Clearing out G5s?

[MacRumors]

In the most recent Apple Developer mailing, Apple is offering special pricing for PowerMac 1.6GHz G5s for ADC Select and Premier members.

ADC is pleased to offer special pricing on the Power Mac G5 1.6GHz to ADC Select and Premier members in the United States and Europe. Through June 26, ADC Select and Premier members can purchase up to five Power Mac G5 1.6GHz systems through the ADC Hardware Purchase Program, without affecting annual hardware discount purchase limits.

Speculation, of course, points to Apple clearing out the low end PowerMac G5s. June 26th also coincides with the end of the Brilliant Savings Promo (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/03/20040328064523.shtml) and is 2 days prior to the start of WWDC.

[MacsRgr8]

Clearing the road..... hopefully for the Dual 3 Ghz!

Bring 'em on, Apple!

[Paulo the Limey]

In the most recent Apple Developer mailing, Apple is offering special pricing for PowerMac 1.6GHz G5s for ADC Select and Premier members.



Speculation, of course, points to Apple clearing out the low end PowerMac G5s. June 26th also coincides with the end of the Brilliant Savings Promo (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/03/20040328064523.shtml) and is 2 days prior to the start of WWDC.
Only question now is the specs.

[marco114]

Here's my guess.. I don't think we'll see 3ghz for some time.
2.2 / 2.4 / DP 2.6

[fregedegpo]

Bring on these new fangled machines, WITHOUT SOUND PROBLEMS PLEASE!!!!!!!!

[edesignuk]

I don't think we'll see 3ghz for some time.
I think you may be right, but I hope you're wrong! If we don't see them soon then we all know that Apple is full of *****!!!! And that they shouldn't make promises they can't keep. :rolleyes:

[ibjoshua]

If they're only clearing out the 1.6 machines then doesn't
1.8, 2 and 2.2 look more realistic?

i_b_joshua

[virividox]

its about time 4 an upgrade

[rosalindavenue]

What is an "ADC" member?

[tazznb]

If they're only clearing out the 1.6 machines then doesn't
1.8, 2 and 2.2 look more realistic?

i_b_joshua

The 1.6 has a different logic, etc that gives it a max capacity of 4GB ram; so those machines need to go.

I'm sure the innards of the available 1.8, and 2.0 can be switched with the higher specs without too much trouble, and time consumption, therefore those 1.8, and 2.0 can be placed inside the awaiting G5 iMacs. :cool:

[segundo]

Here's my guess.. I don't think we'll see 3ghz for some time. 2.2 / 2.4 / DP 2.6
I agree that we won't see 3Ghz for sometime . . . and I think your guesses above will be in the ball park . . . and the 975 rumors are rubbish.

What's more interesting to consider is the amenities the next systems will have. A number of people have pointed out the Express graphics cards are a possibility. ATI will announce (http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article3.asp?datePublish=2004/05/28&pages=A7&seq=41) their new chips June 3rd and Dell just place a large order (http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/NewsSearch.asp?DocID=1ED469478450A15848256EA0004725F4&query=DELL) for some Express cards to include in their systems. I'd think that Apple would be out in front on new technology like this.

What about hard drives? Prices have been dropping for the 80/160 gig sizes used in the current G5's . . . how large are the next round of drives?

Will the Superdrive finally go dual format? Dual layer?

And honestly? Does any of this matter if the XServes are still at 5-7 before they ship? Yeesh, it's been a long time since they were announced and a decent amount of time since IBM said they were doing better as far as manufactoring was concerned. Will we see some very competitive systems (both Power and iMac) be announced but see execution errors all over again? I certainly hope not.

[sosumi]

What is an "ADC" member?

ADC = Apple Developer Community (or something like it)

[Skiniftz]

Bring on these new fangled machines, WITHOUT SOUND PROBLEMS PLEASE!!!!!!!!
Can you elaborate on that? What are these sound problems? I need to know as the only reason I'm going to buy a G5 is to switch my (audio) studio over to Mac. :eek:

[Skiniftz]

What is an "ADC" member?
Apple Developer Connection (http://developer.apple.com/)

[sinisterdesign]

If they're only clearing out the 1.6 machines then doesn't
1.8, 2 and 2.2 look more realistic?

i_b_joshua

i would LOVE steve to pull out the 3GHz & be able to say, "didn't think we were going to be able to do it, did'ja?", but i kind of doubt it.

nevertheless, it's GOT to be more than a bump from 2GHz --> 2.2GHz. people would get up & leave WWDC.

also, the higher we get in GHz, the less of a difference a couple hundred MHz makes from the top end machine to the entry level. if you're going from a 700MHz-->833MHz-->1GHz, that's a good percentage of the processor speed difference, but 2.6GHz-->2.8-->3GHz isn't a lot of spread.

anyone else think that the spread will start getting a little wider?
2-->2.4-->3?

[tny]

ADC = Apple Developer Community (or something like it)
ADC is the Apple analogue to Microsoft's MSDN - it's a program for Apple-based developers which gives them access to training, beta system software, testing platforms, and also provides ways to promote their own software, etc. There are multiple levels, from a free level which gives you access to updated developer tools and a few other things to the premier level which gives you nice discounts on hardware, etc. See http://developer.apple.com/membership/ . Note that the price for premier is $3500

[johnnyjibbs]

Well I would have been very surprised if there hadn't have been any G5 updates planned for WDC...

[ecche]

I agree that we won't see 3Ghz for sometime . . .


3Ghz within a year is what the man said and 3Ghz within a year is what we'll get.

[BornAgainMac]

Think of this as your headless Mac. Instead of being a cube, it's a box.

[sedarby]

If they're only clearing out the 1.6 machines then doesn't
1.8, 2 and 2.2 look more realistic?

i_b_joshua

Exactly what I was thinking. This could be bad news since only the 1.6 is affected. Okay, so 3 ghz is more than likely not going to happen but please let the high end be more than 2.2 ghz!

[MikeH]

Rumor updates aside - what are the 1.6 G5's being discounted to?

[iHack]

Think of this as your headless Mac. Instead of being a cube, it's a box.

And instead of being a practical size, it's huge.

i thought that when people talk about a headless mac, they refferred to a headless iMac: think of (the size of) a white hemisphere, without the arm'n'panel. I'd want one!

[adamfilip]

3Ghz within a year is what the man said and 3Ghz within a year is what we'll get.

I completely agree.

He said 3ghz.. it may be 2 months after wwdc before they start shipping but they will come!

take the man on his word..

[Hattig]

I completely agree.

He said 3ghz.. it may be 2 months after wwdc before they start shipping but they will come!

take the man on his word..

Blind faith! Sheesh. He can't ship anything if IBM can't make 3GHz capable processors. I can see Jobs preannouncing a 3GHz for Christmas if IBM don't fix their process within the next month or two!

I'm hedging my bets on 2.1GHz, 2.4GHz and 2.7GHz systems myself (3x multiplier, 700, 800 and 900MHz busses respectively). If Apple do get >1GHz busses working then maybe we'll see 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, 2.6 (pick any 3) systems.

[darthdrinker]

I completely agree.

He said 3ghz.. it may be 2 months after wwdc before they start shipping but they will come!

take the man on his word..

"The man" has no influence on the yields in the proc factory. Especially because there have been problems before. So I will believe when I see, but I sure hope there will be 3G. ;)

[gorkonapple]

In the most recent Apple Developer mailing, Apple is offering special pricing for PowerMac 1.6GHz G5s for ADC Select and Premier members.



Speculation, of course, points to Apple clearing out the low end PowerMac G5s. June 26th also coincides with the end of the Brilliant Savings Promo (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/03/20040328064523.shtml) and is 2 days prior to the start of WWDC.


CLearing THE LOW END....this may mean a G5 iMac. THINK about it.

[bathysphere]

Blind faith! Sheesh. He can't ship anything if IBM can't make 3GHz capable processors. I can see Jobs preannouncing a 3GHz for Christmas if IBM don't fix their process within the next month or two!

I'm hedging my bets on 2.1GHz, 2.4GHz and 2.7GHz systems myself (3x multiplier, 700, 800 and 900MHz busses respectively). If Apple do get >1GHz busses working then maybe we'll see 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, 2.6 (pick any 3) systems.

i don't think they'll drop the bus speed from the current models.
i also think it's odd that only the 1.6 g5's are being offered for this. unless maybe they just have a surplus of the low end model because it hasn't sold as well as the dual 1.8 and 2 ghz models.

[tveric]

CLearing THE LOW END....this may mean a G5 iMac. THINK about it.

I thought about it. I decided that makes no sense whatsoever. Think about it.

[cr2sh]

I thought about it. I decided that makes no sense whatsoever. Think about it.

Hmm...


You buys have it all wrong. Apple is clearing out the low end G5's, but not for PowerMac revisions (as gork pointed out), WWDC will bring 1.6GHz iMac G5's.

[JasonElise1983]

here is my take on it. They are clearing out supplies for WWDC. There will be kind of update, but noone is going to be able to know what it is. Everyone knew the G5 was coming last year, but noone knew what it was until WWDC. Displays are definately coming, and i believe G5 iMacs are as well. Here is what i would bet on being there.

PowerMac G5
Dual 2.0Ghz $1799
Dual 2.6 Ghz $2499
Dual 3.0Ghz $2999

iMac G5
15" 1.6Ghz $1299
17" 1.8Ghz $1799
20" 1.8Ghz $2099

Displays
17"
20"
23"
30"

[cocoa_nut]

Rumor updates aside - what are the 1.6 G5's being discounted to?

The 1.6 G5's are offered to ADC members for $1299.

[jelloshotsrule]

is the imac (ie, a consumer machine) really going to be discussed at this show for professionals?

i don't think it's really been done before


i believe that the 1.6 with the adc discount is 1299 bucks. which is great. but, it's still not really "worth" just buying because of the price... i mean, the machine ain't all that great.

[johnnyjibbs]

I think the reason it's only 1.6 G5s is that they aren't selling half as well as the dual proc models. So never fear, 3GHz will be here!

[AidenShaw]

Everyone knew the G5 was coming last year, but noone knew what it was until WWDC.

Well, actually it was a bit before WWDC.... ;)

http://www.macminute.com/2003/06/19/g5

[numediaman]

Can you elaborate on that? What are these sound problems? I need to know as the only reason I'm going to buy a G5 is to switch my (audio) studio over to Mac. :eek:

Check out the Apple support discussion pages for the G5: http://discussions.info.apple.com/. The issue involves the power supply.

As for the discounting of 1.6s: I would think they would try to get rid of these for one of two reasons.

One, there will be a modest bump of the G5s -- that would, of course, disappoint everyone. Maybe the line would look like this: 1.8, 2.0, 2.2. I can hear the cries of pain now.

Two, there will be a major move of the G5s, and the 1.8 and 2.0 chips will be used in iMacs or some other product.

In both cases, no need for 1.6 units anymore. In the first scenario, a hundred Macrumor members slit their throats. In the second scenario, I get a new G5.

[eric67]

this info is confirmed in France by macbidouille.com/hardmac.com
it is here:
http://www.hardmac.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2004-05-27#2186
and this is not a rumor, this simply a fact...

now this corraltes quite well with the rumor from croquer.free.fr regarding the future PMG5 Trinity to be announced at the WWDC...
Just to remind you here are the rumored specs:
single PPC 975 @ 2,2 GHz
AGP 8x
FSB 1,1 GHz
Superdrive

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

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

with a BTO for a PRO graphic card still unknown such as FireGL

[davechen]

"The man" has no influence on the yields in the proc factory. Especially because there have been problems before. So I will believe when I see, but I sure hope there will be 3G. ;)

You don't think if Steve spent a month in Fishkill at IBM the mere power of his RDF wouldn't magically increase their processor yields? :)

[Lord Blackadder]

I would have to say (and this is pure speculation, of course) that whatever new lineup we see may still include the 2Ghz PM, with it now forming the bottom end of a new trio of machines with significant speed bumps as you go up: 2Ghz, 2.6 Ghz, 3Ghz. Even if those numbers are off, I still think that the G5 towers are going to be the machines recieving the upgrades - not the iMacs, or any other Mac. If WWDC is a show for professionals, it is logical that Apple would focus on the "pro" line - the G5s (or the Powerbook, but we all know that's a ways off).

[IndyGopher]

this info is confirmed in France by macbidouille.com/hardmac.com
it is here:
http://www.hardmac.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2004-05-27#2186
and this is not a rumor, this simply a fact...

Ok. Stocks are low on G5's. Stocks are almost nil on iPod Mini's... guess that means rev B mini's should be announced any time. The two points (low stock of G5's and new iterations of the G5) are not in any way intrinsically intertwined.. Yes, it seems pretty obvious that new G5's are coming sooner rather than later, but how that fact ties into your regurgitated fantasy specs is beyond me. Is your point that since Rumor Site "A" reported one fact, everything Rumor Site "A" reports must also be fact? You aren't SERIOUSLY trying to say that, are you?

[ITR 81]

Because in about 7 days I'll be buying for my business:

One high-end dual 2Ghz G5 with 23" Apple display.
17" Apple display.
Top end eMac
and 20"display iMac.
I would rather be buying a new 3Ghz G5 for my Bus. and home.
But oh well.

I'll probably have to wait until around X-mas for the 3GHz G5 for home and maybe a new top end Powerbook and 4th gen iPod and OS X Tiger.

Spending alot of money with Apple this yr.

[AngryAngel]

The 1.6 has a different logic, etc that gives it a max capacity of 4GB ram; so those machines need to go.

The main boards in all the G5s models are the same physically. My 1.6 has all the solder points for another processor socket, another 4 RAM slots, etc. It is just that they haven't soldier the slots and socket on, and the controller for PCI cards is either different (or more likely) set up differently.

[Zaty]

here is my take on it. They are clearing out supplies for WWDC. There will be kind of update, but noone is going to be able to know what it is. Everyone knew the G5 was coming last year, but noone knew what it was until WWDC. Displays are definately coming, and i believe G5 iMacs are as well. Here is what i would bet on being there.

PowerMac G5
Dual 2.0Ghz $1799
Dual 2.6 Ghz $2499
Dual 3.0Ghz $2999

iMac G5
15" 1.6Ghz $1299
17" 1.8Ghz $1799
20" 1.8Ghz $2099

Displays
17"
20"
23"
30"

Besides the question if we'll see a 3GHz PM (which I seriously doubt), is it realistic that the current top of the line config becomes the low end confing of the new revision? If the low end gets a 2GHZ cpu than it will be a single proc. machine. (So that the current high end machine remains faster than the future low end PM).As for the iMac, I think they will drop the 15" screen and sell two different 17" configs.

[fossyy]

any chance the 1.6 is being updated to make way for a g5 1.6 imac

[agreenster]

To be honest, I REALLY dont care what speeds we see these in, as long as we dont have to wait 3 months for them to ship. I would be so stoked if they announced the new G5's, and they were available within a 3-4 week timeframe.

A 2.6 G5 would still be a very fast machine.

[adamfilip]

is the imac (ie, a consumer machine) really going to be discussed at this show for professionals?

i don't think it's really been done before


i believe that the 1.6 with the adc discount is 1299 bucks. which is great. but, it's still not really "worth" just buying because of the price... i mean, the machine ain't all that great.

im running a 1.6 right now and its a great machine.. Best Mac I have ever used.! stop trashing it..

[eric67]

Ok. Stocks are low on G5's. Stocks are almost nil on iPod Mini's... guess that means rev B mini's should be announced any time. The two points (low stock of G5's and new iterations of the G5) are not in any way intrinsically intertwined.. Yes, it seems pretty obvious that new G5's are coming sooner rather than later, but how that fact ties into your regurgitated fantasy specs is beyond me. Is your point that since Rumor Site "A" reported one fact, everything Rumor Site "A" reports must also be fact? You aren't SERIOUSLY trying to say that, are you?
no,
but macbidouille.com/hardmac.com is not a rumor site anymore, croquer.free.fr is indded a young rumor site with not much credit yet

[jelloshotsrule]

im running a 1.6 right now and its a great machine.. Best Mac I have ever used.! stop trashing it..

hahaha. yes sir


but really, it's not all that much better than a 1.4 g4

which is fine. it's just that i might otherwise be looking very hard to find a way to justify getting one... but my dual 2 will be enough for now.

[kenaustus]

Everyone seems to think that Steve J made a rash statement about 3 gigs for the G5 in a year - and tend to forget that a few minutes later an IBM Vice-President walked on stage and said 3 gigs in a year. It was definitely in the road map with full expectations that it would be delivered by IBM as well as Apple.

Fab problems on the 90 nm processor killed the Feb/Mar speed bump for the PM (and release of a G5 iMac), but that does not mean that the problems are long term. I expect that IBM is working very hard to keep the commitment THEY made at last year's WWDC and that Steve AND a VP from IBM will announce 3 gigs for delivery in fall. They might even have a PM ready for delivery that is in the mid 2 gig range.

When Steve makes a hardware announcement at this year's WWDC it is important to remember that it will be based on how IBM is doing with the fabs of various chip. There are all sorts of chip names floating around (970FX, 975, 980) but what will count is what IBM is going to be able to get out the door.

Because WWDC is a developer's conference it is the ideal place for Steve to announce where Apple is going in the future. A 3 gig announcement for fall delivery is just that - where Apple is going in the fall.

The iMac range is also of interest to developers who target the consumer and pro-sumer markets and an announcement of a G5 iMac would go over very well for these folks. The problem is that they cannot release a G5 iMac until the speed is increased in the PM range.

Because the 1.6 gig is a 130 nm chip I do not see it going into the iMac. I would bet (up to $1.00) that the G5 iMac's would have a 90 nm chip and would top out 0.2 below the top speed of the PM range. The iMac line is simply too important to Apple not to make a G5 iMac a kick ass computer from Day One. They are going to need to have speeds at 2.0 or higher for the 20", faster FSB's for all models - actually most of the neat things inside of the current PM (except 9 fans) that kick up speed.

If new PMs are ready with dual 2.4, 2.6 and 2.8 for delivery now, with 3.0 in the fall then I believe that the G5 iMac would top out at 2.4 or 2.6 for the larger screens, even if it is a BTO machine. G5 1.6 is dead, unless it is scheduled for the eMac in a few months.

WWDC Projections?

Speed bumps for the PM with 3.0 in the fall.

Next generation G5 iMac with specs close to the PM in terms of speed.

New iPod with a color screen that Steve can pass out to all paying attendees.

[saabmp3]

I posted this to a reply in the Buyers advice over 3 weeks ago. They've had this discount going for atleast that long (I know because I'm a student developer who just bought a machine and looked for quite a while). This IS NOT NEWS! It's been going on for weeks and is nothing special from that email yesterday.

BEN

[neonart]

Ok, if I could get a 1.6 G5 for $1299 I would buy one RIGHT NOW. How do I get this hook up? :D

Seriously.

[seraphnyc]

What I do not understand is the passion with which people are stating - 3Ghz G5's are not coming, Steve Jobs has no power over IBM Fabrication problems, blah blah blah.

Does anyone here work for IBM or Apple in such a way that they CAN be as passionate and overflowing with negativity as they are?[Pointing to websites does not consititute insider information, it is public information of which none says "NO 3Ghz G5!"]

I love speculation on things that have yet to come, wondering how cool it will be, how fast it will feel, WHAT INCREDIBLE NEW GAMES IT CAN KICK THE PCs ASS IN, but to speculate on the side of negativity is rather dull. The facts are:

- Steve Jobs and [you wouldn't believe how many people over look this] chairman of IBM stated that they would reach 3Ghz within 1 year of announcing the G5.

-IBM had fabrication and yield problems using the 90nanometer process for the PPC 970fx.

-XServe G5's using the PPC 970fx have been shipping.

Judging from these 3 things speculations are bound to happen, but to read such passionate arguments against the possibility of the G5 reaching 3Ghz almost reads like some Mac users do not want the G5 to reach 3Ghz. I know some qualify it by saying 'I hope it does reach 3Ghz' at the end of the '3Ghz G5 don't exist and won't for some time' rant.

For arguments sake, and the sake of sanity, let's say it is up in the air and we'd just have to wait and see, but it is starting to sound [<---keyword] like these rumor site's forums are being hit by Windows zealots hoping to rain on the G5 parade.

We have some incredible technology [64bit processor with 32bit backwards compatibility, high-end system architectures and a giant in tech manufacturing like IBM] on our side that the potential to kick the crap out of Intels' and AMDs' line up. Why not air on the side of positivity and hope for a) a statement (he did not CLEARLY promise) come to fruition and b) maybe some REALLY BIG surprises in the realm of new Hardware [both consumer and pro-sumer] and some new software to exploit the power of the G5 to it's fullest.

