Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Dual 1.25 GHz PowerMacs use the 7470 chip

T

TyleRomeo

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 22, 2002
888
0
New York
There has been plenty of talk that the newest and fastest macs are overclocked with moto's 7455 chip. After giving it lots of thought, the idea of Apple releasing an overclocked system is rediculous. Here's a few reasons why.

1. Apple is and has been a very conservative company for as long as I can remember. They don't release a product unless its ready and passed all of their stingent tests. That causes us to wait slightly longer for it but its worth getting a product that is reliable and waiting longer then desired rather than getting an unstable product thats rushed.

2. Has anyone ever heard of a computer company releasing an overclocked system? I sure haven't. Would releasing an overclocked system be a warranty nightmare. I'd make sure I pick up some Apple Care for when the system overheats even with all those vents.

3. Has Apple announced that the top of the line mac is overclocked? I guess must have missed that in the specs.

4. Now how much are you exactly paying for this "overclocked system". Well if you take the faster dual 1 GHz machine and add apples expensive options to upgrade the middle machine to 512 MB DIMM of DDR and a 120GB hard drive, that leaves you with $500 to spend on the power that the top of the line machine gives you. So you get an extra 500 MHz and 1 MB DDR L3. It seems to me that paying $500 for an overclocked and unstabble system is a little silly. There was less then a $500 difference between the previous 933 and the old Dual 1 GHz when they both had the same amount of ram and hard drive space. So you were getting a second G4 chip or a total of an extra 1067MHz. Now to me that was reasonable.

5. Why do you think we have to wait so long for the new 1.25 GHz PowerMacs. That becuase they are putting in the 7470 chip inside. A chip that can read DDR ram much more efficiently than the slower duals. Apple wants to make sure they have enough of them in stock before they ship them out to the stores. That exlplains why you pay so much extra for just 500 MHz. I know I'd shell it out if I knew I had a chip that would actually do something productive with all that DDR ram we now have.
 
i'd be willing to bet money you are wrong. they are overclocked and not 7470's.

otherwise there would be NO reason for the casing to be as such. apple is about functionality and beauty. that case is NOT functional if it has a 7470.
 
ROTFLMAO, the CPUs won't be overclocked or 7470s - there were hints that the 7455 line yielded chips that clocked very fast, but had low yields.

Chances are it'll be a 7455 spec tested at 1.25GHz or faster - the absolute simplest answer.

Anyway I thought Moto and IBM don't update their websites for available processors until after Apple has announced or shipped.

Then there's the box. The physical box is designed for future use, it'll be around for quite awhile as the mobo and CPUs change inside it.

The box itself will handle more heat, which increases with CPU clock speed. The old design was reaching it's limits for getting rid of heat.

Think SIMPLE.
 
Originally posted by Sun Baked
ROTFLMAO, the CPUs won't be overclocked or 7470s - there were hints that the 7455 line yielded chips that clocked very fast, but had low yields.

Chances are it'll be a 7455 spec tested at 1.25GHz or faster - the absolute simplest answer.
Click to expand...

That is essentially overclocking. The 7455 was designed and specced at a 1GHz maximum. The very definition of "user" overclocking involves the fact that the chip was never even tested to run higher, and taking advantage of the possibility that it might. I see this as manufacturer overclocking.

Again, the heat is a major factor in my believing that it is indeed overclocked. Overclocking is generally just a term for end users, but companies do it too.
 
Re: Dual 1.25 GHz PowerMacs use the 7470 chip

Originally posted by TyleRomeo
2. Has anyone ever heard of a computer company releasing an overclocked system? I sure haven't. Would releasing an overclocked system be a warranty nightmare.
Click to expand...

I have seen in the past very high-end gaming PCs from reputable makers (Falcon Northwest, Voodoo Computers, etc.) that not only have overclocked CPUs, but also overclocked graphics cards. Keep in mind that these were slightly overclocked machines, i.e. 2GHz to 2.1GHz. I don't have any statistics on warranty service or failure rates, but I do know that overclocking can be done effectively with enough cooling. It does not seem likely that Apple to try to overclock the 7455 by 25%:eek: .

Personally, I hope that the Dual 1.25 is the 7470 chip with full DDR support. That may be able to kick some peecee a$$.:D
 
Here's a little chart right off of Apple's web site - this it a performance comparison - do you think it would be effectively linear if the 1.25s were going to be the 7470 processors and handle RAM better? I don't think so. You'd see a much greater performance jump.

I'm laying my money on no 7470s when the 1.25s come out in a month or so.

