I have NO problem buying a Powerbook G4 if it is a 7457 G4 running at 1.3 Ghz, with 512KB L2 and 2MB L3 cache with a Radeon graphics card, backlit keybaord, AE, BT, FW800, the works...but it better be at the same price point or I am just gonna pass and wait for the G5. Sorry, just had to throw that out there...
I know the '57 has a 512K L2, but is the 2M L3 on-chip? I just don't know. Do we know the FSB speed? I thought 1.25 GHz implied 167MHz, and 1.3(3) implied 200MHz? What multipliers are possible? I guess maybe I'm thinking wrong, as 167MHz/1.25GHz is 7.5x, and 167MHz/1.33GHz is 8.0x.
In any case, going from 1.0GHz (what is it, a 7447?) to 1.25GHz (7457) should be more than a 25% "speed increase", yes?
I know the '57 has a 512K L2, but is the 2M L3 on-chip? I just don't know. Do we know the FSB speed? I thought 1.25 GHz implied 167MHz, and 1.3(3) implied 200MHz? What multipliers are possible? I guess maybe I'm thinking wrong, as 167MHz/1.25GHz is 7.5x, and 167MHz/1.33GHz is 8.0x.
In any case, going from 1.0GHz (what is it, a 7447?) to 1.25GHz (7457) should be more than a 25% "speed increase", yes?
I saw it on Motos semiconductor site. It says UP TO 2 MB L3 cache. It would sure be nice if Apple decided to use it. I think the FSB would be 200 Mhz. And I am going from a 667 TiBook with 16MB video Ram, so more than 2x the speed and 4x the video power, not to mention 2 MB of L3 cache, throw in an 80GB HD, and I'm gettin me a Powerbook
i would rather have a G4 with a longer battery life, less heat and smaller size than a G5 PB.
even if you underclock a G5 to 1GHz, the die shrink on it is still .13 microns, same as the 7457, but the G5 has about 5 times as many transistors, so there's no way in hell a current G5 will be able to match the space/heat/battery performance of the 7457. So UNLESS IBM secretly managed to make .09 micron G5 chips in quantity, I don't see a G5 PB coming next week and I don't really want one.
That said, I wouldn't completely rule out a G5 PB. Around this time last year people were saying that it was impossible for the PB to get a sloth loading superdrive because they were too big but Apple did it anyways.
I hope this is a decent update, that the PBs are available before the end of the month, that they use a 200 MHz system bus, DDR400 memory, 2MB L3 cache (external to die), and have 2x DVD-R. I also fervently hope the 15 has a 15.4" display.
I saw it on Motos semiconductor site. It says UP TO 2 MB L3 cache. It would sure be nice if Apple decided to use it. I think the FSB would be 200 Mhz. And I am going from a 667 TiBook with 16MB video Ram, so more than 2x the speed and 4x the video power, not to mention 2 MB of L3 cache, throw in an 80GB HD, and I'm gettin me a Powerbook
I'm coming from a 400MHz G3 Pismo! The reason I compared with the 1GHz G4 is that is what is available right now, and if nothing comes next week, what I'll end up with --- I have a standing quote that is quite good, and will remain very attractive with speed bumped 'books. Since I'm not paying for it, of course I will get the faster machine.
Uh...that's for a G5 running at 1.8 Ghz. It is a FACT that a G5 running at 1.2 Ghz dissipates = or less heat than a 7455 G4 (ya know...the one's CURRENTLY in that 1" frame) and also uses less power.
Well I'm not so sure. Part of that heat sink in the picture is for the chip power supply and the faster FSB has to eat up some power along with the DDR memory. Not sure what it all adds up to power wise. Also not sure how the current PB chip is tweaked for low power usage. (as in are the chips throttling dynamically when in use)
even if you underclock a G5 to 1GHz, the die shrink on it is still .13 microns, same as the 7457, but the G5 has about 5 times as many transistors, so there's no way in hell a current G5 will be able to match the
Sorry, but you are utterly wrong. Actually, the 7457 has 58 mio transistors, the 970 "only" 52 mio.