BTW, I am not a pessimist nor an optimist... I make my judgements and base my hopes on reality.

S.

[Foocha]

As I recall, last year, two weeks after MWSF, Apple released G4 updates. Why didn't Steve Jobs announce them during the keynote? Because the updates were not that hot, so he chose to stick with software announcements instead.

The reason Apple sometimes makes product annoucements during Steve Jobs keynotes is to get maximum press attention - if the product update is likely to get negative press coverage (e.g. Steve Jobs dissappoints WWDC crowds with a minor speed bump that falls short for previous promises), Apple will not announce it at a keynote - they'll quietly release it one Tuesday morning - ideally when there are much bigger stories going on for c|net to cover.

If the next G5 revision is minor, they will announce it when its ready, probably prior to WWDC - no point to wait till WWDC and then disappoint the crowds (and distract press attention from Tiger).

If there's no announcement before WWDC, then I think its reasonable to assume a major update with a significant speed-bump.

Finally, WWDC is not a "pro" event, it's a developer event - developers work on both "pro" and home products, and so an iMac announcement would be just as relevant as a desktop announcement - less likely to hear news about iPod, since there aren't may 3rd party developers for this product line.

[AidenShaw]

Because in about 7 days I'll be buying for my business:

One high-end dual 2Ghz G5 with 23" Apple display.

Hmmm, before you spring for that display, try to compare the Apple display side-by-side with the Samsung 24".


the 243T is slightly larger (1", pitch 0.270mm vs. 0.258mm)
the 243T is brighter (300 cd/m2 vs. 250 cd/m2)
the 243T has more contrast (500:1 vs. 350:1)
the 243T has an adjustable height/tilt stand with portrait/landscape rotation
the 243T has a narrow bezel
the 243T has a standard VESA mount for 3rd party stands and arms (e.g. http://www.ergotron.com/3_products/flat_panel/default.asp)
the 243T is not made of clear plastic


It really is time for Apple to update their LCD displays.... If you look at them side-by-side, there's definitely a difference. (In addition to the fashion problem that brushed aluminum and lucite don't match.)

http://www.samsungusa.com/SamsungUSA/PRODUCT/20040120/b2c_m_243t-black.jpghttp://www.ergotron.com/3_products/flat_panel/neoFlex/images/45-160wMon.jpg

[Macmaniac]

I don't care anymore what they release, as long as its $100 across the line cheaper and with better graphics cards across the line! Come on Apple I want to buy my Mac gaming machine, update!

[seraphnyc]

Finally, WWDC is not a "pro" event, it's a developer event - developers work on both "pro" and home products, and so an iMac announcement would be just as relevant as a desktop announcement - less likely to hear news about iPod, since there aren't may 3rd party developers for this product line.

Well said, the whole "Pro conference only with only Pro hardware" thing was getting to me too much to say anything.

Being a Developer of Multimedia content, DVD Authoring and a Proprietary Programmer[I write sotware for in-house corporate use] I work on everything from Pro Desktops to the eMac. I have been to the WWDC twice and can say... IT IS A DEVELOPER CONFERENCE and developers work on all sorts of Machines i.e. one of the main programmers for porting Knights of the Old Republic is developing and porting the game on an 800mhz G4 that is well below spec for the game; would you currently call this a "Pro" machine. The name 'Developer' [WWDC the 'D' stand for Developer] does not mean Pro hardware.

[the future]

Hmmm, before you spring for that display, try to compare the Apple display side-by-side with the Samsung 24".

The Samsung display is not part of the "brilliant savings" promo, though...

[TyleRomeo]

If they're only clearing out the 1.6 machines then doesn't
1.8, 2 and 2.2 look more realistic?

i_b_joshua

no

[~Shard~]

All signs point to.... G5 PowerBooks!!! ;) :p

Seriously, I think this is a good indication that updates are coming, but how big of an update will all depend on the timing. If Apple can't pull off 3 GHz PowerMacs as promised, there is no reason to showcase them at WWDC - the crowd won't be very responsive to a 2.0, 2.2 and 2.4 GHz product line update, and that's just the way it is. So if Apple is going to release something like this, less than 3 GHz, then there is no need to wait for WWDC for it - they might as well announce them right now. If nothing is announced before WWDC, there might be a chance that the 3 GHz G5s will make an appearance. But, if 2.0/2.2/2.4 (or whatever) are announced at WWDC, I fear that the 3 GHzs are a LONG ways away, because that means Apple essentially considers that speed bump a major event... Plus, only bumping up 200 and 400 MHz in an entire year? Maybe Motorola could get away with that, but not IBM and these G5s - that would be a huge disappointment for many people.

[mgargan1]

i work at an apple reseller, and like the original article is talking about, i haven't seen any discount on the g5, and we do have some adc people. Now, as for the stock of G5's it's limited, we just ordered 2 2.0GHz machines, and only two, cause we don't want something else to come out. But it is hard to get them right now.

As for the specs of the new machines, i'm not going to say that we will have 3.0GHz machines, but i do think that we are going to get them... my logic here, (not saying I'm right), is that I think Steve doesn't wanna not put out a 3GHz machine, and that's why we didn't get any update sooner, so that when he does announce a new machine, he can say... "and we're announcing the largest speed update in history!" and so on and so forth... just my opinion, we'll find out in a month now wont we?

[Capt. Obvious]

Ok, if I could get a 1.6 G5 for $1299 I would buy one RIGHT NOW. How do I get this hook up? :D

Seriously.Buy an ADC Select membership for $500 US.
Seriously.

[Wonder Boy]

besides the lack high end g5's being involved, how is this a bad thing? or more importantly, how is this a surprising thing? they had to start clearing inventory eventually...

[achbed]

I also understand that the 1.6 machines are being aggressively cleared out by Apple Direct sales. It seems they're starting to try push the machines out at a price below their current dealer cost - I'm sure the EOL price breaks should be out any day now...

[segundo]

this info is confirmed in France by macbidouille.com/hardmac.com
it is here:
http://www.hardmac.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2004-05-27#2186
and this is not a rumor, this simply a fact...

now this corraltes quite well with the rumor from croquer.free.fr regarding the future PMG5 Trinity to be announced at the WWDC...

It doesn't correlate with the 975 rumors whatsoever. It does correlate with the assumption/rumors of updated G5 systems at WWDC but that is all. Nothing about low stock should lead anyone to assume we will see 975's.

[Sebas00]

I think we will see these:
2.2/2.4/2.6ghz dual
Intel's PCI express :D

[johnnyjibbs]

I think we will get a major bump to G5s because we've effectively missed a revision. That's why Apple site recently had all those press quotes about the G5 being really good - to cover up the fact that it was overdue for a revision.

They'll be updated majorly at WWDC to be sure. And Apple will garner press attention for having the world's fastest personal computers again. Could be 3GHz, otherwise, I'd expect 2.6-2.8GHz at least.

Secondly, this WWDC will be a good one because, in addition to major new G5s and Tiger preview, we will also see G5 iMacs - probably at 1.6 and 1.8 or even 2.0 GHz as previously stated. It's obvious the iMacs will go G5 because they have missed the recent revision and currently sit very out-of-date and overpriced in Apple's lineup. If they weren't getting ready to unleash G5 iMacs, we would have seen a 1.5GHz 17/20" iMac by now and a 1.25/1.33 GHz 15" model (or maybe even can the 15"er). There's no other reason to explain why the iMacs have not been updated yet.

[sinisterdesign]

im running a 1.6 right now and its a great machine.. Best Mac I have ever used.! stop trashing it..

there with you. it's not the speediest boat in the lake, but my company just upgraded me to this 1.6 from a 400MHz G4 so it feels like "Earth Simulator" (http://www.es.jamstec.go.jp/esc/eng/GC/index.html) by comparison.

thank god, too. i was about to pitch that Sawtooth out the window. it was a great machine when i got one just like it when i worked at Apple like 5 years ago...

off topic, but now that i have one here beside me, the 'cheese grater' case has really grown on me. so sleek, so tactile.

[fpnc]

As for the ADC discounts on the 1.6GHz G5s:

Buy an ADC Select membership for $500 US.
Seriously.

That's incorrect. When you purchase your initial ADC Select membership you don't earn any hardware discounts. For Select memberships you only get the discounts after you renew your membership for a second year. Thus, the total outlay for Select members is at least $1000 (i.e. two years at $500 each). To get the discount in the first year you need to be a premier member at a cost of $3500 (for membership).

This fact is pretty much hidden in the small print of the ADC Select membership. The headlines state that Select members are eligible for hardware discounts, it's only after you dig fairly deeply into the details that you find that Select members only get the discounts after they renew for a second year.

UPDATE, okay forget what I said here. The offer for the 1.6GHz Power Macs appears to be a special deal. You apparently don't need any ADC hardware discount assets to qualify for this offer.

[itsa]

If they're only clearing out the 1.6 machines then doesn't
1.8, 2 and 2.2 look more realistic?

i_b_joshua

It would be more realistic....but I hope you are wrong!
I was wishing the 2gigers would be the low end after the next update.
At this point I'm thinking we will be lucky to see much of a bump at all.

Why is Apple (the makers of the leading OS) sooooo far behind in prossing speeds?

[jelloshotsrule]

As for the ADC discounts on the 1.6GHz G5s:



That's incorrect. When you purchase your initial ADC Select membership you don't earn any hardware discounts. For Select memberships you only get the discounts after you renew your membership for a second year. Thus, the total outlay for Select members is at least $1000 (i.e. two years at $500 each). To get the discount in the first year you need to be a premier member at a cost of $3500 (for membership).

This fact is pretty much hidden in the small print of the ADC Select membership. The headlines state that Select members are eligible for hardware discounts, it's only after you dig fairly deeply into the details that you find that Select members only get the discounts after they renew for a second year.

i can confirm this

my g5 order last year (via adc) was rejected because we have to wait a year and renew... quite a bite in the arse, but makes some sense.

[~Shard~]

It would be more realistic....but I hope you are wrong!
I was wishing the 2gigers would be the low end after the next update.
At this point I'm thinking we will be lucky to see much of a bump at all.

Why is Apple (the makers of the leading OS) sooooo far behind in prossing speeds?

Nah, if they're clearing out the 1.6 G5s it's because when Apple announces the new speed bumps up to 3 GHz @ WWDC, the 1.6 G5s will seem completely useless and slow! ;) :cool:

[snooziums]

I am looking for a new computer to replace my aging Power Computing Macintosh clone. Yes, this machine has been through several upgrades, however, I can only upgrade it so far. It is currently running Mac OS 10.1.

I need to be able to use my SCSI and standard ATA drives, which use PCI cards to access them. Having standard PCI cards is very important, as I have yet to see any PCI-X cards on the market. In addition to having PCI cards for standard ATA and SCSI (both internal and for external drives), I also have a PCI card that allows for five USB ports including one internal port (inside of the computer), as well as both firewire 400 and 800.

Since the new PowerMacs do not seem to have any internal drive bays, the Zip, Jaz, PCMCIA card readers, and Tape drives mush be placed externally, however that requires having an external SCSI port, which no new Macintosh comes with, thus I have to keep the SCSI PCI card.

The 1.6 GHz PowerMac G5 appears to be the only new Macintosh that will run standard PCI cards. The 1.8 and 2.0 have PCI-X expansion slots, which are incompatible with any normal PCI cards, and there does not appear to be any PCI-X cards on the market right now.

If Apple cuts the PowerMac G5 1.6 tower, they will be cutting out the use of PCI cards when there are no PCI-X cards yet on the market. So, basically, the 1.6 G5 tower needs to stay, or Apple needs to find a way to use older PCI cards, or they need to come out with some PCI-X ATA and SCSI, controllers.

[gorkonapple]

is the imac (ie, a consumer machine) really going to be discussed at this show for professionals?

i don't think it's really been done before


i believe that the 1.6 with the adc discount is 1299 bucks. which is great. but, it's still not really "worth" just buying because of the price... i mean, the machine ain't all that great.


One of my pastors at church works as a graphic artist and his whole office uses G4 iMacs so it's not far fetched. iMac's fit in where you don't want/need the flexibility or power of a PowerMac.

[jsnuff1]

3 Ghz proccessors are coming. Jobs had plenty of chances, expecially with the IBM yeild problems anouncment to say that they would not be able to meet this goal, but he didnt and WWDC is a few weeks away. There is no way in hell the he would wait untill WWDC to announce that 3GHz isent coming. There would be hell to pay and he knows it. Plus it would not make sense as a buisness move. They need to sell more PM and if they knew they wouldnt be able to reach 3Ghz they would have announced it and those people waiting for 3Ghz to upgrade would have just bought the 2Ghz machines.

Im betting Jobs will wow us with
-3Ghz 975, 980 or whatever you want to call them @ 130nm
-Revamped system bus
-PCI Express with those nice new graphics cards from ATI
-More storage space and dual optical drives

[AidenShaw]

Having standard PCI cards is very important, as I have yet to see any PCI-X cards on the market.

You can plug PCI cards into PCI-X slots (unless you have the old 5v PCI cards, and you can't even plug those into most new PCI slots). Doesn't the Mac support this? (the Apple store says that the FC card for a G5 is PCI)

Even the new PCI-X 2 (up to 533 MHz) is backwards compatible:

http://www.pcisig.com/specifications/pcix_20/

[hervon]

Hi all,

I just noticed that any BTO G5s with an OEM Radeon 9800 has a delivery time of 4 - 6 weeks meaning they are OUT of Stock of OEM Radeon 9800. We can speculate that they are waiting for the arrival of new material.

Some earlier rumors speculated that Apple waited for ATI to deliver a new card... ;-)

[ImAlwaysRight]

Ha ha ha, all this blind faith we will see 3GHz announced in a month. No wonder so many are let down when these dates come and reality sets in.

THINK ABOUT IT ... we don't even have 2.2GHz G5, which should have come out at least in January. Here it is end of May, over 9 months since the dual 2.0 G5 has been shipping, and we STILL have dual 2.0GHz as the high end. Yet many of you believe dual 3.0 in a month ... ha! I have some ocean front property in Kansas to sell ya!

My bets would be the best we will see is dual 2.0/2.2/2.4, because history has shown when Apple can't speed bump its machines, they go to duals just to make the consumer feel like they are getting something. Those of you who believe 3.0GHz is for the next round are gonna be mighty disappointed. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw dual 1.8/2.0/2.2 for the next bump. After all, Apple isn't even discounting the dual 1.8, which tells you something. I prefer to look at Apple's history. It really does show how they do business in the present.

[whooleytoo]

i can confirm this

my g5 order last year (via adc) was rejected because we have to wait a year and renew... quite a bite in the arse, but makes some sense.

Odd, I availed of the Panther & Select membership special offer,and I have a hardware discount in my assets page which expires this November. Since it expires after one year, I can only assume I don't need to renew to use it (I've certainly read nothing until now about having to renew to get the discount).

[AppleJustWorks]

Here's my guess.. I don't think we'll see 3ghz for some time.
2.2 / 2.4 / DP 2.6



That would be a total waste of an update....Actually that would a decrease in the quality of the line!!!

The CURRENT lineup has dual in the middle and high-ends...I would expect the same for the next updated lineup as well as expecting an ALL Dual lineup! :)

[fpnc]

PCI-X is backward compatible with PCI, so your cards should work in the PCI-X Power Macs (i.e. you do NOT need to limit yourself to the 1.6GHz model). However, as someone else mentioned some of the (very) old PCI cards require higher voltage than is supplied by PCI-X. I suspect that most recent PCI cards will work without problems in the Power Mac's PCI-X slots.

...The 1.6 GHz PowerMac G5 appears to be the only new Macintosh that will run standard PCI cards. The 1.8 and 2.0 have PCI-X expansion slots, which are incompatible with any normal PCI cards, and there does not appear to be any PCI-X cards on the market right now.

If Apple cuts the PowerMac G5 1.6 tower, they will be cutting out the use of PCI cards when there are no PCI-X cards yet on the market. So, basically, the 1.6 G5 tower needs to stay, or Apple needs to find a way to use older PCI cards, or they need to come out with some PCI-X ATA and SCSI, controllers.

[jelloshotsrule]

Odd, I availed of the Panther & Select membership special offer,and I have a hardware discount in my assets page which expires this November. Since it expires after one year, I can only assume I don't need to renew to use it (I've certainly read nothing until now about having to renew to get the discount).

hmm. that's weird... what was the panther and select offer? i didn't see anything about that

well, take advantage of it! at this point, i've spent/lost the original 500, so now it is either spend another 500 and get the discount, or just write off the original to begin with. hmm


edit: also i'm not saying the 1.6 is worthless in the least. just saying that it doesn't grab *my* attention all that much... because i have a dual 2. if it were the dual 1.8, it might. that's all. :)

[thedogcow]

(SNIP)
nevertheless, it's GOT to be more than a bump from 2GHz --> 2.2GHz. people would get up & leave WWDC.



This is beyond stupid. WWDC attendees pay a large amount of money ($1300) to attend. They would not leave.

[nuckinfutz]

THINK ABOUT IT ... we don't even have 2.2GHz G5, which should have come out at least in January. Here it is end of May, over 9 months since the dual 2.0 G5 has been shipping, and we STILL have dual 2.0GHz as the high end. Yet many of you believe dual 3.0 in a month ... ha! I have some ocean front property in Kansas to sell ya!

Powermac G5 2Ghz were the best sellers for a while after the initial announcement. So it's reasonable to say that Apple knows that they have to have a decent chip supply. Now hindsight showing us that the 970 recently had fab problems above 2Ghz it's easy to see why Apple would be forced to delay announcement. This however has no bearing on the 3Ghz because that's a different chip design. The 970 is supposed to top out at 2.5-2.6Ghz. The 3Ghz will most likely be based on POWER5 Lite specs.


My bets would be the best we will see is dual 2.0/2.2/2.4,

You could bet but don't bet too much. You'd lose your shirt.


My guess is that we'll see no less than a top model with 2.6Ghz using the 970FX. Apple may very well announce a Dual 3Ghz 975 based processor. However it could be a 4th Powermac in the line and priced at $3499. Which would be fine for me. Only a Pro needs a Dual 3Ghz it's should be beefy and priced accordingly.

[fpnc]

I feel pretty certain that there will NOT be a 3.0GHz Power Mac announced at WWDC. My guess (at best) is a top end of 2.6GHz. Also, no PCI Express for probably another nine months (perhaps in first quarter 2005). I suspect that WWDC will be a simple speed bump on the existing Power Mac motherboard using IBM's 970fx @ 90nm.

You also need to remember that Steve Jobs has already modified his "3GHz in 12 months" statement to "by the end of summer" 2004 (which could mean announcement/intro in late September -- not this June).

My guess is that part of Steve's "surprise" at WWDC will be that the speed-bumped machines will be available immediately and in quantity (after waiting for an entire year this better be the case). Also, I think there is some possibility of a G5-based iMac (which I would rate as a more significant development than just trying to reach 3GHz during the first year).

3 Ghz proccessors are coming. Jobs had plenty of chances, expecially with the IBM yeild problems anouncment to say that they would not be able to meet this goal, but he didnt and WWDC is a few weeks away. There is no way in hell the he would wait untill WWDC to announce that 3GHz isent coming. There would be hell to pay and he knows it. Plus it would not make sense as a buisness move. They need to sell more PM and if they knew they wouldnt be able to reach 3Ghz they would have announced it and those people waiting for 3Ghz to upgrade would have just bought the 2Ghz machines.

Im betting Jobs will wow us with
-3Ghz 975, 980 or whatever you want to call them @ 130nm
-Revamped system bus
-PCI Express with those nice new graphics cards from ATI
-More storage space and dual optical drives

[PRØBE]

[QUOTE=seraphnyc]What I do not understand is the passion with which people are stating - 3Ghz G5's are not coming, Steve Jobs has no power over IBM Fabrication problems, blah blah blah.

Does anyone here work for IBM or Apple in such a way that they CAN be as passionate and overflowing with negativity as they are?[Pointing to websites does not consititute insider information, it is public information of which none says "NO 3Ghz G5!"]

I love speculation on things that have yet to come, wondering how cool it will be, how fast it will feel, WHAT INCREDIBLE NEW GAMES IT CAN KICK THE PCs ASS IN, but to speculate on the side of negativity is rather dull. The facts are:

- Steve Jobs and [you wouldn't believe how many people over look this] chairman of IBM stated that they would reach 3Ghz within 1 year of announcing the G5.

