PowerMac G5 Cooling/Sensor Issues?

MacRumors · Apr 12, 2004, 05:40 PM

Appleinsider points to sensor issues causing delays in the PowerMac G5 updates.

According to a "reliable" Appleinsider source, "Apple was recently forced to completely rework the internal temperature sensors inside the current G5 case design to accommodate the new 90 nanometer G5 processors."

The information is somewhat consistent with early rumors of cooling issues with the new PowerMac revisions.

swissmann · Apr 12, 2004, 05:42 PM

If the current case can cool the old chips why couldn't it cool the newer and cooler chips? Or don't I understand something?

five04 · Apr 12, 2004, 05:44 PM

this might be the problem, but hasn't apple had a while to deal with issues like this?

Gherkin · Apr 12, 2004, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swissmann

If the current case can cool the old chips why couldn't it cool the newer and cooler chips? Or don't I understand something?

The article said the chips WERE cool, but the sensors were misreading the temperature and thus made the fans go wild. Supposedely that's fixed now, but there are just supply issues at this point.

g30ffr3y · Apr 12, 2004, 05:50 PM

if this is true and apple has been holding back Rev. B's which probably wouldve been up to 2.4gig processors will they release what "wouldve been" between the dual 2's and the 3's [dual's or single's] or just skip ahead to what probably wouldve been Rev. C three gig'ers...???

doesnt seem like the summer is shaping up the way steve-o had hoped...

long live the apple digital music corp...

Soire · Apr 12, 2004, 05:51 PM

The real question is why should we believe this or care? Either they're coming out soon, or they're not.

And I agree that this sounds strange given that the new chips are supposed to run much cooler. The only explanation would be a case reworking which has lead to a heat up inside. But hey- as long as they come out soon I couldn't care less if they had to use ultra-poisonous freon to cool them.

thogs_cave · Apr 12, 2004, 05:51 PM

I wonder if this ties in at all to the drive bay cooling issues as well. I know that 10.3.3 has made a decided difference in my G5 DP (2x160G), but that the essential design had a bit of a flaw.

Just musing.

siliconjones · Apr 12, 2004, 05:51 PM

Why is this a problem? If the g5 case in its current configuration runs fine cooling the 130 nm chips, why are the smaller 90 nm chips which are supposed to be cooler a problem? Actually did they ever say anything about being cooler or did they simply say require less power?

Mr.Hey · Apr 12, 2004, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swissmann

If the current case can cool the old chips why couldn't it cool the newer and cooler chips? Or don't I understand something?

It has to do with the sensor and not the issue of cooling; it could be that since the new chips aren't as hot, the current temp sensor are relatively useless.

numediaman · Apr 12, 2004, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by siliconjones

Why is this a problem? If the g5 case in its current configuration runs fine cooling the 130 nm chips, why are the smaller 90 nm chips which are supposed to be cooler a problem? Actually did they ever say anything about being cooler or did they simply say require less power?

You guys need to read the article. It is not a heat issue, it is a sensor issue. The new chip sits differently and gives out the same amount of heat, but sensor was forcing the machine to shut down. It's a minor issue that the article claims is fixed now.

The real news, though, is that IBM is not able to produce chips faster than 2.0 -- according to AppleInsider. It's not that they can't get to 3.0, they can't get to 2.8, 2.6, 2.4, or 2.2!

bennetsaysargh · Apr 12, 2004, 05:58 PM

maybe since the newer chips are smaller, they couldn't use the same sensors because of the size difference? it could either be making the fans not going on enough, or too much.

klaus · Apr 12, 2004, 05:58 PM

The article says it's the sensors that screw things up, the temp of the processor itself is fine! you guys need to read the source article a bit better before saying something..

If they can't yield the processor consistently, that means no consistant supplies of processors, and if that's not the case, than Apple can't release the products, cause of the possibility of another delay between ordering and shipping. And they had that same problem with the Xserve, so I bet they don't want this to happen to the PowerMac too.

If this story is true, than the question is, what are they going to do with this revision. I suspect they already have put a lot of work into this one, and to just throw this one away, and go to the rev C (3ghz) that would be a rather drastic measure... But the article says nothing about pending releases or releases at wwdc, or whatever..

MacFan25 · Apr 12, 2004, 06:00 PM

Well, this seems like a good explanation as to why we have seen some delays. Hopefully this issue will be resolved soon, if it hasn't already been, and we'll see the updates in a timely fashion.

