Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5?

Discussion in 'Hardware Rumors' started by MacManiac1224, Sep 13, 2002.

  1. MacManiac1224 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2001
    Location:
    NY
    #1
    Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5? You are probably scratching your heads on this one. Yep, the Pentium 5 is very real, and it is coming soon. 2nd quarter of 2003, the Pentium 5 debuting at 3.2GHZ is going to come out. It will have 100 million transistors on it and it will be manufactured at .09 microns. Also, here is the doozy, it will have 1 mb of L2 on die cache, and it will support 333mhz bus speeds, with the addition of DDR, that is a possible 667mhz bus speeds. By the way, if you were wondering, the Pentium 4 has 42 million transistors.

    Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.

    Let's be honest, the P4 basically can beat the G4 in most tasks today, so a new faster version of the P4, the P5 can easily beat the G4, most likely in 95-99% of all tasks.

    Ok, we have established that the G4 is, well, to slow against the P5, even though we don't know about it yet, I imagine it will be. Well, Apple just pulled the plug on OS 9 for January, what could this mean? I am not sure, only Steve knows. But Apple better come out with something that can at least compete with the Pentium 5, and it better come soon. I would not be surprised if Apple comes out with the G5 in January, just to say they were the first to have a generation 5 possessor, but I could be wrong.

    Ok, I made my case, now, what do you guys think? By the way: I got this information about the Pentium 5 from eWeek, so it is reputable.
     
  2. Mr. Anderson Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #2
    you got the link, I'd like to read more. Regardless of what happens with the Wintel world, Apple needs to do something about getting faster processors, period.

    Blah!

    D
     
  3. MacManiac1224 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2001
    Location:
    NY
    #3
    eweek

    eweek is a magazine for enterprise customers, there is no link i can provide, but you can take my word for it.
     
  4. vniow macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    I accidentally my whole location.
    #4
    Well...

    This has nothing to do with Macs, or it might depending on which rumors you believe, but AMD's Clawhammer is coming out in the first quarter of 2003 and will likely be marketed as a 3400+ which would be higher than the PV at 3.2 Ghz. However, unless this chip gets used in the next Powermac revision (not likely, I know, but possible) then IBM better get that almost-too-good-to-be-true-Power4-mini-me out fast. I'm going to wait until October to see IBM's roadmap for any further speculation though. :)

    click or I'll hammer you
     
  5. big macrumors 65816

    big

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    #5
    can we jump ship already? would this effectively turn apple into a microsoft like corp?

    in any instance, they certainly are doing well, apple just can not seem to beat this speed thing.

    anyone remember an article about the difference between risk & sisk processors? It talked about windows boxes the windows processors doing just what they are no...getting enough speed to keep going, but will be limited in pushing ghz further than they really are now (ie, they could never get to 8-10 ghz with them)
     
  6. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #6
    truth is pentium 1 is a 5th generation processor
    pentium pro thru pentium III is 6th generation
    athlon from amd is 7th generation...the first 7th generation chip

    and pentium 5 would be considered at least 7th generation and perhaps 8th generation pc processor

    but no way can any G4 beat a pentium 5 at over 3 ghz...but then again, but 2nd quarter 2003, we may hve the G5 which can beat pentium 4 but maybe not pentium 5, but that is all speculation into the future

    who really cares, after 3 ghz, if pc is faster or macs are faster...point is, both will be fast enough for vast majority of users
     
  7. MacCoaster macrumors 6502a

    MacCoaster

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Location:
    Washington, DC / Rochester, NY / Lexington, NC
    #7
    All correct. Make note, though, the desktop Hammer, which is supposed to be called the 8th generation Athlon, is obviously as stated, 8th generation.
     
  8. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #8
    that sounds cool and a decent processor to replace my old amd k6-2 running laptop...8th gen laptop is what i would want but i will wait it out like i do with all gear until it is reasonable to buy

    remember when first pentium 3 1 ghz machines came out...3 grand...way too much for mid 2000?

    not long after, prices practically crashed:p
     
  9. tjwett macrumors 68000

    tjwett

    Joined:
    May 6, 2002
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NYC
    #9
    guys, don't sweat it. by 2nd quarter of 2003 we will cruising along on 1.4 and 1.6 ghz overclocked G4s. oh man...
     