-IBM had fabrication and yield problems using the 90nanometer process for the PPC 970fx.

-XServe G5's using the PPC 970fx have been shipping.

Judging from these 3 things speculations are bound to happen, but to read such passionate arguments against the possibility of the G5 reaching 3Ghz almost reads like some Mac users do not want the G5 to reach 3Ghz. I know some qualify it by saying 'I hope it does reach 3Ghz' at the end of the '3Ghz G5 don't exist and won't for some time' rant.

For arguments sake, and the sake of sanity, let's say it is up in the air and we'd just have to wait and see, but it is starting to sound [<---keyword] like these rumor site's forums are being hit by Windows zealots hoping to rain on the G5 parade.

We have some incredible technology [64bit processor with 32bit backwards compatibility, high-end system architectures and a giant in tech manufacturing like IBM] on our side that the potential to kick the crap out of Intels' and AMDs' line up. Why not air on the side of positivity and hope for a) a statement (he did not CLEARLY promise) come to fruition and b) maybe some REALLY BIG surprises in the realm of new Hardware [both consumer and pro-sumer] and some new software to exploit the power of the G5 to it's fullest.

BTW, I am not a pessimist nor an optimist... I make my judgements and base my hopes on reality.




Lol, I must be tired, but that really made me laugh. I'd love to see a hall of fame or "best of" list of all the funny mistakes people make in their posts. It would provide a little light entertainment and help release some pre-update angst.
;)

[anastasis]

The thing that still upsets me is that Apple is not more flexible with their processors when it comes to purchasing.... I would love to have a Single 2 ghz G5 and I am sure that people would be happy with a dual 1.6 as well. It just does not seem like it would be that hard to have the option to go single or dual on every speed bump.

[mattmack]

Well I would have been very surprised if there hadn't have been any G5 updates planned for WDC...Does Jobs usually keynote the WWDC? It just seems unusual that he would do so without a major announcement.

[dizastor]

It would really seem that the huge lag between updates (12 whole months) would indicate that Apple must have some amazing innovations up their sleeve and I really hope that Steve-o announces 3ghz or better at WWDC but having spent three years religiously checking Macrumors.com daily I know that even the most logical of speculation usually leads to dissapointment.

Here's hoping the cycle of high expectations and disappointing unveilings ends this year. If they hit 3ghz or better at WWDC then I would have confidence enough to venture a guess at G5 PBs announced at MWSF shipping in March. Although for portable use I think the current PB lineup kicks ass compared to the competition.

So cross your fingers, maybe they have some really cool shwag to unveil that we don't even know about yet.

[El Duderino]

i dont mean to change the subject but if someone could quickly let me know how much a 15" PB SD costs at the ADC discount it would be a great help, apple wont let me into the ADC purchase site to see how much they cost, thanx, and sorry for the highjack

P.S. if your getting the student membership ($99) your able to use the discount immediatly, it just takes up to a month for verification, which in turn might work out for the better considering an update or price-drop may occur.

[nuckinfutz]

I feel pretty certain that there will NOT be a 3.0GHz Power Mac announced at WWDC. My guess (at best) is a top end of 2.6GHz. Also, no PCI Express for probably another nine months (perhaps in first quarter 2005). I suspect that WWDC will be a simple speed bump on the existing Power Mac motherboard using IBM's 970fx @ 90nm.

That's pretty conservative. 9 Months though is far too long for PCIe. There's all kind of movement on PICe. SiS is ready to ship PCIe enabled chipsets. Dell is ordering PCIe cards (check xbitlabs.com and anandtech.com respectively). To think Apple is 9 months behind is a little pessimistic but who knows??

The iMac is definitely going to have a G5. If it was a G4 they would have refreshed it along with the eMac. Obviously it's a new design.

I think it's altogether possible for Apple to go ahead and pre-announce the 3Ghz model with the stipulation that it's shipping in Sept. Again I believe it's going to be $3499 so those who find this too righ for their blood will accept the more immediate Dual 2.6Ghz.

[SeaFox]

What's more interesting to consider is the amenities the next systems will have. A number of people have pointed out the Express graphics cards are a possibility. ATI will announce (http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article3.asp?datePublish=2004/05/28&pages=A7&seq=41) their new chips June 3rd and Dell just place a large order (http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/NewsSearch.asp?DocID=1ED469478450A15848256EA0004725F4&query=DELL) for some Express cards to include in their systems. I'd think that Apple would be out in front on new technology like this.

Based on what? Apple's never been out in front on graphics card technology. That's one reason why it's never been a big draw to hardcore gamers. Mac's long came with built-in video systems (for no-driver problem systems, and for proprietary connector strategies). Upgrading was only available via PCI video cards, which weren't nearly as many of as AGP card. Apple went to actual graphics cards then, but they were always a step or two back from the current bus standard. When Apple started shipping G4's with 4x AGP, the PC world was already using 8x.

I see no new graphics bus. But I do see the return of two optical drives, maybe not more internal drives, though. I'm still waiting for Apple to realize if they are going to make your keyboard and mouse USB-only they need to put in more USB ports than the competion. My Dell has six ports and the keyboard and mouse are serial so they don't use any of them.

[windowsblowsass]

Blind faith! Sheesh. He can't ship anything if IBM can't make 3GHz capable processors. I can see Jobs preannouncing a 3GHz for Christmas if IBM don't fix their process within the next month or two!

I'm hedging my bets on 2.1GHz, 2.4GHz and 2.7GHz systems myself (3x multiplier, 700, 800 and 900MHz busses respectively). If Apple do get >1GHz busses working then maybe we'll see 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, 2.6 (pick any 3) systems.
you do ralize that he dual2 has 1ghz fsb bus right. therefor by your 3x multipler we would see 3ghz

[mattmack]

Why is Apple (the makers of the leading OS) sooooo far behind in prossing speeds?
I am having some trouble following this problem. Wasn't apple producing a 450 MHz machine when the pIII 900 was in a majority of computers (100%) faster (I know just in numerical values) and they were stuck there for a long time as pIV's sky rocketed. Apple is now at 2GHz while the most common pIV out there is a 2.6GHz. That sure is a hell of a lot closer that they have been in a long time and even with low end rumors it puts us equivalent in just numbers with the intel world not even considering 64 bit vs 32 bit processing and Dual processor awareness as well as pipeline length and all that. All in all I feel that Apple is a lot better off now than they have been since the days of 66MHz machines when Apple ruled the compter landscape.

I am sorry if this is off topic, but I feel that even if we don't see 3 GHz if you choose to use Apple you are getting a far better computer. And having a 450 that really wasn't that far behind a PIII 900 I have been happy for almost five years. Hopefully I will get a low end rev B G5 when they come out :D

[wdlove]

It is very interesting to read all the predictions. I'm just happy that I only have 30 days to hear the Stevenote. :)

[fpnc]

As for the ADC Select Hardware discounts, this is what Apple says about that:

"ADC Hardware Purchase Program *
Significant discount on Macintosh systems for development and testing. Premier members may purchase up to ten discounted systems per year. Select membership includes one discount per renewal year."

Note the key phrase for Select members -- "per renewal year" -- not per year as for the Premier members. The chart of benefits also shows a half-full bullet under the Select hardware discounts (meaning, I suspect, that not all Select members receive hardware discounts).

Here is the link: http://developer.apple.com/membership/index.html

So, as I previously said, the initial Select membership does NOT include a hardware discount. If you got one or think you got one then that was either a special, one-time deal or it's just a mistake (which may be caught if you actually try to order a system). I purchased my ADC Select membership last October and I did not receive a hardware discount asset.

I've also heard that the ADC Student memberships are eligible for immediate hardware discounts. But I don't know the details on that program (other than that it's really inexpensive) or what exactly they qualify for in hardware purchases.

hmm. that's weird... what was the panther and select offer? i didn't see anything about that

well, take advantage of it! at this point, i've spent/lost the original 500, so now it is either spend another 500 and get the discount, or just write off the original to begin with. hmm


edit: also i'm not saying the 1.6 is worthless in the least. just saying that it doesn't grab *my* attention all that much... because i have a dual 2. if it were the dual 1.8, it might. that's all. :)

[nuckinfutz]

Based on what? Apple's never been out in front on graphics card technology.

No remember Apple was shipping the Rage 128 before it was available on the PC. They do have the ability to hit markets first.

When Apple started shipping G4's with 4x AGP, the PC world was already using 8x

Yeah and moving to 8x really gave a HUGE speed increase right? NOT

I'd give Apple probably a 60% chance of going PCI express. I don't see why someone of you are so pessimistic. The typical Taiwanese Mobo still doesn't have PCI-X so Apple is ahead on this one. Looks like there will be PCIe products in the channel for late 2004 early 2005. Apple is aware of this.

[Windowlicker]

Hmmm, before you spring for that display, try to compare the Apple display side-by-side with the Samsung 24".


the 243T is slightly larger (1", pitch 0.270mm vs. 0.258mm)
the 243T is brighter (300 cd/m2 vs. 250 cd/m2)
the 243T has more contrast (500:1 vs. 350:1)
the 243T has an adjustable height/tilt stand with portrait/landscape rotation
the 243T has a narrow bezel
the 243T has a standard VESA mount for 3rd party stands and arms (e.g. http://www.ergotron.com/3_products/flat_panel/default.asp)
the 243T is not made of clear plastic


It really is time for Apple to update their LCD displays.... If you look at them side-by-side, there's definitely a difference. (In addition to the fashion problem that brushed aluminum and lucite don't match.)

http://www.samsungusa.com/SamsungUSA/PRODUCT/20040120/b2c_m_243t-black.jpghttp://www.ergotron.com/3_products/flat_panel/neoFlex/images/45-160wMon.jpg

just one question: does the samsung come with ADC? I'm not buying a DVI display as long as I can choose from ADC.. less desktop clutter because the display doesn't need its own power cord. though i agree with you that sometimes (very seldom) the clear plastic (which i have on my 17"er) is a bit annoying.

[denm316]

hopefull the rev b's wont have all the fan problems, you know where the power mac gets ready to take-off

[pdxdeano]

Perhaps there are even grander things in the works for WWDC. Earlier this year Steve said that this would be an "exciting" year for the Mac. Maybe we'll see a complete bottom to top revamping of the Mac. Maybe the iMac will replace the eMac. An entierly new system will replace the iMac at the mid-level point and 3GHz G5's will come out on top.

[denm316]

Does Jobs usually keynote the WWDC? It just seems unusual that he would do so without a major announcement.

Jobs did the Keynote last year and announced the Rev A G5's

[Windowlicker]

I think we will get a major bump to G5s because we've effectively missed a revision. That's why Apple site recently had all those press quotes about the G5 being really good - to cover up the fact that it was overdue for a revision.

They'll be updated majorly at WWDC to be sure. And Apple will garner press attention for having the world's fastest personal computers again. Could be 3GHz, otherwise, I'd expect 2.6-2.8GHz at least.

Secondly, this WWDC will be a good one because, in addition to major new G5s and Tiger preview, we will also see G5 iMacs - probably at 1.6 and 1.8 or even 2.0 GHz as previously stated. It's obvious the iMacs will go G5 because they have missed the recent revision and currently sit very out-of-date and overpriced in Apple's lineup. If they weren't getting ready to unleash G5 iMacs, we would have seen a 1.5GHz 17/20" iMac by now and a 1.25/1.33 GHz 15" model (or maybe even can the 15"er). There's no other reason to explain why the iMacs have not been updated yet.

you might very well be right, johnny boy! i haven't really tought very much about iMacs.. somehow they're not very close to my heart. my next computer is gonna be a laptop or a g5, that's for sure. and I think I rather want a pm g5 with a big display, but then again, it's loads of $$ (or actually €€). blah blah blah. (heh just woke up and realized i've been sleeping a couple of hours when i should've been studying.. feeling quite sleepy)

anyway this will be a bit off topic, but has anyone thought that when we get these updated G5's, what will they look like? if we get a 3ghz g5, i don't think it's gonna look the same as rev A... just look at the PM G4s or the colour changes on the g3 imacs.

my guess is they'll add another optical drive (especially if they don't hit 3ghz) and do some other stuff that i can't imagine. the g4 rev's have always looked different.. don't think they want a 3ghz g5 be an exception by looking the same as a 2ghz model.

[allroy]

for the past year doesn't mean they won't hit 3GHZ. Steve never said there would be incremental updates throughout the year, he said there WILL BE 3GHZ G5's within a year. So you can't gauge progress based on something that might not have been planned.

If Apple was going to just modestly bump up the speed, it WOULD NOT be during WWDC, they would just do it, (Powerbook, eMac, iBook) an updated line is not a major event nor has S.J. ever showcased something at WWDC/Macworld that was a simple update. He knows what was said and would not risk public humiliation on the same stage introducing a 2.2GHZ G5 where he promised 3GHZ. NOtice how I did not say iMac, they will have G5's in them not 90nm but the current 130nm 1.6/1.8GHZ

Another thing is I think you will see 3GHZ shipping first, from a business sense it's stupid not to do it this way. You have people waiting for faster machines and offer them a less expensive one right away, most people will jump on it since they've been waiting and it's available immediately, this will take away from the bottom line. You offer the high end, so you sell them at a higher price point and probably a higher profit margin.

Apple was already been seeing yields in the 2.6GHZ range 2 months or so ago, there was no mention of top end.

[dizastor]

Perhaps there are even grander things in the works for WWDC. Earlier this year Steve said that this would be an "exciting" year for the Mac. Maybe we'll see a complete bottom to top revamping of the Mac. Maybe the iMac will replace the eMac. An entierly new system will replace the iMac at the mid-level point and 3GHz G5's will come out on top.

Yeah, with the length of the wait between updates I'm thinking they have been working on something major. Just a gut feeling.

Let's hope you're right.

[slooksterPSV]

Another thing is I think you will see 3GHZ shipping first, from a business sense it's stupid not to do it this way. You have people waiting for faster machines and offer them a less expensive one right away, most people will jump on it since they've been waiting and it's available immediately, this will take away from the bottom line. You offer the high end, so you sell them at a higher price point and probably a higher profit margin.

That is true, they could make more profits on the 3GHz PowerMac G5 then about a month later release the iMac G5. Its just that easy to see it, but still I could also see Apple releasing an iMac G5 1.6 and the PM G5 at the same time, let people decide, more power to them.

[fpnc]

Okay, it appears that I was wrong about the 1.6GHz Power Mac discount offer though ADC. This may be one of those special, one-time deals that apply to all Select and Premier members. Here is a quote from Apple's ADC hardware purchase program site:

"NEWS AND UPDATES:

Special Pricing on Power Mac G5 1.6GHz
ADC is pleased to offer special pricing on the Power Mac G5 1.6GHz to ADC Select and Premier members in the United States and Europe. Through June 26, ADC Select and Premier members can purchase up to five (5) Power Mac G5 1.6GHz systems through the ADC Hardware Purchase Program, without affecting annual hardware discount purchase limits.

ADC Online members in supported countries upgrading to Select or Premier in May or June can participate in this promotion, and will also get access to pre-release software, code-level technical support, discount programs, and all the other great benefits Select and Premier members enjoy. Apple reserves the right to end or to change the terms and conditions of this offer at any time.

Please note: You may not add iPods to orders for the Power Mac G5 1.6GHz. [May 21 2004]"

Note in particular the comment about upgrading in May or June from ADC Online membership.

[neonart]

I am having some trouble following this problem. Wasn't apple producing a 450 MHz machine when the pIII 900 was in a majority of computers (100%) faster (I know just in numerical values) and they were stuck there for a long time as pIV's sky rocketed. Apple is now at 2GHz while the most common pIV out there is a 2.6GHz...


Yeah, but the fastest P4 is 3.4Ghz, and the most "common" Mac is certainly not a 2Ghz.

I'm not rooting for the other side or anything, but were not that close GHz-wise. While that doesn't matter (much) to folks like us, the 3Ghz are necessary to narrow the perceivable gap.

[dontmatter]

If you read from this- "updates must be coming at WWDC": DUH. that they were coming was as sure as anything in the mac world, and this is just another tidbit. We knew this, guys.

If you read this as "b/c they're only clearing out 1.6, it'll be 1.8, 2.0, 2.2" or if you're making claims either way about 3.0 Gigahertz :C'mon. You know you don't know this stuff. Maybe 1.6 sales are behind the others? Maybe 1.8 and 2.2 chips are going in an imac? Maybe steve will leap to 7.8 gigahertz?

Don't bother speculating

[dongmin]

just one question: does the samsung come with ADC? I'm not buying a DVI display as long as I can choose from ADC.. less desktop clutter because the display doesn't need its own power cord. though i agree with you that sometimes (very seldom) the clear plastic (which i have on my 17"er) is a bit annoying.

The last I checked the Samsung 24" was over $2400 at Amazon.com. The Apple 23" start at $2000. If you get it with a Power Mac, it's $1500. Yeah the Samsung might have some nicer specs, but is it worth an extra $900? Not for me. I'm betting that Apple is gonna do another round of price cuts on the displays. The 23" at $1500-1600 and 20" at $800-1000.

[dongmin]

If you read from this- "updates must be coming at WWDC": DUH. that they were coming was as sure as anything in the mac world, and this is just another tidbit. We knew this, guys.

If you read this as "b/c they're only clearing out 1.6, it'll be 1.8, 2.0, 2.2" or if you're making claims either way about 3.0 Gigahertz :C'mon. You know you don't know this stuff. Maybe 1.6 sales are behind the others? Maybe 1.8 and 2.2 chips are going in an imac? Maybe steve will leap to 7.8 gigahertz?

Don't bother speculatingGotta go with dontmatter on this one. The 1.6 ghz have been a slow seller ever since when it was introduced. That model being the only one discounted could simply just mean that it's the only model with a sizable inventory still. I wouldn't use that to guess about the specs.

Apple will dish out whatever IBM can come through with. Apple knows that they've missed one update, and that's because IBM couldn't deliver enough of the 90 nm 970fx. Apple knows as well as anyone that when they miss updates, their sales slow down as people wait for the next big thing. HOPEFULLY, the recent statements by IBM saying that they've got a handle on the problem means that 90 nm chips will be rolling off the assembly line. Whether these 90 nms are 970fx at speeds up to 2.6 or 980s at speeds up to 3.0 is ANYBODY's wild guess.

PowerBook observers will remember that they had to wait 9 months before they got an incremental update last November. The long wait doesn't say anything about how big the update will be. For the millionth time, Apple is at the mercy of IBM and Freescale. Whatever they provide, Apple will deliver.

[reyesmac]

If Apple can make their low end Powermac have the same motherboards as the higher end ones, maybe they wouldn't have to discount them so much to get people to buy them. I wouldn't want to pay Apple to give me something they crippled on purpose so as to keep the real Powermacs (the top two models) at an over $2k starting price.

[eric67]

It doesn't correlate with the 975 rumors whatsoever. It does correlate with the assumption/rumors of updated G5 systems at WWDC but that is all. Nothing about low stock should lead anyone to assume we will see 975's.

I was just trying to make a link between a rumor (PPC975) and a fact (low stocks for PMG5).
now this means we potentially can expect a rev for PMG5 at the WWDC, and potentially it could be a PPC975-based PMG5...that's what I mean, and what I would like to see happening :cool:

[eric67]

Ha ha ha, all this blind faith we will see 3GHz announced in a month. No wonder so many are let down when these dates come and reality sets in.

THINK ABOUT IT ... we don't even have 2.2GHz G5, which should have come out at least in January. Here it is end of May, over 9 months since the dual 2.0 G5 has been shipping, and we STILL have dual 2.0GHz as the high end. Yet many of you believe dual 3.0 in a month ... ha! I have some ocean front property in Kansas to sell ya!

My bets would be the best we will see is dual 2.0/2.2/2.4, because history has shown when Apple can't speed bump its machines, they go to duals just to make the consumer feel like they are getting something. Those of you who believe 3.0GHz is for the next round are gonna be mighty disappointed. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw dual 1.8/2.0/2.2 for the next bump. After all, Apple isn't even discounting the dual 1.8, which tells you something. I prefer to look at Apple's history. It really does show how they do business in the present.

Please remind me to contact you after the WWDC...just to see what will be your position at that time... ;)

[Crikey]

If they're only clearing out the 1.6 machines then doesn't
1.8, 2 and 2.2 look more realistic?

i_b_joshua

Yes. I expect to see either the above, or a 2.0/2.2/2.4 line, or maybe a single 2.0/dual 2.0/dual 2.2 line. I'm wondering how Apple will fit a dual-G5 at any speed into the $1800ish price slot they like to have at the low end. Even if they have to redesign the 1.6GHz logic board or design a new single-CPU board, I suspect the low-end machine will stay single-CPU.

