But you and I both know they are coming out PCI-Express on the next mobo... so is it worth bringing up?
If apple announces their dual core powermac at WWDC (the closer we get to it without any updates the more probable it becomes), they will be the first consumer machine to be running dual core that I know of. That's still beating intel and amd to the punch once again.
But you and I both know they are coming out PCI-Express on the next mobo... so is it worth bringing up?
If apple announces their dual core powermac at WWDC (the closer we get to it without any updates the more probable it becomes), they will be the first consumer machine to be running dual core that I know of. That's still beating intel and amd to the punch once again.
Actually AMD beat them to the punch last time with 64-bit, and there is a pretty good chance they will roll out dual core before Apple does also. That's the whispering on the vine anyway.
... how about good old reliable 2.5 GHz dual G5 (single core) and a new PCI-e-savvy system controller as well as a PS3-PCI-e-card with new core audio/video libraries? Faster rendering *and* better gaming with one update - the only problem would be you would have to open the case every time to change the DVD in the PS3 card.
Just my opinion and I may be wrong but there will be no dual core machines.. why ?
Marketing.. there is no way of making a distinction in peoples minds between a "dual 2.5" and a "dual, dual core 2.5"
Apple will have to think if a name for the dual core chips and market them that way. So unless the G5 is to go bye bye there will not be a dual core release
Easy fix. Introducing the G5 Extreme. Marketing is the least of Apple's problems.
I tell you though, if they introduce a quad-core 2.5Ghz+ machine with PCI-Express, I'll order one immediately.
And sometimes it's not about what we need, it's what Apple needs to keep their lineup respectable. If Apple waits another year after WWDC before using dual core processors they will loose so much credibility with future buyers. AMD, and Intel will have them shortly (AMD first) and that will take it's toll on Apple if they don't get theirs out first. AMD's dual core processors are going to be able to work in current motherboards. When Apple goes dual core your going to be spending a lot more money to transition to dual core than the PC side is because your buying an entire computer to do it. Apple is already criticized for their lineup all the time. If they have their dual core boards out first, some of that wont be noticeable because of the fact that it's available on the Mac at the point that everyone else is releasing theirs.
Just my opinion and I may be wrong but there will be no dual core machines.. why ?
Marketing.. there is no way of making a distinction in peoples minds between a "dual 2.5" and a "dual, dual core 2.5"
Apple will have to think if a name for the dual core chips and market them that way. So unless the G5 is to go bye bye there will not be a dual core release
Introducing the Powermac G5 Hydra?. Because many heads are better than one.
Don't forget that Apple is the company that pushed the line of BS about the G4 being faster than the Pentium IV, even though this was only true for a handful of hand-optimized Photoshop filters. I'm sure they will have no problem marketing a beast of a CPU that mops the floor with anything else out there. At least it will if IBM ever produces them.
Apple seems to be cursed when it comes to CPU suppliers. IBM is better than Moto, but not by much. They still made a liar out of Steve Jobs when they promised 3 GHz in a year and instead gave Apple 2.5 GHz with a vague promise of dual-core G5s.
I will not be surprised if we have to wait until 2006 for the 970mp. What is IBM's incentive to rush it along? Apple doesn't sell enough Powermacs/Xserves to make the 970 a big profit-maker for IBM, so of course they are dragging their feet. They probably have something like 3 engineers working on the 970mp project, along with a few techs and a janitor.
If they could come out with the MP before intel and AMD (to the consumer) than that would definitely give IBM some more respect and perhaps help apple sell more machines.
Problem is this: I have friends at intel (I live next to the campus)... Intel is already building and selling dual core procs to private businesses for servers and software development. They have got over the yield problems they were having and are producing chips at 65nm no problems. This could spell disaster for apple / IBM and amd.
The first move is that they move all PowerMacs onto a unified motherboard.
This will save millions in manufacturing costs, not to mention replacement parts for defects.
I'd say the baseline will be a single 970MP.
The iMac will manage the G5 line up through to 2.5Ghz with a future version dealing with heat constraints that don't require a liquid cooled solution.
What Apple does need to do with Tiger is to make sure ATI and nVidia's chipset lines are covered, instead of hitting on just the basics.
FW800 is obvious. Gigabit Ethernet is obvious at the baseline. Dual Ethernet on higher-end.
Superdrives on all systems. Dual layer on the highend.
PCI-Express on all systems(unified motherboard)
Built-in new version of Airport Extreme
Bluetooth 2.0
Lowend PowerMac to house 1Gig RAM expandable to 8Gig.
Highend PowerMac to house 2Gig RAM expandable to 16Gig.
Optional 4 Port Fibre Channel
Updated XServers with 4 Port Fibre Channel built-in. not to mention standard 2Gig RAM.
Pricing won't be as much of an issue if Apple actually can deliver first solutions that target Desktop Publishing and Professional Engineering CAD systems.
Apple needs to help port Pro/Engineer and/or CATIA to OS X.
If they do so companies like Boeing and Airbus will be ready to switch.
iMac lineup will be where they can be more conservative.
