G5 Specs for WWDC!

[neonart]

(Not sure if this is the right place. Move if nessesary.)

This is what Croquer dans la Pomme states: (so so translation)

-----
2004-05-20 - G5 Trinity with the WWDC

G5 equipped with PPC975 (code name: Trinity) will be announced
with the WWDC and deliverable at the latest in APPLE Expo. The PPC975
consumes on average 65W with 3 GHz and integrates 98 million
transistors. All the models will have two Superdrive site and 4 sites
of hard disk. Side its, 24-bit 192Khz at least on the top-of-the-range
one. APPLE will propose with ATI a graphics board PCI-express train
professional of the type Fire GL.

Config (likely to change):

Mono PPC 975 To 2,2 GHz AGP 8x FSB 1,1 GHz Superdrive

Dual PPC 975 to 2,6 GHz PCI-Express train 16x FSB 1,3 GHz
Superdrive Extreme (double layer)

Dual PPC 975 to 3 GHz PCI-Express train 16x FSB 1,5 GHz
Superdrive Extreme (double layer)
-----
These guys have been dead-on several times. In fact they announced the last Powerbook and iBook revision a few days before their release and were exact on all the specs! I'm not saying they are infallible, but they seem to have some real info (kinda like ThinkSecret).

Anyhow, I'd love to see this happen!

[Mr. Anderson]

Wow, 65W - that's going to be a lot of heat.....so look for a lot of noise....

But it will be nice to see real pro level graphics cards if its true..

D

[Sun Baked]

Really big heat, considering IBM has been publishing their typical # (which is about 1/2 of max.)

So it would be more than the current 130nm 970 in 2GHz PowerMac, and Apple didn't publish the 970 Max numbers only the 970fx -- because they were quite hight.

[musicpyrite]

Wow, 65W - that's going to be a lot of heat.....so look for a lot of noise....


D

How many watts do the current 2, 1.8, and 1.6 processors run at?
How much more noise would their be between a dual 2 GHz now and a dual 3 GHz?

[jane doe]

I've never heard of this site before... I don't know about the reliability of their rumors but i dunno...

[Borg3of5]

I highly doubt that any new iteration of the G5 will include space for any single processor, but I may be wrong.

I'm probably going out on a limb by saying this, but I'd not be surprised if Apple barely sells any 1.6 GHz G5's. The Dual 1.8, however, is a sweet spot being only 9-10% faster than a Dual 2.0.

Here's to my school financial aid disbursement going to a middle of the road Rev.B G5, plus a 20" display. Heck I might even wait until the Spring semester to splurge and get a 23" if it's still around. :confused:

[dbauer]

I don't understand something and maybe you guys can enlighten me. Intel's Prescott core processors dissapate 100W of heat (3.2GHz P4). Why then does 65W seem high? That's still about 25W less than a Athlon64 and the last Athlon system I built used about the same amount of heat and I made it almost silent by using high quality fans and power supplies. That was with a 7200RPM disk as well.

Am I missing something, or is the paranoia about heat a little misleading?

Regardless, I too think the new G5 will have PCI Express video and dual layer DVD burners. Pretty exciting stuff.

[Sun Baked]

I don't understand something and maybe you guys can enlighten me. Intel's Prescott core processors dissapate 100W of heat (3.2GHz P4). Why then does 65W seem high?Because IBM isn't showing their Maximum dissipation numbers, so while a 1.8 970FX might seem like a low Watt competitor to the G4 and or Prescott, the Max number really don't hold up as well.

If it's 65W Typical, the Max number will really curl your hairs -- or be in the Prescott ballpark, if not above it.

[G4scott]

65 watts for a desktop isn't too bad, considering the wattage of other chips at similar speeds. 65 watts in a laptop, though, is not that great...

I'm doubtful of the 2x superdrives, although I don't doubt that they'd make an enclosure with 2 optical drive bays, and room for 4 hard drives (seeing as that that's what my current MDD G4 has...) It would also make it a much better machine, than the current, 1 optical drive, 2 HD machine they have now. Besides, with the amount of advancements Apple made with the first G5, I wouldn't be surprised to see this stuff in the new G5's.

Lets hope the new G5's are at least as good as these rumors say...

[Gyroscope]

My 6th sense tells me that these are not false rumors.

So bring it on.

[alxths]

I believe that it will happen not because of what that site says, but because apple can't afford to release anything less. They're carrying a lot of momentum right now, adn with their claim last summer to be at 3 GHz by august(or setp 21?) it'd just a a huge dissappointment to release say, 2.6 GHz at WWDC..

They'll probably push the mid models a bit more this time, advertising the 3Ghz ones as beign for those who NEED as much power as possible, and don't mind wearing ear protection while at the computer ;)

[oingoboingo]

I highly doubt that any new iteration of the G5 will include space for any single processor, but I may be wrong.

I'm probably going out on a limb by saying this, but I'd not be surprised if Apple barely sells any 1.6 GHz G5's. The Dual 1.8, however, is a sweet spot being only 9-10% faster than a Dual 2.0.

Here's to my school financial aid disbursement going to a middle of the road Rev.B G5, plus a 20" display. Heck I might even wait until the Spring semester to splurge and get a 23" if it's still around. :confused:

Maybe everyone here is much richer than me. In Australia, the 1.6GHz G5 begins at AU$3199. The dual 1.8GHz system, is AU$4399. That's a big difference. It's roughly equivalent to adding a quality 17" flat panel CRT and an extra gigabyte of RAM to the 1.6, or to put it another way, being able to buy a combo drive eMac as well for the kids or spouse.

It's a stretch for many to afford even the base level G5...it's already priced towards the top end of the desktop computer market in Australia, and doesn't even include a monitor. The dual 1.8GHz system (and certainly the single 1.8GHz system that preceded it) is simply too expensive for some. I would be very surprised if the 1.6GHz systems are all sitting around gathering dust on Apple's warehouse shelves as you suggest. If you want an expandable Mac, the 1.6GHz G5 is your only option unless you want to part with a rather substantial AU$4399 (and then you still have to buy a monitor).

Apple has priced the run-out OS9 booting dual 1.25GHz G4 only a few hundred AU$ cheaper than the 1.6GHz system...of course all the usual disclaimers apply (no FW800, louder fans, inferior video card, no SATA, no front-mount I/O ports, and of course, slower for practically all single CPU aware tasks and slower even on certain SMP-aware tasks).

If you can afford a dual 1.8GHz system, obviously it is a superior machine, and compared to the dual 2GHz model, is absolutely hits the price/performance sweet spot. But for those on a budget who need an expandable Mac (ie: not an iMac/eMac/iBook/PowerBook), the 1.6GHz system certainly has a place in the market. Check my sig :)

[oingoboingo]

Apple has priced the run-out OS9 booting dual 1.25GHz G4 only a few hundred AU$ cheaper than the 1.6GHz system...of course all the usual disclaimers apply (no FW800, louder fans, inferior video card, no SATA, no front-mount I/O ports, and of course, slower for practically all single CPU aware tasks and slower even on certain SMP-aware tasks).

Sorry, just to correct that, the run-out dual 1.25GHz G4 with a Superdrive is actually about AU$250 **more** expensive than the single 1.6GHz G5 with Superdrive. The dual 1.25GHz combo drive and the 1.6GHz G5 are around the same price if you spec the G5 also with a combo drive.

[cjc343]

This would be very welcome.... I hope these rumors are true... or the dream rumors where Apple brings out a system that would have the suggested specs for Longhorn... not that it would be able to run it, nor that I would want it to, but just as a in-your-face argument that I would be having with about 5000 PC users....

[blue&whiteman]

I heard from a reliable source that the new G5 towers will be water cooled. this means they will be even more quiet then they are now.

[cjc343]

We will see.... many sources prove themselves by getting it right....


Off topic: I hate the new Office:Mac 2004 ads that are appearing....

[RandomDeadHead]

And btw, anyone who has beef with the 1.6 has beef with me.

[blue&whiteman]

guys. water cooled cpu systems have existed for a while now. its not some pipe dream... its a reality.

[blue&whiteman]

And btw, anyone who has beef with the 1.6 has beef with me.

I don't understand why some are down on the 1.6.. the damn thing has an 800mhz frontside bus for pete sake. I envy anyone with a 1.6 G5.

[blue&whiteman]

yes... lets all laugh at the man who says apple will be using a technology that exists already. one that is proven to cool much better and is real. not fake as many of you seem to think.

I will say this in bold capital letters so no one misses it...


WATER COOLED CPU TECHNOLOGY IS REAL AND HAS EXISTED FOR AT LEAST 2 YEARS NOW. IT DOES NOT GET ANYTHING WET.

[dopefiend]

WATER COOLED CPU TECHNOLOGY IS REAL AND HAS EXISTED FOR AT LEAST 2 YEARS NOW. IT DOES NOT GET ANYTHING WET.

Not gonna happen bro, this is more of a PC sector type thing.

[blue&whiteman]

Not gonna happen bro, this is more of a PC sector type thing.

the system I saw water cooling working on was a dual power mac G4 with a very hot running upgrade. I will post the url with pics if I can find it.

this is a start anyway: http://www.overclockers.com/topiclist/index31.asp

why doesn't someone say apple will put another usb port on these models or something else very realistic so I can laugh and make fun of you... :p

[bertagert]

My guess on updates are this:

If IBM is having a tough time sending out a processor that powers a xserve, these updates the frenchies have listed can't be true. If they were true, Apple would take the so call 975 chip, scale it down, and plop it in the xserve. Although these specs will happen some day in the future, I don't think it will be at WWDC in 2004.

My guess for WWDC (this is a total shot in the dark and I'm not going to try and guess all the accessories; only proc speeds):

PowerMac
2.0 ghz (single)
2.4 ghz (dual)
2.6 ghz (dual)
I called the speeds the last time. Lets go for two in a row!

IMac
1.6 ghz (single)
1.8 ghz (single)

[aswitcher]

With the X-Serve supply problems do people think that this may be because of a production focus on the PM?

[BrianKonarsMac]

i bet these specs are pretty dead on. Dual Layer burners are only at 2.4x right now, so that's pretty accurate (i remember someone saying they wouldn't use a 2x superdrive). i seriously hope these machines can hold 4 internal harddrives...2 is just NOT ENOUGH!! two optical drives would be welcome, but after becoming accustomed to one, i don't see the need (other than to do direct duplications of DVD's without copying to the hard drisk).

[.a]

G5 equipped with PPC975 (code name: Trinity) will be announced
with the WWDC and deliverable at the latest in APPLE Expo.

my question is: when is this apple expo? isn't that far too late? i mean, i would need a new machine right now (for my graphic business) and i am stuck with an old dual g4 ...
.a

[punkmac]

My 6th sense tells me that these are not false rumors.

So bring it on.

I also agree. I think they are right on.

Now, I wonder what refurb Dual 2 ghz are going to go for?

I.

[rdowns]

my question is: when is this apple expo? isn't that far too late? i mean, i would need a new machine right now (for my graphic business) and i am stuck with an old dual g4 ...
.a

Apple's Worldwide Developer's Conference is June 28 - July 2.

http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/index.html

[Zaty]

IBM is having difficulties producing 2GHz chips (PPC 970FX) in quantities. What makes you believe they will suddenly be capable of shipping chips rated at 3GHz? If they were able to do so, as mentioned by another poster, why don't they put underclocked samples of that wonder chip into the Xserves?

Apple most probably will announce new PMs at WWDC because they have to . (They can't keep the same specs for a over a year). So the new top of the line PM will have a CPU running in the 2.3-2.6 GHz range. The 3GHz PM won't surface untill at least MWSF next Jan. Of course, Apple could announce 3 GHz PMs that wouldn't be available for another 6 months or so, but that would seriously hurt short term sales as everybody (or almost everybody) would wait until the 3 GHz beasts hit the shelves. Eventhough Steve Jobs promised they would hit 3 GHz within a year, he can't make IBM produce 3 GHz chips if they have to face a problem that couldn't be foreseen.

[aswitcher]

Eventhough Steve Jobs promised they would hit 3 GHz within a year, he can't make IBM produce 3 GHz chips if they have to face a problem that couldn't be foreseen.


Sounds right to me.

I think they will try and distract us with other things like a new iMac, Tiger, new iPods (Colour), maybe some new software upgrades, new LCD screens etc

[neonart]

IBM is having difficulties producing 2GHz chips (PPC 970FX) in quantities. What makes you believe they will suddenly be capable of shipping chips rated at 3GHz? If they were able to do so, as mentioned by another poster, why don't they put underclocked samples of that wonder chip into the Xserves?

Remember folks were talking about two completely different processors here.
The Xserves NEED the 970FX due to it's lower consumption. The 975 can't simply be underclocked and stuffed in a 1U enclosure, it's just not made for it.
These new towers will need all the space and fans the old ones did to keep cool and quiet.

[.a]

Apple's Worldwide Developer's Conference is June 28 - July 2.

http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/index.html

thanks . though i know that - in the thread stood "... new g5 will be announced with the WWDC and deliverable at the latest in APPLE Expo" - the question is, when is this APPLE EXPO (the french one in paris?), not the wwdc.
as a matter of fact, apple announces products and delivers it 3-5 months later (xserve, ipod mini)
hope they get it right now!
.a

[wrldwzrd89]

thanks . though i know that - in the thread stood "... new g5 will be announced with the WWDC and deliverable at the latest in APPLE Expo" - the question is, when is this APPLE EXPO (the french one in paris?), not the wwdc.
as a matter of fact, apple announces products and delivers it 3-5 months later (xserve, ipod mini)
hope they get it right now!
.a
Since this is an update, not a new product, Apple will only announce it when it's ready to ship immediately. Apple ALWAYS does this for updates of existing products.

[Zaty]

Remember folks were talking about two completely different processors here.
The Xserves NEED the 970FX due to it's lower consumption. The 975 can't simply be underclocked and stuffed in a 1U enclosure, it's just not made for it.
These new towers will need all the space and fans the old ones did to keep cool and quiet.

Do you know the specs of the 975 then? As far as I know its existence has only been rumoured. So do we have any confirmation that such a processors already exists and if it does, is it likely to appear in the next PM revision? If in fact the PPC 975 is ready why has Apple been waiting so long?

[atari1356]

IBM is having difficulties producing 2GHz chips (PPC 970FX) in quantities. What makes you believe they will suddenly be capable of shipping chips rated at 3GHz?

Because Mr. Jobs can get away with announcing 3GHz models, saying they will ship in 2 months, then not actually ship them for 8 months. ;)

[G4scott]

This is about the water cooling thing... I've only seen water cooling on hardcore geek modded PC's, not on any retail offerings from any major computer company. I think it would be a tech support and public relations nightmare, because so many people wouldn't know what to do, or how to use it. Besides, any malfunctions would probably be disastrous...

[Borg3of5]

Don't get me wrong, folks:

The single processor 1.6 GHz G5 is a GREAT machine. I guess I should've been more specific stating that compared to the dual processor G5's, the 1.6 does seem slightly slower to respond.

I've been to my local Apple Store, and did an informal test of the speed between systems. To gauge perceived speed, I quit all applications running (except Finder, of course), and gauged how long it took for each individual system to launch Safari, Entourage, iTunes, iPhoto, and Photoshop CS (almost simultaneously, by clicking on each app's icon in the dock). Both Dual's were, IN MY OPINION SIGNIFICANTLY faster than the single 1.6 model.

So, since when upgrading to a system, for me, I'm looking at the most advanced model I can possibly purchase, so that 6-7 months down the line I don't feel the system is running as slow as molassas.

Purchasing a single processor 1.6 GHz, as opposed to a dual processor 1.8 or 2.0, in light of the specs to be introduced in a little over a month from now, is a mistake. BUT, that's only my OPINION.

[0 and A ai]

Dual layer in all doesn't make sense not to have dual layer in low end

[0 and A ai]

Don't get me wrong, folks:

The single processor 1.6 GHz G5 is a GREAT machine. I guess I should've been more specific stating that compared to the dual processor G5's, the 1.6 does seem slightly slower to respond.

I've been to my local Apple Store, and did an informal test of the speed between systems. To gauge perceived speed, I quit all applications running (except Finder, of course), and gauged how long it took for each individual system to launch Safari, Entourage, iTunes, iPhoto, and Photoshop CS (almost simultaneously, by clicking on each app's icon in the dock). Both Dual's were, IN MY OPINION SIGNIFICANTLY faster than the single 1.6 model.

So, since when upgrading to a system, for me, I'm looking at the most advanced model I can possibly purchase, so that 6-7 months down the line I don't feel the system is running as slow as molassas.

Purchasing a single processor 1.6 GHz, as opposed to a dual processor 1.8 or 2.0, in light of the specs to be introduced in a little over a month from now, is a mistake. BUT, that's only my OPINION.

I'm running dual 1ghz powermac doesn't feel slow as molasses and we use it to layout a magazine and edit large ads and graphics in photoshop.

[&RU]

I acnnot believe that anyone is knocking the idea of water cooling!! They MUST be using an alternate cooling method if they pulled all of those fans out to make room.

How else could they possibly do it? They must have removed at least 6 fans to make room for all those bays! They could be using that Coolidgy technology that popped up not too long ago.

[lewdvig]

(Not sure if this is the right place. Move if nessesary.)

This is what Croquer dans la Pomme states: (so so translation)

-----
2004-05-20 - G5 Trinity with the WWDC

G5 equipped with PPC975 (code name: Trinity) will be announced
with the WWDC and deliverable at the latest in APPLE Expo. The PPC975
consumes on average 65W with 3 GHz and integrates 98 million
transistors. All the models will have two Superdrive site and 4 sites
of hard disk. Side its, 24-bit 192Khz at least on the top-of-the-range
one. APPLE will propose with ATI a graphics board PCI-express train
professional of the type Fire GL.

Config (likely to change):

Mono PPC 975 To 2,2 GHz AGP 8x FSB 1,1 GHz Superdrive

Dual PPC 975 to 2,6 GHz PCI-Express train 16x FSB 1,3 GHz
Superdrive Extreme (double layer)

Dual PPC 975 to 3 GHz PCI-Express train 16x FSB 1,5 GHz
Superdrive Extreme (double layer)
-----
These guys have been dead-on several times. In fact they announced the last Powerbook and iBook revision a few days before their release and were exact on all the specs! I'm not saying they are infallible, but they seem to have some real info (kinda like ThinkSecret).

Anyhow, I'd love to see this happen!



This is about what I would expect. It should secure world's fastest PC line title for a while - maybe permanently when you factor Intel's EOLing the P4 and switching to the P-M architecture going forward.

My P4 generates over 90 and Prescotts create over 100 watts. 65 is great and suggests they have lots more headroom in clock speed.

But peeps are buying more notebooks than desktops - hopefully they speed up the PB line too. Next rev should be G5.

[Steven1621]

the specs seem somewhat feasible, but i think we will see more than this

[macmunch]

Thats the Typical Mac user problem ! Why dont simply think yeah cool a 3 GHz Mac they made it within 1 year !!! (Happy) But, no ....

Now they begin to discuss over heat and noise. In normal Apple learns from there mistakes you see that on (when it is true) 4HDD and 2 Drive Slots so now they wont take a Chip or a colling system which makes the G5 to a vaccum cleaner !

Man ...... be happy over 3 GHz and be Happy that AMD and Intel will not even have a chance against this machine ! The fastet Athlon 64 FX has 2.4 ! And AMD lets it rising slowly in 200 MHz steps.

[nighthawk]

I don't know French, but I bet the translation was off. No way will it have two Superdrives. "Sites" should be translated as "bays".

[nmk]

So, since when upgrading to a system, for me, I'm looking at the most advanced model I can possibly purchase, so that 6-7 months down the line I don't feel the system is running as slow as molassas.

I can understand wanting to buy the best system that one can afford, but this statement makes no sense. The system will not feel any slower 6-7 months down the line than it did the day you bought it. A lot of professional graphics artists (and I'm sure other professionals as well) use older systems to do their work becuase companies wont buy them the latest gear every six monts. Many people are very productive on old G4 towers. Most people who are not productive are probably suffering due to incompetance rather than the fact that they have older computers.

[iChan]

I am amazed about people's disbelief when hearing anything about water cooling in a PC. This has been around for years.

and indeed, Sega's ill-fated dreamcast console had a liquid cooling system and that was in 1997/8!

for further proof, see these links.

http://www.gamesx.com/dreamcast/index2.htm

and

http://members.tripod.com/DC_cheats/id74.htm

case closed. water/liquid cooling is not beyond the realms of possibility.

[neonart]

I don't know French, but I bet the translation was off. No way will it have two Superdrives. "Sites" should be translated as "bays".

Yeah the translation was a little off. I'm sure that means 2 optical drive bays and 4 HD bays, which is very logical and a step in the right direction!

[nmk]

Also, I think this rumor is garbage. I'm expecting Apple to release 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 Ghz models, with the latter two being dual. I don't think its reasonable to expect 3ghz models considering IBM's fabrication problems. I really don't see how it would be a letdown, as a dual 2.6 would be very competitive.

So what if Steve said they would be at 3ghz. He made a statement based on information he had a year ago. Things change. Deal with it.

[CmdrLaForge]

Also, I think this rumor is garbage. I'm expecting Apple to release 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 Ghz models with the latter two being dual. I don't think its reasonable to expect 3ghz models considering IBM's fabrication problems. I really don't see how it would be a letdown as a dual 2.6 would be very competitive.

So what if Steve said they would be at 3ghz. He made a statement based on information he had a year ago. Things change. Deal with it.

I second that. I don't see a 3GHz G5 at WWDC. The xserves still have a very long leadtime. And thats because of the chips. I hope for any update at all at WWDC. :( :eek:

[DGFan]

Also, I think this rumor is garbage. I'm expecting Apple to release 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 Ghz models with the latter two being dual. I don't think its reasonable to expect 3ghz models considering IBM's fabrication problems. I really don't see how it would be a letdown as a dual 2.6 would be very competitive.

So what if Steve said they would be at 3ghz. He made a statement based on information he had a year ago. Things change. Deal with it.

So you're going to ignore a rumor in favor of something that you made up?
LOL

[Wonder Boy]

hooray for two optical drives!

[nmk]

So you're going to ignore a rumor in favor of something that you made up?
LOL

No, I'm going to ignore a rumor in favor of logic. You should try it some time.

[barnett25]

This is about the water cooling thing... I've only seen water cooling on hardcore geek modded PC's, not on any retail offerings from any major computer company. I think it would be a tech support and public relations nightmare, because so many people wouldn't know what to do, or how to use it. Besides, any malfunctions would probably be disastrous...
<sarcasm> Yeah, cause we all know that Apple doesn't innovate right? They won't do anything unless major pc companies do it first. </sarcasm> :rolleyes:

[nighthawk]

Also, I think this rumor is garbage. I'm expecting Apple to release 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 Ghz models, with the latter two being dual. I don't think its reasonable to expect 3ghz models considering IBM's fabrication problems. I really don't see how it would be a letdown, as a dual 2.6 would be very competitive.

So what if Steve said they would be at 3ghz. He made a statement based on information he had a year ago. Things change. Deal with it.

It *may* be possible. PPC 975 is on a different production line than the 970FX, and may not be suffering with the same problems. IBM was very good about their original PPC 970 production quotas.

I agree with another poster that the bottom-end unit specs are not quite right. I would think that the bottom-end unit would be either a Dual 2Ghz or 2.2Ghz PPC 970FX. (Shipping within weeks)

Then shipping in the fall would be the mid-range unit could be the 2.5Ghz or 2.6Ghz and the 3.0Ghz top-of-the-line with the PCI-X.

[gopher]

I found this link which might be of interest:

http://macinsteins.org/newsletters/February_2004.html

[titaniumducky]

i bet these specs are pretty dead on. Dual Layer burners are only at 2.4x right now, so that's pretty accurate (i remember someone saying they wouldn't use a 2x superdrive). i seriously hope these machines can hold 4 internal harddrives...2 is just NOT ENOUGH!! two optical drives would be welcome, but after becoming accustomed to one, i don't see the need (other than to do direct duplications of DVD's without copying to the hard drisk).

1st optical drive: SuperDrive Extreme (Dual Layer 2.4x)
2nd optical drive: SuperDrive (Single Layer 8x as in eMac)

[7on]

Water-cooling is the only viable option now, since CPU have gotten so hot. And Water Cooling, if the component leaks, will be just as devastating as if a PowerMac's fan fails. A burnt processor is about as effective as a soaked one. Hopefully it will have water cooling, then there won't be any gripes about fan noise.

And I'm sure IBM and Apple learned their lesson in the past, get a big stockpile of these boys before shipping.

I sure hope this rumor is true -- because I can't help from being remembered about 2Ghz G5 rumor last year and everyone doubting that.

If they can get 3Ghz into a Powermac, I can see a G5 in Powerbooks in January.


And PCI-Extreme is the new replacement for PCI. All the PC venders are going with PCI-Extreme and it'd be foolish for Apple to keep going with PCI-X just to be different. Not to mention ATI and Nvidia are going with PCI-Extreme with their new GFX cards.

[appleface]

at least it's a good rumor. i would have been a pain to read all the "...Steve said 3.0... only 2.8 is outrageous... how can I live with this meager enhancement...." if nothing else, it makes me hope :)

[morkintosh]

and here I just bought a dual 1.8 ...

[Frobozz]

Wow, 65W - that's going to be a lot of heat.....so look for a lot of noise....

But it will be nice to see real pro level graphics cards if its true..