But, I certainly don't like the sound of this in the article:

Quote:

though sources say that low processor supplies may have acted to compounded the delays.

So hopefully IBM can keep up with the demand...

goof_ball · 06:06 PM

This doesn't make that much sense....lets say the fans ran at speeds made for the 130nm chips...big deal...they'd be running faster than they'd need to, but the same as rev A models. This of course assumes the 90nm chips are cooler.

If this rumor is true, I think its good news in terms of G5 progress. That means that once they get the fans issue resolved, we'll hopefully see a few series of updates in the next little while.

oops.....whats this about Ibm falling behind?

Macmaniac · Apr 12, 2004, 06:00 PM

The alarming news in the article is the fact that they are having problems achieving speeds even close to 2 ghz, if this is true what a step back!!

CrackedButter · Apr 12, 2004, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by numediaman

You guys need to read the article. It is not a heat issue, it is a sensor issue. The new chip sits differently and gives out the same amount of heat, but sensor was forcing the machine to shut down. It's a minor issue that the article claims is fixed now.

The real news, though, is that IBM is not able to produce chips faster than 2.0 -- according to AppleInsider. It's not that they can't get to 3.0, they can't get to 2.8, 2.6, 2.4, or 2.2!

I'm sure they could if they overclocked either the 130nm ones? Why was production on these stopped, couldn't they run both types of processors at the same time to allow for scalability and a fallback, what if the older ones could go faster than 2Ghz? They did it with G4's.

Dont Hurt Me · Apr 12, 2004, 06:06 PM

What everyone seems to be missing from this article is IBM is having problems above 2.0. please remember the Xserve fiasco and the fact that it was advertised for a moment at 2.3 then changed to 2.0 Sounds like IBM may have problems on the 90nm process but i would guess the controler. were they not going to integrate that into the chip instead of on the motherboard like 970s? anyways since Apple uses the HORRIBLE tier structure for its line up. If Powermac isnt going faster then they cant release a Imac G5 and if they cant release a Imac G5 then they cant update Emac. I wonder how many Apple executives along with Steve Job can fit into a VW bug? cause they are looking like a bunch clowns to me.

klaus · Apr 12, 2004, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dont Hurt Me

What everyone seems to be missing from this article is IBM is having problems above 2.0. please remember the Xserve fiasco and the fact that it was advertised for a moment at 2.3 then changed to 2.0 Sounds like IBM may have problems on the 90nm process but i would guess the controler. were they not going to integrate that into the chip instead of on the motherboard like 970s? anyways since Apple uses the HORRIBLE tier structure for its line up. If Powermac isnt going faster then they cant release a Imac G5 and if they cant release a Imac G5 then they cant update Emac. I wonder how many Apple executives along with Steve Job can fit into a VW bug? cause they are looking like a bunch clowns to me.

DHM, you always seem to find a way to blame these things on apple execs, you said it yourself, it's IBM that's having problems, damn dude, get yourself together, and stop bitching already, it's getting annoying to read all these same posts from you.. and i'm sure i'm not the only one

now back on topic

Windowlicker · Apr 12, 2004, 06:10 PM

finally we get even possible answers concerning the delay. this doesn't really affect my life in any way since i'm not buying a desktop for quite a while. anyway it would be nice if they actually reached the 3ghz by july so that steve wouldn't have been overhyping this like he pretty much is used to. (uh oh, quite a long sentence

Koodauw · Apr 12, 2004, 06:12 PM

Could this have anythinng to do with the Fan Control Update that Apple released for the G5's about a month ago?

Dont Hurt Me · Apr 12, 2004, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by klaus

DHM, you always seem to find a way to blame these things on apple execs, you said it yourself, it's IBM that's having problems, damn dude, get yourself together, and stop bitching already, it's getting annoying to read all these same posts from you.. and i'm sure i'm not the only one

now back on topic

Please stay on topic address the thread, your post has 0 to do with the thread and it is the executives fault for such a poor tier structure. 1 Product holding up the whole line up for 3/4 of a year? inexcusable.

