New PowerMac Model?

[MacRumors]

As noted in several places on the internet (Thread (http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42288&perpage=40&pagenumber=8), Thread (http://www.spymac.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=85479)), there appears to be a PowerMac model listed in Mac OS X 10.3.4.

The new machine is listed as "PowerMac 8,1" and is found in the Info.plist file in the system's extensions directory.

This model was reportedly not found in Mac OS X 10.3.3..

[tveric]

Wow, a new PowerMac is coming soon after a year of no updates? What a shock.

I'd be impressed with this "rumor" if there were some details.

[mactastic]

Let's hope it's a 3Ghz flavor and Steve doesn't have to own up to an error in chip speed prediction ability. :p

[iriejedi]

:eek: When did people start speculating about an upgrade? The G5's just came out!

I must have missed something! :p


Wow, a new PowerMac is coming soon after a year of no updates? What a shock.

I'd be impressed with this "rumor" if there were some details.

[GrannySmith_G5]

holy yawn Batman.

[Steven1621]

PM updates aren't much of a suprise. The question should be what will be contained in them. Will we see the G5 hit 3Ghz? Dual Layer DVD Burners? More than 256 MB of RAM standard on the slowest PM?

[Mudbug]

not only is it listed as a new model, it's in /System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/ - which the funny part of is the 4PE, meaning, if I understand this right, a 4 processor usage. That could be quite interesting...

This rumor also popped up at Macbidouille, where their author suggested it may be a G5 imac instead of a PowerMac.

[eyeluvmyimac]

anyone know the number for the current dual 2ghz powermac if this "new one" is 8.1?

[nsb3000]

As noted in several places on the internet (Thread (http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42288&perpage=40&pagenumber=8), Thread (http://www.spymac.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=85479)), there appears to be a PowerMac model listed in Mac OS X 10.3.4.

The new machine is listed as "PowerMac 8,1" and is found in the Info.plist file in the system's extensions directory.

This model was reportedly not found in Mac OS X 10.3.3..

Didn’t people same the same thing when 10.3.3 came out?

Does this really mean anything?

[Mord]

not only is it listed as a new model, it's in /System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/ - which the funny part of is the 4PE, meaning, if I understand this right, a 4 processor usage. That could be quite interesting...

This rumor also popped up at Macbidouille, where their author suggested it may be a G5 imac instead of a PowerMac.

excellent


would that mean they would have numa support?

[bathysphere]

while we are all fairly certain that new g5's are on the way, this is intersting because it probably means instant or almost instant availability upon announcement, due to it being noted in 10.3.4, which likely won't have a lifespan more than 2 months or so.

[3G4N]

Nothing to see here....

Move along. Move along...

[Naimfan]

I think the same sort of thing happened with the new PBs...

Best,

Bob

[sinisterdesign]

The new machine is listed as "PowerMac 8,1"...

sweet! a G8 PowerMac!! or does that mean it's running at 8.1GHz?? or does that just mean it's a slow rumors day? ;)

oh well, more things to speculate before WWDC...

[Abstract]

anyone know the number for the current dual 2ghz powermac if this "new one" is 8.1?

Good question. I was wondering the same thing.

not only is it listed as a new model, it's in /System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/ - which the funny part of is the 4PE, meaning, if I understand this right, a 4 processor usage. That could be quite interesting...

This rumor also popped up at Macbidouille, where their author suggested it may be a G5 imac instead of a PowerMac.

They're going to release a 4 processor iMac!! :eek:

:p

This is the biggest non-event ever! Like I always say, updated G5 rumours aren't rumours. They're inevitabilities.

[LaMerVipere]

I am absolutely loving all of these cynical and nonplussed reactions from people, too funny. :p

[Windowlicker]

yeah not a surprise.. now how long is it gonna take till we know the specs? a couple of hours before the keynote or a couple of days before? i'm guessing rather the first one. let's hope those kickass specs posted here a while back are true :))

[klaus]

A previous 10.3 update listed a new powermac model nr as well.. don't know the exact model nr though, but we have yet to see that one appear in reality.. And now there seems to be another one? or are these numbers the same, if yes, than this rumor isn't worth much...

but hey, any person could guess powermac updates are on the way..but we all know what the question is either :-) but only steve knows the answer I guess...

[SpiceMustFlow]

Macbidouille.com user's found numbers previously... And no Mac follow...

we have a 7,3 ? G5= 7,2, G4 = 3,x

In french:

"La mise à jour 10.3.3 comportait déjà elle aussi un code inconnu jusqu'ici : Power Mac 7,3. Aucune machine frappée de la pomme n'a encore porté ce nom de code. En effet, la série de Powermac actuelle (les G5 quoi) ont pour nom de code Power Mac 7,2. Il faut savoir que les Powermac G4 répondaient eux au nom de code Power Mac 3,x, les Cubes au nom Power Mac 5,1 et les iMac TFT et eMac quant à eux aux noms Power Mac 4,x et 6,x... la liste complète de ces noms de codes se trouve ici : http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld

Or, si l'on regarde maintenant un peu plus la mise à jour 10.3.4, on s'aperçoit qu'il y est fait mention d'un Power Mac 8,1 , ce qui laisse penser qu'il ne s'agit pas du tout d'une mise à niveau mineure mais d'une toute nouvelle machine !

On trouve aussi la référence SMU_Neo2, ce qui peut aussi laisser penser que Neo2 serait une nouvelle version du processeur. Ce qui est certain c'est que Neo2 serait un dérivé du processeur G5 actuel. Mais il est encore difficile d'affirmer qu'il s'agisse d'une version allégée (comme les 970fx des serveurs Xserve) ou boostée (!!!).

Si vous voulez en savoir plus, faites la mise à jour 10.3.4, ouvrez ce fichier :
/System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/
Contents/info.plist
et faites une recherche avec pour objet "8,1".

Sachant justement que les Powermac G5 et les iMac n'ont pas été revus depuis longtemps, on peut en déduire ce qu'on en veut... ;-)

Je vous laisse rêver... (pour moi le 8,1 est un iMac G5 nouveau design, pour fin juin. Le 7,3 quant à lui sera le powermac G5 mis à jour, même date)."

source: http://www.macbidouille.com

English version of bidouille:
http://www.hardmac.com/

If you can translate the post, writing in english is not easy for me! :-)

[brentski]

I would guess this is bad news. Only one new model listed. This is not a good sign. Maybe this will be a quad processor unit because they did not hit the 3GHz limit.

[immaculate]

check theapplemuseum.com for the existing model numbers the apple museum (http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld)

[NOV]

Ok, the 8 needs to be interpreted as follows..

2^3=8

2 stands for the current top-Ghz model and 3 stands for the future top-Ghz model.

[klaus]

Well, in 10.3.3 there was a new powermac model nr:

7.3, and we haven't seen one with that number yet.
and as I mentioned before, already a new number pops up..

thread : http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=64650

[Windowlicker]

if they indeed release a 4-processor PM, my guess would be it isn't 4x3GHz.. All in all I don't really believe it's gonna be a quad proc machine.. then again I don't know crap about what can and cannot be done (or rather what's wise of apple and what's not).

[Zaty]

Since there is a chance that 10.3.4 might be the last update to Panther, this only means that we'll see new models between now and year's end (i.e. the release of Tiger).

[eyeluvmyimac]

this is purely speculation and should be taken with a grain of salt, but since the current PM is 7,2 and this "new model" is 8,1 it may be proof that this new model is in fact using the 975 chip as previously rumored since they jumped from 7 to 8. I have no idea what I'm talking about though so if i'm way off base, slap me silly....but gently...

[klaus]

I would guess this is bad news. Only one new model listed. This is not a good sign. Maybe this will be a quad processor unit because they did not hit the 3GHz limit.

A model number is more associated with a revision line, than with the amount of models there will be available

7,2 is the current G5 powermac model and it applied to 1.6,1.8,dual 1.8,dual2.0 models, so don't worry

[eyeluvmyimac]

one explanation for the appearance of 7,3 without an accompanying model may be that they had planned (at release of 10.3.3) to bump the powermacs to say 1.8, 2.0, and 2.2 (or something along those lines), until they received word from IBM that the 975 would be available or something which made them change their mind to just wait till wwdc, also a reason for the big jump from 7,x to 8,x

[Stike]

I find it interesting that the current G5 Powermac series is codenamed "Omega"... the last letter in the greek alphabet, commonly a sign for "end".
Does it mean we will see a whole new beast next???

Reminds me of some dream I had - already in January. I dreamed about four PowerMac configs... I could dig up the post once more what exactly it was :p

[bathysphere]

i'm fairly certain we'll see another update to panther, depending on how long it will be before tiger comes out. the previous 7,3 in 10.3.3 was the g5 xserve, wasn't it?

[eyeluvmyimac]

i'm fairly certain we'll see another update to panther, depending on how long it will be before tiger comes out. the previous 7,3 in 10.3.3 was the g5 xserve, wasn't it?

no the g5 xserve was RackMac3,1 iirc

[Zaty]

Well, in 10.3.3 there was a new powermac model nr:

7.3, and we haven't seen one with that number yet.
and as I mentioned before, already a new number pops up..

thread : http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=64650

IMO, this can only mean two things:

Apple planned to release a new PM revision sometime between March and May (the release dates of 10.3.3 and 10.3.4, respectively), but had to change that plan for whatever reason, probably IBM's yield problems.

OR

10.3.4 was released sooner than originally planned which is less likely to be the reason than the first possibility

[centauratlas]

i'm fairly certain we'll see another update to panther, depending on how long it will be before tiger comes out. the previous 7,3 in 10.3.3 was the g5 xserve, wasn't it?

I agree. Given that it is unlikely that we'll see Tiger until 2005 (Spring perhaps?) leaving 10.3.4 as the last update for that long seems VERY unlikely.

(This refers to the comments made that Apple isn't going to be updating OS X yearly now. I doubt they'd have made that announcement if it was going to be, say 15 months. It means at least 18-24 months between major updates, which puts it April-Oct 2005.)

[Zaty]

I agree. Given that it is unlikely that we'll see Tiger until 2005 (Spring perhaps?) leaving 10.3.4 as the last update for that long seems VERY unlikely.

(This refers to the comments made that Apple isn't going to be updating OS X yearly now. I doubt they'd have made that announcement if it was going to be, say 15 months. It means at least 18-24 months between major updates, which puts it April-Oct 2005.)

Although I think that we'll see at least one more update to Panther, if Tiger is released at around the same time Panther was released last year (i.e. October), there is a chance we'll never see 10.3.5 as Panther seems to be finished with 10.3.4.

EDIT: I guess we'll find out soon if work on 10.3.5 has begun or if Apple is already concentrating solely on Tiger.

[Stike]

This is the prediction I made end of January:

Guys, I had a really strange dream last night. Apple held a special keynote-style event, but it was not Steve on the stage.

They introduced the G5 iMac with 2 GHz...
...and then they updated the PowerMac line:
2 GHz single
2 GHz QUAD config (!!!)
2.5 GHz DUAL
and
3 GHz DUAL

I know this is way off, especially the dream about the Quad G5 (lol!) but I remember when everything was announced that the people cheered and I said to someone "Hey, NeatGekko was right!!"...

[macridah]

holy moly ... quad processor. I wonder how practical that would be for most users. I think dual is fine for most. If there is a quad processor, then it should be in a class of it's own ... like ultra mac or something.

[Luc@]

Wait, wait and wait

PowerMac7,2 = PowerMac G5.
PowerMac7,3 = ? Probably revB of PowerMac G5.
RackMac3,1 = Xserve.
PowerMac8,1 = new product.

<key>PowerMac8,1</key>
<string>SMU_Neo2_PlatformPlugin</string>

Neo was the codename of PPC970, so Neo2 could be the 970fx? Anyway PowerMac 8,1 probably is the new iMac G5, in fact all the latest iMac have an even revision number (PowerMac 4.x, PowerMac 6.x...).

One more thing, /System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/ is only the .kext necessary for the G5 support, no 4 processor Macintosh yet ;-)

[mrsebastian]

just gimmie my [bleepin] updated g5 apple! i got money just sitting here waiting to get the top g5 with a monster cinema display.

[johnnyjibbs]

Something exciting and new's coming. Hopefully (and probably) it's G5 iMacs...

[shawnce]

not only is it listed as a new model, it's in /System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/ - which the funny part of is the 4PE, meaning, if I understand this right, a 4 processor usage. That could be quite interesting...

I hate to burst this bubble but the above kext is used by all Apple PowerMac G5 systems. The number generally imply a major mother board / chipset not the number of CPUs... likely we should read it as "Apple Mac RISC version 4 platform expert".

The following is a listing of what platform expert is in use on my PowerMac Dual 2GHz G5...

[G5:~] shawnce% ioreg
+-o Root <class IORegistryEntry, retain count 12>
+-o PowerMac7,2 <class IOPlatformExpertDevice, ...>
+-o MacRISC4PE <class MacRISC4PE, ...>
...

If you crack open (view contents) of the above mentioned kext and view the plist you see that the driver class involved is MacRISC4PE (<key>IOClass</key><string>MacRISC4PE</string>).

Now it could very well be that the platform expert and the PowerMac G5s chip set are designed to support dual core PPC chips but the platform expert noted above is not new, it has just been updated which is normal if new system support has been added or bugs fixed, etc.

[bathysphere]

no the g5 xserve was RackMac3,1 iirc

ahh yeah i forgot about that. weird.

[Mudbug]

I hate to burst this bubble but the above kext is used by all Apple PowerMac G5 systems. The number generally imply a major mother board / chipset not the number of CPUs... likely we should read it as "Apple Mac RISC version 4 platform expert".

The following is a listing of what platform expert is in use on my PowerMac Dual 2GHz G5...

[G5:~] shawnce% ioreg
+-o Root <class IORegistryEntry, retain count 12>
+-o PowerMac7,2 <class IOPlatformExpertDevice, ...>
+-o MacRISC4PE <class MacRISC4PE, ...>
...

If you crack open (view contents) of the above mentioned kext and view the plist you see that the driver class involved is MacRISC4PE (<key>IOClass</key><string>MacRISC4PE</string>).

Now it could very well be that the platform expert and the PowerMac G5s chip set are designed to support dual core PPC chips but the platform expert noted above is not new, it has just been updated which is normal if new system support has been added or bugs fixed, etc.

you're probably right - but I hope you're wrong ;)

[ingenious]

sweet! a G8 PowerMac!! or does that mean it's running at 8.1GHz?? or does that just mean it's a slow rumors day? ;)

oh well, more things to speculate before WWDC...

Um, I hope you know that the 8.1 has nothing to do with clock speed or what generation (i.e. G5) it is. Someone else can probably explain this better though.

[wrldwzrd89]

Um, I hope you know that the 8.1 has nothing to do with clock speed or what generation (i.e. G5) it is. Someone else can probably explain this better though.
I suspect either a PowerMac revision and/or a G5 iMac, based on the numbers here. If it's true that previous iMacs had numbers starting with 4 and 6, then a number that starts with 8 surely indicates a new iMac that requires additional hardware support. This is furthered by the fact that the PowerMac G5's number starts with a 7. Number 7,3 is going to be a G5 revision using a new processor, while Number 9,1 will be the first G6-based Mac.

[rjwill246]

Macbidouille.com
If you can translate the post, writing in english is not easy for me! :-)

Here is my translation for you:

The update 10.3.3 also contained an unrecognized 'code' as here: Power Mac 7.3. No machine yet released form Apple has carried this code name designation. In fact, the current series of powermacs (G5s) have the code name Powermac 7.2. You need to know that the Powermac G4s had the code name Powermac 3.x, the Cubes Powermac 5.1 and the iMac TFT and emacs each had the names Powermac 4.x and 6.x respectively... the complete list of code names can be found here: http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld

However, if you look a little closer at the 10.3.4 update, you will notice that mention of a Powermac 8.1 is made, which makes you think that it is not just a minor update but a completely new machine.

You will also find a reference to SMU_Neo2 which might also make you think that the Neo2 would be a new version of the processor. What is certain is that Neo2 would be a derivative of the current G5. But it is still difficult to confirm whether it is a stripped- down version (like the 970fx of the X-Serves) or, BOOSTED!
If you would like to know more, do the 10.3.4 update, open this file:
/System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/
Contents/info.plist
and search for "8.1".

I shall leave you to dream... (for me the 8.1 is an iMac G5 of new design, to be announced/released ?? at the end of June. As for the 7.3, that will be a Powermac G5 update, on the same date. END of translation.

hope this helps. hope it's true.

[Wonder Boy]

Since there is a chance that 10.3.4 might be the last update to Panther, this only means that we'll see new models between now and year's end (i.e. the release of Tiger).

seriously? you think .4 is the last panther update between now and octobrer(ish)? god i hope not. what was jaguar's 10.2.x number 9 months after it was released? that could give us some clues...

[ravenvii]

I think this makes sense;

7,2 is still the next G5 tower, and

8,1 is the new iMac G5.

Makes sense.

[invaLPsion]

Does anyone want to make any offers for the powerbok below? Those G5s sound tasty... :D

[patrickw]

I think one thing no one has thought about is that fact that imacs use the same numbering system.


PowerMac7,2 = PowerMac G5.
PowerMac7,3 = ? Probably revB of PowerMac G5.
RackMac3,1 = Xserve.
PowerMac8,1 = new product.


iMac,1 iMac (Rev.A - Rev.D)
PowerMac2,1 iMac FireWire
PowerMac2,2 iMac FireWire
PowerMac4,1 iMac "Flower Power"
PowerMac4,2 iMac Flat Panel
PowerMac4,4 eMac

Only the first generation used a different name.
Would it not be safe to assume that PowerMac7,3 is an upgraded Powermac G5? The powermac line was PowerMac3,x from AGP to windtunnel. I believe that the PowerMac7,3 is also in 10.3.3 which shows that apple thought about upgrading them earlier but decided against it or couldn't at the time.

Now what other products are people expecting to be upgraded soon? The iMac, I am quite surprised that they continued to use PowerMac4,x for the flat panel imac because it is so different.

I really hope that because both theses products work with the current version of the system that they will be available immediately.

[Photorun]

Wow, Mac news has hit such a crawl of anything interesting people are clinging to this? Yawn! Some day Apple may release something cool again... some day.

[ingenious]

Wow, Mac news has hit such a crawl of anything interesting people are clinging to this? Yawn! Some day Apple may release something cool again... some day.
edit #2: Did this post get deleted or something? ^^^:confused:

I hope that day is June 28! Come on WWDC! (edit #1: ) Don't miss this oppurtunity, please Apple. I want an iMac G5, a PowerMac G5 Rev. B (or something better) and a PowerBook G5 released!

Ha ha my friend said this the other day:

"Innovation takes many naps!" :rolleyes:

I hope not.

