Will MWSF Close The GHz Gap?
2.2 GHz Pentiums are <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,77564,00.asp"; target="_blank">now shipping</a>.
[ 12-29-2001: Message edited by: glurx ]</p>
[ 12-29-2001: Message edited by: glurx ]</p>
Comments
Dont suffer from the megahertz myth.
[ 12-29-2001: Message edited by: Macintosh ]</p>
<strong>Dont suffer from the megahertz myth.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't.
In any event it's now the "gigagertz myth" and give Motorola a few more years and it might even become the "terahertz myth".
<strong>If they don't come up with anything faster than 1.2 GHz, I will not be happy
It will be 867, 1 Ghz and 933DP. The consumer desktop will be the main attaction. Might not even be called iMac.
compared to your three way 70 watt 50hz-50khz....damn your speakers suck"
somethign along those lines
the problem is Though mhz. is for the most part balogne, In CPU benchmarks and that shite, apple is usually 3rd or 4th, against athlons and pentiums that are at peak mhz, meaning that if apple doesn't shape up a bit, mhz will matter, because there is no way a 1 ghz mhz g4 will be stomping a 2.2 ghz p4 when a 867 g4 hardley holds up against a 1.6 p4 and athlon...ya know what I'm saying?
personally I'm optimistic, Apple has surprised us before, they could always surprise us again, but if apple doesn't pass ghz(or just barely passes it) this mw they sure as hell better be offereing a faster system bus, ddr-ram at 300mhz or over,geforce 3 on all computers and make their comptuers a helluva lot cheaper
If the 7460 is basically a 7450 (maybe with some slight improvements) with SOI we can expect a mhz increase of 20-30% (that's what Moto said at least), so you coul expect something like 867 | 1000 | 1133 mhz.
1200 or 1266 would really be the absolute maximum, 1.4 ghz sounds very unlikely unless Moto would add more stages to the pipeline.
Even if a 1.2 ghz G4 is as fast as a higher clocked P4 (and I assume that the 1.2 ghz G4 is not as fast as a 2.2 ghz P4 in common tasks, especially not when comparing G4/OSX and P4/XP), Apple really has to do something about it, it just doesn't look good. As I already mentioned in other posts, consumers know almost nothing about tech and they are led by a few numbers, especially mhz/ghz. On the other hand Apple MUST deliver faster PMs, at least if they want to attract people in pro-areas like 3D graphics.
The only way Apple could really top Intel/AMD would be using raw MP power. Imagine the following lineup:
good - 1 ghz G4
better - dual 867 ghz G4
best - quad 1.133 ghz G4
Maybe Apple could even introduce performance comparing numbers like AMD (dual 867 = 1600, quad 1.133 = 4000 for example - "4000" sounds better than "quad 1.133", doesn't it?)
But to be honest I think the only true solution would be the G5. A 1.6 ghz G5 could easily compete with the P4/2.2.
I often remember AIM announcing new CPUs. Specs were always way ahead, but then we had to wait months (years) until the CPU finally came out. By then Intel/AMD had already equivalent or better CPUs on the market.
I think the G5/1.6 ghz would be a sensation if it came out in January. In mid 2002 it will have to compete with the (guessing) 2.5 ghz P4. If the G5 comes in Jan 2003 you will then be able to buy a 3 ghz PC. Who will care about a 1.6 ghz G5 then???
Whatever Apple plans to do, they will have to do it quickly. We need powerful CPUs, and we need them NOW.
<strong>
It will be 867, 1 Ghz and 933DP. The consumer desktop will be the main attaction. Might not even be called iMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>
While I want a G5 badly, I don't think we will see one. However, even the sites that have said no G5 have at least said 'insanely fast G4s". Your specs are not 'insanely faster' in fact they are barely faster.
If G4s then at least 2 models above 1.0ghz, maybe 1.0 and 1.2ghz.
<strong>
...even the sites that have said no G5 have at least said 'insanely fast G4s". Your specs are not 'insanely faster' in fact they are barely faster.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes but then again I don´t have to make money on people coming to my (nonexisting) rumour page.
<strong>
Yes but then again I don´t have to make money on people coming to my (nonexisting) rumour page.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think AsTheAppleTurns fits into your desciption.
MHz DOES MATTER!
The Athlon XP is one hell of a processor and the Pentium 4 still beats a G4.
performance = C * E * I
where:
C is the clock rate (MHz)
E is the number of execution units
I is a measure of how many instructions it takes to do the job and the complexity of those instructions
At various times the PPC family has had a lead over x86 in terms of "C" and "E", and arguably they will always have the advantage of "I". Currently, however, PPC is way behind because the x86 world has been cranking up both C and E, leaving the G4 way behind.
If the G4 gets a clock rate boost then it will catch up in terms of "C", but not "E". When the G5 arrives then it promises an increase in "E" as well, putting PPC back in the lead at least until the next x86 chips come out. Hopefully Apple gets the G5 before those x86 chips catch up to its promise.
And yes, when it arrives it could close the "MHz Gap" all at once. This is in fact more likely than Apple incrementing clock rates in steps so rapidly that it'll catch up to the x86 world. Since its a single manufacturer it will never be able to update its product lines as fast as the Wintel world -- doing so would canabalize and confuse its own market share, not to mention the headaches it would cause to Apple's QA & support departments.
1.0, 1.133, 1.266 GHz G4s (Apollo)
Less likely but possible:
1.0, 1.2, 1.4 GHz G5s
Not likely, but still possible:
1.2, 1.4, 1.6 GHz G5s.
Apple will close the GHz gap, but not abolish it.
Apple doesn't need to abolish the GHz gap since with Altivec even a 1.6 GHz G5 will trounce a 2.x GHz P4. The current problems are due to the G4 coming in last in virtually ever CPU test. Once a G-chip comes along that can beat the P4 at most tasks, then the GHz myth will be just that, a myth. Moto just needs to find their G-spot.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Anders:
It will be 867, 1 Ghz and 933DP. The consumer desktop will be the main attaction. Might not even be called iMac.
---------------------------------------------------------------
I believe that your specifications are accurate Anders.
Isn't you that nailed perfectly the specifications of the last MWNY? I remember that it was someone from Danemark, the night before the show ...
I think that Apple is definitely over on the pro line... Can you realise folks??? a 133 speed bump in 6 months?
This is a SHAME
And Knowing Apple, I'm pretty sure that the DDR will not be implemented neither.
<strong>quote: I think that Apple is definitely over on the pro line... Can you realise folks??? a 133 speed bump in 6 months?
This is a SHAME
And Knowing Apple, I'm pretty sure that the DDR will not be implemented neither.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If you consider the specs we have about the 7460 (7460=7450+SOI) you cannot expect the G4 to go over 1.2 ghz in January. I think 1.133 ghz is the best they can do for now.
If the G5 is really almost ready (I mean for a release in mid 2002 or so) Apple will introduce it with a new Motherboard for sure (RapidIO). So it would not make much sense to introduce a totally new G4 motherboard for only 6 months. Probably they we will get a slightly modified Sawtooth with the new Apollo CPU, don't expect big changements here.
On the other hand, IF Apple will introduce a totally new MB with the Apollo, this would rather be really bad news. Apple will not design a totally new board that would be used for only 6 months or so, this would mean that the G5 would be far away (the G5 cannot be used in G4 motherboards - well, maybe, using bridges, but then loosing most advantages). In the best case this could mean that there could be two PowerMac lines in future (G4 and G5), but a G5 affordable for most users would then be very far, far away...