I'd be happy if all they did was bump up the speed a bit and boost the L2 cache to at least 1 MB. I think people forget how much this really impacts performance.
<strong>I'd be happy if all they did was bump up the speed a bit and boost the L2 cache to at least 1 MB. I think people forget how much this really impacts performance.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think most people also forget that the MPC7445 only supports 256k on chip L2 cache. Sheesh people, it's not like Apple can pull cache out of its ass and stick it on a chip.
[quote]Recent notes from MacInTouch readers about PowerBook wholesale availability raise some interesting questions:
"The issue here is that on Thursday at 2pm Ingram had over 200 hundred Powerbooks in inventory. At 4pm they had zero. My Ingram rep said that Apple took the inventory back. Also, Powerbooks cannot be back-ordered right now. This is not how Apple has made product upgrades in the past. Previously, Apple would take your order then cancel it when the new product was released.
Also interesting, when I CTO (config to order) direct from Apple the wait time is 14 days for delivery. If you do the math 14 days from today is the 6th of May. Hummm... What else is on the 6th?" [Apple's WWDC conference with a keynote address by Steve Jobs... -MacInTouch] <hr></blockquote>
I think most people also forget that the MPC7445 only supports 256k on chip L2 cache. Sheesh people, it's not like Apple can pull cache out of its ass and stick it on a chip.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Did I say what the exact chip I wanted? No. I just want a G4 with at least a 1 MB L2 cache. Sure I already have one in my Ti500, but I'd like to sell that to my partner, who as a graphic designer primarily uses illustrator, photoshop and quark. The Ti500 is more than enough for her, but I, doing audio composition, would really like to see some benefit if I ever wanted to upgrade. At this point, I would see a performance loss with even a 667, and this I know from experience. As for the exact chip, I don't care. As long as the first two number are either 74, 75 or 85, I'm happy. But not without that L2 cache.
Did I say what the exact chip I wanted? No. I just want a G4 with at least a 1 MB L2 cache. Sure I already have one in my Ti500, but I'd like to sell that to my partner, who as a graphic designer primarily uses illustrator, photoshop and quark. The Ti500 is more than enough for her, but I, doing audio composition, would really like to see some benefit if I ever wanted to upgrade. At this point, I would see a performance loss with even a 667, and this I know from experience. As for the exact chip, I don't care. As long as the first two number are either 74, 75 or 85, I'm happy. But not without that L2 cache.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The point is that the only chips that Motorola makes that can actually scale somewhat only at this point support 256k L2 cache, and while the desktop varieties support 2 MB of L3 cache, they run too hot for portable purposes. The other thing is that your old Powerbook's L2 cache runs at half the processor speed, whereas the new TiBooks, while having a smaller cache, the cache runs at full processor speed. Thus, if there's going to be an update anytime soon, it's going to have 256k of L2 cache running at full processor speeds, because that's what exists now, in reality. Chips with more cache aren't being manufactured.
So lemmie get this straight. They are going to offer the same damn powerbook with 133 additional megahertz? That has GOT to be the lamest accountant-based decision I have EVER read.
First, why the hell do people keep saying that apple doesn't upgrade mhz by more than blah BLAH BLAH. Do you dummies ever remember the day that DUAL processors were introduced to the desktops? How did current owners of single g4 500's chips react to that?
Second, the current powerbook screen is ass weak. Simply cut the damn iBook screen larger for the Powerbook. And before certain morons complain how small everthing is with higher resolutions, I suggest that they boot into OS X.
Third. The ads for Apple final cut pro in Hollywood editing magazines show it running on a powerbook. If Apple is taking that approach, then they should maximize motherboard performance, firewire performance, processor performance, RAM performance, screen and external monitor performance, etc.
Four. DVD burner. This is the pro line, and if it's possible to include it than it SHOULD be at least an OPTION. Even the consumer imacs sell with one now.
So again, not many fools will pay more for a Powerbook that has only been improved by a lousy 133mhz. You can tell that I will hold-off my purchase until they improve the current slow-ass powerbook.
Should I buy a dual G-4 now (in the next 2 months I will be ready) or should I wait for G-5. I want to switch from PC to MAC but it is going to be a huge investment and I would rather buy top of the line.