[wrldwzrd89]

I think one thing no one has thought about is that fact that imacs use the same numbering system.



iMac,1 iMac (Rev.A - Rev.D)
PowerMac2,1 iMac FireWire
PowerMac2,2 iMac FireWire
PowerMac4,1 iMac "Flower Power"
PowerMac4,2 iMac Flat Panel
PowerMac4,4 eMac

Only the first generation used a different name.
Would it not be safe to assume that PowerMac7,3 is an upgraded Powermac G5? The powermac line was PowerMac3,x from AGP to windtunnel. I believe that the PowerMac7,3 is also in 10.3.3 which shows that apple thought about upgrading them earlier but decided against it or couldn't at the time.

Now what other products are people expecting to be upgraded soon? The iMac, I am quite surprised that they continued to use PowerMac4,x for the flat panel imac because it is so different.

I really hope that because both theses products work with the current version of the system that they will be available immediately.
Actually, all the newer iMacs are series 6 (PowerMac 6,x) machines, including the flat-panel iMacs and the new 20" iMac. That makes me think that PowerMac 8,x MUST be a new iMac, PowerMac 7,3 is a revision to the PowerMac G5, PowerMac 7,4 will be another G5 revision, and PowerMac 9,1 will be called the G6.

[Frobozz]

this is purely speculation and should be taken with a grain of salt, but since the current PM is 7,2 and this "new model" is 8,1 it may be proof that this new model is in fact using the 975 chip as previously rumored since they jumped from 7 to 8. I have no idea what I'm talking about though so if i'm way off base, slap me silly....but gently...

That sounds plausible.

I'm guessing that the first number is representative of a model line / major revision. PowerMacs, for example, have multiple first digits in their model number because there were multiple architecture changes. Not sure what the criteria is, but a jump from 7 to 8 indicates something more than a speed bump.

I'm going to add it to my pile of indirect evidence supporting the 975 / 3.0 GHz PowerMac this summer. :-)

[Frobozz]

Actually, all the newer iMacs are series 6 (PowerMac 6,x) machines, including the flat-panel iMacs and the new 20" iMac. That makes me think that PowerMac 8,x MUST be a new iMac, PowerMac 7,3 is a revision to the PowerMac G5, PowerMac 7,4 will be another G5 revision, and PowerMac 9,1 will be called the G6.

This also seems likely. I got thinking that the 8 might be something other than a PowerMac. I wonder what it is? I think your explanation makes a lot of sense.

[Frobozz]

I hope that day is June 28! Come on WWDC! :D:D:D:D:D:D

Amen. If memory serves, last year was pretty much a big yawn-a-thon until WWDC hit and we had Panther and the G5 PowerMac.

[Plissken]

Since there is a chance that 10.3.4 might be the last update to Panther, this only means that we'll see new models between now and year's end (i.e. the release of Tiger).

What are you smoking? Why would 10.3.4 be the last update to Panther?

[kenaustus]

My thought: Steve J knows we have been pulling our hair out for months (he's kept his short since the Moto days) and slipped this in to get us going again.

If IBM is delivering now (and they won't say their yield performance) then Steve J will have a lot to blow our minds at the WWDC. I would not be surprised, however, to see something before then if Steve wants to tell the developers about huge back orders.

[shawnce]

Here is my translation for you:
However, if you look a little closer at the 10.3.4 update, you will notice that mention of a Powermac 8.1 is made, which makes you think that it is not just a minor update but a completely new machine.

You will also find a reference to SMU_Neo2 which might also make you think that the Neo2 would be a new version of the processor. What is certain is that Neo2 would be a derivative of the current G5. But it is still difficult to confirm whether it is a stripped- down version (like the 970fx of the X-Serves) or, BOOSTED!

Yes it is also telling that the 8,1 is listed under the MacRISC4PE which implies, at least to me, it is using a PowerMac G5 like chip set (U3 (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G5/PowerMacG5/2Architecture/chapter_3_section_4.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30000803/TPXREF107) based, the bridge/memory controller). So systems that are using the PowerMac G5 chip set are...

PowerMac7,3 using PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin (new unknown system first in 10.3.3)
PowerMac7,2 using PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin (current PowerMac G5 (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G5/PowerMacG5/index.html) line)
PowerMac8,1 using SMU_Neo2_PlatformPlugin (new unknown system first in 10.3.4)
RackMac3,1 using RackMac3_1_PlatformPlugin (I assume the Xserve G5 (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Servers/XserveG5/index.html) )

So the PowerMac7,3 is using the same platform plugin as the current PM G5s so it is likely not that much drastically different then the current PM G5s. The 8,1 is using a completly different plugin so it is likely different to some extent (less/more or different things connected with the U3 or a variant of the U3).

-Shawn

[wrldwzrd89]

Yes it is also telling that the 8,1 is listed under the MacRISC4PE which implies, at least to me, it is using a PowerMac G5 like chip set (U3 (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G5/PowerMacG5/2Architecture/chapter_3_section_4.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30000803/TPXREF107) based, the bridge/memory controller). So systems that are using the PowerMac G5 chip set are...

PowerMac7,3 using PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin (new unknown system first in 10.3.3)
PowerMac7,2 using PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin (current PowerMac G5 (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G5/PowerMacG5/index.html) line)
PowerMac8,1 using SMU_Neo2_PlatformPlugin (new unknown system first in 10.3.4)
RackMac3,1 using RackMac3_1_PlatformPlugin (I assume the Xserve G5 (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Servers/XserveG5/index.html) )

So the PowerMac7,3 is using the same platform plugin as the current PM G5s so it is likely not that much drastically different then the current PM G5s. The 8,1 is using a completly different plugin so it is likely different to some extent (less/more or different things connected with the U3 or a variant of the U3).

-Shawn
I agree with your analysis and I think my own does not conflict with it. It seems that we're going to see new hardware come WWDC - I'm looking forward to it!

[BornAgainMac]

Wow! This is excellent marketing by the folks at Apple.

[nsb3000]

Since there is a chance that 10.3.4 might be the last update to Panther, this only means that we'll see new models between now and year's end (i.e. the release of Tiger).


From a historical perspective, this seems unlikely. There were 6 updates to 10.1, 8 updates (I think) to 10.2 .

[CmdrLaForge]

Mac,1

iMac (Revision A + B)
iMac (Revision C)
iMac (Revision D)

PowerMac1,1 Power Macintosh G3 (Blue & White)
PowerMac1,2 Power Macintosh G4 (PCI-Graphics)
PowerMac2,1 iMac (Slot-Loading CD-ROM)
PowerMac2,2 iMac (Summer 2000)
PowerMac3,1 Power Macintosh G4 (AGP-Graphics)
PowerMac3,2 Power Macintosh G4 (AGP-Graphics)
PowerMac3,3 Power Macintosh G4 (Gigabit Ethernet)
PowerMac3,4 Power Macintosh G4 (Digital Audio)
PowerMac3,5 Power Macintosh G4 (Quick Silver)
Power Macintosh G4 (Quick Silver 2002)
PowerMac3,6 Power Macintosh G4 (Mirrored Drive Doors)
Power Macintosh G4 (FW 800)
Power Macintosh G4 (Mirrored Drive Doors 2003)
PowerMac4,1 iMac (Early 2001) iMac (Summer 2001)
PowerMac4,2 iMac (Flat-Panel)
PowerMac4,4 eMac eMac (ATI Graphics) eMac (1 GHz G4)
PowerMac4,5 iMac (17-inch Flat-Panel)
iMac (17-inch 1 GHz)
PowerMac5,1 Power Macintosh G4 Cube
Power Macintosh G4 Cube (Early 2001)
PowerMac6,1 iMac (USB 2.0)
PowerMac6,3 iMac (20-inch Flat-Panel)
PowerMac6,4 eMac (USB 2.0)
PowerMac7,2 Power Macintosh G5
PowerMac 8 iMac G5

[wrldwzrd89]

Mac,1

iMac (Revision A + B)
iMac (Revision C)
iMac (Revision D)


PowerMac1,1

Power Macintosh G3 (Blue & White)


PowerMac1,2

Power Macintosh G4 (PCI-Graphics)


PowerMac2,1

iMac (Slot-Loading CD-ROM)


PowerMac2,2

iMac (Summer 2000)



PowerMac3,1

Power Macintosh G4 (AGP-Graphics)


PowerMac3,2

Power Macintosh G4 (AGP-Graphics)


PowerMac3,3

Power Macintosh G4 (Gigabit Ethernet)


PowerMac3,4

Power Macintosh G4 (Digital Audio)


PowerMac3,5

Power Macintosh G4 (Quick Silver)
Power Macintosh G4 (Quick Silver 2002)


PowerMac3,6

Power Macintosh G4 (Mirrored Drive Doors)
Power Macintosh G4 (FW 800)
Power Macintosh G4 (Mirrored Drive Doors 2003)


PowerMac4,1

iMac (Early 2001)
iMac (Summer 2001)


PowerMac4,2

iMac (Flat-Panel)


PowerMac4,4

eMac
eMac (ATI Graphics)
eMac (1 GHz G4)


PowerMac4,5

iMac (17-inch Flat-Panel)
iMac (17-inch 1 GHz)


PowerMac5,1

Power Macintosh G4 Cube
Power Macintosh G4 Cube (Early 2001)


PowerMac6,1

iMac (USB 2.0)


PowerMac6,3

iMac (20-inch Flat-Panel)


PowerMac6,4

eMac (USB 2.0)


PowerMac7,2

Power Macintosh G5

PowerMac 8

iMac G5
Although I didn't list all the numbers, I came to the same conclusion - it can only mean an iMac G5 is coming. Oh well - I bought my G4 iMac in February of this year (what that does mean is that it will most likely be replaced by a G6 Mac of some sort in 2007).

[nsb3000]

I agree. Given that it is unlikely that we'll see Tiger until 2005 (Spring perhaps?) leaving 10.3.4 as the last update for that long seems VERY unlikely.

(This refers to the comments made that Apple isn't going to be updating OS X yearly now. I doubt they'd have made that announcement if it was going to be, say 15 months. It means at least 18-24 months between major updates, which puts it April-Oct 2005.)

I think those comments were refereeing to after apple releases tiger. I don't really think they would introduce it and then wait 8 months or more to sell it.

[Dave00]

IMO, this can only mean two things:

Apple planned to release a new PM revision sometime between March and May (the release dates of 10.3.3 and 10.3.4, respectively), but had to change that plan for whatever reason, probably IBM's yield problems.
[...]


Reading through the rumor noise, something WAS supposed to come out in March and fell through, probably due to cooling issues. The strongest evidence for this was that even the more staid of the rumor sites were calling it a certainty. Hopefully, these issues have been worked out. Otherwise, it'll be a ho-hum WWDC with modest speed-bumps but no new chip; which, if it were the case, would make a quad-processor more likely. ("Sorry, we weren't able to reach 3Ghz, but LOOK! Quad processors!")

You really wound up with a great buy if you bought the original G5's. There's been very little depreciation due to the lack of new machines & relatively stable prices. Refurbrished Dual-2Ghz machines are $2400 at the Apple Store. $600 depreciation (20%) over 9 months? That's fantastic.

Dave

[tother]

me two cents is that apple needs to come out with a quad proc workstation to make stand in the vfx arena they entered when they bough out shake. i'm a compositor and we are still having to use pc for all vfx work (2d-3d). we all love macs and have them at home but they don't cut it for feature film/highend broadcast work. the g5's are fast but not enough, shake barely runs on a dual g5 and motion is a hog because of all the real-time. i believe we are going to see within the next year quad procs on both sides (mac/pc). programs and clients are getting more demanding and proc speeds are not climbing as high as they did in recent years. this seems to be the only logical route to take. i'm excited for it will be like a mini discreet inferno system for a 10th of the price. we will see and i hope it happens soon or apple might loose ground in this market no matter how cool there programs are.

late

[Alb]

4 processor? 975!! Yeeeees!!!

This is certainly a dual 975 PowerMac (or single Power 5!) since the hypertrading-like feature in the Power 5 (and in the supposed 975) is seen from the OS as been 2 different processor. So a dual 975 PowerMac would be seen from MacOS X a 4 "logical" processor machine!

And the "7.3" machine could easily be the new G5 (970fx) iMac...

alb

[Lanbrown]

this is purely speculation and should be taken with a grain of salt, but since the current PM is 7,2 and this "new model" is 8,1 it may be proof that this new model is in fact using the 975 chip as previously rumored since they jumped from 7 to 8. I have no idea what I'm talking about though so if i'm way off base, slap me silly....but gently...

The current iMac is 6.1 and 6.3, the G5 is 7.2 and the eMac 6.4. 8.1 does not necessarily mean that it will be a PM, but will be a desktop, which the iMac, PowerMac and eMac all fit into.

[denm316]

what a slow rumor day when this makes the front page

[dongmin]

Yes it is also telling that the 8,1 is listed under the MacRISC4PE which implies, at least to me, it is using a PowerMac G5 like chip set (U3 (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G5/PowerMacG5/2Architecture/chapter_3_section_4.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30000803/TPXREF107) based, the bridge/memory controller).

If this is true, coupled with the observation that even numbers (4,1 6,1 etc.) have designated iMacs, then it seems fairly reasonable to assume that a new form-factor G5 iMacs are on the way. Rather exciting to consider the possibilities. Will Apple retain the all-in-one design? (Most likely.) Or will Apple introduce a headless iMac as many have been clamoring for? (Dream on.)

[Zaty]

What are you smoking? Why would 10.3.4 be the last update to Panther?

From a historical perspective, this seems unlikely. There were 6 updates to 10.1, 8 updates (I think) to 10.2 .


seriously? you think .4 is the last panther update between now and octobrer(ish)? god i hope not. what was jaguar's 10.2.x number 9 months after it was released? that could give us some clues...

Like I said in another post, I don't think 10.3.4 will be the last update to Panther but it's not completely impossible as IMHO Panther really seems to be finished and Apple might decide to gear the main effort towards Tiger.

[StudioGuy]

I'd buy a quad PM for our studio as well - there can never be enough power for audio plug-ins and/or real-time rendering.

Expecting a big price hit for a quad if ever it comes, but that's ok :)

[dongmin]

Reading through the rumor noise, something WAS supposed to come out in March and fell through, probably due to cooling issues. The strongest evidence for this was that even the more staid of the rumor sites were calling it a certainty. Hopefully, these issues have been worked out. Otherwise, it'll be a ho-hum WWDC with modest speed-bumps but no new chip; which, if it were the case, would make a quad-processor more likely. ("Sorry, we weren't able to reach 3Ghz, but LOOK! Quad processors!")

It's funny, one guy makes a random statement about some piece of code in the OS that may or may not have something to do with quad processors and boom, everyone starts chiming in about how quad processors are definitely the way to go. "Apple is sunk unless they release quad processors!" "We're doomed! Quad G5s will save the day!" I can't imagine a more unlikely scenario given the fact that they're having hard enough time cooling two processors.

And no, the Power Mac revision wasn't delayed because of cooling issues. Steve himself has come out and said that they've delayed shipments because IBM has been having YIELD PROBLEMS with their 90 nm processorss, i.e. the 970fx which was supposed to go into the Power Mac revision.

[SiliconAddict]

From a historical perspective, this seems unlikely. There were 6 updates to 10.1, 8 updates (I think) to 10.2 .

You can’t use that as reference since 10.1 and to a certain extent 10.2 had a whole heck of a lot of things to tweak/fix/optimize. Dat being said NO way in hell is Apple going to not release any updates for 5 months. Heck was not 10.2.8 release literally weeks before 10.3 was released?

[eyeluvmyimac]

Would there be a huge performance gain when jumping from dual to quad? I mean there are lots of arguments (valid or not) that duals aren't that big of a gain over singles (this is clearly untrue although I have never owned a dual), but could anything take full advantage of quad yet?

[AirUncleP]

Nothing to see here....

Move along. Move along...

Funny and True

[centauratlas]

"8.1".


I think it is just a new G5 that is updated to run only Mac OS 8.1

:-)

[centauratlas]

you think .4 is the last panther update between now and octobrer(ish)?

Given Apple's recent comments, I think Tiger in October is not what will happen.

[pjkelnhofer]

PowerMac7,3 using PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin (new unknown system first in 10.3.3)
PowerMac7,2 using PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin (current PowerMac G5 (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G5/PowerMacG5/index.html) line)
PowerMac8,1 using SMU_Neo2_PlatformPlugin (new unknown system first in 10.3.4)
RackMac3,1 using RackMac3_1_PlatformPlugin (I assume the Xserve G5 (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Servers/XserveG5/index.html) )

So is the "PowerMac7,3" still in 10.3.4 or has it disappeared?
Anyone?

[ingenious]

Given Apple's recent comments, I think Tiger in October is not what will happen.


Yes, from what the Developer's website looks like, I'm thinking it might be released this summer.

ADC (http://developer.apple.com)

[pjkelnhofer]

Yes, from what the Developer's website looks like, I'm thinking it might be released this summer.

ADC (http://developer.apple.com)

What on the ADC site makes you think that? They haven't announced anything at all about it other than it's name. The only reference I can find for "Tiger" is that it will mention in Steve's keynote at WWDC.

[Iroganai]

You can find some more info at
http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/index.html.

For example, AppleMacRISC4PE code for 10.3.3 contains a following line:
MacRISC4CPU.cpp:
/* RackMac3,1 and PowerMac7,3 -
pulsar clock chip @ IIC_B 0xD4 */
and a pair of PowerMac7,3 specific source code
PowerMac7_3_CPUCoolingCtrlLoop.{cpp,h}. :cool:

It may mean RackMac3,1 and PowerMac7,3 have some similarity and
PowerMac7,3 have additional CPU Cooling facilities!

Unfortunately, the AppleMacRISC4PE code for 10.3.4 is not available.
all other 10.3.4 kext codes seem to be downloadable at apple's site!
Apple is surely hiding the crucial code fragment from us rumormongers :)

[centauratlas]

I think those comments were refereeing to after apple releases tiger. I don't really think they would introduce it and then wait 8 months or more to sell it.

They are demoing it to developers. They are NOT introducing it for consumers.

They said "We'RE slowing that (pace) down...". E.g "we ARE". They didn't say it would be for after Tiger.

Apple has said nothing about when Tiger will ship.

QED, if we see Tiger in October or November I would be REALLY REALLY surprised.

[dxp4acu]

Yes, from what the Developer's website looks like, I'm thinking it might be released this summer.

ADC (http://developer.apple.com)

Oh wow!! If you look carefully at the pictures on this page:

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

you will see a G5 poster in the background!

WE'RE GETTING G5 MACS!!! The day has finally arrived!!!

I can't believe it.

[BenRoethig]

My Guess:

7,3: Revision B PowerMac G5
8,1: The rumored X station. With the rumors about Apple working with ATI to offer FireGL cards, a new work station makes sense.

[wrldwzrd89]

You can find some more info at
http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/index.html.

For example, AppleMacRISC4PE code for 10.3.3 contains a following line:
MacRISC4CPU.cpp:
/* RackMac3,1 and PowerMac7,3 -
pulsar clock chip @ IIC_B 0xD4 */
and a pair of PowerMac7,3 specific source code
PowerMac7_3_CPUCoolingCtrlLoop.{cpp,h}. :cool:

It may mean RackMac3,1 and PowerMac7,3 have some similarity and
PowerMac7,3 have additional CPU Cooling facilities!

