Well, G5 Xserves are deffinately the next step. I expectd the G5 to hit the Xserve about when these guys are saying they will, so I believe it.
P-Worm
P-Worm
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Xserve G5 Updates?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Re: How Much Better?
In the video 'Introduction to the G5', John Kelly, SVP of Technology Group states that the prototypes of the next generation PPC has already been built.
Now I would think he means the POWER5 and/or the 980. How long it will take them to get to fab from prototype is a guess, but I think that their new fabricating facility will be a big factor in how quick they can bring the new chips to market.
For Jobs to forcast 3Ghz in a year, (when the official line from Apple is always mum about future products) is significant. Jobs wants the world to be confident that Apple is aggressive and a stayer in the PC market.
In the video 'Introduction to the G5', John Kelly, SVP of Technology Group states that the prototypes of the next generation PPC has already been built.
Now I would think he means the POWER5 and/or the 980. How long it will take them to get to fab from prototype is a guess, but I think that their new fabricating facility will be a big factor in how quick they can bring the new chips to market.
For Jobs to forcast 3Ghz in a year, (when the official line from Apple is always mum about future products) is significant. Jobs wants the world to be confident that Apple is aggressive and a stayer in the PC market.
970 and 980
Well, Apple has said that within one year it will hit 3.0 Ghz. That puts it at next June. MacBidouille, and probably the public info on the 970 if I weren't too lazy to look it up, would peg the 970 at maxing out around 2.5 to 2.8 GHz.
The 980 will be available in 2004. Assuming the 3.0 GHz by next June statement by Jobs is true, this will be a 980 chip.
Interesting.
So... is the 980 going to be a "G5" or a "G6"? I don't know about you guys but I don't know if Apple will release another Mobo architecture to compliment the 980. If they don't, I wouldn't plan on a G6 moniker. The current mobo & basic case design havr been in use, with modification here and there, since the B&W G3's in 97. That's approx. 4.5 years.
Well, Apple has said that within one year it will hit 3.0 Ghz. That puts it at next June. MacBidouille, and probably the public info on the 970 if I weren't too lazy to look it up, would peg the 970 at maxing out around 2.5 to 2.8 GHz.
The 980 will be available in 2004. Assuming the 3.0 GHz by next June statement by Jobs is true, this will be a 980 chip.
Interesting.
So... is the 980 going to be a "G5" or a "G6"? I don't know about you guys but I don't know if Apple will release another Mobo architecture to compliment the 980. If they don't, I wouldn't plan on a G6 moniker. The current mobo & basic case design havr been in use, with modification here and there, since the B&W G3's in 97. That's approx. 4.5 years.
Not worried about power or noise, though the quieter the better. I'd worry about system failure or glitches. Given the fans and the size of the heat sinks, I'd be surprised if they can get it in a 1U server. They may be able to, but I'll need to see it to beleive it. Right now the G5 case appears to be one big vent.
wait a minute
This comes from MacBidouille? Now, while I'm not saying whether I think its right or wrong, I DEFINITELY remember, during all the 970 rumors, MacBidouille posted in here that, whether or not they turned out to be right about the 970, they would not post any more rumors. Why do rumor sites keep doing this? Macwhispers seems to have it down to an art form they do it so much (though they usually say its because they were wrong about one rumor or another). Anyway, just pointing something out.
This comes from MacBidouille? Now, while I'm not saying whether I think its right or wrong, I DEFINITELY remember, during all the 970 rumors, MacBidouille posted in here that, whether or not they turned out to be right about the 970, they would not post any more rumors. Why do rumor sites keep doing this? Macwhispers seems to have it down to an art form they do it so much (though they usually say its because they were wrong about one rumor or another). Anyway, just pointing something out.
I belive it too, but for a different reason. My dad was telling me that he was going to try to get a free g5 xserve from apple to test it for his science. It really appeals to him becuase of the now double precesion vector abilities. He told me that he had talked to somebody (david addelson, who appeared on the apple website for mapping the cow genome. Dr. Adelson worked with apple closely on setting up xserves) who mentioned the xserve g5 coming out atleast by the end of this year. September might be a little early but I don't know. I do, however, believe that Dr. Adelson is a good, reliable source who wouldn't just make something up like that. It would be really good if my dad were to get a free xserve g5 and like it cause he is the head of Texas A&M's supercomputer committee and can try to get the university to by a lot of them. That would be good for apple too......
