Fuel for the fire!!!
Check out this article:
<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-02/2002b-0201-futurg5.phtml"; target="_blank">Architosh</a>
<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-02/2002b-0201-futurg5.phtml"; target="_blank">Architosh</a>
Comments
[quote]
Architosh has learned that G5 test boxes, the very same ones we talked about in the pre-Macworld past, are scheduled to be picked up by Apple engineering staff at key customer and developer sites. This news complies with our earlier statements shared by inside sources familiar with the situation.
The details of these systems are still cloaked in mystery. However insiders insist that these next generation machines will put the speed issue to rest. Not that the recent lineup is anything to sneeze at. While details remain mixed, there is widespread interest in Quad processor machines by Apple's growing 3D animation and technical visualization (CAD/CAM) user base. Additionally, the Hollywood crowd which many insiders say Jobs covets, would clearly need a Quad processor solution to be taken seriously.
Architosh has been running a Macintosh Pro 3D User Survey and the results are very telling indeed. In a series of related reports it has become apparent that Apple is getting more serious about the highend 3D market and that the company may be making serious inroads into a market that has long been dominated by SGI and Sun Microsystems. Apple's rumored moves echo what other companys like HP are doing with Linux.
In the meantime, the removal of G5 test boxes aligns with continued speculation that Apple will deliver true G5 parts in July at Macworld Expo. Some have speculated that these machines will end once and for all the speed war with Intel and AMD.
<hr></blockquote>
I'm getting a strong feeling that these folks (and many others) are regurgitating stuff from here and The Register (viz. the high-end 3D stuff).
<strong>Check out this article:
<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-02/2002b-0201-futurg5.phtml"; target="_blank">Architosh</a></strong><hr></blockquote>
Well I hereby re-instate my SIG from the former AI boards
Actually I dropped it because "World Domination" is more Mr. Gate's bag, but I have always felt that since OSX the only thing preventing Apple winning the "GHz Wars" for all time is it's reluctance to go MP. OSX's ability to scale it's performance to MP's is the key here - so turn it on Steve!
Even with the advent of the G4 - 7410 (when I first wrote that SIG) I was hoping and posting for a Quad and even 8 way (Octo?) blade type rack mount. Even now, with a 500MHz G4 7410 eight processor rack mount Apple would shake a lot of trees in the forest. I even bought 500 shares of SGI stock in the hopes that Apple would buy them for their NUMAflex, not to mention Maya. I've quadrupled my money there (SGI) as of now, but my AAPL has suffered (only up 20% on the year) because of Apple's lack of aggression in this area.
The keys to this have always been in Apple's hands - Gentlemen, start your engines!
edit: updated sig
2nd edit: did the math on SGI stock gains
[ 02-01-2002: Message edited by: Aphelion ]
[ 02-01-2002: Message edited by: Aphelion ]</p>
<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-02/2002b-0201-morepower.phtml"; target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-02/2002b-0201-morepower.phtml</a>;
<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-02/2002b-0201-quadswanted.phtml"; target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2002-02/2002b-0201-quadswanted.phtml</a>;
<strong>Can we have some improvements to the bus first please?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly. A 20 processor G4 wouldn't be significantly faster without a new bus architecture. Probably slower since they'd be spending all the bus bandwidth discussing who gets which byte.
(I hope)
<strong>Can we have some improvements to the bus first please?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I would think that Apple could have brought out a Quad 7410 with DDR-RAM at MWSF 2001 - (it was hardly new then). But now it could be 1 GHz Apollos on a UMA-2 (insert mobo buzzwords here).
<strong>
I would think that Apple could have brought out a Quad 7410 with DDR-RAM at MWSF 2001 - (it was hardly new then). But now it could be 1 GHz Apollos on a UMA-2 (insert mobo buzzwords here).</strong><hr></blockquote>
You'd think wrong. In case you haven't been listening, the current chips don't support a faster bus than they are already using. Yes you could put 4 G4s in one box, but they'd all be stuck waiting for memory most of the time. Two 1GHz G4s is pushing it.