Unfortunately, the AppleMacRISC4PE code for 10.3.4 is not available.
all other 10.3.4 kext codes seem to be downloadable at apple's site!
Apple is surely hiding the crucial code fragment from us rumormongers :)
This just confirms my suspicions that Apple is planning MUCH more at WWDC than just demoing Tiger - this year's WWDC is going to be just like the last one (new hardware release along with demo of new OS). I think you might be right - Apple IS hiding something from us. (It doesn't matter to me, anyway - I'm not buying a new Mac anytime soon.)

[Rower_CPU]

Just a friendly reminder to keep posts on topic - per the forum rules (http://forums.macrumors.com/announcement.php?s=&forumid=4), off topic posts will be edited/deleted from non-Community discussion threads.

Thanks :)

[ingenious]

What on the ADC site makes you think that? They haven't announced anything at all about it other than it's name. The only reference I can find for "Tiger" is that it will mention in Steve's keynote at WWDC.

The wording just makes it sound more immediate than the wording in the Panther prerelease info. I guess it's mostly my opinion, though. :(

Maybe, though, Tiger will be released immediately after it is announced! Maybe the new G5s need something that is only half finished in this Panther release and a final 10.3.5 will add that something? Could this explain the 7,3 and 8,1 showing up?

[Dont Hurt Me]

If this is true, coupled with the observation that even numbers (4,1 6,1 etc.) have designated iMacs, then it seems fairly reasonable to assume that a new form-factor G5 iMacs are on the way. Rather exciting to consider the possibilities. Will Apple retain the all-in-one design? (Most likely.) Or will Apple introduce a headless iMac as many have been clamoring for? (Dream on.)I think it will be a new and improved imac with G5 and a few otherthings thrown in. WWDC will be sweet but i wonder how fast a G5 they will use? 1.6 & 2.0? I doubt Apple would move to a cheaper headless unit for sake of marketshare because its plain as day they could care a less about marketshare. Thats why i say a new an improved G5 imac with about the same price points.

[centauratlas]

This just confirms my suspicions that Apple is planning MUCH more at WWDC than just demoing Tiger

I agree we'll see hardware there. Plus a demo of Tiger for developers.

But we won't see Tiger introduced for consumers there or this summer - or for that matter (I don't think) in October/November.

[pjkelnhofer]

Oh wow!! If you look carefully at the pictures on this page:

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

you will see a G5 poster in the background!

WE'RE GETTING G5 MACS!!! The day has finally arrived!!!

I can't believe it.

You do realize that is probably a picture from last years WWDC. Can anyone confirm this?

[wrldwzrd89]

Oh wow!! If you look carefully at the pictures on this page:

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

you will see a G5 poster in the background!

WE'RE GETTING G5 MACS!!! The day has finally arrived!!!

I can't believe it.
You sure about that? We ALREADY have G5s in the PowerMacs. I think there are two possibilities that can be drawn from this: 1. Apple is simply promoting the G5. 2. Apple is promoting the G5 more heavily than usual because some other Mac models are getting G5 processors at WWDC :)

[ingenious]

Oh wow!! If you look carefully at the pictures on this page:

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

you will see a G5 poster in the background!

WE'RE GETTING G5 MACS!!! The day has finally arrived!!!

I can't believe it.

I think that picture is from last WWDC when the G5 was released. :rolleyes:

[e-coli]

Oh wow!! If you look carefully at the pictures on this page:

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

you will see a G5 poster in the background!

WE'RE GETTING G5 MACS!!! The day has finally arrived!!!

I can't believe it.

And why would they have photos of the WWDC shot BEFORE the event? The G5 was introduced at the WWDC last year, if you remember. That's where the photo came from.

:rolleyes:

[Fuchal]

Hasn't Apple always used odd numbers to designate their "Pro" products?

[NNO-Stephen]

My Guess:

7,3: Revision B PowerMac G5
8,1: The rumored X station. With the rumors about Apple working with ATI to offer FireGL cards, a new work station makes sense.

that's exactly what I was thinking. this is the only capacity where the quad processors would come into play also.

I think now more than ever would be a great time to introduce them also. They are going to release Motion, this, coupled with all their other extremely processor intensive apps, would justify a quad-processor system. would truly put it against the Opteron since they have quad-processor boards for it.

but, who knows, I just think it's something Apple should do.

but on the other hand, the iMac really REALLY needs an update.

[wrldwzrd89]

Hasn't Apple always used odd numbers to designate their "Pro" products?
Did you see CmdrLaForge's post on Page 3 with all the numbers listed? That should answer your question.

[klaus]

me two cents is that apple needs to come out with a quad proc workstation to make stand in the vfx arena they entered when they bough out shake. i'm a compositor and we are still having to use pc for all vfx work (2d-3d). we all love macs and have them at home but they don't cut it for feature film/highend broadcast work. the g5's are fast but not enough, shake barely runs on a dual g5 and motion is a hog because of all the real-time. i believe we are going to see within the next year quad procs on both sides (mac/pc). programs and clients are getting more demanding and proc speeds are not climbing as high as they did in recent years. this seems to be the only logical route to take. i'm excited for it will be like a mini discreet inferno system for a 10th of the price. we will see and i hope it happens soon or apple might loose ground in this market no matter how cool there programs are.

late

Hard to believe that shake doesn't run properly, as LOTR was made primarily with shake.. and pixar runs on g5's.. maybe they are just amateurs...

[tother]

well weta did use shake for the lotr's but don't forgets that they are running on linux :)

[iriejedi]

Power Mac G5 Dual 2GHz Z07K 7-10 bus.days
stock video card 9600


Power Mac G5 Dual 2GHz Z07K 4-6 weeks
upgraded video card (9800 pro)

Anyone want to speculate why the 9800 pro card adds 3-5 weeks to delivery time?

No other mod changed the 7-10 day estimate.....any chance that the X800 card will be a stock for the mac?.... that card has the most amazing specs on the PC. But for $500+.... it better.




My Guess:

7,3: Revision B PowerMac G5
8,1: The rumored X station. With the rumors about Apple working with ATI to offer FireGL cards, a new work station makes sense.

[iswimbikeandrun]

I think that the 7,x numbers may correspond to the 97x family of processors, and the 8,x may correspond to a 98x processor. This fits well with the rumors of a 980 (rumored on this site) based powermac revision forthcoming. I know there have been alot of talk of a 975 based PM, but even this site had a thread last summer stating that if the PM was going to reach 3 GHz it would have to be through a PPC 980 which would run at 2.8 GHz up.
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/07/20030706031041.shtml

[nuckinfutz]

me two cents is that apple needs to come out with a quad proc workstation to make stand in the vfx arena they entered when they bough out shake. i'm a compositor and we are still having to use pc for all vfx work (2d-3d). we all love macs and have them at home but they don't cut it for feature film/highend broadcast work. the g5's are fast but not enough, shake barely runs on a dual g5 and motion is a hog because of all the real-time. i believe we are going to see within the next year quad procs on both sides (mac/pc). programs and clients are getting more demanding and proc speeds are not climbing as high as they did in recent years. this seems to be the only logical route to take. i'm excited for it will be like a mini discreet inferno system for a 10th of the price. we will see and i hope it happens soon or apple might loose ground in this market no matter how cool there programs are.
late

Motion isn't even shipping. You have no real experience with the app at all. Quad physical processor are not coming. The POWER5 architecture gets its speed advantages over the POWER4 by high clock rate and Simultaneous Multi Threading. If we're lucky we'll see SMT in the POWER5 derivative this year. That would bifiurcate a CPU into two "Logical" cput and give you your Quad CPU without adding two Motherboard sockets and changing the memory controller. This is the most logical proposition costwise. Performance wojldn't be too shabby either.

Here's my $.02

Apple is going to create a 4th Powermac model based on a 975 PowerPC. This model(The 8.1) will contain a new chipset(hence the new model number) and utilize the 975. It will support DDR Memory and be dual 3Ghz in the machine. It will have a high end card. Either a FireGL or Quadro. It will be priced at at least $3599 which will keep the demand in check. The other systems will top out at dual 2.6Ghz and $2995. So in effect this new Mac will be a "Workstation" It'll probably have 4 drive bays as well as some other power goodies.

The average consumer doesn't need a dual 3Ghz but Pros do and Pros will pay the extra bit to get this speed. Nuk out.

[klaus]

well weta did use shake for the lotr's but don't forgets that they are running on linux :)

ah didn't know that, pixar runs on powermacs, that's for sure, now how could that be :D

well, at least I know a guy who has worked at weta during the last two movies, and he showed off his work for LOTR on his powerbook 17", that counts does it ;)

[Mord]

Wow, Mac news has hit such a crawl of anything interesting people are clinging to this? Yawn! Some day Apple may release something cool again... some day.

er maby in the giant ****** off mac show aka wwdc?


all even numers are consumer macs all odd numbers are powermacs the 8,1 will be a new emac or imac

[JFreak]

Would there be a huge performance gain when jumping from dual to quad? I mean there are lots of arguments (valid or not) that duals aren't that big of a gain over singles (this is clearly untrue although I have never owned a dual), but could anything take full advantage of quad yet?

that is the law of diminishing returns - duals will NEVER add a 100% boost compared to a single cpu (of same speed). that is as impossible as travelling faster than the speed of light. there is always a performance hit when more than one cpu is used simultaneously.

if dual gives a 50% boost, one could assume that the third cpu would add about 33% to it and the fourth some 25%, so in the end, the quad shoud show a +150% speed boost compared to single cpu (of the same speed) in real life.

[Mord]

that is the law of diminishing returns - duals will NEVER add a 100% boost compared to a single cpu (of same speed). that is as impossible as travelling faster than the speed of light. there is always a performance hit when more than one cpu is used simultaneously.

if dual gives a 50% boost, one could assume that the third cpu would add about 33% to it and the fourth some 25%, so in the end, the quad shoud show a +150% speed boost compared to single cpu (of the same speed) in real life.

it's not quite that inefficiant as that http://www.barefeats.com/xserve2.html

[dongmin]

You can find some more info at
http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/index.html.

For example, AppleMacRISC4PE code for 10.3.3 contains a following line:
MacRISC4CPU.cpp:
/* RackMac3,1 and PowerMac7,3 -
pulsar clock chip @ IIC_B 0xD4 */
and a pair of PowerMac7,3 specific source code
PowerMac7_3_CPUCoolingCtrlLoop.{cpp,h}. :cool:

It may mean RackMac3,1 and PowerMac7,3 have some similarity and
PowerMac7,3 have additional CPU Cooling facilities!

Most likely, the 7,3 was the anticipated Power Mac update in Feb/March that was supposed to use the 970fx, same as in the Xserves. The 970fx utilizes the PowerTune technology (and also SpeedStep?) which was supposed to cut down on power consumption.

Given that the 8,1 designates a new G5 iMac, I'm more and more inclined to think that Power Mac update (7,3) will be with the 970fx and not a Power 5 derivative. I would argue that a Power 5 derivative would require a designation 9,1 (or at minimum 7,4) and not 7,3. To sum up:


1. RackMac3,1 and PowerMac7,3 utilize same cooling technologies.

2. RackMac3,1 = G5 Xserves which use the 970fx

3. Therefore 7,3 = Power Macs that use the 970fx

4. 8,1 refers to a new G5 iMac

5. Since there are no new desktop designations other than the 8,1 and 7,3 the Power Mac update at WWDC will be the 7,3 delayed since the summer.

6. Therefore the next Power Mac update will use the 970fx

7. The 970fx-equiped Power Mac will top out at 2.6 ghz or 2.8 ghz at best, according to rumors.

8. Steve Jobs will apologize for making his 3.0 ghz prediction.


Or I could be totally wrong and these model designations mean nothing. Apple could simply relese a 10.3.4.1 update with 3.0 ghz G5s powered by 975/980. Apple could keep the low-end as the 970fx model (7,3) and reserve the 975/980 for the middle and high-end.

[JGowan]

I find it interesting that the current G5 Powermac series is codenamed "Omega"... the last letter in the greek alphabet, commonly a sign for "end".
Does it mean we will see a whole new beast next???It might be signifying "the end" to Motorola. :p

"See ya, Moto. Don't let the door hit your slow-moving processor on the way out!"

[Frobozz]

So the PowerMac7,3 is using the same platform plugin as the current PM G5s so it is likely not that much drastically different then the current PM G5s. The 8,1 is using a completly different plugin so it is likely different to some extent (less/more or different things connected with the U3 or a variant of the U3).

-Shawn

Hmmm. Sounds like a G5 iMac (running 970fx's?) and a new PowerMac G5 (with 975's?).

:-)

[ewinemiller]

that is the law of diminishing returns - duals will NEVER add a 100% boost compared to a single cpu (of same speed). that is as impossible as travelling faster than the speed of light. there is always a performance hit when more than one cpu is used simultaneously.

if dual gives a 50% boost, one could assume that the third cpu would add about 33% to it and the fourth some 25%, so in the end, the quad shoud show a +150% speed boost compared to single cpu (of the same speed) in real life.

Not impossible, just not common. It actually depends on the application. Some things scale well to multiple processors, some do not. I've seen a few things actually get > 100% speed up with a dual. For example, say just to keep humming your OS needs about 2% of your CPU. Add a second CPU and the OS still only needs 2% of that original CPU, but 100% of the second CPU is available so it's actually just a bit faster than 2X a single. However it is very rare for a process to scale that well to a second CPU, the numbers you mention are more typical.

For the stuff I do, Carrara, adding a second CPU gives anywhere from about 50% to nearly 100% boost over a single at render time. It varies depending on the scene and the platform. Between my two duals (800 PIII and 800 G4), the PIII scales a little better to the second CPU.

There would be a market for a 4 CPU box, maybe not a big one, but I'd certainly be looking closely at it if Apple released one. I can get a Quad Opteron for a pretty reasonable price (not reasonable for joe user, but reasonable for joe renderfarm) on the PC side, but they tend to do on board video, that sort of thing. They make great servers, but bad workstations. Not to mention the licensing cost of having to move up to some Windows server variant instead of XP Pro or 2000 Pro. If I could get a quad processor workstation oriented machine from Apple, I probably would, though a dual core/dual processor would be a better solution so the lights in my neighborhood don't dim when I turn the machine on.

[slooksterPSV]

New PowerMac model? Hmm... thats quite the update I must say. We've known about the new PM that're supposed to be coming out @ or after WWDC (right?). Thats neat.

[shawnce]

Reading through the rumor noise, something WAS supposed to come out in March and fell through, probably due to cooling issues. The strongest evidence for this was that even the more staid of the rumor sites were calling it a certainty. Hopefully, these issues have been worked out.

The issue was far far more likely to be a supply of the needed CPUs from IBM as has been public noted by both Apple and IBM.

[shawnce]

The 970fx-equiped Power Mac will top out at 2.6 ghz or 2.8 ghz at best, according to rumors.

The 970fx (or a close kin of it) should be able to scale up to 3GHz. I still believe we will see 3GHz system rather soon and they will be 970fx-ish based.

I doubt we will see any Power 5 derived desktop CPU for at least 6 months to a year despite the wild statements heard in the rumors (they are all over the map).

WWDC should clear up a lot...

[NNO-Stephen]

The 970fx (or a close kin of it) should be able to scale up to 3GHz. I still believe we will see 3GHz system rather soon and they will be 970fx-ish based.

I doubt we will see any Power 5 derived desktop CPU for at least 6 months to a year despite the wild statements heard in the rumors (they are all over the map).

WWDC should clear up a lot...

why should we see it so much later than the POWER 5?

they were developed simultaneously, not an afterthought like the 970 was to the POWER 4. so in theory, we could see the 975 (or whatever) at around the same time as the POWER 5.

natch.

[Chaszmyr]

I believe that 8,1 is a G5 iMac

[k2k koos]

fastforward to the keynote speech....


Just after Steve has introduced and talked about all the cool new g5 machines running up to 3ghz, and 64bit Powerbooks (its about time for those, the wintel world has them with AMD processors, whe eis the leadership here Apple?)....


Oh and one more thing.....(audience go tilt!!) We are proud to introduce the worlds fastest, and first quad processor personal computer, the Powermac G5 Quadra....Running at 3Ghz per processor. These are the machines that will make Pixar fly, and the competition stunned.

[cgc]

that is the law of diminishing returns - duals will NEVER add a 100% boost compared to a single cpu (of same speed). that is as impossible as travelling faster than the speed of light. there is always a performance hit when more than one cpu is used simultaneously.

if dual gives a 50% boost, one could assume that the third cpu would add about 33% to it and the fourth some 25%, so in the end, the quad shoud show a +150% speed boost compared to single cpu (of the same speed) in real life.


Huh? Using your own logic and numbers, a quad CPU system would realize ~208% speed increase over a single CPU system (i.e. 100% + 50% + 33% + 25%).

[blackcrayon]

that is the law of diminishing returns - duals will NEVER add a 100% boost compared to a single cpu (of same speed). that is as impossible as travelling faster than the speed of light. there is always a performance hit when more than one cpu is used simultaneously.

if dual gives a 50% boost, one could assume that the third cpu would add about 33% to it and the fourth some 25%, so in the end, the quad shoud show a +150% speed boost compared to single cpu (of the same speed) in real life.

As some previous posters said, not necessarily true. One example (obviously not practical for most types of apps) would be running multiple instances of single threaded extremely processor intensive shell applications like SETI@home (forgive me if newer versions of it or whatever have switched to automatically using multiple processors from the command line ;) Run one instance of SETI on a dual G4... 7 hours... Run 2 instances of SETI.. Still 7 hours but you have completed 2 units (one per processor)... you're getting *twice* the work done in the same amount of time... ~100% speed increase. ;)

[wdlove]

The 970fx (or a close kin of it) should be able to scale up to 3GHz. I still believe we will see 3GHz system rather soon and they will be 970fx-ish based.

I doubt we will see any Power 5 derived desktop CPU for at least 6 months to a year despite the wild statements heard in the rumors (they are all over the map).

WWDC should clear up a lot...

That is a very correct statement. It's a good feeling to have, in four week we will know for sure.

[Veldek]

Huh? Using your own logic and numbers, a quad CPU system would realize ~208% speed increase over a single CPU system (i.e. 100% + 50% + 33% + 25%).

Sorry, but the increase is only 108%. Your number is the total speed of the system compared to a single CPU.

[klaus]

That is a very correct statement. It's a good feeling to have, in four week we will know for sure.

they'll be the longest 4 weeks of my life ;) no, just kidding.. patience is a good virtue, as long as the new g5's ship immediately :p

[cgc]

Sorry, but the increase is only 108%. Your number is the total speed of the system compared to a single CPU.

Right, I knew what I meant :)

[JGowan]

... then Steve J will have a lot to blow our minds at the WWDC...I think this type of expectation is just what fuels lots of nasty opinions after announcements, littering message boards afterwards like so much trash blowing down Main Streat USA.

We can't expect Apple to "blow our minds". Especially when we've got so much new hardware as it is. I think we can expect new speeds on the computers, but I wouldn't hope for any new hardware or enclosures. The biggest thing MIGHT be G5 iMacs, but PowerBooks just won't happen.

Tiger is going to be THE big announcement and preview.

Would I love to see an all-new IPOD? D@mn straight, but it won't happen. I think the most we can hope for is a 10GB capacity increase on the top end putting us at $499 50GB; $399 30GB; $299 20GB.

I hope I'm wrong... I'd love to see new (& bigger) displays & the much-talked-about "HEADLESS iMac", but I just don't want to think too much about it and then be dissapointed when this stuff does emmerge.

[Kethoticus]

I think this type of expectation is just what fuels lots of nasty opinions after announcements, littering message boards afterwards like so much trash blowing down Main Streat USA.

We can't expect Apple to "blow our minds". Especially when we've got so much new hardware as it is. I think we can expect new speeds on the computers, but I wouldn't hope for any new hardware or enclosures. The biggest thing MIGHT be G5 iMacs, but PowerBooks just won't happen.

Tiger is going to be THE big announcement and preview.

Would I love to see an all-new IPOD? D@mn straight, but it won't happen. I think the most we can hope for is a 10GB capacity increase on the top end putting us at $499 50GB; $399 30GB; $299 20GB.

I hope I'm wrong... I'd love to see new (& bigger) displays & the much-talked-about "HEADLESS iMac", but I just don't want to think too much about it and then be dissapointed when this stuff does emmerge.

Yeah, I agree that there likely won't be any crazy announcements. But I think the possibility of processor upgrades IS important simply because it's been what... 10 months since the 2-gig guys were announced?? We are long overdue now for speed bumps at least.

The x86 world has slowed down in its progress. Apple can not afford to sit on any laurels it thinks it might have. Now's the time to POUNCE!

C'mon IBM! Stop playing Moto and get us some upgraded hardware!!

[NNO-Stephen]

the PC world (AMD at least, Intell is) is NOT sitting on resting. AMD today in fact, released their Athlon 64 3500+ 3700+ and 3800+ as well as the Athlon FX-53 which has dual-channel DDR memory, 1MB of L2 cache and is running at 2.4Ghz (the same speed as the 3700+ and 3800+)

so don't think for a second that AMD is waiting on Apple to catch up. Intel really is. Prescott is ****. they are having so many issues with it it's just way past funny. the Pentium M on the other hand... that's got some potential. Dothan is cool, powerful, and will make it's way into desktops... just watch.

but AMD is sticking it to Apple right now, Apple needs to come out with some seriously powerful hardware. NOW.

http://arstechnica.com/news/posts/1086113338.html <---- AMD release info

[Dont Hurt Me]

It might be signifying "the end" to Motorola. :p

"See ya, Moto. Don't let the door hit your slow-moving processor on the way out!"lets hope so, it would sure be nice for Apple if they had a Cpu that could perform in the same league as the evil side.

[dontmatter]

Thanks!! :D

Here is my translation for you:

The update 10.3.3 also contained an unrecognized 'code' as here: Power Mac 7.3. No machine yet released form Apple has carried this code name designation. In fact, the current series of powermacs (G5s) have the code name Powermac 7.2. You need to know that the Powermac G4s had the code name Powermac 3.x, the Cubes Powermac 5.1 and the iMac TFT and emacs each had the names Powermac 4.x and 6.x respectively... the complete list of code names can be found here: http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld

However, if you look a little closer at the 10.3.4 update, you will notice that mention of a Powermac 8.1 is made, which makes you think that it is not just a minor update but a completely new machine.

You will also find a reference to SMU_Neo2 which might also make you think that the Neo2 would be a new version of the processor. What is certain is that Neo2 would be a derivative of the current G5. But it is still difficult to confirm whether it is a stripped- down version (like the 970fx of the X-Serves) or, BOOSTED!
If you would like to know more, do the 10.3.4 update, open this file:
/System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/
Contents/info.plist
and search for "8.1".

I shall leave you to dream... (for me the 8.1 is an iMac G5 of new design, to be announced/released ?? at the end of June. As for the 7.3, that will be a Powermac G5 update, on the same date. END of translation.

hope this helps. hope it's true.

[nuckinfutz]

There is no need to be unduly pessimistic. The ones ranting and raving after shows are the ones with the most unrealistic desires.

Dual 3Ghz is going to be possible. At $3000? Probably not. However one has to look at the Athlon 64 right now announced today at Computex. 2.4Ghz on the high end for a 130nm part.

IBM should definitely be able to hit at the least 2.6 on a 90nm 970FX.

This thread alone shows that code in OSX portends a new model with architectural changes. Could be an iMac with a G5 or a new Powermac G5. Both significant nontheless.

Apple basically skipped a revision so a large jump is necessary. I wouldn't be suprised to see fairly quick availability of the new models.

Tiger is going to be an exciting thing to behold. My guess is Tiger is the culmination of 2 years of work from the Tiger team. It will lay the groundworkd for the next 2-3 years. It's important to say the least.

We'll all be grinning from ear to ear after WWDC.

[BornAgainMac]

Oh wow!! If you look carefully at the pictures on this page:

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

you will see a G5 poster in the background!

WE'RE GETTING G5 MACS!!! The day has finally arrived!!!

I can't believe it.

If you look even closer, you will see someone with a powerbook backpack and the expression from the face of the person he is talking to.... WE'RE GETTING G5 Powerbooks!!! LOL

[BornAgainMac]

that is the law of diminishing returns - duals will NEVER add a 100% boost compared to a single cpu (of same speed). that is as impossible as travelling faster than the speed of light. there is always a performance hit when more than one cpu is used simultaneously.

if dual gives a 50% boost, one could assume that the third cpu would add about 33% to it and the fourth some 25%, so in the end, the quad shoud show a +150% speed boost compared to single cpu (of the same speed) in real life.

That is more true in the Windows environment. I think Virginia Tech showed the world that Mac's scale better.

[jmustretch]

anyone think that this means the end of the power mac line.
there have been no revisions to the g5 in months…
if the imac g5 is released this would bring the imac to the same level as the power mac but at a lower price point (even more so if apple keeps the all-in-one desing)
what I think we may see… a stand alone imac with a bit more expandability (meaning more ram, maybe a few PCI slots) with a G5 processor.
No Power Mac updates.

[leo]

Apple basically skipped a revision so a large jump is necessary.

This does not apply to the processors themselves, only to the rest of the system. They didn't skip a revision here, they had to delay it due to unexpected availability problems.

And there is no PowerPC 975.

So don't expect large jumps in clock rate.

[kettle]

On a size issue, if the only way to get a dual powerbook is to use one dual core chip with added coolant features, then would the quad power mac just be a dual dual core powermac with no radical box or motherboard redesign.

Also, I think the only reason Jobs has stayed so patient over these last couple of years is because he knew and knows that the next big thing will be worth having his name on. :)

[nuckinfutz]

what I think we may see… a stand alone imac with a bit more expandability (meaning more ram, maybe a few PCI slots) with a G5 processor.

I simply refuse to think you're serious at all here.

This does not apply to the processors themselves, only to the rest of the system. They didn't skip a revision here, they had to delay it due to unexpected availability problems.

What? That is illogical as a statement. Processors creep forward on a defined timeline. Apple has stated that there was an issue with fabbing some G5s. IBM doesn't fab everything on the same line so problems in one area don't necessarily affect others.

And there is no PowerPC 975.
So don't expect large jumps in clock rate.

Then explain to me this : page 2
http://www.fz-juelich.de/zam/files/docs/vortraege/ibm-nutzung/hh_pwr4_arch.2up.pdf

What is your explanation for this roadmap clearly stating the POWER4 (Code GP) and then showing the PPC 970 (GP-UL). Now explain how we have the POWER5 (Codename GR) and it's "97x" (GR-UL) is slated for 2H 2004 at 2.5Ghz+.

Now explain to me why OSX 10.3.4 has a new Machine revision 8,1

I didn't think so. Try doing some research before spoutin off rookie.

[dizastor]

anyone think that this means the end of the power mac line.
there have been no revisions to the g5 in months…
if the imac g5 is released this would bring the imac to the same level as the power mac but at a lower price point (even more so if apple keeps the all-in-one desing)
what I think we may see… a stand alone imac with a bit more expandability (meaning more ram, maybe a few PCI slots) with a G5 processor.
No Power Mac updates.


If there are no powermac updates at WWDC I think Macrumors.com will implode from all of the angry posters trying to spew forth their displeasure at the same time... I for one will avoid Macrumors altogether for a week or so if that happens.

[TheWama]

If we consider the product numbers for the past few years (http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld), we notice 2 things:


Pro Items take the ODD numbers (i.e. Powerbook, Xserve, PowerMac), while consumer items take EVEN numbers (i.e. iMac, iBook)
(noted exception: 12 inch PowerBook)
Generational Changes, such as the xServe G4->G5, and the PowerBook Titanium->Aluminum switch prompt a move to the next higher even or odd number, upgrades that do not affect form factor change the 2nd number only.

Now what do we have?

PowerMac 7,2->7,3: Updated professional Mac (PowerMac G5), same Aluminum Enclosure
PowerMac 6,3->8,1: Brand new consumer Mac (iMac G5), in a form factor we'll see at WWDC
(alright, so it didn't come at WWDC, but soon, I'm telling ya)
(note: it could also be an eMac, but this is highly unlikely, as they were recently updated)
No Quad-Anythings, no Flying Cars, no Time Machines ;)

[badapple]

This is not a speculation but an info I got from an inside source at Apple.
8 is indeed 975 and the ',1' means that it's a single processor as ALL the REV B machines are going to be. the cpu clockspeeds are going to be higher than expected (yes. higher than 3.0GHZ). from what I heard, there are talks about a low end 2.4 machine, mid 2.8 machine and high end 3.2 machine. all with dual layer dvd burners (from sony) and PCI express.

[jmustretch]

I simply refuse to think you're serious at all here.

Why not??
Even a newly designed all-in-one g5 imac would bring stiff competition to the current line of powermac g5s (just think ibook/powerbook sales). Currently the 17" imac runs at around $1794… With a new form factor that includes minor room for expansion, a 17" g5 imac would realistically be priced around $2100 (I would think it would not be much more).

The idea of a headless imac was only to satisfy those who want to see one, but the reason we do not have one now is because we have the Power Mac. Nix the Power Mac and produce two smaller more compact desktops. Keep costs down and make more money.

[nuckinfutz]

Why not??
Even a newly designed all-in-one g5 imac would bring stiff competition to the current line of powermac g5s. Currently the 17" imac runs at around $1794… With a new form factor that includes minor room for expansion, a 17" g5 imac would realistically be priced around $2100 (I would think it would not be much more).

The idea of a headless imac was only to satisfy those who want to see one, but the reason we do not have one now is because we have the Power Mac. Nix the Power Mac and produce two smaller more compact desktops. Keep costs down and make more money. :D

Because people in Pro Audio and Video need more than iMac. They need a modicum of upgradeablility and the fastest processors they can get ahold of. They need HD bays. Sure Apple could change the iMac and add these features but then it ceases to become an iMac.

Sure add some beef to the iMac but there is a contingent of Content Creators that need something along the lines of a dual 3Ghz. Have you ever compressed video into two hours of MPEG2 at it's highest setting? Have you ever had 30+ tracks of audio running and needed compression, reverb and othe effects on each channel? Have you ever created an animation that required you to render overnight just to get a few minutes worth of motion?

You could double the speed of todays Powermac and there would be someone desiring more speed.

the iMac is King of the consumer space but after that we're treading into Pro land.

[Soire]

This is not a speculation but an info I got from an inside source at Apple.
8 is indeed 975 and the ',1' means that it's a single processor as ALL the REV B machines are going to be. the cpu clockspeeds are going to be higher than expected (yes. higher than 3.0GHZ). from what I heard, there are talks about a low end 2.4 machine, mid 2.8 machine and high end 3.2 machine. all with dual layer dvd burners (from sony) and PCI express.

I'm not going to question your source, but I actually consider this on the realm of possibilities. Although if this holds true, then they would have to use SMT so the chip acts like a dual. ...who knows.

But y'know what? Why would Apple drop the dual design altogether? Why not offer dualies as an option for the pros who need it. Whatever the case, fast processors would make me smile. ... :D

[ProfSBrown]

I think that Steve's keynote go something like this: Steve will come the stage wearing some jeans, with a black pole-neck that secretly has a board of circuit within it. He will walk through the stage, to traverse to a table with an object on it, which has a covered black cloth cover it. Before he gets there, he slides in something and strikes his head in the table, striking out a tooth. After crouching doubled over in the pain for some moments, he will be stand up and will throw off the cloth of the object... that reveals it to be new iMac.

The rock music will begin to play, and Steve visibly will be angered. In iMac's the screen will be a G5 logo of a certain class, playing in the Motion. Steve will stop the partial version of program that plays, while spit blood in his pocket. The Spinning Wheel of Death will appear, making Steve still more angered. He will open the side of iMac, and watches fixedly inside, silently. Then he will close it up, and he feels down in front of him. After striking the mouse around the SWoD still it will rotate, and Steve will loosen to its genius, entering a catatonic fury.

To this point, an assistant will emter to the Tiger of the partial version of program. The horrible music of Emo will begin to play. Steve will be stopped behind the assistant, breathing noisy and heavy. The nervous assistant will give his speech with a voice that shakes, his speech broken by fearful swalloning. Steve will appear utterly disinterested in the partial version of program. The assistant will accidentally spill the water of Steve's on the keyboard of iMac, sending panic of the nucleus of the Tiger. Steve will strike the chair with the foot towards outside underneath the assistant, and it strikes it with the foot in the posteriora part, and pushes iMac of the writing-desk with a wild sweeping of his hairy arms. Steve will finish the tonic note staring maniacally out towards the crowd, eyes that burn with vehemance, showing his toothless mouth now, dripping with saliva and blood. The curtains will draw.

Apologies for my English, I am Spaniard

[Sun Baked]

PowerMac 7,2->7,3: Updated professional Mac (PowerMac G5), same Aluminum Enclosure
PowerMac 6,3->8,1: Brand new consumer Mac (iMac G5), in a form factor we'll see at WWDC
(note: it could also be an eMac, but this is highly unlikely, as they were recently updated)
No Quad-Anythings, no Flying Cars, no Time Machines ;)Forget about the odd and even numbers, look at the first number in respect to the chipsets used -- new chipsets usually mean a new first number.

Then computers are added, and if there is a big enough difference between two machines they get a new number.

Apple probably is making a big rev. B change on the 7,3 -- but we will probably see from our end a speed bump.

The 8,1 machine leads people to think -- new chipset. New high end workstation chipset or iMac chipset...

So yes, decent hint of a speed bumped rev. B PPC970FX, and a new machine with an all new chipset (which a G5 iMac would need).

[nuckinfutz]

TheWama I think your post is pretty much spot on.


8,1 odds on is the new iMac G5. Had the iMac remained a G4 Apple would have refreshed it along with the eMac.

7,3 is probably the new Powermac G5. 970FX processors will be used probably for a Single 2Ghz Dual 2.4. At most Dual 2.6. The 975(If announced at WWDC) will be 3Ghz.

I'm thinking that Apple could go this way.

1. Announce new Powermacs up to Dual 2.6Ghz. Announce G5 iMac.

2. Later in September announce Dual 3Ghz which will ship with 10.3.5 which adds 9,1 for the new 975 architecture which includes PCI Express.

[shawnce]

This is not a speculation but an info I got from an inside source at Apple. 8 is indeed 975 and the ',1' means that it's a single processor

Yeah the PowerBook3,3 is a 3 CPU system and the PowerMac 4,5 has 5 CPUs, got it. :rolleyes:

I would look this (http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld) over but why let reality interfere.

Ok how about this 8 + 1 = 9, 8 - 1 = 7, 9 - 7 = 2, 8 - 1 - 2 = 5... so 975 :D

[Windowlicker]

anyone think that this means the end of the power mac line.
there have been no revisions to the g5 in months…
if the imac g5 is released this would bring the imac to the same level as the power mac but at a lower price point (even more so if apple keeps the all-in-one desing)
what I think we may see… a stand alone imac with a bit more expandability (meaning more ram, maybe a few PCI slots) with a G5 processor.
No Power Mac updates.

i have no idea what you're thinking over there.. of course we are going to have power macs! there has always been power macs - the pro line and there has been iMacs - the consumer line for a long time. they're not gonna forget the pro people..

if they have a say 1.6ghz g5 iMac, i'm sure they'll have at least a 2x2.6 g5 PM.

[badapple]

Yeah the PowerBook3,3 is a 3 CPU system and the PowerMac 4,5 has 5 CPUs, got it. :rolleyes:

I would look this (http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld) over but why let reality interfere.

I didn't say that was the logic behind previous models. you were quick to speculate I did. believe me that I did see the 3,3 and 7,2 and 7,5. other than that - believe what you want to believe.

[Windowlicker]

This is not a speculation but an info I got from an inside source at Apple.
8 is indeed 975 and the ',1' means that it's a single processor as ALL the REV B machines are going to be. the cpu clockspeeds are going to be higher than expected (yes. higher than 3.0GHZ). from what I heard, there are talks about a low end 2.4 machine, mid 2.8 machine and high end 3.2 machine. all with dual layer dvd burners (from sony) and PCI express.

taking your statement with a grain of salt, but it sounds possible and pretty cool too. you'll get some special treatment on my behalf if you turn out to be right ;)

[jmustretch]

i have no idea what you're thinking over there.. of course we are going to have power macs! there has always been power macs - the pro line and there has been iMacs - the consumer line for a long time. they're not gonna forget the pro people..

if they have a say 1.6ghz g5 iMac, i'm sure they'll have at least a 2x2.6 g5 PM.

How about this…
Is there anyway to integrate the two lines… Prosumer.
Offer one machine with different variations (single, dual, headless, with monitor) that would satisfy everyone. I hate to say it, but look at the PC manufacturers, they offer one machine (or exoskeleton) and provide different configurations. Why shouldn't apple adopt this stance but with apple quality. It would lower the amount spent (both time and money) maintaining the two current lines.

Just a thought.

[Windowlicker]

I don't see and I don't hope that coming, although it would be kinda funny ;)

I think that Steve's keynote go something like this: Steve will come the stage wearing some jeans, with a black pole-neck that secretly has a board of circuit within it. He will walk through the stage, to traverse to a table with an object on it, which has a covered black cloth cover it. Before he gets there, he slides in something and strikes his head in the table, striking out a tooth. After crouching doubled over in the pain for some moments, he will be stand up and will throw off the cloth of the object... that reveals it to be new iMac.

The rock music will begin to play, and Steve visibly will be angered. In iMac's the screen will be a G5 logo of a certain class, playing in the Motion. Steve will stop the partial version of program that plays, while spit blood in his pocket. The Spinning Wheel of Death will appear, making Steve still more angered. He will open the side of iMac, and watches fixedly inside, silently. Then he will close it up, and he feels down in front of him. After striking the mouse around the SWoD still it will rotate, and Steve will loosen to its genius, entering a catatonic fury.

