The problem with that idea is that many applications will take a performance hit.
Moreover, even some of the [poorly] multithreaded applications may not be faster. A 2 GHz 970fx may actually be faster than a 1.6 MHz 970mp for some multithreaded apps. If the iMac G5 gets a PPC revision before the Intel revision, it'll have to be either a 2.2 GHz 970fx, 2.2 970gx, or a 1.8 GHz 970mp at minimum. If there is a PPC revision, really hope it is a 1.8 GHz 970mp. It may actually be able to run H.264 1080p at full frame rate.
Anyways, Mac OS X/Intel likely requires 6 months of work minimum from WWDC05 to get to shipping form, if not 9 months. That essentially means:
1. iBook will get a PPC update - last update was Oct 04
2. Mac mini will get a PPC update - last update was Jan 05
3. Powerbook will get a PPC update - last update was Jan 05
The likelihood of G4 updates for these 3 lines are pretty high by the end of September. This would mean Apple can switch to Intel for these lines in Q2 06, possibly Q1 06 depending on how good the updates are.
Due to predicted Intel Conroe availability in late 2006,
4. Power Macs will get a PPC update - last update was Apr 05
Power Macs are good candidates for 2.2 to 2.5 GHz 970mp updates in Q1 06.
Of all of the machines, it is the iMac and eMac that may not get a PPC update before the Intel switch. They were updated early May 05, and I can easily see Apple not revising them for 10 months in order to have a Feb/Mar 06 iMac/Intel and eMac/Intel release. Sure hope 2+ GHz Yonahs are in them.
The only thing holding back the schedule is the time needed to get Mac OS X/Intel to shipping form.
If the iMac G5 gets a PPC revision before the Intel revision, it'll have to be either a 2.2 GHz 970fx, 2.2 970gx, or a 1.8 GHz 970mp at minimum. If there is a PPC revision, really hope it is a 1.8 GHz 970mp. It may actually be able to run H.264 1080p at full frame rate.
What is the point of running 1080p H.264 content on a 1680 x 1050 20" display ? No, the iMac needs, as final PPC update before the Intel move, a 2.0-2.2 GHz 970MP in a 23" form factor. Then we talk.
Quote:
Anyways, Mac OS X/Intel likely requires 6 months of work minimum from WWDC05 to get to shipping form, if not 9 months. That essentially means:
1. iBook will get a PPC update - last update was Oct 04
2. Mac mini will get a PPC update - last update was Jan 05
3. Powerbook will get a PPC update - last update was Jan 05
The likelihood of G4 updates for these 3 lines are pretty high by the end of September. This would mean Apple can switch to Intel for these lines in Q2 06, possibly Q1 06 depending on how good the updates are.
Due to predicted Intel Conroe availability in late 2006,
4. Power Macs will get a PPC update - last update was Apr 05
Power Macs are good candidates for 2.2 to 2.5 GHz 970mp updates in Q1 06.
Spot on I believe.
Quote:
Of all of the machines, it is the iMac and eMac that may not get a PPC update before the Intel switch. They were updated early May 05, and I can easily see Apple not revising them for 10 months in order to have a Feb/Mar 06 iMac/Intel and eMac/Intel release. Sure hope 2+ GHz Yonahs are in them.
This is certainly a possibility. I just hope the iMac gets a 970MP chip before the switch.
Quote:
The only thing holding back the schedule is the time needed to get Mac OS X/Intel to shipping form.
A 2.5 GHz 970MP should outrun a 2.7 GHz 970FX on single threaded code in most applications because it has double the L2 cache, and possibly other internal tweaks. The 200 MHz difference isn't particularly significant and given the thermal troubles of the top end G5 currently, the 2.7 doesn't actually run at that speed for very long if it is doing real work.
What is the point of running 1080p H.264 content on a 1680 x 1050 20" display ? No, the iMac needs, as final PPC update before the Intel move, a 2.0-2.2 GHz 970MP in a 23" form factor. Then we talk.
....
...Spot on I believe.
....This is certainly a possibility. I just hope the iMac gets a 970MP chip before the switch.
....I would add appropriate developer support too.
good points PB and Programmer and THT
now time for Apple to BRING IT. that is, PPC updates to mac mini, iBook, and before christmas frenzy, powerbook, iMac g5 updates.
i'm afraid we won't see 970mp anything before 2006
Interesting is the notion that the PPC980, the rumoured Power5 variant of the G5 is and was vapourware. The fact that the next iteration of a PPC9XX series may have had to wait until Power6 obviously held no allure for Apple. Enjoy.