D

For a Mac that may be a lot... but keep in mind the average P4 puts out over 110 Watts. Since we have 2 at 65, we're still pretty close on heat but will stomp the P4 on performance.

[Frobozz]

Water-cooling is the only viable option now, since CPU have gotten so hot. And Water Cooling, if the component leaks, will be just as devastating as if a PowerMac's fan fails. A burnt processor is about as effective as a soaked one. Hopefully it will have water cooling, then there won't be any gripes about fan noise.

I wouldn't mistake LIQUID cooling with WATER cooling. I know for a fact that IBM is integrating liquid cooling into both it's chips and it's motherboards ... and that this is something they've been working on for a long time now.

The liquids they use do not conduct electricity like water. You can submerge them in the liquid and it does not effect the electronics.

I am curious what the properties of these liquids would be, however. I can imagine if they are similar to water that they would need to control condensation...

[DGFan]

No, I'm going to ignore a rumor in favor of logic. You should try it some time.

What logic are you using to come up with 2.6? Apple isn't selling any 2.2-2.6Ghz machines. I don't believe any highly reputable sources have indicated that IBM is producing those in mass quantities.

Oh wait!! Those things would be rumors too (see, I can use logic).

So without using any "rumor" how did you come up with 2.6? Yep, you pulled it out of your a$$.

[nmk]

What logic are you using to come up with 2.6? Apple isn't selling any 2.2-2.6Ghz machines. I don't believe any highly reputable sources have indicated that IBM is producing those in mass quantities.

Oh wait!! Those things would be rumors too (see, I can use logic).

So without using any "rumor" how did you come up with 2.6? Yep, you pulled it out of your a$$.

I said I dismissed the rumor in favor of logic. The specs were just speculation, as I said this is what I "EXPECTED". This means they are not based on any information, rather just a best case scenario that I came up with (call it a hunch). Read the post (and try to understand it) before you repond.

So to make it simple for you:

1) Rumor was dismissed on the basis of logic
2) Specifications were just speculation

I hope you understand now.

Oh wait!! Those things would be rumors too (see, I can use logic).
Congratulations

[keysersoze]

New G5
Code Name: "Furnace"


Now, I wonder how mofo expensive these puppies are going to cost?!?

[mangoduck]

any one of these things would be great, but all of them at once? there's a new proc model AND the 3ghz landmark AND high-definition audio AND pci express AND mac-compatible fire gl cards AND dual layer dvd writing.

if these specs are alleged fact then i would doubt the accuracy of their source, and if it's just wild speculation then it's exactly that, wild and excessive. i hope i'm wrong.

[paulypants]

Also, I think this rumor is garbage. I'm expecting Apple to release 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 Ghz models, with the latter two being dual. I don't think its reasonable to expect 3ghz models considering IBM's fabrication problems. I really don't see how it would be a letdown, as a dual 2.6 would be very competitive.

So what if Steve said they would be at 3ghz. He made a statement based on information he had a year ago. Things change. Deal with it.

indeed i am hopeful but sceptical, especially this far in advance of WWDC

but keep in mind also that IBM's fabrication problems have only been documented with the POWER4 derivative PPC 970FX which runs cool enough to fit in the 1U enclosure that is the XServe

This rumor specifies the use of the the PPC 975 which is a POWER5 derivative and may reach speeds of 3.8GHz eventually but also run hotter than the PPC970FX

as anything rumor-related I take it with a grain of salt (and then sell my G4 in expectation of the G5 rev B!!!)

[SyndicateX]

Argh! Some of you are so nieve and pessemistic! Allright, in regards to you who are complaining that they cant make IBM produce 3ghz when they cant produce 970fx's. You cant stick a 975 in a xserve and scale it down, there is not enough room in a 1u server for all the components necessary to handle the heat it produces.

Secondly, and I have been saying this for 4 months, IBM announced 2.5 ghz fx's in FEBRUARY! ... http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5158615.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed ... now, maybe its just me and Ive fallen off my rocker, but I have never known apple to release a product with specs that have been out for over 4-6 months. 2.6ghz MAX!? Wow, what would that say about apple and IBM, 100mhz jump in half a year. That is not the kind of publicity apple or IBM needs, as apple needs to wow every single chance it can. dual 3ghz 64bit processors utilizing hyperthreading (making the computer basically believe it is 4 3ghz processors) wows people that are still using PC's, 2.6 gets nothing. You dismiss these rumors because your thinking "logically"? If apple used your logic, they would have been out of business in the 80's.

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/index.jsp?epi-content=GENERIC&newsId=20040331005500&newsLang=en&beanID=928376271&viewID=news_view

IBM announced in March the POWER5, saying that it would be shipping later this year in the worlds most advanced computers. Now seeing as apple is one of their larger partners, wouldnt that LOGICALLY put apple in the drivers seat to releasing this chip? Its not based on the 970 (POWER4) so the same problems that are stifiling the production of the xserve will not apply to this processor. If anything, I think apple COULD possibly offer these specs, but 3.4-3.8ghz should not be too far considering it has been rumored to max out at 3.8gh, and being IBM's most advanced processor ever! Now heating is another issue, but if apple can manage to take a 17" laptop with a dvd burner, wireless, backlight keyboard, awesome portably graphics card, and everything else you could want into a 1" thin frame, I think they can handle finding a way to manage the heat in a gigantic case.

So I would suggest you research your facts before you go dismissing attainable rumors in spite of your skewed logic.

[ffakr]

yes... lets all laugh at the man who says apple will be using a technology that exists already. one that is proven to cool much better and is real. not fake as many of you seem to think.

I will say this in bold capital letters so no one misses it...


WATER COOLED CPU TECHNOLOGY IS REAL AND HAS EXISTED FOR AT LEAST 2 YEARS NOW. IT DOES NOT GET ANYTHING WET.

Water cooling has been around on PCs for a while, true. It's been around in computing (mainframes) for like 3 decades in fact.
It's not a mainstream solution though, and it doesn't remove the need for fans in a system.

Right now, water cooling is a high end solution that is pretty much reserved for overclockers in the PC world. Water cooling is often quieter than more passive air cooling but a water cooling kit contains a radiator which is cooled by a fan and a water pump. Both of these generate noise, but the fan can be quieter since it is generally larger (120mm) and it doesn't need to run as fast since the system is more efficient.

A typical water cooling solution for the PC usually contains a number of heat transfer blocks, generally a block with two hose connections and a water channel. There is, at a minimum, one heat transfer block for the CPU, though some systems include blocks for the motherboard and/or video chipset. Once the blocks are in place, you have to cut tubing to fit between the blocks and the pump/radiator assembly. these are usually compression fit, the tubing material us usually some type of plastic like the kind you find in refrigerator icemaker kits. When the system is assembled, you fill the system with distilled water. Distilled water is important to prevent 'scuming', mineral buildup, and shorts in the case of a leak.

Now, why Apple won't do this.
It's expensive in terms of installation and hardware.
It's more prone to failure.. I had similar tubing fail twice on my refrigerator.. the second failure nescessitated me cutting up some of our pergo to dry the floor out.
It's more prone to user caused problems.. what happens if you need to top it off and you (as the owner) don't use distilled water?
It's heavier.. water, copper heat exchanger blocks, radiators, pumps.
and finally...
Apple doesn't need water cooling!

Why would Apple put in water cooling when their G5 case does a fine job of air cooling already? Where is the need? Maybe (and this is a huge longshot) Apple could offer a water cooled 'silent' tower for places like sound studios. I don't see this being a base feature though.

Now, I've seen a lot of people claiming that the Max wattage for the G5 is significantly higher than the typical wattage.
Where is the support for this contention? The Max wattage for the AthlonXP, Athlon64 and P4 are actually quite close to the typical wattage. As far as I've seen, there is ZERO evidence that the PPC 970 isn't typical in this regard. Even if IBM doesn't publish Max wattage, we should be able to deduce the theoretical max wattage of a G5 if IBM publishes the core voltage and amperage of the PPC 970.

[Windowlicker]

I'm probably going out on a limb by saying this, but I'd not be surprised if Apple barely sells any 1.6 GHz G5's.

The 1.6's do sell well. I'm working at this apple reseller/apple care service and I can tell you all the g5 models have a market. I'm not quite sure if the 2x1,8 & 2x2 are selling better, but anyway the 1.6's are certainly not gathering dust on the shelves.

[thatwendigo]

The Croquer numbers are in line with things I've been pointing out for a while. I don't think I'll go out on a limb at this point - the technology just isn't clear enough at the moment to warrant that. However, I find that there's nothing at all unbelievable about any of the aspects that they've claimed.

My reasons:
1) The Power5 Servers are shipping. (http://www.midrangeserver.com/tfh/tfh041904-story01.html) As many of us have heard, the buzz is that the 975/980 (whatever IBM decides to call them) revised processors will be based off of this very same technology, and they're being designed concurrently. Linear scaling, with the assumption that IBM keeps the same performance boost that they did with the Power4 (http://endian.net/details.asp?tag=Power4) to 970 (http://endian.net/details.asp?ItemNo=3668) redesign (1.3ghz to 2.0ghz), we arrive at a 975 clockspeed of 3.08ghz (2ghz Power5, scaled to 154% clock). However, this doesn't tell the whole story. since the Power5 uses on-die memory control (DDR and DDR2), and a lot of advanced interconnect technology, and gains 40-100% performance over its predecessor.

2) PCI-Express is in. The cards exist and PC OEMs are about to start shipping them.

3) Double-Layered DVDs (http://att.com.com/4520-7912_1-5116825-1.html) are possible and coming to market. Pioneer Demoed the DVR AO6 (Apple's current burner) as capable of dual-layer with a firmware rewrite at CES 2004. They will not officially support the format until the DVR A09 in late 2004, or so the company has claimed, but products can be surprise-announced and Apple might have secured a deal on the firmware.

4) The original 130nm process 970s displaced 50w at 2.0ghz. To have their successors gain 50% of the clock rate at only 30% heat increase is pretty good engineering. If the 975 is a 130nm part, it will allow headroom for ramping and heat improvement when he 90nm process is ironed out. Meanwhile, IBM's 130nm line at Fishkill could have been cranking these puppies out for the last six months to ensure delivery.

Incidentally, has anyone else noticed the "90 days, same as cash" adds on the store? I think we're seeing major updates come WWDC. :D

How many watts do the current 2, 1.8, and 1.6 processors run at?
How much more noise would their be between a dual 2 GHz now and a dual 3 GHz?

In order: ~50 watts, ~30 watts, and ~22 watts at peak (for the 130nm parts), from what I've been able to find

Noise? Negligible change in a full tower with Apple's heat management design. I've listened to the dual 1.8ghz and the dual 2.0, and the heat difference is comparable.

Maybe everyone here is much richer than me. In Australia, the 1.6GHz G5 begins at AU$3199. The dual 1.8GHz system, is AU$4399. That's a big difference. It's roughly equivalent to adding a quality 17" flat panel CRT and an extra gigabyte of RAM to the 1.6, or to put it another way, being able to buy a combo drive eMac as well for the kids or spouse.

In the US, the price difference is a much more reasonable $700 ($1,799 to $2,499), and that will possibly buy you the same things if you're going cheap and don't mind skimping on features for that LCD. It's a much tighter difference, though.

Apple has priced the run-out OS9 booting dual 1.25GHz G4 only a few hundred AU$ cheaper than the 1.6GHz system...of course all the usual disclaimers apply (no FW800, louder fans, inferior video card, no SATA, no front-mount I/O ports, and of course, slower for practically all single CPU aware tasks and slower even on certain SMP-aware tasks).

Once again, I think this is more of an international price issue, stemming from the infamous practices of Apple Australia. The dual 1.25ghz G4 is $1,599 here in the states, and the single is $1,299, though that leaves out some substantial difference between them and the newer towers. You get PC2700 RAM, PATA HDs, The Radeon 9000 Pro, and a combo drive on the standard models. It's really a tradeoff and pretty obvious that Apple wants people to move to OS X rather than OS 9.

If IBM is having a tough time sending out a processor that powers a xserve, these updates the frenchies have listed can't be true. If they were true, Apple would take the so call 975 chip, scale it down, and plop it in the xserve. Although these specs will happen some day in the future, I don't think it will be at WWDC in 2004.

No, they couldn't, because the 970 and the 975 are unlikely to be pin-compatible. The move to the newer processors would require a motherboard redesign that could very well have to take into account the likely features of the new chip. The 970FX is a perfectly good server chip, one that will continue to work well in an environment where proven technology and a constant power supply and cooling system can be counted on, but it's just not the speed demon that the 975 could easily be.

i bet these specs are pretty dead on. Dual Layer burners are only at 2.4x right now, so that's pretty accurate (i remember someone saying they wouldn't use a 2x superdrive). i seriously hope these machines can hold 4 internal harddrives...2 is just NOT ENOUGH!! two optical drives would be welcome, but after becoming accustomed to one, i don't see the need (other than to do direct duplications of DVD's without copying to the hard drisk).

Two optical drives would allow the new Pioneer DVR AO7 that burns 8x DVD+/-R and 4x DVD+/-RW, along with a 2.4x Sony dual-layer DVD+/-RW. I championed the idea of an expansion of storage capacity not long ago, and I can see this being done rather easily with a slight rearrangement and resizing of the case. We'll see, though.

IBM is having difficulties producing 2GHz chips (PPC 970FX) in quantities. What makes you believe they will suddenly be capable of shipping chips rated at 3GHz? If they were able to do so, as mentioned by another poster, why don't they put underclocked samples of that wonder chip into the Xserves?

Five words: Motherboard redesign and pin incompatibility.

Do you know the specs of the 975 then? As far as I know its existence has only been rumoured. So do we have any confirmation that such a processors already exists and if it does, is it likely to appear in the next PM revision? If in fact the PPC 975 is ready why has Apple been waiting so long?

We know what the Power5 (http://endian.net/details.asp?tag=Power5) is, and that it's shipping before WWDC.

Dual layer in all doesn't make sense not to have dual layer in low end

Cost.

Why no dual-processor, or top-end graphics? Cost. It all comes down to economics in the end, and what Apple thinks they can sell without breaking themselves in the process.

Man ...... be happy over 3 GHz and be Happy that AMD and Intel will not even have a chance against this machine ! The fastet Athlon 64 FX has 2.4 ! And AMD lets it rising slowly in 200 MHz steps.

The Opteron and Athlon FX chips do smoke the G5 on some things, though. If the 975 is what it could be, then quite a few of those advantages disappear and Apple very well could be on top of the world again. Just be careful not to fall into the megahertz myth yourself... AMD already knows this, and so do Apple and IBM.

Also, I think this rumor is garbage. I'm expecting Apple to release 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 Ghz models, with the latter two being dual. I don't think its reasonable to expect 3ghz models considering IBM's fabrication problems. I really don't see how it would be a letdown, as a dual 2.6 would be very competitive.

So what if Steve said they would be at 3ghz. He made a statement based on information he had a year ago. Things change. Deal with it.

The Power5 is not 90nm, and that's where all the problems have been. If Apple and IBM step back to proven 130nm technology to design the 975 and then drop the die size in 8 months to a year, they have plenty of time and space to work out the crosstalk and fabrication issues before it really matters.

Steve has more information to make his statements than any of us, and Apple started planning this move two or more years before the G5 was announced. It's not at all inconceivable that the next step was always intended to be another processor. Nothing in his keynote said "We will have 970 chips at 3.0ghz." The only promise was that Apple and IBM would be there.

[Palador]

Apple will not do water cooling. The technology isnt ready for the computing masses unless they can find a way to make a completely sealed system that will last ~5 years without any kind of user input. As far as I know, that hasnt happened.

Also, I dont think there will be 3GHz shipping by the end of this year, let along by the end of the summer. All of the evidence (except for this rumor of course) is pointing towards 2.6GHz as the most they could deliver reliably.

[Gherkin]

I HAVE A QUESTION.

You know how around a year ago, the fastest Apple processor was around 1.5 GHz? Everyone always said then that even though there were 3.2 GHz Intels around, that the Apple processors were still comparable for various reasons. Does this mean that if we get 3 GHz in an Apple machine, that they will blow away Intels offerings?

[DGFan]

I said I dismissed the rumor in favor of logic. The specs were just speculation, as I said this is what I "EXPECTED". This means they are not based on any information, rather just a best case scenario that I came up with (call it a hunch). Read the post (and try to understand it) before you repond.

So to make it simple for you:

1) Rumor was dismissed on the basis of logic
2) Specifications were just speculation

I hope you understand now.


Congratulations

LOL
So you interpret my original post in a very strange way, using this as a basis for an insult. And then go on to "prove" how correct you are based on your misunderstanding.

Very nice.
Very nice, indeed.
:rolleyes:

[ffakr]

Argh! Some of you are so nieve and pessemistic! Allright, in regards to you who are complaining that they cant make IBM produce 3ghz when they cant produce 970fx's. You cant stick a 975 in a xserve and scale it down, there is not enough room in a 1u server for all the components necessary to handle the heat it produces.
sorry, that's BS. First, we have no confirmed info that the 975 actually exists (though I believe it does) and we have ZERO real info on its heat output.
What we do know, however:
* The Xeon and Opteron generate 80-90 Watts, typical heat, while the PPC 970 is in the upper 50s at 2GHz typical.
* The Power5 was designed with advanced power saving features (not present in the PPC 970's parent, the Power4)
* MANY vendors ship Dual Xeon and Dual Opteron 1U servers without cooling issues.
* There is actually at least one 1U Quad Opteron Server that I've seen for sale. Saying that two 975s produce too much heat for a 1U is tantamount to saying that the 975 on .09 micron will generate twice as much heat as a .13 micron Opteron. I find this extremely unlikely.

Secondly, and I have been saying this for 4 months, IBM announced 2.5 ghz fx's in FEBRUARY! ... http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5158615.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed ... now, maybe its just me and Ive fallen off my rocker, but I have never known apple to release a product with specs that have been out for over 4-6 months. 2.6ghz MAX!? Wow, what would that say about apple and IBM, 100mhz jump in half a year. That is not the kind of publicity apple or IBM needs, as apple needs to wow every single chance it can. dual 3ghz 64bit processors utilizing hyperthreading (making the computer basically believe it is 4 3ghz processors) wows people that are still using PC's, 2.6 gets nothing. You dismiss these rumors because your thinking "logically"? If apple used your logic, they would have been out of business in the 80's.

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/index.jsp?epi-content=GENERIC&newsId=20040331005500&newsLang=en&beanID=928376271&viewID=news_view

Um, you do realize that your link points to an article that says "IBM is expected to announce". It doesn't indicate that IBM announced anything.
I've not seen any indication that IBM actually announced a 2.5GHz part yet.
If IBM did announce a 2.5GHz part, wouldn't you expect to find it at http://chips.ibm.com ? My search for "970fx" didn't yield anything of the sort.

IBM announced in March the POWER5, saying that it would be shipping later this year in the worlds most advanced computers. Now seeing as apple is one of their larger partners, wouldnt that LOGICALLY put apple in the drivers seat to releasing this chip?
No.
The Power5 is a very expensive, very complex, very large multi-core Power cpu. IBM has announced 2 AIX servers that will carry the Power5. The low end one starts at $10,000 (and scales quickly up). I believe the other starts at around $40,000 (but I could be mistaken).
Apple has nothing to do with the Power5, it's designed for a totally different market.

Its not based on the 970 (POWER4) so the same problems that are stifiling the production of the xserve will not apply to this processor.
Um, the Power5 is produced on a .13 micron process. That is why it doesn't face the same production problems as the PPC 970. It's also one reason (among many) why it is being released at around 2GHz, NOT at 3.4-3.8 GHz.

If anything, I think apple COULD possibly offer these specs, but 3.4-3.8ghz should not be too far considering it has been rumored to max out at 3.8gh, and being IBM's most advanced processor ever! Now heating is another issue, but if apple can manage to take a 17" laptop with a dvd burner, wireless, backlight keyboard, awesome portably graphics card, and everything else you could want into a 1" thin frame, I think they can handle finding a way to manage the heat in a gigantic case.

I'm really not sure what the heck you're talking about. You must be confusing the rumored PPC 975 with a Power5. They would be very different beasts.
A Power5 has multiple cores on one cpu die, along with large L2 caches. Even a basic dual core Power5 is supposed to be nearly 300 Million transistors.. and I think they were saying over 120 watts. It's totally designed, from the ground up for powerful servers.
A 975 (if it exists) will likely be a modified single core of a Power5 with Altivec added on (Power5 doesn't support Altivec), and less cache. The transistors will be rearranged to allow for the die shrink to .09 micron. It will be produced with thiner transistor gates, and the pipelines will likely be elongated. It will be very differnet compared to a Power5.

So I would suggest you research your facts before you go dismissing attainable rumors in spite of your skewed logic.
amen

[thatwendigo]

Argh! Some of you are so nieve and pessemistic! Allright, in regards to you who are complaining that they cant make IBM produce 3ghz when they cant produce 970fx's. You cant stick a 975 in a xserve and scale it down, there is not enough room in a 1u server for all the components necessary to handle the heat it produces.

Pin-incompatibility could be a big deal, too. The 970 uses a scheme that IBM calls 576-GBA, and the Power5 uses 5400. Nevermind that the Power5 uses on-die memory control (usually a pin change), and a different architecture, quite aside ffrom heat.

Secondly, and I have been saying this for 4 months, IBM announced 2.5 ghz fx's in FEBRUARY! ... http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5158615.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed ...

Thanks for the link. I thought I remembered this, but I didn't really want to go digging for even more muck. :D


IBM announced in March the POWER5, saying that it would be shipping later this year in the worlds most advanced computers. Now seeing as apple is one of their larger partners, wouldnt that LOGICALLY put apple in the drivers seat to releasing this chip?

Here's where we take a massive, screechingly different path in our reasoning. The Power5 is a high-power, high fault-tolerance Big Iron server chip, not something intended for workstations or desktop computers. It's like the Power4 on steroids, and so the 975 will be its little brother. Odds are that the 975 will be higher clock because it will be less hefty on the corporate mainframe characteristics (like thicker oxides on the gates and more cores and cache per chip). IBM will be driving the Power5, but I'd be willing to lay money they're working with Apple on the PPC 975.

If anything, I think apple COULD possibly offer these specs, but 3.4-3.8ghz should not be too far considering it has been rumored to max out at 3.8gh, and being IBM's most advanced processor ever!

The Power5 is probably the most advanced thing that IBM has ever created. It's a dual-core, eight logical processor, sixteen virtual processor (SMT) design. Each unit is sold as something called an MCM, or mmulti-chip module, which is then slotted into a two MCM unit called a book. Each book presents the server with the idea that is has 32 processors to work with, all of them on incredible bandwidth that would make the current Opterons and G5s cry like babies.

It is not, however, a chip that goes over 3.0ghz yet. The debut models are around 2.0ghz core clock, which will likely scale over 3.0ghz on the consumer version (the 975).

So I would suggest you research your facts before you go dismissing attainable rumors in spite of your skewed logic.

Facts are wonderful things. :cool:

[SyndicateX]

I HAVE A QUESTION.

You know how around a year ago, the fastest Apple processor was around 1.5 GHz? Everyone always said then that even though there were 3.2 GHz Intels around, that the Apple processors were still comparable for various reasons. Does this mean that if we get 3 GHz in an Apple machine, that they will blow away Intels offerings?

Pretty much, Apple and AMD have always used processors that ran at lower clock speeds but offered comparable calculations. I do find it unbelievable that in a little over a year since apple has dumped Motorola, we have gone from a max of dual 1.4ghz g4's, to dual 2.0 ghz g5, now to dual 3ghz at the least (just my opinion). And although AMD has also made significant progress in their chips, its no where near the progress apple and IBM have made as partners. And all this time, Intel has gone from 3.2ghz when we were at 1.4, all the way to 3.4.....and now scrapped the processor for the Pentium M.

When you look at the domination intel had on the market for so long and their sudden collapse, it can make you wonder if even the great and powerful Microsoft could be setting itself up for just such a collapse with their next os being 3+ years away. :D

[invaLPsion]

-----
These guys have been dead-on several times. In fact they announced the last Powerbook and iBook revision a few days before their release and were exact on all the specs! I'm not saying they are infallible, but they seem to have some real info (kinda like ThinkSecret).

Anyhow, I'd love to see this happen!

Croquer has never gotten anything right. They are like MOSR. No truth at all....

And they were completely wrong about the iBook and Powerbook specs and everyone was saying that they would come out anyway.

S0rry, there is no truth to this. :(

[macridah]

Those are big jumps, but i'll take them. Can't wait. I'll be attending my first WWDC :D

[SyndicateX]

Pin-incompatibility could be a big deal, too. The 970 uses a scheme that IBM calls 576-GBA, and the Power5 uses 5400. Nevermind that the Power5 uses on-die memory control (usually a pin change), and a different architecture, quite aside ffrom heat.

Thanks for the link. I thought I remembered this, but I didn't really want to go digging for even more muck. :D

Here's where we take a massive, screechingly different path in our reasoning. The Power5 is a high-power, high fault-tolerance Big Iron server chip, not something intended for workstations or desktop computers. It's like the Power4 on steroids, and so the 975 will be its little brother. Odds are that the 975 will be higher clock because it will be less hefty on the corporate mainframe characteristics (like thicker oxides on the gates and more cores and cache per chip). IBM will be driving the Power5, but I'd be willing to lay money they're working with Apple on the PPC 975.