Of course, I'd be as happy as anyone to be wrong about this. If July dawned with today's dual-2.0GHz around $1800, I'd be super-tempted to buy one.

Waiting for WWDC . . .


Crikey

[furrina]

I just bought a pb 15" and am waiting til after the conference to purchase a PM G5 -- low end is fine but will definitely get a dual. Right now the 1.8 dp PM is perfect, but I'm hoping for a price drop if they come out with faster ones.

a couple of questions:
Do you guys think there will be any price drops in the dual processor 1.8 or 2 PMs if the come out with faster speeds?

Will they be coming out with some new architecture or form factor for the PM g5s that will be worth the higher price and signify a precedent for future hardware?

Also, pardon my plain old layman question, but what would be the major differences between the tower PM and the iMac (with the exception of the built in screen) if they put the G5 in the iMac as expected? Expandability is not the hugest issue, I've got plenty of external hard drives, etc.
I do some video editing and want a really fast desktop machine, but plan to buy an external cinema display monitor so won't need the built in screen.

[Crikey]

here is my take on it. They are clearing out supplies for WWDC. There will be kind of update, but noone is going to be able to know what it is. Everyone knew the G5 was coming last year, but noone knew what it was until WWDC. Displays are definately coming, and i believe G5 iMacs are as well. Here is what i would bet on being there.

PowerMac G5
Dual 2.0Ghz $1799
Dual 2.6 Ghz $2499
Dual 3.0Ghz $2999



Steve would love to have 3.0GHz Power Macs to announce at WWDC, but if the chip yields aren't there, neither will the systems be. It was a mistake to make that statement last year, and as I recall even the way he phrased it was a little uncertain/wiggle-room-ish. I don't really understand the "Daddy, you PROMISED!" petulance from some posters here (not from the poster I'm quoting, but others). What's possible is possible; what isn't, won't happen.

I think if there is a 3GHz announcement, it will be of systems to ship in the fall.

I also think it goes without saying that most people who post here, including myself, are just guessing. There are probably People In The Know at Apple who read this site and laugh.




iMac G5
15" 1.6Ghz $1299
17" 1.8Ghz $1799
20" 1.8Ghz $2099



I recall hearing about "form factor changes in the iMac line" mentioned by senior Apple execs. I'm not so sure that the G5 iMac will look like a simple line refresh as the above list suggests. Will the new iMacs have built-in LCDs? I'm in favor of a "headless" iMac, but Apple does love that all-in-one concept.

If they do stick with a line-up like they have now, and move them all to the G5, the quoted post is a very realistic scenario.

I could see sort of a split in the iMac line, with some 1.33+GHz G4s and maybe a 1.6GHz iMac at the top end. It will be interesting to see what Apple manages to conjure up.



Displays
17"
20"
23"
30"

This is a very plausible line-up, in accord with the rumors I've read here.

[nuckinfutz]

LOL 2.2Ghz maximum. I hope you guys bet like this in Vegas. Geez talk about safe.

Trust me we don't see anything lower than 2.4. Hell AMD has the Opteron coming this fall in a 2.4 Ghz version and surely you don't think AMD is the superior to IBM do you?

Keep in mind people. IBM never expected the 970 to go much above 2.5Ghz. Therefore when we mention 2.6 or above we're basically talking a new processor. Hence the 975 threads

[MacsRgr8]

Yep.

No chickening here..... Dual 3 GHz, I say ;)
Dunno about PCI-Extreme grfx just yet. Hell, even a Dual 2.0 GHz G5 with Radeon 9800 Pro doesn't stretch the limits of a AGP 4x bus.

Compatiblity! Radeon X800, nVidia 6800 coming??? (either AGP 8x or PCI-Extreme)

BTW, dear nuckinfutz... I nominate you to the funniest name here on MacRumors, although I'm not sotallytober :D

[mattmack]

Yeah, but the fastest P4 is 3.4Ghz, and the most "common" Mac is certainly not a 2Ghz.

I'm not rooting for the other side or anything, but were not that close GHz-wise. While that doesn't matter (much) to folks like us, the 3Ghz are necessary to narrow the perceivable gap.
I see your point, but 2 Ghz compared to 3GHz is still a lot closer than 500MHz to 1.2 GHz

[Windowlicker]

The last I checked the Samsung 24" was over $2400 at Amazon.com. The Apple 23" start at $2000. If you get it with a Power Mac, it's $1500. Yeah the Samsung might have some nicer specs, but is it worth an extra $900? Not for me. I'm betting that Apple is gonna do another round of price cuts on the displays. The 23" at $1500-1600 and 20" at $800-1000.

i can't even dream of getting a 20" SD for $800 (…1000€ tax incl.) :))) i've been thinking what my next setup will be like, and i think this lovely 17"er is gonna get a big brotha. a 12" PB with a 20" SD at home.. 12" on the road, 32" (12"+20") on the desk :))

[nuckinfutz]

No chickening here..... Dual 3 GHz, I say
Dunno about PCI-Extreme grfx just yet. Hell, even a Dual 2.0 GHz G5 with Radeon 9800 Pro doesn't stretch the limits of a AGP 4x bus


Damn I wish I was sotallytober ;)

You know I thought that PCIe was kind of pointless to until I watched a video on IDF and PCIe. Here's what I like

Serial- easier to implement on the Motherboard.

Fast- PCIe is duplex so now it maxes at 8GBps total(4GBps upstrm/dwnstrm)
Efficient- Progammes can program data to stay off the FSB or snoop the bus and still maintain control of data. AGP doesn't handle this well

Relaxed Ordering allows Read Request to jump ahead of posted writes as long as the posted write does not contain data that the read request needs. There goes one bottleneck.

Traffic Channels and Virtual Channels- Great organization for Isochronous data. This is akin to Firewire and it's ability to prioritize streams of data so that mission critical data gets guaranteed bandwidth.

Upstream- AGP's upstream bandwidth is 1x boo hiss. PCIe is duplex so that's a 15x improvement on upstream.

Wanna see cool new PCI cards coming out in the future with HD featues and other stuff. PCIe is the key. The sooner Apple gets there the better.

[MacsRgr8]

Damn I wish I was sotallytober ;)

You know I thought that PCIe was kind of pointless to until I watched a video on IDF and PCIe. Here's what I like

Serial- easier to implement on the Motherboard.

Fast- PCIe is duplex so now it maxes at 8GBps total(4GBps upstrm/dwnstrm)
Efficient- Progammes can program data to stay off the FSB or snoop the bus and still maintain control of data. AGP doesn't handle this well

Relaxed Ordering allows Read Request to jump ahead of posted writes as long as the posted write does not contain data that the read request needs. There goes one bottleneck.

Traffic Channels and Virtual Channels- Great organization for Isochronous data. This is akin to Firewire and it's ability to prioritize streams of data so that mission critical data gets guaranteed bandwidth.

Upstream- AGP's upstream bandwidth is 1x boo hiss. PCIe is duplex so that's a 15x improvement on upstream.

Wanna see cool new PCI cards coming out in the future with HD featues and other stuff. PCIe is the key. The sooner Apple gets there the better.

Probably have a heakingfreadache tomorrow morning.... :D

But, seems AGP could be limiting its own bandwidth... Kinda like USB2 vs FireWire etc.
Sounds convincing. I just hope Apple agrees with both grfx card manufacturers wich way will be best. Being able to sell an X800 or 6800 with a PowerMac G5 is good marketing. I hope PCI-Extreme is the way!

[Black Badger]

Blimey, slow to pick up on this..

See this post 24/05 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=854241#post854241)

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

[Wash!!]

SGI and other Unix base workstations are running at 500MHz to 800Mhz..
see:http://www.sgi.com/workstations/

Look at the type of applications are design for the G5 is a 64 bit chip, IBM nor Apple or any other developer has even start pushing their software to take advantage of the processing power of the chips..

Get over it... I'll just sit and wait to see what Apple comes up with... :rolleyes:

[jaw04005]

As for the ADC discounts on the 1.6GHz G5s:



That's incorrect. When you purchase your initial ADC Select membership you don't earn any hardware discounts. For Select memberships you only get the discounts after you renew your membership for a second year. Thus, the total outlay for Select members is at least $1000 (i.e. two years at $500 each). To get the discount in the first year you need to be a premier member at a cost of $3500 (for membership).

This fact is pretty much hidden in the small print of the ADC Select membership. The headlines state that Select members are eligible for hardware discounts, it's only after you dig fairly deeply into the details that you find that Select members only get the discounts after they renew for a second year.

UPDATE, okay forget what I said here. The offer for the 1.6GHz Power Macs appears to be a special deal. You apparently don't need any ADC hardware discount assets to qualify for this offer.

That is not true any longer. After purchasing a Select membership, Apple automatically issues an asset for a hardware purchase discount. You do NOT have to be in your second year.

[FuzzyBallz]

As much as I like my 20" Cinema Display, I like my Samsung 191T just a bit more. Man, I could've bought a pair of 191Ts and switch both of them to portrait mode. Well, time to sell the 191T and get the new 193P. Now that's a fine ass looking LCD.

And what does ADC discount on the G5 have anything to do w/ the avg. consumer? They're not getting the discount. And how many ADC members are there anyway? Not enough to affect the G5 supply.

[centauratlas]

My prediction is 2.4 and 2.6 with 3.0 "shipping by end of summer." This way, the 2.4 and 2.6 are not bad upgrades - they are essentially what should have been announced back in Feb, Steve doesn't have to eat his words from last Sept, and they get to update the machines.

Then in Sept they drop the 2.2.

If Apple is 'only' going to 2.2 or 2.4 without more, I doubt they'd intro them at WWDC - they'd do it quietly.

If anything is announce at WWDC, it needs to have some 'wow' factor at least in Steve's mind. A speed bump to 2.2 and 2.4 wouldn't do it. 2.6 would with 3.0 by end of summer. Anything else will remind people what he said in June 2003 and Sept 2003 and he doesn't want that because it would take attention away from things like 10.4

There were some really nice points before. The guy writing about the iMacs saying they'd be 200mhz below the top end PM in particular - I think the key will be that they'd be single, the PMs will be dual.

(There is a nice article in this month's Wired about Steve and Pixar, by the way).

[Mr.Hey]

What I do not understand is the passion with which people are stating - 3Ghz G5's are not coming, Steve Jobs has no power over IBM Fabrication problems, blah blah blah.

Does anyone here work for IBM or Apple in such a way that they CAN be as passionate and overflowing with negativity as they are?[Pointing to websites does not consititute insider information, it is public information of which none says "NO 3Ghz G5!"]

It's their way of preparing themselves of the possibility of no 3-Ghz G5's debuting at WWDC. Regardless of the fact that Steve made it clear that Apple will have a 3-Ghz Power-Mac by summer(?) or a short time after that :D. By making that statement, Steve placed the reputation and credibility of both Apple and "The Big Giant Steve" on the line. I have no doubts about a Power-Mac running at 3-Ghz by the timeline that Steve stated.

[rdowns]

im running a 1.6 right now and its a great machine.. Best Mac I have ever used.! stop trashing it..

My Physician's Desk Reference calls this Dual Envy. :D

[rdowns]

is the imac (ie, a consumer machine) really going to be discussed at this show for professionals?

i don't think it's really been done before


i believe that the 1.6 with the adc discount is 1299 bucks. which is great. but, it's still not really "worth" just buying because of the price... i mean, the machine ain't all that great.

It's the perfect venue for announcing a G5 iMac. First, Steve loves the hoopla a big event like this produces; lots of press. Second, developers develop for all markets and Apple announcing a (stupid label) "prosumer" machine may make it more likely that developers start to develop software that can exploit this beast.

Besides, I really want a new G5 iMac.

[ffakr]

The option to buy 5 extra machines on a select developer account is a big deal, but the discount is only $100 less than the edu pricing. I was about to send a mail around to some admins on my campus till I noticed it wasn't all that big of a discount.

[ImAlwaysRight]

You could bet but don't bet too much. You'd lose your shirt.
LOL, you have short term memory loss. Let's go back to Jan 1 of this year and look at a Macrumors MacWorld roundup:

Appleinsider has been the most vocal about the release of updated PowerMacs at MacWorld San Francisco. A December 4th report claimed that speeds of 2GHz, 2.2GHz, 2.4GHz and 2.6GHz processors were currently being produced by IBM with expectations of the release of new PowerMacs at MacWorld SF 2004. Later, "collaborating information" from the same site claimed PowerMac (and Xserve) updates with speeds up to 2.4GHz would indeed be coming at MacWorld SF 2004.

http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/01/20040109023348.shtml

So, looks like u lost your shirt back in January ;) (you seem like the type to buy into this). Be prepared again with your 3.0GHz prediction.

If Apple was capable of even 2.2GHz up until now, even in Feb, March, or April, don't you think it would have happened? Yes, it would have. So I contend, since no updates of even 2.2GHz have happened by now, don't think the new product line will go 2.2/2.4/2.6 with 3.0 also available a few month later. IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!

Remember, only the 1.6GHz is discounted. If the base was going to be 2.2GHz, we'd see the whole current product line discounted.

Sorry to be the voice of reason and to burst some people's bubble, but I hate to see such naivete.

[PRØBE]

for the past year doesn't mean they won't hit 3GHZ. Steve never said there would be incremental updates throughout the year, he said there WILL BE 3GHZ G5's within a year. So you can't gauge progress based on something that might not have been planned.

If Apple was going to just modestly bump up the speed, it WOULD NOT be during WWDC, they would just do it, (Powerbook, eMac, iBook) an updated line is not a major event nor has S.J. ever showcased something at WWDC/Macworld that was a simple update. He knows what was said and would not risk public humiliation on the same stage introducing a 2.2GHZ G5 where he promised 3GHZ.NOtice how I did not say iMac, they will have G5's in them not 90nm but the current 130nm 1.6/1.8GHZ

Another thing is I think you will see 3GHZ shipping first, from a business sense it's stupid not to do it this way. You have people waiting for faster machines and offer them a less expensive one right away, most people will jump on it since they've been waiting and it's available immediately, this will take away from the bottom line. You offer the high end, so you sell them at a higher price point and probably a higher profit margin.

Apple was already been seeing yields in the 2.6GHZ range 2 months or so ago, there was no mention of top end.




I think that's highly unlikely unless they triple the size of the case and add half a dozen fans. You should read some of ThatWendigo's posts about the 130 nm G5 and heat disappation. Imacs are about space-saving, convenience, silence and elegance, so even a redesigned form factor is likely to be compact. I would therefore have thought the lower heat output of a 90nm chip would be crucial to making a G5 imac work.
I also think they will need to apply the perforated "cheese grater" look to any redesigned imac to help cooling. About time they invented some "nano-fans" Imagine a few hundred thousand of them silently pushing air particles around...

[nuckinfutz]

ImAlwaysRight

Well let's hope in "this" case you're wrong. This is a situation when eating some crow is something we all would do happily. But also think of this. If Apple was moving to a new Rev of motherboards including PCI Express then perhaps it is likely that they realized that they could rev the processors and Motherboards at the same time.

Well just over a month to go. We'll all know then. However if IBM is all that they are cracked up to be then they'll hit 3Ghz by summers end. If AMD can get the Opteron to 2.4 they should be able to hit 3.

[hacksaw]

LOL, you have short term memory loss. Let's go back to Jan 1 of this year and look at a Macrumors MacWorld roundup:

Appleinsider has been the most vocal about the release of updated PowerMacs at MacWorld San Francisco. A December 4th report claimed that speeds of 2GHz, 2.2GHz, 2.4GHz and 2.6GHz processors were currently being produced by IBM with expectations of the release of new PowerMacs at MacWorld SF 2004. Later, "collaborating information" from the same site claimed PowerMac (and Xserve) updates with speeds up to 2.4GHz would indeed be coming at MacWorld SF 2004.

http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/01/20040109023348.shtml

So, looks like u lost your shirt back in January ;) (you seem like the type to buy into this). Be prepared again with your 3.0GHz prediction.

If Apple was capable of even 2.2GHz up until now, even in Feb, March, or April, don't you think it would have happened? Yes, it would have. So I contend, since no updates of even 2.2GHz have happened by now, don't think the new product line will go 2.2/2.4/2.6 with 3.0 also available a few month later. IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!

Remember, only the 1.6GHz is discounted. If the base was going to be 2.2GHz, we'd see the whole current product line discounted.

Sorry to be the voice of reason and to burst some people's bubble, but I hate to see such naivete.


MY WORDS EXACTLY!!!

[ClimbingTheLog]

"The man" has no influence on the yields in the proc factory. Especially because there have been problems before. So I will believe when I see, but I sure hope there will be 3G. ;)

There are exactly two things that improve yields: time and money. "The man" has some influence regarding the latter.

[Postal]

Remember, only the 1.6GHz is discounted. If the base was going to be 2.2GHz, we'd see the whole current product line discounted.

Sorry to be the voice of reason and to burst some people's bubble, but I hate to see such naivete.

That's not necessarily the case. They could simply have decided that a discount would be needed to clear the 1.6 models from inventory, where the others are selling briskly enough with the current promos. There could also be an unusual excess of 1.6 GHz models that Apple thinks would need some extra incentives to clear out beyond just display and memory discounts.

Also, remember that the Brilliant Savings and Memory for Less promos apply to any G5 model. That means that they want to purge G5 inventory as a whole, not just lower-end models.

[ClimbingTheLog]

I think the reason it's only 1.6 G5s is that they aren't selling half as well as the dual proc models. So never fear, 3GHz will be here!

Right. Somebody in Sales looked at the current inventories and the current sales rates. At the current rates, by June 30 the supplies of 1.8 and 2.0 machines will be at acceptable lows.

At current rates, the supplies of 1.6 machines will be unacceptably high. Time to liquidate.

So, yes, this means the entire line will be out of stock come the new machines, which means they're all going to be higher than 2.0.

2.3, 2.6 and 3.0 - there, I've got a dollar on it.

[ClimbingTheLog]

Because in about 7 days I'll be buying for my business:


Did you machines suddenly die? Wait a month and stop whining, eh?

[ClimbingTheLog]

Why is Apple (the makers of the leading OS) sooooo far behind in prossing speeds?

Processing Speeds, you say? Do you mean clock oscillations or Processing Speeds? The former gets attention, the latter really matters. Check out some benchmarks - Apple isn't actually behind on processing speeds.

And in a month they'll be well ahead.

[ClimbingTheLog]

Does Jobs usually keynote the WWDC? It just seems unusual that he would do so without a major announcement.

Yeah, every year since he's been back.

It's his way of supporting the developers without jumping around the stage like a sweaty idiot.

God, I bet Jobs sits around with a joint making fun of Balmer at least once a week.

[mountainmac]

I just ordered a 1.6 G5 for my school music program for $1900 CAD. It was only $600 difference to the emac I was first considering and a heck of a lot more computer. 10 days and counting! :D

[BornAgainMac]

[QUOTE=
If Apple was capable of even 2.2GHz up until now, even in Feb, March, or April, don't you think it would have happened? Yes, it would have. So I contend, since no updates of even 2.2GHz have happened by now, don't think the new product line will go 2.2/2.4/2.6 with 3.0 also available a few month later. IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!

Remember, only the 1.6GHz is discounted. If the base was going to be 2.2GHz, we'd see the whole current product line discounted.

Sorry to be the voice of reason and to burst some people's bubble, but I hate to see such naivete.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps Apple will provide a new color for the Powermac 2Ghz for 2004. LOL
I can't believe my G5 machine is still the top dog since I bought it. I bought it back in 2003. The fastest Mac "on the planet" that you can buy from Apple TODAY.

[~Shard~]

It's the perfect venue for announcing a G5 iMac. First, Steve loves the hoopla a big event like this produces; lots of press. Second, developers develop for all markets and Apple announcing a (stupid label) "prosumer" machine may make it more likely that developers start to develop software that can exploit this beast.

Besides, I really want a new G5 iMac.

I agree, I wouldn't discount Jobs from unveiling a G5 iMac at WWDC at all. I could be wrong, but wasn't the G4 iMac released at MWSF or WWDC a few years back? I seem to recall it was a similar type of event in any case when Jobs unveilied it.

