I think IBM is holding out on us...

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by poundsmack, May 9, 2005.

  1. poundsmack macrumors 6502

    poundsmack

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    #1
    I think IBM has been holding out on apple. http://www.activewin.com/awin/comme...x=29527&Group=1
    look at the specs of the new xbox. Now thats the kind of specs i want to see in a new power mac .

    (i know i broke a rule by posting this in 2 different forums but no one would have seen it in the other one, sorry.)
     
  2. stevey500 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2004
    Location:
    Huntington, Utah
    #2
    The link seems to be dead, what was the info on the site? :rolleyes:
     
  3. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
  4. poundsmack thread starter macrumors 6502

    poundsmack

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    #4
  5. James Philp macrumors 65816

    James Philp

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2005
    Location:
    Oxford/London
    #5
    Hmmm, how reliable are these figures?
    I don't wanna keep putting batteries into my controller!
    Maybe i'm backward in thinking that wired has some benefits!
     
  6. jamdr macrumors 6502a

    jamdr

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #6
    I think they are pretty reliable. It has been all but confirmed that the Xbox 360 will have multiple cores at >3.0GHz, so this seems realistic to me. Also, the Xbox 360 will definitely have wireless controllers, so it's just something you will have to deal with. I had the same thoughts when I learned about these specs. IBM is also developing a custom processor for Nintendo's Revolution and it will probably be even more powerful than this. So if they are capable of producing multi-core processors at greater than 3 GHz by November 2005 (the release date of the Xbox 360), why hasn't Apple seen some of this? :(
     
  7. matticus008 macrumors 68040

    matticus008

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    #7
    Because in order to get those clock speeds, they had to simplify the instruction set and basically water-down the math capabilities of the CPU. Because it's a specific environment and this is relying on Cell technology, they can deliver good performance. But if you were to put this CPU in an actual computer, it would be really fast at what it could do, but it wouldn't be able to do everything that a G5 can.

    That was my impression based on the press coverage of the Xbox processing units, but maybe IBM can get faster speeds than they're showing now in full-fledged G5 systems.
     
  8. ravenvii macrumors 604

    ravenvii

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Location:
    Melenkurion Skyweir
    #8
    And to top that off, those PowerPC CPUs aren't based on PPC970, or even a POWERx derivative. Those CPUs are not for desktop use, and if you try to use them as such, you will find that they're much slower than their GHz signify.
     
  9. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #9
    exactly and as others have said, these chips are custom made for a pure gaming rid and not a computer desktop system, so IBM were able to pump out a bit more Ghz in the process, come on why would apple let anything 3Ghz or over not be pushed out asap?
     
  10. web_god61 macrumors regular

    web_god61

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    #10
    Apple is laughting at all the money their bringing in with their ipod division, i dont think they really care about their computers for the moment, simply because theres not much profit.. Look at the iBook, aside from the move form 256 to 512 kb of cache has apple done anything this year to upgrade them...Hell No! I've been waiting for the ibook G4 upgrade since it was at 800Mhz. But until they get either a meaningful upgrade like say a new cpu or a massive increase in Mhz like say 1.8Ghz im waiting.

    For the thing about it getting to close to the powerbook line, yea very smart business plan, "instead of upgrading one line of computers we could just keep one retarded so we maintain the product gap. Great idea." Hey Apple GFY and start making better hardware or license OSX out to IBM and let them develop hardware cause there obviously up to the task (Consider Xbox 360, Nintendo Revolution and the "Allmighty-groundbreaking-faster than a sea of supercomputers in the palm of your hand" Cell Chip).
     
  11. James Philp macrumors 65816

    James Philp

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2005
    Location:
    Oxford/London
    #11
    Are you serious? :confused: :eek:
     
  12. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #12
    well he is web_god.... but thats with a lower case 'g' :rolleyes: :D
     
  13. GFLPraxis macrumors 604

    GFLPraxis

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    #13
    Ugh.


    CORRECTION TIME PEOPLE.


    Firstly...those specs are incorrect. Impressive hoax though. That site is trying to attract attention.

    1) Detachable 20 gig hard drive? Those shots of the XBox 360 show 40 and from other leaks nothing is included, its sold seperately.

    2) "500 MNz"? Whats MNz? :rolleyes:

    3) "CPU Game Math Performance"? Did they make that term up? "9 billion dots per second"? What the heck?

    4) 3 USB 2.0 ports- where are these? We've seen the case.

    5) 3.2 GHz contradicts other sources.

    6) There is no onboard audio processor on the XBox 360.



    How do I know this stuff? The OFFICIAL developer specs are here.

    http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microsoft-xbox/594331p1.html


    The processor is 3 GHz, 3 core. Not 3.2.


    Before anyone goes nuts...


    THESE ARE NOT G5's.


    PowerPC does NOT mean PowerPC 970. Note the "2 instructions per clock cycle" bit in the official specs. Note Apple's web page lists 8 Instructions per clock cycle on the PowerPC 970 (G5).

    These are apparently the same PowerPC core as in the PS3 (obviously, since that is the only IBM chip that runs at 3 GHz and up). They are NOT G5's. They get lower performance per clock cycle (Hz), but higher clock speed.



    Come on- you Mac users of all people should know what the MHz myth is! :rolleyes:
     
  14. Trout74 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
  15. Trout74 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
  16. Trout74 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
  17. poundsmack thread starter macrumors 6502

    poundsmack

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    #17
    @Trout74

    thanks for the 3 posts, some times it takes me a few read throughs to understand something, so that worked out great. hahaha
     
  18. mvc macrumors 6502a

    mvc

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Outer-Roa
    #18
    Yeah they say fish have really really short term memory, so I shouldn't be suprised to see a trout reposting three times :)
     
  19. grizzlybrice macrumors regular

    grizzlybrice

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Location:
    Playa Del Rey, CA
    #19
    made me smile. :)

    Brice
     
  20. James L macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    #20
    Do you need a hug?
     
  21. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #21
    no he needs more than a hug, he needs Raven to come in here and some him some lovin :p ;)
     
  22. web_god61 macrumors regular

    web_god61

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    #22
    c'mon guys, honestly the updates are poor, from 800mhz(256kb) to 1ghz(512kbs) to 1.2 ghz can you really call that a meaningful update, i could boost the FSB on my duron to get a 200 mhz increase, its not even noticable.(Im not saying the duron is as fast as the G4).

    I want a real update like a form change and(realisticly) dual-core G4 for ibook and G5 for powerbook. (unrealisticly G5's all around :rolleyes: )

    Their pumping out new ipods practicaly quartarly.

    You could say im pissed. I'm just not happy with what apple is offering right now, i want better and Apple is able to deliver but their waiting.(probobly for Develepord confrence).

    I could always use a hug.

    Edit:I'm looking at the 12" iBook for n e one going but hey their at 1.33ghz.
     
  23. zach macrumors 65816

    zach

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2003
    Location:
    Medford
    #23
    A 1.33 GHz G4 is plenty to run just about everything you need, with the exception of games and video/audio/graphics editing.

    Come on.. A G5 in a powerbook is ::not:: realistic at this time.

    Oh, and definitely don't get the 14" (I assume you meant 14", as the 12" iBooks are not at 1.33 GHz). The 14" iBooks are some of the most retarded computers I've ever seen in my life. If you buy an iBook, please buy the 12".
     
  24. poundsmack thread starter macrumors 6502

    poundsmack

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    #24
    i think apples offeres are currently a little week in some areas not because of apple but because of those who suply apple with its chips and what not. if the technology and the product was there apple would be using it. the sad truth is at the moment it is not. but thats what research and development are for.
     

Share This Page