PowerBook G5 system I don't expect to see until late August as a back-to-school push.
this year is about software, not hardware. ask anyone who owns a decent G5 PowerMac and ask them if it's slow. It's not. So everyone whining about not having Quad processors just needs to shell out a few bucks. Sometimes I wish rumor sites didn't exist so people wouldn't get so caught up on technologies that probably won't be around for a while, or at least one Mac's. The point is, you don't need quad processors.
What some of us really need is throughput. For eleven years we have used Mac based Avids for editing at the post house where I work. Today, the owner wrote a check to Avid to buy 3 new PC based Avids. Yes that is right Windows XP Avids. The reason? The PC systems can handle 11 streams of standard def video right now. No Mac can do that yet and no one knows when/if Avid will deliver the promised hardware. Overall performance is superior at every level. No dropped frames with the PC's.
Of course the whole story has to include the fact that Avid has slowed down their Mac software development since Apple released Final Cut. We have FInal Cut HD too, but it also needs better hardware. And it is also still is bug and glitch prone sometimes.
Come on Apple make a Mac we can be proud of again! Without rigged speed tests please. We'll never get our Mac Avids back, but maybe FCPHD will scream on the new hardware.
Comments
If apple announces their dual core powermac at WWDC (the closer we get to it without any updates the more probable it becomes), they will be the first consumer machine to be running dual core that I know of. That's still beating intel and amd to the punch once again.
Originally posted by emig647
But you and I both know they are coming out PCI-Express on the next mobo... so is it worth bringing up?
If apple announces their dual core powermac at WWDC (the closer we get to it without any updates the more probable it becomes), they will be the first consumer machine to be running dual core that I know of. That's still beating intel and amd to the punch once again.
Actually AMD beat them to the punch last time with 64-bit, and there is a pretty good chance they will roll out dual core before Apple does also. That's the whispering on the vine anyway.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
Sometimes I wish rumor sites didn't exist so people...
What would you do with all that free time, Mr. 2,600 posts in a year and a half?
Originally posted by wilco
What would you do with all that free time, Mr. 2,600 posts in a year and a half?
i dont post a whole lot in threads about ridiculous power mac specs or hopes.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
i dont post a whole lot in threads about ridiculous power mac specs or hopes.
so then don't post in this thread!
Just kidding
Originally posted by johnrp
Just my opinion and I may be wrong but there will be no dual core machines.. why ?
Marketing.. there is no way of making a distinction in peoples minds between a "dual 2.5" and a "dual, dual core 2.5"
Apple will have to think if a name for the dual core chips and market them that way. So unless the G5 is to go bye bye there will not be a dual core release
Easy fix. Introducing the G5 Extreme. Marketing is the least of Apple's problems.
I tell you though, if they introduce a quad-core 2.5Ghz+ machine with PCI-Express, I'll order one immediately.
Otherwise they really are opening a barrel of monkeys (see my above marketing post)
j.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
The point is, you don't need quad processors.
it isn't about needs, it's about wishes.
you doesn't need a beautiful wife with a great ass either
but you'd wish you had one right now.
quads would be nice though...
next time i need a replacement for my iMacG5, 3 years from now.
Powermacs between now and September: PPC 970mp powered.
2.2 GHz mono dual-core G5
2.6 GHz twin dual-core G5
3.0 GHz twin dual-core G5
Unlikely, but dreamed about:
3.4 GHz twin dual-core G4 Powermac X workstation.
iMacs. PPC 970fx
1.8 GHz 17"
2.0 GHz 20"
2.2 GHz 23" HD
iBooks. 7448 G4.
1.6 GHz 12", 14"
1.8 Ghz 14"
If Freescale can't figure out how to fab their newer G4, then a 7447 iBook will appear:
1.5 GHz 12", 14"
1.67 GHz 14"
Powerbooks between now and November: PPC 970gx.
1.6 GHz 12"
1.8 GHz 15"
2.0 GHz 17"
Unlikely, but possibly: 2.0 GHz 20" HD
Originally posted by ipodandimac
The point is, you don't need quad processors.
Sometimes It's not all about you.
And sometimes it's not about what we need, it's what Apple needs to keep their lineup respectable. If Apple waits another year after WWDC before using dual core processors they will loose so much credibility with future buyers. AMD, and Intel will have them shortly (AMD first) and that will take it's toll on Apple if they don't get theirs out first. AMD's dual core processors are going to be able to work in current motherboards. When Apple goes dual core your going to be spending a lot more money to transition to dual core than the PC side is because your buying an entire computer to do it. Apple is already criticized for their lineup all the time. If they have their dual core boards out first, some of that wont be noticeable because of the fact that it's available on the Mac at the point that everyone else is releasing theirs.
Originally posted by johnrp
Just my opinion and I may be wrong but there will be no dual core machines.. why ?
Marketing.. there is no way of making a distinction in peoples minds between a "dual 2.5" and a "dual, dual core 2.5"
Apple will have to think if a name for the dual core chips and market them that way. So unless the G5 is to go bye bye there will not be a dual core release
Introducing the Powermac G5 Hydra?. Because many heads are better than one.