The other question would be, what is the new form factor G5 iMac going to be like? What if Apple gives us the 1.6 or 1.8 GHz G5 in the iMac and upgrades the guts substantially? As a result, what if APple turns the iMac into a mid-grade model, with the eMac being the only true consumer level machine, the PowerMac being the pro-level machine, and the iMac being a mid-level machine which also carries a higher price tag than we're used to? Speculation for another thread, I suppose... :cool:

[blakespot]

Based on what? Apple's never been out in front on graphics card technology. That's one reason why it's never been a big draw to hardcore gamers.


The Mac was the debut platform for the Rage 128 and the (at the time) revolutionary GeForce 3. Avail for Mac before PC.


blakespot

[BWhaler]

Yeah, every year since he's been back.

It's his way of supporting the developers without jumping around the stage like a sweaty idiot.

God, I bet Jobs sits around with a joint making fun of Balmer at least once a week.

The may just be the funniest Mac related post off all time.

[~Shard~]

If Apple was capable of even 2.2GHz up until now, even in Feb, March, or April, don't you think it would have happened? Yes, it would have. So I contend, since no updates of even 2.2GHz have happened by now, don't think the new product line will go 2.2/2.4/2.6 with 3.0 also available a few month later. IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!

Remember, only the 1.6GHz is discounted. If the base was going to be 2.2GHz, we'd see the whole current product line discounted.

Sorry to be the voice of reason and to burst some people's bubble, but I hate to see such naivete.

I disagree. Even though the 1.6 GHz is the only discounted model, it could easily be because:

a) it is the low-end machine and not selling as much as the DP 1.8 GHz (the best bang for your buck) or the DP 2.0 GHz (top of the line!) so they are trying to clear them out of inventory
b) it is the low-end machine in the PowerMac line, and since Apple is going to be releasing a 1.6 GHz G5 iMac, and PowerMacs up to 3.0 GHz, a 1.6 GHz G5 PowerMac makes little sense to still have around

I'm not saying this is the case, but it is just as likely as your scenario in my opinion, so I definitely wouldn't go around quoting yourself as the voice of reason and implying other people's comments are naive. Perhaps the reason we haven't seen 2.2 Ghz G5s yet is because Jobs, focused on bringing his 3 GHz promise to fruition, has been concentrating all efforts on making it happen, and not focusing on marginal gains - go for broke! :cool:

Now I could be completely wrong, and I admit that, but I think we will indeed see the 3 GHz G5s @ WWDC, and if we don't then I will stand corrected - I have no problems with that. The reason I believe this though is one based on being reasonable, logical and realistic, not because I am blindly naive as you seem to be implying some people are.

[BWhaler]

Well, I'm an optimist, and I don't think there is a chance of 3 Ghz at WWDC. No delayed ship announcement either since it'll screw with sales. I've been waiting for the updates to buy the G5, and if there is a smaller bump, the rev. A issues are worked out, and as long as there are new displays, I'm buying.

I bet the 1.6 is done, the 1.8 and 2.0 will find their way into the iMac, and we'll see 2.2, 2.4, 2.6. Everyone will be pissed for a moment, that horse's ass Paul Thurott will write about it for weeks, the MS shill CNET will write an article about it.

But none of US will care since they are still new, faster Macs and I know Apple has a few things up their sleeves to get the attention and press cycle away from no 3.0.

[LaMerVipere]

...Does anyone think we will see an updated case design?

I really hope so! Maybe something with more curves but still all aluminum, smaller than the current tower (maybe similar in size to the Power Mac G4), and room for 2 optical drives.

It would be nice to have some rumours about the look of the Rev. B G5's too. :)

[slooksterPSV]

...Does anyone think we will see an updated case design?

I really hope so! Maybe something with more curves but still all aluminum, smaller than the current tower (maybe similar in size to the Power Mac G4), and room for 2 optical drives.

It would be nice to have some rumours about the look of the Rev. B G5's too. :)

That really depends on how often the change the design of their case. I think they probably will change it pretty soon I'd say with in a year or two. I mean look at how fast everyone elses' cases are changing. How about when they come out you make one and show it to everyone? I've seen some pretty awesome ones out there.

[~Shard~]

Well, I'm an optimist, and I don't think there is a chance of 3 Ghz at WWDC. No delayed ship announcement either since it'll screw with sales. I've been waiting for the updates to buy the G5, and if there is a smaller bump, the rev. A issues are worked out, and as long as there are new displays, I'm buying.

I bet the 1.6 is done, the 1.8 and 2.0 will find their way into the iMac, and we'll see 2.2, 2.4, 2.6. Everyone will be pissed for a moment, that horse's ass Paul Thurott will write about it for weeks, the MS shill CNET will write an article about it.

But none of US will care since they are still new, faster Macs and I know Apple has a few things up their sleeves to get the attention and press cycle away from no 3.0.

This could very well be the case too, but the other thing to consider when discussing the delayed shipping announcements you touched on briefly, is that perhaps that is another reason there have been no updates to the PowerMac line (3 GHz or otherwise) prior to WWDC - as opposed to announcing updated PowerMacs the second they are ready, but tag a "shipping in 2 months" caveat to the announcement, Apple is perhaps holding back such that once they announce the updates, the Apple Store will be raring to go for people's orders, with shipping commencing immediately. Until Virgina Tech puts in another order and eveyrone else gets bumped 4 months... ;)

If Apple doesn't announce the 3 GHz @ WWDC, I won't be disappointed - any speed bump is progress, especially with the supposed issues Apple and IBM have been having with the evolution of the G5, however the majority of people will be disappointed, and rightfully so - an entire year without speed bumps is quite extreme, so when it does happen, hopefully they'll be significant increases.

I guess we'll see in a month! :cool:

[~Shard~]

...Does anyone think we will see an updated case design?

I really hope so! Maybe something with more curves but still all aluminum, smaller than the current tower (maybe similar in size to the Power Mac G4), and room for 2 optical drives.

It would be nice to have some rumours about the look of the Rev. B G5's too. :)

Usually for a Rev B and an update not involving a complete redesign of the system's guts, an updated case design doesn't happen, so I don't see it being too likely. Mind you, if Jobs has those 3 GHz G5s ready to go, perhaps a case redesign is necessary in order to house and cool that thing - even the cheese grater with 8 fans may not cut it! ;)

My gut feel is that we won't see a case redesign for the Rev B PowerMacs - if Apple is busy redesigning anything right now it would be the new form factor for the G5 iMac, the necessary modifications for the G5 PowerBooks, and new displays - oh, and throw 4G iPods in there too. :cool:

[iswimbikeandrun]

i would LOVE steve to pull out the 3GHz & be able to say, "didn't think we were going to be able to do it, did'ja?", but i kind of doubt it.

nevertheless, it's GOT to be more than a bump from 2GHz --> 2.2GHz. people would get up & leave WWDC.

also, the higher we get in GHz, the less of a difference a couple hundred MHz makes from the top end machine to the entry level. if you're going from a 700MHz-->833MHz-->1GHz, that's a good percentage of the processor speed difference, but 2.6GHz-->2.8-->3GHz isn't a lot of spread.

anyone else think that the spread will start getting a little wider?
2-->2.4-->3?
the jumps from 700->833->1GHZ are around 5%, where as the jumps from 2.6->2.8->3GHz are around 14%, your theory is wrong.

[cocoa_nut]

i dont mean to change the subject but if someone could quickly let me know how much a 15" PB SD costs at the ADC discount ....

US ADC price for 1.5 GHz 15" PB SD is $1999 which is $500 or 25% off the standard apple store price of $2499. The discounts don't stop there. Once you add your computer to your cart, you also can get discounts(generally 20% off for residents of the US) on add-ons such as hard drive upgrades, software (Keynote, Final Cut Express), iPods, iSights, AirPort Base Stations, JBL speaker, etc, so long as these items are purchased all together as a system. Select Members (which costs $500 per year) get one such "System" per year. In addition, if a Select Member renews membership and purchases tickets to the WWDC a the same time, they get 2 hardware discounts in the same year. In many cases, it makes little sense to sign up to be a Developer just to get the Hardware discount. But if your are developing software and/or you plan to attend the WWDC anyway, the perks are significant. As they say, "Membership has its advantages!"

[Pegano]

Others may have asked this very same question, but does anyone think there's a chance of PCI-Express (clarification: not PCI-X) in this next revision? Right now it looks kinda dismal on the processor end of things, so maybe if the PCI-E is included, Apple can draw attention away from their processor shortcomings and broken promises. Thoughts?

[nuckinfutz]

Others may have asked this very same question, but does anyone think there's a chance of PCI-Express (clarification: not PCI-X) in this next revision? Right now it looks kinda dismal on the processor end of things, so maybe if the PCI-E is included, Apple can draw attention away from their processor shortcomings and broken promises. Thoughts?


The the Processor situation will be dismal until June 28th ;)

There's a very good chance that PCI Express will be included. PC chipsets are almost ready to ship with PCI Express so Apple has access to completed specifications just like any other HW developer. I'd say it's 60/40 right now in favor.

[Pegano]

Cool. I'm really more anxious to see the PCI-E than to hit 3ghz, cause anything above 2ghz is gonna be REAL fast anyway. :D

[jared_kipe]

the jumps from 700->833->1GHZ are around 5%, where as the jumps from 2.6->2.8->3GHz are around 14%, your theory is wrong.

What the hell are you talking about, 833/700=1.19 so approx. 20% increase. 1000/833=1.20 so again 20% increase in clock speed. And once again 2.8/2.6=1.077 there is 7.7% increase, with 3/2.8=1.714 that makes 7.14% clock boost. Sorry friend, but you pulled those numbers out of your ass. Or were you maybe talking about benchmark increases. Either way, his theory about clock speed increases is correct, your data is faulty.

[fpnc]

A couple of clarifications and comments.

Here is EXACTLY what Steve Jobs said at last year's WWDC. Steve said:

"Now, what about the future? We're at 2GHz today...(pause)...IBM and Apple are today announcing that within 12 months we'll be at 3GHz. Three GHz processor clock, that's up 50% within 12 months."

Some have tried to claim that Steve never said anything about a 12 month timeframe. But, I think it is plainly obvious that he did say 12 months from WWDC.

However, nearly everyone on this thread seems to be forgetting that Steve amended or changed his prediction at last year's Paris Apple Expo. In September he said that they were committed before the end of next summer to get the Power Mac G5 to 3GHz. Thus the only "promise" that needs to be kept is to ship (or perhaps only announce) a 3GHz Power Mac before the end of September. The 12-month timeframe expressed at last year's WWDC has already been retracted by Steve himself.

[fpnc]

As far as PCI-Express (or PCIe), I don't think that is going to happen at this year's WWDC. It would be very unusual for Apple to perform a major redesign of a motherboard architecture after only one year. Apple usually tries to get a few years out of their motherboard designs and I think the G5 Power Macs will follow that trend (i.e. expect PCI-X and AGP to remain the Power Mac standard through at least the end of 2004). Let's face it, last year's G5 intro was a major effort and breakthrough for Apple, and we probably shouldn't expect them to repeat that effort after only one year.

Someone also suggested that going to PCIe would simplify the motherboard design and thus that's a reason for Apple to introduce PCIe as soon as possible. However, I don't think that is true since at this early date you really need to support both standard PCI and PCIe (inline, backward compatible, extended expansion slots). So, the complexity and cost of the motherboard actually goes up since they have to support both types of cards and the motherboard needs to route even more interconnects.

The other option would be for Apple to completely drop PCI/PCI-X support (go PCIe-only). But that could cause a huge upheaval in the pro user community since it would mean that none of the pro's existing cards would work in the new, PCIe-only Power Mac. Thus, IMO any new Power Mac design with PCIe support would have to be joint PCI/PCIe.

You also have to consider that if Apple moves to PCIe we're talking about a return (essentially) to a rev A product. Now consider how many people have been "sitting on the fence" waiting for the rev B, G5 product. What will these people do? Will they then wait for rev B of the PCIe product?

For these reasons (and others), I suspect that PCIe will have to wait until 2005.

[YoMammy]

ADC is the Apple analogue to Microsoft's MSDN - it's a program for Apple-based developers which gives them access to training, beta system software, testing platforms, and also provides ways to promote their own software, etc. There are multiple levels, from a free level which gives you access to updated developer tools and a few other things to the premier level which gives you nice discounts on hardware, etc. See http://developer.apple.com/membership/ . Note that the price for premier is $3500

Another cool thing about being a member of the ADC is that it allows you to submit bugs about any Apple software product using their online bug reporting tool: https://bugreport.apple.com/. Even if you don't consider yourself a developer, you can help Apple build better software by taking the time to submit detailed reports of the problems you encounter.

[Zaty]

Hey people, Steve Jobs's promise was a bold and somewhat risky thing to do because the development of a semiconductor chip is not a steady, easily predictable task. Sometimes in the course of such a process problems occur that couldn't be foreseen but it's also possible that engineers take less time than planned to design new/and or faster chips. So I'm not sure if SJ's promise was a clever move, if Apple and IBM can deliver then it was, if not, Apple will have to live with a few unhappy customers. So those of you who won't be too happy if the new PM revision tops out below the magic 3 GHz mark, keep in mind that technological progress is and always will be unpredictable!

[fpnc]

That is not true any longer. After purchasing a Select membership, Apple automatically issues an asset for a hardware purchase discount. You do NOT have to be in your second year.

That's not what Apple says on the ADC Membership Overview page. Read my previous posts. Apple says that the hardware discount assets are only given to Select members when they renew, not simply when they join. The Apple ADC site seems pretty clear on this point once you locate the actual details on the plan. However, I think there are exceptions, such as if you join as a Select member AND purchase an admission to WWDC. Another exception could be if you join as a student. Also, the "rules" may be different depending upon where you live (I'm talking about the ADC policy in the U.S.A.).

If Apple has changed the policy (as you suggest), that means that the information that is on the Apple ADC site is wrong. Again, look at the quotes I posted from the ADC site. Or just visit it yourself (here is the link):

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

However, I do admit that the recently announced discount on the 1.6GHz G5s is available to all ADC Select members, even those who upgrade or join between now and the end of the promo.

[iswimbikeandrun]

What the hell are you talking about, 833/700=1.19 so approx. 20% increase. 1000/833=1.20 so again 20% increase in clock speed. And once again 2.8/2.6=1.077 there is 7.7% increase, with 3/2.8=1.714 that makes 7.14% clock boost. Sorry friend, but you pulled those numbers out of your ass. Or were you maybe talking about benchmark increases. Either way, his theory about clock speed increases is correct, your data is faulty.
Dude, I am sorry about the first post I made, it was wrong, but so is yours, show me where you get a percentage by the quotient of the two numbers. When in fact the percentage is found by taking the two numbers, lets say 700 and 833, and the percent differnce is (833-700)/833=about 16%, and then we have (2800-2600)/2800=7.1%, for refrence (3000-2000)/2000=50%; your math is only aprroximatly correct.

[Mercury]

Dude, I am sorry about the first post I made, it was wrong, but so is yours, show me where you get a percentage by the quotient of the two numbers. When in fact the percentage is found by taking the two numbers, lets say 700 and 833, and the percent differnce is (833-700)/833=about 16%, and then we have (2800-2600)/2800=7.1%, for refrence (3000-2000)/2000=50%; your math is only aprroximatly correct.

You used two different formulae here. You used the new speed as the divisor in the first two cases, and then used the original one in the third, which is the only reason you got 50%. Using your method of devising increases(a wholly inaccurate one), the increase from 2 ghz to 3 is only that of 33%, as (3000-2000)/3000=33.333%.

I hate to be teaching math, since the highest I took was college algebra, but if you're using your method, you divide at the end by the original speed. So, (833-700)/700, not 833. We're doing increases. That gives you .19. His math is exact; yours is flawed.

[PPC970FX]

Hm IBM have the money, the people, and the factoris to make 3Ghz G5 ( 975?, 970FX). One ting that Stev will do is to say, we have now the fastest PC in the world. And I think that he will sell a 3Ghz powermac. BUT
1) It will be using wapo (like ailenware)
2) It will cost a lot like over 3,5k
3) Shiping inn September or later
4) There will be very few of them

Well that is my 50cents.

[biaachmonkie]

You used two different formulae here. You used the new speed as the divisor in the first two cases, and then used the original one in the third, which is the only reason you got 50%. Using your method of devising increases(a wholly inaccurate one), the increase from 2 ghz to 3 is only that of 33%, as (3000-2000)/3000=33.333%.

I hate to be teaching math, since the highest I took was college algebra, but if you're using your method, you divide at the end by the original speed. So, (833-700)/700, not 833. We're doing increases. That gives you .19. His math is exact; yours is flawed.


AHHH!!! Your math is so horrible, please do not try teach it. :p

Going from 2Ghz to 3Ghz is a 50% increase, while going from 3Ghz to 2Ghz is a 33.3% decrease.

Now as to what Apple may introduce, well I'd presuming 2.6 maybe 2.8 as the high end. I hope they go all duals but fear they will leave a gimpy single processer as the low end.

They most certainly will not do the smart thing and launch dual and single processor models for each speed grade and price the singles to bring in new users, that would just make to much logical sense and we know Apple (from their historical product placement and pricing) really has no interest in gaining a significant market share.

[Mord]

Intel's PCI express :D

since when dose intel own pci express it's an open standard just like firewire, usb, agp, pci and 802.11.

[Mercury]

AHHH!!! Your math is so horrible, please do not try teach it. :p

Going from 2Ghz to 3Ghz is a 50% increase, while going from 3Ghz to 2Ghz is a 33.3% decrease.

I do hope you were joking, and that the decrease was for someone else's benefit. Can't really tell sarcasm over the internet.

[blutarm]

CLearing THE LOW END....this may mean a G5 iMac. THINK about it.

thats the point.
SP G5 @1.4-2.0 GHz -> headless mac
DP G5 @ 2.0-3.0 GHz -> powermac

nobody wants to buy an SP G5 @ 1.6GHz after WWDC.

i hope ;)

[Abstract]

Seriously guys, this is what we're going to see:

Dual 2GHz,
dual 2.2 GHz,
dual 2.6 GHz

New displays.

New iMacs with a 1.5 Ghz G4 proc, and one "high end" model with a 1.6Ghz G5 proc. The casing for the new iMac may be a bit different as well.

PS: Blackmonkie's math is right, although I would have explained it a different way without using denominators.

[butchcamel]

sorry for straying off the topic here but i have just joined this site and am wanting to start a thread and cant seem to work out how. could someone set me straight.

cheers

[rdowns]

sorry for straying off the topic here but i have just joined this site and am wanting to start a thread and cant seem to work out how. could someone set me straight.

cheers

You can only start a thread in the Forums section of the site. Its tab is located on the upper right hand side of home page.

Just remember to post the thread in the appropriate sections.

[neonart]

Where is NeatGekko when you really need him to sort all this out! We need some solid predictions! :confused: :D

[Mike Linnig]

Rumor updates aside - what are the 1.6 G5's being discounted to?

They are down to $1295 for ADC members. I joined ADC a year or so ago at the lowest level (free). That was enough to get the discount.

Mine will be shipped on tuesday.

I checked and the university/education discount was dropped to $1399.

Not bad with the list still at $1799 at store.apple.com
:)

[segundo]

...Does anyone think we will see an updated case design?

I really hope so! Maybe something with more curves but still all aluminum, smaller than the current tower (maybe similar in size to the Power Mac G4), and room for 2 optical drives.

It would be nice to have some rumours about the look of the Rev. B G5's too. :)
I guess it could be possible since the new G5's generate less heat at the same clock speeds. However, this may be offset by an increase in clock speeds and thereby an increase in heat generation. So I'll claim we will see the same case on the Power Mac's . . . but a new one for the iMac's. :D

[~Shard~]

Where is NeatGekko when you really need him to sort all this out! We need some solid predictions! :confused: :D

LOL - I completely forgot about him! (Well, I suppose not completely, that would be hard to do...) Yes, I wonder where he is right now and what his wild and crazy predictions are now, 5 months after his 3 GHz guarantees, and with one less hand - was it his left hand he said he would eat if he wasn't correct? ;) Hmm, and I supose "predictions" isn't the proper word either, since he was calling them more like "statements of fact"...

No doubt he's still on the forums, just posting under another username - his credibility is now zero so there would be little sense to keep posting as NeatGekko... Ah, those were good times... :cool:

[blakespot]

Going from 2Ghz to 3Ghz is a 50% increase, while going from 3Ghz to 2Ghz is a 33.3% decrease.

I do hope you were joking, and that the decrease was for someone else's benefit. Can't really tell sarcasm over the internet.

