Apple : PowerBook G5 or X86?
It would seem it would make sense to go immediately to the 'other side' rather than fumble around for the smaller G5 process to come up. Basically, motherboards, and processors are already out there to keep costs down.
I'm predicting though that Apple will see to it they etch their own boards; I'm hoping at least this much, as their boards have screaming fast FSB's. This in regards as to whether or not down the line apple will or will not ditch the PowerBook G5 wave, and go straight x86 baby.
-walloo.
p.s. I did some skimming, and couldn't see any forums really nose-diving into this topic of more distant future powerbooks. lates.
I'm predicting though that Apple will see to it they etch their own boards; I'm hoping at least this much, as their boards have screaming fast FSB's. This in regards as to whether or not down the line apple will or will not ditch the PowerBook G5 wave, and go straight x86 baby.
-walloo.
p.s. I did some skimming, and couldn't see any forums really nose-diving into this topic of more distant future powerbooks. lates.
Comments
Just be careful. The mods like to lock threads like this.
I don't think intel will happen until mid '06.
Originally posted by wmf
Apple has no control over the FSB.
They are a member of the Hypertransport consortium so they could fashion their own FSB chips. After all, they do now but I would expect them to save on R&D costs by going with Intel chipsets when Apple starts producing x86 computers.
Originally posted by PBG4 Dude
They are a member of the Hypertransport consortium so they could fashion their own FSB chips. After all, they do now but I would expect them to save on R&D costs by going with Intel chipsets when Apple starts producing x86 computers.
I would think so, but Apple is so used to architecting their own board, and would hope they would do this, as it would cut them above the rest/or could give them that advantage. For the first iteration however, I would assume the cheaper, most easiest solution.
Originally posted by 9secondko
I would think G5.
Just be careful. The mods like to lock threads like this.
I don't think intel will happen until mid '06.
Thanks for the Mod heads-up. Yes, definitely mid-'06 would be the earliest at which these can sprout, as stated by Jobs himself. At that time we will see the x86-PowerMacs. This is generally where my topic pics up speed, after this event. It's generally sought, assumed and lamented that the next PowerBook will be the G5, I'm pressing the idea of no G5. This is if the G5 does worse with temp/process than a similarly compared Intel chip.
For the time being, I'm assuming that Apple will treat Intel as a chip maker, just as it treats IBM, Motorola (past), and Freescale, and not as a motherboard/chipset maker (though this might be the case).
Originally posted by ChevalierMalFet
Ye Gods. Noon can't come soon enough. Apple indeed does not control the FSB. While they likely had some input on the G5, they will not where Intel is concerned. Do not forget that the memory controller is only half the FSB equation, and that half is dictated by what the CPUs will support. So for Apple's FSB interface, you need only look to Intel's CPU products.
Might some motherboards allow a 2000Mhz CPU while running a 1000Mhz DDR FSB, and another allow a 2000Mhz CPU, while sitting on a 133Mhz FSB? I believe these two scenarios are possible. Maybe my terminology is at fault here, but this is what I was generally getting at.
I was under the impression that Apple dictates the architecture / layout of the motherboard. Maybe I need clarity.
[It's late, and I need to do some studying or sleep. SAM'S COLA TO THE RESCUE. (booo) ]
Originally posted by willywalloo
Might some motherboards allow a 2000Mhz CPU while running a 1000Mhz DDR FSB, and another allow a 2000Mhz CPU, while sitting on a 133Mhz FSB? I believe these two scenarios are possible. Maybe my terminology is at fault here, but this is what I was generally getting at.
I was under the impression that Apple dictates the archetecture / layout of the motherboard. Maybe I need clarity. Don't stress out on my too soon !
Apple does in fact control what they put on the board; what their options are is dictated by the chip. For instance, the G5 allows 1/2, 1/3, and 1/4 CPU speed bus speeds, IRC, though they've always used the top speed in their desktops. So with the 2Ghz G5 that's either 1Ghz, 667mhz, or 500mhz. by differentiation, the Yonah I believe is only going to support 533mhz or 600mhz FSB speeds, depending on clock. I suppose you could run it more slowly, but what would be the point?
Originally posted by Robin Hood
I'll eat my hat if there is ever a PowerBook G5.
Does this include the feather?
==> We'll, basically too early to tell; with secrets being held high at Apple : X86 vs. G5. If presler is a reality, and finding that INTEL is going with the 65nm process = cooling/smaller processor (if the same # of transistors) This would nail apple to the wall on this subject.
==
Is this something that a Microsoft monger would care about; getting at their internal secrets? --Oooooo, they are releasing 20 new applications today, but I can't wait to find out what each one does ! They are innovative command line applications that allow you type the (up) key to seek out and discover previously typed commands. What a let down.
Sorry for the Trolling, but M$ is doing the same thing they were doing in 19-stealing-84.
==