Bring on the Quads.. that is what I am waiting for and then I am in... I really wanted a Powerbook 5 but a dual G4 will do
So what is stopping them from releasing a G5 Quad? Do you guys think the case/mobo is designed for it? I am hoping for the next rev... A chip designed for for multiprocessing needs to be atleast in quads... also what is the possibility of octos?
Bring on the Quads.. that is what I am waiting for and then I am in... I really wanted a Powerbook 5 but a dual G4 will do
So what is stopping them from releasing a G5 Quad? Do you guys think the case/mobo is designed for it? I am hoping for the next rev... A chip designed for for multiprocessing needs to be atleast in quads... also what is the possibility of octos?
Man imagine the case for a quad machine? It would have like 6 zones and 2 dozen fans!
I'm curious. I've poked around a bit on a few sites including Sun's. Does anyone build quad processor workstations? It seems Sun does not. Any more than 2 and you're basically talking about a server.
Quads sound neat but duals already bring a truckload of power to the table. I wouldn't be surprised to see a quad Xserve in the not so distant future though (in a revised enclosure). What about clustering? Would that be a more realistic/economical solution?
These are just questions. I'm not taking shots at anyone's dream of a quad processor room heater/computer.
Actualy, the G5 has two fans per processor (those also do the RAM), two for the Power supply, two for the AGP/PCI-X zone and one for the drives.
So a Quad would have 8+2+2+1=13 fans is they don't need more for the Power Supply.
Perhaps the concentration of heat in the CPU zone will warrent more than the normally allotted fans? Personally I think that Apple will do quad when the 9X0 series goes dual core. Too much of a complicated motherboard and chipset otherwise.
i'd like to see Apple do thrice-yearly upgrades to all their models, beginning with the g5. more releases = more buzz = more switchers = more sales = justifies expense of extra yearly product releases.
I don't buy this ramping up production stuff. I think personally (based on nothing but speculation) that they likely have the next speed bumps ready and are sitting on it for economic reasons - IE - new chip, tonnes of people going to upgrade right now, let's take advantage of that. I don't imagine it costs IBM any more to make a 2.5Ghz chip over a 2gig. So, milk each mini-bump.
My prediction:
January:
1.8Ghz low end. 2 Ghz middle 2.4 or 2.5 dual as the high.
June 2004:
2.2 low, 2.8 mid, dual 3ghz high.
Here's a hint : MWSF '04 wil be 6 monthes after WWDC '03. The PowerMac updates have been on a 6 mo. cycle ... expect some changes ... like was said before, the 970 is an interrim chip, to really see the "magic" wait till you see the 980 in action.
Here's a hint : MWSF '04 wil be 6 monthes after WWDC '03. The PowerMac updates have been on a 6 mo. cycle ... expect some changes ... like was said before, the 970 is an interrim chip, to really see the "magic" wait till you see the 980 in action.
The 980 is the "real deal" even though the 970 is not too shabby, although it seems likely that Apple & IBM will have one 970 speed bump and then the 970+ before the 980 is debuted in a PowerMac. We shall see in time.
Why wouldn't Apple follow the BTO PC marketing scheme (ala Dell). As shippable quantities of new higher MHz CPUs become available offer them immediately as an increased price (2.2 GHz +$200 or so). Then, periodically as Rev.(s) come out or the overrall processor speeds reach +0.4 GHz increase or so, raise the base speeds for Good, Better, Best across the board.
This is more profitable than Apple's typical method (which was limited by Motorola's poor yields). Because, when the across the board speed bumps occur, they will likely leave the price points the same.
I would much rather have the option to buy the fastest processor produced than wait for Apple to decide it is time for the bi-annual bump.
The new pricing might become necessary once IBM introduces their own Linux-based 970 systems. Hopefully, Apple has negotiated with IBM to get first rights to the fastest CPUs available. Because, I am sure that IBM would not choose to sit on faster CPUs for 6 months for their own systems, until Apple bumps their speeds.
As much as I would like to see quad G5's, I have to agree with you that it will be two dual core G5's. Then we get into the real marketing wars- are two dual core CPU's four CPU's or not? I would say that they are four CPU's in that there are four distinct sets of registers and four distinct sets of pipes.
As much as I would like to see quad G5's, I have to agree with you that it will be two dual core G5's. Then we get into the real marketing wars- are two dual core CPU's four CPU's or not? I would say that they are four CPU's in that there are four distinct sets of registers and four distinct sets of pipes.
Just wait'll each core is threaded! Then you'll have two processors with two cores each, with each core pretending to be two CPUs.
There are your octos, more or less, and Apple wouldn't even have to change their current system controller!
Glad you understand. Unfortunately, I don't have access to timelines for the 980 ... yet (like I did with GUL) ... and even then, they were old (hence my not having complete trust in them, schedules slip sometimes ... fortunately I was "in the ballpark" this time by saying mid May to 1st week in July. I'm not an "Apple" insider, just got lucky on some info from "a friend".
Stay tuned, if I come across anything, and feel I can "safely" pass it on ... I will.
Comments
Originally posted by BrunoBruin
I agree. I hope the middle box goes to dual with the next rev.
That depends on two things: CPU yeilds and how much people whine over having to pay more for the middle config. I hope for four configurataions:
single 1.8
single 2.0
dual 2.0
dual 2.5
Where the first one sells (sans superdrive) for about $1799-1899.
Bring on the Quads.. that is what I am waiting for and then I am in... I really wanted a Powerbook 5 but a dual G4 will do
So what is stopping them from releasing a G5 Quad? Do you guys think the case/mobo is designed for it? I am hoping for the next rev... A chip designed for for multiprocessing needs to be atleast in quads... also what is the possibility of octos?