I guess they need to re-examine the state of math classes in schools today...

It was most certainly not sarcasm on his part. 50% of 2GHz is 1GHz. So, going from 2GHz to 3GHz is a speed increase of 50%. 50% of 3GHz is 1.5GHz - so a 50% decrease from 3GHz would result in a 1.5GHz machine. To go from 3GHz to 2GHz you are seeing a reduction in speed of 1/3, or 33.3%.

2GHz is a 33.3% reduction in speed from 3GHz.





blakespot

[sushi]

the jumps from 700->833->1GHZ are around 5%, where as the jumps from 2.6->2.8->3GHz are around 14%, your theory is wrong.
Your math is confusing to me.

Here is what I get:

700 to 833 --> 19%
833 to 1000 --> 20%

2.6 to 2.8 --> 8%
2.8 to 3.0 --> 7%

BTW, not sure where you got 700 or 833 to begin with.

Sushi

[Little Endian]

I would not be suprised by a 3Ghz Processor in the next Power Mac revisions. Remember last year before the Power Mac G5 was announced? we heard Rumors that the G5 would be released @ clockspeeds of 1.4, 1.6, and 1.8Ghz however in the end everyone was suprised by a 200Mhz bump across the line with a 2Ghz max. Right now we are hearing rumors of Clockspeed ranging at 2.2-2.6Ghz for the G5, Apple could very well Surpise everyone (as they did last year) by topping out at 2.6-3.0Ghz Range or at least produce a lineup that runs in 2.4-2.8Ghz range. Does a 1Ghz jump sound that unbelievable? True that's a huge jump in speed but hey we went from 1.42Ghz to 2.0Ghz last year that was a 580Mhz jump!! In fact we actually went from 1.42 to 2.0Ghz in about 6-8 months as the G4 1.42 was annouced in Jan 2003 and the G5 2.0Ghz was annouced/shipped in June/Sept of 2003. Most folks would have laughed at that kind of jump in clockspeed but hey it happened. 1Ghz may be a stretch but it is feasible and would make quite a splash for Marketing. Why can't Apple announce 3Ghz at WWDC they could annouce then but ship in September with say a lineup ranging from anywhere form 2.0-2.8Ghz available immediately at announcement at WWDC.

[ktlx]

I guess they need to re-examine the state of math classes in schools today...

It was most certainly not sarcasm on his part. 50% of 2GHz is 1GHz. So, going from 2GHz to 3GHz is a speed increase of 50%. 50% of 3GHz is 1.5GHz - so a 50% decrease from 3GHz would result in a 1.5GHz machine. To go from 3GHz to 2GHz you are seeing a reduction in speed of 1/3, or 33.3%.

2GHz is a 33.3% reduction in speed from 3GHz.

It would help if you guys actually read and understood Mercury's posts.

You are telling him his math is horrible by quoting him explaining what is wrong with iswimbikeandrun's math. It is iswimbikeandrun whose math is pretty messed up.

Here is Mercury's description of the problem:


I hate to be teaching math, since the highest I took was college algebra, but if you're using your method, you divide at the end by the original speed. So, (833-700)/700, not 833. We're doing increases. That gives you .19. His math is exact; yours is flawed.


Mercury is correct. To get the increase or decrease, you compute ((new speed - old speed) / old speed) * 100. For 2Ghz to 3Ghz that will give you 50%. For 3Ghz to 2Ghz that will give you -33%.

[el_aarono]

I joined ADC a year or so ago at the lowest level (free). That was enough to get the discount.


Did you join at the Online level? According to the ADC website the hardware discount isn't available for Online members:

http://developer.apple.com/membership/

Anyone can access the store but only those with valid memberships (Select, Premier, and Student) can actually make a purchase. Have you actually made a purchase at the ADC store with your Online membership?

thanks

-A.

[The Cheat]

I need to be able to use my SCSI and standard ATA drives, which use PCI cards to access them.
Why? By today's standards those drives are likely both tiny and slow. What is the advantage of using them over the superior SATA drive(s) that comes with the Power Mac?


Having standard PCI cards is very important, as I have yet to see any PCI-X cards on the market.

Just because you haven't encountered them, doesn't mean they don't exist. You likely just aren't in the market for fibre-channel network cards or the like.


In addition to having PCI cards for standard ATA and SCSI (both internal and for external drives), I also have a PCI card that allows for five USB ports including one internal port (inside of the computer), as well as both firewire 400 and 800.
Well, the PM has 3 USB 2.0 ports and firewire 400 and 800 built in, so I'm not sure what the problem is here unless you desperately need those two extra USB ports and one interal (?) in which case you could buy a $15 USB hub. Also, your firewire ports will no longer be bottlenecked by the 33MHz PCI bus they currently operate on (and which basically counteracts any speed gain from FW800 in the first place). On the PM they are integrated into the 800MHz hypertransport I/O subsystem.


Since the new PowerMacs do not seem to have any internal drive bays, the Zip, Jaz, PCMCIA card readers, and Tape drives mush be placed externally, however that requires having an external SCSI port, which no new Macintosh comes with, thus I have to keep the SCSI PCI card.
That would be a tragedy if anyone used Zip or Jaz drive anymore. As for backup, you do realize it comes with a DVD burner, don't you?


The 1.6 GHz PowerMac G5 appears to be the only new Macintosh that will run standard PCI cards. The 1.8 and 2.0 have PCI-X expansion slots, which are incompatible with any normal PCI cards, and there does not appear to be any PCI-X cards on the market right now.
Wrong and wrong. They are compatible and there are PCI-X cards for things like gigabit ethernet and fibre channel.


If Apple cuts the PowerMac G5 1.6 tower, they will be cutting out the use of PCI cards when there are no PCI-X cards yet on the market. So, basically, the 1.6 G5 tower needs to stay, or Apple needs to find a way to use older PCI cards, or they need to come out with some PCI-X ATA and SCSI, controllers.
They are compatible, so it's not an issue.

[mattmack]

That would be a tragedy if anyone used Zip or Jaz drive anymore. As for backup, you do realize it comes with a DVD burner, don't you?





Also I haven't seen a SCSI jazz drive in a lonng time and since PCI X is backwards compatible it really doesn't matter. If for some reason you feel the need to add SCSI or ATA to the new power mac you can. exactly as you stated later in your post

[The Cheat]

It would help if you guys actually read and understood Mercury's posts.

You are telling him his math is horrible by quoting him explaining what is wrong with iswimbikeandrun's math. It is iswimbikeandrun whose math is pretty messed up.

Mercury is correct. To get the increase or decrease, you compute ((new speed - old speed) / old speed) * 100. For 2Ghz to 3Ghz that will give you 50%. For 3Ghz to 2Ghz that will give you -33%.

Finally - someone who understands!

For the record:

Mercury is perfectly correct.
iswimbikeandrun is wrong. (and very frustrating to read when he can't even use his wrong formula consistently)
biaachmonkie and blakespot need to pay closer attention to what Mercury has said.

[jwhitnah]

here is my take on it. They are clearing out supplies for WWDC. There will be kind of update, but noone is going to be able to know what it is. Everyone knew the G5 was coming last year, but noone knew what it was until WWDC. Displays are definately coming, and i believe G5 iMacs are as well. Here is what i would bet on being there.

PowerMac G5
Dual 2.0Ghz $1799
Dual 2.6 Ghz $2499
Dual 3.0Ghz $2999

iMac G5
15" 1.6Ghz $1299
17" 1.8Ghz $1799
20" 1.8Ghz $2099

Displays
17"
20"
23"
30"

I might agree with you if the G5 did not have cooling issues, but I think the current fanlessness of the iMac precludes this. Unless they are remodeling the case. This might be reasonable since they have known about the temp of the 130 nm G5 for a while now. Here's hoping...

[nuckinfutz]

I might agree with you if the G5 did not have cooling issues, but I think the current fanlessness of the iMac precludes this. Unless they are remodeling the case. This might be reasonable since they have known about the temp of the 130 nm G5 for a while now. Here's hoping...

What cooling issues? Just how hot do you think the G5 is?? :confused:

Page 9 on pdf (http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/7874C7DA8607C0B287256BF3006FBE54/$file/PPC_QRG_2-22-04.pdf)

The 970fx dissipates 12.3 watts @ 1.4ghz 24.5 @ 2Ghz these are typical numbers

This motorola sheet is old but it shows (http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/taxonomy.jsp?nodeId=03C1TR04670871) that a 1.25Ghz G4 @ 130nm is probably equivalent to a G5 at 1.4+Ghz. Likely to dissipate around 17 watts.

Thus I do not see why people hold on to this myth that the G5 cannot work in an iMac. The 970fx was developed primarily for this application where heat dissipation must be kept minimal. Sure the iMac will have to undergo some changes but they won't be that difficult.

[Postal]

I might agree with you if the G5 did not have cooling issues, but I think the current fanlessness of the iMac precludes this. Unless they are remodeling the case. This might be reasonable since they have known about the temp of the 130 nm G5 for a while now. Here's hoping...

You're assuming that they'd just grab the old G5s at those clock speeds and toss them in. I would think that Apple would want to use the 90 nm G5 (aka the PPC 970FX) and just use some of the chips from the lower end of the acceptable yields. Assuming IBM has been able to make at least 2.6 GHz PowerMacs a reality, I can't see why 1.6 and 1.8 GHz (or maybe even 2 GHz) isn't feasible for the iMac G5... assuming it does in fact debut at WWDC.

[blakespot]

Finally - someone who understands!

Mercury is perfectly correct.
iswimbikeandrun is wrong. (and very frustrating to read when he can't even use his wrong formula consistently)
biaachmonkie and blakespot need to pay closer attention to what Mercury has said.

Actually, no.

I paid perfect attention to the message I responded to, which was Mercury saying:

I do hope you were joking, and that the decrease was for someone else's benefit. Can't really tell sarcasm over the internet.

In response to "biaachmonkey" who said:

AHHH!!! Your math is so horrible, please do not try teach it.

Going from 2Ghz to 3Ghz is a 50% increase, while going from 3Ghz to 2Ghz is a 33.3% decrease..

You'll note my response addresses this sequence, which I quoted in my response. I don't believe my response could be called incorrect or straying from what I quoted.



blakespot

[fpnc]

...Also, your firewire ports will no longer be bottlenecked by the 33MHz PCI bus they currently operate on (and which basically counteracts any speed gain from FW800 in the first place). On the PM they are integrated into the 800MHz hypertransport I/O subsystem...

Unfortunately, in actual practice this does not seem to help. The Firewire ports on the new G5s actually perform WORSE than the previous generation G4 Power Macs and the current generation G4 PowerBooks. Check out this link from Barefeats:

http://www.barefeats.com/fire43.html

That said, native FW800 would be faster than FW400. But (apparently) the Firewire implementation on the G5s seems to be somewhat lacking (individual mileage may vary).

I also read one post (unverified, seems a little strange) that the Power Mac G5s have only a single Firewire channel, which would mean that all Firewire traffic goes through a single point. Apparently, the earlier G4s used dual Firewire channels.

[SyndicateX]

Why? By today's standards those drives are likely both tiny and slow. What is the advantage of using them over the superior SATA drive(s) that comes with the Power Mac?

Not arguing with you, because I agree I would much rather use SATA than anything else...but SCSI is not the slower of the 2. :(

SATA vs SCSI vs FW RAID (http://www.barefeats.com/hard35.html)

Ok, 2 more things...for all you people believing in a release of like 2.0, 2.2, and 2.6, or 2.4, 2.6, 3.0. That will never be. The speeds should have an equal speed diference between each processor allowing for the multiplier. Apple/IBM will NOT decrease their bus speeds as some have suggested (900mhz 3x multiplier?????) so hypothetically, speeds should be 2.2, 2.6, 3.0. with respective bus speeds of 1.1, 1.3, and 1.5.

There will not be any single processor G5 towers released. That is why they are specifically selling those at cost along with the fact they are the lowest sellers. Even if apple decides to keep the current 1.8/2.0ghz towers as a lower level G5 and split it into a consumer/pro line, I would welcome that Idea. The single processors will be released in the G5 iMac. Powerbooks got the 1.5ghz G4 upgrade, because they are a ways away from receiving a G5. iMacs however, went unchanged, leading to the conclusion of very immediate releases that are big enough to be done at WWDC, leading to the speculation of a G5/updated form factor. Can anyone say HEADLESS. :) The current iMac uses a 7455, which can average 35w with a max of 50w heat dissapation (http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC7455&nodeId=03C1TR046708718653) . The proposed 975/980 (we will just call it the POWER5 derivitave for clarification purposes...) G5's are 65w average, however, that is at their higher speeds. A scaled down version of any SINGLE G5 will easilly run in an iMac without any heating issues.

and lastly, I do not believe you will see any 90nm chip in the next G5. Considering the xServe's 4-6 week waiting period due to low processor yields. Business clients are not going to wait any longer for a server, since when you order a business class server you are generally dealing in mission critical data and your time period is not as leniant as consumers. Introducing a 970fx/any 90nm proc'd G5 tower would significantly increase those delays on both ends, and Apple would loose alot of corporate business, which they desperately need.

So, considering that, along with the fact any 970 based processor will not surpass 2.6-2.8ghz on a commercial level. (it has reached 3.2-3.4 in developemental tests, but the chances for that on a large level are close to 0%) SJ did not make a promise he did not intend to keep. So even if they release 970 based revised G5's, he still needs to release another processor after summers end just to keep his word. To me, that seems like alot of work and $ to spend on an outdated processor, when the POWER5 has no forseen limits currently, and is IBM's baby that they have spent 1.5 years developiing, alongside with Apple.

You will see 975/980 equipped powermacs, you will see G5 equipped (hopeless) headless iMacs, (which will also negate the need for eMacs, and fulfill the desires of all you cube lovers out there wanting a small form factor G5). And I think you will see something totally unexpected from Apple as well. :) Now I could be totally wrong, but Id be willing to bet quite alot that Ill be pretty damn close come WWDC day...

:) Keep the optimism, Apples not in business to dissapoint.

[fpnc]

... I do not believe you will see any 90nm chip in the next G5.

I was kind of liking some of what you said until I came upon the above statement. IMO, there is absolutely no question that the next G5 Power Mac will use the 90nm 970fx processor. I don't even think this is worth debating.

As to the FSB speeds and bus multipliers. That is an issue which seems to be seldom discussed. I'm not sure that Apple can deliver a FSB that runs at 1.5GHz. Would anyone like to take a guess as to how fast they can actually run the FSB? I know that some AMD systems are shipping with FSB speeds over 1GHz, but not by much (1.1 or 1.2 GHz?). My guess is that there is a limitation here and 1.5GHz seems a little high.

Also, does anyone know if IBM has ever admitted to supporting a FSB multiplier other than 2X? I think Arstech even asked this question of the IBM engineers and they wouldn't give a direct answer (but that was for the original 970 chip, not the fx).

[manu chao]

It's an accnowleged fact that 970FX supplies caused G5 XServe delays. IBM has said already some time ago that the production numbers are now much closer to what they would like them to be. It is also known that G5 XServes are shipping in volume. But there are still waiting times, 5 - 7 weeks shipping time.

Could it be that there are now enough 90nm 970FX sitting at Apple's assembly lines but there is such a big backlog of orders that they can't put them fast enough together?

[iswimbikeandrun]

Finally - someone who understands!

For the record:

Mercury is perfectly correct.
iswimbikeandrun is wrong. (and very frustrating to read when he can't even use his wrong formula consistently)
biaachmonkie and blakespot need to pay closer attention to what Mercury has said.
My formula was and still is (new-old)/old, I am sorry I didnt use it consitantly, I was pretty tired when I posted, but yeah, biaachmonkie is right. I have been pretty fried latly due to my quantum mechanics final.

[gensor]

Power Mac G5s: 7-10 day wait at The Apple Store
Saturday, May 29 2004 @ 9:11 AM CT | Article Link
The wait for new Power Mac G5s at The Apple Store moved from 'Same Day' delivery to 7-10 days this morning.
:D

[yopro213]

el_aarono: How do you access the ADC store? I can't locate it.

[aswitcher]

Power Mac G5s: 7-10 day wait at The Apple Store
Saturday, May 29 2004 @ 9:11 AM CT | Article Link
The wait for new Power Mac G5s at The Apple Store moved from 'Same Day' delivery to 7-10 days this morning.
:D


Ok, I doubt Apple could afford to have a month of constraint on G5 2.0Ghz.
I also doubt they would push out the 3Ghz without the fanfair of WWDC in 1 month.
This makes me think we are going to see a speed bump now before WWDC and hopefully the real deal 3GHz later this year...

[~Shard~]

Ok, I doubt Apple could afford to have a month of constraint on G5 2.0Ghz.
I also doubt they would push out the 3Ghz without the fanfair of WWDC in 1 month.
This makes me think we are going to see a speed bump now before WWDC and hopefully the real deal 3GHz later this year...

A solid theory - if we do indeed see updates before WWDC, then it's going to be marginal updates to 2.2/2.4/2.6 (or something similar), i.e. nothing worth showcasing at WWDC. And, with WWDC then a few weeks away, there is no way Jobs would go ahead and release the 3 GHz model then, so we would have to expect it later in the year.

So if there are no PowerMac updates at WWDC, due to updates being released earlier, then what does that leave for WWDC? G5 iMacs? New displays? 4G iPods? Or just a 2-hour long presentation on Tiger? ;)

[Mercury]

I guess they need to re-examine the state of math classes in schools today...

It was most certainly not sarcasm on his part. 50% of 2GHz is 1GHz. So, going from 2GHz to 3GHz is a speed increase of 50%. 50% of 3GHz is 1.5GHz - so a 50% decrease from 3GHz would result in a 1.5GHz machine. To go from 3GHz to 2GHz you are seeing a reduction in speed of 1/3, or 33.3%.

2GHz is a 33.3% reduction in speed from 3GHz.

blakespot

You obviously misunderstood me. That is the exact math I did. Read my post; this is exactly what I said. However, I wasn't sure whether or not he was being sarcastic in analysis of mine. I said I hoped he was reiterating what I said (and the decrease of 33%) for someone else's benefit, since he would be wrong to address it to me, because we both did the right math. If he is not being sarcastic, then he is wrong, as we are using the same math. You would also be wrong in agreeing with him.

He said my math is horrible. It is the exact same formula and the same results he used. If he is not being sarcastic, then he and you are wrong; since we did the same thing, the correct thing.

So that everyone can understand exactly what was being said:

iswimbikeandrun does incorrect math.
Mercury(me) does correct math, shows him where it is wrong.
Biiachmonkie(assuming he was not being sarcastic about my math being horrible) incorrectly thought I was doing things the wrong way, and addressed his post to me, and did proper math, asserting that there was a difference between his and mine. There is not.
I(Mercury) called him on it, and said I hoped he was being sarcastic(about me not teaching the math, not his actual numbers, which are fine) since we did the exact same thing, the correct thing.
Blakespot then incorrectly assumed I was wrong because I told biaach he was wrong about calling me wrong. His math was correct, his analysis of mine was not.

To further clarify: This mess began when biiachmonkie(assuming he was not being sarcastic about my math being horrible) misinterpreted what I had to say as being incorrect. We both did the proper math; however, he thought mine was wrong, which it was not. That's where this confusion started. As for the state of math classes, it doesn't really seem fair to say that the quality of education has decreased markedly, as you seem to imply, blakespot, when there is at most a decade between our last math classes. Unless, on the other hand, I can decry the '80s and early '90s trouble with reading comprehension... :p

Thanks to ktlx and The Cheat for taking the time to read and try to explain.
If this needs further clarification, I'll do a post-by-post analysis...

Edit: Edited for maximum explainability.

[aswitcher]

So if there are no PowerMac updates at WWDC, due to updates being released earlier, then what does that leave for WWDC? G5 iMacs? New displays? 4G iPods? Or just a 2-hour long presentation on Tiger? ;)

G5 iMacs...well overdue. Would be a very good thing to appear to celebrate the 20th anniversary year of the mac. If they can only get the price down as well...

New displays...yep...due a while back. I suggest both the 20 and 23 will not support HD Video with room for editing tools...

4G iPods...definetly the right time to get them out as ipod minis are few and far in between and the opposition is pumping lots of players into the market...wonder how much more of a pda it will be...

