Question 3ghz g5's?
Does anyone have a link to the G5 intro at last years WWDC? I recall steve saying that the g5 is great, and that by next year they would be 3ghz, but what he didn't necessarily say anything about it being in a powermac... did he? I'm thinking there's a possibility we're in for a surprise, that its not going to be in a powermac, but something else. anyone? sorry if this could have been somewhere else, but this was sort of an epiphany while looking around, so I thought I'd post my collected thoughts as fast as i can as I have a lot going on?
So any takers?
So any takers?
Comments
Originally posted by kraig911
Does anyone have a link to the G5 intro at last years WWDC? I recall steve saying that the g5 is great, and that by next year they would be 3ghz, but what he didn't necessarily say anything about it being in a powermac... did he? I'm thinking there's a possibility we're in for a surprise, that its not going to be in a powermac, but something else. anyone? sorry if this could have been somewhere else, but this was sort of an epiphany while looking around, so I thought I'd post my collected thoughts as fast as i can as I have a lot going on?
So any takers?
The link to the keynote:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc03/
I don't know exactly where the "one year" statement is, maybe someone else can find it. And IIRC, a statement came out from someone else later that said "by the end of next summer" rather than "within a year." Maybe someone else can find that too.
Originally posted by kraig911
Does anyone have a link to the G5 intro at last years WWDC? I recall steve saying that the g5 is great, and that by next year they would be 3ghz, but what he didn't necessarily say anything about it being in a powermac... did he? I'm thinking there's a possibility we're in for a surprise, that its not going to be in a powermac, but something else. anyone? sorry if this could have been somewhere else, but this was sort of an epiphany while looking around, so I thought I'd post my collected thoughts as fast as i can as I have a lot going on?
So any takers?
*sigh*.....some mac fanatics will never give up, will they?
The earliest we could see 3 GHz seems to be January, maybe at MWSF, but that's only a 20% increase in speed.
DC-DP-IMC-SMT here we come (lets hope)...
Originally posted by Bigc
The way I see it is that Apple doesn't see any reason to spend money to get to 3 GHz which, to me, means they have something better up their sleeve...
DC-DP-IMC-SMT here we come (lets hope)...
What does spending money and IBM getting to 3GHz have to do with each other?
Honestly, by the sounds of things IBM truly expected the 90nm transition to pay off more than it actually did. Perhpas the "975" is architecturally different enough to get to higher clockspeeds, perhaps not. We might still see 3Ghz in something (most likely a power mac of some description) by the end of 2004. Still, in the time that IBM has gone 2Ghz->2.5Ghz, Intel has barely made a 500mhz improvement to their chips, which can only mean we're gaining ground As rolo mentioned though, 2.5->3Ghz is only a 20% increase in speed, not a huge bump.
I with some of the others posting that if Apple is to make a "ridiculous performance" oriented machine, it'll have to branch out into multiple processors (or multicore processors), fast graphics cards (with PCI-Express, they should be able to pipe data *back* quickly as well, making them more useful for general purpose use) and maybe even really fast I/O (some funky hard drive config?)
Just had to pick a thread to ramble in
Anything that gets the 3Ghz before the Powermacs would have to be a model that is higher up the chain. Are you talking about the sometimes-rumored xstation? I suppose that Apple can spend lots more money on developing a super-high tech cooling system that allows the 2.5 to be overclocked to 3 Ghz but that will mean significantly higher costs for little return. A quad 2.5Ghz is more likely.
Originally posted by onlooker
What does spending money and IBM getting to 3GHz have to do with each other?
Well maybe apple could pay IBM some money to add some stages and fix the 130nm 970 to get to 3 GHz if they thought it were important...
Originally posted by Bigc
Well maybe apple could pay IBM some money to add some stages and fix the 130nm 970 to get to 3 GHz if they thought it were important...
What school of thought did you get that idea from. Do you work for motorola? It's notions like that which is probably why motorola was so stuck on the G4. They would never move on.
The 130nm G5 was done. So they moved on. It was not getting any faster. What you just mentioned was prototyped long ago along with every other possibility to make the chips as fast as possible, and failed comparatively. That's why it was not used already. If IBM could have squeezed more out of the 130nm they tried it.
They have to move on. Sitting there going over the 130 again after realizing it's finished using the processes you have available to you is a redundant path to take. All your going to get using the same technology, and processes you are aware of again that already failed in comparison to what you were using on the same processor is like walking on a tread mill. Your doing something again, and again, but your going nowhere.
They would be digging them selves a 6 foot hole would they have.
90NM is what everybody is striving for, and IBM hit it first. 90NM is what got the processor from 2GHz to 2.5GHz. 130 would have left them way far behind, and there would probably have been no update just like the G4, and they would never have hit 2.5GHz. Can you say: G5 downgrade?
They would also still have to work out these kinks in the 90nm process when they moved to that later. Now they have worked out the major bugs, and can move on to their next project which is probably trying to refine it more, then speed it up more, and then eventually cool it down enough to get it into a PowerBook. THen taking what they learned from those experiences, and use it in their supposed dual core G5 I hope.
Obvioulsy neither Apple nor IBM think it is important and nor do I....
Originally posted by Bigc
Can't you read, like I say, if they thought it were important
Obvioulsy neither Apple nor IBM think it is important and nor do I....
Yes I can read, but you leave such statements open to interpretation. As if to say: What is important to us - is not important to Apple, and IBM. With utmost certainty I don't think that's true. I think they did all they could, and Importance has nothing to do with it anyway. The processor had gone as far as it could. End of story.
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
It's pointless, redundatnt, already-beaten-to-death, idiotic threads like this that make AI the laughing stock it is.
That's for sure....
Faster RAM, PCIe, better graphics cards would be much more appreciated.
Originally posted by CDonG4
Honestly, the 500Mhz difference per processor isn't all that big of a deal...
Faster RAM, PCIe, better graphics cards would be much more appreciated.
OMG it's risen from the grave.. What's up CD? Thought you were dead to AI.