2GHz --> 3GHz

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
they said within the next 12 month, do you think that means there will be an update inbetween sometime?
«13456

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 114
    leonisleonis Posts: 3,427member
    Of course
  • Reply 2 of 114
    Right... why would you ask that?
  • Reply 3 of 114
    ast3r3xast3r3x Posts: 5,012member
    well the only reason i ask is because apple likes to ride their prices and current configs as long as possible before they feel they have to upgrade (i think moto made them ride their configs longer then they wnated though) so since they have this awesome fast machien i didn't know fi they'd try and ride it or not



    guess stupidly asked and the answer is they will update



    well then how about do you think more then once (is that a better question? )
  • Reply 4 of 114
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ast3r3x

    well the only reason i ask is because apple likes to ride their prices and current configs as long as possible before they feel they have to upgrade (i think moto made them ride their configs longer then they wnated though) so since they have this awesome fast machien i didn't know fi they'd try and ride it or not



    guess stupidly asked and the answer is they will update



    well then how about do you think more then once (is that a better question? )




    Here's optimism for you. 6 months seems to be Apple's sweet spot for upgrades to system speeds, etc. With IBM's success in already getting the G5 to 2 Gigs, I say they have it that soon. Steve did say "less than a year" after all.



    Flatpainter
  • Reply 5 of 114
    rbrrbr Posts: 631member
    Odds are that there will be "speed bumps" before 6 months as IBM rams up production and the yields of faster chips improve and they apply incremental process improvements.
  • Reply 6 of 114
    @homenow@homenow Posts: 998member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by RBR

    Odds are that there will be "speed bumps" before 6 months as IBM rams up production and the yields of faster chips improve and they apply incremental process improvements.



    It would be a great PR move if Apple could do an update with the release of Panther by the end of the year. "The fastest PC just got faster, and with our new 64 bit OS your critical Apps like Oracle run 'X' times faster than they do on a Windows computer."
  • Reply 7 of 114
    thttht Posts: 5,499member
    1. AMD is toast if they can't get to 90 nm by Q2 04.



    2. If Intel ships Prescott in Q4 03, signalling the ramp up of their 90 nm, watch out. That's plenty of clock rate scaling (4+ GHz) to fend off any comers. If Intel doesn't, AMD gets a reprieve.



    3. IBM might be capable of shipping 2.4 to 2.6 GHz 970s in Q4 03 as the chip and 130 nm fab matures together. It's all about increasing the yields.



    4. 90 nm 970 chips will probably scale up to 3.6 GHz (after awhile) if IBM can squeeze 2.4 GHz on 130 nm.



    5. Last I heard, IBM ramps up the 90 nm fab sometime 1H 04.



    6. Dollars to donuts, AMD will ask IBM to fab Athlon 64 on IBM's 130 and 90 fabs.
  • Reply 8 of 114
    o and ao and a Posts: 579member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    1. AMD is toast if they can't get to 90 nm by Q2 04.



    2. If Intel ships Prescott in Q4 03, signalling the ramp up of their 90 nm, watch out. That's plenty of clock rate scaling (4+ GHz) to fend off any comers. If Intel doesn't, AMD gets a reprieve.



    3. IBM might be capable of shipping 2.4 to 2.6 GHz 970s in Q4 03 as the chip and 130 nm fab matures together. It's all about increasing the yields.



    4. 90 nm 970 chips will probably scale up to 3.6 GHz (after awhile) if IBM can squeeze 2.4 GHz on 130 nm.



    5. Last I heard, IBM ramps up the 90 nm fab sometime 1H 04.



    6. Dollars to donuts, AMD will ask IBM to fab Athlon 64 on IBM's 130 and 90 fabs.




    Don't forget about the 980 next year
  • Reply 9 of 114
    akumulatorakumulator Posts: 1,111member
    I was hoping for a Rev. B around 2.5ghz around christmas, but like someone else pointed out in another thread... it'll have only been 4 months since the first G5s ship. Maybe Feb.?
  • Reply 10 of 114
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Akumulator

    I was hoping for a Rev. B around 2.5ghz around christmas, but like someone else pointed out in another thread... it'll have only been 4 months since the first G5s ship. Maybe Feb.?



    But there's a difference between when IBM starts fabricating in volume and Apple have a viable stock of packaged processors bundled up in the destination platform.



    Assuming that 0.09 starts production volume work in November/December, Apple will have to wait until February for an initial buffer stock and reliable supply. Construction of those machines could start at low volume around the end of January, with shipment to market at around the start of March. Which gets you to 3GHz within a year.