The Power5 is probably the most advanced thing that IBM has ever created. It's a dual-core, eight logical processor, sixteen virtual processor (SMT) design. Each unit is sold as something called an MCM, or mmulti-chip module, which is then slotted into a two MCM unit called a book. Each book presents the server with the idea that is has 32 processors to work with, all of them on incredible bandwidth that would make the current Opterons and G5s cry like babies.

It is not, however, a chip that goes over 3.0ghz yet. The debut models are around 2.0ghz core clock, which will likely scale over 3.0ghz on the consumer version (the 975).

Facts are wonderful things. :cool:

True, and I didnt mean to imply that apple would be using an actual POWER5, I just meant it would be a processor derived from it, which I figured would be implied as all Apples processors are deviations from IBM's more costly processors. If it is a 975, then it wouldnt have ALL the cutting edge technology within the POWER5 itself, but it still offers a huge performance and technological advancement over the current 970's. I guess I should have just kept the argument to the 970 vs 975, I just wanted to point out the fact that you pointed out so well in your other post that they are based on entirely different processor's and regardless of what the derived processor actually utilizes, it will still be superior to the current POWER4 basis.

(And I do have another link somewhere that details an actual article between Apple and IBM that specifically states that Apple would have a significant role in the future direction of IBMs processors, I just need to find it.)

[i_am_a_cow]

FROM THE APPLE STORE:

Between March 28, 2004, and June 26, 2004, purchase a Power Mac G5 and a 23-inch Cinema HD Display at the same time — and get $500 back by mail.

*The following terms and conditions govern this offer: End-user customers must order and take possession of qualifying Apple products from March 28, 2004, through June 26, 2004. Apple products must be purchased directly from Apple or an authorized Apple reseller located in the 50 United States or the District of Columbia...

somethings coming.

[a17inchFuture]

This site is the site that prediucted G5 PB's in eight weeks, about 10 weeks ago. They are bunk, and I think this rumor is too.

Also, I dont know much about burning dvd's, but i think the dual layering is slightly complicated, and unlikely to be included on these computers. Check here if you care to know more, but this article says the model is coming soon, and its teh first dual layer burner, so i doubt apple would casually be including them in their new models.

site: http://www.burnworld.com/howto/articles/intro-to-dual-layer.htm

[ZildjianKX]

Well, the specs are certainly what Apple should be releasing... even if they are true, I bet there is going to be a huge wait.

[ITR 81]

Too bad the 3Ghz won't be out in time for me to use in my new small business.

I'll just have to make due with a dual 2Ghz machine and get a 3GHz or so for home.

[thatwendigo]

somethings coming.

Psssst. Apple Brilliant Savings promo thread (started on March 28th) (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=65765)

[Toreador93]

You guys keep forgetting about COOLIGY (http://www.cooligy.com/)!!


Intel, AMD, Apple + Cooligy (http://www.pcsympathy.com/article318.html)

Also, NEC and Hitachi have water cooling systems for Laptops. I don't think they're 1" thick, but I think the technology will be there eventually. And with Cooligy, I think it'll be soon.

[thatwendigo]

This site is the site that prediucted G5 PB's in eight weeks, about 10 weeks ago. They are bunk, and I think this rumor is too.

As opposed to how often this site and others have crowed that new PowerMAcs, PowerBooks, iMacs, and everything else would show up? Do I really need to go back and show how often you have been in on the feeding frenzy on those topics, or will you drop this?

Also, I dont know much about burning dvd's, but i think the dual layering is slightly complicated, and unlikely to be included on these computers. Check here if you care to know more, but this article says the model is coming soon, and its teh first dual layer burner, so i doubt apple would casually be including them in their new models.

As I already stated, Pioneer has demonstrated the technology in the drive that Apple uses now, otherwise known as the Pioneer DVR A06. It requires an update to the drive's firmware that the company is not releasing to the public yet, but which they did show would work at CES 2004.

http://www.burnworld.com/howto/articles/intro-to-dual-layer.htm

How does this have any bearing whatsoever on the introduction of the technology? For one thing, Apple is known for embracing new techology - 17" laptop screens, USB, FireWire, AGP, and so on - in their designs. All that the link you posted does is explain how it works, and show off the Sony design that's coming to marrket right now.

The computer and peripheral page of Sony Style (http://www.sonystyle.com) is advertising the dual-layer drives right now. They're $199 retail for the installable DRU-700A units.

Reasearch before you shoot down what others say. :rolleyes:

[k2k koos]

If it is WWDC of Paris, Steve has held his promise.

If introduced and available right after the Paris Expo (usually septemberish) Then they are available a year after the 2Ghz was available in the stores (I'm not talking pre order here) , If WWDC announced, that would be 1 year after the announcement of the 2Ghz, With a speed % increase seen usually after 18 months or more, not bad at all, kuddos to Apple



if it is all true of course.....

[iris_failsafe]

It seems that we finally are going to see a workstation from Apple. Very excited to hear about ATI professional cards coming out. Maybe Maya unlimited and Softimage will finally have a Mac version.

Al so if indee these specs turn out to be true, they will crush even an sgi machine and any intel power thing out there

[ZildjianKX]

As I already stated, Pioneer has demonstrated the technology in the drive that Apple uses now, otherwise known as the Pioneer DVR A06. It requires an update to the drive's firmware that the company is not releasing to the public yet, but which they did show would work at CES 2004.

Hardmac, who published this info, posted later that the drive would have to be physically modified as well... I was following the news on it closely since I own that particular drive... real bummer :(

[IBSNOWEDIN]

I hope this rumor is true. if it is i will be ordering one of those 3ghz monsters :D come on be true.

[Ysean]

Wow, 65W - that's going to be a lot of heat.....so look for a lot of noise....

But it will be nice to see real pro level graphics cards if its true..

D

Even if 65W is the "typical" heat generation it is not a big deal. Almost EVERY chipmaker specifies their "typical" heat generation and not their max. You can get the max if you do enough digging. But, what they all like to talk about is the typical output. So this is still better than the other boys. Besides, how many people actually maxes out their computers for extended periods of time doing compute intensive tasks?

[neonart]

Croquer has never gotten anything right. They are like MOSR. No truth at all....

And they were completely wrong about the iBook and Powerbook specs and everyone was saying that they would come out anyway.

S0rry, there is no truth to this. :(

Ahh, dude?

The iBooks were right on except the high end, but they even called the Superdrive. The Powerbooks were also right minus the midrange. They made these calls before anyone else, including ThinkSecret.

Again, I'm not saying this is it, but it appears these guys do have some decent info.

And BTW, was it not you that believed and promoted NeatGekko's predictions? At least these guys have gotten a few things right. Not trying to get on your case or anything, but I find your statement of "Croquer has never gotten anything right" to be misleading, and unfounded.
:confused:

[alexf]

How many watts do the current 2, 1.8, and 1.6 processors run at?
How much more noise would their be between a dual 2 GHz now and a dual 3 GHz?

Here is a link from the Apple site with power consumption / thermal specs for the current lineup: http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=32486

I also believe that the current single processor machines are significantly quieter than the duals. Can anyone confirm this?

[Sun Baked]

Even if 65W is the "typical" heat generation it is not a big deal. Almost EVERY chipmaker specifies their "typical" heat generation and not their max. You can get the max if you do enough digging. But, what they all like to talk about is the typical output. So this is still better than the other boys. Besides, how many people actually maxes out their computers for extended periods of time doing compute intensive tasks?This is why Max is a problem, it would put this chip at or above a 3.2 GHz Intel Xeon chip...

About where the 2.0GHz PPC970 is.

And the PowerMacs have two of these hot puppies.

[thatwendigo]

Hardmac, who published this info, posted later that the drive would have to be physically modified as well... I was following the news on it closely since I own that particular drive... real bummer :(

Ah, well... I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for the correction, and I'll keep it in mind when I argue the dual-layer point in the future. It doesn't change the fact that Sony is selling their burner on their website. :D

Interestingly, Hardmac now claims that NEC is releasing the ND-6100A, a laptop format 8x DVD burner that will support dual-layer format. Their list, verbatim:
DVD+R9 2,4x WRITE
DVD+R 8x WRITE
DVD+RW 4x WRITE
CD-R 24x WRITE
CD-RW 16x WRITE
CD 24x READ
DVD 8x READ

[thatwendigo]

Here is a link from the Apple site with power consumption / thermal specs for the current lineup: http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=32486

I also believe that the current single processor machines are significantly quieter than the duals. Can anyone confirm this?

Oh my God, thank you, alex.

Those of you who clamor for the G5 in a laptop, read it and weep:

1.6 GHz G5 microprocessor, 800 MHz Frontside Bus, 512 KB L2 cache,
256 MB DDR333 128 bit SDRAM, Expandable to 4 GB SDRAM, 80 GB Serial ATA, SuperDrive, (3) PCI Slots, NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra, 64 MB DDR video memory, 56 kbit/s internal modem

IDLE: 120W
MAX: 420W

1.8 GHz G5 microprocessor, 900 MHz Frontside Bus, 512 KB L2 cache,
512 MB DDR400 128 bit SDRAM, Expandable to 8 GB SDRAM, 160 GB Serial ATA, SuperDrive, (3) PCI-X Slots, NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra, 64 MB DDR video memory, 56 kbit/s internal modem

IDLE: 120W
MAX: 430W

Even if you assume that portable versions of components would cut power usage in half, that's 60 watts at idle and 215 watts at full-bore for a single processor 1.8ghz G5. Trim an additional 15 watts for the 970fx, and you're still staring at 45 watts and 200 watts. Damn.

[ffakr]

You guys keep forgetting about COOLIGY (http://www.cooligy.com/)!!


Intel, AMD, Apple + Cooligy (http://www.pcsympathy.com/article318.html)

Also, NEC and Hitachi have water cooling systems for Laptops. I don't think they're 1" thick, but I think the technology will be there eventually. And with Cooligy, I think it'll be soon.

Cooligy is very similar to current heat pipe solutions. This is not "water cooling". It's a bit more complicated than a circulating radiator setup like you'd find in an after market water cooling PC solution.
The G5 uses Heatpipes. If you take the covers off the heat sinks, you'll see that there are heat pipes embedded into the G5 heat sinks.

Here's some info on how heatpipes work...
http://www.cheresources.com/htpipes.shtml

[ffakr]

Oh my God, thank you, alex.

Those of you who clamor for the G5 in a laptop, read it and weep:

1.6 GHz G5 microprocessor, 800 MHz Frontside Bus, 512 KB L2 cache,
256 MB DDR333 128 bit SDRAM, Expandable to 4 GB SDRAM, 80 GB Serial ATA, SuperDrive, (3) PCI Slots, NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra, 64 MB DDR video memory, 56 kbit/s internal modem

IDLE: 120W
MAX: 420W
...
Even if you assume that portable versions of components would cut power usage in half, that's 60 watts at idle and 215 watts at full-bore for a single processor 1.8ghz G5. Trim an additional 15 watts for the 970fx, and you're still staring at 45 watts and 200 watts. Damn.
You do realize that you can't even remotely compare the power consumption of a desktop to a laptop, right?
The Powersupply in the G5 is, I've heard, rated up to 600 watts. Good power supplies are about 70% efficient. Right off the bat, the machine is going to waste a lot of power.
The draw includes a desktop video card that is probably going to draw about 50 watts all by its self, and a 7200 RPM 3.5" hard drive. Also consider that a G5 supports multipliers other than 2:1 so Apple doesn't need to ship a laptop with an 800MHz system bus.
A quick look at hard drives revealed that a 7200rpm 3.5" desktop drive I looked at requires over 12 watts while spun up seeking. A 2.5" 4500rmp laptop drive requires 2 watts while spun up seeking. That's a factor of 6, not a factor of 2.

Think about it this way.....
420 W max draw on a single G5 1.6 GHz tower.
the CPU has a typical draw of under 30 watts, max should be only slightly higher (Athlons and P4's Max is within about 10% of typical). That is nearly 400 unaccounted for watts outside the processor.
or..
A G4 Tower has a powersupply that is roughly 400 watts. Figure the max draw of the machine is probably about 300 watts. Do you think that a G4 laptop has a max current draw of roughly half a tower? That would be 150 watts with a 55 watt/hour Li battery. So, a maxed out G4 powerbook would have 20 minutes of battery life?

I don't think your assumptions are even close to reality. ;)

[MrSugar]

Water-cooling is the only viable option now, since CPU have gotten so hot. And Water Cooling, if the component leaks, will be just as devastating as if a PowerMac's fan fails. A burnt processor is about as effective as a soaked one. Hopefully it will have water cooling, then there won't be any gripes about fan noise.

And I'm sure IBM and Apple learned their lesson in the past, get a big stockpile of these boys before shipping.

I sure hope this rumor is true -- because I can't help from being remembered about 2Ghz G5 rumor last year and everyone doubting that.

If they can get 3Ghz into a Powermac, I can see a G5 in Powerbooks in January.


And PCI-Extreme is the new replacement for PCI. All the PC venders are going with PCI-Extreme and it'd be foolish for Apple to keep going with PCI-X just to be different. Not to mention ATI and Nvidia are going with PCI-Extreme with their new GFX cards.

PCI-x and PCI-Extreme are different, one is the new graphics card interface (PCI Extreme) and one if a faster slot for PCI cards that runs at 133mhz and 100 (PCI X).

[eyeluvmyimac]

i must commend thatwendigo on his input, i feel very enlightened having read his contributions to this thread and he (at least appears haha) to really know what he's talking about...that being said i would like to hear his take on the whole water/liquid cooling aspect because (i dont think) he has commented on that yet...

as far as my own opinion...i really hope this all turns out to be true, the dual layer dvd burning wouldnt mean that much to me, but im sure it does to others....ill have my money out and waiting come wwdc... =)

[Ysean]

PCI-x and PCI-Extreme are different, one is the new graphics card interface (PCI Extreme) and one if a faster slot for PCI cards that runs at 133mhz and 100 (PCI X).


as PCI-Extreme. It's PCI-Express. Also, PCI-Express is a replacement for PCI and PCI-X altogether. Not a video only standard. Maybe this site should have more technically inclined switchers here!

[Borg3of5]

I think it would be a good option to have the first optical drive be straight dual-layer burner, and have a REALLY fast (read 52x) in the second optical bay. Why, if they've been out for a year-and-a-half, can't Apple use 52x CD-burners?!

Let's be able to burn a small amount of data (700 MB or less) to a blank CD-R in about a minute and a half, like the rest of the civilized world!

[ClimbingTheLog]

Not gonna happen bro, this is more of a PC sector type thing.

Of course Apple won't make Water Cooled G5's. You're right that is a very PC thing.

They'll make Phase-Change G5's.

Or this will be the PowerMac G5 (With Climate Control).

Water Cooling is for Dorks. Climate Control is for people who drive a Lexus.

[ClimbingTheLog]

PCI-x and PCI-Extreme are different, one is the new graphics card interface (PCI Extreme) and one if a faster slot for PCI cards that runs at 133mhz and 100 (PCI X).

I just spent some time specing PCI Express Fiber Channel HBA's today.

And that has nothing to do with graphics cards.

[wizard]

Well here is my take:

Anything less that 2GHz on the imac or its replacement would be a waste of Apples time.

At least one of the PowerMacs needs to run at 3GHz. Steve would be under unbelievable pressure if this where not the case. It will certainly have to be announced, delivery might be a bit off but it would have to be announced.

Thanks
Dave


My guess on updates are this:
PowerMac
2.0 ghz (single)
2.4 ghz (dual)
2.6 ghz (dual)
I called the speeds the last time. Lets go for two in a row!

IMac
1.6 ghz (single)
1.8 ghz (single)

[thatwendigo]

You do realize that you can't even remotely compare the power consumption of a desktop to a laptop, right?

That entirely depends on the laptop and the systems being compared. If you look at the Pentium 4 "dekstop replacement" laptops, they eat enough power to reduce even high capacity baterries to less than an hour of life. A GeForce Go 5600 runs at 12 watts on its own, the 970FX is another 15-25watts, add on a 7200RM laptop drive (around 4-5 watts, I gather, but in shorter bursts), I have no idea on RAM wattage, but you'd see an increase in moving to PC3200 SO-DIMMS, and increase in the FSB and other fabric concerns.

The Powersupply in the G5 is, I've heard, rated up to 600 watts. Good power supplies are about 70% efficient. Right off the bat, the machine is going to waste a lot of power.

Yes, and this is supposed to change anything? If you take 70% of 600 watts, that's still 420 watts of expenditure. Take 70% of 420 watts and you come up with 294 watts. Halve that, and you're still at 147 watts. Take off half of that for power optimization in graphics cards and such, and you're still well over the G4 PowerBook's draw, as near as I can figure. With the 7447A, we're looking at around 35-60 watts across the whole system for the portable, though I'm having to guess at a few numbers in that figure.

Oh, and it better be rated to 600 watts, considering that the figure for the dual 2.0ghz is 604w at max draw.

The draw includes a desktop video card that is probably going to draw about 50 watts all by its self, and a 7200 RPM 3.5" hard drive. Also consider that a G5 supports multipliers other than 2:1 so Apple doesn't need to ship a laptop with an 800MHz system bus.

Surprisingly, the wattage of video cards isn't easy to find unless you're looking at the most current generation. The ATI x800 is considerably better at power draw than its predecessors at either nVidia or ATI, and it draws some 60-70 watts, as I recall from anandtech's review.

A quick look at hard drives revealed that a 7200rpm 3.5" desktop drive I looked at requires over 12 watts while spun up seeking. A 2.5" 4500rmp laptop drive requires 2 watts while spun up seeking. That's a factor of 6, not a factor of 2.

The G5 needs faster drives to keep it fed or you lose basically any performance advantage over the G4. That means that you're looking at 5400 and 7200 RPM, not 4500 RPM. The interesting thing is that 7200 RPM drives draw a minute amount of power over 5400RPM but provide a measurable performance boost because of lessened seek times (which keeps the drive in standby more often, and thus pulling less power when not heavily in use).

420 W max draw on a single G5 1.6 GHz tower.
the CPU has a typical draw of under 30 watts, max should be only slightly higher (Athlons and P4's Max is within about 10% of typical). That is nearly 400 unaccounted for watts outside the processor.

Yes, and quite a bit of that "unaccounted for" wattage is going to the subsystems that make using the G5 worthwhile - bus, RAM, drives, GPU, and so on. Without the fast support, you're going to be rehashing the thing that people complain about the most on the G4, which is a starved processor.

A G4 Tower has a powersupply that is roughly 400 watts. Figure the max draw of the machine is probably about 300 watts. Do you think that a G4 laptop has a max current draw of roughly half a tower? That would be 150 watts with a 55 watt/hour Li battery. So, a maxed out G4 powerbook would have 20 minutes of battery life?

It depends on the generation of PowerMac you're talking about, and I don't think that any of those are using the 7447A 1.5ghz part, which is one of the most efficient G4 chips ever manufactured. It puts out that clock rate at a svelte 11 watts and uses much less heat-intensive parts/

I don't think your assumptions are even close to reality. ;)

I was making a comparison to make a point, not stating that there was a direct correlation. The G4 towers used 250-350 watt power supplies for most of their lives. The current generation is much more power efficient than ever, and yet the desktops are drawing off a supply that is twice as fat as anything before. To put this another way, I could build a nice, fast PC from parts (well, as nice as PCs can be, that is ;) ) and have it not need anything like 600 watts at peak.

Laptop-wise, the Centrino is what we need to be looking at. It's competing solidly with the P4 on performance and running a mere 22-25 watts at 2.0ghz since the die shrink to 90nm (something that the G5 doesn't do as a single chip). The G5 is not the way to go. I'm sorry, but the numbers just don't favor it, unless you'd rather have a louder, hotter PowerBook than we have.

i must commend thatwendigo on his input, i feel very enlightened having read his contributions to this thread and he (at least appears haha) to really know what he's talking about...that being said i would like to hear his take on the whole water/liquid cooling aspect because (i dont think) he has commented on that yet...

Thanks for the kind words. I make mistakes, just like any other human being, but I really do try to be well-informed and as objective as possible in the situation. :D

I'm staying out of the watercooling issue because I don't think it really needs to be discussed at this point. Liquid cooling, as in closed-system heatpipes, are already in Apple products. I'm typing at one at the moment (the eMac). However, I don't think that consumer active-pump liquid cooling systems are quite ready for mainstream yet. There's too much that can break and hurt other parts.

If anyone can do it, it's Apple, though. ;)

[JoeMacDaddy]

yes... lets all laugh at the man who says apple will be using a technology that exists already. one that is proven to cool much better and is real. not fake as many of you seem to think.

I will say this in bold capital letters so no one misses it...


WATER COOLED CPU TECHNOLOGY IS REAL AND HAS EXISTED FOR AT LEAST 2 YEARS NOW. IT DOES NOT GET ANYTHING WET.

Water cooled CPUs have been around over 20 years. :cool:

[AndrewMT]

Two words: Vapor Chill

Forget fans, forget water cooling. Vapor chilling is the true solution for a top-of-the-line pro desktop. If Apple made vapor chill a BTU option for around $500, I would get it.

[AndrewMT]

Of course Apple won't make Water Cooled G5's. You're right that is a very PC thing.

They'll make Phase-Change G5's.

Or this will be the PowerMac G5 (With Climate Control).

Water Cooling is for Dorks. Climate Control is for people who drive a Lexus.

What he said. Phase-change is what pro pc users are using, so it would be really embarrassing and dissapointing to be stuck with fans or even water cooling on a high-end pro desktop Apple machine.

[thatwendigo]

Two words: Vapor Chill

Forget fans, forget water cooling. Vapor chilling is the true solution for a top-of-the-line pro desktop. If Apple made vapor chill a BTU option for around $500, I would get it.

Vapor Chill ATX case - a mere $1,175 for a plastic chassis alone. (http://www.inquisitivemind.com.au/solutions/product_info.php/products_id/71)
Complete watercooling - a steal at $390! (http://www.inquisitivemind.com.au/solutions/product_info.php/cPath/26/products_id/107?osCsid=b1018373b4199d6a80f2eb300809e73a)

For those who don't know about Vapor Chill systems, here's an article about it. (http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1581&page=5) Basically, it's an even more complicated and more likely to fail system, because it not only relies on liquid at some stage of the process (between the condendor and the evaporator), but also on forcing high-pressure liquid through copper tubing. The one benefit to this steup is that, as I recall, Freon is gaseous at room temperature, so a leak just means that you have a completely failed cooling system and not an immediately shorted board.

Lovely tradeoff. :rolleyes:

[AndrewMT]

Vapor Chill ATX case - a mere $1,175 for a plastic chassis alone. (http://www.inquisitivemind.com.au/solutions/product_info.php/products_id/71)
Complete watercooling - a steal at $390! (http://www.inquisitivemind.com.au/solutions/product_info.php/cPath/26/products_id/107?osCsid=b1018373b4199d6a80f2eb300809e73a)

For those who don't know about Vapor Chill systems, here's an article about it. (http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1581&page=5) Basically, it's an even more complicated and more likely to fail system, because it not only relies on liquid at some stage of the process (between the condendor and the evaporator), but also on forcing high-pressure liquid through copper tubing. The one benefit to this steup is that, as I recall, Freon is gaseous at room temperature, so a leak just means that you have a completely failed cooling system and not an immediately shorted board.

Lovely tradeoff. :rolleyes:

The new VapoChill case is around $800 (http://www.frozencpu.com/cgi-bin/frozencpu/cas-119.html) and it comes standard on all of L's (http://www.go-l.com/desktops/machl38/cooling/index.htm) Mach desktops - probably the finest windows pc ever made.

Phase-change cooling has come along way since it made its consumer debut a few years ago. Everyone here knows that Apple could take this technology and make it reliable (Although, it is just as reliable as an air-conditioner) and cost-effective. Apple wouldn't be Apple if it didn't take risks by bringing new, somewhat questionable technologies to the market before any other computer manufacturer.

[dopefiend]

Apple wouldn't be Apple if it didn't take risks by bringing new, somewhat questionable technologies to the market before any other computer manufacturer.

Of course they would be.

When have done this before? :confused:

[aussiemac86]

For those who don't know about Vapor Chill systems, here's an article about it. (http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1581&page=5) Basically, it's an even more complicated and more likely to fail system, because it not only relies on liquid at some stage of the process (between the condendor and the evaporator), but also on forcing high-pressure liquid through copper tubing. The one benefit to this steup is that, as I recall, Freon is gaseous at room temperature, so a leak just means that you have a completely failed cooling system and not an immediately shorted board.

Lovely tradeoff. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]


ahhh, just to highlight the reliability of these systems probably everyone on this thread has at least one of them in their house at the moment. Fridges and reverse-cycle airconditioners use phase change cooling. How often do they break down? This technology has been around in fridges and stuff for years and has become very reliable. It would not be very hard to keep that reliability and shrink the system down to fit in a PM.

[thatwendigo]

The new VapoChill case is around $800 (http://www.frozencpu.com/cgi-bin/frozencpu/cas-119.html) and it comes standard on all of L's (http://www.go-l.com/desktops/machl38/cooling/index.htm) Mach desktops - probably the finest windows pc ever made.

