Register FAQ/Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Welcome to the Mac Forums forums. Please read the FAQ if you have questions. Register to participate.

 
Go Back   Mac Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors' Page 2 News Discussion
TouchArcade.com - iPhone Game Reviews and News

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Oct 29, 2003, 04:52 PM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Apple, PPC 980, and Upcoming G5s

An unconfirmed report spelling out some interesting future possibilities about Apple and their PowerPC progress and development:

"Following the microprocessor forum, IBM presented Apple with a handful of PPC 980 alpha samples to begin work on the next generation Powermac due out in 9-12 months. Initial compiler tests showed specfp base 2000 of 1400 and specint of 1200 at 3Ghz. The PPC 980 will have double the L2 cache of the 970, and will still not have an L3 cache option, owing to the fact that the 980 will have a 1x, 2x, 3x, and 4x bus multiplier, which will allow an FSB to run at the chip clock speed if need be, but the plans are to stick to a 2x multiplier, which would mean a 1.5Ghz FSB. The reason why the 980 is appearing only 12 -16 months after the 970 is that Apple chose to engage in parallel development with the Power 5, rather than wait 12-18 months after the fact. The 980 samples that were given to Apple were 90nm chips, as opposed to 130nm chips for the PPC 970 and the Power 5.

For the G5, the next revision is well under way. The bugs on IBM's 90nm process have been squashed, and ramp up will begin within 6 weeks, with intention of having enough chips ready for the next revision G5's due in February. 2.5 - 2.8 Ghz is probably going to be the ceiling of the new revision Powermac G5's based on test yields obtained recently. If everything goes well, 2Ghz may drop out of the equation entirely, and 2.2 Ghz may become the low end, a jump of 500-600 Mhz this revision is realistic, and should be expected. As for the Powerbook G5, only a general timeline is given with a range from April 2004-September 2004 is given, the only obstacle being finding an appropriate cooling technology."
MacRumors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 04:56 PM   #2
x86isslow
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Send a message via AIM to x86isslow
good to hear! i personally wont be able to afford the 3Ghz, but hey, mebbe the 1.6Ghz will drop down to a comfy price
__________________
2009 Mac Mini: C2D 2.0Ghz, 4Gb RAM
RevC 12" PowerBook G4: 1.33Ghz, 1.25Gb RAM
2G iPod Touch 16 Gb
x86isslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 04:58 PM   #3
DTphonehome
macrumors 6502a
 
DTphonehome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: NYC
Yay!

Things are speeding up in Macland
DTphonehome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:05 PM   #4
x86isslow
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Send a message via AIM to x86isslow
and this should put an end to all the nonsense about the amd chips beating g5s.
__________________
2009 Mac Mini: C2D 2.0Ghz, 4Gb RAM
RevC 12" PowerBook G4: 1.33Ghz, 1.25Gb RAM
2G iPod Touch 16 Gb
x86isslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:07 PM   #5
1macker1
Banned
 
1macker1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: A Higher Level
"Next generation powermac" What product will this be. I'm gearing to buy a powerbook late December early Feburary. I dont want them to drop a newer PB right after I get one. I couild wait as long as 9 months if need be. Anyone care to guess what the next gen powermac will be?
1macker1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:18 PM   #6
dongmin
macrumors 68000
 
dongmin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Re: Apple, PPC 980, and Upcoming G5s

Quote:
For the G5, the next revision is well under way. The bugs on IBM's 90nm process have been squashed, and ramp up will begin within 6 weeks, with intention of having enough chips ready for the next revision G5's due in February. 2.5 - 2.8 Ghz is probably going to be the ceiling of the new revision Powermac G5's based on test yields obtained recently. If everything goes well, 2Ghz may drop out of the equation entirely, and 2.2 Ghz may become the low end, a jump of 500-600 Mhz this revision is realistic, and should be expected.
This is incredible, if true. Increase of 30-40% in only 4 months (from when they started shipping in early Oct.)!!! Now I'm glad I held off on the first round.

Could we see:
Fast: 2 ghz single
Faster: dual 2.4 ghz
Fastest: dual 2.8 ghz?

that would blow people away, as much as they were the first time around.
dongmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:27 PM   #7
ZildjianKX
Guest
 
ZildjianKX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Don't get your hopes up...

