TS reveals specs

12467

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 138
    iposteriposter Posts: 1,560member
    For those worried about not having PCI-E: (yes, it's more future proof, but not a necessity for a couple of years at least)

    FromSudhian Media



    Quote:

    Conclusion:_ PCI-Express on Desktop Likely to Offer Very Little Performance:





    Is PCI-Express a bad idea?_ Not at all._ It cuts manufacturing costs and simplifies trace design; from that perspective alone it?s a smart advance._ But don?t confuse ?smart advance? with ?performance advantage.?_ Based on the numbers we?ve seen here, the average game and application (even the modern ones) typically do not take advantage of AGP 8x._ None of our games showed more than a small increase._ Professional applications are a different story, there we saw boosts of 30-40%._ Its also been suggested that certain specified applications, like video editing, might run more smoothly over the PCI-Express system.



    For the gamer, however, PCI-Express is going to be a non-issue._ Given that most games today barely stress the AGP 2x bus, moving to double AGP 8x isn?t going to do anything._ It?s the equivalent of widening a highway no one drives on._ Had AGP developed in the direction it was intended to things might be different, but it didn?t._ Now, to some extent, it?s a solution to a problem no one has._





    If you?re still running on an original Athlon, P3, or Socket 423 P4, than a PCI-Express system might not be a bad idea, but if you?ve got something newer and aren?t using a specialized application demonstrated to gain from PCI-E, we wouldn?t bother planning to upgrade._ You?ll just be throwing money away after hype._ The reality is, in many cases we're barely pushing AGP 2x, sometimes 4x._ 8x, despite now being two years old, is mostly hot air.



  • Reply 62 of 138
    nathan22tnathan22t Posts: 317member
    yeah i was thinking these updates will be fine and remembered the 3ghz promise



    its more and more like we are right back in the MOT Days all over again
  • Reply 63 of 138
    groovergroover Posts: 29member
    Man if the big bump in the CPU department is from 2.5 Ghz to 2.7 Ghz then I will be very sad IMO. I would so love just to even get a 3Ghz bump. It is a long time coming and if it doesn't happen this time around then it will not look good for Apple. I know the whole CPU Industry has hit a wall but If the bump is minimum the price should be lower. I know there are other upgrades in the Machine but to do HD the Macs need much more power. I would love Dual Core CPU then the Ghz won't be such an issue.
  • Reply 64 of 138
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Well, Apple has to go with what IBM can provide, so if a modest speed bump is what's available, there you go.



    On the topic of what else Apple can do to make the pro towers seem like a better proposition till IBM starts shipping those multi-core 4Ghz 5W wonders:



    If Apple bumps up a lot of stuff at the same or lower price points to take the sting out a ho-hum update, what do they do when the 4Ghz etc. do become available?



    I mean, they're offering 512M ram as standard now. If they make it a gig, there's no going back. Every tower from now on would have to ship with a gig of ram minimum , standard, no matter how compelling the rest of the specs.



    Ditto video cards, slot busses, etc. Once you make something standard at a given price point there's just no way you can back down from that in subsequent releases, even if you could have originally gotten away with less due to the general goodness of your motherboard/design/feature set.



    Not that I wouldn't appreciate all the goodies all the time, but this has to figure into Apple's cost/performance equations.
  • Reply 65 of 138
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    You know what is really sad is everybody is making excuses for things the PowerMacs may not have before they are even announced., Apple used to set the tone for where computers are headed. Now the set the tone for whiners.



    One thing that could be a sign that they have addressed this stone age motherboard design is that I recall hearing that Quicktime 7 had a built in 5.1 encoding as well. Hopefully the motherboard will reflect that. Again, new PC motherboards have built in 6.1 already, and Apple is lagging.
  • Reply 66 of 138
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,423member
    Ok if Apple takes the "lame" route with this rev of Powermacs then here's what I want for $3000 next January.



    Powermac DCDP 3Ghz(Dual-Core Dual Processor)

    16X(8x DL) Superdrive

    1GB RAM RAMBUS XDR

    250GB HD

    TOE Gigabit

    3 Drive Bays

    PCI Express/PCI-X

    256MB PCI Express card

    HDMI, FW-800 and eSATA connections

    Hypertransport 2.0 links





    This would make me pretty happy.
  • Reply 67 of 138
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Ok if Apple takes the "lame" route with this rev of Powermacs then here's what I want for $3000 next January.



    Powermac DCDP 3Ghz(Dual-Core Dual Processor)

    16X(8x DL) Superdrive

    1GB RAM

    250GB HD

    TOE Gigabit

    3 Drive Bays

    PCI Express/PCI-X

    256MB PCI Express card

    HDMI, FW-800 and eSATA connections

    Hypertransport 2.0 links





    This would make me pretty happy.




