"Fishing in that canal?" LOL! Well, golly-gee, Gramps, I guess I just don't want to ignore it since that date is printed clearly on the Apple site, while this Jan 22-thing was pretty much pulled out of someone's butt. Call me crazy but I still like using actual facts as a basis for comparison against rumors.
<strong>"Fishing in that canal?" LOL! Well, golly-gee, Gramps, I guess I just don't want to ignore it since that date is printed clearly on the Apple site, while this Jan 22-thing was pretty much pulled out of someone's butt. Call me crazy but I still like using actual facts as a basis for comparison against rumors.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's "golly-gee-willickers" kid and why don't you read all the informative posts above for multiple explanations on the validity of your 'but the promo doesn't end yet" whine, I mean point.
Well, NMR says 1.4 GHz range, which is >10x 133 MHz. So if they stick with PC133, it's not going to run much faster than current ones due to the memory bottleneck.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You ever hear of cache?
[quote]<strong>
I hope Apple goes completely nuts and makes the mobo 400 MHz, which would mean
way faster chips (>2.0 GHz) in the near future (as in G5). Even 266 will solve a lot of
memory bandwidth problems, though, so I won't bitch if they come in at that speed.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maybe I'm missing something, but I haven't seen anyone shipping a 200mhz DDR motherboard let alone a 400mhz SDR motherboard.
Good point, Bodhi. The PowerBook recieved Gb ethernet, 133MHz bus and Radeon graphics.
The best thing Apple could do is come out with towers up to 1.6Ghz, DDR, and fast system bus, with no big fanfare. It's not a new product line like the iPod or iMac2.
<strong>Good point, Bodhi. The PowerBook recieved Gb ethernet, 133MHz bus and Radeon graphics.
The best thing Apple could do is come out with towers up to 1.6Ghz, DDR, and fast system bus, with no big fanfare. It's not a new product line like the iPod or iMac2.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, a new chip deserves a new case or at least mods to the exsisting QS case. Especailly a color mod to match the white keyboard and mouse. I think that and the speeds warrant a descent party.
Also, the mhz/ghz myth does apply because Apple was half the mhz as Intel/AMD, now our chips will be within range, that therotically means our chip will smash and destroy their chips. I think that's something Apple would be quiet about.
The memory bandwidth restrictions of the current motherboard have been widely discussed here in other threads. I'm not going to rehash them for your benefit. Suffice to say that the current G4s current waste a fair number of clock cycles waiting for data. Doubling the chip speed without increasing the memory bandwidth just means it spends a lot more clock cycles waiting for data.
The PPC8540 supports a 333 MHz memory bus. The PPC85XX (Apple's G5) reportedly will support 400 MHz (PC100 double pumped w/ dual channels = 400 MHz effective speed. nVidia is about the only doing it at the moment). If the new mobo supports a 400 MHz FSB, it would be strongly suggestive that the G5 is not far away. Many mobos in the x86 world support PC100, PC133, DDR200, and DDR266 (a few PC167 and DDR333). The bus speed is adjusted to the rating of the memory.
The memory bandwidth restrictions of the current motherboard have been widely discussed here in other threads. I'm not going to rehash them for your benefit. Suffice to say that the current G4s current waste a fair number of clock cycles waiting for data. Doubling the chip speed without increasing the memory bandwidth just means it spends a lot more clock cycles waiting for data.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The originally poster was stating that increasing the cpu clockspeed without increasing memory speed will you no improvement in performance. However, if we take a look at the desktop's (except the crippled 733), we see that they ship with 2 megs of DDR L3 cache running at 1/4 of processor speed. If that trend continues, then doubling clock speed will see a real [average] performance increase.
<strong>I really hope the bus speeds are dramatically improved. I just saw a review of the 2.2GhZ P4 and the Mobo was scary compared to the PowerMac... including a 400MhZ bus.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Keep in mind that is a 400mhz FSB (Front Side Bus) -- that does *not* mean that the entire memory bus architecture runs at that speed. Also the frequency of a bus is only meaningful when accompanied with the width of the bus.
