G5 here and gone?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Did anyone read the architosh article about G5 being tested earlier in the year and Apple not choosing to use it because of a squabble with Motorola. The ApplePI BUS and power consumption was the source of the disagreement.



"Another reason why Eleven may have been killed is due to heat. While Eleven had astounding performance potential (according to our info the 2.4GHz unit had integer performance three times, 300x, better than a unit running at 800MHz, which in itself was faster than a 7455 at 800Mhz.) the heat it generated was substantial. However it wasn't unreasonable."



I understand not being suitable to use in their i products and PB, but still it would have given them a leg up in the performance department.



it would have given them the processor to use while w3aiting on the 970 from IBM.



just my .20



read article here:

<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-10/2002c-1023-mcp7457-rm1.phtml"; target="_blank">web page</a>
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 31
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Interesting article and it makes sense... even the timeline isn't too bad.



    * Macworld Expo Jan 2003: Power Macs 1.0 - 1.4 GHz duals (.13micron MPC7457)

    * May WWDC: Power Macs 1.25 - 1.5Ghz duals (same MPC7457 chip)

    * August (Expo Summer): Power Macs pushed to 1.67GHz duals (same 7457)

    * Macworld Expo Jan 2004: Power Macs 1.8GHz (IBM PowerPC 970 .13micron)

    * Mid 2004: Power Macs 1.8 - 2.4GHz (PowerPC 970 .09micron)



    Oh to lend even more to this timeline... It seems MOT pulled that PDF that showed the MPC7457. Hmm can we now say *CONFIRMED*



    Dave
  • Reply 2 of 31
    tjmtjm Posts: 367member
    The article basically confirmed all the stuff in The Register last year about the 2.4 GHz über-chip that Moto had in the works. I hope there were some really good reasons why Apple pulled the plug at the last minute, rather than some penny-ante hissy fit by SJ. Geez, it would be awesome to have one of those "Eleven" chips cranking away under my desk right now.



    Alas, 'twas not meant to be...
  • Reply 3 of 31
    thttht Posts: 3,061member
    No microarchitectural information means the Archintosh/Registers rumors are unfounded. That is, without architecture details about the chip, performance numbers must be taken with a ton of salt.



    Nothing to concern ourselves over until real info is given.
  • Reply 4 of 31
    kecksykecksy Posts: 1,002member
    Didn't someone here say they made the register article up? A fake email, I think. I forgot who it was.



    [ 10-23-2002: Message edited by: Kecksy ]</p>
  • Reply 5 of 31
    My biggest hangup with this is the fact if the performance was there, why didn't thye just use it in the Pro stuff and continue the G4 in the powerbook,imac and emac.



    I understand that eleven (a.k.a G5) ran hot but why not use it anyway. at the moment, it not like the dual will creep up on anyone because those things are loud.



    For me , I could like with the extra noise if it means more performance out of the Box.



    DAve



    yea the time is pretty close to the rumors that were running around.
  • Reply 6 of 31
    tjmtjm Posts: 367member
    [quote]Originally posted by THT:

    <strong>No microarchitectural information means the Archintosh/Registers rumors are unfounded. That is, without architecture details about the chip, performance numbers must be taken with a ton of salt.



    Nothing to concern ourselves over until real info is given.</strong><hr></blockquote>





    Agreed. It will probably be several years before we get to the truth of what's been going on. I suspect a lot of people who could fill us in on fact/fiction are still under NDA. Maybe when Moto finally throws in the towel on desktop PPCs in general will someone not get guillotined for speaking up.



    Personally, I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume they're telling the truth until I have facts otherwise. I don't accept the G5 rumors as "fact" at this point, just interesting information that remains unproven either way.
  • Reply 7 of 31
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    [quote]Originally posted by THEBIGHT:

    <strong>My biggest hangup with this is the fact if the performance was there, why didn't thye just use it in the Pro stuff and continue the G4 in the powerbook,imac and emac.



    I understand that eleven (a.k.a G5) ran hot but why not use it anyway. at the moment, it not like the dual will creep up on anyone because those things are loud.



    For me , I could like with the extra noise if it means more performance out of the Box.



