I second that! Seeing as the G4 has a stronger implementation of Altivec and is faster than the G5 clock-for-clock.
LOL i guess its nice to dream stronger altivec maybe and big deal faster? i dont think so. 1 G5 = 2 G4s. one more point this is moto we are talking about and i sure have not seen a 2.0 G4 on this planet and i doubt anyone will this year. Dream on about faster G4s i guess the G4 lovers dont know Moto's history.
This would not provide the benefits from having 64 bit across the entire product line (and in the OS)
So what? I'm far from believing that 64 bits matter anything inside a laptop. What is the actual reason for your concern? What particular 64-bit apps would you run on a laptop?
What's this BS on the front page of AI about the next Powerbook having a G4 with a 2.0Ghz G4?
Just guessing, but I would think that a simple die reduction from 0.13µm to 0.09µm would get them there. Though, what they do about the FSB is anyone's guess???? At what GHz. point will the current MPX FSB become so totally saturated it will blow up during operation???
I saw an article about mobile Radeon 9800's on Yahoo yesterday. I guess there *is* some way on earth to get in into a PowerBook form factor
The article said it's based on ATI's x800 architecture. It sounded pretty nice.
Try thisor this. Yet to see anybody say anything glowing about this card when it comes to size. Even ATI has admitted it is aimed at a rather select group.
Try thisor this. Yet to see anybody say anything glowing about this card when it comes to size. Even ATI has admitted it is aimed at a rather select group.
I suspectthe the performance gap will move further towards the G5 when Tiger arrives.
Yeah! And GCC3.5, also the next Version of IBMs XL C/C++ will have Auto-vectorization. Maybe by the end of this year.
Quote:
While the G5 currently continues to utilize a 32-bit virtual address space, it's able to support what are called 64-bit integers, giving it the ability to compute "fast math." What does this mean to non-programmers? In the revised Panther operating system, Apple has "hand-tuned" key functions of system math and vector libraries, where these libraries are better able to use the wider data path of the G5. This means that the G5s are faster, even before any optimization has been applied to applications, where they'll get, according to Apple, an "automatic performance boost on the G5." Also with Panther Apple has also included special programming code that speeds up the process of advanced image processing by taking advantage of the internal math processing of the G5 instead of executing these functions through software.
Try thisor this. Yet to see anybody say anything glowing about this card when it comes to size. Even ATI has admitted it is aimed at a rather select group.
Ahhh, they can easily fit that into the 17" Powerbook. Now the 15".... ummmm... might be a lot harder to fit it in there.
Just guessing, but I would think that a simple die reduction from 0.13µm to 0.09µm would get them there. Though, what they do about the FSB is anyone's guess???? At what GHz. point will the current MPX FSB become so totally saturated it will blow up during operation???
Yeah, a die shrink might get them up to a 1.8Ghz G4. Then again, everyone has had problems with the die-shrink to 0.09. I can't see Motorola having any better success. The FSB shouldn't be a big problem if they could have two 1.42 GHz G4's running on the one bus. If they could get the FSB to DDR, of course, that would help significantly.
Yeah, a die shrink might get them up to a 1.8Ghz G4. Then again, everyone has had problems with the die-shrink to 0.09. I can't see Motorola having any better success. The FSB shouldn't be a big problem if they could have two 1.42 GHz G4's running on the one bus. If they could get the FSB to DDR, of course, that would help significantly.
Maybe I shouldn't have said,"a simple die shrink". In any event, we're not strictly speaking Motorola here, but the new fab in Crolles(sp. ?). Although, sadly this still doesn't fix the FSB situation and Freescales roadmap doesn't mention updating the FSB on the next iteration of the G4.
Now next year, maybe just maybe, Freescale will have the alleged Rapid I/O interconnect e600/e700 core to go with the 0.09µm process, but will this be too late? Ahhh the unending saga of Motorola/Freescale, and millions of comments made on discussion boards about the G4 over the years.
Try thisor this. Yet to see anybody say anything glowing about this card when it comes to size. Even ATI has admitted it is aimed at a rather select group.
is it me, or is the thickness of this card a good thing? if apple is using it for future laptops, they're going to have to give up the retarded race for .5" thin laptops. why try to compete with the likes of sony on this front, when their laptops suck. make the powerbooks a little thicker (and sturdier), add some friggin battery capacity, simplify cooling (by having more volume to work with inside) and still have a killer desktop replacement. Come on, audio and video pros want processing power, fast disks, good gfx, and battery life. i really doubt 1" thick versus 1.5" thick would be a sticking point for anyone but the most shishy toters.
Try thisor this. Yet to see anybody say anything glowing about this card when it comes to size. Even ATI has admitted it is aimed at a rather select group.
I am stealing the word "schlep-top" from THG. That's priceless.
The board doesn't appear that big, actually. The Dell laptop looks like an old Kaypro, but I'll chalk that up to their 31337 laptop engineering skillz, and their inclusion of a desktop P4(!).
I mean, the thing was pulling 83 watts running office apps, and twice that running games?! I think Apple can probably beat those numbers. They've got a far more power-efficient architecture to work with, and I'll wager that they'll spend more time on a MR9800-enabled PowerBook than Dell spent kicking out that behemoth.
We might only see it as an option in the 17" PowerBook for starters, but that's not a bad thing.
Comments
Originally posted by Gavriel
I second that! Seeing as the G4 has a stronger implementation of Altivec and is faster than the G5 clock-for-clock.
LOL
Originally posted by McCrab
This would not provide the benefits from having 64 bit across the entire product line (and in the OS)
So what? I'm far from believing that 64 bits matter anything inside a laptop. What is the actual reason for your concern? What particular 64-bit apps would you run on a laptop?