Originally posted by Producer
"The G5's were built for SMP"
Bring on the Quads.. that is what I am waiting for and then I am in... I really wanted a Powerbook 5 but a dual G4 will do
So what is stopping them from releasing a G5 Quad? Do you guys think the case/mobo is designed for it? I am hoping for the next rev... A chip designed for for multiprocessing needs to be atleast in quads... also what is the possibility of octos?
Man imagine the case for a quad machine? It would have like 6 zones and 2 dozen fans!
Quads sound neat but duals already bring a truckload of power to the table. I wouldn't be surprised to see a quad Xserve in the not so distant future though (in a revised enclosure). What about clustering? Would that be a more realistic/economical solution?
These are just questions. I'm not taking shots at anyone's dream of a quad processor room heater/computer.
Originally posted by Outsider
Man imagine the case for a quad machine? It would have like 6 zones and 2 dozen fans!
Actualy, the G5 has two fans per processor (those also do the RAM), two for the Power supply, two for the AGP/PCI-X zone and one for the drives.
So a Quad would have 8+2+2+1=13 fans is they don't need more for the Power Supply.
Originally posted by Mac Force
Actualy, the G5 has two fans per processor (those also do the RAM), two for the Power supply, two for the AGP/PCI-X zone and one for the drives.
So a Quad would have 8+2+2+1=13 fans is they don't need more for the Power Supply.
Perhaps the concentration of heat in the CPU zone will warrent more than the normally allotted fans? Personally I think that Apple will do quad when the 9X0 series goes dual core. Too much of a complicated motherboard and chipset otherwise.
i'd like to see Apple do thrice-yearly upgrades to all their models, beginning with the g5. more releases = more buzz = more switchers = more sales = justifies expense of extra yearly product releases.
Originally posted by The Mactivist
I don't buy this ramping up production stuff. I think personally (based on nothing but speculation) that they likely have the next speed bumps ready and are sitting on it for economic reasons - IE - new chip, tonnes of people going to upgrade right now, let's take advantage of that. I don't imagine it costs IBM any more to make a 2.5Ghz chip over a 2gig. So, milk each mini-bump.
My prediction:
January:
1.8Ghz low end. 2 Ghz middle 2.4 or 2.5 dual as the high.
June 2004:
2.2 low, 2.8 mid, dual 3ghz high.
Here's a hint : MWSF '04 wil be 6 monthes after WWDC '03. The PowerMac updates have been on a 6 mo. cycle ... expect some changes ... like was said before, the 970 is an interrim chip, to really see the "magic" wait till you see the 980 in action.
Originally posted by Yevgeny
Do you have a link for that timeframe? This is super important because a 970 portable is dependent on the 90 nm die shrink.
Not one you can access!
Originally posted by Outsider
(snip) Personally I think that Apple will do quad when the 9X0 series goes dual core. Too much of a complicated motherboard and chipset otherwise.
In a word ... yes
January 2004:
1.6 G5: $1,499
1.8 G5: $1,999
2.0 G5: $2,399
Dual 2.5: $2,999
June 2004:
1.8 G5: $1,499
Dual 2.0 G5: $1,999
Dual 2.5 G5: $2,399
Dual 3.0 G5: $2,999
Originally posted by DHagan4755
How does this sound?
(snip)
Like you're "sandbagging" a little bit.
Originally posted by MacJedai
Here's a hint : MWSF '04 wil be 6 monthes after WWDC '03. The PowerMac updates have been on a 6 mo. cycle ... expect some changes ... like was said before, the 970 is an interrim chip, to really see the "magic" wait till you see the 980 in action.
The 980 is the "real deal" even though the 970 is not too shabby, although it seems likely that Apple & IBM will have one 970 speed bump and then the 970+ before the 980 is debuted in a PowerMac. We shall see in time.
This is more profitable than Apple's typical method (which was limited by Motorola's poor yields). Because, when the across the board speed bumps occur, they will likely leave the price points the same.
I would much rather have the option to buy the fastest processor produced than wait for Apple to decide it is time for the bi-annual bump.
The new pricing might become necessary once IBM introduces their own Linux-based 970 systems. Hopefully, Apple has negotiated with IBM to get first rights to the fastest CPUs available. Because, I am sure that IBM would not choose to sit on faster CPUs for 6 months for their own systems, until Apple bumps their speeds.
Opus...
I don't know, maybe... but I think we'll be seeing other things at MWSF 04.
Originally posted by MacJedai
Not one you can access!
No fair!
Any thoughts as to what quarter (Q1 or Q2)?
Originally posted by MacJedai
In a word ... yes
As much as I would like to see quad G5's, I have to agree with you that it will be two dual core G5's. Then we get into the real marketing wars- are two dual core CPU's four CPU's or not? I would say that they are four CPU's in that there are four distinct sets of registers and four distinct sets of pipes.
THAT is going to be a good day.
Originally posted by Yevgeny
As much as I would like to see quad G5's, I have to agree with you that it will be two dual core G5's. Then we get into the real marketing wars- are two dual core CPU's four CPU's or not? I would say that they are four CPU's in that there are four distinct sets of registers and four distinct sets of pipes.
Just wait'll each core is threaded! Then you'll have two processors with two cores each, with each core pretending to be two CPUs.
There are your octos, more or less, and Apple wouldn't even have to change their current system controller!
Glad you understand. Unfortunately, I don't have access to timelines for the 980 ... yet (like I did with GUL) ... and even then, they were old (hence my not having complete trust in them, schedules slip sometimes ... fortunately I was "in the ballpark" this time by saying mid May to 1st week in July. I'm not an "Apple" insider, just got lucky on some info from "a friend".
Stay tuned, if I come across anything, and feel I can "safely" pass it on ... I will.