SFNE Freak · Apr 12, 2004, 06:16 PM

And why are we still posting rumors from AppleInsider?

swissmann · Apr 12, 2004, 06:17 PM

Thanks for straightening me out that it is a sensor thing and not a heat thing. I still ask why is this a problem. As others have stated shouldn't Apple have this worked out by now. Time is quickly running out for an incremental upgrade if it hasn't run out already. Maybe the jump straight to 3 is what is going to happen. I am sure Steve would hate to have to say, I know that we promised 3 but... suppliers missed, uh ... heat problems ... uh 9 fans now ... uh. So much is behind controlling all those fans (my G5 is way quieter than my G4s luckily) but I am wondering if liquid cooling would simplify things and improve things? My bet for the future. WWDC we see Dual 3 GHz G5 with liquid cooling.

klaus · Apr 12, 2004, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dont Hurt Me

1 Product holding up the whole line up for 3/4 of a year? inexcusable.

How can you be sure that's the case? It's just an assumption, as all of these news/rumor posts are...

TyleRomeo · Apr 12, 2004, 06:18 PM

I really wonder what Steve is going to say at the WWDC 2004. He openly made a promise that we would see 3GHZ G5s in 12 months. That really gives him until september to deliver since the dual 2GHZ didn't ship until then. So he better announce dual 3GHZ G5s on june 28th and let us know that they will ship in 2-3 months. He already seems to have failed on his 100million ITMS promise, that I don't mind, but give us dual 3GHZ g5 this summer, please.

Tyler

Apr 12, 2004, 05:40 PM	#1
MacRumors macrumors bot Join Date: Apr 2001	PowerMac G5 Cooling/Sensor Issues? Appleinsider points to sensor issues causing delays in the PowerMac G5 updates. According to a "reliable" Appleinsider source, "Apple was recently forced to completely rework the internal temperature sensors inside the current G5 case design to accommodate the new 90 nanometer G5 processors." The information is somewhat consistent with early rumors of cooling issues with the new PowerMac revisions.

Apr 12, 2004, 05:42 PM	#2
swissmann macrumors 6502a Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Utah Alps	If the current case can cool the old chips why couldn't it cool the newer and cooler chips? Or don't I understand something? __________________ Always looking for a faster Mac.

Apr 12, 2004, 05:50 PM	#5
g30ffr3y macrumors 6502a Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: buffalo ny	if this is true and apple has been holding back Rev. B's which probably wouldve been up to 2.4gig processors will they release what "wouldve been" between the dual 2's and the 3's [dual's or single's] or just skip ahead to what probably wouldve been Rev. C three gig'ers...??? doesnt seem like the summer is shaping up the way steve-o had hoped... long live the apple digital music corp... __________________ 933 quicksilver gig ram gig tibook gig ram 01.29.04 begin 01.29.07 engage 05.17.08 forever

Apr 12, 2004, 05:51 PM	#7
thogs_cave macrumors regular Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: State of Confusion	Hmmm... This may tie into older problems. I wonder if this ties in at all to the drive bay cooling issues as well. I know that 10.3.3 has made a decided difference in my G5 DP (2x160G), but that the essential design had a bit of a flaw. Just musing. __________________ Mac user for 25 years and counting. "It's easier to try than prove it can't be done." -Moody Blues

Apr 12, 2004, 05:51 PM	#8
siliconjones macrumors member Join Date: Feb 2004	As swissman already said. Why is this a problem? If the g5 case in its current configuration runs fine cooling the 130 nm chips, why are the smaller 90 nm chips which are supposed to be cooler a problem? Actually did they ever say anything about being cooler or did they simply say require less power?

Apr 12, 2004, 05:44 PM	#3
five04 macrumors member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Charlotte, North Carolina	this might be the problem, but hasn't apple had a while to deal with issues like this?

Apr 12, 2004, 05:51 PM	#6
Soire macrumors regular Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Garden State	The real question is why should we believe this or care? Either they're coming out soon, or they're not. And I agree that this sounds strange given that the new chips are supposed to run much cooler. The only explanation would be a case reworking which has lead to a heat up inside. But hey- as long as they come out soon I couldn't care less if they had to use ultra-poisonous freon to cool them.

Apr 12, 2004, 05:58 PM	#11
bennetsaysargh macrumors 68020 Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: New York	maybe since the newer chips are smaller, they couldn't use the same sensors because of the size difference? it could either be making the fans not going on enough, or too much.

