1. Welcome to the new MacRumors forums. See our announcement and read our FAQ

Upcoming G5, G6, G7

Discussion in 'Hardware Rumors' started by MacManiac1224, Nov 12, 2001.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. macrumors regular

    Just rad an article over at http://www.macosrumors.com, and it was pretty interesting:
    At Apple, we are quite pleased with the way the G5 has progressed. As of noon, we received version 0.7 of the G5. Altivec performance is now at par with equivalent clock speed 7460's. We spent a late night Friday night fitting prototypes with the new revision, and spent the day saturday doing various tests.

    Yields are now just at the commercially acceptable level. Good news is that clock speeds have been improved to the point where 1.6 Ghz chips will be in adequate quantities. Another clock speed record was also set: 1 chip tested at 2.8 Ghz, 2 tested at 2.6 Ghz, 13 tested at 2.4 Ghz, 13 tested at 2.2Ghz, and 54 tested at 2Ghz. This shows that the G5 has tremendous potential at reaching high frequencies, being this early in its life. This is in sharp contrast to Intel's Itanium, which when I spoke to an Intel engineer at the semiconductor forum, they still are not getting sufficient yields above 800Mhz, an yields on current processors are very, very poor, hence the steep price of the Itanium. Mckinley is not faring too well either, progress has not been very good on increasing its clock speed for release sometime next year. The aim is to speed bump the G5 to between 2Ghz and 2.4 Ghz for Macworld New York. Above 1.6 Ghz, the G5 will be produced in 400Mhz increments.

    Apple could theoretically sign off now, but Jon Rubinstein wants to go through one more revision. All the critical bugs have now been worked out, but there are a couple of minor optimizations that will go into revision 0.8, which is due within two weeks. Likely, these slight optimizations will result in version 0.8 being declared 1.0, and mass production will go on throughout December to get a critical volume of chips for a Mid-December production run of Power Mac G5's.

    Anyone considering buying a G5 better be forwarned: the chip price may mean that Apple may not be able to offer G5 Power Macs for the same price as current G4 models. There has been talk between Steve Jobs, Jon Rubinstein, and Phil Schiller about possibly offering 7460 G4's at the low end in the professional models in two configurations, which would also appease Motorola. Apple would have five models of pro desktops until G5 prices fall low enough to warrant having them in the low-end pro models. There is talk of two 7460 G4 models, and 3 G5 models. Talk is that the low end G5 model will sell for slightly more than the current 867Mhz G4. The G5 towers will also sport the quicksilver enclosure initially, which will be changed at Macworld New York. People should understand that even though the G5 is considerably more expensive than the G4, it is a steal considering that we are getting at least 60% overall instructions per cycle than Intel's Itanium, and that it is a 64-bit processor. The 32 bit version of the G5 will be solely targeted towards embedded applications, as 32-bit addressing is no longer adequate for desktop applications.

    The long awaited LCD iMac will also make its debut at Macworld San Francisco. It will be available at up to 1Ghz, 900Mhz being the scenario should yields of IBM's next generation G3's not be sufficient enough at 1Ghz.

    Steve Jobs has very ambitious plans for Apple's processor strategy. He recently said "We've been stuck with the G4 for over two years, that's too long". His intentions are that the G5 have a life of 18 months in the Pro models. He wants the G6 to hit initial silicon between next December, and February 2003, and release it in mid-2003. Initially, the G6 will be fabbed with a 0.1 micron process moving to .07(.065) micron. It will be built upon the HIP 8.0 process, which is still not quite finalized. It will feature Altivec II, which promises to at least double performance of the current Altivec. Early estimates are that it will contain over 100 million gates. The G6 will be introduced at between 4.5 and 5Ghz and scale up to 10 Ghz.

    This week Apple has committed itself to going beyond the G6 to build a G7, and maybe beyond. Apple is looking at Motorola's recently announced Gallium Arsenide technology to give this chip insanely high clock speeds. Talk is the G7 could go as high as 20 Ghz. The G7 would debut in early to mid 2005. This renewed hope with the PowerPc architecture is in light of the fact that Cisco Systems has committed to being a significant customer of G5's for their high-end routers, and Silicon Graphics being in the last stages of abandoning development on its R16000 and R18000 processors as a cost-cutting measure. It looks very likely it will sign a commitment with Apple, IBM and Motorola within a month. It has prototype G5 chips in a prototype workstation of theirs, and is hard at work developing Irix 7.0 for the G5.