Tiger...30 mins...special whole screen icon/bar/text resizing to cope with new screens and new PB G5 screens next year...faster...voice recognition/speaking...selective file/directory encryption...

also

iTune Store and Pod success...15 mins... :rolleyes:

.Mac numbers and new stuff?? 10 mins if it happens... :)

Mac Office 2004...sales, performance etc... :rolleyes:

Maybe mention or hint of the next iLife addition... :D ...iHome, your personal organiser for all your home life issues like bills, reminders, recipes, shoppinglists, service schedules, warranties, purchases, personal finances (able to pull down your bank and cc statements each month and track your spending) etc linking in with iCal to help you organise and keep track of your home life...maybe a cool database of all your music and computer discs, books, videos, etc like some third party products have - with barcode scanning through isight ;)

Better home TV recording support with iMovie and iDVD...a Mac digitial SD/HD TV tuner! :eek: ;)

New Pro Apple Mouse :)...with multibuttons and a wacky wheel... :p

[pjkelnhofer]

Ok, I doubt Apple could afford to have a month of constraint on G5 2.0Ghz.
I also doubt they would push out the 3Ghz without the fanfair of WWDC in 1 month.
This makes me think we are going to see a speed bump now before WWDC and hopefully the real deal 3GHz later this year...

I think we have learned that specials, rebates and extended shipping times often have no correlation to the release of new products.

[fpnc]

The 1.6GHz Power Mac G5s are also showing a 7 to 10 day wait. Given the ADC promo on these machines and all of the speculation on why Apple is trying to reduce inventory on the 1.6GHz model the waiting periods at the Apple Store make no sense. Maybe these delays have nothing to do with the availability of the physical hardware. Or, it could just be a temporary mistake on the part of the online store.

[IndyGopher]

I might agree with you if the G5 did not have cooling issues, but I think the current fanlessness of the iMac precludes this. Unless they are remodeling the case. This might be reasonable since they have known about the temp of the 130 nm G5 for a while now. Here's hoping...
The LCD iMacs have fans, and always have.

[jwhitnah]

You're assuming that they'd just grab the old G5s at those clock speeds and toss them in. I would think that Apple would want to use the 90 nm G5 (aka the PPC 970FX) and just use some of the chips from the lower end of the acceptable yields. Assuming IBM has been able to make at least 2.6 GHz PowerMacs a reality, I can't see why 1.6 and 1.8 GHz (or maybe even 2 GHz) isn't feasible for the iMac G5... assuming it does in fact debut at WWDC.

[jwhitnah]

The LCD iMacs have fans, and always have.
O :eek:

[Freg3000]

All Power Mac G5s are now showing a 7-10 day wait....

[jared_kipe]

You used two different formulae here. You used the new speed as the divisor in the first two cases, and then used the original one in the third, which is the only reason you got 50%. Using your method of devising increases(a wholly inaccurate one), the increase from 2 ghz to 3 is only that of 33%, as (3000-2000)/3000=33.333%.

I hate to be teaching math, since the highest I took was college algebra, but if you're using your method, you divide at the end by the original speed. So, (833-700)/700, not 833. We're doing increases. That gives you .19. His math is exact; yours is flawed.

Yeah, well I'll just walk you through some steps that I was avoiding. First of all when you are doing it my way AKA 833/700=1.19, we are finding that 833 is 119% of 700. This is easy to do it the head, because all we need to do is chop off the 100% to make it a 19% increase. When you take (833-700)/700=.19, we are essentially just doing the minus 100% that I was talking about doing in my head, with that extra addition step. And using the guy's reference (3000-2000)/2000=.5, we can apply my little short-cut 3/2=1.5 (remember that we can take all those little zeros out cause deviding 10/10=1/1 and 1000/100=10/1, technically I could have done it 8.33/7=1.19). We get the same answer, but my way is just a little easier on the calculator when we are finding how much increase 3456627 is to 4885934.....=1.4135 soo 41% increase. By the way, I'm a physicist.

[thatwendigo]

The 970fx dissipates 12.3 watts @ 1.4ghz 24.5 @ 2Ghz these are typical numbers

Ah, another who's fallen into the "typical" trap. Now you need to double that number to arrive at the maximum output of the chip, and you come up with a 970FX 2.0ghz that puts out 49 watts at full-bore operation. By contrast, the 1.5ghz MPC7447A runs 11 watts typical and 22 watts peak performance, which means that the maxium heat of the G4 is lower than the minimal heat of the next cheap. Even if you take the heat for the 1.4ghz 970FX (which would likely be no faster than a 1.5ghz G4), you still arrive at a figure of 24.6 watts at peak, and that doesn't unclude the 700mhz FSB.

Thus I do not see why people hold on to this myth that the G5 cannot work in an iMac. The 970fx was developed primarily for this application where heat dissipation must be kept minimal. Sure the iMac will have to undergo some changes but they won't be that difficult.

No, the 970FX was developed as a way to combat the existing heat in the 970, which was pretty damn sweltering for a PowerPC. The original 130nm part put out 50-51 watts typical, which if extended... Well, you get the point.

The "not so difficult" changes that you're talking about are completely new motherboards, double the chip heat of the available G4, five times the FSB frequency, the newer dual-channel memory architecture, and so on, ad nauseum.

That said, native FW800 would be faster than FW400. But (apparently) the Firewire implementation on the G5s seems to be somewhat lacking (individual mileage may vary).

I also read one post (unverified, seems a little strange) that the Power Mac G5s have only a single Firewire channel, which would mean that all Firewire traffic goes through a single point. Apparently, the earlier G4s used dual Firewire channels.

Ah, lovely... This fits in even more with my position that the 970 and associated hardware are stopgaps and not intended to remain as the pro machines. How about we add on that odd little heatpipe that goes nowhere on the back of the case? Yet another kludge fix, in my opinion, because you might as well route the radiator around to take advantage of a fan.

There will not be any single processor G5 towers released. That is why they are specifically selling those at cost along with the fact they are the lowest sellers. Even if apple decides to keep the current 1.8/2.0ghz towers as a lower level G5 and split it into a consumer/pro line, I would welcome that Idea.

I think that it would be a mistake not to create a lower-end tower with a single processor and the current features of the G5s. That would allow an easy differentiation between the pro and consumer lines even if there's no change in processor type (970 to P5D - Power5 Derivative). Also, for those who cry and moan over there not being a cheaper G5 with expandability and options, the iMac is the worst of both worlds, since it would hideously limit what Apple could do with the machine while also denying upgradability. A tower is the only compromise that makes any sense, and it's the only path that would allow the supposed Holy Grail that I keep hearing people whine over - a headless "iMac."

Can anyone say HEADLESS. :)

Sure can: Tower.

The current iMac uses a 7455, which can average 35w with a max of 50w heat dissapation (http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC7455&nodeId=03C1TR046708718653) . The proposed 975/980 (we will just call it the POWER5 derivitave for clarification purposes...) G5's are 65w average, however, that is at their higher speeds. A scaled down version of any SINGLE G5 will easilly run in an iMac without any heating issues.

The 7455 can run at 35w typical, but the reference you give does not state either the conditions, the clock rate, or anything else that causes it to reach that point. As such, it's more than a little irresponsible to be bandying about that number as if it proves anything, since we've got hard numbers on clock rate and heat in the 970 and 970FX. The P5D, should it make an appearance in the upcoming product cycle, will almost certainly be a pro tower process and not at all make a blip in the consumer market.

Also:
2.0ghz 970FX, 512 MB PC3200 ECC RAM, 80GB SATA, no graphics card or expansion - 130W typical, 170W max, 444BTU/h typical, 580BTU/h max (xServe G5) (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86694&sessionID=anonymous|4096058&kbhost=kbase.info.apple.com%3a80%2f)
2x 2.0ghz 970FX, 1GB PC3200 ECC RAM, 80GB SATA, no graphics card or expansion - 160W typical, 240W max, 546BTU/h typical, 819BTU/h max (xServe G5) (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86694&sessionID=anonymous|4096058&kbhost=kbase.info.apple.com%3a80%2f)
1.6ghz 970, 256MB PC2700, 80GB SATA, SuperDrive, GeForce FX 5200 Ultra - 120W typical, 420W max, 410BTU/h typical. 1420BTU/h max (PowerMac G5 single) (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=32486&sessionID=anonymous|4096058&kbhost=kbase.info.apple.com%3a80%2f)
1.8ghz 970, 512MB PC3200, 1600GB SATA, SuperDrive, GeForce FX 5200 Ultra - 120W typical, 430W max, 410BTU/h typical. 1466BTU/h max(PowerMac G5 single) (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=32486&sessionID=anonymous|4096058&kbhost=kbase.info.apple.com%3a80%2f)
2x 1.33ghz MPC7455, 1GB PC2700 RAM, 60GB PATA, slot-load CD-ROM, no graphics card - 133W typical, 134W max, 453BTU/h typical, 459BTU/h max (xServe G4 final revision) (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86251&sessionID=anonymous|4096076&kbhost=kbase.info.apple.com%3a80%2f)

So, as we can see, even the single 970FX loses to two 7455 processors (which are hotter than the current MPC7447A), especially at maximum wattage consumption and maximum heat output. Load those babies down and watch the temperature rise... Hell, look at the single 1.8 G5, which throws out an ungodly 1466BTU/h, or some 3-4 times the heat output of two 1.33ghz previous-generation G4s. I threw in the dual-processor G5 just to show you what a system with fans that could drown out aircraft engines do with the heat - lose to the G4 all over the place in heat and power draw.

Oh, and those are Apple's numbers, so if anyone has a reason to spin the G5 as being cooler, it's them. No dice.

You will see 975/980 equipped powermacs, you will see G5 equipped (hopeless) headless iMacs, (which will also negate the need for eMacs, and fulfill the desires of all you cube lovers out there wanting a small form factor G5). And I think you will see something totally unexpected from Apple as well. :) Now I could be totally wrong, but Id be willing to bet quite alot that Ill be pretty damn close come WWDC day...

Dead God, I hope that you're wrong about the iMac. I like having a computer that doesn't have any fan noise, and they're going to need some high-speed blowers to get rid of the excess. If the formfactor is completely redesigned, then it might be possible we'll see a "G5 iMac" that can double as a hairdryer. ;)

In all seriousness, the best path to take here is to build a real consumer tower with the 970 or 970FX, not some absurd bastard child of the iMac that could be used to toast your breakfast in the morning. Well, maybe there is a market for the iToaster... :rolleyes:

As to the FSB speeds and bus multipliers. That is an issue which seems to be seldom discussed. I'm not sure that Apple can deliver a FSB that runs at 1.5GHz. Would anyone like to take a guess as to how fast they can actually run the FSB? I know that some AMD systems are shipping with FSB speeds over 1GHz, but not by much (1.1 or 1.2 GHz?). My guess is that there is a limitation here and 1.5GHz seems a little high.

HyperTransport bus on the next chipset for AMD will be 1.6ghz on unidirectional dual-channel, just like the G5's current architecture. (http://www.ecsusa.com/aboutUs/pr_093003.html) The VIA K8T800 chipset, which is in fabrication now with multiple suppliers on the PC side, is reaching 1.6ghz easily and in volume.

Interestingly, a search for this technology shows IBM has their own chip that does a 1.6ghz HT fabric. (http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/579CE18FC6E1549187256E19005716AB) Also, in February, the HyperTransport Consortium announced HT2.0, which runs at 22.4GB/s and 2.0, 2.2, and 2.4ghz. (http://www.hypertransport.org/pr_020904.htm)

[BWhaler]

SyndicateX, those pictures are really creative. Great job.

[BWhaler]

Here's the thing: all of the Apple promotions run out, displays and memory, a day or two before WWDC.

I think we will see nothing until WWDC accordingly. Yes, I still think Apple will miss the 3 Ghz goal, but they are going to really beef up the other components (buses, etc) and will want to brag about being first to market about those features, yet again.

[Mercury]

Yeah, well I'll just walk you through some steps that I was avoiding. First of all when you are doing it my way AKA 833/700=1.19, we are finding that 833 is 119% of 700. This is easy to do it the head, because all we need to do is chop off the 100% to make it a 19% increase. When you take (833-700)/700=.19, we are essentially just doing the minus 100% that I was talking about doing in my head, with that extra addition step. And using the guy's reference (3000-2000)/2000=.5, we can apply my little short-cut 3/2=1.5 (remember that we can take all those little zeros out cause deviding 10/10=1/1 and 1000/100=10/1, technically I could have done it 8.33/7=1.19). We get the same answer, but my way is just a little easier on the calculator when we are finding how much increase 3456627 is to 4885934.....=1.4135 soo 41% increase. By the way, I'm a physicist.

Um...why are you doing this again? Your method is correct. That's exactly what I did. In my post, I was showing iswimebikeandrun(who is a physicist too, seemingly) what he did wrong. By the way, I'm a Philosopher. You must be pretty advanced to be a Physicist at 19, though.

The problem was that iswimbikeandrun was doing (x-y)/x to derive increases, where x is the new speed, whereas he did (x-y)/y for the 2 to 3 ghz, the proper formula, to arrive at the proper conclusion as Steve Jobs said, a 50% increase.

Please go read the posts, in order. We are all doing the right math.

[jared_kipe]

I went through college at the same time as high school. Saved myself a lot of money... But I'm not through learning, and I can use my EDU discount. So how well does the being a philosopher pay?

[Mercury]

I went through college at the same time as high school. Saved myself a lot of money... But I'm not through learning, and I can use my EDU discount. So how well does the being a philosopher pay?

Pretty well. I'm going to go to law school next year. Professorships pay pretty well too; so do books. Back to the topic. Your math is fine. You're just re-iterating what I said. I have no idea why you are doing that. So...if you could explain why...

[janey]

I went through college at the same time as high school. Saved myself a lot of money... But I'm not through learning, and I can use my EDU discount. So how well does the being a philosopher pay?
am i missing something here? how does one achieve that? like college and high school at the same time, only way I can think of is taking classes at a college to get credit, but attending high school at the same time (ie concurrent enrollment, or just winter/summer classes), or you skip high school and go to college like Mercury, or AP classes, or...god, i dont know.
Really, if you're doing college/high school together, tell me how that goes, I'm really interested.

just on a sidenote, I may not be a physicist, but hell, even a 10 year old could probably tell that Mercury's math was right, and that some people just don't have a clear grasp on some things in this world, just by looking at the last two or three pages of this thread.

[el_aarono]

el_aarono: How do you access the ADC store? I can't locate it.

Well here is a link: http://developer.apple.com/membership/usa.html

This is the entrance page to the US ADC store. It's kind of buried but here are the directions: apple.com -> Developer -> Hardware Purchase Program (under Developer Support) -> United States (or other preferred region) -> Hardware Purchase Program Store (Country).

If you are a student then you can buy a student developer membership for $99 and you get the discount. Another MacRumors member said he/she received the discount with just the free Online membership, although Apple's website says it is not available with the Online memberships. Signing up for the free one might be worth a try. :)

later,

a.

[janey]

If you are a student then you can buy a student developer membership for $99 and you get the discount. Another MacRumors member said he/she received the discount with just the free Online membership, although Apple's website says it is not available with the Online memberships. Signing up for the free one might be worth a try.
ADC hardware discount is only for premier/select renewal/student ADC memberships or just hardware purchase assets in their account, I dont get how you could get a hardware discount on a Power Mac, unless the 1.6ghz deal is for everyone, regardless of which level of membership, because apparently it doesnt exactly count towards the machines you get using the discounts.

[iswimbikeandrun]

Yeah, well I'll just walk you through some steps that I was avoiding. First of all when you are doing it my way AKA 833/700=1.19, we are finding that 833 is 119% of 700. This is easy to do it the head, because all we need to do is chop off the 100% to make it a 19% increase. When you take (833-700)/700=.19, we are essentially just doing the minus 100% that I was talking about doing in my head, with that extra addition step. And using the guy's reference (3000-2000)/2000=.5, we can apply my little short-cut 3/2=1.5 (remember that we can take all those little zeros out cause deviding 10/10=1/1 and 1000/100=10/1, technically I could have done it 8.33/7=1.19). We get the same answer, but my way is just a little easier on the calculator when we are finding how much increase 3456627 is to 4885934.....=1.4135 soo 41% increase. By the way, I'm a physicist.
Physicist as in an undergraduate or do you actually have a PhD? I too am a physicist, I was kinda embarassed b/c I posted hastily. My apologies. I am getting ready to start my graduate degree in High energy theory. what about you? where do you go to school?

[jared_kipe]

Well though I quoted you, it wasn't really in a direct response to you. I was simply trying to say how the supposedly differing methods brought the same results. No harm, no foul.

As for the college at the same time as school. I am originally from Colorado, (here in Washington they call it head start, which I think kind of down plays the achievement) there I went to full day of high school and took many night and summer classes. The only reason I went to full day though was because I had horrible luck and didn't draw the pick 6 that let me take this required class before senior year. We called it dual-enrollment, and as such I didn't have to pay practically any tuition, just bought books. Which I didn't do very often, I'd tend to go without books, and either borrow or check out required material.

Edit: No PhD, working on that one. I'm still a physicist at heart though. :)

[~Shard~]

Edit: Edited for maximum explainability.

Kay, my head hurts after trying to follow this whole mess... ;)

[Mercury]

Well though I quoted you, it wasn't really in a direct response to you. I was simply trying to say how the supposedly differing methods brought the same results. No harm, no foul.

The problem is that iswimbikeandrun's method and ours(yours and mine are really the same) didn't bring the same results. His were wrong(not trying to pick at you there iswimbike, just trying to get the facts straight) except for the 2-3 ghz one. Any formulae that can be converted into the other (where they will always convert exactly the same) are thus equivalent, by identity of indiscernibles.

[janey]

As for the college at the same time as school. I am originally from Colorado, (here in Washington they call it head start, which I think kind of down plays the achievement) there I went to full day of high school and took many night and summer classes. The only reason I went to full day though was because I had horrible luck and didn't draw the pick 6 that let me take this required class before senior year. We called it dual-enrollment, and as such I didn't have to pay practically any tuition, just bought books. Which I didn't do very often, I'd tend to go without books, and either borrow or check out required material.
Heh, alright. Cool, yeah thats what i meant by concurrent enrollment...sucks that my high school wont let us do that. :(

[~Shard~]

G5 iMacs...well overdue. Would be a very good thing to appear to celebrate the 20th anniversary year of the mac. If they can only get the price down as well...

Hmm, but what if the completely revamp the product line? Turn it into more of a digital hub, have a removeable screen, update the guts big time - but make it $2500? They turn the eMac into the only consumer level machine, the PowerMacs stay at the pro level and the iMacs become mid-level machines? Just crazy speculation... ;)

Tiger...30 mins...special whole screen icon/bar/text resizing to cope with new screens and new PB G5 screens next year...faster...voice recognition/speaking...selective file/directory encryption...

Sounds pretty good to me...

Better home TV recording support with iMovie and iDVD...a Mac digitial SD/HD TV tuner! :eek: ;)

Sounds like a good segway into the 4G Video iPods that can play your own recordings! ;) :cool:

[~Shard~]

By the way, I'm a physicist.

<applause> What do you want, a cookie? Physicists aren't the only people who can do math, I hope you realize... ;) :p :cool:

[jared_kipe]

No, but we physicists do love our math. But we do like it sugar coated, not like math majors....

[ibookin']

Kay, my head hurts after trying to follow this whole mess... ;)

What I don't get reading through this whole mess is how anyone in their right mind thought that an increase from 700 to 833 was an increase of 5%.

[fpnc]

What I don't get reading through this whole mess is how anyone in their right mind thought that an increase from 700 to 833 was an increase of 5%.

Subtract seven from eight and you get one (as from 8XX minus 7XX), subtract this one from a three to get two (as in 83X minus X1X), and then add the two to a three to get five (as in 2 plus XX3). That gives five as in 5%.

Now, please, can we stop this nearly endless talk about whose math is correct or not. IMO, enough said already.

[wyvern]

No, but we physicists do love our math. But we do like it sugar coated, not like math majors....

The things you guys do to math aren't nearly as heinous as what engineers do. "And, we don't like this term, so we set it to zero. Now, the DiffEQ is in canonical form, so the answer is clearly i/2." :shudder:

[BWhaler]

There is another possibility which may explain the move to longer ship times, yet there are still promotions going on right now.

Maybe Apple being the super secretive company it is, is now changing ship dates earlier even when it has inventory. Hell, they still can do same day shipping regardless of what the web site says.

Doing something like this would throw off the rumor sites considerably.

[fpnc]

...HyperTransport bus on the next chipset for AMD will be 1.6ghz on unidirectional dual-channel, just like the G5's current architecture. The VIA K8T800 chipset, which is in fabrication now with multiple suppliers on the PC side, is reaching 1.6ghz easily and in volume...