Apr 12, 2004, 05:58 PM	#12
klaus macrumors 6502a Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Belgium	The article says it's the sensors that screw things up, the temp of the processor itself is fine! you guys need to read the source article a bit better before saying something.. If they can't yield the processor consistently, that means no consistant supplies of processors, and if that's not the case, than Apple can't release the products, cause of the possibility of another delay between ordering and shipping. And they had that same problem with the Xserve, so I bet they don't want this to happen to the PowerMac too. If this story is true, than the question is, what are they going to do with this revision. I suspect they already have put a lot of work into this one, and to just throw this one away, and go to the rev C (3ghz) that would be a rather drastic measure... But the article says nothing about pending releases or releases at wwdc, or whatever..

Apr 12, 2004, 06:00 PM	#14
goof_ball macrumors member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Canada	This doesn't make that much sense....lets say the fans ran at speeds made for the 130nm chips...big deal...they'd be running faster than they'd need to, but the same as rev A models. This of course assumes the 90nm chips are cooler. If this rumor is true, I think its good news in terms of G5 progress. That means that once they get the fans issue resolved, we'll hopefully see a few series of updates in the next little while. oops.....whats this about Ibm falling behind? Last edited by goof_ball : Apr 12, 2004 at 06:06 PM.

Apr 12, 2004, 06:00 PM	#15
Macmaniac macrumors 68040 Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: A tiny spec in the "Garden State", 1 square mile in area, somewhere on the outskirts of town by the railroad tracks	The alarming news in the article is the fact that they are having problems achieving speeds even close to 2 ghz, if this is true what a step back!! __________________ The customer is NOT always right

Apr 12, 2004, 06:06 PM	#17
Dont Hurt Me macrumors 601 Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Yahooville S.C.	What everyone seems to be missing from this article is IBM is having problems above 2.0. please remember the Xserve fiasco and the fact that it was advertised for a moment at 2.3 then changed to 2.0 Sounds like IBM may have problems on the 90nm process but i would guess the controler. were they not going to integrate that into the chip instead of on the motherboard like 970s? anyways since Apple uses the HORRIBLE tier structure for its line up. If Powermac isnt going faster then they cant release a Imac G5 and if they cant release a Imac G5 then they cant update Emac. I wonder how many Apple executives along with Steve Job can fit into a VW bug? cause they are looking like a bunch clowns to me. __________________ Those that give up Liberty to have temporary Security deserve Neither......Benjamin Franklin.

Apr 12, 2004, 06:10 PM	#19
Windowlicker macrumors 6502a Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Finland	finally we get even possible answers concerning the delay. this doesn't really affect my life in any way since i'm not buying a desktop for quite a while. anyway it would be nice if they actually reached the 3ghz by july so that steve wouldn't have been overhyping this like he pretty much is used to. (uh oh, quite a long sentence __________________ I was elected to lead, not to read.

Apr 12, 2004, 06:12 PM	#20
Koodauw macrumors 68030 Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison	Could this have anythinng to do with the Fan Control Update that Apple released for the G5's about a month ago?

Apr 12, 2004, 06:16 PM	#22
SFNE Freak macrumors member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: CT	And why are we still posting rumors from AppleInsider?

Apr 12, 2004, 06:17 PM	#23
swissmann macrumors 6502a Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Utah Alps	Thanks for straightening me out that it is a sensor thing and not a heat thing. I still ask why is this a problem. As others have stated shouldn't Apple have this worked out by now. Time is quickly running out for an incremental upgrade if it hasn't run out already. Maybe the jump straight to 3 is what is going to happen. I am sure Steve would hate to have to say, I know that we promised 3 but... suppliers missed, uh ... heat problems ... uh 9 fans now ... uh. So much is behind controlling all those fans (my G5 is way quieter than my G4s luckily) but I am wondering if liquid cooling would simplify things and improve things? My bet for the future. WWDC we see Dual 3 GHz G5 with liquid cooling. __________________ Always looking for a faster Mac.

Apr 12, 2004, 06:18 PM	#25
TyleRomeo macrumors 6502a Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: New York	I really wonder what Steve is going to say at the WWDC 2004. He openly made a promise that we would see 3GHZ G5s in 12 months. That really gives him until september to deliver since the dual 2GHZ didn't ship until then. So he better announce dual 3GHZ G5s on june 28th and let us know that they will ship in 2-3 months. He already seems to have failed on his 100million ITMS promise, that I don't mind, but give us dual 3GHZ g5 this summer, please. Tyler __________________ Mac Pro (Early 2008) Dual 2.8GHZ Quad 2GB RAM NVIDIA 8800GT 512MB Dual 1.25 GHz PowerMac G4; 1.91TB; 2GB RAM ATI 9700 Pro 128MB; Airport

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode