Re: Re: G3+, G4
Originally posted by 3G4N
IIRC, the G3 was based, in part, on the ppc603, a streamlined approach, and not SMP-capable
(no dual-processor support).
The G4 was based more off the ppc604, which was dual-capable, and added the vector engine, altivec.
I bet IBM is working on a nice G3 just like they are working on a nice G5. Patience. I don't know if you'll ever get a G4, per se, in an iBook, but you will get much better processors. (like I'm saying a lot. : )
Ok, this has been beaten to death, but lets do it one more time...
The G3 was based on the 603. Simple.
The G4 is a moniker for over
half a dozen different chips. The MPC7400, 7410, 744x series (not used on Macs), and the 745x series (used in various Mac G4 models).
The MPC7400 & 7410 were based primarily on the G3. Added to the G3 design was a floating point unit that essentially came form the PPC604 and Altivec. Thus if you really want to split hairs, the G4 was based on the G3, the PPC603
and the PPC604 and added Altivec to the mix. But for simplicity, it can be said that the original G4s were basically G3+Altivec.
All other G4s (744x and 745x) are evolutions of the original design. The 7 stage pipeline, the enhanced altivec unit, and the on-die L2 cache are decided differences from the original G3 & G4. Therefore, it would be unfair to consider the current G4 as "just a G3+Altivec".
And yes, it is entirely possible that IBM could make a G3+ that includes Altivec. Will they? Who knows. What will Apple call it? Almost certainly they will call it a G4. To call it anything else would simply cause market confusion (which is why the PowerMacs are G5 and not any other of the dozens of suggestions people may have made). Customers don't care about model numbers, they just want a simple one line explaination as to why computer A is better than computer B. 5 > 4 > 3 keeps it simple.