This is the second time in the last years that Apple makes a major change in its high end CPU, first with the G4, now with the G5. And the history seems to repeat itself. Something like a curse .
That thought is sickening. Remember when. or before they the downgraded the 500MHz G4 to 450MHz, and right before it we were all stoked about Motorola's new processors that were going to just kick the pants off of intel at 800MHz. OMG it was a nightmare. It took like a year to get back to 500MHz. Then it was like another 6 months just to get Dual 500MHz, and intel was at 1GHz+ already. That just sucked so bad.
I am not ever going to let that happen again. That is exactly why Apple has til WWDC. If not it's hello BOXX, and Maya 6 Unlimited, and Nvidia Quadro FX 3, or 4000. I am not watching the boat sink from the inside again.
This is the second time in the last years that Apple makes a major change in its high end CPU, first with the G4, now with the G5. And the history seems to repeat itself. Something like a curse .
Nonsense -- they over-delivered on the 2 GHz G5, whereas on the G4 they intro'd at 500 MHz and then backed down. During the year when they were struggling to regain 500 MHz the Intel & AMD chips rocketed upward. During the past year the Intel & AMD chips have barely moved. During the G4's entire life it slowly inched its way from 180nm down to 150nm, gradually making minor performance improvements along the way but hamstringing Apple's ability to build faster systems due to the MPX limitations. The G5 is already shipping 90nm (delayed yes, but now shipping), down from 130nm, and it is memory bound not FSB bound. Motorola's investment in their desktop lineup was limp (to say the least), whereas IBM is flogging it to all comers and spending like crazy.
Sure a delay of a couple of months is unfortunate, but the solution is in hand and all indications are that progress will soon be upon us. Stop doomsaying and hang in there until WWDC.
Nonsense -- they over-delivered on the 2 GHz G5, whereas on the G4 they intro'd at 500 MHz and then backed down. During the year when they were struggling to regain 500 MHz the Intel & AMD chips rocketed upward. During the past year the Intel & AMD chips have barely moved. During the G4's entire life it slowly inched its way from 180nm down to 150nm, gradually making minor performance improvements along the way but hamstringing Apple's ability to build faster systems due to the MPX limitations. The G5 is already shipping 90nm (delayed yes, but now shipping), down from 130nm, and it is memory bound not FSB bound. Motorola's investment in their desktop lineup was limp (to say the least), whereas IBM is flogging it to all comers and spending like crazy.
Sure a delay of a couple of months is unfortunate, but the solution is in hand and all indications are that progress will soon be upon us. Stop doomsaying and hang in there until WWDC.
No kidding.
Im tired of all the "doomsayers" around here. It's like they think reverse psychology is going to influence something in Cupertino as well as their own minds.
Dual 2ghz G5 is super fast, so why complain? You just want the best thing available? Well, by the time your dual 3ghz G5 is under your desk (and mine) Apple is already far into the next greatest thing.
Ive heard many times that those who complain the most about the lack of speed bumps are the ones who need the speed the least. I actually believe that. If you really needed the speed that bad, you'd be working your ass off rendering video(or what have you), not hanging out in public forums complaining about it.
I was wondering how many frequency update can a chip receive before moving to a new prototype of fab process... I guess 2 at least.
In a worse case scenario IBM can still update the 130 nm PPC970 at new frequencies (let's say to 2,4 Ghz) even if it will bare this hungry CPU from Powerbooks or/and iMacs.
Now, they were already able to produce 90 nm PPC970FX at 2 Ghz (xServe currently shipping) : we know from IBM and Apple that they had problems at Fishkill with the fab process on 90 nm and couldn't have enough good yields.
They think they will have resolved the problems and will be in full production this quarter and ready for all their clients.
This means 2 things :
a- The PPC970FX is ok as a design and would have been ditched if it was worse than 970 PPC which has still room to evolve. If IBM kept its effort on it, it is because they are confident they can catchup with PPC970.
b- The fab process is having ONE PROBLEM which, when solved, will allow full production at frequencies expected by IBM clients (aka this quarter).
I suppose that when a CPU is fabbed, a range of marketing wise frequencies is set for the customers : ie it would be stupid to sell at the same time 1,6 Ghz, 2,4 Ghz and 3,2 ghz G5. Hardware companies decide of the public frequency in regard to their whole offering and tend to avoid to clock up to fast their CPUS.
So I guess the publicly announced 2,5 ghz PPC 970 Fx was the top frequency decided to go public for the next gen PMG5 : it is well possible that, because of the delay (2-3 months) in the new PM G5 planned introduction, as soon as IBM is ok with their fab process, Apple choose to go directly with a 2,8 ghz PPC 970 FX just because they can and because now the time is too late for a 2,5 ghz PMG5.
I don't know for you, but I was under the impression that Apple were very confident in this new quarter PM G5 sales and that IBM were also confident to keep their customers happy this quarter...
What is the chance we will see a new tower design. Current design only allows for one optical drive and two hard drives. It seems silly to me that a "pro tower" is limited in that way.
What is the chance we will see a new tower design. Current design only allows for one optical drive and two hard drives. It seems silly to me that a "pro tower" is limited in that way.
The one optical drive is no big deal for me. I never really saw an absolute need for a second.
The two hard discs only situation does bother me a lot though. I can fit 1000GB into my G4, but I need to buy a Massive RAID setup to get that in a G5. Sure I'd love to be able to afford a 4TB Xserve-XRAID, or what ever it is, but that is way too much money for me. I have too much other stuff that I need to get that's going to bankrupt me when I get my next computer.
I wonder what it would cost to build my own working 4 TB external RAID housing? Or just the set up before adding the SATA drives? But that would have to include a Fibre Channel card. Any ideas? If anyone has priced, or built one I'd like to know.
I hope we have some updates tomorrow.....G5 updates.....I don't know if I can hold out till' WWDC....I'm running Windoze here.....it's a nightmare!!
Ditto! I'm so sick of windoze that I decided to stay in Mandrake and Debian from now on. Screw windows... and I won't cave in and buy a mac out there right now... every day that goes by, those emacs look more appealing! I WONT DO IT THOUGH!
The one optical drive is no big deal for me. I never really saw an absolute need for a second.
The two hard discs only situation does bother me a lot though. I can fit 1000GB into my G4, but I need to buy a Massive RAID setup to get that in a G5. Sure I'd love to be able to afford a 4TB Xserve-XRAID, or what ever it is, but that is way too much money for me. I have too much other stuff that I need to get that's going to bankrupt me when I get my next computer.
I wonder what it would cost to build my own working 4 TB external RAID housing? Or just the set up before adding the SATA drives? But that would have to include a Fibre Channel card. Any ideas? If anyone has priced, or built one I'd like to know.
Having 2 optical drives is a huge deal to me. First off... if you burn a lot of cds like I do (about 100 every month), the superdrive will die out eventually. It wasn't designed to burn and burn and burn cds. Nor was it designed to read dvd's constantly. I've gone through 2 pioneer drives in my pc because the drive has burned out eventually. (a 105 and a 106). I would really like a superdrive in 1 bay and a combo drive in the next bay. Especially for direct copy. Only having 2 harddrives in a pro machine is insanity. But there are expansion kits out there to allow another 2 hard drives to be attached to the case door. So the hard drive issue isn't that big of a deal. Neither is the optical drive thing since you can spend another 40-80 dollars on an external fw2/usb2 5.25 case and slap the other optical drive in there.
Either way... it shouldn't cost that much money to add that stuff when the case should already be built for it.
hmm i'm not sure if this is relevant, but wasn't the 3Ghz G5 supposed to be based on the PPC 975? this was going to be the next upgrade that would scale higher. since the 970 begins at 130nm, the idea was to exploit the 970 further by shrinking it to 90nm in order to effect higher clock speeds from the chip. it was in this second revision where it seemed IBM was going to force this remaining potential out of the 970 chip. after that it was on to another architecture better designed for higher frequencies. in other words rev b represents the 970 having run it's course.
hmm i'm not sure if this is relevant, but wasn't the 3Ghz G5 supposed to be based on the PPC 975? this was going to be the next upgrade that would scale higher. since the 970 begins at 130nm, the idea was to exploit the 970 further by shrinking it to 90nm in order to effect higher clock speeds from the chip. it was in this second revision where it seemed IBM was going to force this remaining potential out of the 970 chip. after that it was on to another architecture better designed for higher frequencies. in other words rev b represents the 970 having run it's course.
ghi
That was just random MOSR speculation, there is no real information about whether the 970FX will hit 3 GHz before the next design comes along.
Having 2 optical drives is a huge deal to me. First off... if you burn a lot of cds like I do (about 100 every month), the superdrive will die out eventually. It wasn't designed to burn and burn and burn cds. Nor was it designed to read dvd's constantly. I've gone through 2 pioneer drives in my pc because the drive has burned out eventually. (a 105 and a 106).
I burn almost the same number of CD's every month, and my wife watches tons of DVD's on my first generation Superdrive (SP 733 G4). The drive keeps on crankin' year after year. Guess I'm lucky (or you're not.)
I burn almost the same number of CD's every month, and my wife watches tons of DVD's on my first generation Superdrive (SP 733 G4). The drive keeps on crankin' year after year. Guess I'm lucky (or you're not.)
Comments
Originally posted by PB
This is the second time in the last years that Apple makes a major change in its high end CPU, first with the G4, now with the G5. And the history seems to repeat itself. Something like a curse
That thought is sickening. Remember when. or before they the downgraded the 500MHz G4 to 450MHz, and right before it we were all stoked about Motorola's new processors that were going to just kick the pants off of intel at 800MHz. OMG it was a nightmare. It took like a year to get back to 500MHz. Then it was like another 6 months just to get Dual 500MHz, and intel was at 1GHz+ already. That just sucked so bad.
I am not ever going to let that happen again. That is exactly why Apple has til WWDC. If not it's hello BOXX, and Maya 6 Unlimited, and Nvidia Quadro FX 3, or 4000. I am not watching the boat sink from the inside again.
| quitter.
Originally posted by PB
This is the second time in the last years that Apple makes a major change in its high end CPU, first with the G4, now with the G5. And the history seems to repeat itself. Something like a curse
Nonsense -- they over-delivered on the 2 GHz G5, whereas on the G4 they intro'd at 500 MHz and then backed down. During the year when they were struggling to regain 500 MHz the Intel & AMD chips rocketed upward. During the past year the Intel & AMD chips have barely moved. During the G4's entire life it slowly inched its way from 180nm down to 150nm, gradually making minor performance improvements along the way but hamstringing Apple's ability to build faster systems due to the MPX limitations. The G5 is already shipping 90nm (delayed yes, but now shipping), down from 130nm, and it is memory bound not FSB bound. Motorola's investment in their desktop lineup was limp (to say the least), whereas IBM is flogging it to all comers and spending like crazy.
Sure a delay of a couple of months is unfortunate, but the solution is in hand and all indications are that progress will soon be upon us. Stop doomsaying and hang in there until WWDC.
Originally posted by Programmer
Nonsense -- they over-delivered on the 2 GHz G5, whereas on the G4 they intro'd at 500 MHz and then backed down. During the year when they were struggling to regain 500 MHz the Intel & AMD chips rocketed upward. During the past year the Intel & AMD chips have barely moved. During the G4's entire life it slowly inched its way from 180nm down to 150nm, gradually making minor performance improvements along the way but hamstringing Apple's ability to build faster systems due to the MPX limitations. The G5 is already shipping 90nm (delayed yes, but now shipping), down from 130nm, and it is memory bound not FSB bound. Motorola's investment in their desktop lineup was limp (to say the least), whereas IBM is flogging it to all comers and spending like crazy.
Sure a delay of a couple of months is unfortunate, but the solution is in hand and all indications are that progress will soon be upon us. Stop doomsaying and hang in there until WWDC.
No kidding.
Im tired of all the "doomsayers" around here. It's like they think reverse psychology is going to influence something in Cupertino as well as their own minds.
Dual 2ghz G5 is super fast, so why complain? You just want the best thing available? Well, by the time your dual 3ghz G5 is under your desk (and mine) Apple is already far into the next greatest thing.
Ive heard many times that those who complain the most about the lack of speed bumps are the ones who need the speed the least. I actually believe that. If you really needed the speed that bad, you'd be working your ass off rendering video(or what have you), not hanging out in public forums complaining about it.
In a worse case scenario IBM can still update the 130 nm PPC970 at new frequencies (let's say to 2,4 Ghz) even if it will bare this hungry CPU from Powerbooks or/and iMacs.
Now, they were already able to produce 90 nm PPC970FX at 2 Ghz (xServe currently shipping) : we know from IBM and Apple that they had problems at Fishkill with the fab process on 90 nm and couldn't have enough good yields.
They think they will have resolved the problems and will be in full production this quarter and ready for all their clients.
This means 2 things :
a- The PPC970FX is ok as a design and would have been ditched if it was worse than 970 PPC which has still room to evolve. If IBM kept its effort on it, it is because they are confident they can catchup with PPC970.
b- The fab process is having ONE PROBLEM which, when solved, will allow full production at frequencies expected by IBM clients (aka this quarter).
I suppose that when a CPU is fabbed, a range of marketing wise frequencies is set for the customers : ie it would be stupid to sell at the same time 1,6 Ghz, 2,4 Ghz and 3,2 ghz G5. Hardware companies decide of the public frequency in regard to their whole offering and tend to avoid to clock up to fast their CPUS.
So I guess the publicly announced 2,5 ghz PPC 970 Fx was the top frequency decided to go public for the next gen PMG5 : it is well possible that, because of the delay (2-3 months) in the new PM G5 planned introduction, as soon as IBM is ok with their fab process, Apple choose to go directly with a 2,8 ghz PPC 970 FX just because they can and because now the time is too late for a 2,5 ghz PMG5.