To this point, an assistant will emter to the Tiger of the partial version of program. The horrible music of Emo will begin to play. Steve will be stopped behind the assistant, breathing noisy and heavy. The nervous assistant will give his speech with a voice that shakes, his speech broken by fearful swalloning. Steve will appear utterly disinterested in the partial version of program. The assistant will accidentally spill the water of Steve's on the keyboard of iMac, sending panic of the nucleus of the Tiger. Steve will strike the chair with the foot towards outside underneath the assistant, and it strikes it with the foot in the posteriora part, and pushes iMac of the writing-desk with a wild sweeping of his hairy arms. Steve will finish the tonic note staring maniacally out towards the crowd, eyes that burn with vehemance, showing his toothless mouth now, dripping with saliva and blood. The curtains will draw.

Apologies for my English, I am Spaniard

[JimNoble]

that is the law of diminishing returns - duals will NEVER add a 100% boost compared to a single cpu (of same speed). that is as impossible as travelling faster than the speed of light. there is always a performance hit when more than one cpu is used simultaneously.

I'm not so sure it's as clear cut as that. I can think of at least one pathological case in which a single CPU would be slower than two half speed cpus.

Depends greatly on the uArchitecture of the cpu - especially the cost associated with context switches. It would very much be a pathological case though (so more a "HARDLY EVER" than a "NEVER" :D )

Jim

[spankalee]

Why not??
Even a newly designed all-in-one g5 imac would bring stiff competition to the current line of powermac g5s (just think ibook/powerbook sales). Currently the 17" imac runs at around $1794… With a new form factor that includes minor room for expansion, a 17" g5 imac would realistically be priced around $2100 (I would think it would not be much more).

The idea of a headless imac was only to satisfy those who want to see one, but the reason we do not have one now is because we have the Power Mac. Nix the Power Mac and produce two smaller more compact desktops. Keep costs down and make more money.

Couple things about your post.

First, iMac prices are will be going down not up. Apple noted that the iMac is too far away from the pricing sweet spot for consumer machines and I expect them to try to correct this. The iMac is also underpowered by today's standards. Just because it gets a G5 doesn't mean the price will be higher. By many accounts G5s are cheaper than G4s. The reason G4s are used at all any more is because they run much cooler.

Also, forget about the iMac getting room for internal expansion; it ain't gonna happen so you might as well stop dreaming. The iMac is the heir to the original Macintosh and it will always be the simple, nearly-sealed machine that it is. Internal expansion isn't even necessary these days. The only thing I could possibly see happen at all is that nVidia and ATi get off their asses and finally create a standard graphics module for notebooks and Apple uses that in the iMac for upgradable graphics, but that's a pipe dream too.

There's really no way to tell whether this PowerMac8,1 is a PowerMac or an iMac. Recently consumer machines have been odd numbered, but that could just be the timing of the updates; they usually don't happen at the same time, but both the PM and iMac are due for major revisions right now.

[bar italia]

I think that Steve's keynote go something like this: Steve will come the stage wearing some jeans, with a black pole-neck that secretly has a board of circuit within it. He will walk through the stage, to traverse to a table with an object on it, which has a covered black cloth cover it. Before he gets there, he slides in something and strikes his head in the table, striking out a tooth. After crouching doubled over in the pain for some moments, he will be stand up and will throw off the cloth of the object... that reveals it to be new iMac.

The rock music will begin to play, and Steve visibly will be angered. In iMac's the screen will be a G5 logo of a certain class, playing in the Motion. Steve will stop the partial version of program that plays, while spit blood in his pocket. The Spinning Wheel of Death will appear, making Steve still more angered. He will open the side of iMac, and watches fixedly inside, silently. Then he will close it up, and he feels down in front of him. After striking the mouse around the SWoD still it will rotate, and Steve will loosen to its genius, entering a catatonic fury.

To this point, an assistant will emter to the Tiger of the partial version of program. The horrible music of Emo will begin to play. Steve will be stopped behind the assistant, breathing noisy and heavy. The nervous assistant will give his speech with a voice that shakes, his speech broken by fearful swalloning. Steve will appear utterly disinterested in the partial version of program. The assistant will accidentally spill the water of Steve's on the keyboard of iMac, sending panic of the nucleus of the Tiger. Steve will strike the chair with the foot towards outside underneath the assistant, and it strikes it with the foot in the posteriora part, and pushes iMac of the writing-desk with a wild sweeping of his hairy arms. Steve will finish the tonic note staring maniacally out towards the crowd, eyes that burn with vehemance, showing his toothless mouth now, dripping with saliva and blood. The curtains will draw.

Apologies for my English, I am Spaniard

It's cute that you thought you were being clever.

[nuckinfutz]

Is there anyway to integrate the two lines… Prosumer.
Offer one machine with different variations (single, dual, headless, with monitor) that would satisfy everyone. I hate to say it, but look at the PC manufacturers, they offer one machine (or exoskeleton) and provide different configurations. Why shouldn't apple adopt this stance but with apple quality. It would lower the amount spent (both time and money) maintaining the two current lines.

Apple pretty much does this today. They base their designs on UMA. Unified Motherboard Architecture. This basically means the core layout is the same and Apple simply plugins in/enables certian features.

Thus the iMac/emac shares lineage with the Powerbooks. There was once a time when each Mac line had it's own Motherboard architecture with custom asics. That was too costly and a logistical nightmare.

This new iMac will most like use the UMA G5 so I expect the base to be a bit bigger. PCs are no different. Intel or AMD sells a chipset with a set of features in the North and South bridges and Manufacturers can decide which mix of features they think will hit a sweet spot. Economies of scale then should take over.

Headless Macs at the low end won't happen because Apple know the impetus for Headless Macs is so that people can buy a cheaper monitor. Can they makeup the additional revenue of the built in Monitors if they go Headless. That answer is unclear but it's unlikely.

[nek]

Wait, wait and wait

PowerMac7,2 = PowerMac G5.
PowerMac7,3 = ? Probably revB of PowerMac G5.
RackMac3,1 = Xserve.
PowerMac8,1 = new product.

<key>PowerMac8,1</key>
<string>SMU_Neo2_PlatformPlugin</string>

Neo was the codename of PPC970, so Neo2 could be the 970fx? Anyway PowerMac 8,1 probably is the new iMac G5, in fact all the latest iMac have an even revision number (PowerMac 4.x, PowerMac 6.x...).


I think you are right. The PowerMac7,3 is just a faster Powermac G5 and the PowerMac8,1 is a brand new iMac G5. Although I don't know how to read the file properly, the following seems to indicate very little change in the Powermac:

<key>PowerMac7,2</key>
<string>PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin</string>
<key>PowerMac7,3</key>
<string>PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin</string>
<key>PowerMac8,1</key>
<string>SMU_Neo2_PlatformPlugin</string>

And for those hoping that AppleMacRISC4PE means a 4 processor Powermac, thats not going to happen. If you look at AppleMacRISC2PE, it mentions MacRISC2 and MacRISC3, and the UniNorth motherboard. AppleMacRISC4PE mentions MacRISC4, and its motherboard seems to be called AppleU3.

Of course, that doesn't mean that the new Powermac couldn't be much faster and have a few other changes that require a special new version of OSX 10.3.x.

[shawnce]

I didn't say that was the logic behind previous models. you were quick to speculate I did. believe me that I did see the 3,3 and 7,2 and 7,5. other than that - believe what you want to believe.

Apple's number scheme hasn't worked that way in the past and it is unlikely that it is changed to work the way as you implied (it is 7,3 by the way no 7,5 exists yet out in any open update).

Now Apple may switch to a single CPU package with dual or quad cores in the future. So your internal source may be saying one CPU but it could be a dual (or quad) core package, effectively a dual CPU with very fast interconnect between them.

I personally would be surprised if those are shippable in the next 6 months to a year unless Apple ups the pricing on things. We shall see what pops out at WWDC.

[dongmin]

This is not a speculation but an info I got from an inside source at Apple.
8 is indeed 975 and the ',1' means that it's a single processor as ALL the REV B machines are going to be. the cpu clockspeeds are going to be higher than expected (yes. higher than 3.0GHZ). from what I heard, there are talks about a low end 2.4 machine, mid 2.8 machine and high end 3.2 machine. all with dual layer dvd burners (from sony) and PCI express.

No way will Apple drop duals on the high end. Apple has been selling the Gospel of the Dual forever. Going from dual 2.0 to only single 3.2 would appear as a step backwards for many people, including myself. At best, it's a move sideways. Many pro apps that take advantage of the second processor (at more than 60%) will take a performance hit with this upgrade. Boooo. This would be acceptable only if Apple dropped the price on the high end to $2500 AND if the cumulative architectural changes of the new processor results in a higher per clock performance. A dual 3.0 option should be available as BTO.

[SpamJunkie]

The only thing I could possibly see happen at all is that nVidia and ATi get off their asses and finally create a standard graphics module for notebooks and Apple uses that in the iMac for upgradable graphics, but that's a pipe dream too.

Which upgradeable laptop graphics standard is a pipe dream, MXM announced last week or Axiom announced today?

[thogs_cave]

that is the law of diminishing returns - duals will NEVER add a 100% boost compared to a single cpu (of same speed). that is as impossible as travelling faster than the speed of light. there is always a performance hit when more than one cpu is used simultaneously.

if dual gives a 50% boost, one could assume that the third cpu would add about 33% to it and the fourth some 25%, so in the end, the quad shoud show a +150% speed boost compared to single cpu (of the same speed) in real life.

Um, not to burst your bubble JFreak, but that doesn't hold true at all. I work with SMP systems, and have for 10 years now. Depending on the system design you can actually reach a point (depending on the system design and cache) where the speedup goes superlinear. Sun's E10000 (up to 64 CPU's) would reach that point, and other systems do as well. Certainly the second CPU in even a modest MP box adds more than 50%.

A good deal of the boost is lost in single-threaded code. However, the advent of multicore CPU's (even Intel has finally jumped on that bandwagon), as well as a lot of SMP systems out there in the past decade or so has led to code being much better threaded. OS X (for a young OS) does amazingly well in this arena, and the results on a dual-CPU G5 are excellent.

Given that Intel, the overall leader in inefficient high-frequency CPUs, has thrown in the towel due to heat issues (among other things), you will see even more SMP and multicore designs in short order. It would not surprise me at all if IBM releases a multicore G5 or G6. After all, the POWER line has worked that way for some time.

[pjkelnhofer]

No way will Apple drop duals on the high end. Apple has been selling the Gospel of the Dual forever. Going from dual 2.0 to only single 3.2 would appear as a step backwards for many people, including myself. At best, it's a move sideways. Many pro apps that take advantage of the second processor (at more than 60%) will take a performance hit with this upgrade. Boooo. This would be acceptable only if Apple dropped the price on the high end to $2500 AND if the cumulative architectural changes of the new processor results in a higher per clock performance. A dual 3.0 option should be available as BTO.

I think you are right, it doesn't make sense to go from dual to single all the way down the line. I never believe it when a "newbie" suddenly appears with so called inside information.

[silvergunuk]

I'm expecting new G5 imacs that come in different colours (perhaps to match ipod minis). The rest god knows.

[spankalee]

Which upgradeable laptop graphics standard is a pipe dream, MXM announced last week or Axiom announced today?

That's the point. Neither one is a standard, they are two separate specifications that are not compatible. The pip-dream referred to nVidia and ATi agreeing on one spec.

I guess it's possible that Apple wouldn't mind, and think that limited upgradability is better than none, but I'd much rather see a real standard.

[LaMerVipere]

Do we have any info on the stock of iMacs that resellers have?

Because the est. ship date for an iMac is next day, as opposed to power macs which have a 4-6 week est. ship date

Is this really a good way to gauge whether or not a major new product is around the corner? (ie: iMac G5)

[Freg3000]

8. Steve Jobs will apologize...


STOP!

Did you just say what I think you just said???

Either there will be 3Ghz Power Macs, or Steve won't say a word about missing the mark.

[leo]

Processors creep forward on a defined timeline.

As we have seen with Motorola... :rolleyes:
Just kidding, I too think IBM is different. But the mere fact that they are constantly developing new processor designs doesn't mean they can deliver Apple-sized quantities with high clock speeds on time. And I think this can and does cause a delay.



Apple has stated that there was an issue with fabbing some G5s. IBM doesn't fab everything on the same line so problems in one area don't necessarily affect others.


As far as I understand it, it wasn't a problem with one single fab line, but an issue with the process. I'm still not convinced that they have those 3 GHz chips ready for shipping this summer.


Then explain to me this : page 2
http://www.fz-juelich.de/zam/files/docs/vortraege/ibm-nutzung/hh_pwr4_arch.2up.pdf


This is new, substantial information for me, thank you. I stand corrected.
There is a PowerPC 975. Watch out, folks!

[pjkelnhofer]

Do we have any info on the stock of iMacs that resellers have?

Because the est. ship date for an iMac is next day, as opposed to power macs which have a 4-6 week est. ship date

Is this really a good way to gauge whether or not a major new product is around the corner? (ie: iMac G5)

In the past, this has not been a good way to judge major new products. When the iBook went to G4 last fall, no one had been reporting long ship dates on the old iBooks. Anything that Apple has left when the updates come will be simply sold in the "Refurb" section of Applestore.com.

[tortoise]

Depending on the system design you can actually reach a point (depending on the system design and cache) where the speedup goes superlinear. Sun's E10000 (up to 64 CPU's) would reach that point, and other systems do as well.


That is a fantastically disingenuous argument. First, the number of codes that show superlinear performance increases on ANY system are microscopic to the point of being curiosities. Second, the PPC architecture is nigh pathological as such things go for trying to extract superlinear performance. Third, the current PPC architecture is very poorly suited for scalable SMP in general. In short, the PPC as currently designed cannot be economically scaled beyond two processors as the return falls off very fast for most applications. The lack of SMP scalability in PPC isn't a minor design decision, and adding it would require some wholesale redesign of the current chipsets that it isn't clear that either IBM or Apple is willing to do.

If you want scalable SMP then you want the Opteron, which uses an architecture that is similar to the E10k you mention and an interconnect that is actually superior to the E10k interconnect in many ways. The PPC is currently a pretty modest implementation of vanilla PC-like SMP, and scales a little worse in the general case.

So unless Apple starts producing PPCs with a scalable interconnect and a brand new memory subsystem, it will be nothing more than a glorified single processor machine. The Opteron can do it because it was built for it, with a multiprocessor fabric that would be at home in Unix Big Iron.

[spankalee]

Third, the current PPC architecture is very poorly suited for scalable SMP in general.

So why is IBM's Blue Gene based on the PPC 440? Is it really the PPC that's not SMP friendly, or the chipset?

[aswitcher]

I do hope this does turn out the be the G5 iMac with some cool new design and performance advances at a decent price.

[LeeTom]

My predictions for WWDC...

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=73884

Lee Tom

[mklos]

IMO, this can only mean two things:

Apple planned to release a new PM revision sometime between March and May (the release dates of 10.3.3 and 10.3.4, respectively), but had to change that plan for whatever reason, probably IBM's yield problems.

OR

10.3.4 was released sooner than originally planned which is less likely to be the reason than the first possibility

OR

It will be the OS release that ships with the new PowerMacs or iMac G5's when ever they ship.

[NNO-Stephen]

OR

It will be the OS release that ships with the new PowerMacs or iMac G5's when ever they ship.

which I've thought this since it took so long for them to beta test it and squash as many bugs as possible. this update got quite a bit of beta testing compared to most of the other updates and I believe this will be the OS that ships with any new hardware Apple announces.

[fluidinclusion]

I think that Steve's keynote go something like this: Steve will come the stage wearing some jeans, with a black pole-neck that secretly has a board of circuit within it. He will walk through the stage, to traverse to a table with an object on it, which has a covered black cloth cover it. Before he gets there, he slides in something and strikes his head in the table, striking out a tooth. After crouching doubled over in the pain for some moments, he will be stand up and will throw off the cloth of the object... that reveals it to be new iMac.

The rock music will begin to play, and Steve visibly will be angered. In iMac's the screen will be a G5 logo of a certain class, playing in the Motion. Steve will stop the partial version of program that plays, while spit blood in his pocket. The Spinning Wheel of Death will appear, making Steve still more angered. He will open the side of iMac, and watches fixedly inside, silently. Then he will close it up, and he feels down in front of him. After striking the mouse around the SWoD still it will rotate, and Steve will loosen to its genius, entering a catatonic fury.

To this point, an assistant will emter to the Tiger of the partial version of program. The horrible music of Emo will begin to play. Steve will be stopped behind the assistant, breathing noisy and heavy. The nervous assistant will give his speech with a voice that shakes, his speech broken by fearful swalloning. Steve will appear utterly disinterested in the partial version of program. The assistant will accidentally spill the water of Steve's on the keyboard of iMac, sending panic of the nucleus of the Tiger. Steve will strike the chair with the foot towards outside underneath the assistant, and it strikes it with the foot in the posteriora part, and pushes iMac of the writing-desk with a wild sweeping of his hairy arms. Steve will finish the tonic note staring maniacally out towards the crowd, eyes that burn with vehemance, showing his toothless mouth now, dripping with saliva and blood. The curtains will draw.

Apologies for my English, I am Spaniard


That's the funniest thing I've read (or heard) all day. Thanks for the laugh!!

[wadetemp]

not only is it listed as a new model, it's in /System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/ - which the funny part of is the 4PE, meaning, if I understand this right, a 4 processor usage. That could be quite interesting...

The 4 doesn't indicate number of processors unfortunately. All the G5s (PowerMac7,2 and RackMac3,1, and the not-yet-seen PowerMac7,3) are MacRisc4 platforms and use this kext.

What I find interesting is that the PowerMac8,1 entry points to a non-existant plugin called SMU_Neo2_PlatformPlugin. (7,2 and 7,3 use PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin, and RackMac uses RackMac3_1_PlatformPlugin.)

The bad of this is although 10.3.4 has this entry in the plist file, the plugin binary's just not there, so 10.3.4 is not really compatible with the new system... so I don't think a release date can be inferred by the fact the plist changed. (Note the PowerMac7,3 STILL isn't here, and at least in this area it would be supported by the code they're shipping today.)

The good is that the G5's codename was "Neo." Given the name of the nonexistant plugin, I have high hopes for something good to come along... plus someday we'll get a PowerMac7,3 too.

[centauratlas]

STOP!
... or Steve won't say a word about missing the mark.

They won't say a word about missing the mark because the mark is "end of summer" 2004, e.g. around Sept 21, 2004 +/- a few days.

Steve revised his "within a year" statement from June 2003 in Sept of 2003, as has been beaten to death numerous times.

[nuckinfutz]

Leo

LOL. No doubt I was beginning to think IBM was infected with Moto disease.

Hell man right now I would take a Dual 2.01 speed bump. Just kidding.