Two points, and they roughly go in order of what you're talking about:
1) I'm not impressed by something as ridiculously central to computing as the cooling system costing $800, especially not when people already call Apple overpriced. I mean, Jesus... The top of the line PowerMac, now at $3,799 baseline?
2) If you're so fond of L, then I suppose the prices don't bother you. Here's an example:

P4 3.8ghz with 512K L2 (overlcocked)
950mhz overlcocked FSB
512MB PC3200 (overclocked)
250MB SATA 7200RPM
ATI Radoen 9800 Pro 128MB
8x DVD-RW
IEEE 1394a and 1394b
Gigabit Ethernet
56k modem
802.11g (no base station)
BlueTooth
Wireless Keyboard
XP Pro (but no bundled software specified)
No monitor
Cost: $5,953

At the Apple store:
G5 dual 2.0ghz
1GB PC3200
2x 250GB SATA 7200RPM
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB
8x DVD-RW
IEEE 1394a and 1394b
Gigabit Ethernet
56k modem
Airport Extreme with Base Station (Antenna and modem port)
BlueTooth
Apple Wireless Keyboard and Mouse
OS X 10.3.3
No monitor
iPod 40GB
iSight
Logitech Z-680 6.1 speakers with THX
HP PSC 2410 Multifunction Printer
LaCie d2 160GB FireWire drive
Cost: $5,989

Overclocking = bad. If you want to take those kinds of risks with your system when you've got the parts and you know what you're doing, that's one thing. The systems at L's website are being sold as consumer machines, though, and that's a maintenance nightmare waiting to happen.

Phase-change cooling has come along way since it made its consumer debut a few years ago. Everyone here knows that Apple could take this technology and make it reliable (Although, it is just as reliable as an air-conditioner) and cost-effective. Apple wouldn't be Apple if it didn't take risks by bringing new, somewhat questionable technologies to the market before any other computer manufacturer.

Risks are one thing, and economics and physics are another. Apple tends to lead market trends in many ways, but it's a far better idea to use cooler chips than to use extravagant cooling systems that can easily go wrong.

<edit>Oh, by the way, the baseline L system when specced to be equal to the G5:

Mach 3.5 Custom
Intel Pentium 4 @ 3.5ghz
256MB "DDR466"
120GB SATA 7200RPM
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128Mb
8x DVD-RW
IEEE 1394a and 1394b
Wireless Keyboard and Mouse
XP Professional
no monitor
Cost: $3,642

Dual G5 2.0ghz
1GB PC3200
250GB SATA 7200RPM
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB
8x DVD-RW
IEEE 1394a and 1394b
Wireless Keyboard and Mouse
OS X 10.3.3
no monitor
Cost: $3,712

[thatwendigo]

ahhh, just to highlight the reliability of these systems probably everyone on this thread has at least one of them in their house at the moment. Fridges and reverse-cycle airconditioners use phase change cooling. How often do they break down? This technology has been around in fridges and stuff for years and has become very reliable. It would not be very hard to keep that reliability and shrink the system down to fit in a PM.

You've obviously never seen a compressor foul on a refrigerator or an air conditioner, nor have you seen the runoff pipes for serious cooling units. The one at the restraunt I used to work at had a bucket to catch the residual condensation from the cooling coils, which was piped outside to be rid of it.

I mean... Wow. The units in air conditioners and refrigerators are huge, compared to what goes inside of a computer case! The vapor chill units that are being discussed here are $800 at a minium at the moment, and they're highly specialized. Small parts are more likely to break, and nobody builds these things to last 20 years, whereas air conditioners used to be expected to run forever.

I live in a region that it gets to 90 degrees and 90% humidity by June and only climbs in temperature as summer goes on. All you need to know that this is possibly a bad idea is to remember what happens when your air conditioner freezes a bearing, breaks a line (happened to me more than once), or otherwise fouls. It gets hot really quick then, and if your system is designed around this one wonder system, a singel failure means the whole thing goes down. :rolleyes:

[SiliconAddict]

This is about the water cooling thing... I've only seen water cooling on hardcore geek modded PC's, not on any retail offerings from any major computer company. I think it would be a tech support and public relations nightmare, because so many people wouldn't know what to do, or how to use it. Besides, any malfunctions would probably be disastrous...

I don't think so. If done right several things can be done with water cooled systems.
1. First and foremost this is a Mac. The average user knows NOTHING about the inside of their computer. They don't want to know anything about the inside of their computer as long as it "just works" So water cooling could simply be a feature that is added to the system and Apple wouldn't need to advertise it. Does Apple advertise that their CPU has a heat sink? As long as the user knows that its quite and it runs fast they don’t need to know the cooling method.
2. As long as these water cooled heat pumps are created in a manner that assures that there is NO chance in hell of leaking this shouldn't be a problem. Such a system can be implemented simply by having the water cooling be an all in one system. Having a grunt hook up hoses is a surefire means of having a stray leak here and there. As long as the system is set up where you slap it into the PowerMac, hook up a plug to power the pump, twist some screws this should be doable. But Apple would have to use their development teams to implement a water cooling method that is near flawless in regards to stray leaks and would probably have to redesign the PowerMac to accommodate it which would be a major chore on their part. As for the other technologies that people listed here. Yes they are very impressive and very expensive. Apple is NOT going to take an over the counter solution and slap it in a G5. It’s going to be customized for the system. Look at how the G5 was developed. The guts of the dang thing is a beautiful assembly of technology. Apple isn’t going to take VapoChill, water cooling, Phase-Change or any other type of tech without doing some serious redesigning of the PowerMac. *shrugs* Who knows maybe that’s what they’ve been doing over the last year just in case IBM couldn’t meet the deadline.

IMHO the big problem is that Macs have always been touted as being super cool and super electricity friendly. Water cooled CPU’s don’t strike me as either.

[grneyedjay]

Processor, Schmocessor...I'm excited about a) the two optical drives and b) the superdrive extreme for capability of authoring dual-layer discs...which is what I presume it will do, provided that the rumors prove to be true. The added room for hard drives is helpful as well. I've been needing a reason to shell out extra dough this summer! :rolleyes:

[iindigo]

Guys, I wouldn't worry about the cooling system too much - I'm sure Apple will get something very functional and cool(no pun intended) worked out.

Although it would be neat to have liquid cooling...

I also think these rumors are dead on-


iindigo

[TyleRomeo]

ok one thing you will not see is dual layer superdrive. These drives just came out a few months ago and there isn't any media for them yet in the US market. (it's $13 a pop in Japan) so be happy with an 8x burner for now. Asking for dual layer right now is expecting apple to throw in ati x800 cards. I'd be happy if the 9700 128MB was standard.

Tyler

[thatwendigo]

ok one thing you will not see is dual layer superdrive. These drives just came out a few months ago and there isn't any media for them yet in the US market. (it's $13 a pop in Japan)

Might that change, considering that Sony, Pioneer, and others are manufacturing drives, and that the first company is selling them here in the US? It seems a bit odd to be producing a drive that there wouldn't be media for.

so be happy with an 8x burner for now. Asking for dual layer right now is expecting apple to throw in ati x800 cards. I'd be happy if the 9700 128MB was standard.

Ah, so it's a reasonable but outside chance at technology from companies that have historically been pretty decent to Apple, but not always the quickest to move with them? Neither the ATI x800 nor dual-layer DVDs should be ruled out, though I don't think that people should necessarily be expecting them either.

[MrSugar]

as PCI-Extreme. It's PCI-Express. Also, PCI-Express is a replacement for PCI and PCI-X altogether. Not a video only standard. Maybe this site should have more technically inclined switchers here!

Yes, Sorrry, I ment PCI Express. I am actually very well technically informed, sorry that I mis re-called a name. Maybe you should understand this site is to inform people, and not to insult them about their information. That being said, thanks for the correction...

[ultrafiel]

I don't care if there will be dual-layer superdrives, as I won't be getting one. However, I will be buying a G5 with the upcoming update (whenever that is), and I'll get a combo drive and then go buy a pioneer DVR-07 for cheap (currently $92). All I care about is that the update brings PCI-Express, and room for more than 2 hard drives. It's a given the processors will be faster, and since I'm on a 450 Mhz G4 whatever they turn out to be will be speedy to me. I've been waiting since the end of Jan. to get a new machine, but I have to hold out until the update. It better be WWDC or I'm going to go insane. Curse the rumor sites for constantly putting a carrot in front of me!

[mangoduck]

syndicatex, you might want to pull on the reigns a bit. i'm not discrediting facts here, i'm putting doubt to a wholly outlandish speculation.

1: the only real fact here is that each one of the features listed is the next significant advance in its respective hardware category. when is the last time apple released a machine with so many changes at once? although close, i don't even think the g5 was as different from its predecessors (revamped motherboard, 64bit, speed bump, sata) as this list is from current systems.

2: apple, like most companies, needs money. they'll be able to keep sales up longer by spreading out new features over a period of months, regardless of whether the technology is present to provide them now at consumer prices. every so often apple goes for a big upgrade, but it's not probable.

in regards to your argument, i don't really want to get into all that. other people have already pointed out false statements, misused terminology, and incorrectly cited sources within your post, and the only thing i could add is that your grasp of ibm's ppc roadmap, both past and future, seems a little off. refine before you flame, please.

[SyndicateX]

....Laptop-wise, the Centrino is what we need to be looking at. It's competing solidly with the P4 on performance and running a mere 22-25 watts at 2.0ghz since the die shrink to 90nm (something that the G5 doesn't do as a single chip). The G5 is not the way to go. I'm sorry, but the numbers just don't favor it, unless you'd rather have a louder, hotter PowerBook than we have.....

i think you must be the hardest person to disagree with on this forum because you just happen to know so much, but the 970fx DOES run at 24.5 watts @ 2.0ghz (http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/7874C7DA8607C0B287256BF3006FBE54/$file/PPC_QRG_2-22-04.pdf). Just providing some sources to good information everyone needs.

And If apple used the new Hitachi (http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/storage/display/hitachi-25-7200.html) 7200rpm drives (considering when they make larger ones) they use about 2.5 watts. So if IBM can work out the kinks in their 90nm processors, it is very possible to see it in a g5 notebook, with hardly much change in temp or fan noise.

If anyone can do it, it's Apple, though. ;)

Amen to that, thats why I never think something is too far off from apple successfully doing it. I still am baffled everyday looking at this gorgeous 17" powerbook of how exactly they managed to do it!

[SyndicateX]

syndicatex, you might want to pull on the reigns a bit. i'm not discrediting facts here, i'm putting doubt to a wholly outlandish speculation.

1: the only real fact here is that each one of the features listed is the next significant advance in its respective hardware category. when is the last time apple released a machine with so many changes at once? although close, i don't even think the g5 was as different from its predecessors (revamped motherboard, 64bit, speed bump, sata) as this list is from current systems.

True, but what else are they really upgrading? Processor, dvd drive, an upgraded graphics card? Those all seem pretty reasonable to me even with adding some extra drive bays. Personally I just believe that is the way technology is today. A decade ago, it took years to make a 100mhz jump in cpu speed, now we've gone from cd burners, to dvd burners, to the next evolution of dual layered burners in no time at all. Advancements arent as expensive as they once were so it is much easier to fully adopt brand new technology for hardly any difference in the customers final cost. (From the sonystyle site, dual layer drive with every format possible 199$. How much more is that than the superdrive costs to produce? Not much probably.)

And 1 example I would have is the 17" powerbook, no one had 17" screens, widescreens at that! Wireless built in, bluetooth, firewire, backlight keyboard. At the time it was revolutionary, and considering that NO ONE has even come close to duplicating the 1" form factor and general beauty of it since its release, I think it shows a great deal how much farther ahead Apple is of alot of its competitors, even on their comparitively miniscule budget.


2: apple, like most companies, needs money. they'll be able to keep sales up longer by spreading out new features over a period of months, regardless of whether the technology is present to provide them now at consumer prices. every so often apple goes for a big upgrade, but it's not probable.

I disagree, while all companies need sales, Apple needs publicity. They continue to create products that amaze people that have never paid attention to them and that is the only way they continue to survive in a MS / x86 cursed world. If they just put out products on par with other companies, then no one cares. But when they can put out a tv commercial advertising a dual 3ghz 64 bit computer with dual dvd drives and blah blah...most of the public doesnt follow these things daily as some of us do, adn to them it is the first time they hear about "dual layer drives" and all the other technology just now coming out, and when they see it their jaws drop and they say "wow, thats pretty sweet!" while they look at their crappy beige or black plastic PC.

If they can continually impress non-mac users into remembering that and evven looking into it and eventually see the great things they never knew existed (OS X, for example), thats what apple truly needs, not just every mac user out there to go out and buy a new G5.


in regards to your argument, i don't really want to get into all that. other people have already pointed out false statements, misused terminology, and incorrectly cited sources within your post, and the only thing i could add is that your grasp of ibm's ppc roadmap, both past and future, seems a little off. refine before you flame, please.

Ill be the first to admit to it. I do know what Im talking about but at the time I had only read a section of this thread, and i really didnt care to take the time to write a novel to express every technological aspect of the argument. In haste I summarized it, never read it, and posted it and it came across wrong because i didnt point out alot of things that to me are just common sense. No, the POWER5 is not going to be in the next mac, but its deriviant, the 975 or 980 (whatever IBM decides to call it) will be, I assure you. The 970 is a great processor, but it isnt the processor that is going to take apple where it wants to go. The 970fx had potential to be a good transitional processor from the 970 to something else, but there are to many bugs, Apples not here because they do what everyone thinks they are going to do, they are here because they always manage to suprise us, even though we pour through the rumor mills daily and think we know it all, Steve Jobs always has a good little secret up his sleeve.

[Zaty]

Apples not here because they do what everyone thinks they are going to do, they are here because they always manage to suprise us, even though we pour through the rumor mills daily and think we know it all, Steve Jobs always has a good little secret up his sleeve.

Let's hope you're right!

[Mord]

1) 3GHz could be a reality think of the 970fx as a 744x g4 and the 975 as a 745x chip one for the powerbook, ibook, imac, emac and the 975 for the powermac.

2)wow watercooling in my dreamcast i would have never of thought crazyness, i'll be opening it up now to see if i can some how use it in my cube to reach sub 20 degree tempretures. again wow.

3)a water cooled g5 would be increibaly cool and i think it is a possibility.

[french macuser]

Hello

As a french macuser who knows "croquer.free.fr" pretty well , I may add something.

(please excuse my english)
(I have not read the whole thread)

Croquer.free.fr has been right some times. They predicted the specifications and prices of the new laptops (with some minor errors) before thinksecret did.
They also talked about "motion" (as an "after-effects like") long before NAB.
They also predicted some security update.

Nevertheless, they were completely wrong many times : they talked about new Powermacs and Imacs to be relaesed at january 24th.
They said that 970FX powermacs and Xsations had been delivered to various US governmental agencies, which would have delayed their relaese.
....

They also posted some interesting information about the PPC 975 :
Le PPC 975

Le PPC 975 va inaugurer la technologie Simultaneous Multi-threading d'IBM.
Les premiers résultats obtenus par Apple sont impressionnants. sans SMT, un PPC 975 à 3 GHz donne des performances SpecInt 1350 et SpecFP de 1479. SMT activé, on passe à un SpecInt de 1650 et un SPecFP de 1750. C'est le double d'un PPC 970 à 2 GHz.
La puce qui a 98 millions de transistors, consomme 71W de courant a 3Ghz, et 86 a 3,4Ghz.
Les Mac G5 975 seront peut être annoncés à la WWDC et mis en vente quelques mois plus tard.
Which means : The PPC 975 will introduce IBM's Simultaneous Multi-threading (SMT). First results, got by apple, are impressive. Without SMT, one 3 GHz PPC 975 gives 1350 (SpecInt) and 1479 (SpecFP). With SMT activated, it reaches 1650 (SpecInt) and 1750 (SpecFP). That is twice the performances of a 2 GHz PPC 970.
The ship has 98 million transistors, consumes 71 Watts at 3 GHz and 86 W at 4 GHz.
PPC 975 G5 Macs will be announced at WWDC and will be available few months later (I think at apple expo Paris, september).

They said that the processor is "taped out" and ready for production, and they also refered to "watercooling G5s".
:)

[tgilbey]

I have no doubt they *could* do it, but
a) it would be a massive engineering effort and
b) surely the spanking G5 tower is not at the end of it's lifecycle yet? It was seemingly designed from the ground up with fan cooling in mind (different channels, large fans, front and back perforated) and so it would be a desperate company that scrapped Ive's gorgeous and quiet design for a new one. It is already quite large, and I have heard people complain about this, and so putting an active water cooler in is asking for trouble.

also, do these rumors actually SAY they have 2 optical drives, or two bays? I think the latter, and even at high end apple are concerned enough about the pricepoint to have a second drive ship as BTO only

[tgilbey]

Also, as someone pointed out, this chip (ie the new 90nm Dothan version, which will be integrated into the successor to centrino this fall, but as a chip is available now) is THE succese story of the market at the moment.
SO much so that intel has just dropped plans for any progression of the "main" desktop P4 architecture and is betting on this chip, perhaps in multiple core versions, for it's future desktop and notebook lines.

Powerbooks are awesome, but from talking to people who own both, well-executed centrino/dothan designs such as IBM's awesome thinkpad t41p are currently significantly faster than the top powerbook at similar battery lives etc etc. Clock for clock they are a LOT faster than normal P4s, and, at least in my opinion, the g4 architecture is not that much more efficient again to account for the fact that they are down at 1.5ghz and intel are up to 2, with more to come, at low power draws.

Apple really needs to pull their fingers out but, sadly, it seems that they are constrained by the difficulties with the g5

[tgilbey]

perhaps watercooling is being done in the lab to get G5s running at 3ghz+, and this is where the rumors are coming from?

[immaculate]

Since no-one's posted the original text from Croquer dans la pomme, here it is:

2004-05-20 - G5 Trinity à la WWDC

Les G5 équipés de PPC975 (nom de code: Trinity) seront annoncés à la WWDC et livrable au plus tard à l'Apple Expo. Le PPC975 consomme en moyenne 65W à 3 GHz et intègre 98 millions de transistors. Tous les modèles auront deux emplacement Superdrive et 4 emplacements de disque dur. Côté son, 24-bit 192Khz au moins sur le haut de gamme. Apple proposera avec ATI une carte graphique PCI-express professionnelle du type Fire GL.

Config (susceptible de changer):

Mono PPC 975 à 2,2 GHz
AGP 8x
FSB 1,1 GHz
Superdrive

Dual PPC 975 à 2,6 GHz
PCI-Express 16x
FSB 1,3 GHz
Superdrive Extreme (double couche)

Dual PPC 975 à 3 GHz
PCI-Express 16x
FSB 1,5 GHz
Superdrive Extreme (double couche)

The text explicity says there are two bays for Superdrives, and 4 bays for hard drives.

Croquer also post this item announcing an Apple press conference on 18 June:

2004-05-17 - l'Apple du 18 juin

Steve Jobs devrait donner une conférence de presse le 18 juin. Aucune information sur son contenu n'a filtré. Ce seront donc probablement de grosses annonces.

Steve Jobs is to give a press conference on 18 June. No information about the contents is available (literally: has leaked out/filtered through). It'll therefore probably be something big.

Apologies to all francophones for any translation errors I may have made.

[SpiceMustFlow]

A teacher, a college (departement of arts) and me, are waiting (in stanby) to buying a new G5 desktop (2-3?) and Mac portable (2)... Lack of informations on upcoming products is good for saving money and compulsive buyer's! :-) :p

[stockscalper]

Powerbooks are awesome, but from talking to people who own both, well-executed centrino/dothan designs such as IBM's awesome thinkpad t41p are currently significantly faster than the top powerbook at similar battery lives etc etc.

I don't know what Powerbooks you are referring to, but have you used one of the new 1.5's and they blow the doors off anything in the Wintel world. The Thinkpad's you refer to should be named Thinkbrick. Not only are they crude looking, clunky and heavy as hell, but you can fry eggs on them they get so hot. Then there is the matter of the ****ty video screen. Thanks but no thanks, I'll keep my PB.

Oh, wish you could have been in a local java spot the other morning while I laughed my ass off at some clown trying to log on to the wireless internet with his Thinkbrick. He kept asking, "is the internet working today"? I opened my PB and watched the airport scroll and simply ask me if I wanted to log on to the signal it found. I lost count of how many times he rebooted.

[thatwendigo]

1: the only real fact here is that each one of the features listed is the next significant advance in its respective hardware category. when is the last time apple released a machine with so many changes at once? although close, i don't even think the g5 was as different from its predecessors (revamped motherboard, 64bit, speed bump, sata) as this list is from current systems.

Here's a hint, mango... Apple will have to make at least some of these changes to keep up with consumer machines on the PC side. In order to maintain their position as a full-featured solution for computing, the macintosh platform has to adopt standards where possible. Quite aside from that, the overall speed of the system could be massively improved just by changing some of the background materials - PC4200 RAM (the next standard), 8x8 DVD-/+RW (Pioneer DVR-A07, and no, that isn't a typo in the generic descriptor), one-die memory controllers (more IBM's thing than Apple's), Dual-layer DVD-R (Sony, and others coming to market now).

The G5 towers had an all new FSB (167mhz to 800-1000mhz), ASIC, motherboard (four RAM channels per processor, SATA controller, AGP 8x, PCI X), processor (1.42ghz duals to 2.0ghz duals), storage technology (PATA to SATA), RAM (PC2700 to PC3200), graphics card (Radeon 9000 AGP 4x to Radeon 9800 Pro AGP 8x), expandability (PCI to PCI-X), audio (analog to SPDIF in/out), optical drive (SuperDrive optional to standard).

Actually, the jump is pretty comparable if you at all look at the issues. "refine before you flame, please." :rolleyes:

2: apple, like most companies, needs money. they'll be able to keep sales up longer by spreading out new features over a period of months, regardless of whether the technology is present to provide them now at consumer prices. every so often apple goes for a big upgrade, but it's not probable.

Apple is in the business of making people say wow, and their business has grown to depend on the impression that others get from the experience as well as the actual specifications off the hardware. To that end, a release of a massively upgraded workhorse machine could drop all kinds of professional sales in their laps for all kinds of reasons. First of all, Apple is the only choice in stable, pretty *nix-based operating systems that are at all user friendly and capable of easy deployment. With the addiition of things like the xServe render farms and xServe RAID/xSan data farms, they're forging new paths into enterprise and design houses that couldn't do things like these all that easily before. The G5 sold 100,000 units in its firsst month before it ever showed up. Preorder strength was just that good, and so the idea of a mac that's back onto the speed crown like the G3 was back in the day, and the G4 after it... Well, it would sell. That's all there is to it.

in regards to your argument, i don't really want to get into all that. other people have already pointed out false statements, misused terminology, and incorrectly cited sources within your post, and the only thing i could add is that your grasp of ibm's ppc roadmap, both past and future, seems a little off. refine before you flame, please.

Maybe you should read his posts since those, because he's shown me that he made a couple of innocent mistakes and mistatements. Also, he's added meaningfully to the discussion, while you've mostly just trolled him for things others have already said.

i think you must be the hardest person to disagree with on this forum because you just happen to know so much, but the 970fx DOES run at 24.5 watts @ 2.0ghz (http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/7874C7DA8607C0B287256BF3006FBE54/$file/PPC_QRG_2-22-04.pdf). Just providing some sources to good information everyone needs.

Yes, I'm aware that the 2.0ghz single 970FX runs at around 25 watts. The point that I was making is that a single 2.0ghz G5 is not at performance parity with the ever-evolving Pentium-M. The Centrino has far better power management for a laptop, can slew actively, and competes favorably with a Pentium 4 3.0ghz desktop machine, back when they were 300mhz slower and had 1MB less cache.

Also, you're leaving out a few things. The Centrino uses an FSB that is half the speed of the 1.6ghz G5's (less heat), doesn't need PC3200 to keep it fed (less heat), and is less support-fabric dependent. It has less of an heat overhead for those reasons, and the massive cache allows plenty of avoiding access and prefetching data so that it can run cooler. I'd rather see the PowerBook get a chip that will allow it to remain cool, quiet, and functional, not become a leafblower like most PC laptops.

So if IBM can work out the kinks in their 90nm processors, it is very possible to see it in a g5 notebook, with hardly much change in temp or fan noise.

Sorry, but I think that you're missing something. We might see a 970FX laptop, but it will hardly be much faster than the current crop of G4s, without some massive reworking of the architecture. The G5 is a bandwidth monster and without that support, it chokes just as bad as people accuse the G4 of doing.

Also, as someone pointed out, this chip (ie the new 90nm Dothan version, which will be integrated into the successor to centrino this fall, but as a chip is available now) is THE succese story of the market at the moment. SO much so that intel has just dropped plans for any progression of the "main" desktop P4 architecture and is betting on this chip, perhaps in multiple core versions, for it's future desktop and notebook lines.

There is no perhaps to this.

Pentium-M derived systems are aimed at release around the middle of next year, with two cores on a single chip. The current logical process is a mere 23nm when manufactured at 90nm, and so they have plenty of headroom to double the processor on-die while still retaining quite a respectable cache. If you want to read about what's coming in the processor world, take a look at Endian (endian.net) and read their roadmap. The Jonah/Merom/Conroe line is going to be something that Intel has never really done before, and I'm really hoping that IBM and Apple beat them to the punch this summer.

Clock for clock they are a LOT faster than normal P4s, and, at least in my opinion, the g4 architecture is not that much more efficient again to account for the fact that they are down at 1.5ghz and intel are up to 2, with more to come, at low power draws.

The previous generation of Centrinos, at 130nm and 1.7ghz, were competitive on most tasks with a Pentium 4 running at 3.0ghz. That's a nearly 2:1 performance difference between the two, and if it scales linearly, means that the 2.0ghz processors are around 3.7-3.8ghz equivalents.

