4s in PowerBooks and iMacs. So Apple will need a second, cheaper, cooler and less power-demanding processor for its consumer line. That could be the gap for Motorola's alledgedly upcoming G5. And, of course, Apple can draw a clear line between consumer and pro hardware, naming the GPUL "G6" and the Mot-proc "G5" (just like it was with "G3" and "G4" products until the introduction of the G4 iMac in early 2002).
On the long run (until late 2004), my estimated products list based on the knowledge we have up to now looks like this:
* server
XServe II -- GPUL
* desktop
PowerMac -- GPUL
iMac -- G5
eMac -- G4 or G5
* portable
PowerBook -- G5
iBook -- G4
* super cheap sub-500$ mac (edu/public)
iCube (or anything else like that; you get the idea) -- G4
What would be best case scenario to me would be have moto's new processor in the powermacs at the beginning of the year (2003) and transistion the rest of the products (iBook, iMac, eMac) to the apollo G4's for the remainder of the year. Beginning of 2004, put the GPUL's from IBM that are now available at that point into the Powermacs, and put moto's G5 into the rest of the product (TiBook would get it ahead of the rest of course). 1 year transission for the intro of moto's G5 to get all the way down to the bottom of the rope and have a new Processor to play with in the powermac. :eek:
<strong>What would be best case scenario to me would be have moto's new processor in the powermacs at the beginning of the year (2003) and transistion the rest of the products (iBook, iMac, eMac) to the apollo G4's for the remainder of the year. Beginning of 2004, put the GPUL's from IBM that are now available at that point into the Powermacs, and put moto's G5 into the rest of the product (TiBook would get it ahead of the rest of course). 1 year transission for the intro of moto's G5 to get all the way down to the bottom of the rope and have a new Processor to play with in the powermac. :eek: </strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly! I fully agree with that... And keep an extremely cheap G4 in the shells for the kids...
<strong>I'm pretty sure the 7500 (G5) was cancelled.
Barto</strong><hr></blockquote>
so what does eWEEK mean with "Meanwhile, sources said, the long-awaited PowerPC G5 CPU from Motorola is likely to break cover perhaps as soon as early 2003. The G5, according to published product road maps from Motorola, should be available as 32- and 64-bit products with backward compatibility"?
is this moto's 85xx nobody expects or want anymore?
[quote] Apple and IBM are also tailoring the chip for a new high-frequency, point-to-point Mac bus dubbed ApplePI, short for Apple Processor Interconnect. According to sources, the companies describe ApplePI as "a replacement for the MaxBus used on current Apple systems. ApplePI is used to connect high-performance PowerPC processors to memory and high-speed I/O devices."
<hr></blockquote>
Hmmmm Point to Point Bus just like AMD. Doesn't this Guarantee Bandwidth for each Processor to main memory? With the gonzo bandwidth of GP-UL Quad machines can't be too far down the road. I honestly think that you will see some High End workstations with Quadro cards in these boxen.
I've wondered why Apple hasn't gotten the attention of High End card manf. Now i'm thinking that a full court press is going to happen behind the seems to being in Nvidia or ATI and possibly another for some nice powerful Display action.
Comments
<strong>
What about the portables?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wouldn't expect that anytime soon. The main considerations why are cost and heat. Heck, I would be happy to see these chips at the end of next summer.
Interestingly, I seem to recall that pcWeek said that the chip was Celeron sized. This would imply a small die size which might make portables somewhat more possible.
Taken off the roadmap, NMR reporting that Apple pulled out, and the 85xx being produced at the best chip plants instead of Motorola's high-end (G4) CPU...
x86 Macs? Not low end. x86 chips are more expensive than PowerPC chips. The only possible use is in business machines (where businesses want the option of running windows). Possibly an IBM partnership
However, my source has said that Mac OS X x86 is a back-up plan. The people in charge at Apple only wants ONE Macintosh platform operating at any one time. Although there is a faction that wants the whole computing world to be able to run X, but they're not in charge.
If Apple starts buying IBM chips (possibly other products) for its entire line, then IBM benifits if Apple gains market share, then it's in IBM's interest to switch its business customers to Macs.
I see what's going on!
Barto
<strong>Brother. Apple is not going to make a x86 Mac. Not going to happen. Why do you people believe in that magical x86 crap. Gawd.
Here's my rough dream list of what I see at the end of the 2003 year or early 2004.
$499-$799 1.0Ghz G4 Cube
$999-$1499 1.25Ghz G4 eMac
$1099-$1999 1.5Ghz G4 iMac
$1499-$2999 2x 1.8Ghz G4 PowerMac
$2999-$3999 2x 1.8Ghz G4 Xserve
$3999-$5999 Dual-Core 1x 1.8Ghz GPUL PowerMac
$5999-$7999 Quad-Core 1x 1.8Ghz GPUL PowerMac
$4999-$6999 Dual-Core 1x 1.8Ghz GPUL Xserve
$6999-$8999 Quad-Core 1x 1.8Ghz GPUL Xserve</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is your dreamlist? Four grands plus for a GPUL?? Come on, like that the great magic GPUL could never measure with cheap, cheap P4/4GHz for some hundred bucks a score...