    DAve



    yea the time is pretty close to the rumors that were running around.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Should be noted that what i know about the new moto G4 chip slated for Jan had massive heat issues. I was told that the mobos were actually blowing up in the case because of the heat. So there was speculation that the vents on the new towers were in preperation of the Jan chip. If so, imagine what a 1.8-2.4ghz chip would do? I can see why heat was a major issue. Can't have towerrs blowing up due to heat



    Also, I still believe the 970 is coming next fall. And i don't think we will see an update in Jan and then in May of next year, just Jan.Feb and Aug/Sept.
  • Reply 8 of 31
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,393member
    [quote]Originally posted by KidRed:

    <strong>



    Should be noted that what i know about the new moto G4 chip slated for Jan had massive heat issues. I was told that the mobos were actually blowing up in the case because of the heat. So there was speculation that the vents on the new towers were in preperation of the Jan chip. If so, imagine what a 1.8-2.4ghz chip would do? I can see why heat was a major issue. Can't have towerrs blowing up due to heat



    Also, I still believe the 970 is coming next fall. And i don't think we will see an update in Jan and then in May of next year, just Jan.Feb and Aug/Sept.</strong><hr></blockquote>





    Seems to me that if these G5 chips were really that powerful, it would have been worth it to clock them down somewhat to lower the heat. And I don't understand why they couldn't improve the cooling so that the mobo's didn't blow.

    To be honest, I'd love one of these even if they required massive cooling and were way louder than the current powermacs. I'd put it in the closet to lower the noise level.



    Maybe the 970 was meant to be the low end chip like what the G3 is to the G4...
  • Reply 9 of 31
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,409member
    There are lots of reasons for Apple to reject such a chip:



    - Too hot.

    - Too expensive.

    - Yields too low.

    - Poor long-term roadmap.

    - Unbalanced or bottlenecked design.

    - Design flaws & bugs.



    Who knows what else... we can't second guess Apple with the available information, but I trust the guys at Apple to make the right call on this one.
  • Reply 10 of 31
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    [quote]Originally posted by sc_markt:

    <strong>





    Seems to me that if these G5 chips were really that powerful, it would have been worth it to clock them down somewhat to lower the heat. And I don't understand why they couldn't improve the cooling so that the mobo's didn't blow.

    To be honest, I'd love one of these even if they required massive cooling and were way louder than the current powermacs. I'd put it in the closet to lower the noise level.



    Maybe the 970 was meant to be the low end chip like what the G3 is to the G4...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    These aren't the G5s these are the G4+s we'll get in Jan. I don't think they are "G5"s. And at current 1.25ghz, Apple couldn't have clocked them down too much. Not sure on any speeds, just that the mobo had heat issues which may explain the new mods on the current case.
  • Reply 11 of 31
    [quote] just my .20 <hr></blockquote>

    Inflation?
  • Reply 12 of 31
    [quote]Originally posted by Xidius:

    <strong>



    I believe you mean 300% faster.. otherwise we should expect a processor as fast as 240Ghz crammed into a 2.4Ghz chip... Yeah, I dont take typos lightly, your a moron.



    - Xidius</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I believe you meant 'you're' not 'your'. I don't take typos in posts bitching about typos lightly...moron.



  • Reply 13 of 31
    [quote]Originally posted by Xidius:

    <strong>



    I believe you mean 300% faster.. otherwise we should expect a processor as fast as 240Ghz crammed into a 2.4Ghz chip... Yeah, I dont take typos lightly, your a moron.



    - Xidius</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I apologize for being "off topic" . . .



    In that case, I believe you should learn the proper usage of the "apostrophe".



    "your" - a possessive pronominal adj.: of, belonging to, or done by you.



    "you're" - abbreviated form of "you are"



    The above is courtesey of Webster's Dictionary, to give credit where credit is due.



    If you meant the typo, I'm sorry.



    Carry on folks, interesting reading.



    edit: heh, Flash ... guess we had the same idea, I just don't type as fast.



    [ 10-23-2002: Message edited by: MacJedai ]</p>
  • Reply 14 of 31
    two posts are better than one my friend
  • Reply 15 of 31
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    Architosh are hit-count wh*res.



    They reposted the MPC8500 rumors TheReg carried, they are now reposting the G5 was cancelled rumors.



    Barto
  • Reply 16 of 31
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
  • Reply 17 of 31
    "

    I believe you mean 300% faster.. otherwise we should expect a processor as fast as 240Ghz crammed into a 2.4Ghz chip... Yeah, I dont take typos lightly, your a moron.