Re: Re: Re: How Much Better?
Apple and IBM actually did not forecast. If you listen to the keynote, you will see that they "committed" to delivering a 3 Ghz part in the next 12 months. No admittedly I would take anything that any company says with a large grain of salt, but given that Apple never says *anything* about future hardware, let alone committing to a roadmap, I would say that this is a very significant announcement. I would be quite surprised if they did not follow through and deliver on this one.
Incidentally, in that kind of time frame I doubt that the 3 Ghz part would be a Power 5 derived "PPC 980". After all, the real Power 5 will have only been shipping for a few months at that point! More likely a 90 nm PPC 970 part, but even that should be more than a match for Intel's "Prescott" ("Pentium 5?") or AMD's Lateron (Athlon 64). Remember, when they switch to 90 nm, not only will they crank up the clock and reduce heat, but they will also almost surely double the L2 cache to 1 MB (or possibly even more), much like Prescott and Lateron.
Apple and IBM actually did not forecast. If you listen to the keynote, you will see that they "committed" to delivering a 3 Ghz part in the next 12 months. No admittedly I would take anything that any company says with a large grain of salt, but given that Apple never says *anything* about future hardware, let alone committing to a roadmap, I would say that this is a very significant announcement. I would be quite surprised if they did not follow through and deliver on this one.
Incidentally, in that kind of time frame I doubt that the 3 Ghz part would be a Power 5 derived "PPC 980". After all, the real Power 5 will have only been shipping for a few months at that point! More likely a 90 nm PPC 970 part, but even that should be more than a match for Intel's "Prescott" ("Pentium 5?") or AMD's Lateron (Athlon 64). Remember, when they switch to 90 nm, not only will they crank up the clock and reduce heat, but they will also almost surely double the L2 cache to 1 MB (or possibly even more), much like Prescott and Lateron.
The noise on the xserve is probably not a problem at all because i think that most organizations that would buy one would put it in a dedicated machine room where noise really doesn't matter. Its not like the g5 which goes into the same room as the person operating it and can drive that person mad
. I think that my g4 533 is even very loud . I hope the g5s are quieter than that. Apple did compare them to the newest g4s but I am not sure how my computer compares to the dual 1.42 in terms of noise.
thanks
Thank you for welcoming newbie, actually I have the feeling that some of the macrumors.com forum users do not really like european or more specifically french mac-related web sites or users??
by the way I should really mentionne it again there is a english version of the macbidouille.com news : http://us.macbidouille.com
this will avoid to fire to french web sites due to missundertanding or mistake during french->translation usually performed with some automatic translation engine...
Thank you for welcoming newbie, actually I have the feeling that some of the macrumors.com forum users do not really like european or more specifically french mac-related web sites or users??
by the way I should really mentionne it again there is a english version of the macbidouille.com news : http://us.macbidouille.com
this will avoid to fire to french web sites due to missundertanding or mistake during french->translation usually performed with some automatic translation engine...
Some more evidence for my "3.0 GHz G5 next June" hypothesis....
We'll probably need something along the lines of a 3.0-3.5 Ghz 980 to double the speed of 2.0 970. Apple would want to double the speed of their machines every 18 months to stay abreast with Moore's law, but we all know the heat will be on to improve their machines eeven faster than Intel/AMD can.
We're now going to face the reality that, given identical architectures, to double the speed of a 2.0 Ghz 970 you'd need a 4.0 Ghz 970 or equivalent. So, in a sense, IBM has to be able to ramp up the clock speed fast. A 200 or 300 Mhz jump is mere child's play now. Mmmmmm. I've been waiting to say those words for a long time now.
If Apple says it's hitting 3.0 GHz by next June (one year from now), and that part can only be a 980 (evidence supports this), then we will DOUBLE the speed of the current dual processor systems next June.
That's a statement even I wouldn't expect to say. But hear me out. If the 980 is, say, 35% more efficient per clock cycle than the 970, then a 4.05 Ghz 970 ~ 3.0 Ghz 980. As we all know, 2 x 2 = 4.
Obviously this is all just for fun, but it is interesting.
Quite frankly, I'd buy a new G5 with a Radeon 9800 pro right now if I had some extra cash. I'm not going to wait for anything in particular now that the G5 is out. However, I am in the market for a laptop and I will have to buy sometime in the next 6 months. Fingers are crossed for a 1.4 Ghz G5 PowerBook by January!
