<strong>You are basing your numbers on what ever Intel and AMD want you to believe. I have used their 2ghz machines and the all suck. I bet if they were to gather all of their celeron processors and label them with a 5ghz YOU'D buy one cuz you can't tell the difference</strong><hr></blockquote>
That may keep sales afloat until the G5 is released.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That will depend on real-world performance, which can't be measured until the machine's out in the real world.
[quote]<strong>What bus does the new G4 use? Dorsal said dual channel RapidIO earlier. Is this still the case?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dorsal seems to be standing by his assertion that the RAM will be connected in an "unconventional" way, presumably with an on-chip memory controller and 16-bit RapidIO (although other configurations are possible).
moki has heard that this board slipped, and we'll see a stopgap, but Dorsal is now claiming it's final.
[quote]<strong>How fast is the bus? 16-bit at 2GHz or 8-bit at 500Mhz?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dorsal has said 16-bit; based on a quick reread of this thread, I don't think he's offered a bus speed yet.
[quote]<strong>Does the new G4 have any additional floating point or integer units? Dorsal said no.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dorsal mentioned Book E, an architecture shared between Motorola and IBM that would allow Apple to have chips custom made much more quickly and cheaply than was previously possible. So it's quite possible that there's not much firm data on that.
Dorsal has claimed that the new chip is based on the e500 core, but THT has questioned that.
[quote]<strong>What sizes are the L2 and L3 caches? 512K and 2MB?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dorsal claimed in his first post that cache sizes had doubled.
[quote]<strong>e500 and another high performance core? Was he talking about nVidia?</strong><hr></blockquote>
THT noted that the e500 is not, by the standards of the 7455, a high performance core. THT mentioned a much more powerful and scalable core, but that's probably the one that will appear in early 2003.
nVIDIA is probably involved to some extent; while I'm sure Quartz Extreme sails along nicely on a GeForce4, it also opens up the possibility that a really high-performance graphics subsystem could dramatically boost the available power of the machine, beyond what the raw processor performance would imply.
If it's running at 1.5 GHz, it ain't a G4. Since there isn't a G5 (the chip theoretically capable of these speeds), I doubt seriously that Dorsal knows what he's talking about.
FWIW, I don't know shjt from shinola, but a full-scale improvement in G4's is pretty far-fetched.
TING5
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Yet Another Registration ]</p>
[quote]Come on Dorsal M you can do better than that. I was waiting for months for another post and thats all you can give. Apple is really in deep s**t if it doesnt release a real pro machine worth that 3500$. The powermac's ass is being handed to him in almost all aspects now. <hr></blockquote>
I don't know if Dorsal mentioned this or not, but HE DOESN'T RUN APPLE.
[quote]Originally posted by Yet Another Registration:
<strong>If it's running at 1.5 GHz, it ain't a G4. Since there isn't a G5 (the chip theoretically capable of these speeds), I doubt seriously that Dorsal knows what he's talking about.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Bollocks! There is every reason to suspect a G4 fabbed in a .13 micron process can obtain 1.5GHz, especially if they also extend it to 10 stages. Motorola must have their .13 micron process sorted by now, IBM do, Intel do (for over a year), AMD do (for a couple of months).
[quote]<strong>
FWIW, I don't know shjt from shinola, but a full-scale improvement in G4's is pretty far-fetched.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Lets look at at the P4, the current state of the art Intel processor. Originally fabbed in a .18 micron Al process it could obtain at least 2GHz.
They then introduced a new version made in their new .13 micron process that started at 1.9GHz(I think, would welcom correction). This will obtain 3GHz before the year is out. That is a 50% increase in clock speeds with a slightly tweaked architecture (but no extra pipeline stages).
Motorola should be able to make the G4 go from 1GHz to 1.5Ghz by shrinking it to a .13 micron process. You even get lower power disipation as a nice side effect.
I don't disagree that a .13 processed G4 could one day reach 1.5 GHz, I just don't think it will do that right off the line. Hence, my skepticism. It's not like the P4 went straight to 2.53 GHz after their die shrink; it took some time to evolve up to that speed.
So, I'm sticking to my 1.2 GHz prediction.
