Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The "new machines" available now or the next "new machines"?
Any idea of "when" (without violating things like NDA's)?
Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What if Apple was also planning on releasing some sort of Graphics subsystems along with these machines or perhaps a new card from nVidia or ATI. I mean we never did see any fruit from the Racer Graphics acquisition. I bet one of the *other things* has to do with EVEN MORE graphics performance. Perhaps the other is either a 64-bit OS X OR perhaps integrated, AppleSeed-type clustering. Dean Dauger *has* been pretty quiet via e-mail lately. Hmmmmm.... I wonder.
<strong>I hope that Apple releases a dual 2.5ghz 970 for the "price-is-no-object" professionals. That would get apple some respect. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Why people ask for high priced hardware is beyond me.
I'd rather Apple come out with a dual 2.5ghz 970 for the "price-is-no-barrier" world.
<strong>What if Apple was also planning on releasing some sort of Graphics subsystems along with these machines or perhaps a new card from nVidia or ATI. I mean we never did see any fruit from the Racer Graphics acquisition. I bet one of the *other things* has to do with EVEN MORE graphics performance. Perhaps the other is either a 64-bit OS X OR perhaps integrated, AppleSeed-type clustering. Dean Dauger *has* been pretty quiet via e-mail lately. Hmmmmm.... I wonder.
Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm, symmetric multithreading?
The DSP-on-memory-controller thingamabobs you mentioned last summer?
Any guesses, oh great slavering mass of Appleinsiders?
<strong>Imagine the look on the face of the poor unsuspecting not-in-tune-with-rumors soul that purchases a Dual 1.45 GHz G4s and discovers a couple weeks later that a 2.5 GHz 970 is now selling for the same price and offers 3+ times the performance.
I think the look would probably be equivalent to the those of the people that bought a 23" cinema display right before the huge price cuts.
[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: kim kap sol ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I can't believe I'm replying to one the many Kim's, but:
#1) Apple has said nothing about this yet.
#2) Nobody expects this stuff for a while.
#3) I don't think we'll see it in a PowerMac until MWSF (if there is one)
#4) I don't think these processors are being produced yet, other than prototypes, and I think we'll see a few more proto refinements before they are rolling off the conveyor belts (so to speak)
Buying a Dual 1.42 GHz PowerMac right now is not a bad move. The PowerMac is the most recently updated piece of Apple hardware, and I still say we wont see the 970 til super late 2003, or 2004. IT MAY BE A MERRY X_MAS AFTER ALL
Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm... a couple uneducated guesses on the incorrect conventional wisdoms:
#1) The PPC970 won't be included in consumer boxes until well after its introduction in the PowerMacs
#2) Apple won't introduce PPC970 systems until 2004
[quote]Since a 1.8ghz PPC 970 is faster than what a 3.6ghz PPC G4 would be (if such a thing existed), a 2.5ghz PPC 970 is coming in with performance at well over what you'd see from a 5ghz G4, based on SPECint and SPECfpu benchmarks.
Actually, the floating point performance is even better than 2x a G4 at the same clockspeed... hold onto your hats...
<hr></blockquote>
Der-rool, der-rool.
Hmmm. Just thought...2fpu. Moki nudge my brain forward... ERm. Hmmmm. Double the fpu of the G4 at 1 gig. Quad at 1.8. 970 At 2.5? Almost 5-6 times the fpu performance of the G4? And THAT excludes bandwidth...and improved Altivec performance. AND PUT THAT IN DUALS? A 2.5 dual 970 will murder current G4s in Lightwave benches. It's going to be a blood bath!!!
OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH-MYYYYYYYYYYY-WOOOOOOOOOOOORD!
:eek: :eek: :eek:
This is going to be a quantum leap for the Mac platform.
<strong>I'm waiting for the first post that states...
"Okay I'm thinking of purchasing a 2.5 GHz 970 Powermac this fall for school , but I'm wondering if I should just wait for the Dua; 3 Ghz that we have all heard rumored... Any advice?"
I guess my big fear is that Apple (in logic-defying typicalness) does not adopt the 970.
MSKR</strong><hr></blockquote>
That would be inline with their "logic." How convinced were people of a G5? of a Tablet? an iPhone (the whole patent thing)? The "year of the portable" slogan seems to support this sadness, but Apple's economic survival in the business market does not.
