I will agree with everyone that we need more power in laptops. However, where will the juice come from? Most PB these days are lucky if they get 3-3.5 hours from the batteries. What will a G5 chip do? Not only does Apple have to work to cram aa G5 chip into the sleek PB body, but it must also manage to power the chip for a good length of time. Good luck...you can do it!
If you'd care to read the developer doc on 64bit on the apple site(s), you'd see that there is nothing that will justify a G5 in a powerbook. Of course we need more speed (YMMV), but we do not need a G5. In fact a dual-core G4 may make much more sense. Imagine you have the aequivalent of 2x1.5GHz G4 running in a Powerbook! The G5 in fact is slower at a given clock rate than the G4 clocked the same. So the G5 needs speed and laptop-batteries "hate" high clock rates. I'd opt for dual CPU or dual-core version.
The current 7447a runs on very low power at 1GHz right now. Imagine you'd have 2x 1GHz G4 (7447a), that would be a very fat machine and it would not be "hotter" than the current one!
Personally I'd settle for dual 1ghz g4's compared to a single 2ghz g5 right now. Why? More battery life. That extra processor can be non existant until it's needed... that is saving a lot of battery right there. But for instance... My friend has a 1.8ghz iMac and a dual 1ghz g4 powermac. He's usually on the powermac. That extra processor is so nice to have. It makes so much mroe sense than a single proc. Its like... BAM i'm here to execute cpu instructions when needed.
I remember I had the choice between buying a dual 533 and a single 867 quicksilver. To this day I wish I had bought the 533. Now that I'm on a dual machine I see the importance of dual processors.
Exactly. Apple's having a VERY hard time making it compelling to spend 3k on a notebook computer. I want a notebook that screams for 3000 dollars. I certianly can get one on the windows side that's more than "Apple Snappy" it's FAST. I want a FAST powerbook, not a snappy one. Mac OS X is the real advantage, the hardware is nothing to be impressed by.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr Fisky
Definately yes.
The Pro lineup should be the best you can get. Nothing worse than trying to get a job done saving files to the laptop and it's the laptop that's holding you up.
Yes. Why not? That's like sayin do we need progress. If it were up to some people I guess we'd still live in the stone age. Also...the G5 has a MUCH better floating point than the current G4s being used.
Am I correct in assuming that this new PB update doesnt use the new freescale e500 MPC8641D ???? If the technology is available why not use it?
MPC8641D
Dual e600 PowerPC core, >1.5GHz each, 2.3MIPS/MHz
Caches
(per core) \tL1: 32kB I/D
L2: 1MB with ECC
Memory Controller Dual 64b DDR2, 667MHz with ECC
Fabric Interface Serial RapidIO®, 1x/4x at up to 2.5Gb/s per lane
Local I/O Interface \tDual PCI Express, x1/x2/x4/x8, 2.0Gb/s per lane
Am I correct in assuming that this new PB update doesnt use the new freescale e500 MPC8641D ????
Yes (if you mean e600).
Quote:
If the technology is available why not use it?
Since it is not yet available. If Freescale does not run into problems, the 8641D chips will go into production in 10-12 months from now.
EDIT: here is the official Freescale roadmap (look at page 41). It gives a good idea on what to expect in future Powerbooks if IBM appears unable to manufacture a powerful mobile processor.
Thanks PB - it seems that people read the "proposed" roadmap from freescale and hey presto! we have dual core G4's around the corner?
As PB stated expect the dual core G4 by this time 2006 (at best!), until then there is some tech which could get the G5 into the PB, and with dual core G5's coming around the same time as freescale's timeline.
The Power5 cores are built specifically for low power applications, unlike the Power4 9xx derivations.
Until then? Dothan's will kick our butts for a little while longer. But we have OSX!
Yes, of course we need a G5 in the powerbook line up. The question is what processor that should bear the "mobile G5" nick...
Obviously there are two main categories of Powerbook users:
- the ones that value portability & sex-factor (designers, those who run presentations etc.)
- those who value raw speed (developers, video editors etc.)