    In terms of future G5 development, work is well underway on the 8510, which is a low-power SOI LoK dielectric version of the G5. It is due out in late Q4 2002, and it will be an IBM product fabbed with its 0.1 micron process. Work is also progressing on the 8550, which is due out Q1 2003. It will be a 0.1 micron chip built upon SOI LO-K dielectric. It is a candidate to receive Altivec II if it is completed in time.

    Relationships between Apple and Motorola as of late could very well be described as Jeckyll and Hyde. Just three weeks ago, Steve Jobs said "I am going to sue the ass of those guys at Motorola. At the last minute, they f*cked us up. They told us we would have 1Ghz G4's, and days before Macworld, the ****ers told us there was a defect which would cause them to fail above 900Mhz." Days later, the relationship becomes cordial again when Motorola shows renewed interest when SGI and Cisco Systems start looking into the G5.
    What do you guys think?
  2. Retired


    time to market

    the time to market takes so long from the chip "testing" phase to the computer store

    when i was at the microsoft school, we were first hearing about the P4, then unnamed, with upper yields at 2.4 GHz, in march 2000

    (the first microprocessor chip to hit 1 GHz did so in an ibm lab in 1997)

    so i hope apple could be faster than that to market a machine with those speeds than those pc makers were with the intel chips
  3. macrumors member

    Too good to be true...?

    This is a lot of information that could have only come from inside Apple or one of it's vendors. I won't beleive it until I see it.
  4. Retired


    speaking about too good to be true...

    what is the deal with the "register", they make some really wild claims that it goes beyond just rumors, it's almost funny!
  5. macrumors regular

    jefhatfield>what is the deal with the "register", they make some really wild claims that it goes beyond just rumors, it's almost funny!

    1) no one mentioned the reg, unless i've missed it.

    2) the reg's sources are solid.

    3) this report sounds too conservative to be phony.

    4) given that the perspective given is that of an apple hardware engineer of some description MOSR should know whether or not he is in fact an employee in the know (i.e. who he says he is).
  6. macrumors regular

    There is apparently one insider who keeps leaking info to MOSR and the Register about the current state of the G5 project. Usually they have the info up at about the same time, and it is the same info. This guy's reports have all been fairly conservative (except for this one-it goes a little beyond what I've read in the past), and both websites say that he (or she) has been accurate in the past. Just out of curiosity, Jef, what made you think of the reg?
  7. Retired


    i had never heard of the register until i saw it mentioned here on macrumors

    we will have to see if we get that super fast G5 soon...we are not even up to 1 GHz yet and that would make me happy enough for the moment

    also other stuff i have seen on the register is way out there, but i will continue to read the register over time and see if predictions come true

    i was a fan of appleinsider and i sometimes look at macosrumors, too
  8. macrumors 6502a

    that sounds optimistic.
    It doesnt say much about the supposed 64bit G5.
    I thought motorolas semiconductor section was really behind the times, so how can they be looking at G6?
    And it looks like the G4 apollo is out of the window.

    Im not sure i believe everything from this guy, but some of the G5 stuff seems to fit.
  9. macrumors 6502


    Right. Ummm John123, you can come out now. Admit it, you created a new handle inorder to evade the usual thrashing you get when you try to be intelligent. G7?? Hold ur horses what about G5.
  10. macrumors 6502a

    nah john isnt the optimistic sort.

  11. SPG
    macrumors 65816


    It's too hard to tell if this is true or not, but I hope they do come out with a G5 at MWSF. If they release a DP G5 I will buy one on the spot. I need one. I am getting tired of watching progress bars creep across the screen while doing compositing in Final Cut Pro.
    This is what Apple needs.
  12. macrumors 68000

    Ensign Paris


    LCD iMac - I Hope so, but not to sure
    G5s - Certainly (Don't quote me after MWSF though!)
    Lowend G4 - Most probably