Damn man you're supposed to get hot under the collar because of my ribbbing you. Oh well...my provocation skills are weak. Welcome to the board......noob heheheh.

I figure Apple will have some cool stuff and once again I won't be able to afford what I "really" want without a loan. C'est la vie

Makes a man want a good ole fashioned Public Roadmap.

[Freg3000]

They won't say a word about missing the mark because the mark is "end of summer" 2004, e.g. around Sept 21, 2004 +/- a few days.

Steve revised his "within a year" statement from June 2003 in Sept of 2003, as has been beaten to death numerous times.

Whether or not your should be allowed to revise those types of projections is another story completely, but think about this for a moment. What do you think is more publicly known?
A) Steve's bold prediction of 3 Ghz within 12 months announced on on stage during the WWDC keynote.....or
B) Steve's adjustment to his claim at......Paris Expo? I don't even know. And I am on this site everyday! :)

Fact is, most people probably think that the mark still is this year's WWDC, but if Steve has no 3 Ghz Power Macs to give us, I doubt he'll say a word, leaving many people confused.

Although, he probably will claim that Apple did meet "the mark" if they get to 3 Ghz by September.

Nonetheless, I am sure that we both can agree that a 3 Ghz Power Mac sure sound goods.....whenever it comes! :D

[Wyrm]

this is purely speculation and should be taken with a grain of salt, but since the current PM is 7,2 and this "new model" is 8,1 it may be proof that this new model is in fact using the 975 chip as previously rumored since they jumped from 7 to 8. I have no idea what I'm talking about though so if i'm way off base, slap me silly....but gently...

I hope you're right, but I think you're wrong.

The 970 was a well known processor before it was even announced that Apple was going to use it (IBM let out all sorts of juicy info).
The 970fx is also a known entity, being the 90nm shrink of the 130nm 970.
The 975,980 etc is not known... no details... only what can be infered from the Power5 or <gasp> rumors. :eek:

We had Bernie Meyerson (CTO IBM Microelectronics, aka the guy who knows the PPC numbers) say scaling is dead for the 90nm node (in Prague)EETimes Link (http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=19502091) .

So IBM has some *issues* at Fishkill with 90nm: Again, known.

If we take Bernie's comment of 70% innovation required for the 90nm node, we can guess that the 970 required significant re-work, and would probably sap engineering resources from any other manufacturing project at 90nm (a guess, but the economic principle of IBM having finite resources is not debated)

Now, this doesn't rule out that the Power5 lite could be a 130nm part... (the Power5 is), or IBM has a skunkworks 90nm project for the 97x/98x. These would be surprises, although a 130nm Power5 Lite would probably not hit 3Ghz unless it increases the pipeline length like the Prescott, has double pumped ALUs, or employs some other sort of slight of hand.

The 970 is ~120 mm2 which, for example, is a little more than half the surface area of an AMD Opteron, so there's room to grow even at 130nm. Of course if it has changed significantly then IBM has to re-verify the processor... which then it might be ready for next year's WWDC if they started last year... and IBM hasn't released any sampling information, or any volume production information for a 97x series.

I think the only thing IBM has that could hit 3Ghz, and is in production, would be the 970fx.

And who knows, for Steve Jobs to eat his words, the Summer has to end...
(And Steve lives in California... it's always Summer there right?)

-Wyrm

[aswitcher]

They won't say a word about missing the mark because the mark is "end of summer" 2004, e.g. around Sept 21, 2004 +/- a few days.

Steve revised his "within a year" statement from June 2003 in Sept of 2003, as has been beaten to death numerous times.

End of Australian Summer is Feb 28 2005 :)

Thats probably the earliest we will get it

[Wyrm]

What is your explanation for this roadmap clearly stating the POWER4 (Code GP) and then showing the PPC 970 (GP-UL). Now explain how we have the POWER5 (Codename GR) and it's "97x" (GR-UL) is slated for 2H 2004 at 2.5Ghz+.


I don't see how you get 2H 2004 for the 97x GR-UL from the slide, since by the same logic the GP-UL would have been released in the beginning of 2003.
:confused:

I hope the GR-UL rears it's head at WWDC, but I think we are going to get the GP-UL FX (maybe a '+' in IBM notation?)

-Wyrm

[nuckinfutz]

I don't see how you get 2H 2004 for the 97x GR-UL from the slide, since by the same logic the GP-UL would have been released in the beginning of 2003.
:confused:

I hope the GR-UL rears it's head at WWDC, but I think we are going to get the GP-UL FX (maybe a '+' in IBM notation?)

-Wyrm


Yes I'm beginning to think WWDC is not going to see the fabled 3Ghz announcement. They still have until mid Sept to announce that machine and keep Steves promise. The diagram is definately sloppy. According to this it looks like the GR-UL could come at "any" time in 2004 just as it shows the GP-UL could have come at "any" time in 2003.

If a 3Ghz isn't announced I won't be heartbroken. I'll look to see the performance of the top Powermac and then we can see how much another few hundred megahertz will get us.

[Macmaniac]

I Love how AppleInsider chimes in to claim that the new powermacs will be coming in June, its like throwing more gasoline onto an already burning forrest fire of rumors.

[Wyrm]

Yes I'm beginning to think WWDC is not going to see the fabled 3Ghz announcement. They still have until mid Sept to announce that machine and keep Steves promise. The diagram is definately sloppy. According to this it looks like the GR-UL could come at "any" time in 2004 just as it shows the GP-UL could have come at "any" time in 2003.

If a 3Ghz isn't announced I won't be heartbroken. I'll look to see the performance of the top Powermac and then we can see how much another few hundred megahertz will get us.

Presentation slides are intentionally unclear. :)
For marketing reasons... ("What was that? We didn't get that CPU out in the timeframe that was on the slide? Oh, you mean that slide.. well <sound of chuckling> I think it's an optical illusion, yeah... no no not this year... sampling, yeah right, *sampling*...")

Yeah, 3Ghz would be very impressive (but so would a dual 2.5Ghz for that matter), and a 970fx might be able to hit that, so you still may be surprised. I just don't think we are going to see the Power5 UL one (so no SMT, etc).

-Wyrm

[Wonder Boy]

Given Apple's recent comments, I think Tiger in October is not what will happen.

i agree thats why i said october(ish).

i figure jaguar was in august->panther in october->tiger in december or january's expo.

~ 2 months apart

[mountainmac]

According to what I've read so far the 8,1 indicates a new Imac. This may have been mentioned but all of the even numbers have been Imac updates and odd numbers have been power mac updates

2,x - IMac
4,x - IMac
6,x - IMac
8,1 - ????

3,x - Powermac
5,x - Powermac
7,x - Powermac

This was shown on one of the sites listed on anothe site like macbytes or something like that with a link to applemuseum.

Just some more fuel for the fire. ;)

[Stike]

According to what I've read so far the 8,1 indicates a new Imac. This may have been mentioned but all of the even numbers have been Imac updates and odd numbers have been power mac updates

2,x - IMac
4,x - IMac
6,x - IMac
8,1 - ????

3,x - Powermac
5,x - Powermac
7,x - Powermac

This was shown on one of the sites listed on anothe site like macbytes or something like that with a link to applemuseum.

Just some more fuel for the fire. ;)
I also noticed that. My money is on a new iMac. G5? Hopefully! The performance is currently a letdown, and the iMac is currently the worst performing model (saleswise AND CPU-wise)...

[Sun Baked]

According to what I've read so far the 8,1 indicates a new Imac. This may have been mentioned but all of the even numbers have been Imac updates and odd numbers have been power mac updates

2,x - IMac
4,x - IMac
6,x - IMac
8,1 - ????

3,x - Powermac
5,x - Powermac
7,x - Powermac

This was shown on one of the sites listed on anothe site like macbytes or something like that with a link to applemuseum.

Just some more fuel for the fire. ;)Don't look at it as a iMac vs. PowerMac thing -- look a bit deeper to chipsets used in these things.

There is a good chance there is a new chipset coming. Good chance it is a consumer machine, might not be.

Anyway Apple started mixing up the odd/even stuff used to keep pro/consumer portable lines apart.

It could happen with the desktops.

[eyeluvmyimac]

Update: According to Appleinsider, the new PowerMac should be released by the end of June.

<extreme sarcasm>wow good call apple insider, where did you ever come up with a date like that!??!? they must have someone working on the inside...</extreme sarcasm>


'ya think?

:p

[Wyrm]

According to what I've read so far the 8,1 indicates a new Imac. This may have been mentioned but all of the even numbers have been Imac updates and odd numbers have been power mac updates

2,x - IMac
4,x - IMac
6,x - IMac
8,1 - ????

3,x - Powermac
5,x - Powermac
7,x - Powermac

Just some more fuel for the fire. ;)

Yep, we don't know since they are both listed as "Power Mac" for the IMac, eMac, and the PowerMac... why, we could be looking at something totally new... or maybe someone was just putting in the number after 7?
The codename is "Image" which doesn't exactly bring the *image* of a supremely power computing platform, but rather the idea of a smart mirror or something :confused: . I thought the *French* rumors cited the codename as "Trinity" - YAMCN.

Even the CPU info has changed, whatever a "SMU_Neo2" is..

m'gosh, maybe it's the XBox2 that runs OS-X???? :eek:

Only 26 days until WWDC... which will probably leave more questions unanswered (like ship dates)

-Wyrm

[diego]

Yep, we don't know since they are both listed as "Power Mac" for the IMac, eMac, and the PowerMac... why, we could be looking at something totally new... or maybe someone was just putting in the number after 7?
The codename is "Image" which doesn't exactly bring the *image* of a supremely power computing platform, but rather the idea of a smart mirror or something :confused: . I thought the *French* rumors cited the codename as "Trinity" - YAMCN.

Even the CPU info has changed, whatever a "SMU_Neo2" is..

m'gosh, maybe it's the XBox2 that runs OS-X???? :eek:

Only 26 days until WWDC... which will probably leave more questions unanswered.

-Wyrm


Trinity was the codename for the Cube, Neo was the codename for the G5 (970), so this could mean 975

[tortoise]

So why is IBM's Blue Gene based on the PPC 440? Is it really the PPC that's not SMP friendly, or the chipset?


Blue Gene isn't SMP. It is a fine-grained message passing architecture, kind of a modern remake of the old 1980s massively parallel supercomputers, with gobs of relatively simple processors. In a sense, it is basically a computing cluster that has been cut down to fit in a box, and with the same limitations on what it is useful for.

The poor multiprocessor scalability isn't intrinsic to the PPC, it was an explicit design choice. The Power series processors actually do have all the glue logic and memory hardware to scale extremely well in multiprocessor environments. These features were probably not included for two reasons. First, it was likely a cost saving measure by Apple and IBM, as vanilla SMP systems are much less costly to produce. Second, IBM may not want to cannibalize the sale of their Power systems. The additional features don't come cheap; with its huge cache, onboard memory management, and ccNUMA, the Opteron has a substantially larger die size than the PPC970 for the same fab process which translates into cost.

Apple may eventually sell a scalable version of the PPC processor, but they have a lot of work to do to get there, including coming up with a scalable operating system (OSX is hampered by a crusty old ABI that they have to support). If it ever shows up, it will show up in the XServe first, but I don't see that happening any time soon as a practical matter -- all these changes would take years if they are currently planned at all.

So in the meantime, Apple will be making a killer workstation and a decent low-end server box. Nothing wrong with that.

[bathysphere]

[thogs_cave]

The poor multiprocessor scalability isn't intrinsic to the PPC, it was an explicit design choice. The Power series processors actually do have all the glue logic and memory hardware to scale extremely well in multiprocessor environments. These features were probably not included for two reasons. First, it was likely a cost saving measure by Apple and IBM, as vanilla SMP systems are much less costly to produce. Second, IBM may not want to cannibalize the sale of their Power systems. The additional features don't come cheap; with its huge cache, onboard memory management, and ccNUMA, the Opteron has a substantially larger die size than the PPC970 for the same fab process which translates into cost.
...snip...
So in the meantime, Apple will be making a killer workstation and a decent low-end server box. Nothing wrong with that.

I don't disagree with you at all. I was responding more to the individual who made the sweeping claim that SMP was not good for much, with the "50%, 33%, 25%" logic.

The G5 is good for what it does. And the overhead I see on the Dual 2.0 I have is about 15-ish % (sometimes more, sometimes less), which seems much better than 50%...

It is a killer UNIX workstation. It works quite well, despite netinfo. :-) As for servers, Xserves are cool, but if I'm really pushing it, I want a Sun running Solaris. No reason why the two can't live together.

[JFreak]

Huh? Using your own logic and numbers, a quad CPU system would realize ~208% speed increase over a single CPU system (i.e. 100% + 50% + 33% + 25%).

bad math.

1.00 * 1.50 * 1.33 * 1.22 = 2.49 --> original plus 149%

[JFreak]

it's not quite that inefficiant as that http://www.barefeats.com/xserve2.html

i was just making an example, not putting hard facts on the table. but thank you, very nice link.

[JFreak]

~100% speed increase. ;)

almost and exactly are two different things. but you're right, in the real world some 95% increase can very well be considered to have "doubled" the cpu power.

i was just stating an example, not facts, but i'm glad people write good and efficient software that put theories to shame ;)

[JFreak]

I think Virginia Tech showed the world that Mac's scale better.

thank god for that :) actually, it is the underlying unix that performs well.

[Wyrm]

thank god for that :) actually, it is the underlying unix that performs well.

It clusters well.

Just think, you could spend 30-50 times more and get one of these:
The FASTEST MACHINE IN THE WORLD!! HA HA HA HA (http://www.es.jamstec.go.jp/)

<sorry, too tempting to show a flagrant waste of tax money>

I helped pay for that I... er I'm still helping to pay for that... along with 60 odd million other people in this country (oooh and to think they could have just bought 10,000 XServes)...

-Wyrm

[Unclezeppy]

iMac G5 has been in production for almost a month, 1.8 and 2.0GHz models. They still looked the same (cam phone pic) but might have white egg shell that can change color, each user can have their own color when they log in or you can match the color with you home decor (just my guess based on their patents, what would be cool and couple of other things).

So there, too bad, I live close to the factory but can't buy them until US market gets them.

[klaus]

iMac G5 has been in production for almost a month, 1.8 and 2.0GHz models. They still looked the same (cam phone pic) but might have white egg shell that can change color, each user can have their own color when they log in or you can match the color with you home decor (just my guess based on their patents, what would be cool and couple of other things).

So there, too bad, I live close to the factory but can't buy them until US market gets them.

sure, and if we don't believe this story, you'll tell us another one :p

lame attempt, you could've at least shown us that cam pic you were talking about ;)

[rdowns]

anyone think that this means the end of the power mac line.
there have been no revisions to the g5 in months…
if the imac g5 is released this would bring the imac to the same level as the power mac but at a lower price point (even more so if apple keeps the all-in-one desing)
what I think we may see… a stand alone imac with a bit more expandability (meaning more ram, maybe a few PCI slots) with a G5 processor.
No Power Mac updates.

Crazy talk! End of the PM? Pass the joint dude.

I have no doubt that the PMs will get a speed bump and think Steve will meet his 3 GHz goal even if it is only an announcement with shipping in 60-90 days.

Let's say the iMac gets the G5 (please!!!!) and is on par, speed wise, with the PM. There is still a lot of other items to diffrentiate the systems such as

Single vs. dual processors
RAM expansion
Drive bays
Graphics cards

I don't see the iMac changing in terms of expandability; RAM is it. While I'd love to see a small form tower, Apple won't do it. They'd be afraid of canibalizing PM sales.

[SLAPSHOTW]

Oh wow!! If you look carefully at the pictures on this page:

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

you will see a G5 poster in the background!

WE'RE GETTING G5 MACS!!! The day has finally arrived!!!

I can't believe it.

Actually, I think you're confused. G5 Macs have been around for almost a year already, in the PowerMac.


I think what you meant to say is that since the word G5 looks rectangular, and a Powerbook from the top is rectangular, Pythagorean's theorem of Relativity (and his closely associated "How to discover a secret cousin") states that Powerbook G5's will be released at WWDC.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.
-Matt

[blakespot]

I think clearly some manner of G5 upgrade is coming. I don't expect it to be less than 2.5GHz at the top end - it _has_ been a _year_ since the 2GHz was introduced, almost. Whether we get PCI Extreme on this round is a good question. But drilling down to a smaller detail - what video card will be in these new G5's?

If Apple goes for the top consumer cards, it would be a choice between the nv40-based nVIDIA GeForce Ultra 6800 and ATI's new X800 line. The former is the overall performance king, while the latter offers much lower power consumption and does not nudge over into the slot next door, like the nVIDIA does with its massive heatsink/fan combo. And in some benches, the X800 defeats the nVIDIA.

My money would be on the X800 - but will it be the full, top-end ($499 retail) 16-pipeline or the somewhat scaled down 12-pipeline X800 "Pro" ??

Thoughts?




blakespot

[Bigheadache]

I think clearly some manner of G5 upgrade is coming. I don't expect it to be less than 2.5GHz at the top end - it _has_ been a _year_ since the 2GHz was introduced, almost. Whether we get PCI Extreme on this round is a good question. But drilling down to a smaller detail - what video card will be in these new G5's?

If Apple goes for the top consumer cards, it would be a choice between the nv40-based nVIDIA GeForce Ultra 6800 and ATI's new X800 line. The former is the overall performance king, while the latter offers much lower power consumption and does not nudge over into the slot next door, like the nVIDIA does with its massive heatsink/fan combo. And in some benches, the X800 defeats the nVIDIA.

My money would be on the X800 - but will it be the full, top-end ($499 retail) 16-pipeline or the somewhat scaled down 12-pipeline X800 "Pro" ??

Thoughts?




blakespot

I hope that by moving to PCI Express, we can start using PC versions of the graphics cards instead of waiting for designated mac versions. I don't know what needs to be done or if its difficult, but that would be a positive.
I haven't seen every benchmark out there, but I think NVidia tend to come out infront on OpenGL stuff which would be a plus on the Mac front. Having said that, there are rumors at the Rage3d forum that ATI are rewriting from scratch openGl drivers (on the windows side), maybe that might have some sort of flow on effect.

[Wyrm]

I hope that by moving to PCI Express, we can start using PC versions of the graphics cards instead of waiting for designated mac versions. I don't know what needs to be done or if its difficult, but that would be a positive.
I haven't seen every benchmark out there, but I think NVidia tend to come out infront on OpenGL stuff which would be a plus on the Mac front. Having said that, there are rumors at the Rage3d forum that ATI are rewriting from scratch openGl drivers (on the windows side), maybe that might have some sort of flow on effect.

I don't think it will make much of a difference from the situation that exists today... I mean the only difference seems to be a bios change and support for the Apple magical display connector, so I don't see what difference a bus interface change would make.

-Wyrm

[Bigheadache]

I don't think it will make much of a difference from the situation that exists today... I mean the only difference seems to be a bios change and support for the Apple magical display connector, so I don't see what difference a bus interface change would make.