Interesting is the notion that the PPC980, the rumoured Power5 variant of the G5 is and was vapourware. The fact that the next iteration of a PPC9XX series may have had to wait until Power6 obviously held no allure for Apple. Enjoy.
my gawds. so that is what happened to the supposed Power5 derivative. not good news.
edit: with all this stuff now coming out about ibm, clearly their target markets and mode of operation shows something very out of sync with a consumer-focused Apple.
my gawds. so that is what happened to the supposed Power5 derivative. not good news.
edit: with all this stuff now coming out about ibm, clearly their target markets and mode of operation shows something very out of sync with a consumer-focused Apple.
Still wonder why Steve triggered the switch \ ?
So, from the look of things, this next generation MP from the confidential roadmap, is probably a Power6 derivative, right?
Don't worry, you're not mistaken: the PPC970 (FX, GX, MP, MX) is indeed a Power4-derivative.
Some people thought ther would be, after the 970 (and its low-power and dualcore variants), a newer scaled-down architecture derivated from Power5, and they called it the "PPC980".
Obviously this 980 processor doesn't exist even on IBM's roadmap. It seems they wanted to jump directly from a Power4 to a Power6-derivative (this one is perhaps on the roadmap the "Next Gen MP", which woul come after 2006 and is different from the 970MP).
i'm lost now i thought the 970MP is a Power4 derivative??
Cosmos 1999 got it right. When I say "next generation" I mean what the roadmap refers to as next generation without the 9xx designation. This is perhaps a Power6 derivative. All the others (970, 970FX, etc.) are Power4 derivatives (improvements in the same generation).
Cosmos 1999 got it right. When I say "next generation" I mean what the roadmap refers to as next generation without the 9xx designation. This is perhaps a Power6 derivative. All the others (970, 970FX, etc.) are Power4 derivatives (improvements in the same generation).
oh ok. got ya now..... personally, i'd say Apple will long be on intel before we see a Power6-derived anything that's even remotely going to be considered by Apple.
as to whether the next gen MP is a Power6 derivative, i'm so high off the vapor(ware) of that part of the chart i think let's not waste valuable brain energy on that
edit:
i quizzed my cousin that works with Applied Materials, and he was trying to explain to me how IBM chip development is all a very partnership-oriented approach. that is, they make these proposals and they want others to come in to the game, eg Cell. Power4-and Power-5 stuff is all well and good because IBM can push these in their server/ enterprise/ consulting scene. Beyond Cell and Xbox360, i think IBM needs and desires a heavyweight partner that can bear the brunt of R&D and production investment for them to bring out the good stuff.
oh ok. got ya now..... personally, i'd say Apple will long be on intel before we see a Power6-derived anything that's even remotely going to be considered by Apple.
as to whether the next gen MP is a Power6 derivative, i'm so high off the vapor(ware) of that part of the chart i think let's not waste valuable brain energy on that
So true. We see a little more clearly though why the Power Mac will be the last to switch.
Quote:
Power4-and Power-5 stuff is all well and good because IBM can push these in their server/ enterprise/ consulting scene. Beyond Cell and Xbox360, i think IBM needs and desires a heavyweight partner that can bear the brunt of R&D and production investment for them to bring out the good stuff.
And I suppose they tried to get Apple. And Apple gave them teh f1ng3r.
heh \ what did IBM expect? that Apple would start putting power6 's in their next line of iPods?
Yeah, if true (and I don't see why not) Apple just did the math. And they don't need a G5 for that. A desk calculator is sufficient to give you an idea of where you are going with an involvement in CPU manufacturing.
No, the iMac needs, as final PPC update before the Intel move, a 2.0-2.2 GHz 970MP in a 23" form factor. Then we talk.
Do the recent Mac Mini and iBook G4 revisions change your mind any?
Besides, the 2 GHz 970mp will likely be too hot for the iMac G5 form factor, probably somewhere in the 70 to 80 Watt range.
On the subject of Mac OS X/Intel, judging from the recent update, I'm beginning to think Apple is targetting a January release or a Q1 release for a couple of the lines, or perhaps a brand new model.
Do the recent Mac Mini and iBook G4 revisions change your mind any?
Besides, the 2 GHz 970mp will likely be too hot for the iMac G5 form factor, probably somewhere in the 70 to 80 Watt range.
On the subject of Mac OS X/Intel, judging from the recent update, I'm beginning to think Apple is targetting a January release or a Q1 release for a couple of the lines, or perhaps a brand new model.