Gary
POSTED WRONG PLACE?
[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: Gary Holifield ]</p>
The other thing is that your old Powerbook's L2 cache runs at half the processor speed, whereas the new TiBooks, while having a smaller cache, the cache runs at full processor speed.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Let me spell it out for you chief...
Are you trying to say that makes up for the loss in cache size. If you are, then you really need to put these machines side by side and see the difference. The new ones are really slow. For example, look at the rt enabler script in FCP3 and note that both the 667 and the 550 are rated lower than the 500 for rt effects. Because of this small cache an 800 mhz ti is not enough to bring the machine up to a high performance level in line with today's standards. Sure, it will be a bumb above the 500, but it will not be nearly the kind of difference you would expect from a machine 300 mhz faster. With avid xpress dv 3 and new os x audio programs coming out this summer, people that do push their machines will need much more than what is being rumored. 800 mhz w/ 256k L2 cache is not fast and is certainly not worth $3000 or more. So I'm glad you have such extensive knowledge of motorola's chips, but lets hope that somethings waiting in the wings that hasn't been posted on the site, like there usually is.
<strong>Are you trying to say that makes up for the loss in cache size. If you are, then you really need to put these machines side by side and see the difference. The new ones are really slow. For example, look at the rt enabler script in FCP3 and note that both the 667 and the 550 are rated lower than the 500 for rt effects.</strong><hr></blockquote>Are you sure that's the cache, though? We are talking about two different chips - the 500Mhz has the 7410, with a shorter pipeline than the 7441 in the 550/667.
<strong>zo wants iBooks (at least one model) with a G4 chip.
This 600Mhz G3 chip is total $hit for OSX. Zo hates this computer for the price zo paid.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Zo, while I understand the eternal want/need for more power... I don't have any problems with OS X and my 600mhz iBook (640Megs RAM). Could be you need more RAM. But my iBook runs OS X faster then my G4 Cube at 500mhz (and 1Gig of RAM). And the speed difference on my G4 933 mhz vs the iBook is nothing to jump up and down about (just discussing OS X). The real performance jump I see is all in the video card between the iBook and the G4 933. That, and a few seconds faster at burning that CD... but those few seconds don't mean much.
The point of this lengthy post... if more RAM doesn't solve the problem you have with the iBook, I doubt that a G4 will either. The limitation I keep running into is the video chipset.
<strong>Are you sure that's the cache, though? We are talking about two different chips - the 500Mhz has the 7410, with a shorter pipeline than the 7441 in the 550/667.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What prompts me to focus on cache size, as opposed to cache speed or pipeline, is that the new powerbooks perform particularly poorly in audio and native rt video, two applications that depend heavily on cache size.
What prompts me to focus on cache size, as opposed to cache speed or pipeline, is that the new powerbooks perform particularly poorly in audio and native rt video, two applications that depend heavily on cache size.</strong><hr></blockquote>
no, they are two applications that depend heavily on data streaming between ram and processor. the datarate on the 133Mhz bus Powerbook is actually slower in many cases than the original 500 and 400. Not because of the processor.
I have an old beige G3 with a 466 G3 upgrade processor with 1 MB cache.
I also have a 500 new iBook.
The 466 is much faster, and the slowness of the iBook is a real downer.
I too would like a Ti, but the screen brightness is dismal. I have seen the 14" iBook along side the 667 Ti, and I will clearly choose the iBook screen.
So lemmie get this straight. They are going to offer the same damn powerbook with 133 additional megahertz? That has GOT to be the lamest accountant-based decision I have EVER read.
First, why the hell do people keep saying that apple doesn't upgrade mhz by more than blah BLAH BLAH. Do you dummies ever remember the day that DUAL processors were introduced to the desktops? How did current owners of single g4 500's chips react to that?
Second, the current powerbook screen is ass weak. Simply cut the damn iBook screen larger for the Powerbook. And before certain morons complain how small everthing is with higher resolutions, I suggest that they boot into OS X.
Third. The ads for Apple final cut pro in Hollywood editing magazines show it running on a powerbook. If Apple is taking that approach, then they should maximize motherboard performance, firewire performance, processor performance, RAM performance, screen and external monitor performance, etc.