I hope this is a decent update, that the PBs are available before the end of the month, that they use a 200 MHz system bus, DDR400 memory, 2MB L3 cache (external to die), and have 2x DVD-R. I also fervently hope the 15 has a 15.4" display.
That's good news - AI has a decent track record now, and they say it is "positively confirmed."
On the other hand, I wonder if this is the kind of update that would make it to a Stevenote. Yeah, it's a different enclosure, but it's just filling out the line in such a way that I would have thought it would simply be a press release.
There are numerous reasons why Apple has staggered the release of G5 systems, heat generation, battery life and heat sink size just arent in the picture.
IBM claims that a 1.2-1.3 Gig G5 generates less heat and eats less power than a 1 Gig G4. Putting one of these chips if IBM makes them into the PB is possible. You can not for one minute truly believe that in the 3 years or so that IBM and Apple have been working at developing the G5 that they could only come up with a tower design??? Its not like Apple has 3 employees that can only work 1 project at a time.
Also who has seen the inside of a 1.6, 1.8 and dual 2 G5. from the pictures they look very similar with the exception of a missing processor on the single CPU units. In todays economic climate it is idiotic from a manufacturing standpoint to make 3 separate systems when any possible cost savings individually can be increased by the increased volumes of a single design being used in more than one place. I bet that the heat sinks were designed for worst case and used throughout the product line to save money and make assembly more efficient and less error prone.
Well I'm not so sure. Part of that heat sink in the picture is for the chip power supply and the faster FSB has to eat up some power along with the DDR memory. Not sure what it all adds up to power wise. Also not sure how the current PB chip is tweaked for low power usage. (as in are the chips throttling dynamically when in use)
At the same overall power consumption, any processor would need equivalent power supply; that's not unique to the 970. Also, if the processor were clocked down to 1.2 GHz (say), then the FSB would be down to a max of 600 MHz, and if they wanted to they could use 3:1 ratio and bring it down to 400 MHz. Isn't the slow bus on the G4 a source of endless complaining anyway? What kind of FSB do the Centrino machines use?
It remains possible that the current G5 infrastructure is not ready for a laptop, but I'm still not convinced that we've seen any hard evidence of it. Nonetheless, I expect we'll be seeing 7457-based PowerBooks next week.
I hope this is a decent update, that the PBs are available before the end of the month, that they use a 200 MHz system bus, DDR400 memory, 2MB L3 cache (external to die), and have 2x DVD-R. I also fervently hope the 15 has a 15.4" display.
AI Article, I like this one:
To levitate some concerns -- during the last week of August -- Apple told some of its select retail partners to expect new PowerBooks in early to mid September.
...hmm, levitating the concerns as in making them higher??
On the other hand, I wonder if this is the kind of update that would make it to a Stevenote. Yeah, it's a different enclosure, but it's just filling out the line in such a way that I would have thought it would simply be a press release.
hey guys, i'm new here so this may be a dumb question.
I don't want to give anyone a heart attack, but I would really like to know why apple laptops have remained at the 1 GHz level.
My cousin was just in the market for a laptop and I took her to the apple store to show her the 12 inch I plan to buy after paris expo. She thought the wwhole place was beautiful and loved the powerbook designs. However she couldn't bring herself to buy a $1600 powerbook with only 867mhz when a $950 compaq has 2GHz.
Personally, I'm willing to pay because i value more then just haphazard computing power. I've just had it with the plastic unreliability of my Pc computers.
ANyway, back to my question. This will be my first Apple and I am by no stretch particularly computer wise, but I just don't understand what the limitations are. Apple deserves to be at the top of the heap especially for what they charge!.
I don't want to give anyone a heart attack, but I would really like to know why apple laptops have remained at the 1 GHz level.
The basic answer is that Apple's CPU suppliers haven't been able to do any better. The PowerPC chips that have surpassed 1 GHz have been too hot for a notebook, in Apple's and most others' opinions.