Don't forget that Apple is the company that pushed the line of BS about the G4 being faster than the Pentium IV, even though this was only true for a handful of hand-optimized Photoshop filters. I'm sure they will have no problem marketing a beast of a CPU that mops the floor with anything else out there. At least it will if IBM ever produces them.
Apple seems to be cursed when it comes to CPU suppliers. IBM is better than Moto, but not by much. They still made a liar out of Steve Jobs when they promised 3 GHz in a year and instead gave Apple 2.5 GHz with a vague promise of dual-core G5s.
I will not be surprised if we have to wait until 2006 for the 970mp. What is IBM's incentive to rush it along? Apple doesn't sell enough Powermacs/Xserves to make the 970 a big profit-maker for IBM, so of course they are dragging their feet. They probably have something like 3 engineers working on the 970mp project, along with a few techs and a janitor.
Problem is this: I have friends at intel (I live next to the campus)... Intel is already building and selling dual core procs to private businesses for servers and software development. They have got over the yield problems they were having and are producing chips at 65nm no problems. This could spell disaster for apple / IBM and amd.
efficiency more than pure speed.
If heat issues still prevent higher clock speeds, then dual cores may be the only way to effectively improve benchmark results.
I still haven't figured out how far Apple might go with the 970 series to improve a Rev C PowerMac G5 before moving on to a Power 5 based Rev A G6
WWDC: New seminar - The Dual-Core CPU Myth - why a single core CPU is better than a dual core CPU by Greg Joswiack (sp?).
The first move is that they move all PowerMacs onto a unified motherboard.
This will save millions in manufacturing costs, not to mention replacement parts for defects.
I'd say the baseline will be a single 970MP.
The iMac will manage the G5 line up through to 2.5Ghz with a future version dealing with heat constraints that don't require a liquid cooled solution.
What Apple does need to do with Tiger is to make sure ATI and nVidia's chipset lines are covered, instead of hitting on just the basics.
FW800 is obvious. Gigabit Ethernet is obvious at the baseline. Dual Ethernet on higher-end.
Superdrives on all systems. Dual layer on the highend.
PCI-Express on all systems(unified motherboard)
Built-in new version of Airport Extreme
Bluetooth 2.0
Lowend PowerMac to house 1Gig RAM expandable to 8Gig.
Highend PowerMac to house 2Gig RAM expandable to 16Gig.
Optional 4 Port Fibre Channel
Updated XServers with 4 Port Fibre Channel built-in. not to mention standard 2Gig RAM.
Pricing won't be as much of an issue if Apple actually can deliver first solutions that target Desktop Publishing and Professional Engineering CAD systems.
Apple needs to help port Pro/Engineer and/or CATIA to OS X.
If they do so companies like Boeing and Airbus will be ready to switch.
iMac lineup will be where they can be more conservative.
PowerBook G5 system I don't expect to see until late August as a back-to-school push.
to throw off the competition.
We still don't know how Apple will make use of the available technology
or how much they are keeping under wraps with IBM
I still think we will see major improvements in the next revision,
but Apple will reserve a bit of hold back until they know more of what the competiton has to offer.
Welcome to Core Wars
Originally posted by ipodandimac
this year is about software, not hardware. ask anyone who owns a decent G5 PowerMac and ask them if it's slow. It's not. So everyone whining about not having Quad processors just needs to shell out a few bucks. Sometimes I wish rumor sites didn't exist so people wouldn't get so caught up on technologies that probably won't be around for a while, or at least one Mac's. The point is, you don't need quad processors.
What some of us really need is throughput. For eleven years we have used Mac based Avids for editing at the post house where I work. Today, the owner wrote a check to Avid to buy 3 new PC based Avids. Yes that is right Windows XP Avids. The reason? The PC systems can handle 11 streams of standard def video right now. No Mac can do that yet and no one knows when/if Avid will deliver the promised hardware. Overall performance is superior at every level. No dropped frames with the PC's.
Of course the whole story has to include the fact that Avid has slowed down their Mac software development since Apple released Final Cut. We have FInal Cut HD too, but it also needs better hardware. And it is also still is bug and glitch prone sometimes.
Come on Apple make a Mac we can be proud of again! Without rigged speed tests please. We'll never get our Mac Avids back, but maybe FCPHD will scream on the new hardware.
How long will it take Avid/ProTools to work seemlessly
in a real 64 bit environment using Windows or Longhorn?
The hardware upgrades alone are frightening.
I still cringe at the thought of replacing a $7000 PCI card.
Those Avid/PC's you're buying might hold you till Microsoft
finally get's their act together with Longhorn, but then you're
facing tremendous challenges and expenses in hardware, software and training to upgrade a 2 year old system to work with Longhorn.
No doubt Apple needs to get serious about a Pro Workstation,
but innovaton takes time and right now, all things considered,
time seems to be working in their favor.
AMD and Wintel have 2 huge hurdles to overcome in the next 2 years.
Reliable performance in a dual core system AND making the transition to
Longhorn.
At least Apple can build safely around OSX NOW