Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

G5'S anyone?

M

Mac2006

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Now that apple has released the 1.25 G4'S how much longer do yall think tell apple releas's a G5.
im not exactly sure what makes a G4 a G4 a G3 a G3 and what will make the G5 a G5.... anyone want to help clarify that for me thanks...
 
the Gx represnts the generation of processor since apple switched to PowerPC. The G4 is the fourth generation of PowerPC chip, the G5 the fifth generation, etc., etc. However, the Gx names are really just marketing names for Apple, G4 sounds a lot better than PowerPC 74xx, in terms of my limited marketing studies. You know?
 
Sorta like the Pentium to the PII to the PIII to the PIV, In Apple's case, it's the G3 (IBM) to the G4 (Motorola) to the G5 (IBM?)
In any case, it's usually an upgraded version of the last one although it may be a slightly different architecture.
 
the next generation of processor. like, you hads the 601, 603, then the 750, then the 74xx. each one of those was a different generation of processor, each represented a sigfigant change from the last, that it needed to be differentiated from the last. also, think of pentuim - pentium II - Pentium III - pentium IV. each processor has a differnt name because each one is so different from the last, that it is said to be in a newer generation of processor.

edit: edvniow, i didn't tka ehtat fro you i/m just a slow typer🙂
 
Originally posted by crazy_will
the next generation of processor. like, you hads the 601, 603, then the 750, then the 74xx. each one of those was a different generation of processor, each represented a sigfigant change from the last, that it needed to be differentiated from the last. also, think of pentuim - pentium II - Pentium III - pentium IV. each processor has a differnt name because each one is so different from the last, that it is said to be in a newer generation of processor.


Except that the Pentium 3 was something of a marketing scam in that respect, it was a Pentium 2 with SSE tech bolted on, though I guess you could sum up the differences between the G3 and G4 as Altivec, SMP and L3 (only one of which I'd say constitutes a generational difference in the slightest, and that's Altivec)
 
In my simplistic thinking:

G3 is basic PPC with backside L2 cache.

G4 is a G3 with AltiVec and multi processor capable.

G5 is a 64 bit G4.

It makes sense to me, but someone can likely find holes in this.
 
Or for a more accurate description: A G3 is a G3 if Apple says, and a G4 is a G4 if Apple says. Its true PowerMacs have G4s with L3 caches, but G4 imacs do NOT have an L3 cache. There have also been more than one G3 processor, and more than one G4. The original G3 was made by Motorolla, whereas the new G3s are a totally different chip made by IBM. Furthermore, whereas i think all G4s have been made by Motorolla, the chip used in the G4s is what Motorolla called the G5 during its development. Theres no way to REALLY predict what kind of specs the G5 will have... Hopefully it will be the 64bit IBM Power4 chip that has multiple cores on each unit, but that might be too optomistic until we get more information.
 
Originally posted by snoopy
In my simplistic thinking:

G3 is basic PPC with backside L2 cache.

G4 is a G3 with AltiVec and multi processor capable.

G5 is a 64 bit G4.

It makes sense to me, but someone can likely find holes in this.
Click to expand...

you're right about the 'simplistic' part, but you are on the right track though
 
It was my impression that Motorola holds the primary license to the 6xx, 7xx, 7xxx, 8xxx, etcxxx. architecture and IBM is delayed in bringing their products to market for this reason (the delay usually results in cooler running more reliable versions of the processors). Thus the lame Moto has been holding things up across the board. It seems that the IBM Power64 is not of this licensed architecture, thus it may be IBM' first chance to bypass Moto.
 
Originally posted by snoopy
In my simplistic thinking:

G3 is basic PPC with backside L2 cache.

G4 is a G3 with AltiVec and multi processor capable.

G5 is a 64 bit G4.

It makes sense to me, but someone can likely find holes in this.
Click to expand...

The G3 (750) is basically a 603, which was economical and slow with, as you said, the backside L2 cache added on. The cache was meant to work at full speed, but never made it until it was on-chip.

The G4 (7400) is a 750 with 604e parts + AltiVec. The multi-processing abilities came from the very capable 604e. Unfortunately, the floating-point units on the 604e were big and wouldn't fit alongside the AltiVec unit so both floating-point and AltiVec were designed by compromise. I.e. slow standard floating-point and single precision vector floating-point only.

The G5 is anything that you can imagine. It's been changed so many times to fit whatever people wanted that 64-bit and AltiVec are the only bits that seem to remain.

Remember that there was already the 620, a 64-bit server-type processor which came out very early--1996 or 1997. It went nowhere on its own and was taken by IBM's AS/400 hardware development and re-designed slightly to become the PowerPC AS and was successful in expensive machines.
 
Originally posted by Site 5560
It was my impression that Motorola holds the primary license to the 6xx, 7xx, 7xxx, 8xxx, etcxxx. architecture and IBM is delayed in bringing their products to market for this reason (the delay usually results in cooler running more reliable versions of the processors). Thus the lame Moto has been holding things up across the board. It seems that the IBM Power64 is not of this licensed architecture, thus it may be IBM' first chance to bypass Moto.
Click to expand...

The PPC architecture was developed jointly by IBM, Motorola and Apple, with contributions likely in that order. I hear it is base on the IBM Power2, and uses that instruction set essentially. Motorola holds rights to how they implement the processors they build. So IBM cannot copy them, but can layout their own chip design and fabrication based on the architecture. IBM has been doing that all along, but a few years ago they were not interested in a vector processor engine, or SIMD as it is called, single instruction multiple data.

It appears that IBM has gotten interested in SIMD now with their new 64 bit chip. My guess is that Apple went to IBM a couple years ago and got the ball rolling on a G5, likely when Apple figured out that Motorola would never get around to it for desktop computers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back