I don't know what Powerbooks you are referring to, but have you used one of the new 1.5's and they blow the doors off anything in the Wintel world. The Thinkpad's you refer to should be named Thinkbrick. Not only are they crude looking, clunky and heavy as hell, but you can fry eggs on them they get so hot. Then there is the matter of the ****ty video screen. Thanks but no thanks, I'll keep my PB.

Oh, wish you could have been in a local java spot the other morning while I laughed my ass off at some clown trying to log on to the wireless internet with his Thinkbrick. He kept asking, "is the internet working today"? I opened my PB and watched the airport scroll and simply ask me if I wanted to log on to the signal it found. I lost count of how many times he rebooted.

If you're going to attack something, know what you're talking about. Benchmarks place the Pentium-M 1.7ghz laptops of last generation higher than the PowerBooks in overall performance. There's some wiggle room on floating point and vector, but that's not common enough in daily operation to matter.

The place that Apple shines in the portable world is feature set, sleekness, portability, and the combination of these things. While they're rather speedy in their own right, the G4 PowerBooks have been clearly supplanted in the performance arena at this point. I happen to love my iBook for the very reason that you've brought up - it works. However, you can't pin that all on OEMs in the PC world, since they don't control the OS the way that Apple does. A lot of the blame rests squarely on Microsoft and Windows, though they do have to support an incredible amount of hardware.

We're lucky and blessed, but Apple isn't perfect. Don't lose sight of that.

[tgilbey]

I agree with you about ease of use (although thinkpads do have some interesting ibm-specific software stuff), but i have to disagree on speed and size.
There is a large diversity of thinkpads made and while the styling is not that hot, some like the ultra-industrial black chic look! The "thin and light" models that I mentioned are pricey (think powerbook and more) but

a) as thatwendigo said have chips that absolutely own anything apple has to offer at the moment on sheer speed. Also they are right at the start of 90nm at the mo and there is a lot more to come

b) are not that hot....as apple are finding, you cannot put a hot chip in an inch-thickm housing

c) are just as small if not smaller than apples offering (eg IBM have an even smaller x-series which is so tiny it is almost unusable, whilst performance wise would still be above the 12 inch powerbook). They use advanced composites, have superb quality screens and even have a proprietary accelerometer-based HDD protection system that parks the disc head if you drop the machine, before it hits the ground!

There are other centrino based offerings, but they do not have as rich a feature set/nice design. If a power user wanted the most powerful, functional and portable machine on the market, at any price, it is NOT currently an Apple. Just look at what is there before you criticise them so heavily....IBM have about 5 different thinkpad lines at various pricepoints, don't assume that they only have 6 or so configurations like apple;)
It is just a shame the thinkpads are hampered by windows. I hope IBM counters the Pentium M/dothan architecture well because they are currently quite a bit behind. That said, I would rather use an Apple on almost all counts, providing I am not paying for a comparitively slow machine.

[Kagetenshi]

You guys keep forgetting about COOLIGY (http://www.cooligy.com/)!!

You mean like how it's been referenced multiple times in this thread alone? And not infrequently in other threads? That kind of "forgetting about Cooligy"?

~J

[ffakr]

i must commend thatwendigo on his input, i feel very enlightened having read his contributions to this thread and he (at least appears haha) to really know what he's talking about...that being said i would like to hear his take on the whole water/liquid cooling aspect because (i dont think) he has commented on that yet...

Hey! What about that stupid ffakr? I can be as argumentative, I mean informative as anyone!.

;) :p :rolleyes:

BTW.. the Dothan and it's predecessor are nice processors, but if you pull back the curtain, their wattage is actually relatively high when the processor clock isn't slewed.

[wide]

I'm still waiting for the PowerBook G5! I doubt I will ever buy a desktop computer again. I don't see a need for them. They are big, clunky (especially the G5), and it's much cooler to be able to use your computer anywhere with wireless internet or to be able to watch movies up close in bed, on a chair, wherever you want! I don't care if they are more expensive...I don't think you should be buying an Apple if you aren't willing to fork over whatever you can for your computer.

[Sun Baked]

The G5 towers had an all new FSB (167mhz to 800-1000mhz), ASIC, motherboard (four RAM channels per processor, SATA controller, AGP 8x, PCI X), processor (1.42ghz duals to 2.0ghz duals), storage technology (PATA to SATA), RAM (PC2700 to PC3200), graphics card (Radeon 9000 AGP 4x to Radeon 9800 Pro AGP 8x), expandability (PCI to PCI-X), audio (analog to SPDIF in/out), optical drive (SuperDrive optional to standard).Shared Dual Channel DDR, and most likely 4 'switched' banks (pairs) of RAM.

The new architecture made the RAM the weak point at 6.4GB/s, but it sure beats the G4's 1GB/s constipated FSB.

[anjaki]

Hey! What about that stupid ffakr? I can be as argumentative, I mean informative as anyone!.

That's true, but thatwendigo has obviously given up his day job, he's been so busy posting. Really together.

If this rumour is true though, it would explain why there have been no updates for the past year. I mean, why go to all the trouble of updating a stop-gap (because that's what the current G5 looks like compared with what might happen), it could only mean that Apple has been investing its energy in such a project as this, after all it would be a disaster if all those developers had been twiddling their thumbs for the last year, they must have been doing something!

[invaLPsion]

Ahh, dude?

The iBooks were right on except the high end, but they even called the Superdrive. The Powerbooks were also right minus the midrange. They made these calls before anyone else, including ThinkSecret.

Again, I'm not saying this is it, but it appears these guys do have some decent info.

And BTW, was it not you that believed and promoted NeatGekko's predictions? At least these guys have gotten a few things right. Not trying to get on your case or anything, but I find your statement of "Croquer has never gotten anything right" to be misleading, and unfounded.
:confused:

They also said that powermacs would be released in March from 2.2 - 2.6 GHz. :rolleyes:

[Telomar]

They also said that powermacs would be released in March from 2.2 - 2.6 GHz. :rolleyes:So did just about everyone else and in fact I think AppleInsider led the chorus on those rumours.

[neonart]

They also said that powermacs would be released in March from 2.2 - 2.6 GHz. :rolleyes:

And your pal NeatGekko said 3Ghz G5's in January.. no, February... no, March..

All the rumor sites, including the best, make inaccurate calls. In fact, ThinkSecret- one of the most respected- said a special edition 40GB iPod would be available at the Paris show. They were very confident, but that changed.

Who knows how many times it's not that it's not true, but a change in Apple.

Let's see what happens come the WWDC.

[bryanc]

on the liquid cooling issue...it seems to me that something like liquid cooling would only really be necessary for laptops or 1U servers, where the space and/or power consumption for air-cooling is a problem.

However, I carry my Tibook around at -46, so a liquid cooling system might cause me a real problem (esp. if the liquid was water). I know lots of people who've suffered cracked pipes in their houses when it's gotten cold...it'd be a bugger to have cracked pipes in your laptop.

Thanks to all the posters in this thread...I've found it most informative and entertaining.

Cheers

[Gymnut]

the system I saw water cooling working on was a dual power mac G4 with a very hot running upgrade. I will post the url with pics if I can find it.

this is a start anyway: http://www.overclockers.com/topiclist/index31.asp

why doesn't someone say apple will put another usb port on these models or something else very realistic so I can laugh and make fun of you... :p

http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/watercooled_MDD_G4/watercooled_mdd_g4.html

This is a pretty old topic and I did in fact e-mail Dangerden awhile back asking to how far they are along in developing a water cooling system for the G4 and I was notified that the project was put to the wayside. Unless this has changed or another company has started development, I see this not happening. Take note that this water cooling system was done to a single processor. As to the link you provided, mind stating where the pertinent information is?

[thatwendigo]

as thatwendigo said have chips that absolutely own anything apple has to offer at the moment on sheer speed. Also they are right at the start of 90nm at the mo and there is a lot more to come

Actually, I have a feeling that 90nm is going to be the limit of traditional CMOS production lines because of issues of leakage, crosstalk, power bleeding, and other problems. Nobody foresaw just how difficult it was going to be, but even IBM has come right out and said that future chips will have to be more innovative to gain in features because the transistor size is starting to be an issue.

This isn't stopping companies from investigating CMOS065 (65nm process), but it could very well be a long, long way off.

BTW.. the Dothan and it's predecessor are nice processors, but if you pull back the curtain, their wattage is actually relatively high when the processor clock isn't slewed.

I don't doubt that you're right, but I'd be curious to see any numbers you have on the subject. Most of the sites I've found report the Dothan Centrino 2.0ghz as running between 22 and 26 watts at peak, improving both performance and heat usage.

Is there a source you could point me at?

Shared Dual Channel DDR, and most likely 4 'switched' banks (pairs) of RAM.

The new architecture made the RAM the weak point at 6.4GB/s, but it sure beats the G4's 1GB/s constipated FSB.

Ah, sorry. :o

What I'd meant to say was four banks of RAM per processor, locked onto a dual-channel bus. I'm hoping the see the dual-channel kept, but the RAM itself swapped for DDR1 PC4200 or DDR2 PC3200. However, I disagree that the RAM is the weakpoint because, in almost every modern computer, the worst speed is in the I/O systems - optical and hard drives.

That's true, but thatwendigo has obviously given up his day job, he's been so busy posting. Really together.

Hey, leave my current unemployment out of this! I posted like this even when I had a job. ;)

If this rumour is true though, it would explain why there have been no updates for the past year. I mean, why go to all the trouble of updating a stop-gap (because that's what the current G5 looks like compared with what might happen), it could only mean that Apple has been investing its energy in such a project as this, after all it would be a disaster if all those developers had been twiddling their thumbs for the last year, they must have been doing something!

Exactly my thoughts, though a little less detailed.

The PowerPC 970 and 970FX are looking more and more like they were holdovers intended to keep Apple's loyal professional core tided over until the real announcement could be made a year later. As I've noted, Jobs merely said that Apple and IBM would be at 3.0ghz within twelve months, not that the chip used to do the job would be the one that they'd debuted. The PowerPC 975 seems to be a whole different animal from its close cousin, and it could very well be the thing that rockets the mac world into a clear position of high competition and possible speed dominance - though that will always be temporary. Returning pro-grade tools like 24khz audio and the FireGL line of cards (we'd really be doing well if we got Matrox Parhelia, ATI FireGL, and nVidia QaudroFX all as options!) back into the towers.

As I've been saying since last summer, there has never been a better time to be a mac user. The machines have more than ever for their cost, they are more speed competitive than they've been since the early days of the G3, and the OS is getting faster with each revision. Apple is strong and turning a profit, with a warchest that gives them options.

This is far better than 1997.

[frem001]

The new VapoChill case is around $800 (http://www.frozencpu.com/cgi-bin/frozencpu/cas-119.html) and it comes standard on all of L's (http://www.go-l.com/desktops/machl38/cooling/index.htm) Mach desktops - probably the finest windows pc ever made.

Phase-change cooling has come along way since it made its consumer debut a few years ago. Everyone here knows that Apple could take this technology and make it reliable (Although, it is just as reliable as an air-conditioner) and cost-effective. Apple wouldn't be Apple if it didn't take risks by bringing new, somewhat questionable technologies to the market before any other computer manufacturer.

Looks like a brewery... :p

[Flowbee]

I usually don't jump into a thread that's already this long, but nobody's mentioned the most interesting part of this rumor: that the new systems are codenamed "G5 Trinity." If memory serves me, Apple had another product codenamed Trinity... the original G4 CUBE!

Just thought I'd throw that out there. Let the speculation begin.

[appleface]

I usually don't jump into a thread that's already this long, but nobody's mentioned the most interesting part of this rumor: that the new systems are codenamed "G5 Trinity." If memory serves me, Apple had another product codenamed Trinity... the original G4 CUBE!

Just thought I'd throw that out there. Let the speculation begin.

why TRI-nity?

[alexf]

So does anyone have any guesses as to whether these new machines (if the rumors are in fact true) will be just as quiet as the current models (especially the 1.6 GHz, which I believe is the quietest) or will they sound like the last G4 tower incarnations?

[lem0nayde]

http://modernpixel.com/silly_junk/dual_3ghz.jpg

[oingoboingo]

http://modernpixel.com/silly_junk/dual_3ghz.jpg

That instantly brought a smile to my face. We need some more of that kind of stuff to make these forums a little less serious sometimes. It's a rumours site, after all. Good work :)

[thatwendigo]

http://modernpixel.com/silly_junk/dual_3ghz.jpg

That. is. hilarious. :p :D

[Multimedia]

my question is: when is this apple expo? isn't that far too late? i mean, i would need a new machine right now (for my graphic business) and i am stuck with an old dual g4 ...
.a

He's asking about Apple Expo In Paris August 31-September 4, not WWDC. Click Here To Register. (http://www.apple-expo.com/uk/index.nclk?home=gp)

Apple will be at DV Expo East July 13-16 at New York City's Javits Center. Click here to Register for FREE. (http://www.dvexpo.com/east/)

Apple WILL NOT BE at MacWorld Expo Boston July 12-15. Click here to register for FREE with a priority code. (http://www.macworldexpo.com/live/20/)

Apple will probably be at Seybold Seminars San Francisco Moscone West August 16-19. Click here to register for FREE. (http://www.seybold365.com/sf2004/)

Apple will be at San Francisco MacWorld Expo January 10-14, 2005 to show us a G5 PowerBook and the release of 10.4 Tiger. Click here to bookmark this link for registration in the Fall. (http://www.macworldexpo.com/live/20/)

Feels like Paris might get Dual 3 GHz G5's for sale by August 31.

[Metatron]

I would give anything to see someone hack that "Sweet Mother of God G5" image on the front page of the apple website....that would be classic. By the way, that is a crazy kool pic.

[szark]

http://modernpixel.com/silly_junk/dual_3ghz.jpg

That's almost perfect, but a dual G5 system should have two flame jets, not one. :D

Otherwise, great job!

[cjc343]

that looks a LOT better than the Office box that's there right now.... Does M$ pay off Apple to do that? or is Apple marketing being stupid?

[jchand28]

My 667 G4 Powerbook has something similar to what you described. Runs along the top of the Proc heatsinc parallel to the top/rear of machine.

Cooligy is very similar to current heat pipe solutions. This is not "water cooling". It's a bit more complicated than a circulating radiator setup like you'd find in an after market water cooling PC solution.
The G5 uses Heatpipes. If you take the covers off the heat sinks, you'll see that there are heat pipes embedded into the G5 heat sinks.

Here's some info on how heatpipes work...
http://www.cheresources.com/htpipes.shtml

[visor]

I could make up those specs by reading my hand.

[jihad the movie]

The new VapoChill case is around $800 (http://www.frozencpu.com/cgi-bin/frozencpu/cas-119.html) and it comes standard on all of L's (http://www.go-l.com/desktops/machl38/cooling/index.htm) Mach desktops - probably the finest windows pc ever made.



I know this is very off topic but, Frozen CPU is based in my village, in fact, their store is right behind my house.

[Nemesis]

http://modernpixel.com/silly_junk/dual_3ghz.jpg

That's definitely more interesting that anything we've seen on Apple's web site recently, especially 1.25 GHz G4 eMacs! :D

[iLilana]

better have the ati 800xt in it

[Naimfan]

http://modernpixel.com/silly_junk/dual_3ghz.jpg

ROFLMAO!

Perfect!

Bob

[orb]

http://modernpixel.com/silly_junk/dual_3ghz.jpg


I'm naming mine Trogdor!

[neonart]

I'm naming mine Trogdor!

The Burninator!

[Mord]

a minor note heatpipes are not new the dual 1.42GHz mdd g4 had on on it's giant copper heatsink cooling those hot hot hot overclocked 7455 g4's

[makkystyle]

that looks a LOT better than the Office box that's there right now.... Does M$ pay off Apple to do that? or is Apple marketing being stupid?

My guess is that it helps Apple promote the idea that MacOS is compatible with Windows. Fact is, many people still don't realize this.

[rainman::|:|]

Okay, a couple of thoughts.

When people say "water-cooling", they generally mean liquid cooling, active or passive. Water would, of course, be a poor choice, in as it's conductive (well, not distilled, but this isn't a lab setting) and it boils too readily. Sure, it could be played with, but why bother. Vegetable oil, for instance, is non-conductive and boils higher. People make very crude passive cooling systems by submerging a (usually heavily-overclocked) motherboard directly into a pool of oil, the cables just snake in. The oil in the center gets hot, moves to the top, is cooled, and moves down the sides. Pure convection. Anyway point is it's nonconductive, and something along these lines could easily be used. I'm sure whatever Cooligy uses is similar. But in a closed pipe this small, there's really no reason to worry about leakage, in a non-phase-change system, because we don't really need to use pressure. Plus, Cooligy uses a different type of pump, that's more in line with ion propulsion than the typical mechanical pump (and compressor) that is likely to blow in your car or home heat pump.

On to cooling pipes. These aren't as effective as an active liquid cooling system, and i think Apple was just experimenting with the G5s. These are more like the PowerBook version of a liquid-cooling system, assuming they don't want to use a Cooligy system in there. It has it's uses, but there are more effective methods that are just as safe and reliable.

paul

[SyndicateX]

Alright, 1 other quick question, Seeing as we expected Apple to keep the G5 name as if they would have released updates earlier this year everyone would be angry, but seeing as no releases have happened in a year, would it hurt or help apple to start offering its desktops with G6's? All in all it is just a name and a marketing ploy, but the new processor (just looking from the POWER5's simultaneous multi threading) could offer up to a 3x speed increase over the current dual 2.0ghz's.

Just wondering because if they get the iMacs and powerbooks up to G5's soon enough then it would still have alot of consumers wanting the desktops for the G6 instead of just buying a laptop. (Not talking about professional users who need speed, but just average consumers)

[windowsblowsass]

Okay, a couple of thoughts.

When people say "water-cooling", they generally mean liquid cooling, active or passive. Water would, of course, be a poor choice, in as it's conductive (well, not distilled, but this isn't a lab setting) and it boils too readily. Sure, it could be played with, but why bother. Vegetable oil, for instance, is non-conductive and boils higher. People make very crude passive cooling systems by submerging a (usually heavily-overclocked) motherboard directly into a pool of oil, the cables just snake in. The oil in the center gets hot, moves to the top, is cooled, and moves down the sides. Pure convection. Anyway point is it's nonconductive, and something along these lines could easily be used. I'm sure whatever Cooligy uses is similar. But in a closed pipe this small, there's really no reason to worry about leakage, in a non-phase-change system, because we don't really need to use pressure. Plus, Cooligy uses a different type of pump, that's more in line with ion propulsion than the typical mechanical pump (and compressor) that is likely to blow in your car or home heat pump.

On to cooling pipes. These aren't as effective as an active liquid cooling system, and i think Apple was just experimenting with the G5s. These are more like the PowerBook version of a liquid-cooling system, assuming they don't want to use a Cooligy system in there. It has it's uses, but there are more effective methods that are just as safe and reliable.

paul
actually cooligy does use water its conductivness is the key to its silent pump

[Sun Baked]

Basis for this French RUMOR?

Originally posted by M.Isobe:
Those who believes http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=8300945231&m=9080959175&r=596001844631#596001844631 should read http://blog.livedoor.jp/macworx/archives/679743.html.
French rumor makers often read Japanese site and posted the content to rumor sites. I have known MacBodouille posted such articles. Now, http://croquer.free.fr/ does the same thing.

Originally posted by kurtk:
Originally posted by M.Isobe:
Those who believes http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=8300945231&m=9080959175&r=596001844631#596001844631 should read http://blog.livedoor.jp/macworx/archives/679743.html.
French rumor makers often read Japanese site and posted the content to rumor sites. I have known MacBodouille posted such articles. Now, http://croquer.free.fr/ does the same thing.

I could not read the rest from the Japanese site. Was he just guessing or did he claim to have some inside information?

Originally posted by M.Isobe:
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=8300945231&m=9080959175&r=112003054631#112003054631,

_I could not read the rest from the Japanese site. Was he just guessing or did he claim to have some inside information?_

The blog was written on May 19, 2004 (JST) and he wrote he was just guessing. Apparently, French person could not read Japanese too.Look's like it may have just been speculation that was lifted off one site and posted as gospel on another. :rolleyes:

From ARS (http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=8300945231&m=9080959175&r=828001054631#828001054631)

Course there is some stuff further on down the page on the 975, maybe. ;)

[jwhitnah]

Since this is an update, not a new product, Apple will only announce it when it's ready to ship immediately. Apple ALWAYS does this for updates of existing products.

[insert sarcastic tone here] Oh, yeah like the PowerMac G4 500 MHz. Right on time 6 months or so late!

[wdlove]

http://modernpixel.com/silly_junk/dual_3ghz.jpg

Great job lem0nayde, that is awesome. Now for the reality and to have on on my desk. It brought a smile to my face also, thanks! :)

[Rod Rod]

General Motors will start selling the G6 this Fall. http://www.pontiac.com/g6

Buy it and put one of your white Apple logo stickers on it. :)


Alright, 1 other quick question, Seeing as we expected Apple to keep the G5 name as if they would have released updates earlier this year everyone would be angry, but seeing as no releases have happened in a year, would it hurt or help apple to start offering its desktops with G6's? All in all it is just a name and a marketing ploy, but the new processor (just looking from the POWER5's simultaneous multi threading) could offer up to a 3x speed increase over the current dual 2.0ghz's.

Just wondering because if they get the iMacs and powerbooks up to G5's soon enough then it would still have alot of consumers wanting the desktops for the G6 instead of just buying a laptop. (Not talking about professional users who need speed, but just average consumers)

[mangoduck]

Here's a hint, mango... Apple will have to make at least some of these changes to keep up with consumer machines on the PC side. In order to maintain their position as a full-featured solution for computing, the macintosh platform has to adopt standards where possible.

here's a hint, too. what exactly did i say before? did i contradict anything you said just here? i said that it's not likely that apple will upgrade so many aspects at once. i'm not saying they won't, i'm not saying they can't, i'm not saying it's impossible, i'm not putting hard conclusive fact up against the speculation. i said it's not probable, as shown by apple's own history.

The G5 towers had an all new FSB (167mhz to 800-1000mhz), ASIC, motherboard (four RAM channels per processor, SATA controller, AGP 8x, PCI X), processor (1.42ghz duals to 2.0ghz duals), storage technology (PATA to SATA), RAM (PC2700 to PC3200), graphics card (Radeon 9000 AGP 4x to Radeon 9800 Pro AGP 8x), expandability (PCI to PCI-X), audio (analog to SPDIF in/out), optical drive (SuperDrive optional to standard).

Actually, the jump is pretty comparable if you at all look at the issues. "refine before you flame, please." :rolleyes:

sata only counts once, ram speed bump to 3200 is no huge miracle, video card jump was more logical than industry-leading, and a standard superdrive is nice but certainly not huge considering it was available through the store before, albeit at a price.

conversely, the alleged specs for the new machine are not available in any other mac to date, nor even largely available in anything less than workstation class machines. you can't just hop over to dell or gateway and get a computer with pci express, or a 1.5ghz bus, or two dual layer capable dvd writer combos, or integrated high definition audio, or a fire gl series card. that last one seems especially big to me, moreso than the move from 9000 to 9800, since anything higher than the radeon has never been available for the mac. this represents more than a casual collaboration with ati.

rolleyes yourself.

however, did i not say it was close? actually this brings up another point.

3: would apple be likely (likely, mind you) to make such a large jump immediately after an equally uncommonly large one? don't misunderstand me, it would be nice if they did, but step back a minute.

Apple is in the business of making people say wow, [etc etc]

again, did i say factually that this rumor would not come to pass? i'm not arguing with you. we're on the same side. we both "fight" for apple, as it were. don't jump me for bringing a little realism into the conversation.

Maybe you should read his posts since those, because he's shown me that he made a couple of innocent mistakes and mistatements. Also, he's added meaningfully to the discussion, while you've mostly just trolled him for things others have already said.

i have read what he posted. did you notice that he admitted mistakes not before my two other posts? hence i have not replied to him since.

initially i replied to him in detail because his post was not only the first under mine, but the first that attempted to completely tromp what i said. it appeared to me that he was overreacting.

also, you're correcting me for correcting him, right after you pointed out that he said he was partly wrong? whose "side" do you think you're on? and all this after you spend several paragraphs yourself trying to tell my how i'm wrong?

everyone needs to settle the fsck (-y) down. we're talking about a rumor, here. is it beyond people to keep things in perspective? there's no reason why a thread like this should have approaching 200 replies. there's simply not much to discuss, and anything more is just arguing for the sake of argument. wanking, if you will, and don't kid yourselves.

[Multimedia]

It *may* be possible. PPC 975 is on a different production line than the 970FX, and may not be suffering with the same problems. IBM was very good about their original PPC 970 production quotas.

I agree with another poster that the bottom-end unit specs are not quite right. I would think that the bottom-end unit would be either a Dual 2Ghz or 2.2Ghz PPC 970FX. (Shipping within weeks)

Then shipping in the fall would be the mid-range unit could be the 2.5Ghz or 2.6Ghz and the 3.0Ghz top-of-the-line with the PCI-X.
Yes. I Read Somewhere 3 GHz 975 Yields Are Not Having The Same Problems As Slower 970 Yields. This is why the dual 3 GHz G5 Systems may still come in on time. In my mind this means September-October as that was the real time the first G5's started arriving last Fall.

[thatwendigo]

here's a hint, too. what exactly did i say before? did i contradict anything you said just here? i said that it's not likely that apple will upgrade so many aspects at once. i'm not saying they won't, i'm not saying they can't, i'm not saying it's impossible, i'm not putting hard conclusive fact up against the speculation. i said it's not probable, as shown by apple's own history.