  10. big macrumors 65816

    big

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    #10
    >guys, don't sweat it. by 2nd quarter of 2003 we will cruising along on 1.4 and 1.6 ghz overclocked G4s. oh man

    <sarcasm>oh yeah</sarcasm>, that'll be consolation, though our bus speed will be @ 133mhz for the next 5 years
     
  11. Jeffx342 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Location:
    North Andover
    #11
    I know Steve has some kind of plane to take on the Pentium world hes a smart guy especially if he got this far.




    I have 2 Pc's yes still no mac....

    Comp 1: P3 700Mhz w/ 256mgs, Geforce 2

    Comp 2: p4 2.4 Ghz w/ 512mgs, Geforce 3

    Let me tell you I was so excited about the "new Pentium 4 Processor" when it came out. To tell you the truth there is not a whole lot difference between Pentium 3 700Mhz, and Pentium 4 2.4Ghz. I was actually dispointed because everybody made such a big deal about it. The Mhz numbers looked nice on p4 but I waisted my money!
     
  12. big macrumors 65816

    big

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    #12
    KOOL, my alarm I set for an event from iCal just went off, that was neat! it also just went off on my iPod too! how cool is that?

    anyways

    >The Mhz numbers looked nice on p4

    most of my die hard PC friends who know the PC also know about the mhz myth, and understand the Mac is great at some things....& can hold its on against a quicker pentium processor,

    however, I remember buying my B&W G3, when apple could actually tout it as the fastest machine in the world.

    man we have fallen behind so damn fast, until I see 2. something ghz with ddr ram and a bus speed from here to amazing, I will not be buying a new mac.

    I use to say I'll wait till dual 1.6 ghz, but I've decided to make apple work for the money I have to work for

    anyone else tired of being left behind? I realize our OS is fantastic, the machines (design) and the way they work are amazing (especially with compatibility)
     
  13. big macrumors 65816

    big

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    #13
    the double post is appreciated, that was the first time I have chuckled all day....
     
  14. Jeffx342 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Location:
    North Andover
    #14
    I woudn't Switch to PC Again

    I wouldn't buy a pc again because of the OS

    I baught windows XP Pro $200
    let me tell ya not even worth a penny

    1. Microsoft has rights to access your computer (disclaimer)
    2. Internal errors in IE 6 (no line found 140)
    3. Windows Xp Uses too much recourses
    4. Something always screws up
    5. you delete a system file by accident windows wont log you in
    6. you have to download Drivers for every little thing
    7. Movie maker Sucks on XP
    8. Media player isn't really that good
    9. I feel like I am handicaped when im using XP, (goofy looking Icons)
    10. Setting up a network can be a biatch*
    11. not responsive enough
    12. Ms Office Xp sucks compared to Mac edition
    13. Freezes alot
    14. Doesn't look pretty like Os X


    Looking forward to getting a Mac...
     
  15. Gatorman macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2002
    Location:
    Florida
    #15
    Big Brother?

    That's a little scary if you ask me. A little Big Brother-ish? Or how about something out of Robert Ludlum's Promethus Deception. Tell me that isn't about Bill Gates.:D
     
  16. Gatorman macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2002
    Location:
    Florida
    #16
    Re: I woudn't Switch to PC Again

    WHOOOPS.....wrong quote used above. This relates to my statement above.
     
  17. Telomar macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2002
    #17
    Just a few details. I can verify the subject of the post is genuine and as far I recall it has been pretty well talked about by Intel and planned for some time. It certainly hasn't been kept secret.

    I would however be a touch surprised if it is called the PV. It really is very much an evolution of the PIV and nothing new.

    The 1MB Level 2 cache is expected it roughly doubles every fabrication generation improvement at the moment. AMD has already planned the same for the Hammer series. The faster FSB is also nothing new or surprising.

    The current PIV has ~55 million transistors though and a rough doubling over a fabrication generational change isn't unexpected.

    Really there's nothing new there that Intel hasn't had roadmapped since early 2002 and before.

    On the Apple side I have said this before and I will say it again. The G4 core has life. Improvements can be made to easily lift its performance substantially and there are things worth note coming :) Whether they will arrive on time is another matter and whether they will satisfy everybody I can't say but given people are rarely pleased I'd say probably not :p
     
  18. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    #18
    The Pentium5 is to the Pentium4 what the Pentium3 was to the Pentium2. It is not a new core. It sports a few new bells and whistles, twice the L2, the potential for a faster FSB, but it is still essentially the same chip as before.