Four. DVD burner. This is the pro line, and if it's possible to include it than it SHOULD be at least an OPTION. Even the consumer imacs sell with one now.
So again, not many fools will pay more for a Powerbook that has only been improved by a lousy 133mhz. You can tell that I will hold-off my purchase until they improve the current slow-ass powerbook.
[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: mugwump ]
<hr></blockquote>
Now Mugwump, don't be such a party-pooper. You seem to think that only fools and idiots (like you and me, I suppose) would ever buy Apple if they don't bring out what you want! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
I have been waiting for ADC out, so that would make me very happy. I'd be quite pleased if they upgraded the graphics card and made the screen as sharp as the iBooks, about which I agree But, I think obsessing about 1GHz vs 800 Mhz is hardly worth the sweat. Heat dissipation, portability and reliability are what PowerBooks are for. That's why I still love my Pismo <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
<strong>I have an old beige G3 with a 466 G3 upgrade processor with 1 MB cache.
I also have a 500 new iBook.
The 466 is much faster, and the slowness of the iBook is a real downer.
I too would like a Ti, but the screen brightness is dismal. I have seen the 14" iBook along side the 667 Ti, and I will clearly choose the iBook screen.
At the moment, I hope they upgrade the 14" iBook.</strong><hr></blockquote>
screen brightness on mine is too strong. I use it around 80 percent and its fine. at max it is really quite bright. perhaps it varies
Perhaps a simple bump to 667 and 800 may not be enough to entice users who have been sitting on the fence waiting for something better.
Maybe the bump will be accompanied with the same form factor but a new bronze tinted titanium coating (is that possible?). Or maybe the titanium is darkened to a black or graphite colour.
You get my drift. Just something to add a "wow" factor since the speed bump is not substantial.
This would carry over until a completely new form factor is finalized and revealed late this year.
Apple has been bumping the processors on the portables at 5 or 6 month intervals. We are now at ~6 months. If the 'books are bumped now don't expect new ones till around September.
But, I think obsessing about 1GHz vs 800 Mhz is hardly worth the sweat. Heat dissipation, portability and reliability are what PowerBooks are for. That's why I still love my Pismo <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, I would dare to guess that the 1ghz chips will be in there, downclocked to 800. This would provide less heat. But who is going to buy if they don't add in some WOW. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Comments
<strong>I'd be happy if all they did was bump up the speed a bit and boost the L2 cache to at least 1 MB. I think people forget how much this really impacts performance.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think most people also forget that the MPC7445 only supports 256k on chip L2 cache. Sheesh people, it's not like Apple can pull cache out of its ass and stick it on a chip.
[quote]Recent notes from MacInTouch readers about PowerBook wholesale availability raise some interesting questions:
"The issue here is that on Thursday at 2pm Ingram had over 200 hundred Powerbooks in inventory. At 4pm they had zero. My Ingram rep said that Apple took the inventory back. Also, Powerbooks cannot be back-ordered right now. This is not how Apple has made product upgrades in the past. Previously, Apple would take your order then cancel it when the new product was released.
Also interesting, when I CTO (config to order) direct from Apple the wait time is 14 days for delivery. If you do the math 14 days from today is the 6th of May. Hummm... What else is on the 6th?" [Apple's WWDC conference with a keynote address by Steve Jobs... -MacInTouch] <hr></blockquote>
Thats about normal isn't it?
<strong>
I think most people also forget that the MPC7445 only supports 256k on chip L2 cache. Sheesh people, it's not like Apple can pull cache out of its ass and stick it on a chip.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Did I say what the exact chip I wanted? No. I just want a G4 with at least a 1 MB L2 cache. Sure I already have one in my Ti500, but I'd like to sell that to my partner, who as a graphic designer primarily uses illustrator, photoshop and quark. The Ti500 is more than enough for her, but I, doing audio composition, would really like to see some benefit if I ever wanted to upgrade. At this point, I would see a performance loss with even a 667, and this I know from experience. As for the exact chip, I don't care. As long as the first two number are either 74, 75 or 85, I'm happy. But not without that L2 cache.