  13. macrumors 6502

    yeah then whats all this talk about G6 and G7. People, lets hope that by next summer (2002) we get the G5. Forget G6 and G7 for another decade.
  14. Retired


    the way we are at dual 800 or single 867 now, the G6 and G7 may unfortunately be that far away like kela says

    we are still using the G3 chip and that goes back to the emilio days of apple...at least gil emilio was a huge believer in getting that G3 thing to huge levels, otherwise sj's imac would have had a 604e processor at debut...which is still not a bad processor for that time
  15. macrumors 6502

    yes i mean I doubt G6 and G7 would even come out. Hopefully for god sake by the time the G7 debuts it is based on an entirely new technology like (hologram/crystal data bytes or a new conduction material). I mean, im tired of this 3 GHz and 4 Ghz, I WANT TERRA-GHZ!! and now!! You see in the future, it wont be about how fast a computer can run a certain application. The whole system will be connected to a faster than firewire internet. all apps will be stored on this huge cyberdine systems thingy and one will pay to licesence software for a limited time. One wont be ablt to buy it any more.
  16. macrumors 6502a

    Wow, that future is really quite bleak. Will a robot assasin come from the future to kill bill gates?

    Hey jef, congrats. your triple century.

  17. SPG
    macrumors 65816


    A lot of people have been talking about the centralized system thing for a while, like since the 80's, but I think if that happens that will be a hard change for people to make. It's such a big shift in the way people think and behave that it may take a long long time. Corporations will be able to do it, they could probably do it right now if they wanted to or thought they could save a few bucks.
    With processors getting faster adn cheaper, and with people loving the slightly illegal aspects of napster and limewire, the wholly owned personal computer will stick around for quite some time.
  18. Retired


    centralized system could be a good idea but i hope it's not microsoft

    also, thanks spikey...but i will never catch up to you since i have run out of stuff to talk about...at least for now
  19. macrumors 68000

    Ensign Paris

    Not Yet

    Even though Steve might have thoughts about the G6 and G7 but nobody even Steve can predict that far in the future!

    G5s in JAnurary! We may have the MegaMhz Myth but lets SHOW THEM!

  20. macrumors 6502

    soo umm

    So umm SPG, does that mean Apple is using the mega hertz conversion to PCs? (i.e will the G5 list MHZ like intel does with its processors?????)???

    - Kela
  21. macrumors regular

    >It doesnt say much about the supposed 64bit G5.

    "it is a 64-bit processor". <-- how much simpler does it have to be?

    ... and if you reread the article you'll notice the leak mentions next
    that `32-bit addressing is no longer adequate for desktop applications'.
    Now surely that puts the question of which G5 (32- or 64-bit) design we're
    talking about beyond all question?

    (i hate to tell you this, but when the rest of the mac world hears `G5',
    they think 64 bit. you're the only person i've seen so far that hasn't
    caught on)

    In any case it doesn't matter a toss because a) 4 gb of ram is fine for
    very close to all people, and will be for the next few years at least,
    despite what the leak would suggest and b) i have good reason to doubt
    leaky's credentials as this leak in particular keeps yapping about SGI's
    ceasing development of the high-end MIPS. Erm, I though SGI spun MIPS off
    a few years back? Unless SGI still has engineers working on the high-end
    design. (hrmph, i'm stumped).

    >I thought motorolas semiconductor section was really behind the times,

    Don't believe everything you read. The G4 was merely a PITA to fabricate.
    Why, i don't know, it just was. Granted, IBM, intel, amd, TSMC probably
    all have niftier facilities, but this is microprocessors, in fabbing procs
    there's no such thing as `behind the times', either you move with the flow
    or you get hammered.

    i.e. ****** g4 yields != out-of-date fabbing (erm, probably should be

    (behind the times? didn't moto just take out a swag of patents on some new
    method? and GaAs this and that as per MOSR...)

    > so how can they be looking at G6?

    *shrug* upgrade your facilities. yeah, shareholders hate these
    capital-intensive upgrades, but if moto wants to stay in the running they
    have to do it.

    > And it looks like

    No, you [hope] the apollo is `out the window', for reasons unbeknownst to
    those who don't smoke as much crack as you apparently do.

    > the G4 apollo is out of the window.

    "offering 7460 ... in two configurations"

    >Im not sure i believe everything from this guy, but some of the G5 stuff
    seems to fit.

    The G5 stuff sounds conservative enough so i'll believe it. if i'm wrong,
    then i wait for MWNY (if it's not out then, **** this, i'll buy a G4,
    plenty fast enough anyway, with a decent graphics card).

    However, if i'm right in my hunch that the G5 will be announced MWSF...
    (well, ~january-february, so the most likely event would be MWSF, or maybe
    the february MW, what is it, tokyo, IIRC) ... then i'm going to come back
    and give mad **** to those that disagreed with me. Hrmph.
  22. macrumors 68030



    Most of the stuff about the G5 seems fairly reasonable, but the G6 and G7 is just someone reporting wishful thinking as fact (in my opinion). I don't know about the SGI stuff. I think the high price of the chip means no dual G5s even though the processor supports it. Hopefully they'll do that when the price drops some. I think that if their isn't an LCD Imac their'll be something equally spiffy; The Imac is getting old enough that people are starting to recommend not buying it. Too bad the G3 doesn't support multiprocessing... a dual 1Ghz LCD Imac would be a pretty spiffy computer.
  23. macrumors regular

    Re: Reliability

    >Most of the stuff about the G5 seems fairly reasonable, but the G6 and G7
    is just someone reporting wishful thinking as fact (in my opinion).

    It is distant, sure, but Apple has to be on the ball -- so I'm not
    surprised at all that they'd be planning two generations ahead. There's
    probably (an admittedly small, although the numbers will reverse soon, if
    not in transition now) a G6 team, probably Apple engineers, Moto's having
    mood swings with the G6 according to MOSR's sources as it would appear.

    > I don't know about the SGI stuff.

    SGI's bleeding to death. I doubt they could sustain an ISA transition like
    this. Then again, if it's true (bear in mind that the MOSR source said
    that a contract between apple/ibm/moto and sgi was `very likely' to be
    official in a month) it would be a stunning indictment on behalf of the
    PPC. ISA transitions are _big_ decisions -- you can't go back.

    > I think the high price of the chip means no dual G5s even though the
    processor supports it.

    Let's say the processor costs $400 each in volume (outlandish given that
    the 7410s are something like $180 at their max clockspeed, IIRC, so i'm
    giving you the benefit of the doubt :p). Now R&D for a DP G5 has to be
    made up, so let's say another $500 per unit. That's an extra $900 per
    unit, but the only people who'd buy it are the ones who have mad wallets
    to throw at their need for speed anyway -- real media pros, apple's core

    However, the G5 has a multicored design, and there's been nary a peep from
    any leak whatsoever as to the number of cores on the G5s Apple's been
    testing. Perhaps apple could ship 2- or 4-cored G5s, that would be even
    better than dual-proc boxes due to the increased bandwidth between the
    cores. So multicoring would be more likely than dual processors.

    > Hopefully they'll do that when the price drops some.

    I'd rather have multicoring than dual procs. Of course, dual multicored
    procs is even better ;). However given the choice i'd take multicoring
    (due to the higher performance, duh =]).

    > I think that if their isn't an LCD Imac their'll be something equally
    spiffy; The Imac is getting old enough that people are starting to
    recommend not buying it.

    If that's true then there must be people who agree w/me that the imac is
    in serious need of a big boost. LCD, big beasty G3 at least or preferably
    7450/60 starting at 700-733 Mhz (preferably 800 Mhz) and... and i'm out of
    ideas (that i want, anyway :p). What other features do we want in the
    imac? Spit it out PEOPLE! What do we want? ;)

    > Too bad the G3 do esn't support multiprocessing... a dual 1Ghz LCD Imac
    would be a pretty spiffy computer.

    The answer is the 7460 :p It will soak up the G4s Moto has been minting
    for Apple lately (according to MOSR's source) and MP is a bonus if apple
    wanted it. I doubt MP would make it into the imac, it's not needed (like
    how many consumer-level machines need dual 700 mhz 7450s? how many need
    dual 1 ghz 7460s?) and also, it's much like the clockspeed perception
    problem (apple doesn't ship imacs of higher clockspeed than their G4s) --
    people might think that the dual G4s are more powerful than the single G5,
    even if the G5 is multicored.

  24. macrumors 601


    I want my G5 2GHz+

    Come MWSF, I will be checking to see what is released for the desktops. I have two people interested in my 'tweaked' G4-500 now. Provided one of them buys it, I will be in the market for a replacement. Most likely, the fastest single processor G5 that hits the market. The only thing holding me back would be MWNY2002 since I will want to see what they do differently for the case. That is, unless they make a change for the G5 initial release. I think it would make sense to do that, to make it look different then the current G4. Something along the lines of when they went from the G3 blue and white to the G4.

    How about we start a petition for the cyborg/robot assassin from the future to come and take out old bg?
  25. macrumors regular

    good idea

    Killing Bill Gates is a very good idea... When the police are looking for people with a motive to kill him, they can just interview every windows user...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page