This would be a very different Apple trend, but it would be nice if comes true.
ZildjianKX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:34 PM   #8
Catfish_Man
macrumors 68020
 
Catfish_Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Send a message via AIM to Catfish_Man
2GHz 970 = 800/840
3GHz 980 = 1200/1400

change in clock frequency = 1.5
change in SPECint = 1.5
change in SPECfp = 1.666

overall: supralinear scaling with clock frequency (wouldn't be possible without other enhancements)

comments: Excellent, if it's true. Also, I doubt that significant changes have been made if it's being developed in parallel with the POWER5. It sounds as though they're just rushing it to .09 micron as quick as possible (doubling the cache with a process shrink is pretty easy. Other changes are harder). I would guess that the revision after this one would incorporate POWER5 changes.
Catfish_Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:36 PM   #9
Makosuke
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The Cool Part of CA, USA
These numbers sound so good I'm skeptical, but then again they're not out of the realm of possibility now that Apple's working with IBM.

I sure hope they're true (although I'll be bumming about my "measly" 2.0 if we see a dual 2.8s in Feburary).
Makosuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:40 PM   #10
1macker1
Banned
 
1macker1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: A Higher Level
Dual Processor Powerbooks!!!!! That's has to be next. The g5 chip isn't coming to the PB anytime soon.
1macker1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:41 PM   #11
x86isslow
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Send a message via AIM to x86isslow
i think if you re-read the article, it says that the next revision of the G5 is different from the 980, so i doubt speeds up to dual 2.8 by feb.
__________________
2009 Mac Mini: C2D 2.0Ghz, 4Gb RAM
RevC 12" PowerBook G4: 1.33Ghz, 1.25Gb RAM
2G iPod Touch 16 Gb
x86isslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:42 PM   #12
T.Rex
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, ON
Quote:
Originally posted by x86isslow
and this should put an end to all the nonsense about the amd chips beating g5s.
It is hardly nonsense; while the G5's put Apple back in the game, it was hardly the knockout punch that we were led to believe. Right now, if I were in need of the absolute fastest machine for a workstation, there would be an AMD chip inside - be it the Athlon64-fx or more likely, an Opteron.

And I don't care what anyone says, such a computer would be cheaper, too.
T.Rex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:43 PM   #13
mvc
macrumors 6502a
 
mvc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Outer-Roa
Bring it on y'all

Man, I'd be happy just if the dual 2Ghz became the mid range machine - cos then I could maybe afford it come february.

Isn't it refreshing to even consider a 500 mhz speed increase as being plausible. Seems we were stuck around the magic 1.2 - 1.4GHz for so long, now it looks like we may actually see our raw processor speed double in a year.

Moores law lives, at least in Mac land!
__________________
If Apple really wanted to secure their OS to their own hardware, they might have tried something stronger than limmericks
mvc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:47 PM   #14
Genie
macrumors 6502a
 
Genie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: heaven
Seems plausible, but you never know. I'm happy with the one I have now.
__________________
Free songs for your love ... G5 pics ... GEAR CLOSET.
Genie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 05:54 PM   #15
mvc
macrumors 6502a
 
mvc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Outer-Roa
Quote:
Originally posted by T.Rex
It is hardly nonsense; while the G5's put Apple back in the game, it was hardly the knockout punch that we were led to believe.…
Hey T.Rex, stop talking like a dinosaur.
The G5 was a mass extinction event for most of the Mac Haters out there.
Evolve or Die!
__________________
If Apple really wanted to secure their OS to their own hardware, they might have tried something stronger than limmericks
mvc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 06:00 PM   #16
Steven1621
macrumors 6502a
 
Steven1621's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Connecticut (Ankara, Turkey for the next year)
let the new rumors commence!!!!!!
Steven1621 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 06:06 PM   #17
mvc
macrumors 6502a
 
mvc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Outer-Roa
Quote:
Originally posted by Steven1621
let the new rumors commence!!!!!!
Absolutely, it's been nothing but hard facts on this board for days now. Where have all the dubious rumours gone?

We need more grist for the speculative mill and the pointless G5 powerbook flame wars!

I blame Apple, how can a poor rumour site survive when they keep actually launching new hardware, software and services at this current rate!
__________________
If Apple really wanted to secure their OS to their own hardware, they might have tried something stronger than limmericks
mvc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 06:14 PM   #18
arn
macrumors god
 
arn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Send a message via AIM to arn
Take with usual skepticism for unconfirmed rumors.

arn
arn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 06:21 PM   #19
tpjunkie
macrumors 65816
 
tpjunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Where the streets have Dutch names
Send a message via AIM to tpjunkie
even so....

*drool*

A FSB that could run at processor speed? As Keanu Reeves would say, "Whoa."
__________________
Happy Festivus; You're a disappointment
tpjunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 06:25 PM   #20
Oirectine
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Wuxi, China
Send a message via AIM to Oirectine
Quote:
Originally posted by mvc
Hey T.Rex, stop talking like a dinosaur.
The G5 was a mass extinction event for most of the Mac Haters out there.
Evolve or Die!

That was so clever it made me want to vomit.

Good job
Oirectine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 06:29 PM   #21
manu chao
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Quote:
Originally posted by 1macker1
Dual Processor Powerbooks!!!!! That's has to be next. The g5 chip isn't coming to the PB anytime soon.
I'll be the first one to buy one when they come out. The only time when I really need more power is when, I'm doing several things in parallel. Installing a new security patch for Windows in VPC, listening to music, and editing a document in Illustrator, and my 1Ghz Powerbook slows to a crawl.
manu chao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 06:38 PM   #22
Freg3000
macrumors 68000
 
Freg3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York
Happy, happy, joy, joy!

This is wonderful. Big Blue = Big Speeds.
__________________
FregTK
This Is Momentum.
Freg3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 06:44 PM   #23
NNO-Stephen
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
Send a message via AIM to NNO-Stephen Send a message via MSN to NNO-Stephen Send a message via Yahoo to NNO-Stephen Send a message via Skype™ to NNO-Stephen
oohhh, how nice. dual processor PowerBooks aren't gonna happen though. would require too much space and would be even hotter. I do think we could see a 2.0Ghz or so PowerBook G5 though with a die shrink to 90nm. they would have to have some sort of liquid cooling system though, which IBM already has in some Think Pads. IBM for processors, as well as the cooling technology, why not? makes perfect sense. but man, a dual 2.8Ghz G5 by February! good greif. sign me up for that one
__________________
~Stephen~
My GamerCard
NNO-Stephen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 06:45 PM   #24
wrylachlan
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Quote:
Originally posted by Catfish_Man
2GHz 970 = 800/840
3GHz 980 = 1200/1400

change in clock frequency = 1.5
change in SPECint = 1.5
change in SPECfp = 1.666

overall: supralinear scaling with clock frequency (wouldn't be possible without other enhancements)

comments: Excellent, if it's true. Also, I doubt that significant changes have been made if it's being developed in parallel with the POWER5. It sounds as though they're just rushing it to .09 micron as quick as possible (doubling the cache with a process shrink is pretty easy. Other changes are harder). I would guess that the revision after this one would incorporate POWER5 changes.
This seems fishy in that its kind of underwhelming. Not the overall speed increase, but the spec scores per clock. If the 980 is based on the Power5 then there should be a more significant per clock increase in spec scores as the Power5 is a significant increase on the Power4 which the 970 is based on. And the original article implies that the 980 is using the Power5 as a base just working in parallel development instead of waiting for the Power5 to be finished...
wrylachlan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 06:51 PM   #25
Frobozz
macrumors 6502a
 
Frobozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Sounds good.

This all sounds plausible. I have a Quicksilver DP 1 Ghz machine and it feels snappier than when I bought it, thanks in part to Panther. I figured that my next machine would be a Dual 3.0 Ghz G5, and it looks like next June will be the timeframe. Perfect... right after I get married... no more wedding expenses. :-)

Apple could hardly be doing anything better these days. I really have to give it to them: it seems like their CPU problems are *finally* resolved. I would like to see the PB G5, or a snappier PB G4, however.
__________________
Mac: MacBook Pro 15" 2.16 / 100GB 7200HD / 2GB
Win: Intel 975XBX / e6700 @ 3.1GHz / 2 ATI x1900xt CF / DDR2 800
"My first Mac was an Amiga." -- Me
Frobozz is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Mac Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors' Page 2 News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:46 PM.

Mac News | Mac Rumors | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002-2009, MacRumors.com, LLC