You and most of us appreciate the other things that make a Mac worth having, despite the fact that it might not be quite as fast as a comparably priced or cheaper windoze PC. Most people can't or don't appreciate those things and therefore follow the crowd and settle for what I consider to be a less satisfying computer experience. I won't argue that one is less productive on a windoze PC, just that I think Macs are better for many reasons, and worth the extra money.
hey guys, i'm new here so this may be a dumb question.
I don't want to give anyone a heart attack, but I would really like to know why apple laptops have remained at the 1 GHz level.
My cousin was just in the market for a laptop and I took her to the apple store to show her the 12 inch I plan to buy after paris expo. She thought the wwhole place was beautiful and loved the powerbook designs. However she couldn't bring herself to buy a $1600 powerbook with only 867mhz when a $950 compaq has 2GHz.
Personally, I'm willing to pay because i value more then just haphazard computing power. I've just had it with the plastic unreliability of my Pc computers.
ANyway, back to my question. This will be my first Apple and I am by no stretch particularly computer wise, but I just don't understand what the limitations are. Apple deserves to be at the top of the heap especially for what they charge!.
Simple: The value of the computer is determined by a lot more than the speed of the CPU clock.
Does the Compaq have anywhere near the fit and finish, ruggedness, features, ease of use, portability, screen or keyboard quality? Mac portables can easily last for years and years (I know one that turned 11 last spring, and it still works). Finally, when she decides to sell it, Macs hold their value much better than PCs do. A friend of mine is looking at buying a three year old PowerBook for $600.
Also, I daresay that OS X uses the hardware more efficiently than Windows does, and unlike Windows it's gotten faster with each release.
hey guys, i'm new here so this may be a dumb question.
I don't want to give anyone a heart attack, but I would really like to know why apple laptops have remained at the 1 GHz level.
My cousin was just in the market for a laptop and I took her to the apple store to show her the 12 inch I plan to buy after paris expo. She thought the wwhole place was beautiful and loved the powerbook designs. However she couldn't bring herself to buy a $1600 powerbook with only 867mhz when a $950 compaq has 2GHz.
Personally, I'm willing to pay because i value more then just haphazard computing power. I've just had it with the plastic unreliability of my Pc computers.
ANyway, back to my question. This will be my first Apple and I am by no stretch particularly computer wise, but I just don't understand what the limitations are. Apple deserves to be at the top of the heap especially for what they charge!.
What does she plan on doing with it? Don't need 2GHz to type, surf and send.
To levitate some concerns -- during the last week of August -- Apple told some of its select retail partners to expect new PowerBooks in early to mid September.
...hmm, levitating the concerns as in making them higher??
hehe... good one, albeit they obviously meant "alleviate", not "levitate". Spell checkers do run wild at times.
Ok, back on topic. I sold my Ti400 over a month ago now. I am typing this on a very old and poky (as fas as OS X is concerned) graphite iBook SE 466. I am on the market for a new 15" PowerBook and I do hope it debuts next week. Since my former PB was a 400mhz G4, I am 100% sure whatever Apple brings will be more than adequate for my needs, whether it sports a 1.2 G4 or G5.
hehe... good one, albeit they obviously meant "alleviate", not "levitate". Spell checkers do run wild at times.
Ok, back on topic. I sold my Ti400 over a month ago now. I am typing this on a very old and poky (as fas as OS X is concerned) graphite iBook SE 466. I am on the market for a new 15" PowerBook and I do hope it debuts next week. Since my former PB was a 400mhz G4, I am 100% sure whatever Apple brings will be more than adequate for my needs, whether it sports a 1.2 G4 or G5.
I agree, I'm going to upgrade from a PB500.
(they haven't changed the text yet and I also assume they meant alleviate; although levitate does add much more to the PB upgrade confusion)
Comments
What does the heatsink in a 1.0 GHz dual look like? You may as well use all the space you can!
Looks like it isn't going to happen, of course, but G5s will be in powerbooks someday, right?
Originally posted by filmmaker2002
I have NO problem buying a Powerbook G4 if it is a 7457 G4 running at 1.3 Ghz, with 512KB L2 and 2MB L3 cache with a Radeon graphics card, backlit keybaord, AE, BT, FW800, the works...but it better be at the same price point or I am just gonna pass and wait for the G5. Sorry, just had to throw that out there...
