If the Powermacs are going to be released at NAB then they will definitely be more than a 10% increase in clock speed. It would be too embarrasing to still not reach the promised 3GHz.
I have to consider that any leaks at this time may have been deliberately planted to trace the source.
I don't think that we can safely make any assumption on this point, now that Apple sues Think Secret. It could very well be that Think Secret twists the reports just to cover the source.
Off topic: I think I know why the xbox 2 wasn't announced at GDC. Apple is using same type of proccessors as the new xbox in their new lineup. Apple, with its secrecy didn't want Microsoft to get the scoop of dual cores. Just an idea.
i can't imagine microsoft holding back on a possible xbox unveiling vs. the imminent ps3 because apple asked/told them to. only way that could have happened is if steve personally talked to bill, and even then, i think steve's rdf can be deflected by the gravitational distortion affected by the masses of cash that bill has in redmond, rendering steve's abilities nearly inert.
only way that could have happened is if steve personally talked to bill, and even then, i think steve's rdf can be deflected by the gravitational distortion affected by the masses of cash that bill has in redmond, rendering steve's abilities nearly inert.
It's entirely possible that the processors are 970GX/MP chips, and that the sources are legit but don't know the exact details. I've spoken to Apple people who've tested prerelease hardware without knowing the full specs until Apple officially announces them!
The "Radeon 9650" is defintely curious. It might just be a Radeon 9600 XT. Either way, the hint seems to be that it's still an AGP lineup, since otherwise we'd be looking at X600s instead of 9600s.
The "Radeon 9650" is defintely curious. It might just be a Radeon 9600 XT. Either way, the hint seems to be that it's still an AGP lineup, since otherwise we'd be looking at X600s instead of 9600s.
There is a weird detail with the video cards. TS says that the first two Power Mac models would sport the Radeon 9600. However, this card is not in the list of GPUs that are capable to handle Core Image/Video. I mean the list Apple officially announced two days ago here. How could Apple update the professional desktop line, just after Tiger's release, without meeting all the requirements to run the new OS in its full potential out of the box?
There is a weird detail with the video cards. TS says that the first two Power Mac models would sport the Radeon 9600. However, this card is not in the list of GPUs that are capable to handle Core Image/Video. I mean the list Apple officially announced two days ago here. How could Apple update the professional desktop line, just after Tiger's release, without meeting all the requirements to run the new OS in its full potential out of the box?
That published list is rather odd -- it contains the 5200, but not the 9600. AFAIK the 9600 has all the capabilities of the 5200, and more... plus it performs better. I'm suspicious of a mistake in this "official" list.
I'm suspicious of a mistake in this "official" list.
Right, but two days after and with the Mac web stewing on this one, no one from Apple could correct such a mistake? I am afraid that it will turn like Quartz 2D Extreme in the end.
That published list is rather odd -- it contains the 5200, but not the 9600. AFAIK the 9600 has all the capabilities of the 5200, and more... plus it performs better. I'm suspicious of a mistake in this "official" list.
But the use of the word "include" implies that it isn't a full list.
But the use of the word "include" implies that it isn't a full list.
Quite correct, but why they don't just say which exactly cards/chips are supported? They must know, don't they? Could it be that the specifications are not yet finalised? Even two weeks before release?
When is Apple going to move to parity with PC's graphics? Charging a premium price for (old) AGP graphics is not going to help. Where are the PCI-E level graphics? Powermacs need more than AGP.
Forgive my ignorance, but I swear I heard mention that the 970MP would support 16GB of RAM. If even the top end PM still maxes out at 8GB, on top of the FSB and cache listings, does that mean this can't be dual core?
On a side note, why does apple always cripple the low end PMs? It essentially seems like the current dual 2.0 but with the max RAM cut in half. And I'm willing to bet it will revert to plain old PCI as well.
I know that any of these computers should be able to handle my needs, but after waiting so long, it's really aggrivating \
If the new PowerMacs don't have PCI Express graphics, DDR2 RAM, and Dual Layer DVD-+RW drives (Blu Ray would be nice, but its not essential) Apple will be introducing an updated product that is already out of date.
Like everyone else my mouth waters at the though of dual 970MP's but if we are still restricted with AGP graphics and regular DDR RAM, we still haven't gained all that much in the performance department. These items are already standard equipment on high end PC's, the PowerMac needs them to stay competitive.
That published list is rather odd -- it contains the 5200, but not the 9600. AFAIK the 9600 has all the capabilities of the 5200, and more... plus it performs better. I'm suspicious of a mistake in this "official" list.
Very interesting. When I click on the link provided her <a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/coreimage/"; target="_blank">Core Image</a> I can see this list which DOES mention the 9600:
Very interesting. When I click on the link provided her <a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/coreimage/"; target="_blank">Core Image</a> I can see this list which DOES mention the 9600:
They just don't want to have reference on their site of a product that is not announced yet. Core image will have the same list untill the new products are announced!
Comments
Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
I have to consider that any leaks at this time may have been deliberately planted to trace the source.
I don't think that we can safely make any assumption on this point, now that Apple sues Think Secret. It could very well be that Think Secret twists the reports just to cover the source.
this is a PB style model clearance with just enough to improve
some weak points, giving them time to evaluate how they will address
the competition later this year.
Originally posted by fieldor
Off topic: I think I know why the xbox 2 wasn't announced at GDC. Apple is using same type of proccessors as the new xbox in their new lineup. Apple, with its secrecy didn't want Microsoft to get the scoop of dual cores. Just an idea.
i can't imagine microsoft holding back on a possible xbox unveiling vs. the imminent ps3 because apple asked/told them to. only way that could have happened is if steve personally talked to bill, and even then, i think steve's rdf can be deflected by the gravitational distortion affected by the masses of cash that bill has in redmond, rendering steve's abilities nearly inert.
Originally posted by rok
only way that could have happened is if steve personally talked to bill, and even then, i think steve's rdf can be deflected by the gravitational distortion affected by the masses of cash that bill has in redmond, rendering steve's abilities nearly inert.
The BEST!
The "Radeon 9650" is defintely curious. It might just be a Radeon 9600 XT. Either way, the hint seems to be that it's still an AGP lineup, since otherwise we'd be looking at X600s instead of 9600s.
Originally posted by Commodus
The "Radeon 9650" is defintely curious. It might just be a Radeon 9600 XT. Either way, the hint seems to be that it's still an AGP lineup, since otherwise we'd be looking at X600s instead of 9600s.
There is a weird detail with the video cards. TS says that the first two Power Mac models would sport the Radeon 9600. However, this card is not in the list of GPUs that are capable to handle Core Image/Video. I mean the list Apple officially announced two days ago here. How could Apple update the professional desktop line, just after Tiger's release, without meeting all the requirements to run the new OS in its full potential out of the box?
Originally posted by PB
There is a weird detail with the video cards. TS says that the first two Power Mac models would sport the Radeon 9600. However, this card is not in the list of GPUs that are capable to handle Core Image/Video. I mean the list Apple officially announced two days ago here. How could Apple update the professional desktop line, just after Tiger's release, without meeting all the requirements to run the new OS in its full potential out of the box?
That published list is rather odd -- it contains the 5200, but not the 9600. AFAIK the 9600 has all the capabilities of the 5200, and more... plus it performs better. I'm suspicious of a mistake in this "official" list.
Originally posted by Programmer
I'm suspicious of a mistake in this "official" list.
Right, but two days after and with the Mac web stewing on this one, no one from Apple could correct such a mistake? I am afraid that it will turn like Quartz 2D Extreme in the end.
Originally posted by Programmer
That published list is rather odd -- it contains the 5200, but not the 9600. AFAIK the 9600 has all the capabilities of the 5200, and more... plus it performs better. I'm suspicious of a mistake in this "official" list.
But the use of the word "include" implies that it isn't a full list.
Originally posted by JLL
But the use of the word "include" implies that it isn't a full list.
Quite correct, but why they don't just say which exactly cards/chips are supported? They must know, don't they? Could it be that the specifications are not yet finalised? Even two weeks before release?
On a side note, why does apple always cripple the low end PMs? It essentially seems like the current dual 2.0 but with the max RAM cut in half. And I'm willing to bet it will revert to plain old PCI as well.
I know that any of these computers should be able to handle my needs, but after waiting so long, it's really aggrivating
Like everyone else my mouth waters at the though of dual 970MP's but if we are still restricted with AGP graphics and regular DDR RAM, we still haven't gained all that much in the performance department. These items are already standard equipment on high end PC's, the PowerMac needs them to stay competitive.
Just my two cents....
And maybe monkeys can fly.
The iMac line gets a well deserved update: 512 mb Ram, bigger HD and better Graphics cards. Seems more appealing to me .
Originally posted by Programmer
That published list is rather odd -- it contains the 5200, but not the 9600. AFAIK the 9600 has all the capabilities of the 5200, and more... plus it performs better. I'm suspicious of a mistake in this "official" list.
Very interesting. When I click on the link provided her <a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/coreimage/"; target="_blank">Core Image</a> I can see this list which DOES mention the 9600:
Core Image-capable graphics cards include:
* ATI Mobility Radeon 9700
* ATI Radeon 9600 XT, 9800 XT, X800 XT
* nVidia GeForce FX Go 5200
* nVidia GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
* nVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL, 6800 GT DDL
Originally posted by Gulliver
Very interesting. When I click on the link provided her <a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/coreimage/"; target="_blank">Core Image</a> I can see this list which DOES mention the 9600:
9600XT, but not 9600. Is there a difference?
Originally posted by vtprinz
9600XT, but not 9600. Is there a difference?
1. There are 4 different "flavours" of the 9600. This might be the sources' least problem. ( http://www.ati.com/products/radeon96...o/compare.html )
2. Apple always used the XT in the past. The source might simply have left this away.