We'll probably need something along the lines of a 3.0-3.5 Ghz 980 to double the speed of 2.0 970. Apple would want to double the speed of their machines every 18 months to stay abreast with Moore's law, but we all know the heat will be on to improve their machines eeven faster than Intel/AMD can.
We're now going to face the reality that, given identical architectures, to double the speed of a 2.0 Ghz 970 you'd need a 4.0 Ghz 970 or equivalent. So, in a sense, IBM has to be able to ramp up the clock speed fast. A 200 or 300 Mhz jump is mere child's play now. Mmmmmm. I've been waiting to say those words for a long time now.
If Apple says it's hitting 3.0 GHz by next June (one year from now), and that part can only be a 980 (evidence supports this), then we will DOUBLE the speed of the current dual processor systems next June.
That's a statement even I wouldn't expect to say. But hear me out. If the 980 is, say, 35% more efficient per clock cycle than the 970, then a 4.05 Ghz 970 ~ 3.0 Ghz 980. As we all know, 2 x 2 = 4.
Obviously this is all just for fun, but it is interesting.
Quite frankly, I'd buy a new G5 with a Radeon 9800 pro right now if I had some extra cash. I'm not going to wait for anything in particular now that the G5 is out. However, I am in the market for a laptop and I will have to buy sometime in the next 6 months. Fingers are crossed for a 1.4 Ghz G5 PowerBook by January!
eric67, welcome!
now, i'm glad that people have gotten over the hype of the G5 and realized that the G5 is awesome, and an integral part of Apple's future, but the real exciting part is the partnership between Apple and IBM.
As Mr. Anderson stated, this is SUCH a HUGE change from waiting a few years for minor upgrades from Motorola and already there is serious (valid) discussion of the G5's successor!!!! the machines' haven't even shipped!!!!!! Does anybody realize the potential??? Apple and IBM won't end this partnership anytime soon and that gives us, Mac users, the unbelieveable edge of now having Industry-leading equipment, superior OS, ALL AT THE SAME TIME FOR YEARS TO COME!!!
AAAAAGH!!!
{whew}
I'm okay...
{sigh}
Can't wait till MWSF! Can you?
now, i'm glad that people have gotten over the hype of the G5 and realized that the G5 is awesome, and an integral part of Apple's future, but the real exciting part is the partnership between Apple and IBM.
As Mr. Anderson stated, this is SUCH a HUGE change from waiting a few years for minor upgrades from Motorola and already there is serious (valid) discussion of the G5's successor!!!! the machines' haven't even shipped!!!!!! Does anybody realize the potential??? Apple and IBM won't end this partnership anytime soon and that gives us, Mac users, the unbelieveable edge of now having Industry-leading equipment, superior OS, ALL AT THE SAME TIME FOR YEARS TO COME!!!
AAAAAGH!!!
{whew}
I'm okay...
{sigh}
Can't wait till MWSF! Can you?
Originally posted by Frobozz
Some more evidence for my "3.0 GHz G5 next June" hypothesis....
We'll probably need something along the lines of a 3.0-3.5 Ghz 980 to double the speed of 2.0 970. Apple would want to double the speed of their machines every 18 months to stay abreast with Moore's law, but we all know the heat will be on to improve their machines eeven faster than Intel/AMD can.
We're now going to face the reality that, given identical architectures, to double the speed of a 2.0 Ghz 970 you'd need a 4.0 Ghz 970 or equivalent. So, in a sense, IBM has to be able to ramp up the clock speed fast. A 200 or 300 Mhz jump is mere child's play now. Mmmmmm. I've been waiting to say those words for a long time now.
If Apple says it's hitting 3.0 GHz by next June (one year from now), and that part can only be a 980 (evidence supports this), then we will DOUBLE the speed of the current dual processor systems next June.
That's a statement even I wouldn't expect to say. But hear me out. If the 980 is, say, 35% more efficient per clock cycle than the 970, then a 4.05 Ghz 970 ~ 3.0 Ghz 980. As we all know, 2 x 2 = 4.
Obviously this is all just for fun, but it is interesting.
Quite frankly, I'd buy a new G5 with a Radeon 9800 pro right now if I had some extra cash. I'm not going to wait for anything in particular now that the G5 is out. However, I am in the market for a laptop and I will have to buy sometime in the next 6 months. Fingers are crossed for a 1.4 Ghz G5 PowerBook by January!
