Looks about right, except the PB's will probably be around the 1.6G mark.
This allows the iBook/eMac to get an update as well at up to 1.33G (G4 of course).
I hope Apple keeps the 15" iMac as well, a G5 @ 1.4 say?. New VPC for G5 and things could get interesting in corporate land.
The 2" screen size and the other goodies are enough to warrant the extra price for the 17". If they had put in a 1.4 G5 in a 15" then I would hope that they could get it down to $1099, but I doubt it with the reported shortage of 15" LCD panels. If I recall the iMac traditionally has 2 tiers of processor speeds, and if they had a 3rd speed it was basically "last year's model at bargain basement prices."
The 2" screen size and the other goodies are enough to warrant the extra price for the 17". If they had put in a 1.4 G5 in a 15" then I would hope that they could get it down to $1099, but I doubt it with the reported shortage of 15" LCD panels. If I recall the iMac traditionally has 2 tiers of processor speeds, and if they had a 3rd speed it was basically "last year's model at bargain basement prices."
Um, your right, Apple will purchase G5's @ x clock rate in volume. So Im leaving the supposition on clock rates alone for now. But, my gut tells me, where looking at G5 iMacs in the near term.
Im not so sure on the PB's - but Im desperate to upgrade my Ti400 to a PBG5 the moment their announced!
I'd be surprised if Apple announced on the 20th only because IBM is set to reveal new micro porcessors that day.
On the otherhand it is the 20th year of the Mac so celebrating that on the 20th does seem like an Apple way of doing things. Personally to create maxium noise with this celebration I expect that Apple will go big. That is they will try to get as close to 3 GHz as they can in the PowerMac. Beyond that I would not be surprised to see 970's in all of the rest of the desktops.
Even is we hit slightly less that 3GHz, 2.6 GHz will put Apple in the performance leasdership position. Pretty soundly I might add. It appears that at the moment the only credible competition comes from AMD's 64 bit line. 600 MHz of extra capability ought to leave them in the dust.
isnt it great that when we talk about apple, we say "we"? i think its cool that so many people feel like part of the company.
Actually "we" as in "the poor saps that frequent these boards and grovel when Steve's brushed aluminum chariot passes by"
"We" as in the consumers and professionals that check the rumor sites 5-11 times a day to see when we can have the next "weapon of choice" from our masters at AAPL.
What other company under the canopy of heaven has the devotion that "we" do for Apple? Are people needing therapy about the next soon-to-be-released product from Dell? Nope.
Has anyone got information on the 90 nm yields that IBM is getting?
I have a feeling that there will be a G5 iMac and that it will be the lower two speed levels, based on IBM yields - not Apple marketing.
While 3 Gig would be nice I think that will be a few months down the line. Again, we are at the mercy of how IBM is doing - but that is a hell of a lot better than Moto!
My 2 cents is for a G5 iMac within a fortnight - allowing the iMac to be the single G5 option and the PM the dual. By summer the PM will blow past 3 Gig as IBM tries to match, or beat, Intel on speed. PB in the fall and we'll probably be waiting a few more months for a display revision.
If it happens, the Dual 2.0GHz models will be aplenty and cheap, now that Virginia Tech is swapping 1-for-1 the PowerMacs for xServes. 1,100 dualies just waiting to be unloaded at "used" prices.
PS. Played with the Dual 2 gigger for the first time today. Verrrry nice machine. Opens 9 apps at once blazingly fast. Photoshop? Version 8 doesn't as optimised as it could be for this G5 machine. 300 dpi resize image. Hmmm. Not as fast as I was expecting. Some filters fast, some reasonably fast. Some instant. Erm. Mind you, it was running on a 1900 x 1200 (gorgeous) Apple display...
[...]
PPS. Edit: It only had 512 megs. Maybe it choked alittle. Guy in shop said they bunged in several gigs of ram and it processed an 800 meg image in 10 seconds...
The guy's right. The G5 has a lot of bandwidth, and that's like having a freeway with a lot of lanes: It only pays off when you have to handle a lot of traffic. The more RAM you add, the more traffic there is (the system isn't waiting the relative eternity that it takes to fetch data from the hard drive), the more useful all that bandwidth becomes in practice.
ven is we hit slightly less that 3GHz, 2.6 GHz will put Apple in the performance leasdership position. Pretty soundly I might add. It appears that at the moment the only credible competition comes from AMD's 64 bit line. 600 MHz of extra capability ought to leave them in the dust.
600 mhz of 970 PPC is alot better than 600 mhz of G4. At it's most optimised, the G5 is overall twice the performer the G4 is. (How much of that depends on XLC compilers I don't know. But in the benches I've seen...a single G5 is whomping a single G4.)
I'd think a 600 mhz leap for the PPC will do more for it than 600 mhz for Prescott?
Plus we know the bus speed is going to follow the cpu speed upwards this time. So each mhz bump will count in more ways than one when you factor in support for even faster memory.
I don't know if anyone has seen MOSR's latest news article. But those guys have got a whole PPC roadmap on tap.
PPC 975 Power 5 based and 3 gig plus. (Apparently it aint called the 980 anymore...was it ever called that in all but rumour?)
PPC 976 dual core.
True or not. We'll have to wait and see, eh?
At least we here snippets on various rumour sites of what process IBM is moving too. We have 0.09 X-Serves so we can ASSUME 0.09 PowerMacs at 2-2.4 gig at a conservative guess. Imminent with details from IBM's Detailed Press Release on new 0.09 processors sometime in early Feb? With an announcement by Apple in the last week of Jan'? Later this week or next Tuesday?
The sooner the better...so that in six months we can expect the dual 3 gigger by late June/early July!
I'd like to see Apple hit dual 3 gigs in the top tower and stick a single 2 gig into a low end headless mini-tower onto the market for a dirt cheap switcher box with a dirt cheap price of £495.
To pick up volume alround, I'd like to see the G5 splashed around liberally as soon as possible to push Apple through 1 million cpu sales.
I read that on mosr this morning. It sounds like they are trying to cover all of their bases here. Unless IBM is changing the way you number processors by keeping them in families to just numbering them generally, this doesnt sound that true... It sounds more like a general numbering for the next 10 years. Notice some really large jumps? Multi cored 15Ghz chips would be great though... Maybe in about 10 years though. Well maybe now too
Comments
Originally posted by hasapi
Looks about right, except the PB's will probably be around the 1.6G mark.
This allows the iBook/eMac to get an update as well at up to 1.33G (G4 of course).
I hope Apple keeps the 15" iMac as well, a G5 @ 1.4 say?. New VPC for G5 and things could get interesting in corporate land.
The 2" screen size and the other goodies are enough to warrant the extra price for the 17". If they had put in a 1.4 G5 in a 15" then I would hope that they could get it down to $1099, but I doubt it with the reported shortage of 15" LCD panels. If I recall the iMac traditionally has 2 tiers of processor speeds, and if they had a 3rd speed it was basically "last year's model at bargain basement prices."
Originally posted by @homenow
The 2" screen size and the other goodies are enough to warrant the extra price for the 17". If they had put in a 1.4 G5 in a 15" then I would hope that they could get it down to $1099, but I doubt it with the reported shortage of 15" LCD panels. If I recall the iMac traditionally has 2 tiers of processor speeds, and if they had a 3rd speed it was basically "last year's model at bargain basement prices."
Um, your right, Apple will purchase G5's @ x clock rate in volume. So Im leaving the supposition on clock rates alone for now. But, my gut tells me, where looking at G5 iMacs in the near term.
Im not so sure on the PB's - but Im desperate to upgrade my Ti400 to a PBG5 the moment their announced!
DP 2.6 will be the top of the line come next week but oh how wonderful that crow will taste if you're right Lemon!
I'm standing by with a shovel just in case...
Lemon Bon Bon
On the otherhand it is the 20th year of the Mac so celebrating that on the 20th does seem like an Apple way of doing things. Personally to create maxium noise with this celebration I expect that Apple will go big. That is they will try to get as close to 3 GHz as they can in the PowerMac. Beyond that I would not be surprised to see 970's in all of the rest of the desktops.
Even is we hit slightly less that 3GHz, 2.6 GHz will put Apple in the performance leasdership position. Pretty soundly I might add. It appears that at the moment the only credible competition comes from AMD's 64 bit line. 600 MHz of extra capability ought to leave them in the dust.
Dave
Originally posted by ipodandimac
isnt it great that when we talk about apple, we say "we"? i think its cool that so many people feel like part of the company.
Actually "we" as in "the poor saps that frequent these boards and grovel when Steve's brushed aluminum chariot passes by"
"We" as in the consumers and professionals that check the rumor sites 5-11 times a day to see when we can have the next "weapon of choice" from our masters at AAPL.
What other company under the canopy of heaven has the devotion that "we" do for Apple? Are people needing therapy about the next soon-to-be-released product from Dell? Nope.
Originally posted by Jubelum
Are people needing therapy about the next soon-to-be-released product from Dell? Nope.
Its a Saturday.
Nope.
Not going to happen.
Please...
I have a feeling that there will be a G5 iMac and that it will be the lower two speed levels, based on IBM yields - not Apple marketing.
While 3 Gig would be nice I think that will be a few months down the line. Again, we are at the mercy of how IBM is doing - but that is a hell of a lot better than Moto!
My 2 cents is for a G5 iMac within a fortnight - allowing the iMac to be the single G5 option and the PM the dual. By summer the PM will blow past 3 Gig as IBM tries to match, or beat, Intel on speed. PB in the fall and we'll probably be waiting a few more months for a display revision.
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
PS. Played with the Dual 2 gigger for the first time today. Verrrry nice machine. Opens 9 apps at once blazingly fast. Photoshop? Version 8 doesn't as optimised as it could be for this G5 machine. 300 dpi resize image. Hmmm. Not as fast as I was expecting. Some filters fast, some reasonably fast. Some instant. Erm. Mind you, it was running on a 1900 x 1200 (gorgeous) Apple display...
[...]
PPS. Edit: It only had 512 megs. Maybe it choked alittle. Guy in shop said they bunged in several gigs of ram and it processed an 800 meg image in 10 seconds...
The guy's right. The G5 has a lot of bandwidth, and that's like having a freeway with a lot of lanes: It only pays off when you have to handle a lot of traffic. The more RAM you add, the more traffic there is (the system isn't waiting the relative eternity that it takes to fetch data from the hard drive), the more useful all that bandwidth becomes in practice.
So when you get your G5, fill 'er up.
ven is we hit slightly less that 3GHz, 2.6 GHz will put Apple in the performance leasdership position. Pretty soundly I might add. It appears that at the moment the only credible competition comes from AMD's 64 bit line. 600 MHz of extra capability ought to leave them in the dust.
600 mhz of 970 PPC is alot better than 600 mhz of G4. At it's most optimised, the G5 is overall twice the performer the G4 is. (How much of that depends on XLC compilers I don't know. But in the benches I've seen...a single G5 is whomping a single G4.)
I'd think a 600 mhz leap for the PPC will do more for it than 600 mhz for Prescott?
Plus we know the bus speed is going to follow the cpu speed upwards this time. So each mhz bump will count in more ways than one when you factor in support for even faster memory.
I don't know if anyone has seen MOSR's latest news article. But those guys have got a whole PPC roadmap on tap.
PPC 975 Power 5 based and 3 gig plus. (Apparently it aint called the 980 anymore...was it ever called that in all but rumour?)
PPC 976 dual core.
True or not. We'll have to wait and see, eh?
At least we here snippets on various rumour sites of what process IBM is moving too. We have 0.09 X-Serves so we can ASSUME 0.09 PowerMacs at 2-2.4 gig at a conservative guess. Imminent with details from IBM's Detailed Press Release on new 0.09 processors sometime in early Feb? With an announcement by Apple in the last week of Jan'? Later this week or next Tuesday?
The sooner the better...so that in six months we can expect the dual 3 gigger by late June/early July!
I'd like to see Apple hit dual 3 gigs in the top tower and stick a single 2 gig into a low end headless mini-tower onto the market for a dirt cheap switcher box with a dirt cheap price of £495.
To pick up volume alround, I'd like to see the G5 splashed around liberally as soon as possible to push Apple through 1 million cpu sales.
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Jubelum
Actually "we" as in "the poor saps that frequent these boards and grovel when Steve's brushed aluminum chariot passes by"