Naturally; it just seemed like a spike. But after thinking about it, it really isn't. Simple way to compare -- 'd be like going from the 867 in my PowerBook now to a 1.37 GHz processor. Suppose the increase is understandable.
A G4 in the next Powerbook update, may be not that far from reality after all. Although the update seems minimal and may be proved problematic, it can't be excluded.
EDIT: PPCNUX has a little comment on the availability of the 7447A. Hmm...
A G4 in the next Powerbook update, may be not that far from reality after all. Although the update seems minimal and may be proved problematic, it can't be excluded.
Yeah, this is to another lackluster update :-/
I sure hope Apple is able to shoehorn a G5 into the Powerbooks, even if it means adding a few mm in thickness (my 1100.00? Centrino Notebook with its 3.5cm is not bulky but blows any laptop Apple has to offer out of the water speedwise) and not-so-great battery runtime because a 1.4Ghz G4 Albook is nothing I will even remotely consider buying.
Just look at the power consumption: 20W at 1.4Ghz for the 7447A - the 970FX consumes 24.5W at 2Ghz but only 12.3W at 1.4Ghz, so it should be the better mobile chip with the added capability to reduce its power hunger even further via PowerTune. Since the 970FX is produced from 1.4Ghz to over 2.0, Apple could create a lineup like:
PowerBook:
12": 1.4Ghz
15": 1.6Ghz
17": 1.8Ghz (maybe even a "best" config running at 2.0Ghz)
iBook:
12": 1.167Ghz and maybe 1.3Ghz
14": 1.42Ghz or even 1.5Ghz.
IBM spec link - scroll down to the 970/970FX section for specs.
I sure hope Apple is able to shoehorn a G5 into the Powerbooks, even if it means adding a few mm in thickness (my 1100.00? Centrino Notebook with its 3.5cm is not bulky but blows any laptop Apple has to offer out of the water speedwise) and not-so-great battery runtime because a 1.4Ghz G4 Albook is nothing I will even remotely consider buying.
Just look at the power consumption: 20W at 1.4Ghz for the 7447A - the 970FX consumes 24.5W at 2Ghz but only 12.3W at 1.4Ghz, so it should be the better mobile chip with the added capability to reduce its power hunger even further via PowerTune. Since the 970FX is produced from 1.4Ghz to over 2.0, Apple could create a lineup like:
PowerBook:
12": 1.4Ghz
15": 1.6Ghz
17": 1.8Ghz (maybe even a "best" config running at 2.0Ghz)
iBook:
12": 1.167Ghz and maybe 1.3Ghz
14": 1.42Ghz or even 1.5Ghz.
IBM spec link - scroll down to the 970/970FX section for specs.
Just look at the power consumption: 20W at 1.4Ghz for the 7447A - the 970FX consumes 24.5W at 2Ghz but only 12.3W at 1.4Ghz, so it should be the better mobile chip with the added capability to reduce its power hunger even further via PowerTune.
So, let's see what we have here: a G4 at 1.4 GHz (up to 1.5 GHz) and a much more power efficient G5 at 1.4 GHz (up to 2 GHz). What would be now the guide for Apple's choice? Are there still technological obstruction preventing the use of the G5? What became this story for the IBM SoC, meant to be used by Apple?
I suspect that the heat issue Apple has to deal with comes from more than just the processor. In the current lineup of AlBooks, the bus runs at 167MHz which means that the system controller does not generate much heat - most of the power budget in the AlBook then comes from the CPU, GPU, screen and HD - which is what gives me mediocre battery life on my 17" - but that screen is worth it :-)
Now, for a G5 PowerBook, we have to add not only a processor that consumes more power, but one that is more difficult to cool (see some of the notes at cooligy.com on cooling 90nm chips), but we also have to add in a system controller now running at around 1GHz, and if 90nm with the same cooling issues.
We have more heat to dissipate - maybe twice what we did before. We also have a lot more power being used and hence even worse battery life. If they were to use the same battery as is in the 17, then I suspect the life would be < 2 hours.
In short, I think getting the G5 into a PB is going to take a lot more engineering than we think including liquid cooling and better batteries than are currently used.
No wonder they're talking about late '04.
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
So, let's see what we have here: a G4 at 1.4 GHz (up to 1.5 GHz) and a much more power efficient G5 at 1.4 GHz (up to 2 GHz). What would be now the guide for Apple's choice? Are there still technological obstruction preventing the use of the G5? What became this story for the IBM SoC, meant to be used by Apple?
So, let's see what we have here: a G4 at 1.4 GHz (up to 1.5 GHz) and a much more power efficient G5 at 1.4 GHz (up to 2 GHz). What would be now the guide for Apple's choice? Are there still technological obstruction preventing the use of the G5? What became this story for the IBM SoC, meant to be used by Apple?
The obvious stumbling block could be the system controller chip which has a heat pipe (or was that a passive cooling block?) in the G5 desktops. Since the CPU is well within the G4 power draw ballpark, we will most likely not see an integrated CPU/controller SOC, but this "SOC" would be the controller moved from 130nm to 90nm and fabbed at IBM.
As the IBM guy talked about starting to deliver this SOC to Apple, I consider a Powerbook G5 in the next few weeks much more likely than a fall release date and an interim PowerBook G4 in between.
According to Motorola, the 1.42GHz 7447A is shipping in sample quantities to "selected customers" for $245 a go, in batches of 10,000 CPUs. Volume production was not confirmed, but is likely to be reached during Q2 or Q3, we'd say.
That gives Apple time to beef up its existing PowerBook G4 line one last time before switching to the G5 - a distinct possibility now that IBM has got the 90nm version out the door. If Apple chooses to go straight to the G5 with the next PowerBook update, the 7447A can always be used to give the iBook a performance boost.
shove it in an iBook than... and present us the powerbook G5 at wwdc 2004.
So, it looks like we get one of the same soon... .
But again, if the levels of the heat generated by the fast system bus are so high to prevent use of the G5 in a Powerbook, what is going to change so much in the engineering front from now until the end of this year, to make the G5 in a Powerbook reality?
Maybe because there is a thread of truth here. Motorola has released a product summary for the referenced chip, so at least that much is true. Along with this is the reality that the 970 and its support chips are not going into a portable any time soon - indicates that the article seems to have traction.
The first possibility is that they produce a 970 variant with a larger cache and a reduced speed FSB. The cache could potentially make up for the slower FSB.
The second possibility is to move the memory controller on die in a manner similar to AMD's Opteron. The differrence would be to optimize for energy usage instead of performance. Here the FSB would be replaced with a hypertransport port to work along side the memory port for I/O.
The third option would be to go SOC which would be a bigger move to integration than the above thought. The little bit of information that slipped past that IBM'er a few days ago may be a hint at something here. Or it could just be a mistake in interpetation. A SOC implementation would put the vast majority of the laptops circuitry on one chip. With extensive use of serial I/O (USB, FIREWIRE, SATA and possibly PCI-Express) this could be very doable and not grossly effect pin count. You would have everything on board including the memory interface, with Hypertransport or PCI-Express driving the GPU. This is very much a possibility and has the potential to lower power usage due to level shifting.
In both of the situations above the ciruitry that would have been in the north bridge should end up simplified. These would be chips for single processor machnes only which eliminates a good portion of the complexity form the norht bridge. This provides additional power savings.
Thanks
Dave
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
So, it looks like we get one of the same soon... .
But again, if the levels of the heat generated by the fast system bus are so high to prevent use of the G5 in a Powerbook, what is going to change so much in the engineering front from now until the end of this year, to make the G5 in a Powerbook reality?
20W at 1.42GHz (7447: 21 @ 1.33), not much better than the 7447 at lower clockspeeds.
The only major new feature is on the fly clock speed adjustment. I'm a bit disappointed about 2 things. The first is that this revision of the CPU doesn't make that much progress in Hz and isn't slightly more efficient for a voltage reduction from 1.3V to 1.1V. Second, it's still using an MPX bus, at 166MHz maximum.
This seems like quite a minor revision, and it doesn't really return the G4 as a powerful and efficient laptop CPU. I was hoping for something more dramatic.
This seems like quite a minor revision, and it doesn't really return the G4 as a powerful and efficient laptop CPU. I was hoping for something more dramatic.
Motorola have, for some time it seems, given Apple nothing but minor revisions. Why did you expect this to change now?
CNET reports that Motorola has announced a new G4 processor. The new processor typically consumes 20 watts at 1.42GHz, which could make it ideal for portables. The chip may be too late to make it into new Macintosh models though. IBM's new low power G5 chips are more advanced and are likely to consume similar levels of power while outperforming the Motorola chip. Industry insiders expect G5 based PowerBooks no later than August 2004, and Apple is already using the low-power G5 chip in the Xserve G5.
G5 based powerbook no later than august 2004?
sounds fine to me.
actually, everything before december 2004 suits me
The question is, how much of the elegantness of the G4 PowerBook are we willing to surrender in order to have Apple quickly delivering a G5 PowerBook instead? Can Apple make it thicker, and if so, then how much thicker? And heavier, and warmer, and noisier, and power outlet dependent etc.?
Personally I adore the look of the G4 Powerbooks. I wouldn't accept much (if any) degrading of it's slimness and portability simply to stick a faster processor in there. But that's just me, maybe...
The first possibility is that they produce a 970 variant with a larger cache and a reduced speed FSB. The cache could potentially make up for the slower FSB.
Are you talking about a larger cache on the CPU which would mean more transistors, more power consumption, and more heat? or are you talking about an external off chip cache?
If I saw a headline "G4 to hit 2Ghz" --- I would yawn and giggle a little, just like when I watch my 6 year old niece excited about tying a shoe for the first time.
Look, Motorola at 2ghz, isn't that CUTE?
The "wow" ability for this kind of annc ended about this time last year.
Comments
EDIT: PPCNUX has a little comment on the availability of the 7447A. Hmm...
Originally posted by PB
A G4 in the next Powerbook update, may be not that far from reality after all. Although the update seems minimal and may be proved problematic, it can't be excluded.
Yeah, this is to another lackluster update :-/
I sure hope Apple is able to shoehorn a G5 into the Powerbooks, even if it means adding a few mm in thickness (my 1100.00? Centrino Notebook with its 3.5cm is not bulky but blows any laptop Apple has to offer out of the water speedwise) and not-so-great battery runtime because a 1.4Ghz G4 Albook is nothing I will even remotely consider buying.
Just look at the power consumption: 20W at 1.4Ghz for the 7447A - the 970FX consumes 24.5W at 2Ghz but only 12.3W at 1.4Ghz, so it should be the better mobile chip with the added capability to reduce its power hunger even further via PowerTune. Since the 970FX is produced from 1.4Ghz to over 2.0, Apple could create a lineup like:
PowerBook:
12": 1.4Ghz
15": 1.6Ghz
17": 1.8Ghz (maybe even a "best" config running at 2.0Ghz)
iBook:
12": 1.167Ghz and maybe 1.3Ghz
14": 1.42Ghz or even 1.5Ghz.
IBM spec link - scroll down to the 970/970FX section for specs.
Originally posted by Smircle
Yeah, this is to another lackluster update :-/
I sure hope Apple is able to shoehorn a G5 into the Powerbooks, even if it means adding a few mm in thickness (my 1100.00? Centrino Notebook with its 3.5cm is not bulky but blows any laptop Apple has to offer out of the water speedwise) and not-so-great battery runtime because a 1.4Ghz G4 Albook is nothing I will even remotely consider buying.
Just look at the power consumption: 20W at 1.4Ghz for the 7447A - the 970FX consumes 24.5W at 2Ghz but only 12.3W at 1.4Ghz, so it should be the better mobile chip with the added capability to reduce its power hunger even further via PowerTune. Since the 970FX is produced from 1.4Ghz to over 2.0, Apple could create a lineup like:
PowerBook:
12": 1.4Ghz
15": 1.6Ghz
17": 1.8Ghz (maybe even a "best" config running at 2.0Ghz)
iBook:
12": 1.167Ghz and maybe 1.3Ghz
14": 1.42Ghz or even 1.5Ghz.
IBM spec link - scroll down to the 970/970FX section for specs.
One 17" here please, thank you...
Originally posted by Smircle
Yeah, this is to another lackluster update :-/
Just look at the power consumption: 20W at 1.4Ghz for the 7447A - the 970FX consumes 24.5W at 2Ghz but only 12.3W at 1.4Ghz, so it should be the better mobile chip with the added capability to reduce its power hunger even further via PowerTune.
So, let's see what we have here: a G4 at 1.4 GHz (up to 1.5 GHz) and a much more power efficient G5 at 1.4 GHz (up to 2 GHz). What would be now the guide for Apple's choice? Are there still technological obstruction preventing the use of the G5? What became this story for the IBM SoC, meant to be used by Apple?
Now, for a G5 PowerBook, we have to add not only a processor that consumes more power, but one that is more difficult to cool (see some of the notes at cooligy.com on cooling 90nm chips), but we also have to add in a system controller now running at around 1GHz, and if 90nm with the same cooling issues.
We have more heat to dissipate - maybe twice what we did before. We also have a lot more power being used and hence even worse battery life. If they were to use the same battery as is in the 17, then I suspect the life would be < 2 hours.
In short, I think getting the G5 into a PB is going to take a lot more engineering than we think including liquid cooling and better batteries than are currently used.
No wonder they're talking about late '04.
Originally posted by PB
So, let's see what we have here: a G4 at 1.4 GHz (up to 1.5 GHz) and a much more power efficient G5 at 1.4 GHz (up to 2 GHz). What would be now the guide for Apple's choice? Are there still technological obstruction preventing the use of the G5? What became this story for the IBM SoC, meant to be used by Apple?
Originally posted by PB
So, let's see what we have here: a G4 at 1.4 GHz (up to 1.5 GHz) and a much more power efficient G5 at 1.4 GHz (up to 2 GHz). What would be now the guide for Apple's choice? Are there still technological obstruction preventing the use of the G5? What became this story for the IBM SoC, meant to be used by Apple?
The obvious stumbling block could be the system controller chip which has a heat pipe (or was that a passive cooling block?) in the G5 desktops. Since the CPU is well within the G4 power draw ballpark, we will most likely not see an integrated CPU/controller SOC, but this "SOC" would be the controller moved from 130nm to 90nm and fabbed at IBM.
As the IBM guy talked about starting to deliver this SOC to Apple, I consider a Powerbook G5 in the next few weeks much more likely than a fall release date and an interim PowerBook G4 in between.
But I could be overly optimistic...
According to Motorola, the 1.42GHz 7447A is shipping in sample quantities to "selected customers" for $245 a go, in batches of 10,000 CPUs. Volume production was not confirmed, but is likely to be reached during Q2 or Q3, we'd say.
That gives Apple time to beef up its existing PowerBook G4 line one last time before switching to the G5 - a distinct possibility now that IBM has got the 90nm version out the door. If Apple chooses to go straight to the G5 with the next PowerBook update, the 7447A can always be used to give the iBook a performance boost.
shove it in an iBook than... and present us the powerbook G5 at wwdc 2004.
Q2-Q3 2004
man i feel so depressed
But again, if the levels of the heat generated by the fast system bus are so high to prevent use of the G5 in a Powerbook, what is going to change so much in the engineering front from now until the end of this year, to make the G5 in a Powerbook reality?
Thanks
Dave
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Smirk:
And you believe them because..................
The first possibility is that they produce a 970 variant with a larger cache and a reduced speed FSB. The cache could potentially make up for the slower FSB.
The second possibility is to move the memory controller on die in a manner similar to AMD's Opteron. The differrence would be to optimize for energy usage instead of performance. Here the FSB would be replaced with a hypertransport port to work along side the memory port for I/O.
The third option would be to go SOC which would be a bigger move to integration than the above thought. The little bit of information that slipped past that IBM'er a few days ago may be a hint at something here. Or it could just be a mistake in interpetation. A SOC implementation would put the vast majority of the laptops circuitry on one chip. With extensive use of serial I/O (USB, FIREWIRE, SATA and possibly PCI-Express) this could be very doable and not grossly effect pin count. You would have everything on board including the memory interface, with Hypertransport or PCI-Express driving the GPU. This is very much a possibility and has the potential to lower power usage due to level shifting.
In both of the situations above the ciruitry that would have been in the north bridge should end up simplified. These would be chips for single processor machnes only which eliminates a good portion of the complexity form the norht bridge. This provides additional power savings.
Thanks
Dave
Originally posted by PB
So, it looks like we get one of the same soon...
But again, if the levels of the heat generated by the fast system bus are so high to prevent use of the G5 in a Powerbook, what is going to change so much in the engineering front from now until the end of this year, to make the G5 in a Powerbook reality?
No L3 cache, 512KB of L2 cache
20W at 1.42GHz (7447: 21 @ 1.33), not much better than the 7447 at lower clockspeeds.
The only major new feature is on the fly clock speed adjustment. I'm a bit disappointed about 2 things. The first is that this revision of the CPU doesn't make that much progress in Hz and isn't slightly more efficient for a voltage reduction from 1.3V to 1.1V. Second, it's still using an MPX bus, at 166MHz maximum.
This seems like quite a minor revision, and it doesn't really return the G4 as a powerful and efficient laptop CPU. I was hoping for something more dramatic.
Originally posted by Stoo
This seems like quite a minor revision, and it doesn't really return the G4 as a powerful and efficient laptop CPU. I was hoping for something more dramatic.
Motorola have, for some time it seems, given Apple nothing but minor revisions. Why did you expect this to change now?
Apple may not use new G4
2004/02/23 14:18 | By Amy Percival
CNET reports that Motorola has announced a new G4 processor. The new processor typically consumes 20 watts at 1.42GHz, which could make it ideal for portables. The chip may be too late to make it into new Macintosh models though. IBM's new low power G5 chips are more advanced and are likely to consume similar levels of power while outperforming the Motorola chip. Industry insiders expect G5 based PowerBooks no later than August 2004, and Apple is already using the low-power G5 chip in the Xserve G5.
G5 based powerbook no later than august 2004?
sounds fine to me.
actually, everything before december 2004 suits me
Originally posted by gar
actually, everything before december 2004 suits me
Ditto.
When Xmas mornin' 2004 arrives I expect nothing less than a PB G5 (with 3 year warranty) in my stocking.
I just hope IBM can fab enough units so I won't have to wait until AFTER Xmas for it.
Originally posted by Stoo
I was hoping that Motoroal had something interesting up their sleeves for desktop PowerPC. At least IBM certainly do.
after all the great things ibm has done and is working on, i wouldnt touch a powermac with a 'new' motorola chip in it. ibm is the future (and now
Personally I adore the look of the G4 Powerbooks. I wouldn't accept much (if any) degrading of it's slimness and portability simply to stick a faster processor in there. But that's just me, maybe...
Originally posted by wizard69
The first possibility is that they produce a 970 variant with a larger cache and a reduced speed FSB. The cache could potentially make up for the slower FSB.
Are you talking about a larger cache on the CPU which would mean more transistors, more power consumption, and more heat? or are you talking about an external off chip cache?
Look, Motorola at 2ghz, isn't that CUTE?
The "wow" ability for this kind of annc ended about this time last year.
</bitterness for Moto>