I see what you are saying, but I think that it might be a little optimistic to think that apple is going to double their processor speed every year. I wouldn't be surprised if the 3.0 ghz were a 970, and I would be surprised if apple switched to a new chip so quickly (ok... the 980 is similar, but I don't think that apple has ever gotten a new chip in such little time. Of course we all hope that ibm will be a million times better than motorolla....). I think you have a better chance of getting a g5 powerbook in January, but then again, apple said that you wouldn't. Well, all I can say is good luck.
There is room for some design rethink inside the Xserve. Remember it has a PCI slot with room around it so that it can have a graphics card installed and be used as a workstation.
The new desktop G5 makes that idea redundant, so they could make use of that PCI real estate for a different config, and accommodate some nifty heat dissipation design.
As I read on heise.de yesterday, the Power5 should be out in the first half of 2004. So December seems a bit too early and we won't see the 980 before the second half of 2004 if I believe in the article. I don't expect them to arrive before beginning of 2005 to be honest. And it is extremely improbable that Apple will bring out the G6 (or whatever it will be called) in less than a year after the G5 in my eyes.
Here's the link (in German):
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/as-30.06.03-000/
Here's the link (in German):
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/as-30.06.03-000/
i was thinking that too. At first I thought that it would be a great idea for apple to use the power 4 or power 5 chips in the xserves, but now I don't really think so. I think that most people who would want an xserve (or atleast a good portion) would want the high clock speeds of the g5 for their work. Yes, the power 4 and power 5 are more stable, but I really don't think that the xserves are only used for servers. They also make good clusters and alternatives for supercomputers.
Re: thanks
The majority of people on this message board, and in the US have nothing against France and love our European neighbors.
I also wanted to say that Macbidouille is a very accurate source of Mac information and we appreciate the work you do. Thanks again for your efforts.
Please don't read too much into the insults that some people on this message board use. Those people are too quick to believe the anti-French propaganda put out by our current government.
The majority of people on this message board, and in the US have nothing against France and love our European neighbors.
I also wanted to say that Macbidouille is a very accurate source of Mac information and we appreciate the work you do. Thanks again for your efforts.
Re: wait a minute
After the truth of their 970 rumors has been seen first hand, why would you now doubt their sources?
Please don't compare MacBidouille and MacWhispers. MacBidouille has been very accurate and consistent with it's 970 rumors. The only thing they were wrong about was the immediate availability of PowerMac G5s. Their benchmarks were spot on, and nobody even believed them at the time because there are so many ignorant people on these forums that think anything from a French site should be taken as if it came from the Iraqi minister of information.
After the truth of their 970 rumors has been seen first hand, why would you now doubt their sources?
G5 Xservers
It only makes sence that the G5 would end up in their server line ASAP. It's a much better chip and database servers are one of the things that will greatly benefit from a 64 bit OS. Hopefully the same for web, video editing, and rendering.
980? I suspect we'll see at least one speed bumb in the next 6 months just because IBM will want to get their money. 980's will most likely also be called G5 and the only difference the average user will notice will be proc speed listed on the box. Probably having 970's in the low end and 980's in the high end as per speed avialable. I would hope for at least 20% speed bumps every four months just to keep up sales and competition with Intel. That will all depend on IBM, but hopefully they'll do better than Motorola
It only makes sence that the G5 would end up in their server line ASAP. It's a much better chip and database servers are one of the things that will greatly benefit from a 64 bit OS. Hopefully the same for web, video editing, and rendering.
980? I suspect we'll see at least one speed bumb in the next 6 months just because IBM will want to get their money. 980's will most likely also be called G5 and the only difference the average user will notice will be proc speed listed on the box. Probably having 970's in the low end and 980's in the high end as per speed avialable. I would hope for at least 20% speed bumps every four months just to keep up sales and competition with Intel. That will all depend on IBM, but hopefully they'll do better than Motorola
Re: thanks
thanks for the tip (the us version) -- and, yes, the vast majority of the people on this site are not anti-european. There are a significant number of europeans who visit this site.
The anti-whoever users will be banned as they appear.
arn
thanks for the tip (the us version) -- and, yes, the vast majority of the people on this site are not anti-european. There are a significant number of europeans who visit this site.
The anti-whoever users will be banned as they appear.
arn