Yeah I was a bit disappointed about those revisions, it looks like Apple doesn't have a lot of headroom before the switch, but I wouldn't like Apple to rush it, they have to be sure enough native software will be availbable at the intro...
I guess the PowerBooks update rumored for sept-oct will also be disappointing.
Now on the subject (G5 updates), can someone explain simply the differences between the actual G5 CPU found on PMacs and iMac and the announced new models FX and MP (I know those are dual core) and what kind of power ratio can we expect to get (for example 2.0GHz G5 vs 2.0GHz FX vs 2.0GHz MP)?
Do the recent Mac Mini and iBook G4 revisions change your mind any?
The iBook update was something to be expected. But the Mac mini one just terrible.
But you are right, such updates are useful to remind us(me) of who are we talking about here. I still think though that a 23" iMac, not necessarily dual core, could be possible some time next year.
Quote:
Besides, the 2 GHz 970mp will likely be too hot for the iMac G5 form factor, probably somewhere in the 70 to 80 Watt range.
Even in a 23" (and a little more thick) enclosure?
But you are right, such updates are useful to remind us(me) of who are we talking about here. I still think though that a 23" iMac, not necessarily dual core, could be possible some time next year.
Even in a 23" (and a little more thick) enclosure?
I think the a 23" "iMac HD" is quite possible next year too. And by next year, I mean sometime in February to May time frame. The current 23" display is $1500. As I recall, Apple was selling the 20" display for $1300 when the 20" iMac G4 came out.
So give it another 6 months for 23" LCD prices to go down a few hundred $, maybe 8 months for Mac OS X/Intel to ship, then I can see Apple ship a 23" iMac with a 2.1 GHz Yonah for $2k. There, 1080p H.264 video at full frame rate on an iMac.
As far as updating the iMac with a PPC rev before the Intel switch, don't know about that. The iMac was released during the 1st week of May 05. I can easily see Apple doing nothing for 10 months in order to ship the Intel version. No need to bump the iMac at all.
As for the 970mp and the iMac enclosure, yes I don't think so. If Apple intends to keep the same thickness and sound levels, I don't think so. A 2 GHz 970mp would have nearly twice the max power consumption as a 2 GHz 970fx.
Comments
Originally posted by Cosmos 1999
IBM has deleted the PowerPoint!
you can see it here
Originally posted by melgross
The problem with that idea is that many applications will take a performance hit.
Moreover, even some of the [poorly] multithreaded applications may not be faster. A 2 GHz 970fx may actually be faster than a 1.6 MHz 970mp for some multithreaded apps. If the iMac G5 gets a PPC revision before the Intel revision, it'll have to be either a 2.2 GHz 970fx, 2.2 970gx, or a 1.8 GHz 970mp at minimum. If there is a PPC revision, really hope it is a 1.8 GHz 970mp. It may actually be able to run H.264 1080p at full frame rate.
Anyways, Mac OS X/Intel likely requires 6 months of work minimum from WWDC05 to get to shipping form, if not 9 months. That essentially means:
1. iBook will get a PPC update - last update was Oct 04
2. Mac mini will get a PPC update - last update was Jan 05
3. Powerbook will get a PPC update - last update was Jan 05
The likelihood of G4 updates for these 3 lines are pretty high by the end of September. This would mean Apple can switch to Intel for these lines in Q2 06, possibly Q1 06 depending on how good the updates are.
Due to predicted Intel Conroe availability in late 2006,
4. Power Macs will get a PPC update - last update was Apr 05
Power Macs are good candidates for 2.2 to 2.5 GHz 970mp updates in Q1 06.
Of all of the machines, it is the iMac and eMac that may not get a PPC update before the Intel switch. They were updated early May 05, and I can easily see Apple not revising them for 10 months in order to have a Feb/Mar 06 iMac/Intel and eMac/Intel release. Sure hope 2+ GHz Yonahs are in them.
The only thing holding back the schedule is the time needed to get Mac OS X/Intel to shipping form.
Originally posted by THT
If the iMac G5 gets a PPC revision before the Intel revision, it'll have to be either a 2.2 GHz 970fx, 2.2 970gx, or a 1.8 GHz 970mp at minimum. If there is a PPC revision, really hope it is a 1.8 GHz 970mp. It may actually be able to run H.264 1080p at full frame rate.
