View Full Version : 3GHz PowerPC G5 Eludes IBM

Jun 25, 2004, 11:04 PM
Category: 3rd Party Hardware
Link: 3GHz PowerPC G5 Eludes IBM (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20040626000405)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)

Approved by Mudbug

Jun 26, 2004, 02:24 AM
got $3000 ready to burn.. as soon as one of the puppies are ready to roll...

hmm.. or should I wait for rev B?

cool first post! :p

Little Endian
Jun 26, 2004, 09:22 AM
Very interesting to note that the article points out that IBM's primary Problem is with Yields at Higher Clock speeds. I also believe it is not so much as a heat issue in the New 2.5Ghz G5 that made Apple include liquid Cooling. If anything the reason we are at 2.5Ghz is a yield problem and not a heat one or at least at this point. I believe that Apple implemented the Liquid Cooling @ 2.5Ghz primarily for noise concerns and for looking ahead when 3Ghz+ chips may actually need liquid cooling. The liquid Cooling is a nice way of reducing noise and will serve as a testbed when it becomes a neseccity. For all we know IBM may actually be producing 3Ghz 970FX chips right now but the yield are most likely too low for Apple to use. I am quite confident that we will see 3Ghz Power Macs on or before MacWorld 2005 Jan 10th.

King Cobra
Jun 26, 2004, 10:30 AM
got $3000 ready to burn.. as soon as one of the puppies are ready to roll...

cool first post! :p
Enough... :mad:

I'd still like to hear something like "We have 3GHz machines in the works, and we will be shipping them later this year..." As already mentioned, IBM has them, but they're not available in great quantities. So some better liquid cooling, maybe a few more fans, another couple of months, and Apple should be ready to give the signal to release them into the public.

Also, just how many more "3GHz" articles are we going to see for the rest of the month? To me, it seems like old news that's brought back at us again and again, saying "We couldn't do it." That's kinda depressing. What happens after WWDC if nobody still gets what they want? Will we have to encounter ten more articles saying "We still couldn't do it"?