    This is not to say that the G4 will be able to keep up, or anything. :)

    2 to 3 weeks till the dual 1.25's ship, and I'm still really temped to get one.
     
  19. big macrumors 65816

    big

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    #19
    >and I'm still really temped to get one

    nope, again Apple better surprise me with something amazing
     
  20. scem0 macrumors 604

    scem0

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    back in NYC!
    #20
    I am mad at apple, their processors suck right now... not to mention their price. Im not gunna spend 3,000 for a computer that I could get with -yes - a worse os, for 1,000. Macs just arent worth it right now. Until they have something that can compete speed wise, my next comp is a PC.
     
  21. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #21

    You don't need to spend 3,000 to get an extremely fast mac right now try 1,600-1,700.
     
  22. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #22
    Re: Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5?


    Not to be criticle but the G4 does not have 2mb of L2 cache on the high end model it only has 256k. It does have 2mb of L3. The 1MB of L2 in my oppinion will be a lot faster then any L3 cache because it's accessed at full CPU speed. But we all know this doesn't really make a nickels worth of difference because we all know the current cpu at the current speed would be absolutely trounced by this new pentium. I also know feel that we will not be stuck at this slow progression of speed for the next year.

    I personally though am in no way dissapointed in the new macs they are extremely fast. Yes faster then the Quicksilvers they just need to be used in the right application i.e. video editing, gaming, etc.. Anything that requires large amounts of data to be moved from the hard drive to the Ram and the same for the PCI and AGP cards to the Ram or Hard drive.
     
  23. nuckinfutz macrumors 603

    nuckinfutz

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2002
    Location:
    Middle Earth
    #23
    Let's clear up some confusion and errors

    This nextgen Processor is codenamed "Prescott"

    Yes it looks like a 1MB L2 Cache is likely. Xeons are already at 512k so this is the next logical step.

    The doubling of the L2 of course raises the transistor count so don't be shocked that the P4 is going from roughly 40million to 100 million. The larger cache is adding many. Prescott is going to be fabbed on 90 nanometer tech so these transistors will be physically smaller.

    http://www.chip-architect.com/news/2002_04_16_Prescott_Prospects.html for "over your head info" good stuff

    http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1677 Nice also.

    The FSB of Prescott will probably be 667mhz but this is NOT Double Pumpled 333mhz. This is still a Quad Pumped bus which now starts out at 166mhz.(166.66 x 4 I believe).

    Remember Apple's Top Line G4 supports 166 mhz but it doesn't Double or Quad pump the bus.


    How does Apple compete? Well here's my guess.

    Perhaps at Macworld San Fran or soon after Apple announces the next G4 based machines. These Computers will be based on 130 nano G4+ chips(the current G4+ are 180 nano chips) . This will allow the G4's to clock to as high as 1.6Ghz.

    This allows Apple to prepare for what I think everyone knows is coming. The IBM GPUL Power4 based Proc which should hit late 2003. This Proc would start at 1.8ghz and depending on yields Apple could always offer a Dual Configuration. We'll know how quickly IBM will drop from 130 to 90 nano tech on these procs as soon as Oct 15. So there you have it.

    Intel will be shipping 4Ghz P4's

    AMD will have 3.4Ghz Rated chips

    And shortly after Apple will be at 2Ghz with a 64bit proc.


    Will we be faster. Who knows. The IBM Proc is 8way Superscalar with 5 dispatch, It supports 6.4Gbps throughput which puts it on par with where Intel and AMD will be as far as Bandwidth. Apple is clearly not freaking out about this. They're calm and cool so you know something good is coming.



    Can you please explain why Apple's using G4's suck? And please since you have it ALL figured out. Tell me what Apple needs to do to fix this. I'm sure we're all ears. ;)
     
  24. bullrat macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2002
    #24
    I'm a potential "switcher" that wants to buy an iMac now but I keep reading all the posts on the various Mac boards about how even the latest 17 inch iMac looks "choppy" or "jerky" when resizing or moving windows and how much slower browsing the Web is than bad old MS on Wintel.

    I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.

    I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.

    Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.

    The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!

    -bullrat
     
  25. big macrumors 65816

    big

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002

Share This Page