I don't know for you, but I was under the impression that Apple were very confident in this new quarter PM G5 sales and that IBM were also confident to keep their customers happy this quarter...
Lol.....Their not there!
Originally posted by Dave K.
What is the chance we will see a new tower design. Current design only allows for one optical drive and two hard drives. It seems silly to me that a "pro tower" is limited in that way.
The one optical drive is no big deal for me. I never really saw an absolute need for a second.
The two hard discs only situation does bother me a lot though. I can fit 1000GB into my G4, but I need to buy a Massive RAID setup to get that in a G5. Sure I'd love to be able to afford a 4TB Xserve-XRAID, or what ever it is, but that is way too much money for me. I have too much other stuff that I need to get that's going to bankrupt me when I get my next computer.
I wonder what it would cost to build my own working 4 TB external RAID housing? Or just the set up before adding the SATA drives? But that would have to include a Fibre Channel card. Any ideas? If anyone has priced, or built one I'd like to know.
Originally posted by applejustworks2
I hope we have some updates tomorrow.....G5 updates.....I don't know if I can hold out till' WWDC....I'm running Windoze here.....it's a nightmare!!
Ditto! I'm so sick of windoze that I decided to stay in Mandrake and Debian from now on. Screw windows... and I won't cave in and buy a mac out there right now... every day that goes by, those emacs look more appealing! I WONT DO IT THOUGH!
Originally posted by onlooker
The one optical drive is no big deal for me. I never really saw an absolute need for a second.
The two hard discs only situation does bother me a lot though. I can fit 1000GB into my G4, but I need to buy a Massive RAID setup to get that in a G5. Sure I'd love to be able to afford a 4TB Xserve-XRAID, or what ever it is, but that is way too much money for me. I have too much other stuff that I need to get that's going to bankrupt me when I get my next computer.
I wonder what it would cost to build my own working 4 TB external RAID housing? Or just the set up before adding the SATA drives? But that would have to include a Fibre Channel card. Any ideas? If anyone has priced, or built one I'd like to know.
Having 2 optical drives is a huge deal to me. First off... if you burn a lot of cds like I do (about 100 every month), the superdrive will die out eventually. It wasn't designed to burn and burn and burn cds. Nor was it designed to read dvd's constantly. I've gone through 2 pioneer drives in my pc because the drive has burned out eventually. (a 105 and a 106). I would really like a superdrive in 1 bay and a combo drive in the next bay. Especially for direct copy. Only having 2 harddrives in a pro machine is insanity. But there are expansion kits out there to allow another 2 hard drives to be attached to the case door. So the hard drive issue isn't that big of a deal. Neither is the optical drive thing since you can spend another 40-80 dollars on an external fw2/usb2 5.25 case and slap the other optical drive in there.
Either way... it shouldn't cost that much money to add that stuff when the case should already be built for it.
ghi
Originally posted by ghiangelo
hmm i'm not sure if this is relevant, but wasn't the 3Ghz G5 supposed to be based on the PPC 975? this was going to be the next upgrade that would scale higher. since the 970 begins at 130nm, the idea was to exploit the 970 further by shrinking it to 90nm in order to effect higher clock speeds from the chip. it was in this second revision where it seemed IBM was going to force this remaining potential out of the 970 chip. after that it was on to another architecture better designed for higher frequencies. in other words rev b represents the 970 having run it's course.
ghi
That was just random MOSR speculation, there is no real information about whether the 970FX will hit 3 GHz before the next design comes along.
Originally posted by KCOM2006
With the ibook &powerbooks updted, could e see a desktop (imac & powermac) speed bump on tuedsay?
Unlikely. Next week iTMS, then iMacs, then PowerMacs (I believe).
lol...made u look
Originally posted by applejustworks2
OMG! POWERBOOK G5S!
lol...made u look
HAHAH!
Originally posted by emig647
Having 2 optical drives is a huge deal to me. First off... if you burn a lot of cds like I do (about 100 every month), the superdrive will die out eventually. It wasn't designed to burn and burn and burn cds. Nor was it designed to read dvd's constantly. I've gone through 2 pioneer drives in my pc because the drive has burned out eventually. (a 105 and a 106).
I burn almost the same number of CD's every month, and my wife watches tons of DVD's on my first generation Superdrive (SP 733 G4). The drive keeps on crankin' year after year. Guess I'm lucky (or you're not.)
Originally posted by NShirkey
I burn almost the same number of CD's every month, and my wife watches tons of DVD's on my first generation Superdrive (SP 733 G4). The drive keeps on crankin' year after year. Guess I'm lucky (or you're not.)
"updates, 'bout 2 weeks at most & interestingly (to me) Powerbooks especially.
now you know.
(4/6/04)
& now it's new Powermacs next week!