What is the point of running 1080p H.264 content on a 1680 x 1050 20" display
Anyways, Mac OS X/Intel likely requires 6 months of work minimum from WWDC05 to get to shipping form, if not 9 months. That essentially means:
1. iBook will get a PPC update - last update was Oct 04
2. Mac mini will get a PPC update - last update was Jan 05
3. Powerbook will get a PPC update - last update was Jan 05
The likelihood of G4 updates for these 3 lines are pretty high by the end of September. This would mean Apple can switch to Intel for these lines in Q2 06, possibly Q1 06 depending on how good the updates are.
Due to predicted Intel Conroe availability in late 2006,
4. Power Macs will get a PPC update - last update was Apr 05
Power Macs are good candidates for 2.2 to 2.5 GHz 970mp updates in Q1 06.
Spot on I believe.
Of all of the machines, it is the iMac and eMac that may not get a PPC update before the Intel switch. They were updated early May 05, and I can easily see Apple not revising them for 10 months in order to have a Feb/Mar 06 iMac/Intel and eMac/Intel release. Sure hope 2+ GHz Yonahs are in them.
This is certainly a possibility. I just hope the iMac gets a 970MP chip before the switch.
The only thing holding back the schedule is the time needed to get Mac OS X/Intel to shipping form.
I would add appropriate developer support too.
Originally posted by PB
What is the point of running 1080p H.264 content on a 1680 x 1050 20" display
....
...Spot on I believe.
....This is certainly a possibility. I just hope the iMac gets a 970MP chip before the switch.
....I would add appropriate developer support too.
good points PB and Programmer and THT
now time for Apple to BRING IT. that is, PPC updates to mac mini, iBook, and before christmas frenzy, powerbook, iMac g5 updates.
i'm afraid we won't see 970mp anything before 2006
http://bbs.xlr8yourmac.com/ubb/Forum28/HTML/000366.html
Interesting is the notion that the PPC980, the rumoured Power5 variant of the G5 is and was vapourware. The fact that the next iteration of a PPC9XX series may have had to wait until Power6 obviously held no allure for Apple. Enjoy.
Originally posted by a j stev
Credit to where credit is due...M. Isobe is a web gopher per excellance:
http://bbs.xlr8yourmac.com/ubb/Forum28/HTML/000366.html
Interesting is the notion that the PPC980, the rumoured Power5 variant of the G5 is and was vapourware. The fact that the next iteration of a PPC9XX series may have had to wait until Power6 obviously held no allure for Apple. Enjoy.
my gawds. so that is what happened to the supposed Power5 derivative. not good news.
edit: with all this stuff now coming out about ibm, clearly their target markets and mode of operation shows something very out of sync with a consumer-focused Apple.
Originally posted by sunilraman
my gawds. so that is what happened to the supposed Power5 derivative. not good news.
edit: with all this stuff now coming out about ibm, clearly their target markets and mode of operation shows something very out of sync with a consumer-focused Apple.
Still wonder why Steve triggered the switch
So, from the look of things, this next generation MP from the confidential roadmap, is probably a Power6 derivative, right?
Originally posted by PB
Still wonder why Steve triggered the switch
So, from the look of things, this next generation MP from the confidential roadmap, is probably a Power6 derivative, right?
i'm lost now
Some people thought ther would be, after the 970 (and its low-power and dualcore variants), a newer scaled-down architecture derivated from Power5, and they called it the "PPC980".
Obviously this 980 processor doesn't exist even on IBM's roadmap. It seems they wanted to jump directly from a Power4 to a Power6-derivative (this one is perhaps on the roadmap the "Next Gen MP", which woul come after 2006 and is different from the 970MP).
Originally posted by sunilraman
i'm lost now
Cosmos 1999 got it right. When I say "next generation" I mean what the roadmap refers to as next generation without the 9xx designation. This is perhaps a Power6 derivative. All the others (970, 970FX, etc.) are Power4 derivatives (improvements in the same generation).
Originally posted by PB
Cosmos 1999 got it right. When I say "next generation" I mean what the roadmap refers to as next generation without the 9xx designation. This is perhaps a Power6 derivative. All the others (970, 970FX, etc.) are Power4 derivatives (improvements in the same generation).
oh ok. got ya now..... personally, i'd say Apple will long be on intel before we see a Power6-derived anything that's even remotely going to be considered by Apple.
as to whether the next gen MP is a Power6 derivative, i'm so high off the vapor(ware) of that part of the chart i think let's not waste valuable brain energy on that
edit:
i quizzed my cousin that works with Applied Materials, and he was trying to explain to me how IBM chip development is all a very partnership-oriented approach. that is, they make these proposals and they want others to come in to the game, eg Cell. Power4-and Power-5 stuff is all well and good because IBM can push these in their server/ enterprise/ consulting scene. Beyond Cell and Xbox360, i think IBM needs and desires a heavyweight partner that can bear the brunt of R&D and production investment for them to bring out the good stuff.