<strong>
Did I say what the exact chip I wanted? No. I just want a G4 with at least a 1 MB L2 cache. Sure I already have one in my Ti500, but I'd like to sell that to my partner, who as a graphic designer primarily uses illustrator, photoshop and quark. The Ti500 is more than enough for her, but I, doing audio composition, would really like to see some benefit if I ever wanted to upgrade. At this point, I would see a performance loss with even a 667, and this I know from experience. As for the exact chip, I don't care. As long as the first two number are either 74, 75 or 85, I'm happy. But not without that L2 cache.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The point is that the only chips that Motorola makes that can actually scale somewhat only at this point support 256k L2 cache, and while the desktop varieties support 2 MB of L3 cache, they run too hot for portable purposes. The other thing is that your old Powerbook's L2 cache runs at half the processor speed, whereas the new TiBooks, while having a smaller cache, the cache runs at full processor speed. Thus, if there's going to be an update anytime soon, it's going to have 256k of L2 cache running at full processor speeds, because that's what exists now, in reality. Chips with more cache aren't being manufactured.
First, why the hell do people keep saying that apple doesn't upgrade mhz by more than blah BLAH BLAH. Do you dummies ever remember the day that DUAL processors were introduced to the desktops? How did current owners of single g4 500's chips react to that?
Second, the current powerbook screen is ass weak. Simply cut the damn iBook screen larger for the Powerbook. And before certain morons complain how small everthing is with higher resolutions, I suggest that they boot into OS X.
Third. The ads for Apple final cut pro in Hollywood editing magazines show it running on a powerbook. If Apple is taking that approach, then they should maximize motherboard performance, firewire performance, processor performance, RAM performance, screen and external monitor performance, etc.
Four. DVD burner. This is the pro line, and if it's possible to include it than it SHOULD be at least an OPTION. Even the consumer imacs sell with one now.
So again, not many fools will pay more for a Powerbook that has only been improved by a lousy 133mhz. You can tell that I will hold-off my purchase until they improve the current slow-ass powerbook.
[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: mugwump ]</p>
Gary
POSTED WRONG PLACE?
[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: Gary Holifield ]</p>
<strong>
The other thing is that your old Powerbook's L2 cache runs at half the processor speed, whereas the new TiBooks, while having a smaller cache, the cache runs at full processor speed.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Let me spell it out for you chief...
Are you trying to say that makes up for the loss in cache size. If you are, then you really need to put these machines side by side and see the difference. The new ones are really slow. For example, look at the rt enabler script in FCP3 and note that both the 667 and the 550 are rated lower than the 500 for rt effects. Because of this small cache an 800 mhz ti is not enough to bring the machine up to a high performance level in line with today's standards. Sure, it will be a bumb above the 500, but it will not be nearly the kind of difference you would expect from a machine 300 mhz faster. With avid xpress dv 3 and new os x audio programs coming out this summer, people that do push their machines will need much more than what is being rumored. 800 mhz w/ 256k L2 cache is not fast and is certainly not worth $3000 or more. So I'm glad you have such extensive knowledge of motorola's chips, but lets hope that somethings waiting in the wings that hasn't been posted on the site, like there usually is.
<strong>Are you trying to say that makes up for the loss in cache size. If you are, then you really need to put these machines side by side and see the difference. The new ones are really slow. For example, look at the rt enabler script in FCP3 and note that both the 667 and the 550 are rated lower than the 500 for rt effects.</strong><hr></blockquote>Are you sure that's the cache, though? We are talking about two different chips - the 500Mhz has the 7410, with a shorter pipeline than the 7441 in the 550/667.
<strong>zo wants iBooks (at least one model) with a G4 chip.
This 600Mhz G3 chip is total $hit for OSX. Zo hates this computer for the price zo paid.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Zo, while I understand the eternal want/need for more power... I don't have any problems with OS X and my 600mhz iBook (640Megs RAM). Could be you need more RAM. But my iBook runs OS X faster then my G4 Cube at 500mhz (and 1Gig of RAM). And the speed difference on my G4 933 mhz vs the iBook is nothing to jump up and down about (just discussing OS X). The real performance jump I see is all in the video card between the iBook and the G4 933. That, and a few seconds faster at burning that CD... but those few seconds don't mean much.