    However, 2.2 and 2.5 GHz will probably start becoming reliable product around July/August, which gives you an entry point of November, and lets the 1.6 and 1.8 become viable for iMac - based on the slower mobo design - once production shifts to 0.09 thus dealing with some of the heat issues.



    Thus you have a differentiated and segemented product range, and the calendar seems about right.
  • Reply 11 of 114
    kroehlkroehl Posts: 164member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    1. AMD is toast if they can't get to 90 nm by Q2 04.







    AMD is doomed! Doomed I tell ya! Thank $DEITY Apple didn't go with them!



    Sorry, couldn't resist.
  • Reply 12 of 114
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    Isn´t it funny it is the old horses (Intel and IBM) that is winning now? What happened to Transmedia, AMD and Mot?
  • Reply 13 of 114
    kroehlkroehl Posts: 164member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Anders

    Isn´t it funny it is the old horses (Intel and IBM) that is winning now? What happened to Transmedia, AMD and Mot?



    R&D $s in a post .bomb economy happened I think.\
  • Reply 14 of 114
    Quote:

    Originally posted by O and A

    Don't forget about the 980 next year





    WTF?





    970 is here for atleast 2 years right? i was thinking it was scalable to 4Ghz + ?





    What is the actual top MHZ of the 970? Will we be ssing the 980 that fast?
  • Reply 15 of 114
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,425member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by macnn sux

    WTF?





    970 is here for atleast 2 years right? i was thinking it was scalable to 4Ghz + ?





    What is the actual top MHZ of the 970? Will we be ssing the 980 that fast?




    Not really. The 970 is basically the interim chip to start the ball rolling. IBM will want to quickly transition to the 980 bing based off the POWER5 Core..it should have internal design tweaks that give it a noticable edge over the 970. The 980 will be 90nm only. This means IBM gets their EF Fab "broken in" with the 970 before moving to the 980. I'm looking forwared to SMT in the 980 giving us the power of Quad processing in a Dual CPU config.
  • Reply 16 of 114
    Quote:

    Originally posted by RBR

    Odds are that there will be "speed bumps" before 6 months as IBM rams up production and the yields of faster chips improve and they apply incremental process improvements.



    I don't buy this ramping up production stuff. I think personally (based on nothing but speculation) that they likely have the next speed bumps ready and are sitting on it for economic reasons - IE - new chip, tonnes of people going to upgrade right now, let's take advantage of that. I don't imagine it costs IBM any more to make a 2.5Ghz chip over a 2gig. So, milk each mini-bump.



    My prediction:



    January:



    1.8Ghz low end. 2 Ghz middle 2.4 or 2.5 dual as the high.



    June 2004:



    2.2 low, 2.8 mid, dual 3ghz high.
  • Reply 17 of 114
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Akumulator

    I was hoping for a Rev. B around 2.5ghz around christmas, but like someone else pointed out in another thread... it'll have only been 4 months since the first G5s ship. Maybe Feb.?



    Solution: announce and ship two months later (not like apple doesn't do this already?)"
  • Reply 18 of 114
    flounderflounder Posts: 2,674member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by The Mactivist

    I don't buy this ramping up production stuff. I think personally (based on nothing but speculation) that they likely have the next speed bumps ready and are sitting on it for economic reasons - IE - new chip, tonnes of people going to upgrade right now, let's take advantage of that. I don't imagine it costs IBM any more to make a 2.5Ghz chip over a 2gig. So, milk each mini-bump.



    My prediction:



    January:



    1.8Ghz low end. 2 Ghz middle 2.4 or 2.5 dual as the high.



    June 2004:



    2.2 low, 2.8 mid, dual 3ghz high.




    My guess (this is so ridiculous we're making these guesses now!) for February 2004 is single 2.0 dual 2.0 dual 2.5
  • Reply 19 of 114
    brunobruinbrunobruin Posts: 552member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Flounder

    My guess (this is so ridiculous we're making these guesses now!) for February 2004 is single 2.0 dual 2.0 dual 2.5



    I agree. I hope the middle box goes to dual with the next rev.
  • Reply 20 of 114
    yevgenyyevgeny Posts: 1,148member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    5. Last I heard, IBM ramps up the 90 nm fab sometime 1H 04.





    Do you have a link for that timeframe? This is super important because a 970 portable is dependent on the 90 nm die shrink.
Sign In or Register to comment.