And I've shown that, at least least in the last revision, Apple took a serious jump from their previous line and moved into parity or surpassing the PC line once more. This goes for everything in the system especially now that some refurb customers are already getting 8x SuperDrives in their machines.

Whether or not your intention was to introduce some kind of "realism" to the discussion, your tone is explicitly negative and confrontational. I responded with a post that cut the floor out from under your objections. End of story.

sata only counts once, ram speed bump to 3200 is no huge miracle, video card jump was more logical than industry-leading, and a standard superdrive is nice but certainly not huge considering it was available through the store before, albeit at a price.

Your quibbling over SATA aside, I disagree with nearly everything you had to say. Apple moves up a RAM speed in their towers and it's "not a big deal" (after people have complained about this at length in the past that you like to bring up). The SuperDrive is made standard without negatively effecting the the price and that's not a big deal, either. Moving to an industry standard on graphics is a minor point, but it's measurable improvement.

Interesting that you have nothing to say about the rest of it. Apple revamped the towers from the ground up, and you sit there and belittle it. That's fine, but don't expect me to sit here and listen to you call it "reason."

conversely, the alleged specs for the new machine are not available in any other mac to date, nor even largely available in anything less than workstation class machines.

As I've already stated, Apple has lead the market or been an early adopter in more than once, and I see no reason to believe that they can't do it again. You're not paying attention to something that really matters - Apple has a positive cash balance they could use to cut deals. You're also sadly behind if you think that these technologies aren't about to become standard in other machines, even if it's held at the high end. It's good luck for us that the PowerMac has always been a high-end computer, huh?

you can't just hop over to dell or gateway and get a computer with pci express, or a 1.5ghz bus, or two dual layer capable dvd writer combos, or integrated high definition audio, or a fire gl series card.

1.0ghz Dual-Channel (effective 2.0ghz) HyperTransport on Athlon 64 chipset:
http://www20.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20040505/
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/chipsets/display/20031113152821.html
http://www.thecrucible.ca/reviews/k8vdeluxe/

SiS will also offer two new I/O controllers in 2004. The new SiS965 will offer 8 USB 2.0 ports, PCI and 2 PCI Express x1 connectors, 2-channel integrated Parallel ATA-33/66/100/133 controller and 4 Serial ATA-150 connectors with RAID support. Among standard features we should mention 10/100/1000Mb/s Ethernet, Home PNA 2.0, 6-channel audio-solution, MC’97 Modem and AC’97 Audio. In addition, it will boast with FireWire (IEEE1394) support. SiS966 adds yet another pair of PCI Express x1 ports as well as Intel’s Azalia audio.

Dual-Layer DVDs on sale, media released in Japan and coming to US:
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,116228,00.asp
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.html?i=2045
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_BrowseCatalog-Start;sid=joOOvXAJnSOOvDC41umEtj8GioublsMqVsE=?CategoryName=cpu

Sony PC with Dual-Layer DVD-RW - Also to include option of up to 1.6TB of HD space, passive cooling, PCI-Express graphics, and 4 independent SATA ports. (http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start;sid=dL0RzWNWMBwRhSPnLfsbxixG8bgJVDizIag=?CategoryName=cpu_raseriesdesktops&ProductSKU=VGCR&Dept=cpu)

FSBs for Dual Processors over 1.0ghz in production machines, with pro graphics cards:
Alienware "Roswell" Opteron on HT with nVidia Quadro FX graphics, starting at $2,697 (Single processor) and ranging to $4,976 (Dual) (http://www.alienware.com/system_pages/roswell_AMD.aspx)
Alienware "Ozma" Opteron on HT with M-Audio Delta system, ATI FireGL graphics, starting at $2,271 (Single) to $4,265 (Double) (http://www.alienware.com/system_pages/ozma_AMD.aspx)
IBM Intellistation - Opteron and HT, nVidia QuadroFX (http://www.pc.ibm.com/us/intellistation/apro/index.html)

Dual Processor 1.0ghz+ FSB workstation with high-def audio:
Alienware "Ozma" Opteron on HT with M-Audio Delta system, ATI FireGL graphics, starting at $2,271 (Single) to $4,265 (Double) (http://www.alienware.com/system_pages/ozma_AMD.aspx)

rolleyes yourself.

Care to retract that?

3: would apple be likely (likely, mind you) to make such a large jump immediately after an equally uncommonly large one? don't misunderstand me, it would be nice if they did, but step back a minute.

They have to. There is little choice at this point, unless they're planning on trying to hold on at the current level and reverse all progress to this point. I think that Jobs is arrogant and makes mistakes sometimes, but the man isn't stupid and he has to realize what going back on that announcement would mean in terms of ship-jumpers.

initially i replied to him in detail because his post was not only the first under mine, but the first that attempted to completely tromp what i said. it appeared to me that he was overreacting.

Given your response to me, I sympathize with him.

also, you're correcting me for correcting him, right after you pointed out that he said he was partly wrong? whose "side" do you think you're on? and all this after you spend several paragraphs yourself trying to tell my how i'm wrong?

I'm on the side of reason, and that's it. He's not attacked me, not attacked anyone else unreasonably, and admits with he's wrong. It's that simple.

there's no reason why a thread like this should have approaching 200 replies. there's simply not much to discuss, and anything more is just arguing for the sake of argument.

There's apparently plenty to discuss, because we're still going. In fact, I just dropped quite a lot of material on you that you're apparently ignorant of. Imagine that.

wanking, if you will, and don't kid yourselves.

If you don't want to talk about it, then don't, but leave those of us who do want to alone. To paraphrase the late, great Thomas Jefferson, "It bothers me not what another man believes. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

[rog]

Well let's hope they make the prices $1499, $1999, and $2499 at the absolute max. Even then they'd be very pricey and not likely to spur sales. So of course that means Apple will prices them drastically more expensive. dual 3 GHZ. Sorry, but a 50% increase in a year is still just ho-hum, and does not justify a price increase, especially since the G5 was not the PC killer it was supposed to be. Even at 3 GHz, it will lag PCs on quite a few benchmarks. Looks like it's out of the frying pan, into the fire with the jump from Motorola to IBM.

[Sun Baked]

here's a hint, too. what exactly did i say before? did i contradict anything you said just here? i said that it's not likely that apple will upgrade so many aspects at once. i'm not saying they won't, i'm not saying they can't, i'm not saying it's impossible, i'm not putting hard conclusive fact up against the speculation. i said it's not probable, as shown by apple's own history.Apple typically likes to keep a chipset around 12-18 months to get some use out of the R&D (heck the original KeyLargo was introduced in 1999 and is still being sold), and the features of this machine are locked into the chipset (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G5/PowerMacG5/2Architecture/chapter_3_section_2.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30000803/TPXREF102)...

Memory Controller -- AGP Port, DDR Memory, HT port, 2 CPU eBus connectors.

HT Tunnel -- most likely AMD sourced, provide PCI/PCI-X

KeyLargo2 -- HT port to connect through tunnel to Memory controller, all the I/O -- USB, FW, SATA, ATA, Audio, etc.

---

If Apple changes stuff on a chip (the 3 above) it'll be a leap and be around for awhile. Apple didn't change the G4s for so long, because drastic changes would kill OS 9 bootability, which DDR and USB2 finally did.

So if Apple uses a new HT Tunnel from AMD, it'll be PCI-Express and most likely pre-announced like most AMD stuff. No need for them to keep it secret for Apple's sake.

A new memory controller would most likely add DDR2, PCI-Express at the same time (and current HT upgrades, newest buses if needed) -- since it'll be around for awhile.

But don't expect KeyLargo to change quick, extended yes though PCI.everyone needs to settle the fsck (-y) down. we're talking about a rumor, here. is it beyond people to keep things in perspective? there's no reason why a thread like this should have approaching 200 replies. there's simply not much to discuss, and anything more is just arguing for the sake of argument. wanking, if you will, and don't kid yourselves.Actually it's probably NOT a rumor, but speculation.

If you look at the way Apple does R&D, you might be close with some of the speculation. But this may NOT be too realistic if they feel Apple will add PCI-Express video, and not change the rest of the memory controller (by incorporating DDR2).

[MrSugar]

Well let's hope they make the prices $1499, $1999, and $2499 at the absolute max. Even then they'd be very pricey and not likely to spur sales. So of course that means Apple will prices them drastically more expensive. dual 3 GHZ. Sorry, but a 50% increase in a year is still just ho-hum, and does not justify a price increase, especially since the G5 was not the PC killer it was supposed to be. Even at 3 GHz, it will lag PCs on quite a few benchmarks. Looks like it's out of the frying pan, into the fire with the jump from Motorola to IBM.

are you being serious? Please tell me this post was sarcasm. If IBM and Apple do hit 3ghz, it will be one of the most amazing things that has happened to Apple.

[dopefiend]

If IBM and Apple do hit 3ghz, it will be one of the most amazing things that has happened to Apple.

Nah, not really.

You know it will only be a few months after at the most that the PC world would catch up.

[nuckinfutz]

Well let's hope they make the prices $1499, $1999, and $2499 at the absolute max. Even then they'd be very pricey and not likely to spur sales. So of course that means Apple will prices them drastically more expensive. dual 3 GHZ. Sorry, but a 50% increase in a year is still just ho-hum, and does not justify a price increase, especially since the G5 was not the PC killer it was supposed to be. Even at 3 GHz, it will lag PCs on quite a few benchmarks. Looks like it's out of the frying pan, into the fire with the jump from Motorola to IBM.

You're making no sense here. $2499 max??? Why? I can easily outdo 2500 pricing a P4 Extreme system. Or on a dual Opteron or Xeon system. Pricey is a relative term. What's pricey to a consumer is "cheap" to some Professionals. An audio engineer won't bat an eye at paying $3500 for a Mic preamp.

Folks we need to be looking in terms of market. The reality is that consumers now regard a $1499 system as expensive while Pros are looking to gain the most productivity at prices they can justify.

A 50% increase in speed is HUGE when considering the pipeline length of the processor hasn't changed. In fact rumor has it that the 3ghz model could be based on POWER5 tech which would be more efficient on a clock for clock basis.

Rog no one called the G5 a PC Killer but you.

In fact I'd prefer that Apple create a system well appointed for $3499. It should be loaded with memory and have a top flight GPU. It should have two hard drives for RAID potential.

Peope that need Dual 3Ghz computers are willing to pay for them because odds are they own companies and this is a business purchase.

[thatwendigo]

Well let's hope they make the prices $1499, $1999, and $2499 at the absolute max. Even then they'd be very pricey and not likely to spur sales. So of course that means Apple will prices them drastically more expensive. dual 3 GHZ. Sorry, but a 50% increase in a year is still just ho-hum, and does not justify a price increase, especially since the G5 was not the PC killer it was supposed to be. Even at 3 GHz, it will lag PCs on quite a few benchmarks. Looks like it's out of the frying pan, into the fire with the jump from Motorola to IBM.

Riiiiight.

Alienware Roswell 4500 Extreme
XP Professional
Dual AMD Opteron 250 2.4ghz
Matrox RT.X100 Xtreme Video Processing
Enermax 550W PSU
nVidia QuadroFX 3000 256MB
1GB PC3200 ECC (2x512MB)
2x250GB SATA RAID 0
Plextor PX-708A 8x DVD+/-RW
SoundBlaster Audigy 2 ZS Platinum

Cost: $7,042

Who's expensive? Granted, about $3,000 of that is video card and video equipment, but still... Ouch. A 3.0ghz 975 will likely smoke the 2.4ghz Opteron, considering that 2.0ghz 970 can hang with it on some things, especially since all number point to a roughly 40% clock-to-clock performance increase between the Power4 and Power5.

Looks like it's time for baseless commentary. :rolleyes:

Nah, not really.

You know it will only be a few months after at the most that the PC world would catch up.

Because, you know, Intel's come so far in the last year... I mean, Apple must be smarting after their competition introduced a whole new line of process... No, wait. I guess it was when they jumped 50% of their clo... No... It must have been when they dropped their flagship line after only bumping it 200mhz since the G5 was debuted.

Yep. Those crafty PC chipmakers, showing Apple up hardcore, when all they have is a massive industry that will cooperate easily on parts. I shed so many tears for them... :D

[mangoduck]

And I've shown that, at least least in the last revision, Apple took a serious jump from their previous line and moved into parity or surpassing the PC line once more. This goes for everything in the system [...]

i have to seriously question whether you're reading or blindly replying. i myself said already what you just said. apple just made a big jump. that is why another big jump isn't likely in the very next revision.

Whether or not your intention was to introduce some kind of "realism" to the discussion, your tone is explicitly negative and confrontational. I responded with a post that cut the floor out from under your objections. End of story.

if my tone is confrontational, it is because yours is. you may deny it, but excerpts such as the above embody it fairly well. as to whether you "cut the floor" out from under me, and whether the "story" is over, that is your opinion alone.

As I've already stated, Apple has lead the market or been an early adopter in more than once, and I see no reason to believe that they can't do it again. You're not paying attention to something that really matters - Apple has a positive cash balance they could use to cut deals. You're also sadly behind if you think that these technologies aren't about to become standard in other machines, even if it's held at the high end.

that's what? about to become standard? not are standard, but about to become. meaning not here yet.

what deals are those? just because there's surplus cash doesn't mean they're ready to spend it. the only reason one has cash is because one hasn't spent it already, and it says nothing of one's likeliness to use it. i don't think money is burning a hole in jobs' pocket.

i too believe that they can and will impress again. but it is probable now? does it make any sense, from a buisnessman's perspective? above all, long term sales are the key to company survival and profit. wow factor is valuable as well, but why not wow them twice or even three times? why waste all your ammo when there's such a long road ahead (in terms of the it market) before the next "big thing", whatever that may be? i say again that it's great if this is the dawn of a new era for product revisions. i agree with you here. hooray, huzzah, and all kinds of merry-making. just don't count on it. don't get yourself worked up about what may be, never considering the alternative, only to be shattered and bitter when less than all of it happens. i've seen it time and time again, people in a tizzy because apple didn't deliver the fancy goods people wanted, and who do they blame? apple. all because they took less-then-credible rumors at face value.



do you realize that none of those urls address what you were trying to address? you went to manufacturers and third party resellers and compiled a list of parts and bto systems, many of them quite costly, and for nought.

what i said was, you can't hop over to dell or gateway and buy a machine with many of these rumored g5 specs, of which i listed some. you seem to pick your fights strangely, because i don't see what was so offensive about this statement.

Your quibbling over SATA aside, I disagree with nearly everything you had to say. Apple moves up a RAM speed in their towers and it's "not a big deal" (after people have complained about this at length in the past that you like to bring up [b][what now? you lost me here. who are you talking about?]). The SuperDrive is made standard without negatively effecting the the price and that's not a big deal, either. Moving to an industry standard on graphics is a minor point, but it's measurable improvement.

Interesting that you have nothing to say about the rest of it. Apple revamped the towers from the ground up, and you sit there and belittle it. That's fine, but don't expect me to sit here and listen to you call it "reason."

is a small ram speed bump a big deal in light of the jump from standard sdram to ddr in the g4s, the previous major ram-related revision? is incorporating the 9800, a card available for purchase elsewhere, a big deal compared to incorporating a workstation-class 16x graphics chipset that has never been available for the mac to date? what about doubling the hard drive and optical drive bays to four and two, respectively? is revamping the tower's form factor again to make room for the extra components not impressive?

i'm not belittling the current g5s. i'm comparing them to the rumored specs to illustrate how close they are in terms of significance. this is all i said to start with, and if you've read this and understood it, how can you not concede that such a new machine would be at least in the same ballpark as the g5's introduction? i find it interesting that you've completely avoided this point. you choose to argue semantics instead of addressing the source, being my first post in this thread.

I think that Jobs is arrogant and makes mistakes sometimes, but the man isn't stupid and he has to realize what going back on that announcement would mean in terms of ship-jumpers.

what announcement? last i checked, this was a rumor from a french mac site. don't tell me you've been arguing all this time with the wrong idea because you misread something.

I just dropped quite a lot of material on you that you're apparently ignorant of. Imagine that.

what material? the urls that have little relevance?

If you don't want to talk about it, then don't, but leave those of us who do want to alone. To paraphrase the late, great Thomas Jefferson, "It bothers me not what another man believes. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

oh, but it does pick your pocket so to speak, at the very least. it bothers you enough that you're willing to sit and reply repeatedly, making quotes and fetching links. how long did it take to assemble that list? no matter that it didn't relate to the discussion -- all you've proven is that various products are available for purchase somewhere, not that one "whole widget" type manufacturer offers all of them standard -- you've got to include the text anyway, because we all know the more text you paste and the more quotes you quote the more awe-inspiring your case will appear. and links! i am mesmerized by your liney clickable blue characters and i submit.

also, i noticed that you took great care to list every single change that you could think of between the g4 and g5 systems, even going so far as to list sata controllers separate from sata drives. please. they go together. you don't have one without the other, now do you. in my earlier posts i mentioned the "revamped motherboard" as i put it, which covers all these bases; bus speed hand in hand with memory speed, expansion, and so on.

but you don't want to sacrifice any detail, no matter how small, that could make your argument look better. whatever it is that you're arguing about at this point, because it certainly doesn't involve computers. this fight has become personal for you. it's not about apple, it's not about the rumor at the top of the thread, it's about making the other guy admit defeat and give up. you don't care why you're debating, it just feels good to debate. no, for you there's no giving up, no limit to how long you'll go or what you'll say, no stop to blatantly provoking your opponent, but what you fail to realize is that for you there's no real point anymore.

my very first post on ths topic was a devil's advocate's view. pessimistic? absolutely! i feel that every argument should have all parties brought to the stand and represented equally, ragardless of plausability. my point was quite plausible indeed, i thought, because it reflects conservative and resourceful buisness practice. throughout my tenure here, the conservative view in regards to rumors has always been one that is under-represented due to the boisterous nature of the crowd.

so it seems that the roles have reversed: by continuing to debate, you support the statement from the french mac site as near-factual at the least. by continuing, you're saying that you'd rather support unverified speculations -- they're on page two for a reason, folks -- instead of using repeated history as a reference point. i believe that makes you the devil's advocate. was that your intention to start with?

[MrSugar]

Nah, not really.

You know it will only be a few months after at the most that the PC world would catch up.

It would still be a huge step. A 50% increase in clock in one years time, Apple would truly have taken a dominent role in the Top End market if this happened. Right now they have a good computer setup that competes, but a 3ghz G5 would blow them back on top, not to mention show that this generation of chips really does have legs.

I honestly don't know if I think it will happen or not, but it would not be something to mock.

[Mav451]

...
Because, you know, Intel's come so far in the last year... I mean, Apple must be smarting after their competition introduced a whole new line of process... No, wait. I guess it was when they jumped 50% of their clo... No... It must have been when they dropped their flagship line after only bumping it 200mhz since the G5 was debuted.


I wouldn't be so quick to denounce the PC industry based on Intel's current developments alone. While Intel had success with its Northwood the past 2 years, I believe we are in that 2-year period that AMD will enjoy its overall performance crown--this is the beauty of having two big CPU manufacturers for the PC.

Also, it should be interesting to note that AMD had the SINGLE cpu config of the Opteron 250 (2.4ghz) in the FX-53 since March! It is INTERESTING b/c it took nearly 3 months after the FX-53 to release the Opteron 2-way/4-way counterparts. This is the reason I doubt the 3.0Ghz G5's are even close to coming out. The Opteron and G5 cpus have been close in clockspeed/performance--and the shared IBM support should certainly also play a part in predicting where this goes. Certainly 2.2, 2.4 are practically guaranteed. This is why I find it funny that you mention a 3.0G5 will smoke a 2.4--of COURSE it will! Heck, a 3.0 Opteron (256?) would smoke a 2.4 Opteron (250) too...kind of a moot point -_-

*This is why i say it, time and time again, that IF

Apple sticks by Steve jobs claimed, that 3ghz will be here by June--and I have still yet to see a quote/.mov clip of this statement, (can someone find/make a clip of this statement?)

THEN

Apple will truly have the "world's fastest, most powerful personal computer".

[MrSugar]

I wouldn't be so quick to denounce the PC industry based on Intel's current developments alone. While Intel had success with its Northwood the past 2 years, I believe we are in that 2-year period that AMD will enjoy its overall performance crown--this is the beauty of having two big CPU manufacturers for the PC.

Also, it should be interesting to note that AMD had the SINGLE cpu config of the Opteron 250 (2.4ghz) in the FX-53 since March! It is INTERESTING b/c it took nearly 3 months after the FX-53 to release the Opteron 2-way/4-way counterparts. This is the reason I doubt the 3.0Ghz G5's are even close to coming out. The Opteron and G5 cpus have been close in clockspeed/performance--and the shared IBM support should certainly also play a part in predicting where this goes. Certainly 2.2, 2.4 are practically guaranteed. This is why I find it funny that you mention a 3.0G5 will smoke a 2.4--of COURSE it will! Heck, a 3.0 Opteron (256?) would smoke a 2.4 Opteron (250) too...kind of a moot point -_-

*This is why i say it, time and time again, that IF

Apple sticks by Steve jobs claimed, that 3ghz will be here by June--and I have still yet to see a quote/.mov clip of this statement, (can someone find/make a clip of this statement?)

THEN

Apple will truly have the "world's fastest, most powerful personal computer".

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc03/

move to 1:52 minutes in, he has a whole slide dedicated for it. Right before he shows the G5 video.

[gerardrj]

WATER COOLED CPU TECHNOLOGY IS REAL AND HAS EXISTED FOR AT LEAST 2 YEARS NOW. IT DOES NOT GET ANYTHING WET.

Sorry, you're a little off. Water cooling technology for CPUs has existed for at least 3 decades. IBM used it in their mainframes. They used a liquid coolant (water and antifreeze) that was circulated out to a chiller (centrifugal I think). They actually had problems with the water jacket getting so cold that water condensed out of the atmosphere and dripped on to components so they had to turn down the cooling system.

Water cooling is not new, it was not invented by modders. In fact using water cooling on the new Powermac systems would be like the technology coming home again.

[Mav451]

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc03/

move to 1:52 minutes in, he has a whole slide dedicated for it. Right before he shows the G5 video.

Haha, ok, that was fast. Thanks.

[bradz_id]

Unfortunately, Apple need to release fool-proof products and water cooling is far from fool proof.

There IS a practical solution though:

There is room to move in the G5 so increase the length of the CPU heatsink and make it 120mm x 120mm and seal 120mm fans at each side of it.

AND DEFINATELY make the heatsink out of copper and just whack the same pretty face on top of it.

GUARANTEE all heat problems will go away.

[Black Badger]

Apple are now letting ADC premier & select members to purchase up to 5 1.6 G5s through the ADC Hardware Discount Program without affecting their anual discount limits.

Looks like they are trying to dump a load of the 1.6s

[rdowns]

*This is why i say it, time and time again, that IF

Apple sticks by Steve jobs claimed, that 3ghz will be here by June--and I have still yet to see a quote/.mov clip of this statement, (can someone find/make a clip of this statement?)

THEN

Apple will truly have the "world's fastest, most powerful personal computer".

Here's the clip from his keynote.

edit: Oops, won't let me upload a .mov file.

[Frobozz]

Well let's hope they make the prices $1499, $1999, and $2499 at the absolute max. Even then they'd be very pricey and not likely to spur sales. So of course that means Apple will prices them drastically more expensive. dual 3 GHZ. Sorry, but a 50% increase in a year is still just ho-hum, and does not justify a price increase, especially since the G5 was not the PC killer it was supposed to be. Even at 3 GHz, it will lag PCs on quite a few benchmarks. Looks like it's out of the frying pan, into the fire with the jump from Motorola to IBM.

where to start... I hope you aren't trying to imply a dual 3.0 GHz 975 would lag any PC in benchmarks. LOL. I know none of us know how fast they will be until we see the benchmarks, but let's assume it's roughly linear over the course of one year ago. A 50% speed increase in a year would be rougly 45% faster than Intel has managed in a year (3.2 --> 3.4), and 33% faster than AMD has managed (2.0 --> 2.4).

I don't think anyone here suggests that Apple will increase the cost of the PowerMac. In fact, at the last earnings call, Apple suggested they would lower the price point if they were not able to bring volume up by (I believe) 10%.

Maybe I'm the exception, but $2799 - $2999 for the dual 3.0 GHz Mac (with all it comes with) would be a fair price. It's not a bargain... but pro machines aren't really meant to compete heavily on price. It's not the major sale point. Power is, and I believe they will be the fastest desktops without contention.

[Trekkie]

Not gonna happen bro, this is more of a PC sector type thing.

get a welding torch out and cut open some of the heat sinks on IBM systems. They are full of water at 50% air PSI to better transfer the heat along the heat sink.

[Ysean]

Yes, Sorrry, I ment PCI Express. I am actually very well technically informed, sorry that I mis re-called a name. Maybe you should understand this site is to inform people, and not to insult them about their information. That being said, thanks for the correction...

I just chose your reply to comment on out of others that were calling it PCI-Extreme as well. I wasn't trying to attack you. But, the misconception that PCI-Express is JUST a new video 'connector' interface was still way off base. Again, PCI-Express is designed as a replacement for traditional PCI and PCI-X. It just has the bandwidth needed to support modern video cards as well and is why video cards are being manufactured targetted to the interface.

[benpatient]

no way is this accurate.

These are just some made-up numbers...Guess you can't fault dreamers from dreaming, though...