Originally posted by sunilraman
oh ok. got ya now..... personally, i'd say Apple will long be on intel before we see a Power6-derived anything that's even remotely going to be considered by Apple.
as to whether the next gen MP is a Power6 derivative, i'm so high off the vapor(ware) of that part of the chart i think let's not waste valuable brain energy on that
So true. We see a little more clearly though why the Power Mac will be the last to switch.
Power4-and Power-5 stuff is all well and good because IBM can push these in their server/ enterprise/ consulting scene. Beyond Cell and Xbox360, i think IBM needs and desires a heavyweight partner that can bear the brunt of R&D and production investment for them to bring out the good stuff.
And I suppose they tried to get Apple. And Apple gave them teh f1ng3r.
Originally posted by PB
And I suppose they tried to get Apple. And Apple gave them teh f1ng3r.
heh
Originally posted by sunilraman
heh
Yeah, if true (and I don't see why not) Apple just did the math. And they don't need a G5 for that. A desk calculator is sufficient to give you an idea of where you are going with an involvement in CPU manufacturing.
Originally posted by PB
No, the iMac needs, as final PPC update before the Intel move, a 2.0-2.2 GHz 970MP in a 23" form factor. Then we talk.
Do the recent Mac Mini and iBook G4 revisions change your mind any?
Besides, the 2 GHz 970mp will likely be too hot for the iMac G5 form factor, probably somewhere in the 70 to 80 Watt range.
On the subject of Mac OS X/Intel, judging from the recent update, I'm beginning to think Apple is targetting a January release or a Q1 release for a couple of the lines, or perhaps a brand new model.
Originally posted by THT
Do the recent Mac Mini and iBook G4 revisions change your mind any?
Besides, the 2 GHz 970mp will likely be too hot for the iMac G5 form factor, probably somewhere in the 70 to 80 Watt range.
On the subject of Mac OS X/Intel, judging from the recent update, I'm beginning to think Apple is targetting a January release or a Q1 release for a couple of the lines, or perhaps a brand new model.
Yeah I was a bit disappointed about those revisions, it looks like Apple doesn't have a lot of headroom before the switch, but I wouldn't like Apple to rush it, they have to be sure enough native software will be availbable at the intro...
I guess the PowerBooks update rumored for sept-oct will also be disappointing.
Now on the subject (G5 updates), can someone explain simply the differences between the actual G5 CPU found on PMacs and iMac and the announced new models FX and MP (I know those are dual core) and what kind of power ratio can we expect to get (for example 2.0GHz G5 vs 2.0GHz FX vs 2.0GHz MP)?
Thanks.
Originally posted by THT
Do the recent Mac Mini and iBook G4 revisions change your mind any?
The iBook update was something to be expected. But the Mac mini one just terrible.
But you are right, such updates are useful to remind us(me) of who are we talking about here. I still think though that a 23" iMac, not necessarily dual core, could be possible some time next year.
Besides, the 2 GHz 970mp will likely be too hot for the iMac G5 form factor, probably somewhere in the 70 to 80 Watt range.
Even in a 23" (and a little more thick) enclosure?
Originally posted by PB
But you are right, such updates are useful to remind us(me) of who are we talking about here. I still think though that a 23" iMac, not necessarily dual core, could be possible some time next year.
Even in a 23" (and a little more thick) enclosure?
I think the a 23" "iMac HD" is quite possible next year too. And by next year, I mean sometime in February to May time frame. The current 23" display is $1500. As I recall, Apple was selling the 20" display for $1300 when the 20" iMac G4 came out.
So give it another 6 months for 23" LCD prices to go down a few hundred $, maybe 8 months for Mac OS X/Intel to ship, then I can see Apple ship a 23" iMac with a 2.1 GHz Yonah for $2k. There, 1080p H.264 video at full frame rate on an iMac.
As far as updating the iMac with a PPC rev before the Intel switch, don't know about that. The iMac was released during the 1st week of May 05. I can easily see Apple doing nothing for 10 months in order to ship the Intel version. No need to bump the iMac at all.
As for the 970mp and the iMac enclosure, yes I don't think so. If Apple intends to keep the same thickness and sound levels, I don't think so. A 2 GHz 970mp would have nearly twice the max power consumption as a 2 GHz 970fx.