Let it be known that I have NEVER EVER gotten a prediction right since 1999, so betting against me is a good idea. <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Hell, the damn expo is about a week away, anyway; I would expect people's level of stress to go down, as the waiting period is practically over.....
Does anyone know where Power Mac inventories stand right now? I'm wondering if Apple would announce something like a 1.5 GHz dual G4 with DDR at MWNY... but announce that it wouldn't be available for 2-3 months.
My vague feeling from all the rumors running about is that if Dorsal is right, these new Power Macs will almost, but not quite, be ready to ship at MWNY. Once such an announcement were made, you'd have one hell of a time getting rid of the current "Power" Mac models.
Buy an iPod, get a dual 1 Gig for free? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
If history is any judge, some time around Tuesday or Wednesday, Powermacs will go to "shipping in 7 (or 10) days" at the Apple Store.....
The day after new Powermacs come out, all the rsellers drop their prices $100-500 on Powermacs. Those specials don't last for more than a week or two, pushing out all of the old products.
A month or so later, Apple has "Special Deals" on "refurbished" last generation stuff.
Baically, what I am saying is that exces inventory is something they deal with after that fact pretty well, and I can't think of a single scenario where excess inventory would DELAY a launch.
Also, Apple hasn't since the return of Steve announced a future shipping date of more than 30 days out. They often just lie and say it's available immediately.
TING5
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Yet Another Registration ]</p>
[quote]Originally posted by Yet Another Registration:
<strong>I don't disagree that a .13 processed G4 could one day reach 1.5 GHz, I just don't think it will do that right off the line. Hence, my skepticism. It's not like the P4 went straight to 2.53 GHz after their die shrink; it took some time to evolve up to that speed.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OK, but Intel could have released the P4 at 2.53 easily, that they didn't was for marketing and profitability. Note now that AMD are struggling to release new processors, the steady release of Intel gear has slowed...
[quote]<strong>
So, I'm sticking to my 1.2 GHz prediction.
Let it be known that I have NEVER EVER gotten a prediction right since 1999, so betting against me is a good idea. <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Hell, the damn expo is about a week away, anyway; I would expect people's level of stress to go down, as the waiting period is practically over.....
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I apologise, after going away and rereading what I wrote it did come sounding fat too harsh.
[quote]Originally posted by Yet Another Registration:
<strong>If it's running at 1.5 GHz, it ain't a G4. Since there isn't a G5 (the chip theoretically capable of these speeds), I doubt seriously that Dorsal knows what he's talking about.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah?
And what about me? I was here pounding my fist on the table about a 1.5 Ghz Dual some time back, and while my info forced me to lower my insistence on it, I know that these G4s have existed for a while.
Sure you don't (yet) have good reason to believe me, since you don't know me from the hundreds of tweens that crawl these boards trying to plant information. But then again, you don't have a good reason not to believe me either :cool:
And no, if history is any judge, the expectation and tense status of all Mac fans will only rise exponentially as the keynote approaches. I know already I won't sleep the night before the keynote--I'll stay up and get in line with my colleagues way early, so we won't need binoculars to check out those new towers!
BTW, if any of you are watching the keynote (LOL! I mean...when you are watching the keynote) if the Powermac upgrades are so poor they prompt crowd riot....I'll be the one sneaking on stage to grab the demo machines! JK
TING5, YAR, whatever you are now, have some faith. I know everyone here follows Dorsal like a deity, and to be perfectly honest, hearing him confirm everything I've heard is very relieving. (of course, Dorsal, if for any reason the Powermacs are not up to 1.5, we'll be eating crow )
[quote]Originally posted by Yet Another Registration:
<strong>Also, Apple hasn't since the return of Steve announced a future shipping date of more than 30 days out. They often just lie and say it's available immediately.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
IIRC,
More than a couple products have seen shipping dates of > 30 days. The original G4 (AGP Graphics) Towers (Sawtooth) were introed in September, but didn't ship until November or December.
More recently, the different models of new iMac shipped 1, 2, and 3 months after intro. And even more recently, the Xserve technically shipped over 30 days after its intro.