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> Quoting IBM, the GPUL is addressed to consumers, workstations and low-end servers -- so $4k+ is surely not in the cards! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
Quoting IBM, the GPUL is addressed to consumers, workstations and low-end servers -- so $4k+ is surely not in the cards! <hr></blockquote>
I think I'd venture to say that the GPUL would enter at 2ghz and would SMASH a P4 4ghz.
Dual 1.6-1.8Ghz G4 with full DDR Busses should keep the midrange competitive enough.
GPUL doesn't excite me one bit, you know why? Because it won't be out for over a year and a half! By that time the GPUL may be just enough to keep up with Intel's performance. Sure if it debuted at MWSF2003 it might be something to write home about, but 2004? Who cares?
If Apple has to limp along on the G4 for another year and a half, I hate to think of what will happen. The G4 already get's slaughtered by x86 on any computationally intensive tasks, and Intel/AMD aren't STAGNATING at 1.25 GHz. So if we're lucky, Motorola MIGHT give Apple 1.5 GHz sometime in the next year, on the same damn 166 MHz FSB.
If the GPUL isn't ready sooner than this article is predicting, I fear Apple will lose significant market share in the very niches they are courting: multimedia and graphics, 3d animation, etc.
Now here's what I don't understand...perhaps someone with more tech knowledge can answer it. Why will it take IBM so damn long to get their sh!t together on the GPUL? The fab is up and running, they are manufacturing test CPUs that Apple is using to run OS X, so what is the holdup? Why is it going to take a year to go from working prototypes to full scale production?
Oct 15 Kemosabe ...Oct 15
The GPUL will step in for future PowerMacs (or new workstations), we all agree on that. But, then Apple will still have a dog-slow G3 in its best-selling portable -- the iBook -- plus there will remain relatively (compared to GPUL) slow G4s in PowerBooks and iMacs. So Apple will need a second, cheaper, cooler and less power-demanding processor for its consumer line. That could be the gap for Motorola's alledgedly upcoming G5. And, of course, Apple can draw a clear line between consumer and pro hardware, naming the GPUL "G6" and the Mot-proc "G5" (just like it was with "G3" and "G4" products until the introduction of the G4 iMac in early 2002).
On the long run (until late 2004), my estimated products list based on the knowledge we have up to now looks like this:
* server
XServe II -- GPUL
* desktop
PowerMac -- GPUL
iMac -- G5
eMac -- G4 or G5
* portable
PowerBook -- G5
iBook -- G4
* super cheap sub-500$ mac (edu/public)
iCube (or anything else like that; you get the idea) -- G4
<strong>What would be best case scenario to me would be have moto's new processor in the powermacs at the beginning of the year (2003) and transistion the rest of the products (iBook, iMac, eMac) to the apollo G4's for the remainder of the year. Beginning of 2004, put the GPUL's from IBM that are now available at that point into the Powermacs, and put moto's G5 into the rest of the product (TiBook would get it ahead of the rest of course). 1 year transission for the intro of moto's G5 to get all the way down to the bottom of the rope and have a new Processor to play with in the powermac. :eek: </strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly! I fully agree with that... And keep an extremely cheap G4 in the shells for the kids...
<strong>I'm pretty sure the 7500 (G5) was cancelled.
Barto</strong><hr></blockquote>
so what does eWEEK mean with "Meanwhile, sources said, the long-awaited PowerPC G5 CPU from Motorola is likely to break cover perhaps as soon as early 2003. The G5, according to published product road maps from Motorola, should be available as 32- and 64-bit products with backward compatibility"?
is this moto's 85xx nobody expects or want anymore?
i see we have two threats about the same eWEEK article... pretty confusing.
i think Algol helped me out a little in the "Will Apple's G5 come from IBM?" thread
Junior Member
Posts: 4
That works for me man! I like that.
<hr></blockquote>
Hmmmm Point to Point Bus just like AMD. Doesn't this Guarantee Bandwidth for each Processor to main memory? With the gonzo bandwidth of GP-UL Quad machines can't be too far down the road. I honestly think that you will see some High End workstations with Quadro cards in these boxen.
I've wondered why Apple hasn't gotten the attention of High End card manf. Now i'm thinking that a full court press is going to happen behind the seems to being in Nvidia or ATI and possibly another for some nice powerful Display action.
<strong>
So much for all that credibility.</strong><hr></blockquote>
awww, now ya went and dragged the 'monsoon' over here.
<strong>
Oct 15 Kemosabe ...Oct 15</strong><hr></blockquote>
G6 = IBM
HINT: THE G8 WILL BE SUPPLIED BY INTEL!!!
<strong>HINT: THE G8 WILL BE SUPPLIED BY INTEL!!!
don't spread FUD
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />