PDA

View Full Version : Powerbook G5 Power consumption


praetorian_x
Jun 27, 2003, 02:46 PM
All,

OK, so everyone here wants the G5 15 inch powerbook. Some (like myself) were expecting it to be the "Oh, one more thing" at WWDC. And it didn't come. Now everyone is saying "Of *course* it wouldn't be out" and "Macwhispers suxors", but I do think we need to establish why it *couldn't* have been released.

The offered reason is heat dissapation. But that is, in my mind, not a valid reason. Consider the following quote ( from : http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2002/10/16/ibm/)

At 1.8GHz, the PowerPC 970 will consume 1.3-volts and dissipate 42-Watts. At 1.2 GHz, the PowerPC 970 will consume 1.1-volts and dissipate only 19-Watts. For comparison, a 1GHz G4 consumes 1.6-volts and dissipates 21.3-Watts.

So, the answer has to be something other than heat dissapation. Form factor might be it (I don't know the relative sizes), but I doubt it. It may also be that apples laptop motherboard design has lagged (this seems likely with powermacs not shipping till september.) But the reason, I think, has to do with apple, rather than power consuption.

As such, I still think that g5 powerbooks either *are* or *should be* close to launch. If apple doesn't do so, I think the blame is on them, not on the power characteristics of the g5.

/end insane rant

Cheers,
prat

shadowfax
Jun 28, 2003, 01:03 AM
i have heard way too many reports about power consumption to rest your case on that. but i will believe you on that statistic for now.

i suspect that the problem may lie in that either the chip is too big (UNLIKELY okay) or that, well, apple spent 3 years on the powermac G5, it may well take them a little while to cram it into a powerbook.

also, apple contends that they will continue buying G4 chips from Motorola for quite some time... so... i wouldn't hold my breath ;)

maradong
Jun 28, 2003, 01:26 AM
something like 67 W of heatproduction. i think it is to much for notebooks... :(


on 29 june
because that is what i ve read on some other sites...

szark
Jun 28, 2003, 01:34 AM
I believe it was mentioned somewhere recently that the actual power consumption is somewhat higher than IBM's original estimates (the ones the MacCentral article quotes).

I think it is a combination of several factors, not the least of which is having enough CPUs to go around between all of the new models.

bwawn
Jun 28, 2003, 01:42 AM
People, the 970 is not going to be available in mass amounts until Q3 this year. That has been established for about a year now. Q3 is when the PowerMac G5 is shipping. This is no coincidence.

Apple's PowerMac sales were already lagging, so it is no harm announcing ahead of time, "Hey, something better is coming in two months!"

However, announcing PowerBook G5s at WWDC would have resulted in another two to three month wait on the new systems due to the lack of 970 chips until Q3, and the current systems are already selling well. Why suspend sales on them for two to three months when they can bring plenty of money in NOW?

Apple chose not to announce a PowerBook G5 at WWDC because it would not have been smart financially. I'm sure they have designs for the motherboard done already... it's just a matter of waiting until the 970 is in mass production and easy to acquire for both PowerMacs and PowerBooks.

cb911
Jun 28, 2003, 04:16 AM
i agree that Apple is just letting the G5 PowerMac pre-orders pile up now... then they'll release the PowerBooks. if Apple for some reason wanted, i bet they could have had the G5 PowerBook out by now. the delay has to be with Apple... but i'm betting that the new PowerBooks will have a G4 still...:( :rolleyes:

Sun Baked
Jun 28, 2003, 04:38 AM
Originally posted by maradong
something like 67 W of heatproduction. i think it is to much for notebooks... :( Yes too much for laptops, and just about right for CookBooks.

The 7457s should be fine...

Everybody is comparing a future chip to a current chip (7455 Rev 3.3) instead of looking at the 7457 which really is a decent laptop chip at 1GHz and 1.25/1.3GHz.

D*I*S_Frontman
Jun 28, 2003, 07:47 AM
If Apple released a 1ghz 970 G5 PowerBook, wouldn't the FSB be @ 500mhz? The 970's bus speed is 1/2 proc speed, right? That would obviously require a completely new mobo design, as the 17" only sports 167mhz bus.

Designing the new PowerBook mobo, one that would scale nicely with the chip as dies shrink and speeds improve, is going to take some time. She'll sure be a screamer when she's done, but it won't be anytime soon. Boy, do I hope I am wrong here...

Remember how much everyone hated having only one high-end processor maker (motorola) and therefore being at the mercy of THEIR R&D department? We need Motorola to keep IBM on its toes.

crazzyeddie
Jun 28, 2003, 08:28 AM
Originally posted by D*I*S_Frontman
We need Motorola to keep IBM on its toes.

And also, we need IBM to keep Moto pumping out some faster chips. Competition is the best thing ever, just like Intel/AMD. I'm convinced the only reason that AMD exsists is because of direct competition with Intel, most largely in price.

If we can get Moto and IBM to "fight" over Apple, then GREAT things will come.

macphoria
Jun 28, 2003, 12:55 PM
Apple wants to bring Power Mac sales back up.

To do that, Power Mac line needs to get huge performance boost over PowerBooks because up until recently, G4 Power Mac and G4 PowerBooks were very close in terms of performance. But now that Powe Macs are getting G5, it will get sales boost and also headstart over PowerBook.

So by the time Power Mac gets 3 Ghz G5 (as Steve promised) then they can release PowerBook with 2 Ghz G5 or something like that, as to distinguish the performance ladder of Apple computers. Having said that, I don't see G5 PowerBook coming out until next summer.

Fender2112
Jun 28, 2003, 02:11 PM
I suspect that the Mac Creative Pro Expo (or whatever it's called) will reveal the 15" PowerBook, hopefully with a G5. I also expect to see a new monitor design at this expo.

I think it's important to look at which market the WWDC and the Expo cater to. WWDC is for developers. Therefore, Apple announces the new PowerMac. This is the new power house you will be developing around. The Expo is targeted at the publishing and creative markets. This would be the logical venue to announce the next line up of PowerBooks and Apple Displays.

If the G5 is as dramatically faster than the G4 as Apple makes it out to be, Apple can't afford not to release G5 PowerBooks. If they don't the PowerMac and PowerBook will reverse rolls in terms of sales. The PowerMac increases, which is good. The PowerBook becomes stagnate because folks believe the G5 is just around the corner. The PowerBook will suffer the same way the PowerMacs have the past few years.

If the PowerBook G5 isn't ready, that's one thing. Apple can't sell what they don't have. In this case Apple needs to tell us up front. If they are ready, I think the Creative Expo is where they will show up.

ZildjianKX
Jun 28, 2003, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by macphoria
So by the time Power Mac gets 3 Ghz G5 (as Steve promised) then they can release PowerBook with 2 Ghz G5 or something like that, as to distinguish the performance ladder of Apple computers.

I think that's super ****ty if that's what Apple's doing. Giving the consumer a slower product in the pro line powerbook to sell the towers. This is the reason why Apple's speeds have been lagging if they're doing marketing ploys like this.

cliffm
Jun 28, 2003, 03:11 PM
Greg Joswiak, Apple's vice president of Hardware Product Marketing says:

"Our partnership with Motorola is not going away, G4s are in every other part of our product line. As you can see, [the G5] is not going in a PowerBook anytime soon. Motorola remains very important to us, but IBM is the one that can take us to the next level."

ouketii
Jun 28, 2003, 03:23 PM
hey! i have a great idea. don't wait to buy a g5 powerbook. tell your friends to get their hands on as many g4 ones as they can. that way, apple won't have to waste time getting rid of old stock before announcing new powerbooks! of course, they could do what they did with the powermacs and go ahead and announce them and discount the crap out of the older models.

Panther
Jun 28, 2003, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by szark
I believe it was mentioned somewhere recently that the actual power consumption is somewhat higher than IBM's original estimates (the ones the MacCentral article quotes).

I think it is a combination of several factors, not the least of which is having enough CPUs to go around between all of the new models. I asked a couple of Apple folks about the PowerBook.

In both cases the conversation went something like this:
me: "... yeah... I'm holding out for the new 15" PowerBook"

Apple dude: "What new 15" PowerBook?"

me: "... you know... the one with the G5"

Apple dude: "a G5? That thing would burn your legs off!"
Having seen the lengths the PowerMac engineers went to do dissipate heat (4 independently cooled zones... so the heat from the CPUs won't damage other system components... oh my!), I have to say I've gone from being a Imminent G5 PowerBook believer to thinking we're not going to see a G5 PowerBook until IBM gets the process down to 90nm later in the year (with the corresponding drop in voltage that will allow, thus power, thus heat)

Puts me in a bit of a bind. I really like the current 17" too (though its a bit big)... but I know if I buy one, then Apple will announce the G5 PowerBooks a month later :rolleyes:

Sun Baked
Jun 28, 2003, 11:36 PM
The rumormonger's that think a PPC 970 is cooler running than a PPC 7457 are probably the same ones that dreamed up this rather large horsepower upgrade.

cb911
Jun 29, 2003, 10:14 PM
LOL!! :D funny pic. he he :) now that's some horsepower. :p :D


are there any sites like 'wrecked PowerBooks' or something like that. i've never seen a photo of a smashed PowerBook or iBook.

praetorian_x
Jun 30, 2003, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by Sun Baked
The rumormonger's that think a PPC 970 is cooler running than a PPC 7457 are probably the same ones that dreamed up this rather large horsepower upgrade.

Take a look at the article at the *start* of the thread hoss. 1.2 Ghz 970's running a 18 watts vs 1 Ghz G4s running at 21 watts. LESS POWER.

Now, those numbers may have been incorrect, as suggested above. If so, please show me an article saying so.

It is clear that a g5 running at 1.8 or 2.0 ghz would fry a notebook unless it was speed-stepped or some other such nastiness. But at 1.2 ghz, *from all public evidence seen so far*, it would be a better portable chip in terms of *battery life* and *heat dissapation* (not just performance) than the current g4s.

If I'm wrong, please point me to the site showing g4s clocked at 1 ghz putting out less than 18 watts, or a site showing the 970s are coming in at higher wattage than originally specified. I'd gladly admit error and move on. Until then, I maintain that the chorus of "A g5 portable would fry your legs!" comments are a bull***t meme.

Cheers,
prat

P.S. It also strikes me that Joswiak quote is suspicous. #1: he's a director of marketing. Therefore statements are driven by marketing rather than technology. #2: the quote *never* mentions the g5 directly. That is an insertion into the quote from Maccentral, hence the brackets. He may have been referring to the 1.6-2.0 ghz chips. And what is that "As you can see..." referring to? Did he have a diagram showing power consumption? What evidence did he offer?

P.P.S. Yeah, I'm this neurotic.

Sun Baked
Jun 30, 2003, 04:03 PM
... except complex math (those darn less than/greater than equations). :(
Originally posted by praetorian_x
Take a look at the article at the *start* of the thread hoss. 1.2 Ghz 970's running a 18 watts vs 1 Ghz G4s running at 21 watts. LESS POWER.

Now, those numbers may have been incorrect, as suggested above. If so, please show me an article saying so. Go to Motorola thread, look for the 7457 product page (http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/taxonomy.jsp?nodeId=03C1TR04670871) and download the part number .pdf

Everybody neglects that the 7457 is the next chip in G4 progression, look at it.

You might see this...

macphoria
Jun 30, 2003, 08:09 PM
Doesn't new G5 Power Mac have 9 fans? Maybe that's what they'll do with new G5 PowerBook. Make it all fans and it will hover over your desk. It will be like a hovercraft.

praetorian_x
Jun 30, 2003, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by Sun Baked
... except complex math (those darn less than/greater than equations). :(
Go to Motorola thread, look for the 7457 product page (http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/taxonomy.jsp?nodeId=03C1TR04670871) and download the part number .pdf

Everybody neglects that the 7457 is the next chip in G4 progression, look at it.

You might see this...

Seen it. Would be a bit more compelling if the 7457s were IN POWERBOOKS NOW. But they aren't. Instead we have 7455s in the *current machines*, pumping out 20+ watts.

Math might be hard when your drunk, but getting basic facts straight shouldn't be. Let me recap, real slow like:

The 970's were announced to run a 18 watts at 1.3 ghz. This is *less* than the *current* 1 ghz g4 chips already in powerbooks. Therefore, heat dissapation is not the reason why the g5 isn't in a powerbook, or the heat dissapation numbers originally given were incorrect.

Follow? Perhaps if I used hand puppets?

Cheers, (kinda)
prat

Sun Baked
Jun 30, 2003, 09:43 PM
Remember PowerBook 970 heaven is this site...

http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/

Jack agrees with you, plus he might enjoy a sock puppet show.

While I might enjoy testing the socks puppets resistance to lighter fluid and flames, if it's not a muppet it should be burned. ;)

Flynnstone
Jun 30, 2003, 09:46 PM
I think Apple still has plenty up their sleeve.

I have a Power Mac DP 867 MHz and it pumps plenty of heat out the back. I test drove a G5 at WWDC. There wasn't much heat coming out the back. It was quiet. Oh and it was quite snappy.

The G5 has monster heatsinks on the processors. And yet is quiet and cool.
An EE Times article stated 97 watts per processors. I think they are wrong.
So why does the Power Mac G5 have so big of heatsinks?
I think there are two reasons : 1) quieter 2) there are faster processors in the wings and the platform is ready to handle them.

I thought Apple would come out with a Dual 1.8 GHz has their top machine. They came out at 2 GHz. I think the dual 1.8 GHz machine wasn't enough to give Apple bragging rights over the PCs and dual 2.0 GHz did it.
We heard rumor of 2.5 GHz 970s, I think the present G5 platform can handle them.

Flynnstone
Jun 30, 2003, 09:51 PM
The Motorola 7457 should be in Power Books now!
Does Apple need a new design of mother boards for the 7457? No, my understanding is that it is a simple change.
The specs state the 7457 would allow for more battery life.
So why isn't the 7457 in Apple's product lines ?
The answer is simple ... Motorola is having a hard time delivering !

praetorian_x
Jul 1, 2003, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by Sun Baked
Remember PowerBook 970 heaven is this site...

http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/

Jack agrees with you, plus he might enjoy a sock puppet show.

While I might enjoy testing the socks puppets resistance to lighter fluid and flames, if it's not a muppet it should be burned. ;)

Please, please, please: facts. Show me where I'm wrong, offer an alternative explaination, something! In another thread someone posted that the macbid article on the g5 said that the problem was chipset related. That I can buy.

Ad hominem attacks are part and parcel with message boards (see my posts), but do try to mix some actual fact into the postings.

cheers,
prat

Sun Baked
Jul 1, 2003, 09:47 AM
Why bother... the sock puppet should be burned. Long live the muppets.

What's the point of comparing the two next generation chips? When people want to compare a chip that'll be introduced in August/September with one that'll be a generation older/hotter/more expensive.

Because it makes better press, and it's easier for them to prove their point.

Imagine the screams of bloody murder if Apple's SPEC test tested a September 2003 computer with a January 2003 PC.

Why bother using the 7457 as the comparison for a September 2003 G5? When the sock puppet wants to use the January's 7455.

Hey if you use the first generation 7457 as your benchmark, it'll use as much power as the 7455 Rev. 3.3 :rolleyes:

If you compare the latest 7457 vs. the 970 -- one is going to be cooler, one will cost less, and one requires little engineering dollars.

And of couse people aren't complaining about the heat of the current machines. :(

Use the 2GHz G5 and we probably wouldn't need a lighter to torch the sock puppet.

Yay muppets...

Pete_Hoover
Jul 1, 2003, 10:09 AM
I'm thinking they won't be out for atleast 8 months.

dongmin
Jul 1, 2003, 11:02 AM
Current G4:

7455-L (rev 3.3): 15.0 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-N: 7.5 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-L: 16.6 watts at 1.3 ghz

from a Moto document (http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/PPCSALESFACT.pdf)


IBM 970:

970 (1.1v): 19 watts at 1.2 ghz
970 (1.3v): 43 watts at 1.8 ghz

from an IBM document (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1C2AE087256C5200611780/$file/PPC970_MPF2002.pdf)


I wish I had some sort of script written so that I don't have to type this up everytime someone rants about how the 970 runs cooler than a G4 and how there is this Apple conspiracy to withold fast computers from a wanting public. What rubbish! Oh, by the way, I think IBM's original estimates are lower than the current shipping G5s. I can't find the link but I think it's something like 20W for 1 ghz 970.

shadowfax
Jul 1, 2003, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by dongmin
Current G4:

7455-L (rev 3.3): 15.0 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-N: 7.5 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-L: 16.6 watts at 1.3 ghz

from a Moto document (http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/PPCSALESFACT.pdf)


IBM 970:

970 (1.1v): 19 watts at 1.2 ghz
970 (1.3v): 43 watts at 1.8 ghz

from an IBM document (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1C2AE087256C5200611780/$file/PPC970_MPF2002.pdf)


I wish I had some sort of script written so that I don't have to type this up everytime someone rants about how the 970 runs cooler than a G4 and how there is this Apple conspiracy to withold fast computers from a wanting public. What rubbish! Oh, by the way, I think IBM's original estimates are lower than the current shipping G5s. I can't find the link but I think it's something like 20W for 1 ghz 970. what's your point? that the G5 is not going into laptops soon, or that 20 W is low enough for a laptop. i really think 20 W at 1 GHz is outrageous, personally. i would like to see apple and IBM make a joint effort at a Centrino-esque processor. something small, with superfly altivec and power management features on the core.

praetorian_x
Jul 1, 2003, 06:28 PM
Originally posted by dongmin
Current G4:

7455-L (rev 3.3): 15.0 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-N: 7.5 watts at 1.0 ghz
7457-L: 16.6 watts at 1.3 ghz

from a Moto document (http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/PPCSALESFACT.pdf)


IBM 970:

970 (1.1v): 19 watts at 1.2 ghz
970 (1.3v): 43 watts at 1.8 ghz

from an IBM document (http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1C2AE087256C5200611780/$file/PPC970_MPF2002.pdf)


I wish I had some sort of script written so that I don't have to type this up everytime someone rants about how the 970 runs cooler than a G4 and how there is this Apple conspiracy to withold fast computers from a wanting public. What rubbish! Oh, by the way, I think IBM's original estimates are lower than the current shipping G5s. I can't find the link but I think it's something like 20W for 1 ghz 970.

Fair enough. Finally, some documentation. Were rev 3.3 chips released last year when the powerbook went 1 ghz? That would tell us if the current form factor could handle that sort of heat output. The 7457 numbers are meaningless, since they aren't out right now.

I'd be interested in any information that current 970s are running hotter than originally planned.

I should note, my claim is not that apple is intentionally witholding products, my claim is merely that, given what I had previously seen published, *heat* was not the reason. Could be chip-set issues. Could be case redesign. I don't think apple will hold back better laptops a second longer than is necessary.

Cheers,
prat

dongmin
Jul 2, 2003, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by Shadowfax
what's your point? that the G5 is not going into laptops soon, or that 20 W is low enough for a laptop. i really think 20 W at 1 GHz is outrageous, personally. i would like to see apple and IBM make a joint effort at a Centrino-esque processor. something small, with superfly altivec and power management features on the core.

My point is actually quite modest: simply that the current G4 runs cooler than a 970. Whether such and such processor at such and such power levels can go into a laptop is a whole another question that I'm not qualified to answer. I would assume, however, that if current PowerBooks only do 4-4.5 hours of battery life on current power levels, Apple will not put in a more power-hungry processor UNLESS they found other ways to compensate for it, like a bigger-capacity battery or better power management.

As far as a Centrino-type processor, the G4 7457 should do quite well in balancing performance and power consumption. And the rumored .09-process 970s should also do quite well. Assuming that the G4 is more or less at the end of its development path, it's safe to say that Apple and IBM are working on a power-efficient chip whether this be a G5 derivative or G3 derivative. Apple NEEDS these lite chips to go into their small-form-factor machines, i.e. the iMacs, laptops, and Cubes.

shadowfax
Jul 2, 2003, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by dongmin
My point is actually quite modest: simply that the current G4 runs cooler than a 970. Whether such and such processor at such and such power levels can go into a laptop is a whole another question that I'm not qualified to answer. I would assume, however, that if current PowerBooks only do 4-4.5 hours of battery life on current power levels, Apple will not put in a more power-hungry processor UNLESS they found other ways to compensate for it, like a bigger-capacity battery or better power management.

As far as a Centrino-type processor, the G4 7457 should do quite well in balancing performance and power consumption. And the rumored .09-process 970s should also do quite well. Assuming that the G4 is more or less at the end of its development path, it's safe to say that Apple and IBM are working on a power-efficient chip whether this be a G5 derivative or G3 derivative. Apple NEEDS these lite chips to go into their small-form-factor machines, i.e. the iMacs, laptops, and Cubes. ah, gotcha. a .09 970 would be good for a laptop, but would need to be clocked pretty high and have powersaving technology on the core to be competitive with the chip in those centrino laptops.

primalman
Jul 2, 2003, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by bwawn
People, the 970 is not going to be available in mass amounts until Q3 this year. That has been established for about a year now. Q3 is when the PowerMac G5 is shipping. This is no coincidence.

...PowerBook G5s at WWDC would have resulted in another two to three month wait on the new systems due to the lack of 970 chips until Q3, and the current systems are already selling well...

...it's just a matter of waiting until the 970 is in mass production and easy to acquire for both PowerMacs and PowerBooks.

It is Q3 buddy. If they are talking calendar year, Q3 started July 1. If they are, talking fiscal year, depending on their books, Q 3 may have started in May.

Either way, 970 is in mass production, and no doubt shipping to the major client.

jbomber
Jul 3, 2003, 03:00 AM
Originally posted by primalman
It is Q3 buddy. If they are talking calendar year, Q3 started July 1. If they are, talking fiscal year, depending on their books, Q 3 may have started in May.

Either way, 970 is in mass production, and no doubt shipping to the major client.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but won't all those chips be immediately earmarked for desktops? won't it be atleast another 6-12 months (from now) before those chips see the inside of a prosumer portable?

1- apple wouldn't want to steal the thunder of their brand new desktops by introducing a line of laptops sporting their new chip.

2- all the motorola chips have to go somewhere. might as well bump the laptop line up a bit and push those until the 970 is ready.

3- they gotta give us something to wait for. :)