I may misunderstand what you are trying to say here and perhaps I misspoke when connecting AMD with FSB speeds over 1GHz (perhaps I was reading about an overclocked Intel chip), but I don't think that HyperTransport speeds are really comparable to the FSB on the PPC970. The FSB on the PPC970 also carries the memory interface while AMD's Athlon 64 has a built-in memory controller. Obviously there is a limit on how fast you can run the connection between the PPC970 and the system controller. I don't know how far Apple can stretch that speed beyond the current 1GHz. It should be a function of the 970fx, the motherboard, and Apple's custom-built system controller. I suspect that only Apple and IBM know the actual limit. Similarly, I don't know whether the original PPC970 or the new 970fx supports bus multipliers other than 2X (it would be nice if it did). Thus, when you combine these two unknowns it seems that there might be some uncertainty about what processor speeds Apple's current G5 design can actually support.

The simple (or obvious) solution would be that they can support a FSB speed of at least 1.3GHz. Combine that with the existing bus multiplier of 2X and you can produce:

2.6GHz processor (2 x 1.3GHz FSB)
2.4GHz processor (2 x 1.2GHz FSB)
2.2GHz processor (2 x 1.1GHz FSB)

Frankly, if Apple can do that then I'd say that they are closer this year to having the world's fastest PC than they were at last year's WWDC.

Does someone want to check my math? :)

[SyndicateX]

I think that it would be a mistake not to create a lower-end tower with a single processor and the current features of the G5s. That would allow an easy differentiation between the pro and consumer lines even if there's no change in processor type (970 to P5D - Power5 Derivative). Also, for those who cry and moan over there not being a cheaper G5 with expandability and options, the iMac is the worst of both worlds, since it would hideously limit what Apple could do with the machine while also denying upgradability. A tower is the only compromise that makes any sense, and it's the only path that would allow the supposed Holy Grail that I keep hearing people whine over - a headless "iMac."

pleaase forgive me for being sotallyuntober....but Ill make my argument anyway :). Although I agree there should be a differentiation between the pro and consumer G5 lines, I do not think there should be G5 tower's that consist of single processors. Although the iMac may offer very little in terms of expandability, people purchasing current 1.6 singles are not looking to deck it out and add every feature they can to it. It is the cheapest G5 out there, and although fast, it is only sold because it is a G5 processor, not because it is a power hungry machine that will devour art/video work. I would suggest apple offer the current 970 machines as consumer models. with 1.8/2.0 duals beign offered. (1 model up or down too, but that is dependant on what professional models they release.

An iMac (headless) offers a cheap G5, much cheaper than any curent tower. i dont even care what it looks like, the fact is selling a base of a iMac could be cut down to 800+$, which would bring alot more costomers into Apples ballpark. Considering if they dont have the money to spend on a beautiful LCD display, they can use their current CRT monitors and be haoppy. IT would distinctly separate the low end computers, mid-level consumers, and professional buyers with all 3 levels. Offering all types of pricing options, along with bringing their monitor proces down due to the separate iMac sales instead of the packaged current deals.

Sure can: Tower.

Your such a smart ass :P I wish I coould prove you wrong, but I know your probably right. But what would the fun be in that if you had no one to argue with! :D Im just offering my personal opinion based on the entire consumer market, and not just the current rich, professional based buyers. I want apple to steal every comp usa, circut city, and best buy customer there is, and be able to offer something that can make anybody at least think about buying it. Oppossed to the cuurent huge price gap between a decently loaded AMD computer and Apples low end computer.


The 7455 can run at 35w typical, but the reference you give does not state either the conditions, the clock rate, or anything else that causes it to reach that point. As such, it's more than a little irresponsible to be bandying about that number as if it proves anything, since we've got hard numbers on clock rate and heat in the 970 and 970FX. The P5D, should it make an appearance in the upcoming product cycle, will almost certainly be a pro tower process and not at all make a blip in the consumer market.

I know, I know. :( But whatever specs or heat numbers we throw out there, Apple simply MUST release a G5 iMac, because it is what the public desires. You cant offer a stunning processor 1 year ago and keep all your your models on its predecessor and expect sales to climb. Consumers arent stupid, well, they might be but they still know the difference between getting a G5 that they saw in the commercials, or a G4, which by even elementary mathematics they can tell is outdated. ( "G5 - G4 = G1 | so the cool model is 1 better than the one I am spending 1800$ for...hrmmmm....") Makes no sense, but Im drunk and felt like doing math. But for the most part, the public doesnt want to spend 2000$ on something it knows isnt even the best they offer, and that seems like a waste, especially in todays market when a spanking new PC is outdated in 6 months.

So, as we can see, even the single 970FX loses to two 7455 processors (which are hotter than the current MPC7447A), especially at maximum wattage consumption and maximum heat output. Load those babies down and watch the temperature rise... Hell, look at the single 1.8 G5, which throws out an ungodly 1466BTU/h, or some 3-4 times the heat output of two 1.33ghz previous-generation G4s. I threw in the dual-processor G5 just to show you what a system with fans that could drown out aircraft engines do with the heat - lose to the G4 all over the place in heat and power draw.

Oh, and those are Apple's numbers, so if anyone has a reason to spin the G5 as being cooler, it's them. No dice.

Dead God, I hope that you're wrong about the iMac. I like having a computer that doesn't have any fan noise, and they're going to need some high-speed blowers to get rid of the excess. If the formfactor is completely redesigned, then it might be possible we'll see a "G5 iMac" that can double as a hairdryer. ;)

In all seriousness, the best path to take here is to build a real consumer tower with the 970 or 970FX, not some absurd bastard child of the iMac that could be used to toast your breakfast in the morning. Well, maybe there is a market for the iToaster... :rolleyes:

No matter how right you may be, consumers dont care about the technology involved in the product of keeping it quiet & cool, they just want the "G5" name, plain and simple. You and I desire the same thing, but I am just putting out the perspective from everyone I have talked to about them, and while 70% of those people just want a cheap G5, 30% want a small for factor. And to add to this, which you already make you point abundantly clear in your previous posts that Apple is VERY far away from a powerbook G5, and although I agree with you, people dont care. You and I understand the specific details of engineering it and how difficult it is. Mom and pop just want it because it looks cool, and it beats the hell out of the comparable pentium M, and if Apple never pulls through on this front, then they will eventually loose.

If they cant fit a low powered G5 into an iMac @ WWDC, then powerbook G5's are a LOOOONNNGGG ways off. And I dont think they can afford that. And although what you propose makes total sense to a business o supplier, it will not keep apples 5% marketshare growing, since people eagerly want iMac / powerbook G5's. It doesnt matter how they do it, its just the fact that they do accomplish it.

And please dont come down on me too hard, I know 1/2 5his stuff Ill regret in the morning, but its the best drunken argument I could make! :P

P.S. .........Irish carbombs frikkin rock!!!!!!!

[Mercury]

pleaase forgive me for being sotallyuntober..

...

P.S. .........Irish carbombs frikkin rock!!!!!!!

Best...post...ever!

[troup]

No Mercury the post by SyndicateX regarding Irish carbombs is NOT the best post ever. In fact it is absolute disgrace and utterly shameful. I sincerely hope both these posts will be removed.

Back to the G5 rumors please!

[Mercury]

No Mercury the post by SyndicateX regarding Irish carbombs is NOT the best post ever. In fact it is absolute disgrace and utterly shameful. I sincerely hope both these posts will be removed.

Back to the G5 rumors please!

Pretty gutsy for your first post. People are just having a good time discussing the things they like. For what it's worth, he was far more on-topic than me. I just thought it was funny.

As for being on-topic, after the huge mess that math spawned, I don't know. I want new G5s. I honestly won't be surprised if they are not 3 ghz. I can hope, and I'll be let down a bit if they're not, but I will still be buying one. My G4/733 is too aged to live another year, and people are chomping on the bit to get it handed down as a used one.

I will be buying the top of the line, regardless of what comes out. I'll feel gipped if it's 2.2, though...

At least without a new graphics card. :p

[Foocha]

Terrorism never rocks.

[iReilly]

Terrorism never rocks.
Agreed.

Irish car bombs = Tall glass of Guinness + One shot of Irish wiskey (either Bushmills or Jamesons will do). Pour wiskey in shot glass, drop shot into beer, achieve Nivana... :D

iReilly

PS: I went to order a G5 again (Dual 2.0) and I have a 4 to 6 week lead time. What's that tell ya...

[AidenShaw]

2.6GHz processor (2 x 1.3GHz FSB)
2.4GHz processor (2 x 1.2GHz FSB)
2.2GHz processor (2 x 1.1GHz FSB)

Frankly, if Apple can do that then I'd say that they are closer this year to having the world's fastest PC than they were at last year's WWDC.

For comparison, this year the competition for the title is:


Opteron 250 (dual 2.4 GHz, 1 MiB L2 cache, 2*2.4GHz FSB)
Xeon 3.2GHz (dual, 2 MiB cache, 533 MHz FSB)
Itanium 1.5 GHz (dual, 6 MiB cache, 533 MHz FSB, 24 GiB RAM)


Let's hope that Jobs uses these systems for the comparison, and not use some kind of "justification" so that he can use a single processor 3.06 GHz system for the PC.


Also, when you're comparing FSB speeds, think about a couple of things:


Apple is using 400 MHz equivalent memory
The G5's bus is 2*32-bit unidirectional
Intel's bus is 64-bit bidirectional, AMD 128-bit


So, the bus is more than just a single frequency number....

This also means that if the next G5 uses a 3:1 multiplier (say for a 2.4GHz with 800MHz bus) it will still be at least as fast as the memory!

[Foocha]

Irish Car Bomb = drink?!

I never knew that - I suppose it's funny in a sick kind of way.

Thanks for the explanation, iReilly.

Personally I prefer single malt Scottish Whisky, with ice.

[johnnyjibbs]

Irish Car Bomb = drink?!

I never knew that - I suppose it's funny in a sick kind of way.

Thanks for the explanation, iReilly.

Personally I prefer single malt Scottish Whisky, with ice.
I'd never heard of the irish carbomb drink until i had one at a UCLA bar in Los Angeles! And I live in Britain!

It's not a very nice drink and is very expensive. Not that great a name either.

Anyway, G5s need to be updated: here comes WDC!

[~Shard~]

No, but we physicists do love our math. But we do like it sugar coated, not like math majors....

Fair enough. :)

[~Shard~]

The things you guys do to math aren't nearly as heinous as what engineers do. "And, we don't like this term, so we set it to zero. Now, the DiffEQ is in canonical form, so the answer is clearly i/2." :shudder:

I majored in Electronics Engineering, and yah, that's pretty much it. ;) We essentially obtain minors in Math and Physics while we pursue our degree, (at least at the univeristy I attended), so I've been through all ends of things. The thing I find most interesting is the application of all that raw knowledge. Sure, you can learn how to do Fourier transforms, 3-dimensional calculus, electromagnetic induction, and all those wonderful things, but in Engineering we learned how to apply them in the real world, which was cool. You can teach Communcations Theory to whoever you like, and you can learn all about the theory of discrete sampling and the Nyquist sampling rate, but unless you can go into the lab and build a radio from scratch (as a simple example), constructing the circuits and all that, what's the point? ;) :cool:

[sushi]

I majored in Electronics Engineering, and yah, that's pretty much it. ;) We essentially obtain minors in Math and Physics while we pursue our degree, (at least at the univeristy I attended), so I've been through all ends of things. The thing I find most interesting is the application of all that raw knowledge. Sure, you can learn how to do Fourier transforms, 3-dimensional calculus, electromagnetic induction, and all those wonderful things, but in Engineering we learned how to apply them in the real world, which was cool. You can teach Communcations Theory to whoever you like, and you can learn all about the theory of discrete sampling and the Nyquist sampling rate, but unless you can go into the lab and build a radio from scratch (as a simple example), constructing the circuits and all that, what's the point? ;) :cool:
Well Put! :D

Then again, there is always the twinkle twinkle little star V is equal to IR!

...coming from someone with a CS/EE major. Just wanted to add a little levity. I know, don't quite my day job!

Sushi

[~Shard~]

Well Put! :D

Then again, there is always the twinkle twinkle little star V is equal to IR!


I can honestly say I never heard that one, not even in my first-year classes. Of course, with having to memorize constants like Planck's constant, the permeability of free space, Rydeberg's constant, etc. ad infinitum, coupled with formulae regarding waveguides, DSP, Shannon capacitance, Hamming codes, electgromagnetic waves, and <shudder> Maxwell's equations, remembering V=IR was the least of my worries! ;) :cool:

Hmm, "Clearing Out G5s"... I guess I better quit for now and get back on topic... :o

[SyndicateX]

:eek:

Hehe, allright, just to clarify what I believe mercury already said, I was not appreciating terrorism. Irish car bombs are one of the best , albeit pricy, drinks Ive ever had. To be honest, Id never even thought about the name in that sense because when you watch them when they are made, you understand.

Sorry if I offended anyone, but like I said, i was sotallyuntober. :cool: I was just trying to have fun and although the argument wasnt that great...at least I could still make sentences! lol

[janey]

why people want PC users to SWITCH is beyond me.
Honestly, it is better if Apple just has a few million users, because then they can spend the money on r&d for better stuff, not on like tech support and help for people who can use and know the Start menu like the back of their hands but cannot understand what the hell Finder is for. Gah.
Be happy you're part of a minority, because if you weren't we'd all be using Linux or something, and this forum would be called LinuxRumors.

[fpnc]

For comparison, this year the competition for the title is:


Opteron 250 (dual 2.4 GHz, 1 MiB L2 cache, 2*2.4GHz FSB)
Xeon 3.2GHz (dual, 2 MiB cache, 533 MHz FSB)
Itanium 1.5 GHz (dual, 6 MiB cache, 533 MHz FSB, 24 GiB RAM)


Let's hope that Jobs uses these systems for the comparison, and not use some kind of "justification" so that he can use a single processor 3.06 GHz system for the PC.


I don't think those systems qualify to be named a "PC" (personal computer). The Itanium is definitely a workstation/server, the dual Xeon is arguably the same, and I don't think a dual Opteron would qualify either. True, some would argue that the G5 should be considered or classified as a workstation, but then there is the question of price (those Intel systems are likely to be much more expensive than any Power Mac G5).

I think it would be fine if they benchmarked against single-processor PCs. Either an Intel Pentium 4 Extreme at 3.4GHz or the fastest AMD Athlon 64 that they can locate. And then they could add a repeat performance on the dual Xeon. Of course, if Apple's marketing is working overtime they should probably choose the latest Intel Pentium 4E (Prescott). That would give Steve Jobs the ability to take some "cheap shots" about the Prescott's relatively poor performance against last year's P4 designs. And I suspect that against the Prescott the heat generation of the G5 suddenly starts to look not too bad. And I'm sure Steve is going to talk about how Intel is dropping MHz/GHz as a way to market their processors (i.e. the MHz myth is finally confirmed).


Also, when you're comparing FSB speeds, think about a couple of things:


Apple is using 400 MHz equivalent memory
The G5's bus is 2*32-bit unidirectional
Intel's bus is 64-bit bidirectional, AMD 128-bit


So, the bus is more than just a single frequency number....


Yes, that's a valid point.

In any case, I still say that comparing the design limits of the Athlon 64's HyperTransport-based FSB against the G5's FSB is problematic. The Athlon 64 processor design is arguably superior with its built-in memory controller and HyperTransport link and IMO that forces one to classify the FSB design on Apple's G5 a completely different "beast." I'm not suggesting that the G5 FSB design is better. In fact, the opposite is probably true and for that reason I won't just assume that the FSB on the G5 can run significantly faster than the current 1GHz.

[.a]

I will be buying the top of the line, regardless of what comes out. I'll feel gipped if it's 2.2, though...


... so will i ... i just bought a vintage dual g4 1250 mhz today ... just to have some work done until the new g5 will be announced and then delivered ... my old dual g4 450 mhz was just too outdated for some serious gfx- & vfx-stuff ... and for a price of approx $1'200.- (with super-drive) i thought it is cool ...
but then again i really want a new g5 and please let it be really fast !!! but i buy the high-end anyway, whatever chip they'll use ...
the future will tell ... let it be fast ... let it be fast ... let it be fast ...
.a

[sushi]

why people want PC users to SWITCH is beyond me.
Probably has something to do with the market.

To have a few more Mac users always helps market wise. Keeps the developers happy as well as long as the market is big enough for them to make a profit. I for one, would hate to see MSFT, Adobe, etc. pull out because the market share is too small to make it profitable for them to continue support.

For those of us who have owned and used Macs since the early 80's, we have seen so many changes. Maybe in the back of our minds, we feel that the bigger the market, the better chance of not loosing any more key developers.

Edit: And of course Apple itself. Then we would be stuck in a Winders world! :eek:

Sushi

[el_aarono]

I dont get how you could get a hardware discount on a Power Mac, unless the 1.6ghz deal is for everyone, regardless of which level of membership, because apparently it doesnt exactly count towards the machines you get using the discounts.

I don't get it either. I was refering to another macrumors member who said they got it with just the online membership. I suppose you are correct in saying the 1.6 ghz deal is for all levels of ADC membership.

If that is the case, then anyone who wants to take advantage of this 1.6ghz deal can just get a free online membership. Personally, I'm waiting for updates.:)

later,

a.

[neonart]

I don't get it either. I was refering to another macrumors member who said they got it with just the online membership. I suppose you are correct in saying the 1.6 ghz deal is for all levels of ADC membership.

If that is the case, then anyone who wants to take advantage of this 1.6ghz deal can just get a free online membership. Personally, I'm waiting for updates.:)

later,

a.

Yeah, if an online membership gets you this blowout deal, IM IN!
Does anyone here have the email sent by Apple about this 1.6 Deal? What is required to make the purchase?

[janey]

Yeah, if an online membership gets you this blowout deal, IM IN!
Does anyone here have the email sent by Apple about this 1.6 Deal? What is required to make the purchase?
Special Pricing on Power Mac G5 1.6GHz
ADC is pleased to offer ADC Select and Premier members in the U.S., special pricing on the Power Mac G5 1.6GHz. Through June 26, ADC Select and Premier members can purchase up to five (5) Power Mac G5 1.6GHz systems through the ADC Hardware Purchase Program, without affecting annual hardware discount purchase limits.

ADC Online members who upgrade to Select or Premier in May or June can participate in this promotion, and will also get access to pre-release software, code-level technical support, discount programs, and all the other great benefits Select and Premier members enjoy. Apple reserves the right to end or to change the terms and conditions of this offer at any time.

Please note: You may not add iPods to orders for the Power Mac G5 1.6GHz. [May 21 2004]

[fpnc]

thatwendigo provided some useful links to data on the Power Mac G5 and Xserve G4/G5 power consumptions and thermal outputs (thanks). I looked for additional systems and I think I found some interesting comparisons.

According to Apple's data the 800MHz G4 flat-panel iMac consumes 130 watts max and produces a maximum thermal output of 445 BTU/hr. This was the Jan. 2002 model with the 15" LCD.

Now let's compare that to the single 970fx-based Xserve G5 running at 2.0 GHz. According to Apple's data this configuration requires 170 watts max and produces a maximum thermal output of 580 BTU/hr. This is for what they call a minimum configuration -- Single 2.0 GHz G5 Processor, single 80 GB Apple Drive Module, 512 MB ECC RAM (2x256 MB DIMMs), no PCI cards, no video. Adding a PCI video card apparently increases the power consumption by 10 watts (according to Apple).

Obviously, these are quite different systems and the iMac includes a flat-panel display. But, based upon this data it seems possible that you could handle the power consumption and thermal properties of a 970fx in an iMac-like design. It might even be considered easy if you dropped the 970fx speed down to 1.6 GHz.

[AidenShaw]

:eek: In any case, I still say that comparing the design limits of the Athlon 64's HyperTransport-based FSB against the G5's FSB is problematic. The Athlon 64 processor design is arguably superior with its built-in memory controller and HyperTransport link ....

Opteron/Athlon have an on-chip FSB/memory controller that runs at clock speed.

HT is an I/O bus and a cache-coherency bus for MP - it is not the memory (FSB) bus.


And really, what does "superior" mean? The Xeons with the 533 MHz bus lose all of the "spec" battles, but they win a good number of the benchmarks. Actual delivered performance vs. a few isolated technical specs.

Which is more important - hot numbers on the tech spec sheets, or hot numbers on important application benchmarks? I'll go with the benchmarks....