-Wyrm

that would be a shame, a bus interface wouldn't make a change as you say, but for consumers it a plus as if we can take advantage of PC card production runs, instead of waiting for manufacturers to come out later with mac versions. I don't claim to know why there is a difference, but uniformity with PC versions would be a plus for the average consumer.

[blakespot]

that would be a shame, a bus interface wouldn't make a change as you say, but for consumers it a plus as if we can take advantage of PC card production runs, instead of waiting for manufacturers to come out later with mac versions. I don't claim to know why there is a difference, but uniformity with PC versions would be a plus for the average consumer.

Recall that the Rage 128 and the GeForce 3 debuted on the Mac before PC. I think that rather acceptibly high-end consumer cards have long been available for the Mac, albeit at a higher price tag than their PC brethren. I think the Mac's "problem" here is that, while OpenGL is arguably a more robust and clen way of doing 3D, Microsoft has done a very good job of adding effect after effect to DirectX with hardware vendors implementing the specs in hardware immediately. While it is theoretically possible to see this type of featureset/hardware marriage in the OpenGL world, we're not seeing it at present.

I can't even turn on FSAA on my GeForce 4Ti under OS X. If I buy a new G5 and opt to spend an extra $400 to get the high-end vidcard, will I then be able to use basic FSAA? The video driver feature situation under OS X needs serious addressing.



blakespot

[Krevnik]

that would be a shame, a bus interface wouldn't make a change as you say, but for consumers it a plus as if we can take advantage of PC card production runs, instead of waiting for manufacturers to come out later with mac versions. I don't claim to know why there is a difference, but uniformity with PC versions would be a plus for the average consumer.

Well, video cards are very much compatible except for two things: drivers for the chip on the board... these are sorely lacking for anything but the ones ATi ships and Apple OEMs. The other thing is the ROM on the board, this needs to be flashed, and while you can do this, it usually requires a PC and some risk. Some boards once flashed still don't work because they aren't exactly the same.

Video cards are one of the few things you cannot make dual-platform easily.

[AidenShaw]

The other thing is the ROM on the board, this needs to be flashed....

Video cards are one of the few things you cannot make dual-platform easily.


It would be easy if the Macs worked with the standard ROM, wouldn't it?

Does Apple really need to have proprietary ROMs? Of course not - but they choose to.

[blakespot]

It would be easy if the Macs worked with the standard ROM, wouldn't it?

Does Apple really need to have proprietary ROMs? Of course not - but they choose to.


There are, among other things, little endian / big endian issues between the Mac and PC architectures.



blakespot

[AidenShaw]

There are, among other things, little endian / big endian issues between the Mac and PC architectures.

Any endian issues which the driver can't fix could be handled via a mode bit in the standard ROM.

The video card manufacturers would be happy to enhance the standard ROM with an endian mode bit, if it meant that they would only have to build and support one ROM image. (A common ROM should also mean that much more of the driver would be common between standard systems and Macs.)

Note that I didn't say that there were no reasons that Apple couldn't use common ROMs today - I said that they *could* use them if they wanted to. It might not be trivial, and it might not apply to legacy PC cards.

[Unclezeppy]

Another thing beside the new iMac G5 was the news that all the current Apple models are also made in China. Well, those Taiwan companies have factories here so maybe. The new aluminum LCD display is made here.

I hope I can buy a new G5 iMac next month, my old lime green beast is too much trouble even for background music handling. It's just too bad that mainland dealers don't have much say when they can get their stock. There are also universities and colleges that seem to get theirs first.

Anyway, let's wait couple of weeks and see. The cam pic I was mentioning is probably deleted by now and showed a fuzzy pic about 40 iMacs lined up. It could be claimed to be from Taiwan, unless you know the guy who took it.

[gorkonapple]

Are we sure? No. This is mere speculation still and the second article only reinforces what Mac Rumors thinks. Sure, a G5 update would be nice, but is it NEEDED? Duel Proc G5's simply run OS X very very well. Anything that lags at all on my G4 Powerbook is completed instantaneously (and there's not much that doesn't happen like this on my G4 either...the G5 just makes it smoother and takes the lags out). One thing that I so far love about my mac is even though new powerbooks have come out since I got my 1 GHz 12 incher (albiet...small updates), I don't really want for anything....not even the bigger disc that is on them now. I bought a external 120 GB hard disk and that plus the 40 that came with mine lets me do everything and anything I ask of my PB. Now if G5 Powerbooks were to come out....WHOA NELLY! I'd be standing ther with credit card in hand! :D

If I was planning a purchase now, would I wait til the new ones came out? No....because when they come out the next question would be would I wait for the ....I would never postphone a purchase unless I had VERY good information and this, to me, while it seems liek a guarantee, it probably is not and I would just go buy what I want now. Would I be mad? Maybe a little, but I would still be happy because I am using a computer that is probably one of the best built computers on the planet and it would still be way fast for what I need it for.

[gorkonapple]

Blue Gene isn't SMP. It is a fine-grained message passing architecture, kind of a modern remake of the old 1980s massively parallel supercomputers, with gobs of relatively simple processors. In a sense, it is basically a computing cluster that has been cut down to fit in a box, and with the same limitations on what it is useful for.

The poor multiprocessor scalability isn't intrinsic to the PPC, it was an explicit design choice. The Power series processors actually do have all the glue logic and memory hardware to scale extremely well in multiprocessor environments. These features were probably not included for two reasons. First, it was likely a cost saving measure by Apple and IBM, as vanilla SMP systems are much less costly to produce. Second, IBM may not want to cannibalize the sale of their Power systems. The additional features don't come cheap; with its huge cache, onboard memory management, and ccNUMA, the Opteron has a substantially larger die size than the PPC970 for the same fab process which translates into cost.



Wait. Blue Gene COULD be SMP. You reallty don't know. Here's what Blue Gene is....it's a IBM AIX/SP cluster. IE, a super computer. SP clusters consist of many nodes and each node could have SMP on it. Would it matter? No, because SP would still manage things like those two CPU's were essentially one. The messaging interface (mostlikely Miranet or some other low latency networking infrastructure) is a HUGE part of it. You WANT SP clusters to have crazy I/O ability because the less time you have to wait for each node to get it's piece to work on, the less time the calculation will take. All said and done, each node COULD be a SMP machine. Most likely, ieach node may not be a SMP mahcine but it definitely could. From the sounds of the description I found on IBM's website, Blue Gene is probably using the blade power servers that IBM has been working on. Blue Gene/L, when complete, will fill 64 racks.

What does this mean to Mac users? If I remember right, the CPU in these may be a 975.

[pjkelnhofer]

What does this mean to Mac users? If I remember right, the CPU in these may be a 975.

The unannounced and unconfirmed 975? Everything I can find says it uses it own chip based on the PowerPC 440 and it runs at 700 MHz. Doesn't sound like the next generation of the G5.

[bathysphere]

...I can't even turn on FSAA on my GeForce 4Ti under OS X. If I buy a new G5 and opt to spend an extra $400 to get the high-end vidcard, will I then be able to use basic FSAA? The video driver feature situation under OS X needs serious addressing.



blakespot

you can only turn on fsaa if the card is retail, not oem, at least with ati cards.

[pjkelnhofer]

Trying to get back to the PowerMac8,1 part of the topic. We have seen the designation for PowerMac, iMac, and eMacs.

What are the names for the PowerBooks and iBooks? How come no one noticed the appearance of a new iBook before the G4's came out?

[segundo]

Are we sure? No. This is mere speculation still and the second article only reinforces what Mac Rumors thinks. Sure, a G5 update would be nice, but is it NEEDED?

Actually, yes, updates are needed. Apple needs, if nothing else, to justify the relatively high pricing for their midrange (iMac) and high end (Power Mac) lines compared to similar x86 based offerings. There are two ways to achieve pricing parity . . . one is to lower prices (which has not happened for a year) and the other is to increase performance while holding prices firm. Twelve months is a long time in the computer world to not do at least one of these for the G5 line.

If I was planning a purchase now, would I wait til the new ones came out? No....

Absolutely. Why wouldn't anyone wait three more weeks to either get the latest gear or get price cuts on the current offerings? Only in the most extreme examples could someone justify purchasing an Apple desktop today.

[NNO-Stephen]

if Apple were to stop using that crazy ADC then it might be more feasable to have the ability to use off-the-shelf PC graphics cards, but at this point, not gonna happen... and that sucks major because I really could use a GPU upgrade and the PC GPU boards are just going down in price since the X800 series and the 6800 series were announced, not to mention the X600 series. I'd purchase a Radeon 9600XT given the choice right now, but no, I'm stuck with my GeForce 4 MX.

Something really needs to be done about this situation.

[pjkelnhofer]

If I was planning a purchase now, would I wait til the new ones came out? No....because when they come out the next question would be would I wait for the ....I would never postphone a purchase unless I had VERY good information and this, to me, while it seems liek a guarantee, it probably is not and I would just go buy what I want now. Would I be mad? Maybe a little, but I would still be happy because I am using a computer that is probably one of the best built computers on the planet and it would still be way fast for what I need it for.

Just to be safe, I would never buy within a few weeks of any Steve Keynote. There is always a good chance something new is going to arrive (of course it may not ship for several months).

[Studio Dweller]

I'm ready to buy a G5 and 23" Cinema Display. The current $500 rebate on the display is very tempting, but I have to think that once the new G5s are announced, the current dual 2 GHz may very well drop by the better part of $500 anyway. I don't see any reason to buy now even if someone is looking to get one of the current models.

[gorkonapple]

Just to be safe, I would never buy within a few weeks of any Steve Keynote. There is always a good chance something new is going to arrive (of course it may not ship for several months).

Yes but in that time where you would be throwing a fit because the damn thing isn't shipping yet, you could be having fun on your Dual Proc 2.0 GHz G5. Unless the reason there have not been updates is that Steve wanted it to be shipping THE DAY he announced it. I say screw it.....in the end your machine is ALWAYS going to be obsoleted. Unless you CAN wait and unless you REALLY need that clock speed bump, it's not worth the wait (to me). Besides, if your stuck on a G4 Power mac (say the first G4, not the latest G4), imagine how much faster everything would run on the Dual Proc 2.0 GHz G5 and how much MORE work you'd get done). You'd waste TIME waiting if your that far out of date. If your the compulsive type that must have the highest end Mac always, then I am glad I don't have YOUR credit card bill! :D

[dongmin]

iMac G5 has been in production for almost a month, 1.8 and 2.0GHz models. They still looked the same (cam phone pic) but might have white egg shell that can change color, each user can have their own color when they log in or you can match the color with you home decor (just my guess based on their patents, what would be cool and couple of other things).

So there, too bad, I live close to the factory but can't buy them until US market gets them.What you're saying makes NO SENSE. I'm not sure if it's because of your English or because you're just pulling stuff out of you-know-where. No way can an external plastic shell "change color" depending on who logs on to the computer. And I also highly doubt that Apple can maintain the existing form factor and put in a brand new G5 architecture, at 2.0 ghz to boot. Can you post that phone camera pic?

I love how these 'insider' reports start coming out of the woodwork in the weeks before a major event.

[manu chao]

Trying to get back to the PowerMac8,1 part of the topic. We have seen the designation for PowerMac, iMac, and eMacs.

What are the names for the PowerBooks and iBooks? How come no one noticed the appearance of a new iBook before the G4's came out?

I have no idea why Arn did not put this link into the original article (it was in my submission and somebody else also mentioned it in this thread):
http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld

It has a full list of all the codes and will answer your question.

[pjkelnhofer]

Yes but in that time where you would be throwing a fit because the damn thing isn't shipping yet, you could be having fun on your Dual Proc 2.0 GHz G5. Unless the reason there have not been updates is that Steve wanted it to be shipping THE DAY he announced it. I say screw it.....in the end your machine is ALWAYS going to be obsoleted. Unless you CAN wait and unless you REALLY need that clock speed bump, it's not worth the wait (to me). Besides, if your stuck on a G4 Power mac (say the first G4, not the latest G4), imagine how much faster everything would run on the Dual Proc 2.0 GHz G5 and how much MORE work you'd get done). You'd waste TIME waiting if your that far out of date. If your the compulsive type that must have the highest end Mac always, then I am glad I don't have YOUR credit card bill! :D

I am still stuck on my G3 iMac DV, so I plan to keep waiting until there is an all-in-one G5 solution for < $1500. Do I think it will happen anytime soon? Not a chance. I plan to keep my iMac for another year or two if necessary. However, when I do have the money/inclination to buy, I will definitely wait until after an update. After all, I have waited this long so far, what's a few more months.

If you are buying for business, it is a whole other world. If you need computers now then order the current model. If you are simply thinking about upgrading then I would still wait. At the very least, you will be able to afford a faster machine for the money you were going to spend anyhow.

My point is, that when a keynote is close at hand, if you can wait, and waiting won't hurt you, then wait. If your need is immediate order today (but don't go BTO, it could very well take just as long as if you waited for WWDC).

As far as shipping dates, I would expect to whatever gets announced to be much closer to shipping than the original G5's. It is one thing to tell people they need to wait three months for a brand new technology, it is quite different to announce an upgrade to that technology and say.. "Oh, by the way they will ship in September."

[thatwendigo]

What you're saying makes NO SENSE. I'm not sure if it's because of your English or because you're just pulling stuff out of you-know-where. No way can an external plastic shell "change color" depending on who logs on to the computer.

Why not? I can see two or three different ways to do it, actually, depening on just how Apple wanted to play the game. The first is to use fiberoptics with a couple of colored LEDs hidden in the base. You get colored light through a clear shell over a white background, and each user can store their preferences for which light to activate. This is likely the cheapest and most power efficient way to do things.

The other way, and I'm not as certain about this one, is the use of electroreactive polymers, which change states based on the amount of current passed through them. Instead of a white shell, you'd have a clear coat over the polymer substrate, which would similarly change based on the preferences of users. Almost certainly more expensive and power-hungry, but a more elegant and consistent way to accomplish the effect.

And I also highly doubt that Apple can maintain the existing form factor and put in a brand new G5 architecture, at 2.0 ghz to boot. Can you post that phone camera pic?

This I fully agree with, actually. The 970FX is still quite a bit hotter than the G4, though I wouldn't put it past Apple to have come up with some kind of trick that we aren't aware of. What a lot of people don't realize when I say that I doubt G5 iMac is coming right away is that I'm just pointing out that it will have to be a major revision just to control the heat, and that there are a number of factors that will have to be addressed. Power and heat are the largest worries, but I really think that a "headless iMac" would just be better off as a consumer tower with real expandability.

[pjkelnhofer]

What you're saying makes NO SENSE. I'm not sure if it's because of your English or because you're just pulling stuff out of you-know-where. No way can an external plastic shell "change color" depending on who logs on to the computer. And I also highly doubt that Apple can maintain the existing form factor and put in a brand new G5 architecture, at 2.0 ghz to boot. Can you post that phone camera pic?

I love how these 'insider' reports start coming out of the woodwork in the weeks before a major event.

I think this is in reference to a patent that Apple filed for a while back for a case that could change color (I assume it used a translucent white case and various different colored bulbs).

I found the thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=16315).

[cubist]

What a lot of messages! Has anyone done a "strings" on the SMU_Neo2 plugin and see what's inside it? Is it bigger or smaller than the G5 PowerMac one?

Speculation on Apple Insider is that SMU stands for "Shared Memory Unit" and this is an expandable multiprocessor PowerMac, not an iMac.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I would like a picture from unclezeppy but as many have stated lots of talk,no pictures and from a newbie so what does this mean to most of rumors folks? not much .Talk is cheap and we have plenty of it here. I doubt a G5 could go into the current shell with its supporting hardware.

One thing that is sure is that Imac sales have sucked,its not gaining any market for Apple and with its slow cpu and last in class video(fx5200) and then they want your arm & leg. If Apple wants Imac to compete with other $2000 machines then it needs a lot of help. Even if Apple comes out with a G5 imac i cant but help wonder how they will end up crippling it so not to take away from Powermac. Apple has a very strong history of playing the crippling game with all of its so called consumer lines. Its just to bad that Imac has become Apples worst value.

[thatwendigo]

One thing that is sure is that Imac sales have sucked,its not gaining any market for Apple and with its slow cpu and last in class video(fx5200) and then they want your arm & leg. If Apple wants Imac to compete with other $2000 machines then it needs a lot of help. Even if Apple comes out with a G5 imac i cant but help wonder how they will end up crippling it so not to take away from Powermac. Apple has a very strong history of playing the crippling game with all of its so called consumer lines. Its just to bad that Imac has become Apples worst value.

Most PC manufacturers are using Intel's integrated graphics and not a card, unless you get up into the iMac's pricerange, and even then you're not getting quite as adjustable or elegant a solution. It's true that the machine is getting long in the tooth, and few people here will argue that, but fact of the matter is that just about any machine that has the same features is going to cost about the same at this point.

The one place the iMac loses is in having a lower-clocked G4, and that's not so much of a loss if you compare the heat and noise profiles of its competitors.

[cubist]

I don't see how you get 2H 2004 for the 97x GR-UL from the slide, since by the same logic the GP-UL would have been released in the beginning of 2003.
:confused:


The GP-UL was released in the beginning of 2003. Apple didn't release machines using it until six months later.

[Luc@]

if Apple were to stop using that crazy ADC

ADC is great!

[Dont Hurt Me]

Hey thatwendigo, i allways think of high end Pcs like say alienware when comparing to imac, for $1700 i can buy a alienware machine that will almost match a powermac G5 let alone smoke a Imac. In this price category they have real video cards. Even base aurora has a 9600xt which is better then what you get in a new dual G5 which has a 9600 pro. Apple needs a model that says look at me with performance to match if its going to bring in new users. current imac is sweet and very nice but its performance is very poor and probably is about the same as a P4 running at 2.0 how long ago did they stop making P4s at 2.0? catch my drift? Anyways after lots of looking i couldnt ever go out and switch to pc. so ill just keep waiting hoping that one day Apple does what it should have done a year ago and that is make a imac that has respectable performance with a decent cpu & gpu.

Apple really needs a computer that calls in the masses(high end consumers) and right now they just dont have one. dual G5 is great for the pro's but a single G4 at 1.25 doesnt cut the mustard in todays age of video games,movie editing and what have you. 26 days and counting ;)

[fpnc]

...The 970FX is still quite a bit hotter than the G4, though I wouldn't put it past Apple to have come up with some kind of trick that we aren't aware of. What a lot of people don't realize when I say that I doubt G5 iMac is coming right away is that I'm just pointing out that it will have to be a major revision just to control the heat, and that there are a number of factors that will have to be addressed. Power and heat are the largest worries, but I really think that a "headless iMac" would just be better off as a consumer tower with real expandability.

Thatwendigo, you may want to read my latest response to your claims that a 970fx iMac isn't possible (post #301, near the end of the "Clearing out G5s?" thread). Simply put, I don't accept your arguments that the 970fx is too hot and power hungry to be used in an iMac. I'm pretty certain that the figures that I provided show that a 970fx-based, G5 iMac is possible.

