POWER 4, motorola G5

Discussion in 'Hardware Rumors' started by i_wolf, Aug 4, 2002.

  1. i_wolf macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    #1
    Hi all, I am a newbie here and i just wanted to get your opinions. As someone who is holding out to 'switch' so i can get a more powerful machine from apple to work with MAYA i was wondering.
    I was looking through all the rumor sites and info sites about future chips from Moto and IBM.
    I was wondering... at the SAME speed... (compare IPC versus IPC)how would the IBM Power 4 compare with say the theoretical performance of moto's G5???
    Personally despite the cost and huge heat output of IBMs POWER 4 i reckon that we could see one in an apple powermac much sooner than later..... especially since most of the X86 community are aware that x86 is about to transition to 64bit.... these same people (that apple is targeting with switch adverts) will be asking does apple have a 64bit processor. They need a 64bit part.
    Is there anybody out there at all that would prefer a G5 to a POWER 4 in a future mac?
    Finally IMHO, apple need to do a hell of a lot more than add small MHz and DDR to the G4 line. For every 1MHz apple adds to the G4. Intel seams to add another 4 MHz to the P4. Now people including myself slag intel for a low IPC, but at the end of the day the fact that the P4 runs so fast allows it to overcome its crap IPC. It will do the same job faster than its competitors even if the P4's competitors are running on a more efficient design.
    I would like your opinions please..... Educate me... if I'm wrong tell me!
    Sincere Regards,
    I_Wolf.
     
  2. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #2
    Re: POWER 4, motorola G5


    I don't have the preliminary G5+ SPEC scores bookmarked, but I recall 2.4GHz scores being slightly higher than those of a single core of the POWER4. (POWER4 is not a single CPU - it's a multi-chip module with two cores per chip.)
    If they would be improved at the same rate, I think the G5+ would DEFINITELY be a better choice in a Mac.

    - Much lower power consumption, translating into better battery life and less heat
    - Faster
    - Much less expensive
    - AltiVec II accelerates double-precision FP; POWER4 doesn't have AltiVec

    Once the POWER4 is pared down enough for use in a Mac, with all that fast onboard cache and all but one core removed, it will be considerably slower than a G5+.

    Alex
     
  3. Catfish_Man macrumors 68030

    Catfish_Man

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2001
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #3
    Wellll....

    ...nobody actually knows how fast the G5 will be. The Register had some crazy articles about it, but the scores made no sense whatsoever (instead of going up linearly with clock frequency or with a downward curve, they went up with an upward curve which should be impossible). I would guess that it would depend on the task. The POWER4 is a server chip. A big server chip. Its basic goal is scaling to large numbers of processors really really well. The G5 (Motorola's) is either going to be desktop or really-high-end embedded, so its goal will be getting the most power possible out of the smallest (most energy efficient) package. I expect the G5 to perform approximately like an AMD Hammer with a lower clock frequency, Altivec, and no x86 baggage (note: this is a complete guess). I would also expect it be more than a thousand dollars cheaper than a POWER4. I don't think a comparison between them really means much, given their different goals and pricing.
     
  4. eirik macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Location:
    Leesburg, VA
    #4
    G5+

    I hope Alex_Ant doesn't mind my stating something I believe he meant to also say about the G5: 'based upon the vaporous rumors about the G5'.

    No one from this site can credibly say for a fact that a "G5" exists as rumored. Again, I'm sure Alex_Ant meant to say something about the vaporous nature of the G5.

    You'll find that he's one of the better posters on the board. Welcome i_Wolf!
     
  5. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #5
    Re: G5+


    Whoops... Sorry, I forgot. Yes, the vaporous nature of the G5.

    But it's coming SOON! I can FEEL it! It's not the same as last January... there's something in the air now. I KNOW it's coming, I KNOW it! It will be less than 9 months now, I SWEAR, and then I'll be the one who's laughing! I WILL! 2.4GHz, baybee, 2.4GHz!
    Second only to eirik. :) Good to see you again, matey.
     
  6. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #6
    I truly believe that AltiVec can be useful for desktop machines running graphics applications and games. If the G5 debuts at over 2 GHz, it might be well accepted. Since it's really late, it will have to perform well.

    Apple might do well to include the Power4 in its plans, if it would like to gain large enterprises as clients, but it would not be so useful for desktop machines. The Power3 might be a better choice, as most companies have microwave ovens as well as central heat with which to cook food and heat the office. :D
     
  7. ktlx macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    #7
    I think Apple is going to have a rough sell to large enterprises with or without the Power4. If I am a CIO of a large enterprise, what incentive do I have to buy a server from Apple? They have zero experience in making enterprise servers. They have zero exeperience in making enterprise software. They have zero enterprise applications available for their platform (Apache does not count :D).

    Why would any large enterprise CIO go to Apple to buy a server when Dell, HP/Compaq, IBM and Sun all have experience and good reputations selling everything from 1U web servers to mainframes with terabytes of attached data? Especially after so many of these large enterprise CIOs have fought hard to get rid of Apple's on their desktops.:D
     

Share This Page