The point of this lengthy post... if more RAM doesn't solve the problem you have with the iBook, I doubt that a G4 will either. The limitation I keep running into is the video chipset.
[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: grifter ]</p>
<strong>Are you sure that's the cache, though? We are talking about two different chips - the 500Mhz has the 7410, with a shorter pipeline than the 7441 in the 550/667.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What prompts me to focus on cache size, as opposed to cache speed or pipeline, is that the new powerbooks perform particularly poorly in audio and native rt video, two applications that depend heavily on cache size.
<strong>
What prompts me to focus on cache size, as opposed to cache speed or pipeline, is that the new powerbooks perform particularly poorly in audio and native rt video, two applications that depend heavily on cache size.</strong><hr></blockquote>
no, they are two applications that depend heavily on data streaming between ram and processor. the datarate on the 133Mhz bus Powerbook is actually slower in many cases than the original 500 and 400. Not because of the processor.
xlr8yourmac covered that months ago.
I also have a 500 new iBook.
The 466 is much faster, and the slowness of the iBook is a real downer.
I too would like a Ti, but the screen brightness is dismal. I have seen the 14" iBook along side the 667 Ti, and I will clearly choose the iBook screen.
At the moment, I hope they upgrade the 14" iBook.
Junior Member
Posts: 5
From: Southern California
\t posted 04-25-2002 02:16 AM Â*Â*Â* Â*Â* Â*Â* Â*Â* Â* Â* Â*Â*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
So lemmie get this straight. They are going to offer the same damn powerbook with 133 additional megahertz? That has GOT to be the lamest accountant-based decision I have EVER read.
First, why the hell do people keep saying that apple doesn't upgrade mhz by more than blah BLAH BLAH. Do you dummies ever remember the day that DUAL processors were introduced to the desktops? How did current owners of single g4 500's chips react to that?
Second, the current powerbook screen is ass weak. Simply cut the damn iBook screen larger for the Powerbook. And before certain morons complain how small everthing is with higher resolutions, I suggest that they boot into OS X.
Third. The ads for Apple final cut pro in Hollywood editing magazines show it running on a powerbook. If Apple is taking that approach, then they should maximize motherboard performance, firewire performance, processor performance, RAM performance, screen and external monitor performance, etc.
Four. DVD burner. This is the pro line, and if it's possible to include it than it SHOULD be at least an OPTION. Even the consumer imacs sell with one now.
So again, not many fools will pay more for a Powerbook that has only been improved by a lousy 133mhz. You can tell that I will hold-off my purchase until they improve the current slow-ass powerbook.
[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: mugwump ]
<hr></blockquote>
Now Mugwump, don't be such a party-pooper. You seem to think that only fools and idiots (like you and me, I suppose) would ever buy Apple if they don't bring out what you want! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
I have been waiting for ADC out, so that would make me very happy. I'd be quite pleased if they upgraded the graphics card and made the screen as sharp as the iBooks, about which I agree
<strong>I have an old beige G3 with a 466 G3 upgrade processor with 1 MB cache.
I also have a 500 new iBook.
The 466 is much faster, and the slowness of the iBook is a real downer.
I too would like a Ti, but the screen brightness is dismal. I have seen the 14" iBook along side the 667 Ti, and I will clearly choose the iBook screen.
At the moment, I hope they upgrade the 14" iBook.</strong><hr></blockquote>
screen brightness on mine is too strong. I use it around 80 percent and its fine. at max it is really quite bright. perhaps it varies
<img src="confused.gif" border="0">
Maybe the bump will be accompanied with the same form factor but a new bronze tinted titanium coating (is that possible?). Or maybe the titanium is darkened to a black or graphite colour.
You get my drift. Just something to add a "wow" factor since the speed bump is not substantial.
This would carry over until a completely new form factor is finalized and revealed late this year.
<strong>
But, I think obsessing about 1GHz vs 800 Mhz is hardly worth the sweat. Heat dissipation, portability and reliability are what PowerBooks are for. That's why I still love my Pismo <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, I would dare to guess that the 1ghz chips will be in there, downclocked to 800. This would provide less heat. But who is going to buy if they don't add in some WOW. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
[ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: mugwump ]</p>