Both categories value good battery life - and this will be provided even with a mobile "G5" (trust Apple on this one).
I, personally, kinda fall into both categories and will probably buy the newly released 17" as my main working tool (OK, so it's not a speed monster - but it's the last incarnation of it's kind and, considering my trusty Pismo, this means a computer with few flaws. When the PbG5 arrives (this fall?) I'll buy one of those too (for private/hobby use). This way I can go "all mobile" retiring my desktop computers.
As to which processor will get the "G5 mobile" name: Given the company's track record, I don't trust Motorola/Freescale for a second and set my hopes on a low power IBM thing.
I will agree with everyone that we need more power in laptops. However, where will the juice come from? Most PB these days are lucky if they get 3-3.5 hours from the batteries. What will a G5 chip do? Not only does Apple have to work to cram aa G5 chip into the sleek PB body, but it must also manage to power the chip for a good length of time. Good luck...you can do it!
As been said before, Apple can introduce a top-of-the-line Powerbook G5, while keeping and selling the Powerbook G4 and iBook G4. A Powerbook G5 would cost $2500+ while the Powerbook G4 would cost between $1400 to $2400, and the iBook G4 would cost less than $1300. Apple doesn't have to have svelt Powerbook G5.
Where will the juice come from? A prospective Powerbook G5 could be 1.5 inches thick. This means Apple could employ a 100+ Watt-hour battery for a Powerbook G5, twice as much juice as the current ~50 Watt-hour batteries for the Powerbook G4.
As been said before, Apple can introduce a top-of-the-line Powerbook G5, while keeping and selling the Powerbook G4 and iBook G4. A Powerbook G5 would cost $2500+ while the Powerbook G4 would cost between $1400 to $2400, and the iBook G4 would cost less than $1300. Apple doesn't have to have svelt Powerbook G5.
Where will the juice come from? A prospective Powerbook G5 could be 1.5 inches thick. This means Apple could employ a 100+ Watt-hour battery for a Powerbook G5, twice as much juice as the current ~50 Watt-hour batteries for the Powerbook G4.
I've been a proponent of this approach as well. Why limit the laptops to two lines when three would cover the entire spectrum of users-- Power users (G5), the image conscious (G4 PB) and the rest of us (iBook).
But somehow I can just see Jobs saying "we could drop in a G5 into a 2 inch 8lb. laptop like the competition...but we didn't. We kept it only one inch thick. Introducing the all new 2008 Powerbook G5"
Comments
Processor only uses what it needs, scales back when it's idle?
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Yes.
If you'd care to read the developer doc on 64bit on the apple site(s), you'd see that there is nothing that will justify a G5 in a powerbook. Of course we need more speed (YMMV), but we do not need a G5. In fact a dual-core G4 may make much more sense. Imagine you have the aequivalent of 2x1.5GHz G4 running in a Powerbook! The G5 in fact is slower at a given clock rate than the G4 clocked the same. So the G5 needs speed and laptop-batteries "hate" high clock rates. I'd opt for dual CPU or dual-core version.
The current 7447a runs on very low power at 1GHz right now. Imagine you'd have 2x 1GHz G4 (7447a), that would be a very fat machine and it would not be "hotter" than the current one!
Personally I'd settle for dual 1ghz g4's compared to a single 2ghz g5 right now. Why? More battery life. That extra processor can be non existant until it's needed... that is saving a lot of battery right there. But for instance... My friend has a 1.8ghz iMac and a dual 1ghz g4 powermac. He's usually on the powermac. That extra processor is so nice to have. It makes so much mroe sense than a single proc. Its like... BAM i'm here to execute cpu instructions when needed.
I remember I had the choice between buying a dual 533 and a single 867 quicksilver. To this day I wish I had bought the 533. Now that I'm on a dual machine I see the importance of dual processors.
Originally posted by Mr Fisky
Definately yes.
The Pro lineup should be the best you can get. Nothing worse than trying to get a job done saving files to the laptop and it's the laptop that's holding you up.
Bring it on! I hope "the next" is spot on.
Am I correct in assuming that this new PB update doesnt use the new freescale e500 MPC8641D ???? If the technology is available why not use it?
