(Rumor) G4 speedbump on Monday

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 91
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,411member
    [quote]Originally posted by G-News:

    <strong>However speed bumps above 200MHz from one chip generation to the next would be a total industry first...</strong><hr></blockquote>





    A speed bump of 200 MHz on top of the current 900 MHz is only about 22%, which isn't particularly unusual. These days +/- 200 MHz isn't really that big a deal.





    Motorola just started producing Apollos so it will probably take a bit of time to get the yields of faster chips up. I'd guess that the small speed-bump will be Apollo chips from the low-end of the yield (800-1000 MHz) so that they can get the volume right now. When production gets into full swing they will be able to move the iMac & Ti lines to the Apollo and take it to higher clock rates. The Apollo will be just an SOI version of the 7540 with a bit of optimization to scale better. It will still be stuck with a 64-bit 133MHz bus.



    In the WWDC - MWNY time frame I expect to see the G5 with a new bus technology and DDR RAM. That will have been more than 6 months of prototypes, and there are just too many hints from all sources to ignore. The chip development timeline is not unreasonable -- they've been working on it since at least '98, with the original delivery projected for sometime in 2000 (optimistically, obviously).
  • Reply 62 of 91
    thttht Posts: 4,030member
    <strong>Originally posted by Telomar:

    Quality of work never depends on the speed of the machine unless you can't even run the program you need.</strong>



    Clearly, yes. However, that isn't the context of the argument. The context of the argument is PPC v x86 with the presumption of common applications. If a person thinks that a 30 to 50% computational improvement in their computer will improve their performance, by all means, they should do so.



    But I doubt it, not for the great majority of tasks out there. A competent person will always be better than a better computer.



    <strong>However clearly you haven't had to deal with functions that take hours to complete.</strong>



    I've done computational work (rarified gas dynamics) that requires days, let alone hours, to compute before, albiet a long time ago.



    <strong>When you have to repeat them often speed does start to matter. Repeating a 2hr operation a few dozen times is far preferable to repeating 3hr operations. It also becomes important when you work to a deadline.</strong>



    When a 50% improvement in computational speed is vital to meet a deadlines, the planning is too tight, and I would expect missing deadlines to be common occurances. Like Amorph said, if one's computational need is such that a 50% improvement is vital to their work, they should buy the fastest they can afford. And buy again 6 to 12 months later.



    <strong>PowerMacs are their for those who need the speed though and frankly the current offerings aren't impressive.</strong>



    No one's denying that. It's the buying another computer becuase it is 20 to 30% faster than the competition part that is the troublesome part. This is the computer market where there is always a newer and faster product coming out months later.



    Obviously, Apple has to have [continuously] faster computers for at least an equivalent cost than x86 variants to gain more marketshare. But I don't think that's possible anymore since the economic advantages are all on Intel's side. Virtually the only way to do it is for Apple to design its own processors and let Intel manufacture them.
  • Reply 63 of 91
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    Someone posted this on macnn article reply-



    [quote] 1. Steve is playing poker. I can not divulge my sources, but he made no tower changes for a reason. The G5s are close. To update the towers would create demand and then have to delay a G5 announcement. The iMacs aren't shipping in full force for another month or so. That gives him a bit of breathing room to wait on the G5 production.

    <hr></blockquote>



    So, I guess if true, I will be waiting till MWNY
  • Reply 64 of 91
    133 mhz is what stopped Apple from releasing the new PowerMacs in MWSF. Give me a fuccking break. I don't think Apple breaking the Ghz barrier would steal the limelight from the new iMac which would be 200 Mhz slower and an absense of an extra processor.



    I can see the PowerMac stealing the limelight if they released a 1.6 Ghz machine, but only 1 Ghz, come on.



    [ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: Mac_OS_X_Addict ]</p>
  • Reply 65 of 91
    If all Apple can muster for new Powermacs is a lame speedbump to the 7450 G4s, that is pathetic. If this is true then I guess Moto was right after all, about the G4 having plenty of life left in it.



    At this rate, Apple will never be competitive in performance with Wintels. That is just sad...Apple has so many great ideas, but their hardware is going to be holding them back. Wintels will be at 3 GHz and Apple will be stuck at 1 GHz on their high end, $4000 powermacs. Pathetic.



    If Apple does this to the powermac line, then people are going to start defecting to Wintels. This is the time for it...if one has to update all their software to run in OS X natively, then why not just buy a Wintel?



    It's starting to look like my next computer might be a Wintel. I'm not buying for a few years, but unless there is a drastic change in the direction of PPC development, it looks like I'll be choosing between a 7 GHz Wintel for $999, or a 2 GHz Powermac for $4000. That's no choice at all...
  • Reply 66 of 91
    Of course, you'd have seen alll those stories about how Motorola's chip business is in danger of being spun off



    Apple portables are still a bargain - it's wierd they don't do the same with the desktops.
  • Reply 67 of 91
    jlljll Posts: 2,713member
    [quote]Originally posted by G-News:

    <strong>Well, the iMac alone won't get the analysts happy enough to keep Apple stock high, at least not as high as it is now, in the after announcement euphoria. remember, it's the analysts to a BIG degree that decide and influence the stock value of a company, apart from the companies financial performance.

    If analysts over the world would agree that Apple is going to die soon, the stock would make a dive like never before, good thing they never agreed so far.

    If you want to get the money you have in stock form now, sell them now, because they are NOT going to rise any further with the PowerMac release next week, definitely not.



    G-News</strong><hr></blockquote>



    ??



    I'm glad that you don't handle my stocks (if I had any).



    Analysts and investors care about one thing: the bottom line.



    Apple has told them what they think the result for this quarter will be, and the analysts and investors were happy.
  • Reply 68 of 91
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    [quote]Originally posted by Gulliver:

    <strong>What if ...

    ... Motorola acknowledged that the G4 is a dead-end road and allocated 80% of the enineering-manpower to the development of the G5 a year and a half ago?

    ... Steve acknowledged that Apple lost the GHz battle and therefore tries to win the war by skipping the 1.x GHz era and jumping right into the 2.x GHz league



    There were times when thousands of engineers tried to get another 5% speed out of prop aircraft whilst others were working on jet-engines...



    Just a thought...</strong><hr></blockquote>





    I quoted someone above saying about the same thing.



    If Apple released 1.4ghz towers with DDR, etc, they would spend resources and time filling those orders.



    Instead, Steve is basically throwing these towers out there assuming no one will order them, freeing up a few months of being able to dedicate

    everything to the developement of the G5. Makes sence, if the orders were high on these towers next week, they couldn't commit as much to the G5, because they have to fill all of the just released towers.



    That being said, it looks like maybe March, we'd have the G5. As these towers aren't really menat to sell like the Apollo or G5, and apparently Steve knows that.



    The G5s are close according to his source. This lame speed bump buys Apple some time.
  • Reply 69 of 91
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    [quote]Analysts and investors care about one thing: the bottom line.



    Apple has told them what they think the result for this quarter will be, and the analysts and investors were happy.<hr></blockquote>

    Many of these same people were also talking up Lucent, Cisco and anything web related about a year ago. What changed to make them more intelligent now than they were then? Analysts make money by getting people to invest in the stock market. Brokerages make money even when investors lose money. Of course it looks better if your analysts recommendations are right every once in a while, but if you check many analysts track records [especially in the tech sector] you would stand a better chance if your dog/cat picked your stocks.



    +267mhz in 12 months. AMD seems to do that by accident every other week.
  • Reply 70 of 91
    [quote]Instead, Steve is basically throwing these towers out there assuming no one will order them, freeing up a few months of being able to dedicate

    everything to the developement of the G5. Makes sence, if the orders were high on these towers next week, they couldn't commit as much to the G5, because they have to fill all of the just released towers.



    That being said, it looks like maybe March, we'd have the G5. As these towers aren't really menat to sell like the Apollo or G5, and apparently Steve knows that. <hr></blockquote>



    Ummm, dude, the people who are responsible for building and distributing new Apple computers are not the same people who are in R&D. If Powermacs were flying off the shelves, it wouldn't matter, Apple/Mot could still devote thier resources to G5 R&D.



    Also, March is too early for new Powermacs, if new Powermacs are released next week. It takes time to fill the distribution channels, and then they must be emptied before new product arrives. Two months isn't enough time for this cycle.



    However, if these lame-ass powermacs are released next week, then it would suggest that Apple are concentrating their efforts on developing entirely new Powermacs. We saw the same thing with the last iMac revision prior to the G4 iMac...Apple just gave the iMacs a cheesey speed bump and otherwise left them alone.



    So if the powermacs get this 133 MHz speedbump, it basically means that all Apple did was dump some newer chips in the CPU bins on the Powermac assembly lines, and then they change the soldering pattern on the bus multiplier. There is little to no cost for this sort of change, and it would suggest that the next powermac revision, at probably at MWNY, would be significant.



    Although, if Apple continues with current trends, at MWNY the Powermacs will get speedbumped from 1 GHz to 1.2 GHz. Meanwhile Wintels will be at 2.5 GHz or higher at this time.



    This is soo, soo sad! Apple has all their sh!t together on software, hardware design, everything except the CPUs and motherboards. It's hard to think of a scenario where Apple can keep this up and hold onto their marketshare. Graphics professionals are going to start demanding faster hardware from Apple, because time is money, and if a Wintel will save them time from staring at progress bars, then no matter how much they like Mac OS X, they will dump the overpriced Powermacs and go for a speedy Wintel.



    The mass defection begins with the new 1 GHz powermacs. If this rumor is true, then lots of professionals are going to be dumping Apple next week. They've been waiting a long time for fast Powermacs, and such a lame speed bump would be proof that Apple cannot deliver.
  • Reply 71 of 91
    jlljll Posts: 2,713member
    [quote]Originally posted by G-News:

    <strong>Last time I listened to my guts, I'd have bought at 13$ per share and sold at 143$ per share, that's about 1100% gain, not too bad...



    G-News</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Hmm? looking af Apple's stock chart the stock were around $143 on March 23, 2000 ($71.5 adjusted to the latest stock split) and going back to January 20, 1992 the lowest price on Apple stock was $13 on December 23, 1997 ($6.5 adjusted to the latest stock split).



    I find it hard to believe that you are wise enough to know that $13 would be an all time low and $143 would be an all time high - at the day they hit those prices.



    [ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: JLL ]</p>
  • Reply 72 of 91
    wwworkwwwork Posts: 140member
    I almost bought that day but paid off my credit card instead. What a maroon.



    I don't understand why there is any wait time if it's just going to be a faster chip in the same enclosure. It's a really easy thing to swap. It's even easy to just swap the chip, leaving the whole heat sink etc. in place.

    They could put the existing chips in the new iMacs.
  • Reply 73 of 91
    gordygordy Posts: 1,004member
    Bring it on Apple...



    I was prepared to pay 2200 for the 867 MHz model, but if I can get it for less in a few days, then I will wait.



    I'll never buy another iMac. The expandability issue just killed it for me this time around. There will be no regrets after I sell my DVSE.
  • Reply 74 of 91
    ahhh, finally got my password.



    So...tell me... Are any of you people with the fantasies about G5s (or even 1.6GHz Apollos) ready for release above the age of 10?



    Some of the posts here are really off the wall. To those who really believe that we'll see a real G5 this year: what color is the sky in your world?



    TC
  • Reply 75 of 91
    [quote]Originally posted by The Cynic:

    <strong>ahhh, finally got my password.



    So...tell me... Are any of you people with the fantasies about G5s (or even 1.6GHz Apollos) ready for release above the age of 10?



    Some of the posts here are really off the wall. To those who really believe that we'll see a real G5 this year: what color is the sky in your world?TC</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I am pretty held back in my real predictions and even I think we will see a G5 in 2002.



    [ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: Macintosh ]</p>
  • Reply 76 of 91
    jwdawsojwdawso Posts: 369member
    [quote]Originally posted by The Cynic:

    <strong>ahhh, finally got my password.



    So...tell me... Are any of you people with the fantasies about G5s (or even 1.6GHz Apollos) ready for release above the age of 10?



    Some of the posts here are really off the wall. To those who really believe that we'll see a real G5 this year: what color is the sky in your world?



    TC</strong><hr></blockquote>



    You're so right! But, by the way, what is your source of information? I'm sure it's real and not off the wall.
  • Reply 77 of 91
    m5884m5884 Posts: 69member
    I would like to point out a article I read while looking for info on the G5. Here is the address

    <a href="http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/13626.html"; target="_blank">http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/13626.html</a>;



    This other article by the register is dated in september but the top website seems to believe it.

    <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/21692.html"; target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/21692.html</a>;



    I would also like to add

    <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/21692.html"; target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/21692.html</a>;

    I would like to point out an obvious point. That if apple only had a little upgrade they would have done it at MacWorld. There would have been no reason not to and all the reason to. Why lose sales on the Powermacs while every one is hopeing for a G5 and faster G4. It makes no sense for them to bring out a 1Ghz G4 now when they should have done it at the Expo. (Yes another 133Mhz )The only reason not to was so the iMac would get all the attension. And in this case you can expect much faster G4's or even G5's if we're lucky.



    Another thing I want to say is about the sites I have posted above. Some of the rumors are from before the expo. This means nothing. Everyone expected faster PowerMacs at the expo but apple opted to use it for the imacs instead. The PowerMacs all already ready or are almost ready and will be out by seyboldNY. Yes the G5. This is the only thing that makes sense. Plus can any of you come up with a solid reason why the G5 will not come out that is not based on the mistake they made in the G4.





    I think all of you will find it interesting. Come on lets not give up on Motorola. Just becasue they screwed up on the G4 doesn't mean they will never be great again. Every company makes mistakes. Likewise Apple made a mistake when they would not license their OS. They almost went out of business because of this. But Apple is doing much better now and will be great again. lets not lose hope in a company just becasue they screwed up once. I am not apolagizing for motorola I'm just saying don't lose all your hope. Gosh I almost cried reading this forum.



    [ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: M5884 ]</p>
  • Reply 78 of 91
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>



    Ummm, dude, the people who are responsible for building and distributing new Apple computers are not the same people who are in R&D. If Powermacs were flying off the shelves, it wouldn't matter, Apple/Mot could still devote thier resources to G5 R&D.



    Also, March is too early for new Powermacs, if new Powermacs are released next week. It takes time to fill the distribution channels, and then they must be emptied before new product arrives. Two months isn't enough time for this cycle.



    However, if these lame-ass powermacs are released next week, then it would suggest that Apple are concentrating their efforts on developing entirely new Powermacs. We saw the same thing with the last iMac revision prior to the G4 iMac...Apple just gave the iMacs a cheesey speed bump and otherwise left them alone.



    So if the powermacs get this 133 MHz speedbump, it basically means that all Apple did was dump some newer chips in the CPU bins on the Powermac assembly lines, and then they change the soldering pattern on the bus multiplier. There is little to no cost for this sort of change, and it would suggest that the next powermac revision, at probably at MWNY, would be significant.



    Although, if Apple continues with current trends, at MWNY the Powermacs will get speedbumped from 1 GHz to 1.2 GHz. Meanwhile Wintels will be at 2.5 GHz or higher at this time.



    This is soo, soo sad! Apple has all their sh!t together on software, hardware design, everything except the CPUs and motherboards. It's hard to think of a scenario where Apple can keep this up and hold onto their marketshare. Graphics professionals are going to start demanding faster hardware from Apple, because time is money, and if a Wintel will save them time from staring at progress bars, then no matter how much they like Mac OS X, they will dump the overpriced Powermacs and go for a speedy Wintel.



    The mass defection begins with the new 1 GHz powermacs. If this rumor is true, then lots of professionals are going to be dumping Apple next week. They've been waiting a long time for fast Powermacs, and such a lame speed bump would be proof that Apple cannot deliver.</strong><hr></blockquote>





    So Moto can roll off tons of G4 800, 933, 1.0ghz and 3 G5's at the same time? I don't think so. These speed bumps won't sell well, look at the responses. Meanwhile, Moto can roll off the G5s due to low orders on the towers. Steve bascially bought himself a few months. March may be pushing it, but following this theory, why let the towers suck for 6 months when you can try for 3?
  • Reply 79 of 91
    Hey, remember the weekend before the Expo Apple employees were told to "keep their mouths shut"? There was no timeframe mentioned with respect to this memo. Circulating something like this 3 days before the secret is revealed doesn't seem terribly effective, especially since Time had already been shown, and it was "just" the iMac. Perhaps it was to remind the employees that secrecy needed to be maintained during and after the Expo. And does anybody really think a little speed bump would justify all the secret keeping that Apple is indulging in?



    So, an open question to any Apple employee AI posters... are you still keeping secrets?
  • Reply 80 of 91
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    I'd like to hope so, but I think this is a ploy to buy time, that's why the quiet release. However, I'd love to be blown away by a G5 quiet release, that would be way beyond the rumor sites
Sign In or Register to comment.