    That's acceptable, but where will the comp be by then?



    Actually if they wait that long and take that rout they better upscale to the Power5 based MP processor with a ODMC. That would put the PowerMac back where it should be. Include some 6.1, or 7.1 audio options as well.
  • Reply 68 of 138
    Both Apple and IBM quarterly stock reports did not meet analyst's

    expectations today.



    The posted specs fail to meet our expectations as well.
  • Reply 69 of 138
    I don't buy into the specs at all, mainly due to the chips. I know that there are 3GHZ 970MPs out there and I know Apple has them. They have 1MB of L2 cache per core. The 970GX has 1MB of L2 cache and is essentially a single core version of the 970MP.



    I see no reason why Apple wouldn't use the 970GX in the iMac and the 970MP in the PowerMac. I could see them lowering the clock on the 970MP if they have heat issues. The 970GX is actually cheaper than the 970FX for Apple and, according to my IBM sources, Apple has used most of their stock of the 970FX.



    I could see them being boneheaded and staying with DDR on both machines - but I see no reason why the iMac and PowerMac couldn't support DDR2 (well, they may still tone the bus down in the iMac to alleve heat issues). A 970MP and a 970GX will have some major performance differences at the same clock rate, as anyone with a brain could figure out. I see no reason why the iMac couldn't go up to 2.5GHZ on the 970GX unless there are heat issues in the enclosure. A PM with Two 2.5GHZ 970MPs should blow a single processor iMac out of the water. A 2.5GHZ 970GX with 1MB L2 would make the iMac be an impressive prosumer machine, especially with the updated GPU (though I was hoping for 9800s across the PM and iMac lines to be standard). I'd prefer for the PMs to have PCI-e and the X?00 series of cards from ATI with the iMac getting the 9800).



    eMac looks about right and is a good bargain. Much improved on the graphics front and the 1.42 G4 is certainly serviceable in that kind of machine. The increase in RAM will be great there. Now we have to see if it stays at $999 for the SuperDrive model or goes even lower (an $899 eMac with 512MB, a 160GB HDD, Superdrive, 1.42 G4, and 64MB Radeon 9600 is probably too much to hope for - but it's likely doable for $999).



    I'll believe the Thinksecret report when I see it. I'm not too sure how reliable their sources will be anymore. We'll know in less than 48 hours.
  • Reply 70 of 138
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,423member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by onlooker

    That's acceptable, but where will the comp be by then?



    Actually if they wait that long and take that rout they better upscale to the Power5 based MP processor with a ODMC. That would put the PowerMac back where it should be. Include some 6.1, or 7.1 audio options as well.




    More than acceptable it would rock. Here's why.



    DCDP- This is a given. We have that now with the HP/Opty systems.



    Superdrive- I'm sure we'll have at least 6x DL recording by nest year probably 8.x from Pioneer.



    TOE Gigabit- Thanks to Overtoasty for hipping me to this upcoming tech. Gigabit is fast..perhaps too fast for the CPU to keep up with I/O handling. Let the NIC process these and see CPU efficiency rise and networking speed rise. I'm sold.



    3 Drive bays- Apple's gotta squeeze in at least another bay and move the optical drive to SATA. That way they can have a 4 channel SATA controller for internal and a 4 way external eSATA. We need at least another drive bay for more RAID options.



    With eSATA there's no need to add more FW ports so a single FW800 will do.



    HDMI- PC motherboards support 6.1 sound but through analog ports or SPDIF Toslink in compressed formats. Buzzzt not cool. HDMI supports multichannel uncompressed audio and video to boot. It's like DVI and Audio tech had a child. One small connector...one giant sonic boom into the future.



    Now I'd spend loot on this stuff.
  • Reply 71 of 138
    Why do I get the feeling that a few of those stock analysts were ALSO

    hoping to hear better PowerMac specs when they read TS this morning.



    9% drop in share values in one afternoon!







    tisk tisk
  • Reply 72 of 138
    Quote:

    Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

    Both Apple and IBM quarterly stock reports did not meet analyst's

    expectations today.




    what are you talking about?! Apple beat the street by $.10 per share!



    AP article @ Forbes



    Quote:

    Cupertino-based Apple reported Wednesday that it earned $290 million, or 34 cents per share in the quarter. In the same period a year ago, the company earned $46 million, or 6 cents per share.



    Revenue for the quarter was a record $3.24 billion, up nearly 70 percent from $1.91 billion in the year-ago quarter.



    Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial had projected earnings of 24 cents per share on revenue of $3.17 billion.



  • Reply 73 of 138
    Quote:

    Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

    Why do I get the feeling that a few of those stock analysts were ALSO

    hoping to hear better PowerMac specs when they read TS this morning.



    9% drop in share values in one afternoon!







    tisk tisk




    No, "the analysts" weren't disappointed at all, the entire market tanked. When that happens, large institutions and mutual funds start dumping stocks (and/or other mutual funds) in favor of safer short-term investments. PiperJaffray and UBS both reitterated a target of OVER $50 per share.
  • Reply 74 of 138
    Quote:

    Originally posted by concentricity

    what are you talking about?! Apple beat the street by $.10 per share!



    AP article @ Forbes




    This



    http://money.excite.com/jsp/qt/full....arch_text=AAPL

    9.21% drop in one afternoon



    Or maybe it was just those horrid TS specs
  • Reply 75 of 138
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Screw the analysts. Apple had their best 2nd quarter ever, and sold over a million Macs. Did Apple meet their own forecast? That's the real question.
  • Reply 76 of 138
    arty50arty50 Posts: 201member
    Apple's price per share may have dropped, but it had nothing to do with it's performance. Apple beat every analysts estimates for this quarter, and two of the major brokerage firms acknowledge the iPod halo effect is a reality. This was really, really good news for Apple. However, investors got spooked by the market in general and also perhaps an already overpriced Apple to begin with. But like concentricity said, it had nothing to do with the analysts' reports.
  • Reply 77 of 138
    chagichagi Posts: 284member
    If the new iMac specs are accurate, I think that it will be a welcome set of tweaks to the existing models. My personal beefs with the iMac G5 were: choice of video cards, base RAM config, and I saw a number of media reviews commenting that standard bluetooth would be nice.



    Looks like all of the above just might be fixed, making the iMac a very interesting little box for the pricepoint.
  • Reply 78 of 138
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    More than acceptable it would rock. Here's why.



    DCDP- This is a given. We have that now with the HP/Opty systems.



    Superdrive- I'm sure we'll have at least 6x DL recording by nest year probably 8.x from Pioneer.



    TOE Gigabit- Thanks to Overtoasty for hipping me to this upcoming tech. Gigabit is fast..perhaps too fast for the CPU to keep up with I/O handling. Let the NIC process these and see CPU efficiency rise and networking speed rise. I'm sold.



    3 Drive bays- Apple's gotta squeeze in at least another bay and move the optical drive to SATA. That way they can have a 4 channel SATA controller for internal and a 4 way external eSATA. We need at least another drive bay for more RAID options.



    With eSATA there's no need to add more FW ports so a single FW800 will do.



    HDMI- PC motherboards support 6.1 sound but through analog ports or SPDIF Toslink in compressed formats. Buzzzt not cool. HDMI supports multichannel uncompressed audio and video to boot. It's like DVI and Audio tech had a child. One small connector...one giant sonic boom into the future.



    Now I'd spend loot on this stuff.




    OK, now I'm gonna fixate with all my might on HDMI for the next rev. Apple could sell fan out cables for use with your non-HDMI stuff, and start putting HDMI connectors on their monitors, and, let's see, how about on the Airport Express, and, um, the friggin' shuffle, man, that'd be awesome, and, um....... sorry.



    Now here's a question-- how soon before digital convergence means HDCP on you computer's digital out? I mean, if you've got a blu-ray drive and studio released HDVD, or whatever they'll call, no way content providers are going to want you to be able to play that back on a machine with non-copy protected HDMI out.
  • Reply 79 of 138
    jlljll Posts: 2,713member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Arty50

    Apple's price per share may have dropped, but it had nothing to do with it's performance. Apple beat every analysts estimates for this quarter, and two of the major brokerage firms acknowledge the iPod halo effect is a reality. This was really, really good news for Apple. However, investors got spooked by the market in general and also perhaps an already overpriced Apple to begin with. But like concentricity said, it had nothing to do with the analysts' reports.



    I think they're spooked about the current quarter. Apple stated that they expect this quarter's result to be almost identical to the previous quarter.



    Results aren't what investors care about - growth is.
  • Reply 80 of 138
    bootsboots Posts: 33member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by nathan22t

    yeah i was thinking these updates will be fine and remembered the 3ghz promise



    its more and more like we are right back in the MOT Days all over again




    Sit down and chart Intel's clock speed progress since 2003, while you are at it.



    Summer 2003: 3.4 GHz

    Spring 2005: fill in the blank..
Sign In or Register to comment.