    - Xidius "



    I notice that you're not too bright yourself or you'd have notice the quotation at the beginning and end of the paragraph. This would indicate that it was a direct quote from somewhere possibly the article.



    BTW, I don't hold it against you.
  • Reply 18 of 31
    mrmistermrmister Posts: 1,095member
    Children, behave.
  • Reply 19 of 31
    tjmtjm Posts: 367member
    Why I by and large buy what Architosh says:





    1) They are not a rumors site. They are focused on Mac-based architectural and CAD/CAM software. Their interest in the G5 is primarily related to its impact on that. They have a large, professional, well-educated audience for whom their own reputation is paramount. If they routinely posted BS, their readership would plummet. The brief burst of interest from Mac hardware nuts over these articles isn't a signifcant issue, IMO.



    2) They simply have too much detail for me to buy that they just made the whole thing up. To quote:

    [quote]Our sources have told us that Eleven was killed either in late 2001 or early 2002. Test boxes at certain locations we were made aware of were rumored to contain the Eleven processor(s). As we mentioned before (see late 2001 timeframe articles on Architosh) were heard these boxes were so fast that it was almost ridiculous when compared to Intel x86. Our sources at these test locations told us that in February Apple techs came and took the test units away. That was likely the ending point of the Eleven era at Moto. <hr></blockquote>



    and some details about the chip itself:

    [quote] The Moto G5 was a true Book-E microarchitecture with a single core. A true 64-bit chip it featured dual 64KB Level 1 caches with parity and an integrated 512L2 cache with ECC. Central to the architecture was an integrated SDRAM controller with various DDR support, two RapidIO interfaces (presumably running at 500MHz or faster), CC-NUMA SMP scalability, and the integrated DMA and ApplePI-BIU. This chip was incredibly promising but it seemed to suck power like there was no tomorrow. But compared to AMD and Intel it seemed reasonable. The 1.5GHz unit used a max power of 29 watts and a typical draw of 15 watts. At 2.0GHz these numbers increased to 55 and 28 watts respectively.<hr></blockquote>



    That's a lot of stuff to fabricate out of whole cloth. A bored 15-year-old would hardly write stuff like this. I've yet to see a post by someone saying, "We're one of Apple's main test centers. We can't tell you what we're working on, but we sure never saw anything like that!" to call their bluff on this. Or even, "I know microprocessor design and the specs they quote for it are ridiculous."



    3) The article has the "ring of truth" about it - a quality that no one can define, unfortunately. There is a consistency throughout it that suggests they know what they are talking about.



    Now, I have no "inside" information of any kind. Can those of you who are objecting to this article offer any compelling reasons why I should believe you and not Architosh? Seriously. I don't like being played for a fool. The value I place on a given piece of information depends on how much I trust the source. For most of you, you're nothing more than a bold-faced handle on the left side of my screen - so why should I believe you over Architosh? What concrete reasons do you have for doubting this story? If anyone has direct proof that this Moto G5 stuff is all nonsense, please let me know. You needn't state the information, just that you have first-hand evidence that none of this is legit. Of course, you could always lie, but I'm a trusting sort. If you don't want to post even that you have that sort of info, send me a private message.



    My main motivation here is that I'm getting tired of the knee-jerk "Did not! Did too! Did not! Did too!" playground-level bickering that goes on here constantly. Isn't there some way we can rate rumors based on real knowledge that people have, not just "I want it to be true!" or "I don't like that one so it must be false!"? Probably not, I guess.



    This is already too long of a post, so I won't wax philosophical any further. BTW, Architosh has added some editorial comments at the beginning and end of the article <a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-10/2002c-1023-mcp7457-rm1.phtml"; target="_blank">Another link to Architosh artile</a>



    P.S. The "300x" is indeed a typo in the original article. Let's try to be a bit more polite to each other.
  • Reply 20 of 31
    bigcbigc Posts: 1,224member
    Rumours are rumours, that's all they are regardless of where they come from. The only truth will be from Apple when they release a new machine. Period. Period. Period. End of story.



    Therefore, believe what you want to believe. That's the American way (otherwise known as the way of the sheep).
Sign In or Register to comment.