[thatwendigo]

mangoduck:

I am forgoing my traditional method of reply, since it seems that you want to try to draw me into a flamewar by picking and choosing what of my reply you'd like to respond to. You brought the conflict into this, and I'm ending it now.

My point is that you came in here and started attacking people for supposedly having false beliefs about what Apple would do for the update of the G5, which we're all hoping will be at WWDC in a matter of weeks. What you don't seem to grasp is that I am merely engaging in a practice known as speculation and research, where I show off what might be there and then talk about what it could mean if it is. At this point, I caution everyone and anyone who reads my posts not to pin their hopes on any of this happens - because it is a substantial jump, one similar to the introduction of the G5 - but I also point out a significant fact. The PowerPC 970 does not look like a chip that was intended to be Apple's long-term strategy, but more like a holdover, a stopgap to allow people to stay on the platform while the ream deal was prepared.

At this point, we can all hem and haw over what might or might not be happening in Cupertino, but nobody knows for certain. However, we do know where the PC industry is going, especially the ones that tend to lead the way in new technology (which Dell and Gateway do not, as they're low-to-middle end computing), and it includes an awful lot of my wish list for the next PowerMacs. The pace of technology is increasing, and Apple is going to need to follow along or they'll be left behind, no matter who their chip partner is. They have around $5 billion in the bank that could be used to cement ties to manufacturers, create contracts to deliver things like top-end GPUs on parity with the PC world, though we don't know if they will.

I have addressed every one of your points, other people have seen me address them, and I will do so again right here, briefly, because it appears that you missed out somewhere in my post:

You cannot buy machines at Dell or Gateway that do these things because Dell and Gateway are not bleeding-edge companies and never have been. They're primarily low-market, consumer, and business suppliers, not creative studio machines, and Dell is notoriously hostile to AMD (who is the source of over half of what I pointed out). If you want FSBs over 1.5ghz, you have to go to AMD and possibly Apple/IBM. If you want dual-processor systems that are of the more efficient RISC design, you have to go AMD or Apple/IBM. The point was not "offensive," except in your attempt to apply a market that doesn't fit the model at all.
You continuously sidestep my main points and commit the same kind of semantic quibbling that you accuse me of. The important parts of the G5 revision are technological, not specific parts. To repeatedly point out the Radeon 9800 as sub-par is like pointing at a Seagate HD rather than the fact that Apple now has SATA cotrollers, since the whole thrust of that was the adoption of AGP 8x, not the card that is in the slot. Also, if you're going to be knocking on Apple for the 16x graphics chipset, you need to attack PC OEMs, since nobody has PCI-Express yet, and there has never been a card for it in any computer. Your point cuts both ways, and therefore has no bearing on the dicussion.
Changing form factor would be impressive, and I never denied it. You make allegations over things that I've never said, and in fact, which I wouldn't say.
The URLs that I put up are all illustrative of the fact that these technologies you decry are all in machines that are currently for sale, or coming to the market in the next month. Every single one shows a product that is current, available, and several of them show workstations that incorporate many of the things that you're saying Apple won't do with the G5 revisions. You may refuse to accept that my points are not only relevant, but basically damning to your argument that these things won't be done in the near future and that nobody offers machines with the technology, but that does not make it any less so in the long run. The AMD FSB is at 1.6ghz right now and moving to 2.0ghz, Sony is selling DVD-RW dual-layer drives and their computers are beings built with them, high-level audio is about to be built into Intel Chipsets (Azalia) and can be had on other system from the get-go (not BTO), and Alienware sells a $4000-$5000 computer with pro-graphics, pro-audio, dual Opterons, and most of what you said Apple wouldn't do.

In short, I read your post, understood it perfectly, and the question is now where you're getting these things that you're accusing me of. I reply at length because detail and precision are important. Yes, mistakes creep in and I admit when I make them, but you have yet to do anything other than attack and attempt to provoke. When you give short shrift to the changes by summarizing them, I often find it quite worthwhile to point out just how expansive and sweeping such things can be, because people often don't think of them on their own. If you were at all familiar with my post history, I am typically of a very conservative demeanor in terms of what might happen with computing, but I also don't restrain my speculation when I talk about what might be possible. This whole thread is about what might be seen, and that means that it ought to cover everything within reason, not just what might be in line with the past.

If this discussion is personal, it's because you're committing argumentum ad hominem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem), specifically of the abusive and circumstantial varieties. As such, we're done here. If you can discuss this without assaulting me personally, I'd be glad to continue talking about the issue, but I'm not going to sit here and listen to attacks made in the very tone that I'm being accused of.

I wouldn't be so quick to denounce the PC industry based on Intel's current developments alone. While Intel had success with its Northwood the past 2 years, I believe we are in that 2-year period that AMD will enjoy its overall performance crown--this is the beauty of having two big CPU manufacturers for the PC.

I was joking, Mav. ;)

It is INTERESTING b/c it took nearly 3 months after the FX-53 to release the Opteron 2-way/4-way counterparts. This is the reason I doubt the 3.0Ghz G5's are even close to coming out. The Opteron and G5 cpus have been close in clockspeed/performance--and the shared IBM support should certainly also play a part in predicting where this goes.

Say what you like about the Opteron, it's not a Power5, and that's what we've been hearing whispers about the next chip coming from. For one thing, I agree with you that AMD is moving ahead of Intel once more because of the help from IBM and their massive library of IP and technology, but that doesn't mean that Big Blue is going to be stupid and give away the farm. They're going to have some tricks that are for their machines and their products so that they can have an edge over the competition, and I firmly believe that the Power5 is a good example of that. If the 975 contains the on-die memory controller, even if it's only a single-core, it will go a long way towards catapulting the chip pasts PC competition, since one place that Opterons beat the G5 is in memory intensive tasks.

The other biggie will be getting a pro-level graphics card. Almost every CineBench and 3D test I've seen that has a PC beating the G5 is done with a higher-level GPU (Radeon 9800XT, FireGL, or QuadroFX, to be specific).

[benpatient]

An audio engineer won't bat an eye at paying $3500 for a Mic preamp.

what world are you on? The most expensive commercially available mic pre I'm aware of is 1500 dollars.

I'd certainly bat an eye at paying 230% sales tax!

[.a]

... nice hint at the new apple motion page, that there are coming new graphic-cards ... though, everybody knows, there will come new and better graphic-cards to the mac - the funny thing is just, that apple hinted to it, what is rather unusual for apple :)
.a

[Hobbes]

benpatient, you're wrong there - 1500 will buy you a middle of the range to good quality preamp, but professional audio engineers could spend double that on a pre and upwards.

[WurlWynd]

1500 bucks won't even buy the knobs on one channel of an SSL preamp.


That's the world we live on.

[wrldwzrd89]

Maybe I'm the exception, but $2799 - $2999 for the dual 3.0 GHz Mac (with all it comes with) would be a fair price. It's not a bargain... but pro machines aren't really meant to compete heavily on price. It's not the major sale point. Power is, and I believe they will be the fastest desktops without contention.
I agree with you here - I'm thinking Apple will set the price of the high-end G5 at $2799 (with the default options). One thing we all agree on - the 3.0 GHz Macs, WHEN THEY ARE RELEASED, will be fast. How fast they are compared to other Macs and Windows PCs will have to wait until benchmarks are compiled. At $2799, I'd snap up a Dual 3.0 GHz machine (no monitor) - if only I was in the market for a new computer. Sigh.

[wizard]

where to start... I hope you aren't trying to imply a dual 3.0 GHz 975 would lag any PC in benchmarks. LOL. I know none of us know how fast they will be until we see the benchmarks, but let's assume it's roughly linear over the course of one year ago. A 50% speed increase in a year would be rougly 45% faster than Intel has managed in a year (3.2 --> 3.4), and 33% faster than AMD has managed (2.0 --> 2.4).

Good math that sound very groovy. Apple really needs to take the performance lead in a machine that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. The problem is if Apple repeats their well known history they will over price such a machine and then wonder where the sales are.


I don't think anyone here suggests that Apple will increase the cost of the PowerMac. In fact, at the last earnings call, Apple suggested they would lower the price point if they were not able to bring volume up by (I believe) 10%.

We have heard this before. The problem is the goose has already been cooked. Besides what is ten percent, less than 20,000 computers per quarter and they will still mis.

The problem is they need more than just competitve prices they need a marketing program.


Maybe I'm the exception, but $2799 - $2999 for the dual 3.0 GHz Mac (with all it comes with) would be a fair price. It's not a bargain... but pro machines aren't really meant to compete heavily on price. It's not the major sale point. Power is, and I believe they will be the fastest desktops without contention.

Another argument that doesn't hold up in light of real Apple sales figures. Such a machine can not be called fairly priced when similar hardware can be had for half that price.

Further just because a machine is described as "pro" doesn't mean it is. It can be easly argued that the current G5 Tower is missing alot of "pro" qualities. If Apple is able to deliver the current G5 platform with a 3GHz chip the maximum they should be charging for that system is $2000. Users are currenlty paying at least $1000 more than they should be for this hardware. It is no wonder that consumers and "pro" have left the fold for greener pastures.

[wrldwzrd89]

Good math that sound very groovy. Apple really needs to take the performance lead in a machine that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. The problem is if Apple repeats their well known history they will over price such a machine and then wonder where the sales are.

We have heard this before. The problem is the goose has already been cooked. Besides what is ten percent, less than 20,000 computers per quarter and they will still mis.

The problem is they need more than just competitve prices they need a marketing program.

Another argument that doesn't hold up in light of real Apple sales figures. Such a machine can not be called fairly priced when similar hardware can be had for half that price.

Further just because a machine is described as "pro" doesn't mean it is. It can be easly argued that the current G5 Tower is missing alot of "pro" qualities. If Apple is able to deliver the current G5 platform with a 3GHz chip the maximum they should be charging for that system is $2000. Users are currenlty paying at least $1000 more than they should be for this hardware. It is no wonder that consumers and "pro" have left the fold for greener pastures.
I don't buy that one bit. Apple doesn't and won't sell (current) PowerMacs at $2000 for two reasons:
1. Apple requires high profit margins to survive.
2. Apple bundles so much useful software with all Macs that they need to recover their costs somehow.

Also, have you tried going to an online PC store and pricing a PC that has specifications as close as possible to those of the Mac (including bundled software)? You'll probably find the Mac is cheaper than the PC.

[SyndicateX]

Another argument that doesn't hold up in light of real Apple sales figures. Such a machine can not be called fairly priced when similar hardware can be had for half that price.


Not quite. Getting a machine at 2799$-2999$ for all the suppossed specs the next G5 would contain would be unbelievable. Again, apple isnt trying to sell their absolute top of the line model (dual 3ghz isnt intended for mom and dad to check their emails...) to everyone, thats what the lower spec'd options are for. Even if they have 1 computer at 1999-2199, it will still be very competitive against anything comparable offer from the wintel world. Heres a current price of a decently equipped alienware system, and I didntg go all out because Im not sure what the apple is going to actually have....

[1] Aurora™
Case: Alienware® Full-Tower Case (420-Watt PS) - Cyborg Green
Processor: AMD Athlon™ 64 FX-53 Processor with HyperTransport Technology
Memory: 1GB Extreme Dual Channel DDR SDRAM at 400MHz Registered - 2 x 512MB
Video Card: Alienware® GeForce™ FX 5950 Extreme 256MB DDR w/Digital and S-Video Out
Video Cooling: AlienIce™ Video Cooling System - Terra Green
Sound Card: Creative Sound Blaster® Audigy 2 ZS Platinum Pro High Definition 7.1 Surround
Operating System: Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional
Motherboard: ASUS SK8V - VIA K8T800 Motherboard
Optical Drive One: Lite-On 52x32x52x CD-RW
Optical Drive Two: Plextor PX-708A 8x DVD±R/W Drive - Black
Home Networking: D-Link® 802.11G Wireless USB Adapter
Network Connection: High Speed Gigabit Ethernet
System Drive: High Performance - Serial ATA - 120GB Seagate Barracuda® 7,200 RPM

$3,711.00

And thats no bluetooth, 1 120gb SATA drive because its all they offer, no dual layer DVD drive, no dual processors...


Further just because a machine is described as "pro" doesn't mean it is. It can be easly argued that the current G5 Tower is missing alot of "pro" qualities. If Apple is able to deliver the current G5 platform with a 3GHz chip the maximum they should be charging for that system is $2000. Users are currenlty paying at least $1000 more than they should be for this hardware.

I agree with the first part of this, Apples current G5's are pro quality machines, but they dont cover the needs of alot of professionals. The graphics card is the #1 problem I see, followed by the sound, and then expandability options. All of these factors, if this rumor proves to be true, would be fixed by apple. Then what? What would their possibly be missing from calling this the most professional, complete, mass production computer in history? You will not find a computer that can come even close to a G5 for 1500-2000$ You would still need all the cutting edge technology from the pc side, and that still isnt cheap.

It is no wonder that consumers and "pro" have left the fold for greener pastures.

Riiight, last time I checked, the last 7 academy awards for best visual effects were all done with Shake and on a mac. The majority of television broadcasting is done with a mac, a majority in the film/video/graphics workforce ALL use macs. So maybe the "pros" have left for greener pastures, but they all seem to be right here...now with Apple.

[wrldwzrd89]

I agree with the first part of this, Apples current G5's are pro quality machines, but they dont cover the needs of alot of professionals. The graphics card is the #1 problem I see, followed by the sound, and then expandability options. All of these factors, if this rumor proves to be true, would be fixed by apple. Then what? What would their possibly be missing from calling this the most professional, complete, mass production computer in history?
There is no way Apple is going to use any other solution besides their integrated sound that's the same across ALL Macs - that would break Apple tradition. Besides, there's nothing wrong with Apple's sound implementation, and it frees up a PCI slot.

[gerardrj]

... The problem is if Apple repeats their well known history they will over price such a machine and then wonder where the sales are...

Apple's well known history (in my view) is to ship a quality machine at a reasonable t0 comfortable profit margin. On more than a few occasions they have released hardware that people on these boards complained was WAY overpriced (the original iMac, the iPod to name a few) that sold like hot cakes at an igloo raising. Some others have not sold well (the cube). Most Apple products sell at a comfortable rate at their price points.

...Another argument that doesn't hold up in light of real Apple sales figures. Such a machine can not be called fairly priced when similar hardware can be had for half that price...

Please tell me what "similar" hardware can be had for half that price. I just checked pricewatch and the Xenon 3.0GHz chip alone is $367, the "cheap" Athalon 64 is $400 and the "pro" one is $730. So that's $740 to $1460 for comparable chips alone on the Wintel side. Never mind the cost of the motherboard, killer case and all the other stuff. Sure wholesale lots will be cheaper, but not significantly I should think.

...Further just because a machine is described as "pro" doesn't mean it is. It can be easly argued that the current G5 Tower is missing alot of "pro" qualities...
Such as? Remember, PRO doesn't mean redundant these machines are not targeted as server. What else should a "pro" machine have other than wicked fast components and lots of connectivity/expansion possibility?

...If Apple is able to deliver the current G5 platform with a 3GHz chip the maximum they should be charging for that system is $2000. Users are currenlty paying at least $1000 more than they should be for this hardware. It is no wonder that consumers and "pro" have left the fold for greener pastures...

As above, based on what? Where you get this magical $2000 price from? On the Wintel side you're talking about half of that price point or more for just the CPU and motherboard, leaving $1000 for case, power supply, controllers, drives, fans, kb, etc. DELL can't even hit the price you specify for the equipment that comes standard in the current G5 2x2. A Dell Precision 450 workstation builds out to $3828 after you add SATA,FireWire,second processor, more RAM, DVDRW, modem, etc. And that's taking out any additional cost software they put in by default.
PLEASE... show be a pre-built Wintel system with all the hardware of the current G5 2x2 that comes in at $2000, hell I'd be surprised if you could get down to $3000.

[SyndicateX]

PLEASE... show be a pre-built Wintel system with all the hardware of the current G5 2x2 that comes in at $2000, hell I'd be surprised if you could get down to $3000.

3700$ as posted above, for SIMILAR options, but by no means competitive. Everyone believes pc's are just so cheap, and for average consumers they are. But professionals needed a truly powerful windows workstation are going to pay just as much, if not more, than anything comparable to what apple has to offer.

[Mav451]

As above, based on what? Where you get this magical $2000 price from? On the Wintel side you're talking about half of that price point or more for just the CPU and motherboard, leaving $1000 for case, power supply, controllers, drives, fans, kb, etc. DELL can't even hit the price you specify for the equipment that comes standard in the current G5 2x2. A Dell Precision 450 workstation builds out to $3828 after you add SATA,FireWire,second processor, more RAM, DVDRW, modem, etc. And that's taking out any additional cost software they put in by default.
PLEASE... show be a pre-built Wintel system with all the hardware of the current G5 2x2 that comes in at $2000, hell I'd be surprised if you could get down to $3000.

Being on this site long enough, I would have no doubt spend 3G's for the Dual 2.0 G5 b/c I now see that it is worth it--however, now that's its been a year, yes, maybe the 2x2 is a little bit less, maybe 2700-2800.

But, in no way is it close to $2000. Opteron prices have only dropped a couple hundred, while mobo prices are relatively stable...again, reason to believe that the 2x2 is still around 2700-2800, now. When and if the 3x3 is released, if it is released for $2999, it would be insane. I personally don't think the current 1.8 and 2.0 G5's, as a piece of hardware, have devalued much at all on a hardware level--so putting it at 3ghz, and then selling it for the same cost, would be outrageous! We are talking about server/workstation power, on the desktop, and for only 3 grand. As a AMD-head, I will tell you that Opterons, even now, aren't cheap. For SMP processing, it will cost you a ton more than a single proc configuration. I mean, obviously you could get a single Athlon 64 (socket 754)--these wipe the floor on the 1.6 for easily half the cost; but dual 1.8's and 2.0's are an entirely different monster--b/c they have dual procs, and yet, the price remains insanely low.

*this is the distinction that needs to be made. Games, traditionally, have been developed with single proc configurations in mind...it is b/c you don't "need" a workstation to play games that is important. Gaming, on the PC, will ALWAYS be cheaper b/c of the aforementioned reason.

Workstations? That's a toss up, but Apple definitely has the software/overall bundle advantage, in all honesty.

[MrSugar]

I just chose your reply to comment on out of others that were calling it PCI-Extreme as well. I wasn't trying to attack you. But, the misconception that PCI-Express is JUST a new video 'connector' interface was still way off base. Again, PCI-Express is designed as a replacement for traditional PCI and PCI-X. It just has the bandwidth needed to support modern video cards as well and is why video cards are being manufactured targetted to the interface.

Good to know, thanks :o

[jakemikey]

I spent a little time on IBM's PowerPC site to try and find any official confirmation on the status of the 975. I found nothing. Nothing mentioning the 975 on the PowerPC roadmap, no documentation, not even anything on IBM's PowerPC newsletter. A quick Google reveals that any mention of the 975 is limited almost exclusively to various Mac rumors sites.

The only reason I think this might be releveant to this very page-2 rumor is this: the 970 was announced officially by IBM a full YEAR before it began shipping in volume in the form of the G5. Do we honestly think that a chip never officially announced by IBM will show up within a month in new PowerMacs? I doubt it. But I, like the others who have more conservative speculation on this, would be happy to be wrong. The over-zealous optimists might not be so happy if they turn out to be wrong.

Another thing: how big do we think this thing's going to be? 4 hard drive bays? 2 optical bays? Assuming this thing has the same cooling requirements as the current dual deuce G5, the new one would be HUGE. Believe me, I've got a G5 on my desk. It's already bordering on too big. I think we should be thinking more about capacity than the number of bays. Hard drives have much more capacity than they do in the G4 days. If you need more than 500GB, you're probably doing digital video and you should be looking at something like an Xserve RAID.

So it's too big, let's go to liquid cooling: okay we've had myriad fanatics point out that this isn't new technology, but it's far from mainstream technology. This is a potential support nightmare. Especially for a revision A model. If this is included in the next PowerMacs, you can bet that a lot of people will wait for revision B to get all the kinks worked out.

I'm no ueber-techie and I would love to be proven wrong on these counts. So if anyone ha anything resembling an official link about the 975, I would love to see it.

I think it would do us all some good to make our expectations a little more conservative. That way, we'll be more likely to be wowed and less likely to be disappointed come WWDC.

[FoxyKaye]

Given how the G4s have evolved, it would make sense that the Rev. B G5s would encompass dual optical and 4 HD slots - though I wonder how much taller and/or wider the overall form factor would need to be? The G5s are already pretty big and heavy (compared to the G4s, and especially compared to the G3 Blue/White). Plus, 65W dual G5 chips running at 2.4 and 2.6 GHz will generate even more heat than the current lineup. Even if we assume liquid cooling, I bet these are going to be the biggest Macs yet. :D

I'm no expert, but I'd gladly pay between $2000 and $3000 for a Rev. B G5. I don't need to run heavy duty "pro" programs, but I do have a lot of hobbies that would benefit from the advances this rumor mentions (Web design, Illustrator/Photoshop use, Sound Studio work, etc...), so I guess I'm more of a "power" user. I've always bought tower systems mainly because they can be easily expanded and upgraded, though the iMac/eMac lines are pretty great for the everyday households (and nonprofits too - my organization hums along fine with a bunch of G3/350 iMacs for Word/Excel/FileMaker and email, and I expect we'll continue to use them for the next three years).

I think that this is one area that Apple does really well in its tower systems lineup, making them for the "power" user (somewhere between mom & pop and serious professionals). I sometimes wonder if Apple might go the way of the PC world and further segregate its tower systems by creating a high-end "workstation" system ($4000K+) that would be the "pro"-"pro" system with full trappings that the "power" users don't really need for their work or home businesses. Although I do know a few of the serious professionals who simply buy additional upgrades for their G4/G5 systems to do all the great Shake and Maya work we see coming out of Hollywood.

Incidentally, my first "power" system was a Dell I bought for doing statistical work in grad school, and for $3600 I got a 17" monitor and a Dimention tower (PII/233, 64MB RAM, 6.5GB HD, Matrox 2000 graphics card, on board sound, and a Zip100). Wow, that was back in the day.

[thatwendigo]

Just to chime in again on the side of those who are shooting down the idiocy of a $2000 dual-processor competiitor, I've got a nice little parts list for you people who like to trot out that old fabrication:

Tyan Thunder K8W - $436
2x AMD Socket 940 processors (Opteron) on HT bus
4x PC3200 slots per processor
2x ATA133,, 4x SATA (RAID 0/1/0+1)
AGP 8x, 2x PCI-Xa, 2x PCI-Xb, 1x PCI
2x Ps/2, 1x LPT, 2x COM, 5x USB 1.1 (3 rear), 2x FireWire 400 (1 rear), Audio ports
Gigabit Ethernet

2x AMD Opteron 246 - $461 x 2 = $922
2ghz core clock
HT FSB
1MB L2

ATI Radeon x800 Pro 256MB - $475
AGP 8x

Enermax Noisetaker 600w PSU - $160

Soundblaster Audigy2 ZS Platinum - $206
Optical SPDIF in/out

4x Corsair 512MB PC3200 OEM-sticks - $199 x 4 = $796

Western Digital 250GB SATA 7200RPM (WD2500JD) - $192

Pioneer DVR-A07XLB - $134


With no case, no cooling system, or anything other than the core components, this system sets you back $3141 in parts. The one really, really new part of it is the Radeon x800, but they're now in the previous top price point for consumer cards.

[MrSugar]

Further just because a machine is described as "pro" doesn't mean it is. It can be easly argued that the current G5 Tower is missing alot of "pro" qualities.


Please explain what these are...

[Trekkie]

I just spent some time specing PCI Express Fiber Channel HBA's today.

And that has nothing to do with graphics cards.

PCI-e is going to come in multiple flavors, 1x, 2x, 4x, 8x, and 16x. Your vid cards will be 16x. your GigE and FC cards will be 4x - 8x.

[oingoboingo]

The PowerPC 970 does not look like a chip that was intended to be Apple's long-term strategy, but more like a holdover, a stopgap to allow people to stay on the platform while the ream deal was prepared.

I think you meant to type 'real deal', but 'ream deal' is good too...nice imagery for people who foolishly buy a dual 2GHz G5 the day before Steve announces dual 3GHz systems :)

[Kid Red]

Well let's hope they make the prices $1499, $1999, and $2499 at the absolute max. Even then they'd be very pricey and not likely to spur sales. So of course that means Apple will prices them drastically more expensive. dual 3 GHZ. Sorry, but a 50% increase in a year is still just ho-hum, and does not justify a price increase, especially since the G5 was not the PC killer it was supposed to be. Even at 3 GHz, it will lag PCs on quite a few benchmarks. Looks like it's out of the frying pan, into the fire with the jump from Motorola to IBM.

What?!? Have we ever gone 50% in a year before? Lag? The dual G5 barely loses much as it is and even wins a few. So you're saying a dual 3.0ghz with PCIe will lag? HAHAAHAHA

[Moonlight]

If apple used your logic, they would have been out of business in the 80's.


:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:


Makes you go: Hmmmmmmmmm.....

[LittleJohn]

I upgraded my G4 last year for lack of funds for a G5, and now I'm holding out for the next revision. Apple needs to get something out because there are lots of people in the same boat as me. My prediction is half hope and half expectation but here it goes:

$1999: Single 2 Ghz/8GB RAM/SD/Xtra Optical/4 HD's/AGP-PCI-X
$2499: Dual 2.6 /8GB RAM/SDx2/Xtra Optical/4 HD's/AGP-PCI-X
$2999: Dual 3 Ghz/16GB Ram/SDx2/Xtra Optical/4 HD's/AGP-PCI-X

By SDx2 I mean dual layer DVD burner. They might include an OEM version of the new NVidea PCI-X Graphics Card as an option. I expect a refresh of the display line to match with a 30" beast on the top end.