Say for a minute (NOTE this isn't based on anything besides the 1.5 Ghz ceiling) that the new towers come in configurations of 1.26 Ghz, Dual 1.13 Ghz, and Dual 1.5 Ghz. Apple may do what they did with the iMac--scale the intros. The Dual 1.13 model might ship in early August, with the 1.26 model coming in Sept and the Dual 1.5 in October. Why not? Its perfectly feasible...and if yields aren't QUITE there yet and that's what it takes to get 1.5 Ghz announced, then I say do it!
Don't worry, dude. I'll be more than happy with 1.2 GHz. I'm not a 'sky is falling' type at all. I leave that to the Chicken Little camp and their leader, JYD.
If all Motorola did was put a DDR controller on the current 7455 and the speed didn't move an inch, I'd be happy.
I guess it's easy for me to wait because:
1) I don't get my big check until July 15th, so I wouldn't be buying 'til after the Expo no matter what
2) I'm gonna get a portable, and it seems like the Expo is a Powermac (and possibly iMac) affair.
As for shipping dates, Apple always lies about them, so I expect the next shipping date to be a carefully crafted lie as well. In other words, if I do buy an updated-at-the-expo product, I KNOW I won't see it until August at the earliest.
TING5
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Yet Another Registration ]</p>
well since mot seems to have 1ghz chips out the wazoo, it might be likely that the base model will be a dual 1gz machine, giving us an all dual lineup.
<strong>heh.. java.. therein lies your problem, dude.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't want to wander too far off topic, but what else besides Java would you suggest for a highly interactive cross-platform web applet like this: <a href="http://www.skyviewcafe.com"; target="_blank">www.skyviewcafe.com</a> ? The applet is too interactive for server-side solutions to work effectively. I need the applet to get most of its horsepower from client system, and Java is the best way to do that for my calculation-intensive astronomy code.
Besides, my applet's performance with Java on Wintel systems is pretty good, so Java is not the problem. It's a combination of current underpowered Mac hardware and the current Mac Java implementation.
To get back to "Future Hardware": I'm very eager to see how much Java performance improves if we really get a 1.5 GHz G4 with DDR at MWNY.
This brings to mind a speculative "Future Hardware" idea, best started on a new thread...
Comments
<strong>You are basing your numbers on what ever Intel and AMD want you to believe. I have used their 2ghz machines and the all suck. I bet if they were to gather all of their celeron processors and label them with a 5ghz YOU'D buy one cuz you can't tell the difference</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
<strong>So, 1.5GHz and DDR266?
That may keep sales afloat until the G5 is released.
But I have some questions:
What bus does the new G4 use?
How fast is it?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
If it is 266 DDR then it *should* use a 133 bus, and everything I have heard says it will. But it should be double-pumped for the DDR.
[quote]Originally posted by Kecksy:
<strong>
Does the new G4 have any additional floating point or integer units?
What sizes are the L2 and L3 caches?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dunno.
[quote]Originally posted by Kecksy:
<strong>
Does this also mean 1GHz iMacs?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not necessarily, though it is very possible.
<strong>So, 1.5GHz and DDR266?
That may keep sales afloat until the G5 is released.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That will depend on real-world performance, which can't be measured until the machine's out in the real world.
[quote]<strong>What bus does the new G4 use? Dorsal said dual channel RapidIO earlier. Is this still the case?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dorsal seems to be standing by his assertion that the RAM will be connected in an "unconventional" way, presumably with an on-chip memory controller and 16-bit RapidIO (although other configurations are possible).
moki has heard that this board slipped, and we'll see a stopgap, but Dorsal is now claiming it's final.
[quote]<strong>How fast is the bus? 16-bit at 2GHz or 8-bit at 500Mhz?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dorsal has said 16-bit; based on a quick reread of this thread, I don't think he's offered a bus speed yet.
[quote]<strong>Does the new G4 have any additional floating point or integer units? Dorsal said no.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dorsal mentioned Book E, an architecture shared between Motorola and IBM that would allow Apple to have chips custom made much more quickly and cheaply than was previously possible. So it's quite possible that there's not much firm data on that.
Dorsal has claimed that the new chip is based on the e500 core, but THT has questioned that.
[quote]<strong>What sizes are the L2 and L3 caches? 512K and 2MB?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dorsal claimed in his first post that cache sizes had doubled.
[quote]<strong>e500 and another high performance core? Was he talking about nVidia?</strong><hr></blockquote>
THT noted that the e500 is not, by the standards of the 7455, a high performance core. THT mentioned a much more powerful and scalable core, but that's probably the one that will appear in early 2003.
nVIDIA is probably involved to some extent; while I'm sure Quartz Extreme sails along nicely on a GeForce4, it also opens up the possibility that a really high-performance graphics subsystem could dramatically boost the available power of the machine, beyond what the raw processor performance would imply.
FWIW, I don't know shjt from shinola, but a full-scale improvement in G4's is pretty far-fetched.
TING5
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Yet Another Registration ]</p>
I don't know if Dorsal mentioned this or not, but HE DOESN'T RUN APPLE.
Complain to Apple, not hardware testers.
<strong>If it's running at 1.5 GHz, it ain't a G4. Since there isn't a G5 (the chip theoretically capable of these speeds), I doubt seriously that Dorsal knows what he's talking about.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Bollocks! There is every reason to suspect a G4 fabbed in a .13 micron process can obtain 1.5GHz, especially if they also extend it to 10 stages. Motorola must have their .13 micron process sorted by now, IBM do, Intel do (for over a year), AMD do (for a couple of months).
[quote]<strong>
FWIW, I don't know shjt from shinola, but a full-scale improvement in G4's is pretty far-fetched.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Lets look at at the P4, the current state of the art Intel processor. Originally fabbed in a .18 micron Al process it could obtain at least 2GHz.
They then introduced a new version made in their new .13 micron process that started at 1.9GHz(I think, would welcom correction). This will obtain 3GHz before the year is out. That is a 50% increase in clock speeds with a slightly tweaked architecture (but no extra pipeline stages).
Motorola should be able to make the G4 go from 1GHz to 1.5Ghz by shrinking it to a .13 micron process. You even get lower power disipation as a nice side effect.
So, I'm sticking to my 1.2 GHz prediction.
Let it be known that I have NEVER EVER gotten a prediction right since 1999, so betting against me is a good idea. <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Hell, the damn expo is about a week away, anyway; I would expect people's level of stress to go down, as the waiting period is practically over.....
TING5
My vague feeling from all the rumors running about is that if Dorsal is right, these new Power Macs will almost, but not quite, be ready to ship at MWNY. Once such an announcement were made, you'd have one hell of a time getting rid of the current "Power" Mac models.
Buy an iPod, get a dual 1 Gig for free? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: shetline ]</p>
The day after new Powermacs come out, all the rsellers drop their prices $100-500 on Powermacs. Those specials don't last for more than a week or two, pushing out all of the old products.
A month or so later, Apple has "Special Deals" on "refurbished" last generation stuff.
Baically, what I am saying is that exces inventory is something they deal with after that fact pretty well, and I can't think of a single scenario where excess inventory would DELAY a launch.
Also, Apple hasn't since the return of Steve announced a future shipping date of more than 30 days out. They often just lie and say it's available immediately.
TING5
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Yet Another Registration ]</p>
<strong>I don't disagree that a .13 processed G4 could one day reach 1.5 GHz, I just don't think it will do that right off the line. Hence, my skepticism. It's not like the P4 went straight to 2.53 GHz after their die shrink; it took some time to evolve up to that speed.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OK, but Intel could have released the P4 at 2.53 easily, that they didn't was for marketing and profitability. Note now that AMD are struggling to release new processors, the steady release of Intel gear has slowed...
[quote]<strong>
So, I'm sticking to my 1.2 GHz prediction.
Let it be known that I have NEVER EVER gotten a prediction right since 1999, so betting against me is a good idea. <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Hell, the damn expo is about a week away, anyway; I would expect people's level of stress to go down, as the waiting period is practically over.....
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I apologise, after going away and rereading what I wrote it did come sounding fat too harsh.
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: JRG ]</p>
<strong>If it's running at 1.5 GHz, it ain't a G4. Since there isn't a G5 (the chip theoretically capable of these speeds), I doubt seriously that Dorsal knows what he's talking about.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah?
And what about me? I was here pounding my fist on the table about a 1.5 Ghz Dual some time back, and while my info forced me to lower my insistence on it, I know that these G4s have existed for a while.
Sure you don't (yet) have good reason to believe me, since you don't know me from the hundreds of tweens that crawl these boards trying to plant information. But then again, you don't have a good reason not to believe me either :cool:
And no, if history is any judge, the expectation and tense status of all Mac fans will only rise exponentially as the keynote approaches. I know already I won't sleep the night before the keynote--I'll stay up and get in line with my colleagues way early, so we won't need binoculars to check out those new towers!
BTW, if any of you are watching the keynote (LOL! I mean...when you are watching the keynote) if the Powermac upgrades are so poor they prompt crowd riot....I'll be the one sneaking on stage to grab the demo machines! JK
TING5, YAR, whatever you are now, have some faith. I know everyone here follows Dorsal like a deity, and to be perfectly honest, hearing him confirm everything I've heard is very relieving. (of course, Dorsal, if for any reason the Powermacs are not up to 1.5, we'll be eating crow
<strong>Also, Apple hasn't since the return of Steve announced a future shipping date of more than 30 days out. They often just lie and say it's available immediately.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
IIRC,
More than a couple products have seen shipping dates of > 30 days. The original G4 (AGP Graphics) Towers (Sawtooth) were introed in September, but didn't ship until November or December.
More recently, the different models of new iMac shipped 1, 2, and 3 months after intro. And even more recently, the Xserve technically shipped over 30 days after its intro.
Say for a minute (NOTE this isn't based on anything besides the 1.5 Ghz ceiling) that the new towers come in configurations of 1.26 Ghz, Dual 1.13 Ghz, and Dual 1.5 Ghz. Apple may do what they did with the iMac--scale the intros. The Dual 1.13 model might ship in early August, with the 1.26 model coming in Sept and the Dual 1.5 in October. Why not? Its perfectly feasible...and if yields aren't QUITE there yet and that's what it takes to get 1.5 Ghz announced, then I say do it!
If all Motorola did was put a DDR controller on the current 7455 and the speed didn't move an inch, I'd be happy.
I guess it's easy for me to wait because:
1) I don't get my big check until July 15th, so I wouldn't be buying 'til after the Expo no matter what
2) I'm gonna get a portable, and it seems like the Expo is a Powermac (and possibly iMac) affair.
As for shipping dates, Apple always lies about them, so I expect the next shipping date to be a carefully crafted lie as well. In other words, if I do buy an updated-at-the-expo product, I KNOW I won't see it until August at the earliest.
TING5
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Yet Another Registration ]</p>
<strong>heh.. java.. therein lies your problem, dude.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't want to wander too far off topic, but what else besides Java would you suggest for a highly interactive cross-platform web applet like this: <a href="http://www.skyviewcafe.com"; target="_blank">www.skyviewcafe.com</a> ? The applet is too interactive for server-side solutions to work effectively. I need the applet to get most of its horsepower from client system, and Java is the best way to do that for my calculation-intensive astronomy code.
Besides, my applet's performance with Java on Wintel systems is pretty good, so Java is not the problem. It's a combination of current underpowered Mac hardware and the current Mac Java implementation.
To get back to "Future Hardware": I'm very eager to see how much Java performance improves if we really get a 1.5 GHz G4 with DDR at MWNY.
This brings to mind a speculative "Future Hardware" idea, best started on a new thread...
Screed ...My nipples explode with ambiguity.
Here's what he's got to say:
QuickSilver is dead. Long live the White Apple (for a year or so, at least).
? It looks as though the current 800MHz base system will be replaced with a single processor 1GHz.
? Mid and top-level systems will sport dual processors, and they should clock-in around 1.2GHz and 1.4GHz respectively.
? It seems that the total RAM amount will still max-out at 1.5GB ? but that seems odd to me?
? The case will sport more internal bays to better handle multiple IDE drive installations.
? Low-end systems will have the GeForce4 MX card, and mid and top-level Macs will have the GeForce4 Titanium (this is pretty well-known already).
? Drive capacity will start at 60GB, 80GB, and 2x80GB.
? Prices will not change from they are now (supposedly).
<strong>Well, the guy from railheaddesign.com has weighed in on the subject.
Here's what he's got to say:
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Where did you see that? I can't see any mention of that anywhere on his site.
<strong>Well, the guy from railheaddesign.com has weighed in on the subject.
Here's what he's got to say:
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Where did you see that? I can't see any mention of that anywhere on his site.