<strong>
I would think that Apple could have brought out a Quad 7410 with DDR-RAM at MWSF 2001 - (it was hardly new then). But now it could be 1 GHz Apollos on a UMA-2 (insert mobo buzzwords here).</strong><hr></blockquote>
The fact that DDR has been existing on PC motherboards and processors for some time now basically means nothing in regards to whether Apple can use it in their machines (apart from the fact that DDR modules are widely available, of course).
Just because VIA creates the KT266, a new DDR-capable version of UniNorth doesn't just appear somehow, and the G4 doesn't just get a DDR FSB auto-magically either just because the Athlon has one...
Bye,
RazzFazz
[ 02-05-2002: Message edited by: RazzFazz ]</p>
<strong>I've quadrupled my money there (SGI) as of now, but my AAPL has suffered (only up 20% on the year) because of Apple's lack of aggression in this area.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Err/umm....try looking more closely.
AAPL has been a pretty darned aggressive performer in the last year or so (especially so FYTD'02).
Exhibit A: your own assertion of 20% upside.
Exhibit B: iPod
Exhibit C: iMac
20% upward movement on a stock continually minimised, downplayed & dismissed by "the financials"? During the first-ever catastrophic downturn in the industry? Amid the bleakest economic picture in 15(?) years?
It's called persperctive - look into it.
Err/umm....try looking more closely.
AAPL has been a pretty darned aggressive performer in the last year or so (especially so FYTD'02).
Exhibit A: your own assertion of 20% upside.
Exhibit B: iPod
Exhibit C: iMac
20% upward movement on a stock continually minimised, downplayed & dismissed by "the financials"? During the first-ever catastrophic downturn in the industry? Amid the bleakest economic picture in 15(?) years?
It's called persperctive - look into it.<hr></blockquote>
Don't misunderstand me Capt. Obvious, I'm pleased in a 20% gain on the year for my AAPL investment, as we should all be as Mac fans, Having said that, from MY perspective APPL could have had the same or similar jump that SGI has had, plus the benefits of increased marketshare if they had embraced MP at about the time they "iced" the Cube.
MWSF 2001: Put dual 7410's @ 500 MHz in the "revised" Cube, go Duals across the board in the PowerMac, and brought out a Quad in a top of the line tower and/or in a "RacMac", And while they were at it, put the same dual 7410's in the TiBook. My point being that MP's have had the power to win the MHz Wars for some time.
You'd think wrong. In case you haven't been listening, the current chips don't support a faster bus than they are already using. Yes you could put 4 G4s in one box, but they'd all be stuck waiting for memory most of the time. Two 1GHz G4s is pushing it.<hr></blockquote>
I'm thinking for every problem there is a solution, could RapidIO or Hypertransport help here? How about interleaved memory? NUMAflex from SGI? My purchase if SGI stock was based on a hope that Apple would buy them out to get NUMAflex and other SGI technologies, not to mention OpenGL and Maya, in fact I'm only still holding my SGI in that hope.
[ 02-05-2002: Message edited by: Aphelion ]</p>
<strong>
And while they were at it, put the same dual 7410's in the TiBook. My point being that MP's have had the power to win the MHz Wars for some time.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know, even titanium has a melting point.
<strong>
You know, even titanium has a melting point.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
You know, even titanium has a melting point.
<hr></blockquote>
I'd say that two of the low power 7410's @ 500GHz would run cooler than the 667MHz G4 in there now.
<strong>I'm thinking for every problem there is a solution, could RapidIO or Hypertransport help here? How about interleaved memory? </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, RapidIO and HyperTransport would address the problem... but these are things built into the CPU. The current CPUs don't have these things build in. Haven't you been listening to the discussions? The leading problem with adopting any of the faster memory technologies is the lack of any way to get the data into the CPU faster. The next CPU on the horizon is the G5 (barring some unknown and substantially modified G4 flavour), and one of its biggest features is a faster bus & onchip memory controller.