Just a matter of time... G4 @ 2ghz

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by RGunner, Apr 4, 2005.

  1. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #2
    I want to buy a powerbook, but I'm waiting for the right time. A 2.0 G4 15inch would be the right time.
     
  2. wide macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Location:
    NYC
    #3
    I'd be interested to see if BareFeats will compare that to the PowerMac G5 line (both revisions). They will probably release a dual 2.0 GHz G4 soon too. Can't wait to see how that compares
     
  3. atari1356 macrumors 68000

    atari1356

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2004
    #4
    If you look closely it says:

    "Powered by a Freescale (formerly Motorola) 1.6GHz 7447A processor"

    So, they're using a 1.6GHz processor and just overclocking it to 2GHz. You may still have to wait a while before a 2GHz PowerBook is available...
     
  4. Demon Hunter macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    #5
    Wow... the G4 never fails to amaze me. At this rate it'll be years before the G5 PowerBook...
     
  5. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #6
    But if the 1.6 can be overclocked to 2GHz, then a 2GHz itself can't be far along. Will it be ever be in the pBook? Who knows. I don't see the g5 powerbooks coming anytime soon, so a speed bump to 2.0GHz might have to do.
     
  6. auxplage macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Location:
    Virginia Beach
    #7
    The dual-core G4 in development supposedly is up to almost 2ghz with a 200mhz bus if I remember reading correctly on Freescale's website.
     
  7. Caesar_091 macrumors regular

    Caesar_091

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Italy
    #8
    Can't wait to view some benchs of these G4s.

    Maybe at 2Ghz we'll not miss the lack of the L3 cache....
     
  8. Lancetx macrumors 68000

    Lancetx

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Texas
    #9
    The L3 cache hasn't really been missed since they doubled up the L2 to 512KB a year or two ago. Besides, the L3 cache only ran at about 20% of the CPU speed anyway.
     
  9. mgargan1 macrumors 65816

    mgargan1

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    Reston, VA
    #10
    2MB of L3 cache w/256kB of L2 is faster clock for clock than a 512k L2 w/out L3. this is because the G4 has a lower clockspeed, so it's starved for data, and the L3 cache really helps out. Now the 1MB of L3 cache w/ 256k of L2 is slower than the 512k. (hope this makes sense). But it all really depends on the app that you're using... most of them take advantage of the L3, if it's there.
     
  10. MacsRgr8 macrumors 604

    MacsRgr8

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #11
    Let's hope to see 2 GHz G4 PowerBooks and Mac minis in the near future aswell! :)

    BTW.... I wonder how much of a factor the FSB will be. I can't help feeling that FSB "problem" was overrated when the G4 vs. P4 discussions were hot... especially if a grand L3 cache is used.
     
  11. Rocksaurus macrumors 6502a

    Rocksaurus

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #12
    2 GHz with a 133 MHz bus... Doesn't that bus kind of cripple the processor?
     
  12. R.Youden macrumors 68020

    R.Youden

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    #13
    Last year I bought a 1.42GHz DP power mac and it is fantastic!! I ould have payed an extra £250 pounds and got a G5 but why. I think the G4 case looks better and it had two optical draws, thats a big bonus in my mind. I have also just ordered a 12" power book and I am not bothered if Apple brings a G5 laptop out next week. When ever I tryout a G5 I am not impressed with it. Both my computers can run stuff like Final Cut Pro and Adobe InDesign fine. Maybe I will regret it when Apple or whoever bring out something that needs a G5. Ah well thats my thoughts. Does anyone else feel that people are going over the top about these G5's.
     
  13. jamdr macrumors 6502a

    jamdr

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #14
    Do programmers really concern themselves with the presence of the L3 cache? Isn't that something the OS writers would take care of when they design the memory manangement system? How are apps written specifically to take advantage of the caches?
     
  14. capone2 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Location:
    chelsea-nyc
    #15
    G5 over the top yes!


    I heard the same thing about the DP G4 1.4, how great it is. First off, if the G4 hits 2gig with 167bus whats the point ? maybe with a 1mb of l2cache maaaaybe?? it just defeats the purpose the bus does all the work. I think g5 PB's in 6-9months or next january.
    PB 17" 1.5GHZ 1GIGRAM
     
  15. caveman_uk Guest

    caveman_uk

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    Hitchin, Herts, UK
    #16
    Gigadesigns did some tests and found that the Dual 1.42GHz with 2MB of L3 cache (the 7455 processor) was equivalent to a dual 7447A G4 running at 1.733GHz (The newer 7447A doesn't support L3 cache). See here for more details.

    Those old MDDs don't seem so bad... ;)
     
  16. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #17
    I'm disappointed in the 7447's performance as compared to the 7457 - the lack of cache causes a big performance hit. A 1.467 GHz 7457 with L3 cache can outrun Giga's 1.8GHz 7447, from what I've seen digging around xlr8yourmac.com. I'm a bit worried about the 400MHz overclock too. I haven't heard any reliability info on the 1.8s yet...and they are overclocked about the same.
     
  17. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #18
    Yes. Giga Design's latest designs seem more and more dodgy. I'd rather trust what PowerLogix is doing with their upgrades. They both 7457 and 7447A upgrades and don't use overclocking to get there.
     
  18. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #19
    OWC seem to do the same, my old 1.4 is still humming along at 1.47 :) I think iam going to give it to my son. a 7447 @ 2.0 may edge out a 7455 @ 1.47 . Still Quicksilver is a solid machine 4-5 yrs later. perhaps a 9800 in the future. :D he would like that.
     
  19. MacSA macrumors 68000

    MacSA

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #20
    By the time Apple gets a G5 into a Powerbook it will be as far behind the competition in terms of processing power as the G4 is right now.
     
  20. Rocksaurus macrumors 6502a

    Rocksaurus

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #21
    So where does that leave us? Dual Core G4's? Dual Core G5's? Something else?
     
  21. dongmin macrumors 68000

    dongmin

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    #22
    Sounds like you're quite hardened by the continued disappointment of 'G5 PowerBooks Next Tuesday' failing to materialize. Remember though at when Apple first came out with the dual 2.0 ghz G5s, it pretty much leapfrogged the Intels and AMDs out there. Now Intem/AMd has caught up and passed it but Apple should be back up there with the next iteration.

    My feeling about why it's taken Apple/IBM so long with the PB G5 is that they're designing a completely new mobile chip a la Pentium M. I'm hopeful that this G5 mobile will leapfrog the Pentium M when its out.
     
  22. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #23
    wow this makes my 867 MHz powerbook look like a wimp, but hey it gets the job done, maybe by the time the Mac minis are up to 2.0 i will upgrade ;)
     
  23. Demon Hunter macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    #24
    Um.. what? The G5/P4 are having trouble getting ahead of themselves... the desktop hurdles have to be met before the laptop hurdles!
     
  24. gekko513 macrumors 603

    gekko513

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    #25
    Looks like it's just overclocked

    "Powered by a Freescale (formerly Motorola) 1.6GHz 7447A processor"

    But the fact that a 1.6GHz factory rated processor can be overclocked to 2.0GHz and be stable should mean that the official rate could go up soon, too, shouldn't it?
     

Share This Page