As long as I'm at it, I'll throw in the next iMac.

15": 1.6 G5/4GB Max Ram/64MB Graphics/SD/80GB HD
17": 1.8 G5/8GB Max Ram/64MB Graphics/SD/120GB HD
20": 1.8 G5/8GB Max Ram/128 MB Graphics/SD/120GB HD

[rog]

What?!? Have we ever gone 50% in a year before? Lag? The dual G5 barely loses much as it is and even wins a few. So you're saying a dual 3.0ghz with PCIe will lag? HAHAAHAHA
I think when the G3 and G4 1st came out, they were easily 50% faster than corresponding top end models of the prior year, though not in raw MHz. Between summer 94 to summer 95, the top end went from 80MHz 601 to 132MHz 604, certainly more than 50% faster, and the 80Mhz 601 was far more than the 40MHz 60840 of the prior year. These are just 3 examples I can think of off the top of my head. The PC world has had similar big jumps, such as going from 500Mhz P2 to 1GHz P3 in under a year, although they clearly have lagged in progress in the past 12-18 months.

The point is Apple needs to leapfrog PCs and not just on the $3000 tower. An SP G5 for many things is no faster than an SP P4 or Athlon 64, Opteron, etc at the same price. The DPs are where it's at, and they start at $2499 after nearly a year since they were announced. It's nuts. The G5 needs to be across the line ASAP. Even a 1.4GHz G5 in an iBook would likely be slower than similarly priced PCs. Apple made huge progress with the G5, agreed, but only enough to barely get back to where they were before the 5 year long G4 debacle.

[vertinox]

I acnnot believe that anyone is knocking the idea of water cooling!! They MUST be using an alternate cooling method if they pulled all of those fans out to make room.

How else could they possibly do it? They must have removed at least 6 fans to make room for all those bays! They could be using that Coolidgy technology that popped up not too long ago.

Ionic Breeze technology? Although I'm not sure how effective that stuff is for cooling, you could charge air particles to move out of the computer without a fan... It's seem possible in theory, but might not be feasible.

[blue&whiteman]

I upgraded my G4 last year for lack of funds for a G5, and now I'm holding out for the next revision. Apple needs to get something out because there are lots of people in the same boat as me. My prediction is half hope and half expectation but here it goes:

$1999: Single 2 Ghz/8GB RAM/SD/Xtra Optical/4 HD's/AGP-PCI-X
$2499: Dual 2.6 /8GB RAM/SDx2/Xtra Optical/4 HD's/AGP-PCI-X
$2999: Dual 3 Ghz/16GB Ram/SDx2/Xtra Optical/4 HD's/AGP-PCI-X


I think this is very realistic although I hope the prices stay the same and not go higher as you have indicated there. I have money in the bank for the middle model. if for some crazy reason the entry level ends up being dual I may even buy that but I doubt it will. I will buy whatever the lowest dual is and get at least 2 gb ram. stock everything else.

the middle model may end up being lower than 2.6 but even 2.2 or 2.4 is fine by me.

[Sun Baked]

Ionic Breeze technology? Although I'm not sure how effective that stuff is for cooling, you could charge air particles to move out of the computer without a fan... It's seem possible in theory, but might not be feasible.Yes that would really make the interior of the computer a dust trap. :eek:

[gerardrj]

Being on this site long enough, I would have no doubt spend 3G's for the Dual 2.0 G5 b/c I now see that it is worth it--however, now that's its been a year, yes, maybe the 2x2 is a little bit less, maybe 2700-2800.

Do what I just did... Go to Apple's web site and click on the store tab. About 2/3 of the way down the page on the left side is a red tag and "special deals" link. Click it.

Again way down the list you'll find DUAL 2.0Ghz G5 systems for $2,399! That's $100 less than a new 2x1.8 and shipping is free.

Yes, they are refurbs not "brand spanking new". I look at it this way... a refurb has gone through Apple QC twice, it's just that much less likely you will have any problems.

[Kid Red]

I think when the G3 and G4 1st came out, they were easily 50% faster than corresponding top end models of the prior year, though not in raw MHz. Between summer 94 to summer 95, the top end went from 80MHz 601 to 132MHz 604, certainly more than 50% faster, and the 80Mhz 601 was far more than the 40MHz 60840 of the prior year. These are just 3 examples I can think of off the top of my head. The PC world has had similar big jumps, such as going from 500Mhz P2 to 1GHz P3 in under a year, although they clearly have lagged in progress in the past 12-18 months.

The point is Apple needs to leapfrog PCs and not just on the $3000 tower. An SP G5 for many things is no faster than an SP P4 or Athlon 64, Opteron, etc at the same price. The DPs are where it's at, and they start at $2499 after nearly a year since they were announced. It's nuts. The G5 needs to be across the line ASAP. Even a 1.4GHz G5 in an iBook would likely be slower than similarly priced PCs. Apple made huge progress with the G5, agreed, but only enough to barely get back to where they were before the 5 year long G4 debacle.

That's my point tho. You only mentioned 3 times and they were years ago. I mean a 50% in today's market is astounding, especially for macs. We used to get 200hmz every 6 months if we were lucky.

Additionally, I don't think speed is an issue any longer. I can't remember the last troll post about speed, so I don't think Apple has anything to worry about. I think pricing is their biggest issue. I also think Apple doesn't like having a lot of choices for mom and dads. They cater to the pros but could grow much more with last year's tech in today's iMac with a low price. That just seems to beneath Jobs and I think that's Apple's major flaw-his pride.

[DaveClarkOne]

Water cooling works for Porsches, why not Apple?

How do I post a picture in here? HTML code is in the off position. Can I copy and paste or insert an gif without HTML access? I "reworked" the fire coming out of the G5. Two fires are better than one...

[Rod Rod]

(wizard's comment about consumers and pros leaving for greener pastures)

Riiight, last time I checked, the last 7 academy awards for best visual effects were all done with Shake and on a mac. The majority of television broadcasting is done with a mac, a majority in the film/video/graphics workforce ALL use macs. So maybe the "pros" have left for greener pastures, but they all seem to be right here...now with Apple.

Thanks for the great information about high-end PC prices. The comment about Shake is correct because "with Shake and on a mac" does not reflect the two are necessarily linked. Had you said "with Shake on a mac," that would have been incorrect.

I'm just clarifying in case anyone got the mistaken impression that all of those 7 Academy Awards were won by way of Macs. Apple just bought Nothing Real a couple of years ago, and the majority of the Academy Award winning work was done on PCs and Linux machines. Lord of the Rings was rendered on Linux. Apple bought a winning company and a winning technology.

[broken_keyboard]

Even if it is not 3GHz, I will still be happy as long as it is faster than the current Pentium 4.

[ethernet76]

The idea that IBM was able to make a 1 ghz jump is complete crap. IBM itself admits they're having problems ramping production and can't get the number of chips they want per wafer. It makes no sense for them to jump to a 975 when they don't know how to correct the problem with the FX.

I'd expect no higher than 2.5 and I'm being optimistic. The numbers or expected news isn't there for 3 ghz chips, and rampant optimisum is stupid

[jane doe]

This is a fun thread I think. You guys are all over the place with what "will" and "will not" be in the new G5 or whatever.

We should hang on to this thread till their released and then see whos creditability holds. :)

[StudioGuy]

Maybe I'm the exception, but $2799 - $2999 for the dual 3.0 GHz Mac (with all it comes with) would be a fair price. It's not a bargain... but pro machines aren't really meant to compete heavily on price. It's not the major sale point. Power is, and I believe they will be the fastest desktops without contention.

Have to 3rd you on this :). Have to buy a PC also in life :( and I am amazed at how much more a Dell dual-workstation seems to cost than a comparable dual G5.

Eagerly awaiting the new dual G5s...

[SyndicateX]

Thanks for the great information about high-end PC prices. The comment about Shake is correct because "with Shake and on a mac" does not reflect the two are necessarily linked. Had you said "with Shake on a mac," that would have been incorrect.

I'm just clarifying in case anyone got the mistaken impression that all of those 7 Academy Awards were won by way of Macs. Apple just bought Nothing Real a couple of years ago, and the majority of the Academy Award winning work was done on PCs and Linux machines. Lord of the Rings was rendered on Linux. Apple bought a winning company and a winning technology.

Wow. There are so many knowledgable people on this forum it amazes me! You are correct about shake in the movie industry, however in alot of network television they use predominantly mac's. One example off the top of my head is this years intro to the Academy Awards when Billy Cristal (sp) was running around playing parts in all of the nominated movies, that entire thing was done on the spot with a digital camcorder and a 17" powerbook. One other example is I was touring one of our local broadcasting companies and was literally shocked to see a room full of 10 or so G5's w/ 20"-23" Monitors....nearly brought tears to my eyes.... ;)

I do love apples influence on applications though, between shake, final cut pro, all the iApps, Logic, dvd studio pro, and I am eagerly awaiting Motion. But all offer unparalelled power while still maintaining an intuituive interface. Although I did word it correctly, I did not mean to imply everyone was using macs, only that apple, wether through software or hardware, has a very large hold on much on the professional workforce pertaining to graphics and video.

[Gymnut]

I think this is very realistic although I hope the prices stay the same and not go higher as you have indicated there. I have money in the bank for the middle model. if for some crazy reason the entry level ends up being dual I may even buy that but I doubt it will. I will buy whatever the lowest dual is and get at least 2 gb ram. stock everything else.

the middle model may end up being lower than 2.6 but even 2.2 or 2.4 is fine by me.

Glad to see you're off your emotional "high" after hearing from a "reliable" source that the new G5's will be watercooled. ;)

[edenwaith]

I can just hear Leisure Suit Larry (from LSL6) saying: "I hope, I hope, I hope..."

IF these rumors are true, or somewhat close, the feature I'd most appreciate would be the return of up to 4 hard drives. I would love to have multiple HD in a machine, which makes it easier to boot to multiple operating systems. Quite useful for the developer who needs to test on various OS's.

[szark]

Water cooling works for Porsches, why not Apple?

How do I post a picture in here? HTML code is in the off position. Can I copy and paste or insert an gif without HTML access? I "reworked" the fire coming out of the G5. Two fires are better than one...

You just need to attach the file. Click the Manage Attachments button in the Additional Options section on the Reply to Topic page)

[gerardrj]

I can just hear Leisure Suit Larry (from LSL6) saying: "I hope, I hope, I hope..."

IF these rumors are true, or somewhat close, the feature I'd most appreciate would be the return of up to 4 hard drives. I would love to have multiple HD in a machine, which makes it easier to boot to multiple operating systems. Quite useful for the developer who needs to test on various OS's.

See... I don't understand the need to have all that storage inside the box. Firewire (distance issues aside) is effectively just as fast as SATA internal drives, remember the drive throughput is the limitation in most cases, not the connection.

You can boot to a FW drive and you can turn them off when not needed. With more drives outside the computer case there's lower cooling load and less noise. Plus when you need/want to move your data around, swap two cables and you've got all your volumes on another system.

In the beginning all drives were external, then they migrated inside, now they're going back outside (where I think they belong).

[Bigheadache]

See... I don't understand the need to have all that storage inside the box. Firewire (distance issues aside) is effectively just as fast as SATA internal drives, remember the drive throughput is the limitation in most cases, not the connection.

You can boot to a FW drive and you can turn them off when not needed. With more drives outside the computer case there's lower cooling load and less noise. Plus when you need/want to move your data around, swap two cables and you've got all your volumes on another system.

In the beginning all drives were external, then they migrated inside, now they're going back outside (where I think they belong).

i'd suggest convenience. Some of us want 1 box + monitor, not 3-5 boxes.

[wizard]

If Apple needs those high profit margins to survive then they seriously need to consider restructuring the company. The reality is they don't need those margins as is demonstrated by their cash position.

The development costs are one thing, but as has been suggested if they didn't have that covered then they would be a bit short on cash. Besides they have turned software into a profit center with the yearly updates.

I don't normally go on line to buy hardware. It is usually easier to deal with local vendors. As to bundled software who cares?

Apple is in very bad straights right now, they are not moving enough of the PowerMacs to justify the development expense. They need in the worst way improved sales. If lowering the price will generate those sales then that is the path to follow. The problem is Apple has so muddied their reputation that even that may not generate the sales required to justify the existance of the Mac. Do you really believe that Apple is doing well when PowerMac sales sit around 60,000 a month?

Thanks
dave


I don't buy that one bit. Apple doesn't and won't sell (current) PowerMacs at $2000 for two reasons:
1. Apple requires high profit margins to survive.
2. Apple bundles so much useful software with all Macs that they need to recover their costs somehow.

Also, have you tried going to an online PC store and pricing a PC that has specifications as close as possible to those of the Mac (including bundled software)? You'll probably find the Mac is cheaper than the PC.

[Zeekomkommer]

I am amazed about people's disbelief when hearing anything about water cooling in a PC. This has been around for years.

and indeed, Sega's ill-fated dreamcast console had a liquid cooling system and that was in 1997/8!

for further proof, see these links.

http://www.gamesx.com/dreamcast/index2.htm

and

http://members.tripod.com/DC_cheats/id74.htm

case closed. water/liquid cooling is not beyond the realms of possibility.

This is NOT liquid cooling. This is a heatpipe system. And Apple is already using heatpipe cooling for years in the iBooks and Powerbooks!!

A heatpipe contains a refrigerant to transport heat. And does not use a pump. While liquid cooling uses a coolant that is pumped through a cycle.

Read some more about it over here: http://www.overclockers.com/articles342/

[vanmonkey]

First, has anyone ever opened a single possessor GG5 system and looked at the big cavity where the second possessor should be? To me, that's a disgusting waste of space. It's clearly a stripped down, crappified version of the "real" G5s. So, continuing to release single processor G5's, in my opinion, is foolish, and a rip off unless that take advantage of that space in the Box.

As far as the liquid cooling talk goes, long ago, the mainframe computers of the past (and we're talking 1980s and 1970s) all ran liquid cooled. Distilled water in fact, because distilled water does not conduct electricity. The water was pumped right over the... well, hey weren't chips per say, but that ever you call the giant ancient equivalent, the water flowed right over the conducting surfaces, with no danger of short circuit. If that did it way back then, why the hell are we still using fans today?

In fact, why aren't our towers just mini beer fridges? The compressor would only come of every once in a wile, which is way less annoying then a constant wind tunnel, and everything inside o=would be nice and cool! Plus you could keep your BEER in there!

[mangoduck]

[...] it seems that you want to try to draw me into a flamewar by picking and choosing what of my reply you'd like to respond to. [...] My point is that you came in here and started attacking people for supposedly having false beliefs about what Apple would do for the update of the G5 [...] What you don't seem to grasp is that I am merely engaging in a practice known as speculation and research, where I show off what might be there and then talk about what it could mean if it is.

pick and choose? i replied directly under your previous posts.

i attacked no-one. i too am speculating, so would you please not behead me for it? allow me to paste in my initial post:

"any one of these things would be great, but all of them at once? there's a new proc model AND the 3ghz landmark AND high-definition audio AND pci express AND mac-compatible fire gl cards AND dual layer dvd writing.

if these specs are alleged fact then i would doubt the accuracy of their source, and if it's just wild speculation then it's exactly that, wild and excessive. i hope i'm wrong."

now, i said this because the specs are so extreme. it looks as if whoever posted them added every cutting edge piece of hardware they could muster; it's a beast! what else is left to add? maybe quad procs, integrated fibre channel, or standard hardware raid 0+1/10. in short, it's suspicious and worthy of scrutiny.

and then, the first reply to this (syndicatex's) began, "Argh! Some of you are so nieve and pessemistic!"

isn't that worthy of question? namely, why such ferocity? and, get this now, if you, wendigo, are not speaking in reference to my above quoted first post, then you are no longer talking about the same thing that i am talking about.

---

and to clarify the rest...

You cannot buy machines at Dell or Gateway that do these things because Dell and Gateway are not bleeding-edge companies [...]

i never said they were. what i'm pointing out is that you could buy hardware like this (if specs are true) from apple at less than bleeding edge prices. nobody else offers these things in the consumer price range, which is indeed the market i'm talking about. such a thing would be significant *.

You continuously sidestep my main points and commit the same kind of semantic quibbling that you accuse me of. [...] To repeatedly point out the Radeon 9800 as sub-par (i did not, read again) [...] Also, if you're going to be knocking on Apple for the 16x graphics chipset (that's not what i said at all, you interpreted my comparison backwards), you need to attack PC OEMs, since nobody has PCI-Express yet, and there has never been a card for it in any computer (significant *).

you're the one who picked apart my wording and hardware list. you replied to me first, not vice versa. i continue to address semantics because you continue to quote me and misinterpret and misread my posts (as marked).

Changing form factor would be impressive, and I never denied it. You make allegations over things that I've never said, and in fact, which I wouldn't say.

and i never said nor implied that you stated the contrary. they are my words, not yours. sorry for any confusion (the heck?).

The URLs that I put up are all illustrative of the fact that these technologies you decry are all in machines that are currently for sale, or coming to the market in the next month. [...] workstations [...] $4000-$5000 computer with pro-graphics, pro-audio, dual Opterons, and most of what you said Apple wouldn't do.

i never mentioned any timeframe, i said available now. it was you who said "in the next month". also, i said in anything less than expensive workstation-class machines, since apple's pro line will no doubt be priced lower than 4 to 5k. such cheap pricing would be significant *. also also, i never said apple wouldn't, i said it's not probable. we went over this.

In short, I read your post, understood it perfectly (this has been brought into question) [...] I reply at length because detail and precision are important (i agree!) [...] you have yet to do anything other than attack and attempt to provoke. [...] This whole thread is about what might be seen, and that means that it ought to cover everything within reason [...]

nice of you to reply in a logical place.

you no longer seem to be on the same page. detail and precision should not be so painstakingly followed at the expense of the big picture or the root topic. it's very aggrivating to debate with someone who cannot stay on one thread (literally! look where you replied) and is so easily swept off course by details. if you are not going to address my main point, then do not reply to me, do not quote me, and do not refer to the content in my posts.

aye, speculation should encompass everything within reason, which i explained was my motivation for posting in this thread the first time. my point therein was reasonable because it showed in a concise (and obvious) fashion how the alleged specs may (may) not be reasonable. but apparently one's opinion is not reasonable if you personally don't deem it so.

as for my tone, you're not one to point fingers. i like the way you try to shut down the other person. implying i haven't read your posts (after which i returned the favor), proclaiming "end of story", "i am ending it", "we're done here", and many instances of tactless sarcasm designed to get a rise. mm hmm, not provocative at all. no sir.

to tie the semantics to the main topic, * significant points (some of them yours - thanks for contributing to my cause) have been marked that illustrate what an event the release of such a beast of a machine would be. it's significant enough in fact to warrant scrutiny and investigation of the speculations we all started out discussing. (see my initial post, quoted near the top of this one, for more details)

[Kid Red]

From what I read at AI, Apple had to G5 developments going on simultaneously the 970fx and the 975. The 970fx is the update we never got, it was due a few months ago. It ran into those yield problems, and other problems so Apple canned it. However, the 975 was ongoing and uninterrupted.

This makes the french site not wrong in predicting the update for march (along with everyone else). It also means that following Apple's normal increases the missed update may have been for 2.0, 2.25, 2.5 and this update will be 2.5, 2.75 and 3.0 or so. I think this means we do have a very good shot of getting to 3.0 keeping in mind we missed a full scale update.

[uzombie]

Not gonna happen bro, this is more of a PC sector type thing.

I highly agree. Apple would never sell a consumer anything that would be water cooled. Not going to happen. Easier to design a cooler chip than provide support for an ethylglycol-based electronic device. UL gonna love that one...

[Frobozz]

The idea that IBM was able to make a 1 ghz jump is complete crap. IBM itself admits they're having problems ramping production and can't get the number of chips they want per wafer. It makes no sense for them to jump to a 975 when they don't know how to correct the problem with the FX.

I'd expect no higher than 2.5 and I'm being optimistic. The numbers or expected news isn't there for 3 ghz chips, and rampant optimisum is stupid

Are you new to the discussion? :-) If you look back through some of these posts you'll find the evidence and mention from IBM sources that they delays in the 970fx have nothing to do with the 975. The 975 is Power5 derived and was designed at the same time as the Power5. Judging by these facts and some basic extrapolation of claims Jobs and IBM made last year and earlier this year, the 975 will be out no later than september at 3 GHz.

It's actually a pretty obvious prediciton. As with any prediction it may turn out to be untrue, but it's far more likely than any other scenario at this point given the information at hand. That is why I tend to believe these specs are close to accurate (if not spot-on). In fact, it may be they made them up... but it wouldn't change the (seemningly) obvious.

One year ago when the specs for the G5 were leaked (by MacBidouille and then confirmed by Apple) there were a lot of people on this board claiming there was NO WAY they were accurate. They kicked and screamed that the specs for the memory and bus speed were pure fabrication and that they doubted the 2GHz model would happen. Well, they were wrong...

I guess we'll wait and see, but I do expect a 3GHz G5 sometime this summer. The shoe just seems to fit.

[Frobozz]

From what I read at AI, Apple had to G5 developments going on simultaneously the 970fx and the 975. The 970fx is the update we never got, it was due a few months ago. It ran into those yield problems, and other problems so Apple canned it. However, the 975 was ongoing and uninterrupted.

This makes the french site not wrong in predicting the update for march (along with everyone else). It also means that following Apple's normal increases the missed update may have been for 2.0, 2.25, 2.5 and this update will be 2.5, 2.75 and 3.0 or so. I think this means we do have a very good shot of getting to 3.0 keeping in mind we missed a full scale update.

Preach on brotha-man. I, for one, think you're right.

[dongmin]

Are you new to the discussion? :-) If you look back through some of these posts you'll find the evidence and mention from IBM sources that they delays in the 970fx have nothing to do with the 975. The 975 is Power5 derived and was designed at the same time as the Power5. Judging by these facts and some basic extrapolation of claims Jobs and IBM made last year and earlier this year, the 975 will be out no later than september at 3 GHz. Well if you look back through the rumors, you'll notice that info on the 975 is pretty light. IT DOES NOT EXIST outside a few unconfirmed rumors. So all this talk of parallel development blah blah and the 975 not running into the same production problemsblah blah blah is all speculation at this point.

The fact is that Fishkill is having major yield problems (as they admitted) that they are finally getting a handle on. If this mythical 975 is on the 90 nm process, than it too is liable to have the same yield problems as the 970fx; remember the problem is with the process, not the chip design. (I'm not a chip designer so I don't know how much of the yield problem is dependent on the chip design itself.)

For my money, I think Steve WILL come through with the 3.0 ghz this summer (September). He's never made such promises before so I'm assuming that he's pretty darn sure about it.

[SyndicateX]

Well if you look back through the rumors, you'll notice that info on the 975 is pretty light. IT DOES NOT EXIST outside a few unconfirmed rumors. So all this talk of parallel development blah blah and the 975 not running into the same production problemsblah blah blah is all speculation at this point.

The fact is that Fishkill is having major yield problems (as they admitted) that they are finally getting a handle on. If this mythical 975 is on the 90 nm process, than it too is liable to have the same yield problems as the 970fx; remember the problem is with the process, not the chip design. (I'm not a chip designer so I don't know how much of the yield problem is dependent on the chip design itself.)

For my money, I think Steve WILL come through with the 3.0 ghz this summer (September). He's never made such promises before so I'm assuming that he's pretty darn sure about it.

POWER5 / suppossed 975 is 130nm, IBM has a very good handle on their 130nm chip making process, so therefore it has none of the production issues limiting the 970fx. IBM announced their POWER5 chip awhile ago, and received their glory and press, but who else uses the PPC97x platform besides Apple? Not too many people, and IBM/Apple do have a very tight partnership planned to exist far into the future. So, the fact that IBM would respect apple (and the secrecy apple uses in their business strategy) enough to not disclose information on a processor built for them seems like a reasonable idea to me.

[SyndicateX]

One other thing on a sidenote, but if you look at the past year since the G5 debuted, has Apple really intensly pursued adoption of the 970 or 970fx? There have been no upgrades, no other models have been upgraded to 970's. The 970fx craze came and went, and I do think that processor is better suited for Xserves / notebooks which will ultimately have cooling issues, but it is not suited for a desktop with as much space as the G5 tower possesses.

Somewhere in the back of your mind you have to be thinking "Well, just what the hell has Apple been doing for the past year?" Sitting on their thumbs paying $ out to everyone? Or waiting paitently because they knew on their roadmap with IBM that the future of their computers did not lie with the 970, which is fairly tapped out, but with another processor? Why upgrade the iMacs with current G5's only to release a truly unbelievable processor in a few months? Why not wait and upgrade the whole line at once, with a huge marketing blitz about EVERY COMPUTER that will make your head spin and create apple some much needed consumer interest?

I just find it truly hard to believe that with absolutely NO meaningful updates in a year (G4 updates of 125mhz do not count anymore...), that apple is just going to come out with a 2.4ghz 970 and be like..."Tada!!!! This is what we did in 1 whole year!" Because I, for 1, will be very unimpressed.

[blue&whiteman]

Glad to see you're off your emotional "high" after hearing from a "reliable" source that the new G5's will be watercooled. ;)

smart ass :p :D