I think the implications of this are huge. One of them is the likelyhood of OSX on Intel...Oh yes my friends. The move to Intel was espoused as a solution to performance problems...how wrong we were. The port to Intel will be an aggressive move aimed right at Microsnot's arse, Think about it, if you are totally confident that you have the best specced, best designed, FASTEST machines around then there is nothing to fear. Get the great unwashed playing with OSX on their digusting beige boxes and then sell 'em a REAL computer...Oh the irony!
I can't stop smiling.... <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
<strong>Well fark my old boots...I've gone all tingly...
I think the implications of this are huge. One of them is the likelyhood of OSX on Intel...Oh yes my friends. The move to Intel was espoused as a solution to performance problems...how wrong we were. The port to Intel will be an aggressive move aimed right at Microsnot's arse, Think about it, if you are totally confident that you have the best specced, best designed, FASTEST machines around then there is nothing to fear. Get the great unwashed playing with OSX on their digusting beige boxes and then sell 'em a REAL computer...Oh the irony!
I can't stop smiling.... <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
BINGO. I have been having a nagging suspicion about this for awhile. I've said it before, Apple's best days are ahead of them.
I think the implications of this are huge. One of them is the likelyhood of OSX on Intel...Oh yes my friends. The move to Intel was espoused as a solution to performance problems...how wrong we were. The port to Intel will be an aggressive move aimed right at Microsnot's arse, Think about it, if you are totally confident that you have the best specced, best designed, FASTEST machines around then there is nothing to fear. Get the great unwashed playing with OSX on their digusting beige boxes and then sell 'em a REAL computer...Oh the irony!
Too bad MS just bought Virtual PC. I wonder if Apple even knew about that (i.e., had a chance to buy it instead). I hope Apple has an even better solution than VPC to offer those with one foot in both camps.
Comments
<strong>two as in dual as in core?
That would be nice... and something that I though was going to happen (and then later quite shocked when it did come to pass)
Dave</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.
<strong>
Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The "new machines" available now or the next "new machines"?
Any idea of "when" (without violating things like NDA's)?
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>
Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Damn you
[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
<strong>
Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Free? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
--
Ed M.
<strong>I hope that Apple releases a dual 2.5ghz 970 for the "price-is-no-object" professionals. That would get apple some respect.
Why people ask for high priced hardware is beyond me.
I'd rather Apple come out with a dual 2.5ghz 970 for the "price-is-no-barrier" world.
<strong>What if Apple was also planning on releasing some sort of Graphics subsystems along with these machines or perhaps a new card from nVidia or ATI. I mean we never did see any fruit from the Racer Graphics acquisition. I bet one of the *other things* has to do with EVEN MORE graphics performance. Perhaps the other is either a 64-bit OS X OR perhaps integrated, AppleSeed-type clustering. Dean Dauger *has* been pretty quiet via e-mail lately. Hmmmmm.... I wonder.
--
Ed M.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Raycer = Quartz Extreme
<strong>
Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm, symmetric multithreading?
The DSP-on-memory-controller thingamabobs you mentioned last summer?
Any guesses, oh great slavering mass of Appleinsiders?
Blark
<strong>Imagine the look on the face of the poor unsuspecting not-in-tune-with-rumors soul that purchases a Dual 1.45 GHz G4s and discovers a couple weeks later that a 2.5 GHz 970 is now selling for the same price and offers 3+ times the performance.
I think the look would probably be equivalent to the those of the people that bought a 23" cinema display right before the huge price cuts.
[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: kim kap sol ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I can't believe I'm replying to one the many Kim's, but:
#1) Apple has said nothing about this yet.
#2) Nobody expects this stuff for a while.