The originally poster was stating that increasing the cpu clockspeed without increasing memory speed will you no improvement in performance. However, if we take a look at the desktop's (except the crippled 733), we see that they ship with 2 megs of DDR L3 cache running at 1/4 of processor speed. If that trend continues, then doubling clock speed will see a real [average] performance increase.</strong><hr></blockquote>
True, but having a swimming pool full of water (large cache) isn't much good for putting out a fire if all you've got is a hand pump and a garden hose [yes, lots of holes in the analogy, but you get the point]. That is the current situation with the quicksilver boards. The cache has to be loaded and unloaded occasionally, and a slow overall system bus gets in the way of that - it doesn't matter how fast stuff can be retrieved from cache if the whole system is waiting for the data to get to the cache in the first place.
In my first post, I was responding to Mac Glue Sniffer, who said he didn't see any evidence of a revised mobo coming. My point was that simply having a 1.4 GHz processor would necessitate a new mobo, as the current one could not support that kind of speed. I don't see what cache has to do with that at all, btw.
<strong>The current promo applies only to the current hardware.</strong><hr></blockquote>Right. And another thing - they've cut short their promos in the past. So the Jan. 31st date doesn't necessarily mean anything.
I think the promo does mean something because right now it's the only actual fact that we have.
It's amazing how you the folks on this thread (well, KidRed, anyway) are so willing to analyze and theorize about every possible rumor if it offers the faintest promise of immediate gratification, but you refuse to accept cold hard facts that point to any sort of disappointing news.
Sure, Apple could end the promotion early. Apple could also wait until April to update the Power Mac.
I'm going on record as saying I think there will be no annoucement on the Power Macs before Feb 1. Is anyone as sure that I'm wrong? Let me know because I will gladly accept a challenge on this.
(KidRed, I'm really not trying to pick on you or anything, but dude, try not to be so smug. Remember you're in the same boat as the rest of us. We don't know anything either.)
[ 01-14-2002: Message edited by: Michael Grey ]</p>
[quote] It's amazing how you the folks on this thread (well, KidRed, anyway) are so willing to analyze and theorize about every possible rumor if it offers the faintest promise of immediate gratification, but you refuse to accept cold hard facts that point to any sort of disappointing news. <hr></blockquote>
And this is coming from the same person that says no new towers before Jan because of the tower/display promo that ends 15 days from now kinda like the shipping time for the current towers. Also, see everyone else's rebuttal on your topic instead of pointing just me out.
[quote] (KidRed, I'm really not trying to pick on you or anything, but dude, try not to be so smug. Remember you're in the same boat as the rest of us. We don't know anything either.)<hr></blockquote>
Smug? I think blunt or frank would be more accurate, but I can agree I could be a little more cheerful. However, I just think it's <cheerful>silly</cheerful> to think that a <cheerful>silly</cheerful> promo has any correlation with the release date of products. Why? 1) the date can be changed whenever Apple feels like it. 2) They changed the date last fall with the PBs-so it is fact that Apple has stopped promos short of their effective end date to release products early.
I think Michael has a point. While yes the promo means very little, because it can be cut at any time, and it only applies to current hardware etc. It is the only hard evidence that you guys have. We have the promo that can dissapear at any time, and the Gay Blades report. Neither of which are very solid evidence, but at least one is comming straight from the horses mouth. While the other is comming from... well I dont know what its coming from, that guy is way to friendly with the happy gas from the dentist's office.
Jan 20 sounds much to early to me. And while I would be glad to be proven wrong, I will join Michael in the "No PM before Feb 1. club."
Comments
<strong>Stoooopid...stooooooopid....you're all stoooooooopid! AHAHAHAHAHA!</strong><hr></blockquote>
The wisdom of this post apparently transcends my mental capabilities.
<strong>"Fishing in that canal?" LOL! Well, golly-gee, Gramps, I guess I just don't want to ignore it since that date is printed clearly on the Apple site, while this Jan 22-thing was pretty much pulled out of someone's butt. Call me crazy but I still like using actual facts as a basis for comparison against rumors.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's "golly-gee-willickers" kid and why don't you read all the informative posts above for multiple explanations on the validity of your 'but the promo doesn't end yet" whine, I mean point.
<strong>
Well, NMR says 1.4 GHz range, which is >10x 133 MHz. So if they stick with PC133, it's not going to run much faster than current ones due to the memory bottleneck.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You ever hear of cache?
[quote]<strong>
I hope Apple goes completely nuts and makes the mobo 400 MHz, which would mean
way faster chips (>2.0 GHz) in the near future (as in G5). Even 266 will solve a lot of
memory bandwidth problems, though, so I won't bitch if they come in at that speed.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maybe I'm missing something, but I haven't seen anyone shipping a 200mhz DDR motherboard let alone a 400mhz SDR motherboard.
[ 01-14-2002: Message edited by: msp ]</p>
<strong>It's not just a speed bump: It's a speed bump and mobo revision.
SdC</strong><hr></blockquote>
after a year with the same motherboard a motherboard rev isn't exactly big stuff.
the G4s would have been released at MWSF if they were going to be a speedbump like that article describes
<strong>WEll, the 21st is a national holiday here in the US.
So I'd go for the 22nd.
That's also the day many, many state schools start.
Andrew</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not sure what schools you're familiar with... I have had class since the 7th
<strong>
after a year with the same motherboard a motherboard rev isn't exactly big stuff.
the G4s would have been released at MWSF if they were going to be a speedbump like that article describes</strong><hr></blockquote>
So you think it's bigger then just a speed bumped G4 with DDR? Maybe like a G5?
The Powerbook had motherboard improvements with the latest "quiet" upgrade.
The best thing Apple could do is come out with towers up to 1.6Ghz, DDR, and fast system bus, with no big fanfare. It's not a new product line like the iPod or iMac2.
<strong>Good point, Bodhi. The PowerBook recieved Gb ethernet, 133MHz bus and Radeon graphics.
The best thing Apple could do is come out with towers up to 1.6Ghz, DDR, and fast system bus, with no big fanfare. It's not a new product line like the iPod or iMac2.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, a new chip deserves a new case or at least mods to the exsisting QS case. Especailly a color mod to match the white keyboard and mouse. I think that and the speeds warrant a descent party.
Also, the mhz/ghz myth does apply because Apple was half the mhz as Intel/AMD, now our chips will be within range, that therotically means our chip will smash and destroy their chips. I think that's something Apple would be quiet about.
<strong>
You ever hear of cache?
Maybe I'm missing something, but I haven't seen anyone shipping a 200mhz DDR motherboard let alone a 400mhz SDR motherboard.
[ 01-14-2002: Message edited by: msp ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
The memory bandwidth restrictions of the current motherboard have been widely discussed here in other threads. I'm not going to rehash them for your benefit. Suffice to say that the current G4s current waste a fair number of clock cycles waiting for data. Doubling the chip speed without increasing the memory bandwidth just means it spends a lot more clock cycles waiting for data.
The PPC8540 supports a 333 MHz memory bus. The PPC85XX (Apple's G5) reportedly will support 400 MHz (PC100 double pumped w/ dual channels = 400 MHz effective speed. nVidia is about the only doing it at the moment). If the new mobo supports a 400 MHz FSB, it would be strongly suggestive that the G5 is not far away. Many mobos in the x86 world support PC100, PC133, DDR200, and DDR266 (a few PC167 and DDR333). The bus speed is adjusted to the rating of the memory.
<strong>
The memory bandwidth restrictions of the current motherboard have been widely discussed here in other threads. I'm not going to rehash them for your benefit. Suffice to say that the current G4s current waste a fair number of clock cycles waiting for data. Doubling the chip speed without increasing the memory bandwidth just means it spends a lot more clock cycles waiting for data.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The originally poster was stating that increasing the cpu clockspeed without increasing memory speed will you no improvement in performance. However, if we take a look at the desktop's (except the crippled 733), we see that they ship with 2 megs of DDR L3 cache running at 1/4 of processor speed. If that trend continues, then doubling clock speed will see a real [average] performance increase.
<strong>I really hope the bus speeds are dramatically improved. I just saw a review of the 2.2GhZ P4 and the Mobo was scary compared to the PowerMac... including a 400MhZ bus.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Keep in mind that is a 400mhz FSB (Front Side Bus) -- that does *not* mean that the entire memory bus architecture runs at that speed. Also the frequency of a bus is only meaningful when accompanied with the width of the bus.
<strong>
Also the frequency of a bus is only meaningful when accompanied with the width of the bus.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is that like... oh, nevermind.
Moki, when the new PMacs get introduced, you want to give us your thoughts on the new specs?
<strong>
The originally poster was stating that increasing the cpu clockspeed without increasing memory speed will you no improvement in performance. However, if we take a look at the desktop's (except the crippled 733), we see that they ship with 2 megs of DDR L3 cache running at 1/4 of processor speed. If that trend continues, then doubling clock speed will see a real [average] performance increase.</strong><hr></blockquote>
True, but having a swimming pool full of water (large cache) isn't much good for putting out a fire if all you've got is a hand pump and a garden hose [yes, lots of holes in the analogy, but you get the point]. That is the current situation with the quicksilver boards. The cache has to be loaded and unloaded occasionally, and a slow overall system bus gets in the way of that - it doesn't matter how fast stuff can be retrieved from cache if the whole system is waiting for the data to get to the cache in the first place.
In my first post, I was responding to Mac Glue Sniffer, who said he didn't see any evidence of a revised mobo coming. My point was that simply having a 1.4 GHz processor would necessitate a new mobo, as the current one could not support that kind of speed. I don't see what cache has to do with that at all, btw.
<strong>The current promo applies only to the current hardware.</strong><hr></blockquote>Right. And another thing - they've cut short their promos in the past. So the Jan. 31st date doesn't necessarily mean anything.
It's amazing how you the folks on this thread (well, KidRed, anyway) are so willing to analyze and theorize about every possible rumor if it offers the faintest promise of immediate gratification, but you refuse to accept cold hard facts that point to any sort of disappointing news.
Sure, Apple could end the promotion early. Apple could also wait until April to update the Power Mac.
I'm going on record as saying I think there will be no annoucement on the Power Macs before Feb 1. Is anyone as sure that I'm wrong? Let me know because I will gladly accept a challenge on this.
(KidRed, I'm really not trying to pick on you or anything, but dude, try not to be so smug. Remember you're in the same boat as the rest of us. We don't know anything either.)
[ 01-14-2002: Message edited by: Michael Grey ]</p>
And this is coming from the same person that says no new towers before Jan because of the tower/display promo that ends 15 days from now kinda like the shipping time for the current towers. Also, see everyone else's rebuttal on your topic instead of pointing just me out.
[quote] (KidRed, I'm really not trying to pick on you or anything, but dude, try not to be so smug. Remember you're in the same boat as the rest of us. We don't know anything either.)<hr></blockquote>
Smug? I think blunt or frank would be more accurate, but I can agree I could be a little more cheerful. However, I just think it's <cheerful>silly</cheerful> to think that a <cheerful>silly</cheerful> promo has any correlation with the release date of products. Why? 1) the date can be changed whenever Apple feels like it. 2) They changed the date last fall with the PBs-so it is fact that Apple has stopped promos short of their effective end date to release products early.
So, I am a little less cheerful then normal
Jan 20 sounds much to early to me. And while I would be glad to be proven wrong, I will join Michael in the "No PM before Feb 1. club."
[ 01-15-2002: Message edited by: Falcon ]</p>