Originally posted by Aurora
1 G5 = 2 G4s
Now that's todays overestimation (and oversimplification).
Originally posted by Telomar
I can't. The card is huge. There's no way on earth they'd get it into a Powerbook form factor.
I saw an article about mobile Radeon 9800's on Yahoo yesterday. I guess there *is* some way on earth to get in into a PowerBook form factor
The article said it's based on ATI's x800 architecture. It sounded pretty nice.
Originally posted by Fat Freddy
ACK
Croquer is IMO the french version of MOSR
I suspectthe the performance gap will move further towards the G5 when Tiger arrives.
Originally posted by Leonard
What's this BS on the front page of AI about the next Powerbook having a G4 with a 2.0Ghz G4?
Just guessing, but I would think that a simple die reduction from 0.13µm to 0.09µm would get them there. Though, what they do about the FSB is anyone's guess???? At what GHz. point will the current MPX FSB become so totally saturated it will blow up during operation???
Originally posted by Bancho
I saw an article about mobile Radeon 9800's on Yahoo yesterday. I guess there *is* some way on earth to get in into a PowerBook form factor
The article said it's based on ATI's x800 architecture. It sounded pretty nice.
Try this or this. Yet to see anybody say anything glowing about this card when it comes to size. Even ATI has admitted it is aimed at a rather select group.
Originally posted by Telomar
Try this or this. Yet to see anybody say anything glowing about this card when it comes to size. Even ATI has admitted it is aimed at a rather select group.
It is a bit chunky.
Originally posted by Addison
I suspectthe the performance gap will move further towards the G5 when Tiger arrives.
Yeah! And GCC3.5, also the next Version of IBMs XL C/C++ will have Auto-vectorization. Maybe by the end of this year.
While the G5 currently continues to utilize a 32-bit virtual address space, it's able to support what are called 64-bit integers, giving it the ability to compute "fast math." What does this mean to non-programmers? In the revised Panther operating system, Apple has "hand-tuned" key functions of system math and vector libraries, where these libraries are better able to use the wider data path of the G5. This means that the G5s are faster, even before any optimization has been applied to applications, where they'll get, according to Apple, an "automatic performance boost on the G5." Also with Panther Apple has also included special programming code that speeds up the process of advanced image processing by taking advantage of the internal math processing of the G5 instead of executing these functions through software.
http://www.hollywoodindustry.com/art...jsp?id=25757-1
Originally posted by Telomar
Try this or this. Yet to see anybody say anything glowing about this card when it comes to size. Even ATI has admitted it is aimed at a rather select group.
Ahhh, they can easily fit that into the 17" Powerbook. Now the 15".... ummmm... might be a lot harder to fit it in there.
Originally posted by rickag
Just guessing, but I would think that a simple die reduction from 0.13µm to 0.09µm would get them there. Though, what they do about the FSB is anyone's guess???? At what GHz. point will the current MPX FSB become so totally saturated it will blow up during operation???
Yeah, a die shrink might get them up to a 1.8Ghz G4. Then again, everyone has had problems with the die-shrink to 0.09. I can't see Motorola having any better success. The FSB shouldn't be a big problem if they could have two 1.42 GHz G4's running on the one bus. If they could get the FSB to DDR, of course, that would help significantly.
ps - Just teasing Leonard
Originally posted by Leonard
Yeah, a die shrink might get them up to a 1.8Ghz G4. Then again, everyone has had problems with the die-shrink to 0.09. I can't see Motorola having any better success. The FSB shouldn't be a big problem if they could have two 1.42 GHz G4's running on the one bus. If they could get the FSB to DDR, of course, that would help significantly.
Maybe I shouldn't have said,"a simple die shrink". In any event, we're not strictly speaking Motorola here, but the new fab in Crolles(sp. ?). Although, sadly this still doesn't fix the FSB situation and Freescales roadmap doesn't mention updating the FSB on the next iteration of the G4.
Now next year, maybe just maybe, Freescale will have the alleged Rapid I/O interconnect e600/e700 core to go with the 0.09µm process, but will this be too late? Ahhh the unending saga of Motorola/Freescale, and millions of comments made on discussion boards about the G4 over the years.
Originally posted by Telomar
Try this or this. Yet to see anybody say anything glowing about this card when it comes to size. Even ATI has admitted it is aimed at a rather select group.
is it me, or is the thickness of this card a good thing? if apple is using it for future laptops, they're going to have to give up the retarded race for .5" thin laptops. why try to compete with the likes of sony on this front, when their laptops suck. make the powerbooks a little thicker (and sturdier), add some friggin battery capacity, simplify cooling (by having more volume to work with inside) and still have a killer desktop replacement. Come on, audio and video pros want processing power, fast disks, good gfx, and battery life. i really doubt 1" thick versus 1.5" thick would be a sticking point for anyone but the most shishy toters.
Originally posted by Telomar
Try this or this. Yet to see anybody say anything glowing about this card when it comes to size. Even ATI has admitted it is aimed at a rather select group.
I am stealing the word "schlep-top" from THG. That's priceless.
The board doesn't appear that big, actually. The Dell laptop looks like an old Kaypro, but I'll chalk that up to their 31337 laptop engineering skillz, and their inclusion of a desktop P4(!).
I mean, the thing was pulling 83 watts running office apps, and twice that running games?! I think Apple can probably beat those numbers. They've got a far more power-efficient architecture to work with, and I'll wager that they'll spend more time on a MR9800-enabled PowerBook than Dell spent kicking out that behemoth.
We might only see it as an option in the 17" PowerBook for starters, but that's not a bad thing.