I know the '57 has a 512K L2, but is the 2M L3 on-chip? I just don't know. Do we know the FSB speed? I thought 1.25 GHz implied 167MHz, and 1.3(3) implied 200MHz? What multipliers are possible? I guess maybe I'm thinking wrong, as 167MHz/1.25GHz is 7.5x, and 167MHz/1.33GHz is 8.0x.
In any case, going from 1.0GHz (what is it, a 7447?) to 1.25GHz (7457) should be more than a 25% "speed increase", yes?
Originally posted by machem
I know the '57 has a 512K L2, but is the 2M L3 on-chip? I just don't know. Do we know the FSB speed? I thought 1.25 GHz implied 167MHz, and 1.3(3) implied 200MHz? What multipliers are possible? I guess maybe I'm thinking wrong, as 167MHz/1.25GHz is 7.5x, and 167MHz/1.33GHz is 8.0x.
In any case, going from 1.0GHz (what is it, a 7447?) to 1.25GHz (7457) should be more than a 25% "speed increase", yes?
I saw it on Motos semiconductor site. It says UP TO 2 MB L3 cache. It would sure be nice if Apple decided to use it. I think the FSB would be 200 Mhz. And I am going from a 667 TiBook with 16MB video Ram, so more than 2x the speed and 4x the video power, not to mention 2 MB of L3 cache, throw in an 80GB HD, and I'm gettin me a Powerbook
even if you underclock a G5 to 1GHz, the die shrink on it is still .13 microns, same as the 7457, but the G5 has about 5 times as many transistors, so there's no way in hell a current G5 will be able to match the space/heat/battery performance of the 7457. So UNLESS IBM secretly managed to make .09 micron G5 chips in quantity, I don't see a G5 PB coming next week and I don't really want one.
That said, I wouldn't completely rule out a G5 PB. Around this time last year people were saying that it was impossible for the PB to get a sloth loading superdrive because they were too big but Apple did it anyways.
I hope this is a decent update, that the PBs are available before the end of the month, that they use a 200 MHz system bus, DDR400 memory, 2MB L3 cache (external to die), and have 2x DVD-R. I also fervently hope the 15 has a 15.4" display.
Originally posted by filmmaker2002
I saw it on Motos semiconductor site. It says UP TO 2 MB L3 cache. It would sure be nice if Apple decided to use it. I think the FSB would be 200 Mhz. And I am going from a 667 TiBook with 16MB video Ram, so more than 2x the speed and 4x the video power, not to mention 2 MB of L3 cache, throw in an 80GB HD, and I'm gettin me a Powerbook
I'm coming from a 400MHz G3 Pismo! The reason I compared with the 1GHz G4 is that is what is available right now, and if nothing comes next week, what I'll end up with --- I have a standing quote that is quite good, and will remain very attractive with speed bumped 'books. Since I'm not paying for it, of course I will get the faster machine.
Originally posted by filmmaker2002
Uh...that's for a G5 running at 1.8 Ghz. It is a FACT that a G5 running at 1.2 Ghz dissipates = or less heat than a 7455 G4 (ya know...the one's CURRENTLY in that 1" frame) and also uses less power.
Well I'm not so sure. Part of that heat sink in the picture is for the chip power supply and the faster FSB has to eat up some power along with the DDR memory. Not sure what it all adds up to power wise. Also not sure how the current PB chip is tweaked for low power usage. (as in are the chips throttling dynamically when in use)
Originally posted by popmetal
even if you underclock a G5 to 1GHz, the die shrink on it is still .13 microns, same as the 7457, but the G5 has about 5 times as many transistors, so there's no way in hell a current G5 will be able to match the
Sorry, but you are utterly wrong. Actually, the 7457 has 58 mio transistors, the 970 "only" 52 mio.
Moto specs (see page 10).
IBM press release.
Originally posted by Rolo
AI has an update on new PBs in Paris: New PBs in Paris
I hope this is a decent update, that the PBs are available before the end of the month, that they use a 200 MHz system bus, DDR400 memory, 2MB L3 cache (external to die), and have 2x DVD-R. I also fervently hope the 15 has a 15.4" display.
That's good news - AI has a decent track record now, and they say it is "positively confirmed."
On the other hand, I wonder if this is the kind of update that would make it to a Stevenote. Yeah, it's a different enclosure, but it's just filling out the line in such a way that I would have thought it would simply be a press release.
IBM claims that a 1.2-1.3 Gig G5 generates less heat and eats less power than a 1 Gig G4. Putting one of these chips if IBM makes them into the PB is possible. You can not for one minute truly believe that in the 3 years or so that IBM and Apple have been working at developing the G5 that they could only come up with a tower design??? Its not like Apple has 3 employees that can only work 1 project at a time.
Also who has seen the inside of a 1.6, 1.8 and dual 2 G5. from the pictures they look very similar with the exception of a missing processor on the single CPU units. In todays economic climate it is idiotic from a manufacturing standpoint to make 3 separate systems when any possible cost savings individually can be increased by the increased volumes of a single design being used in more than one place. I bet that the heat sinks were designed for worst case and used throughout the product line to save money and make assembly more efficient and less error prone.
Originally posted by Bigc
Well I'm not so sure. Part of that heat sink in the picture is for the chip power supply and the faster FSB has to eat up some power along with the DDR memory. Not sure what it all adds up to power wise. Also not sure how the current PB chip is tweaked for low power usage. (as in are the chips throttling dynamically when in use)
At the same overall power consumption, any processor would need equivalent power supply; that's not unique to the 970. Also, if the processor were clocked down to 1.2 GHz (say), then the FSB would be down to a max of 600 MHz, and if they wanted to they could use 3:1 ratio and bring it down to 400 MHz. Isn't the slow bus on the G4 a source of endless complaining anyway? What kind of FSB do the Centrino machines use?
It remains possible that the current G5 infrastructure is not ready for a laptop, but I'm still not convinced that we've seen any hard evidence of it. Nonetheless, I expect we'll be seeing 7457-based PowerBooks next week.
Originally posted by Rolo
AI has an update on new PBs in Paris: New PBs in Paris
I hope this is a decent update, that the PBs are available before the end of the month, that they use a 200 MHz system bus, DDR400 memory, 2MB L3 cache (external to die), and have 2x DVD-R. I also fervently hope the 15 has a 15.4" display.
AI Article, I like this one:
To levitate some concerns -- during the last week of August -- Apple told some of its select retail partners to expect new PowerBooks in early to mid September.
...hmm, levitating the concerns as in making them higher??
Originally posted by BRussell
On the other hand, I wonder if this is the kind of update that would make it to a Stevenote. Yeah, it's a different enclosure, but it's just filling out the line in such a way that I would have thought it would simply be a press release.
Like the Key Lime iBooks (Paris 2000)?
Originally posted by BrunoBruin
Like the Key Lime iBooks (Paris 2000)?
Yeah, that was a strange moment... the publics' enthusiasm was... mixed.
I don't want to give anyone a heart attack, but I would really like to know why apple laptops have remained at the 1 GHz level.
My cousin was just in the market for a laptop and I took her to the apple store to show her the 12 inch I plan to buy after paris expo. She thought the wwhole place was beautiful and loved the powerbook designs. However she couldn't bring herself to buy a $1600 powerbook with only 867mhz when a $950 compaq has 2GHz.
Personally, I'm willing to pay because i value more then just haphazard computing power. I've just had it with the plastic unreliability of my Pc computers.
ANyway, back to my question. This will be my first Apple and I am by no stretch particularly computer wise, but I just don't understand what the limitations are. Apple deserves to be at the top of the heap especially for what they charge!
Originally posted by cris84
I don't want to give anyone a heart attack, but I would really like to know why apple laptops have remained at the 1 GHz level.
The basic answer is that Apple's CPU suppliers haven't been able to do any better. The PowerPC chips that have surpassed 1 GHz have been too hot for a notebook, in Apple's and most others' opinions.
You and most of us appreciate the other things that make a Mac worth having, despite the fact that it might not be quite as fast as a comparably priced or cheaper windoze PC. Most people can't or don't appreciate those things and therefore follow the crowd and settle for what I consider to be a less satisfying computer experience. I won't argue that one is less productive on a windoze PC, just that I think Macs are better for many reasons, and worth the extra money.
Too bad you can't convince your cousin.
Originally posted by cris84
hey guys, i'm new here so this may be a dumb question.
I don't want to give anyone a heart attack, but I would really like to know why apple laptops have remained at the 1 GHz level.
My cousin was just in the market for a laptop and I took her to the apple store to show her the 12 inch I plan to buy after paris expo. She thought the wwhole place was beautiful and loved the powerbook designs. However she couldn't bring herself to buy a $1600 powerbook with only 867mhz when a $950 compaq has 2GHz.
Personally, I'm willing to pay because i value more then just haphazard computing power. I've just had it with the plastic unreliability of my Pc computers.
ANyway, back to my question. This will be my first Apple and I am by no stretch particularly computer wise, but I just don't understand what the limitations are. Apple deserves to be at the top of the heap especially for what they charge!
Simple: The value of the computer is determined by a lot more than the speed of the CPU clock.
Does the Compaq have anywhere near the fit and finish, ruggedness, features, ease of use, portability, screen or keyboard quality? Mac portables can easily last for years and years (I know one that turned 11 last spring, and it still works). Finally, when she decides to sell it, Macs hold their value much better than PCs do. A friend of mine is looking at buying a three year old PowerBook for $600.
Also, I daresay that OS X uses the hardware more efficiently than Windows does, and unlike Windows it's gotten faster with each release.
Originally posted by cris84
hey guys, i'm new here so this may be a dumb question.
I don't want to give anyone a heart attack, but I would really like to know why apple laptops have remained at the 1 GHz level.
My cousin was just in the market for a laptop and I took her to the apple store to show her the 12 inch I plan to buy after paris expo. She thought the wwhole place was beautiful and loved the powerbook designs. However she couldn't bring herself to buy a $1600 powerbook with only 867mhz when a $950 compaq has 2GHz.
Personally, I'm willing to pay because i value more then just haphazard computing power. I've just had it with the plastic unreliability of my Pc computers.
ANyway, back to my question. This will be my first Apple and I am by no stretch particularly computer wise, but I just don't understand what the limitations are. Apple deserves to be at the top of the heap especially for what they charge!
What does she plan on doing with it? Don't need 2GHz to type, surf and send.
Originally posted by Bigc
AI Article, I like this one:
To levitate some concerns -- during the last week of August -- Apple told some of its select retail partners to expect new PowerBooks in early to mid September.
...hmm, levitating the concerns as in making them higher??
hehe... good one, albeit they obviously meant "alleviate", not "levitate". Spell checkers do run wild at times.
Ok, back on topic. I sold my Ti400 over a month ago now. I am typing this on a very old and poky (as fas as OS X is concerned) graphite iBook SE 466. I am on the market for a new 15" PowerBook and I do hope it debuts next week. Since my former PB was a 400mhz G4, I am 100% sure whatever Apple brings will be more than adequate for my needs, whether it sports a 1.2 G4 or G5.
Originally posted by Bill M
hehe... good one, albeit they obviously meant "alleviate", not "levitate". Spell checkers do run wild at times.
Ok, back on topic. I sold my Ti400 over a month ago now. I am typing this on a very old and poky (as fas as OS X is concerned) graphite iBook SE 466. I am on the market for a new 15" PowerBook and I do hope it debuts next week. Since my former PB was a 400mhz G4, I am 100% sure whatever Apple brings will be more than adequate for my needs, whether it sports a 1.2 G4 or G5.
I agree, I'm going to upgrade from a PB500.
(they haven't changed the text yet and I also assume they meant alleviate; although levitate does add much more to the PB upgrade confusion)