MPC8641D
Dual e600 PowerPC core, >1.5GHz each, 2.3MIPS/MHz
Caches
(per core) \tL1: 32kB I/D
L2: 1MB with ECC
Memory Controller Dual 64b DDR2, 667MHz with ECC
Fabric Interface Serial RapidIO®, 1x/4x at up to 2.5Gb/s per lane
Local I/O Interface \tDual PCI Express, x1/x2/x4/x8, 2.0Gb/s per lane
Voltage 1.0, 1.1V
Technology \t90nm silicon-on-insulator (SOI)
Originally posted by TigerWoods99
Am I correct in assuming that this new PB update doesnt use the new freescale e500 MPC8641D ????
Yes (if you mean e600).
If the technology is available why not use it?
Since it is not yet available. If Freescale does not run into problems, the 8641D chips will go into production in 10-12 months from now.
EDIT: here is the official Freescale roadmap (look at page 41). It gives a good idea on what to expect in future Powerbooks if IBM appears unable to manufacture a powerful mobile processor.
As PB stated expect the dual core G4 by this time 2006 (at best!), until then there is some tech which could get the G5 into the PB, and with dual core G5's coming around the same time as freescale's timeline.
The Power5 cores are built specifically for low power applications, unlike the Power4 9xx derivations.
Until then? Dothan's will kick our butts for a little while longer. But we have OSX!
Obviously there are two main categories of Powerbook users:
- the ones that value portability & sex-factor (designers, those who run presentations etc.)
- those who value raw speed (developers, video editors etc.)
Both categories value good battery life - and this will be provided even with a mobile "G5" (trust Apple on this one).
I, personally, kinda fall into both categories and will probably buy the newly released 17" as my main working tool (OK, so it's not a speed monster - but it's the last incarnation of it's kind and, considering my trusty Pismo, this means a computer with few flaws. When the PbG5 arrives (this fall?) I'll buy one of those too (for private/hobby use). This way I can go "all mobile" retiring my desktop computers.
As to which processor will get the "G5 mobile" name: Given the company's track record, I don't trust Motorola/Freescale for a second and set my hopes on a low power IBM thing.
Originally posted by chipz
I will agree with everyone that we need more power in laptops. However, where will the juice come from? Most PB these days are lucky if they get 3-3.5 hours from the batteries. What will a G5 chip do? Not only does Apple have to work to cram aa G5 chip into the sleek PB body, but it must also manage to power the chip for a good length of time. Good luck...you can do it!
As been said before, Apple can introduce a top-of-the-line Powerbook G5, while keeping and selling the Powerbook G4 and iBook G4. A Powerbook G5 would cost $2500+ while the Powerbook G4 would cost between $1400 to $2400, and the iBook G4 would cost less than $1300. Apple doesn't have to have svelt Powerbook G5.
Where will the juice come from? A prospective Powerbook G5 could be 1.5 inches thick. This means Apple could employ a 100+ Watt-hour battery for a Powerbook G5, twice as much juice as the current ~50 Watt-hour batteries for the Powerbook G4.
Originally posted by THT
As been said before, Apple can introduce a top-of-the-line Powerbook G5, while keeping and selling the Powerbook G4 and iBook G4. A Powerbook G5 would cost $2500+ while the Powerbook G4 would cost between $1400 to $2400, and the iBook G4 would cost less than $1300. Apple doesn't have to have svelt Powerbook G5.
Where will the juice come from? A prospective Powerbook G5 could be 1.5 inches thick. This means Apple could employ a 100+ Watt-hour battery for a Powerbook G5, twice as much juice as the current ~50 Watt-hour batteries for the Powerbook G4.
I've been a proponent of this approach as well. Why limit the laptops to two lines when three would cover the entire spectrum of users-- Power users (G5), the image conscious (G4 PB) and the rest of us (iBook).
But somehow I can just see Jobs saying "we could drop in a G5 into a 2 inch 8lb. laptop like the competition...but we didn't. We kept it only one inch thick. Introducing the all new 2008 Powerbook G5"