The next Powermacs.

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Steve says we'll be at 3ghz by the the end of Summer 2004, So what happens between now and then?



My guess is that there will be a speed bump, but not a big one, the 3ghz level is obviously going to be achieved by moving to a 0.09 process. Current processors are made on the 0.13 fab and as such scaling beyond the current high end is going to cause even greater heat problems. Having said that the coolingf system does not seem to be stressed in the current machines.



I believe we will see a new lineup in January.



SP 1.8Ghz, DP 2.00Ghz, and (In short supply) DP2.4



Modest but I believe realistic.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 53
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Addison

    I believe we will see a new lineup in January....

    Modest but I believe realistic.




    Modest? Not unless you mean January of '05. (IMO)
  • Reply 2 of 53
    splinemodelsplinemodel Posts: 7,311member
    I think the dual 2GHz will stay for a while, but the prices will come down and we'll see a dual 1.6 version positioned right below it, occupying the apex of price-performance in the powermac line.
  • Reply 3 of 53
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    I think in the future we will see one single and two dual. The G5 tower is made for dual (both the mobo and the case), it will be a waste of money if the majority of the G5 builded are not dual.
  • Reply 4 of 53
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    I'm still pining for the not-so-Pro G5 micro tower. There have been plenty of threads about it and most people are sick of hearing about it, but basically it breaks down to a less expensive machine to replace the Cube and possibly the low-end PowerMac. Single processor, 4 RAM slots, smaller motherboard, AGP slot with one PCI slot, same ports as the G5 tower (except for possibly the optical audio). Redesign the iMac to make it a replacement for the eMac and FP iMac at a LOWER price to make room for this new micro tower.
  • Reply 5 of 53
    mggmgg Posts: 124member
    I think that January is a little soon personally.
  • Reply 6 of 53
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself

    Modest? Not unless you mean January of '05. (IMO)



    How would it be January of '05 when Steve says they'll be at 3ghz by middle of 2004? Heck, we'll probably have dual Powerbook G5s by January of 05.
  • Reply 7 of 53
    Here's a lineup prediction which I think is entirely feasible given what we know IBM is likely to do:



    * single 2.0 GHz

    * dual 2.2 GHz

    * dual 2.5 GHz



    It makes the low-end purchasers happy because they get the clock speed that was high-end a few months before; the mid-range buyers are happy because they don't have to go for broke (or just go broke) to get dual processors, and the high-end of course has a perceptibly higher clock speed.



    Price cuts? I don't expect any myself, but this is also October 2003 and not early 2004. The cuts would depend on whether IBM refines its technologies and yields enough to lower prices, as well as whether or not higher-speed DDR and Serial ATA become more common. Even then I wouldn't expect more than a $100 US drop.
  • Reply 8 of 53
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    I'm buying a G5 when it's at dual 3 GHz. So bring it on!



    What if Steve's statement of 3 GHz was a pessimistic forecast? If moving to a 90 nanometer G5 production in the fourth quarter is a good indicator of faster chips, I'm hoping that we may see the 3 GHz model announced at MWSF in January. Talk about shock value.



    New line up:



    2.0

    2.5

    Dual 3 GHz
  • Reply 9 of 53
    Quote:

    Originally posted by macmike

    How would it be January of '05 when Steve says they'll be at 3ghz by middle of 2004? Heck, we'll probably have dual Powerbook G5s by January of 05.



    I say your crazy.
  • Reply 10 of 53
    @homenow@homenow Posts: 998member
    A 1 ghz jump in 6 months is pushing it...I would fell confident (optimistic?) on 2.5 ghz PM's by the announced in February, when "Spring" PM's have been announced the past few years. I guess that if IBM does have 2.5's like the anouncement that the published earlier this year suggests, and the move to 90 nanometer gives us a 25% boost in speed then there is the possibility that IBM will be getting some 3 ghz (3.125 to be exact) 970's off their line, but to date there are no 2.5 ghz 970's shipping that I know of so a safer bet is 2.5.
  • Reply 11 of 53
    addisonaddison Posts: 1,185member
    I don't think IBM can push the 130nanometer chips far beyond their current speed. I am not an expert but this seem to be a common theme, hence my modest predictions. When they move to 90 nanometer I guess there will be a step jump.
  • Reply 12 of 53
    rickagrickag Posts: 1,626member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Addison

    I don't think IBM can push the 130nanometer chips far beyond their current speed. I am not an expert but this seem to be a common theme, hence my modest predictions. When they move to 90 nanometer I guess there will be a step jump.



    Why? Just asking, but Intel is pushing 3.2GHz and looking for more @ 0.13µm. The IBM has between 9 and 20(?) pipeline stages depending on which execution unit your looking at, I think this should allow quite an increase over 2.0GHz before the jump to 0.09µm. After all, those 9 fans aren't really being stressed at the moment, could be that this case, with it's 9 fans was designed to handle a lot more heat than is currently(pun) being generated. Just a thought, I could be wrong, have been in the past, and surely will be in the future.
  • Reply 13 of 53
    thttht Posts: 5,450member
    The 970 has a longer execution pipeline than the Athlon, 14 stages versus 10 or 12 stages. AMD is shipping 2.2+ GHz Athlons, be it 32 bit or 64 bit versions, on their Motorola inspired 130 nm fab. If IBM can't ship a 970 clocked faster than 2.2 GHz on their 130 nm fab, it means they aren't trying hard enough or their 130 nm fab isn't as good as AMD's 130 nm fab. 2.5 GHz is a good top end number for the 970 at 130 nm and should be achievable given its architecture.
  • Reply 14 of 53
    This is all suposing Apple will use the same box of course. With news of Liquid Cooling for future processors we could see something radically different again before not too long. As we have seed with the iPod, Apple will improve upon a winning product whenever and wherever it can. Personally, I wouldnt be surpirsed if new boxes were available next year to house faster processors.. Keep that ball rolling.
  • Reply 15 of 53
    zapchudzapchud Posts: 844member
    With all the R&D that's gone into the current G5 box, I think we'll be stuck with that for a long time. The cooling system might change slightly (or radically, but that's just eventually) over the revisions, but mostly, it'll stay the same.
  • Reply 16 of 53
    rickagrickag Posts: 1,626member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Zapchud

    With all the R&D that's gone into the current G5 box, I think we'll be stuck with that for a long time. The cooling system might change slightly (or radically, but that's just eventually) over the revisions, but mostly, it'll stay the same.



    Exactly, and with 9 fans and 4 separate cooling zones, my bet is that the current case can indeed handle a lot more heat than the current versions generate. That's just me though and my knowledge of computers is woefully limited.
  • Reply 17 of 53
    naplesxnaplesx Posts: 3,743member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Zapchud

    With all the R&D that's gone into the current G5 box, I think we'll be stuck with that for a long time. The cooling system might change slightly (or radically, but that's just eventually) over the revisions, but mostly, it'll stay the same.



    if apple is smart, and I think that they have proven they are, they would design things from a modular perspective. This would make changing the design or size of the box relatively easy. The fact that it is aluminum points to me that they will probably change it at will. Aluminum is fairly easy to work with.
  • Reply 18 of 53
    I just hope there is a mid-range dual in the lineup by next May or so, which is the earliest I will be buying (end of the fiscal year). I really want a dual, but I doubt I'll be able to spring for the highest-priced model.



    I doubt we'll see any case revisions, except perhaps cosmetic changes, for a few years. Look at Apple's recent track record. The Titanium PowerBooks lasted almost three years, the CRT iMac got just one architectural overhaul in four years and El Capitan...well, El Cap is actually STILL with us after almost five. Steve is all about iconic designs, not transitory ones.
  • Reply 19 of 53
    Premature specification.



    IBM page had a 970 at 2.5 gig.



    I think Rev B will be that in duals at high end.



    2.2 ish dual mid.



    Single 2 gig bottom end.



    Rev B. 2.5 top end with Panther.



    That's what I want...



    San Fran' Jan' announcement surely with shipping soon after.



    It's in Apple and IBM's interest to pile the pressure on Intel. They've both got their reasons.



    Apple's getting growth with laptops. Wonder if it will achieve growth with desktops? Only if the G5 transitions to the rest of the desktop line swiftly...



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 20 of 53
    ipodandimacipodandimac Posts: 3,273member
    i have money ready and everyhing--i'm totally waiting on new displays and a speed bump... i'll get back to you in january
Sign In or Register to comment.