As to whether an iMac G5 will be introduced at WWDC, that is another question. It's possible that they may just do a speed bump to a 1.5GHz G4 (although one could ask why they waited so long to do that -- more chip supply problems at Motorola?). However, if they could produce a G5-based model running at 1.6GHz or higher then that should produce a very nice performance increase over the current G4s. And I'm sure that Apple marketing would love to have ANY G5-based iMac (even over a similarly clocked G4).

[thatwendigo]

Thatwendigo, you may want to read my latest response to your claims that a 970fx iMac isn't possible (post #301, near the end of the "Clearing out G5s?" thread). Simply put, I don't accept your arguments that the 970fx is too hot and power hungry to be used in an iMac. I'm pretty certain that the figures that I provided show that a 970fx-based, G5 iMac is possible.

Funky. I replied to that, but it seems my post was lost.

Well, back to the trenches. I'll have a new one written up before too long.

[pjkelnhofer]

The one place the iMac loses is in having a lower-clocked G4, and that's not so much of a loss if you compare the heat and noise profiles of its competitors.

I still think the main place where the iMac loses is still in price. The eMac is essentially the same machine with a CRT as opposed to an LCD, but the price difference is much greater that the cost of an LCD screen (in fact you can pick up an eMac and a 17" Apple Display for $100 less than the cost of the 17" iMac). Explain that pricing scheme.

As to whether an iMac G5 will be introduced at WWDC, that is another question. It's possible that they may just do a speed bump to a 1.5GHz G4 (although one could ask why they waited so long to do that -- more chip supply problems at Motorola?). However, if they could produce a G5-based model running at 1.6GHz or higher then that should produce a very nice performance increase over the current G4s. And I'm sure that Apple marketing would love to have ANY G5-based iMac (even over a similarly clocked G4).

I agree there seems to be no logic behind another simple speed bump of the G4's that are in the current iMacs. It has been nine months since the top one went to 1.25 GHz (around the same time the G5's started shipping at the same speeds they are now, so I guess IBM has the same supply problems). I would expect to see a total redesign of the product. I have started to believe that the iMac may be the announcement of the FreeScale (formerly Motorola) e600. I never thought I would agree with thatwendigo ;), but I have to say a 2 GHz, G4 with a 400 MHz system bus sounds like a pretty good chip.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Just a point for pjkelnhofer, there does not exist a 2.0 G4 with 400 fsb yada yada yada, there does exist a 970fx 2.0 G5 with 1 gig fsb. now which one could be put into a imac with some engineering today? G5 which one is vaporware? thats right slow old aging G4 that just hit 1.5 after 5 years so come on. please we have had to make due with this chip(g4) 2 years longer then we should have. :mad:

[pjkelnhofer]

Just a point for pjkelnhofer, there does not exist a 2.0 G4 with 400 fsb yada yada yada, there does exist a 970fx 2.0 G5 with 1 gig fsb. now which one could be put into a imac with some engineering today? G5 which one is vaporware? thats right slow old aging G4 that just hit 1.5 after 5 years so come on. please we have had to make due with this chip(g4) 2 years longer then we should have. :mad:

I understand that, but there is also no 975 or 980 yet (in fact there seems to be not one single official announcement for it), and the IBM 750VX (which many people here pegged to replace the Moto G4) has turned out to be vaporware itself. Whatever IBM's future plan for the 970 line is unknown to everyone except IBM and their customers.
So far the IBM G5 has gone one year with a speed increase despite the introduction of the 970FX, and other than a vague promise from Steve Jobs there is no real evidence that they are going to get any faster soon.
The e600 and e700 are at least announced and publicly planned by Freescale.
I don't dispute the 970FX could be in the iMac in a month, I just think that to simply find a way to put it in an iMac at it's current speeds would not make for much of a WWDC keynote. Let's hope IBM, Apple, etc. have more for us than that.

[dongmin]

Just a point for pjkelnhofer, there does not exist a 2.0 G4 with 400 fsb yada yada yada, there does exist a 970fx 2.0 G5 with 1 gig fsb. now which one could be put into a imac with some engineering today? G5 which one is vaporware? thats right slow old aging G4 that just hit 1.5 after 5 years so come on. please we have had to make due with this chip(g4) 2 years longer then we should have. :mad:

970 - not possible
970fx - possible but the supply is still constrained.

Xserves still show a 4-6 week delay which is better than the 5-7 week delay of the last two months, but still not that great. I say IBM is still having difficulties fabbing enough 970fxs to go around.

Of course, it's possible that Apple will release 970fx iMacs and not ship for 6 weeks during which time IBM will be able to ramp up production. But then, what the heck are they going to put into Power Macs?

[klaus]

970 - not possible
970fx - possible but the supply is still constrained.

Xserves still show a 4-6 week delay which is better than the 5-7 week delay of the last two months, but still not that great. I say IBM is still having difficulties fabbing enough 970fxs to go around.

Of course, it's possible that Apple will release 970fx iMacs and not ship for 6 weeks during which time IBM will be able to ramp up production. But then, what the heck are they going to put into Power Macs?

We only know that the 970 & 970 fx are being produced and shipped in products, so we can't really speculate about other processors (well, we can, but with absolutely no certainty)

We also know that the 970fx had or still has some yield issues, and that the shipping of Xserve's has seen a delay because of this. But there is also reason to believe that the 970fx will be the processor in the upcoming powermac revisions.

Isn't it possible that Apple changed their plan a little bit after ibm didn't get through with their end of the deal (so they could update pm's in march) and now they are dividing the 970fx they do get into 2 parts.. not equal parts for that matter.

let me say it in an example. Say Ibm ships 1000 970fx processors per batch to Apple, and Apple uses 700 of them for use in the Xserve's, and holds back 300 for use in the powermac revisions, so they have a sufficient stock to meet the demand when announcing the macs with immediate availiability...

Would that be too far of a stretch? Because I bet they will be very eager to ship and announce products at the same date, and to avoid paper releases as much as they can...

Any thoughts on this?

[Sun Baked]

let me say it in an example. Say Ibm ships 1000 970fx processors per batch to Apple, and Apple uses 700 of them for use in the Xserve's, and holds back 300 for use in the powermac revisions, so they have a sufficient stock to meet the demand when announcing the macs with immediate availiability...

Would that be too far of a stretch? Because I bet they will be very eager to ship and announce products at the same date, and to avoid paper releases as much as they can...

Any thoughts on this?Yes, it would be like saving the change you get from your weekly trip to McDonald's so you have enough money to take Wolfgang Puck out to eat at the Four Seasons.

The XServe G5 is a rather low volume product, holding back anything from the XServe production wouldn't make a dent in the first weeks pre-orders for Rev.B Powermacs.

[pjkelnhofer]

Yes, it would be like saving the change you get from your weekly trip to McDonald's so you have enough money to take Wolfgang Puck out to eat at the Four Seasons.

The XServe G5 is a rather low volume product, holding back anything from the XServe production wouldn't make a dent in the first weeks pre-orders for Rev.B Powermacs.

This is an excellent point. I highly doubt they could squirrel away enough chips to release a new line of PowerMacs (970FX version), and they are trying too hard to make inroads with the Xserve for them to delayed production for some suprise release. If we are going to see a new lineup of G5 powered products (iMacs, PowerMacs or PowerBooks), I feel like our best hope is for some as yet announced 9XX chip that can run at faster speeds and/or at similar speeds with lower power consumption.

[Wyrm]

Recall that the Rage 128 and the GeForce 3 debuted on the Mac before PC. I think that rather acceptibly high-end consumer cards have long been available for the Mac, albeit at a higher price tag than their PC brethren. I think the Mac's "problem" here is that, while OpenGL is arguably a more robust and clen way of doing 3D, Microsoft has done a very good job of adding effect after effect to DirectX with hardware vendors implementing the specs in hardware immediately. While it is theoretically possible to see this type of featureset/hardware marriage in the OpenGL world, we're not seeing it at present.

I can't even turn on FSAA on my GeForce 4Ti under OS X. If I buy a new G5 and opt to spend an extra $400 to get the high-end vidcard, will I then be able to use basic FSAA? The video driver feature situation under OS X needs serious addressing.
blakespot

Mac OS X Tiger should support DirectX then... (wave of the hand decree)
This might not be so far off the mark, as XBox2 dev kits from Microsoft include an Apple G5... and do you think the XBox2 is going to just use OpenGL? No. So some work has to be done to port DirectX to work on a PPC platform... hmmmm.

Other than that we have to hope OpenGL org can sort out the ARB vs pure debate before we die of old age.

-Wyrm

[davetrow1997]

Macbidouille.com user's found numbers previously... And no Mac follow...

we have a 7,3 ? G5= 7,2, G4 = 3,x

In french:

"La mise à jour 10.3.3 comportait déjà elle aussi un code inconnu jusqu'ici : Power Mac 7,3. Aucune machine frappée de la pomme n'a encore porté ce nom de code. En effet, la série de Powermac actuelle (les G5 quoi) ont pour nom de code Power Mac 7,2. Il faut savoir que les Powermac G4 répondaient eux au nom de code Power Mac 3,x, les Cubes au nom Power Mac 5,1 et les iMac TFT et eMac quant à eux aux noms Power Mac 4,x et 6,x... la liste complète de ces noms de codes se trouve ici : http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld

Or, si l'on regarde maintenant un peu plus la mise à jour 10.3.4, on s'aperçoit qu'il y est fait mention d'un Power Mac 8,1 , ce qui laisse penser qu'il ne s'agit pas du tout d'une mise à niveau mineure mais d'une toute nouvelle machine !

On trouve aussi la référence SMU_Neo2, ce qui peut aussi laisser penser que Neo2 serait une nouvelle version du processeur. Ce qui est certain c'est que Neo2 serait un dérivé du processeur G5 actuel. Mais il est encore difficile d'affirmer qu'il s'agisse d'une version allégée (comme les 970fx des serveurs Xserve) ou boostée (!!!).

Si vous voulez en savoir plus, faites la mise à jour 10.3.4, ouvrez ce fichier :
/System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/
Contents/info.plist
et faites une recherche avec pour objet "8,1".

Sachant justement que les Powermac G5 et les iMac n'ont pas été revus depuis longtemps, on peut en déduire ce qu'on en veut... ;-)

Je vous laisse rêver... (pour moi le 8,1 est un iMac G5 nouveau design, pour fin juin. Le 7,3 quant à lui sera le powermac G5 mis à jour, même date)."

source: http://www.macbidouille.com

English version of bidouille:
http://www.hardmac.com/

If you can translate the post, writing in english is not easy for me! :-)

"the 10.3.3 update contained a previously unknown model number up to
now: Power Mac 7.3. No current Apple model bore this code. Indeed, the current series of Powermac (G5 what) bears model number Power Mac 7.2. The Powermac G4 bore the model Power Mac 3.x, the Cubes Power Mac 5.1 and iMac TFT and eMac Power Mac 4.x and
6.x... the complete list can be found at: [
url]http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld[/url
]

However, if one now looks a little more at the 10.3.4 update ,
one realizes that mention is made of a Power Mac 8.1, which
leads one to think that it is not a question of the whole of a minor update
but of a very new machine!

One finds also the SMU_Neo2 reference, which can as let think as Neo2
would be a new version of the processor. What is certain it is that
Neo2 would be a derivative of the current G5 processor. But it is
still difficult to affirm that it acts of a reduced version (like the
970fx of the Xserve servers) or boosted (!!!).

If you want to know some more about the 10.3.4 update, open
this file: /System/Library/Extensions/AppleMacRISC4PE.kext/
Contents/info.plist and search for object: "8,1".

Knowing that Powermac G5 and the iMac were not revised
for a long time, one can deduce from them what one wants...; -)

Dream away... (for me the 8,1 is a iMac G5 new design, for the
end of June. The 7,3 for others will be the updated powermac G5...

[rdowns]

I have started to believe that the iMac may be the announcement of the FreeScale (formerly Motorola) e600. I never thought I would agree with thatwendigo ;), but I have to say a 2 GHz, G4 with a 400 MHz system bus sounds like a pretty good chip.

Agree with thatwendingo? I hear there's a 12 step program for that. :D

A 600e at 2 GHz and 400 MHz FSB would have been a killer system if released in the past. Whether or not it performs as good as a similarly clocked G5, we are in the G5 era and people (myslef included) do not want to buy old technology. Motorola, er, Freescale has announced what they should have done well over a year ago. And who the hell knows when they'll actually ship it. I see these Freescale chips being used in PBs and iBs only.

[Wyrm]

This is an excellent point. I highly doubt they could squirrel away enough chips to release a new line of PowerMacs (970FX version), and they are trying too hard to make inroads with the Xserve for them to delayed production for some suprise release. If we are going to see a new lineup of G5 powered products (iMacs, PowerMacs or PowerBooks), I feel like our best hope is for some as yet announced 9XX chip that can run at faster speeds and/or at similar speeds with lower power consumption.

The great thing about fabs is, if you get your process down, you can fab the heck out of thing. Each wafer can hold over 500 fabbed 970s at the 130nm node (so even more at 90nm obviously), minus waste and defects, this is still probably a few hundred good ones. These are then verified and binned (heat/speed/whatever)

From an article in 2003:
"By year's end, IBM may be running 15,000 to 18,000 of the 300-mm wafers per month" (eetimes Article (http://www.eetimes.com/article/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=18308101&url_prefix=story&sub_taxonomyID=2251))

Ok, the 970 isn't the only thing they do there at Fishkill, and now they have 130/90/65 nodes in various stages, so assuming they get ok yields, the Fishkill fab can easily fill Apple's needs. So it's pretty binary: either they can make it, and make lots of it, or they can't.

According to Bernie, yes they had some problems at 90nm but IBM innovation has overcome that... so the XServe stuff might have been some of the early low-yield runs, and now they're now fabbing 970fx en masse at 90nm.

Who knows if they are fabbing something else (the mystical 97x etc, but knowing IBM, if it were different enough from the 970, I think we'd hear about it well in advance... of course Apple might be pressuring them to secrecy... hmmm... low probability there)

Whether the 970fx can hit 3Ghz remains to be seen.
I think, theoretically, it is possible, but that remains in the hands of the IBM and Apple engineers to back up Steve's statement.

If I were Steve, I'd be calling my Engineering team everyday saying "Am I going to eat my words? Come'on! Pull out some Apple magic!!! I want 3Ghz! Gimme 3Ghz!"... of course, from what I've heard, Steve might be breathing heavily over their shoulders ("Don't let me down guys... nobody let's Steve down... twice!") :eek:

-Wyrm

[spankalee]

Whether the 970fx can hit 3Ghz remains to be seen.
I think, theoretically, it is possible, but that remains in the hands of the IBM and Apple engineers to back up Steve's statement.

If I were Steve, I'd be calling my Engineering team everyday saying "Am I going to eat my words? Come'on! Pull out some Apple magic!!! I want 3Ghz! Gimme 3Ghz!"... of course, from what I've heard, Steve might be breathing heavily over their shoulders ("Don't let me down guys... nobody let's Steve down... twice!") :eek:

-Wyrm

It's not really in the hands of Apple engineers at all. It's pretty much all up to IBM. I think that Apple can probably cool anything IBM puts out. They're obviously taken air cooling to a new level with the PM G5 and there's been lots of rumors of Apple working on liquid cooling.

The two big questions for me are: what plans and information was Steve basing his 3.0Ghz promise on? Is the 970fx supposed to be the 3.0Ghz chip, or was it the 975/980 all along. The other question is whether or not the production problems IBM was having have been solved and put them right back on track, or if they're been "solved" and set them back, so that we might see say a 2.6Ghz G5 instead of the 3.0.

[Dont Hurt Me]

970 - not possible
970fx - possible but the supply is still constrained.

Xserves still show a 4-6 week delay which is better than the 5-7 week delay of the last two months, but still not that great. I say IBM is still having difficulties fabbing enough 970fxs to go around.

Of course, it's possible that Apple will release 970fx iMacs and not ship for 6 weeks during which time IBM will be able to ramp up production. But then, what the heck are they going to put into Power Macs?many seem to forget that Apple could just engineer a 970 Imac. 975 for powermac, 970 for imac ,sort of like G3 imac vs G4 powermac from a few years ago. 970s have been in production with no problems for a year!

[pjkelnhofer]

many seem to forget that Apple could just engineer a 970 Imac. 975 for powermac, 970 for imac ,sort of like G3 imac vs G4 powermac from a few years ago. 970s have been in production with no problems for a year!

No problems and no speed bumps. Also, there is still no conclusive evidence that the 975 even exists.

[Wyrm]

It's not really in the hands of Apple engineers at all. It's pretty much all up to IBM. I think that Apple can probably cool anything IBM puts out. They're obviously taken air cooling to a new level with the PM G5 and there's been lots of rumors of Apple working on liquid cooling.

The two big questions for me are: what plans and information was Steve basing his 3.0Ghz promise on? Is the 970fx supposed to be the 3.0Ghz chip, or was it the 975/980 all along. The other question is whether or not the production problems IBM was having have been solved and put them right back on track, or if they're been "solved" and set them back, so that we might see say a 2.6Ghz G5 instead of the 3.0.

Steve was probably basing the 3Ghz number on the marketa-ganda that IBM was feeding him at the time: ("3Ghz?!? Steve what do you take me for? Of course! E-A-S-Y by next year... we're making the conversion to the 90 node as we speak, and Bernie here is giving me the thumbs up... that is your thumb, right Bernie? Bernie?).

From Bernie's Prague talk it sounds like they HAD problems (past tense), but they have innovated around them (aka redesign). So we will probably only see a 970fx by WWDC. That gives them until the Winter to bring the 97x or the 980 or whatever notation the Power5 UL has.

-Wyrm

[segundo]

let me say it in an example. Say Ibm ships 1000 970fx processors per batch to Apple, and Apple uses 700 of them for use in the Xserve's, and holds back 300 for use in the powermac revisions, so they have a sufficient stock to meet the demand when announcing the macs with immediate availiability...

Would that be too far of a stretch? Because I bet they will be very eager to ship and announce products at the same date, and to avoid paper releases as much as they can...

Any thoughts on this?

I seriously doubt Apple would do this. Why? Accounting. I don't think it would be worthwhile for them to hold back revenue. They can't show a sale on the books until the systems ship. Therefore, wouldn't it be more likely that they would ship as many as they could as fast as they could?

However, I'll throw reason/caution to the wind and indulge you for a moment. Here's a nice rumor:

Apple has actually been manufactoring G5 iMac-like computers for 4 months. They could not hold up the production line so they had to use a large number of the available .90 G5's to keep the line going. This effectively lengthened the wait times for the G5 XServes. While it hurt overall revenue in the short term, Apple had to make this move so as to not shut down the G5-iMac factory and thus incur a larger financial burden. However, the supply problem will mean no new G5 PowerMacs at WWDC. The new PowerMacs will follow two to three months later as G5 supplies increase.

Okay, how's that for wild speculation? :D