#3) I don't think we'll see it in a PowerMac until MWSF (if there is one)
#4) I don't think these processors are being produced yet, other than prototypes, and I think we'll see a few more proto refinements before they are rolling off the conveyor belts (so to speak)
#5) forget #5
Buying a Dual 1.42 GHz PowerMac right now is not a bad move. The PowerMac is the most recently updated piece of Apple hardware, and I still say we wont see the 970 til super late 2003, or 2004. IT MAY BE A MERRY X_MAS AFTER ALL
<strong>
Well, I meant two separate fairly surprising items... at least based on current conventional wisdom re: the PPC970's and Apple's new machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm... a couple uneducated guesses on the incorrect conventional wisdoms:
#1) The PPC970 won't be included in consumer boxes until well after its introduction in the PowerMacs
#2) Apple won't introduce PPC970 systems until 2004
Actually, the floating point performance is even better than 2x a G4 at the same clockspeed... hold onto your hats...
<hr></blockquote>
Der-rool, der-rool.
Hmmm. Just thought...2fpu. Moki nudge my brain forward... ERm. Hmmmm. Double the fpu of the G4 at 1 gig. Quad at 1.8. 970 At 2.5? Almost 5-6 times the fpu performance of the G4? And THAT excludes bandwidth...and improved Altivec performance. AND PUT THAT IN DUALS? A 2.5 dual 970 will murder current G4s in Lightwave benches. It's going to be a blood bath!!!
OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH-MYYYYYYYYYYY-WOOOOOOOOOOOORD!
:eek: :eek: :eek:
This is going to be a quantum leap for the Mac platform.
Good luck, Intel. You're going to need it.
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> :cool:
<strong>I'm waiting for the first post that states...
"Okay I'm thinking of purchasing a 2.5 GHz 970 Powermac this fall for school , but I'm wondering if I should just wait for the Dua; 3 Ghz that we have all heard rumored... Any advice?"
I guess my big fear is that Apple (in logic-defying typicalness) does not adopt the 970.
MSKR</strong><hr></blockquote>
That would be inline with their "logic." How convinced were people of a G5? of a Tablet? an iPhone (the whole patent thing)? The "year of the portable" slogan seems to support this sadness, but Apple's economic survival in the business market does not.
Careful now, that sort of thing might get Virtual PC cancelled. :eek:
There probably is still a need for the 7457-RM; in iMacs/iBooks/eMacs.
glee++;
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
I think the implications of this are huge. One of them is the likelyhood of OSX on Intel...Oh yes my friends. The move to Intel was espoused as a solution to performance problems...how wrong we were. The port to Intel will be an aggressive move aimed right at Microsnot's arse, Think about it, if you are totally confident that you have the best specced, best designed, FASTEST machines around then there is nothing to fear. Get the great unwashed playing with OSX on their digusting beige boxes and then sell 'em a REAL computer...Oh the irony!
I can't stop smiling.... <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
<strong>
there may be more than one bag of sand, too... two more that I can think of actually... I posted it here as well:
[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: moki ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Remember that about the same time moki started talking about GP-UL, he was also making unhelpful yet teasing comments about OS X on x86.
Folks, I think there's more here than meets the eye.
<strong>Well fark my old boots...I've gone all tingly...
I think the implications of this are huge. One of them is the likelyhood of OSX on Intel...Oh yes my friends. The move to Intel was espoused as a solution to performance problems...how wrong we were. The port to Intel will be an aggressive move aimed right at Microsnot's arse, Think about it, if you are totally confident that you have the best specced, best designed, FASTEST machines around then there is nothing to fear. Get the great unwashed playing with OSX on their digusting beige boxes and then sell 'em a REAL computer...Oh the irony!
I can't stop smiling.... <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
BINGO. I have been having a nagging suspicion about this for awhile. I've said it before, Apple's best days are ahead of them.
[quote]
I think the implications of this are huge. One of them is the likelyhood of OSX on Intel...Oh yes my friends. The move to Intel was espoused as a solution to performance problems...how wrong we were. The port to Intel will be an aggressive move aimed right at Microsnot's arse, Think about it, if you are totally confident that you have the best specced, best designed, FASTEST machines around then there is nothing to fear. Get the great unwashed playing with OSX on their digusting beige boxes and then sell 'em a REAL computer...Oh the irony!
<hr></blockquote>
I agree. It's a real possibility. See:
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=003081"; target="_blank">What if... Post-970 Marklar?</a>
Too bad MS just bought Virtual PC. I wonder if Apple even knew about that (i.e., had a chance to buy it instead). I hope Apple has an even better solution than VPC to offer those with one foot in both camps.