D
 

Attachments

  • graphphotoshop08132002.gif
    graphphotoshop08132002.gif
    6.5 KB · Views: 1,243
Orginally posted by dukestreet
Here's a little chart right off of Apple's web site - this it a performance comparison - do you think it would be effectively linear if the 1.25s were going to be the 7470 processors and handle RAM better? I don't think so. You'd see a much greater performance jump.
Click to expand...

So now were basing performance specs by Apple's highly reliable Photoshop tests. Well I think, I'm sold
 
Originally posted by dukestreet
Here's a little chart right off of Apple's web site - this it a performance comparison - do you think it would be effectively linear if the 1.25s were going to be the 7470 processors and handle RAM better? I don't think so. You'd see a much greater performance jump.
Click to expand...
Might want to take a course in Graph Reading 101. The benchmark isn't disclosed, there is no quantitative data, and the x axis isn't even labeled. It's a BS graph.
 
Months ago when the 7455 was released, Motorola announced they were shipping 7455’s between 600 MHz and 1000 MHz.

This does not mean that 1GHz is as fast as it's ever supposed to go.

There was even buzz that Motorola was pulling chips off the line that test much faster than 1GHz, but in typical Motorola fashion -- meeting demand of 1GHz chips was troublesome.

There was talk that THIS chip design may eventually scale to between 1.5&2.0 GHz when moved to the smaller scale processes.

So after 4-6 months, there is a good chance that Motorola may be able to make enough 1.25 GHz & 1GHz for Apple's needs.
 
Originally posted by sparkleytone


That is essentially overclocking. The 7455 was designed and specced at a 1GHz maximum. The very definition of "user" overclocking involves the fact that the chip was never even tested to run higher, and taking advantage of the possibility that it might. I see this as manufacturer overclocking.

Again, the heat is a major factor in my believing that it is indeed overclocked. Overclocking is generally just a term for end users, but companies do it too.
Click to expand...

Just because you haven't seen a new specification doesn't mean that it isn't there. It could go the other way too, but they may never have announced 1.25 GHz because the yield was so low.

As far as the heat goes, as the chips go faster, clocked properly or not, they tend to be hotter.
 
Originally posted by alex_ant

Might want to take a course in Graph Reading 101. The benchmark isn't disclosed, there is no quantitative data, and the x axis isn't even labeled. It's a BS graph.
Click to expand...

Actually there is a benchmark, the P4 2.53ghz.

Relative performance:

Dell P4 2.53ghz: 1.00
G4 dual 1.00ghz: 1.69
G4 dual 1.25ghz: 1.90

According to this, the 1.25ghz is only 12.4% faster (1.90/1.69). So it's actually worse than what people are saying: 25% gain in clock speed translates into only 12% gain in this particular photoshop test.

I assume that there are many factors involved in this, including how photoshop handles multiprocessorss. I say it's not conclusive either way whether the dual 1.25 ghz uses a different chip or not.
 
Originally posted by dongmin


Actually there is a benchmark, the P4 2.53ghz.

Relative performance:

Dell P4 2.53ghz: 1.00
G4 dual 1.00ghz: 1.69
G4 dual 1.25ghz: 1.90

According to this, the 1.25ghz is only 12.4% faster (1.90/1.69). So it's actually worse than what people are saying: 25% gain in clock speed translates into only 12% gain in this particular photoshop test.

I assume that there are many factors involved in this, including how photoshop handles multiprocessorss. I say it's not conclusive either way whether the dual 1.25 ghz uses a different chip or not.
Click to expand...
That's not nearly enough information, though... how much memory do the machines have? What size scratch disk, and how fast is the scratch disk? What operation(s) is/are being run in Photoshop, and with what size data? Is/are the particular operation(s) AltiVec-optimized on the Macs (presumably yes)?

And the all-important question: Were the benchmarks conducted by an un-biased third party?

On the subject of the graph, what unit do the vertical lines measure? The x axis isn't labeled - it could mean anything from the actual benchmark results to the coolness factor of Steve Jobs' turtleneck as it pertains to the gigaflops of the previous generation G4 divided by the number of hairs on Michael J. Fox's head.
 
Originally posted by alex_ant

Might want to take a course in Graph Reading 101. The benchmark isn't disclosed, there is no quantitative data, and the x axis isn't even labeled. It's a BS graph.
Click to expand...

A quick look tells me the graph is divided in steps of 33.3%. No need for you to tell people what courses to take.
 
Originally posted by cc bcc


A quick look tells me the graph is divided in steps of 33.3%. No need for you to tell people what courses to take.
Click to expand...
Okay, I didn't see that. They should still have labeled the x axis, though. The axes are ALWAYS supposed to be labeled! And titled! !!!!!
 
I don't see what's so confusing...

...they've already posted how fast the dual 1.25GHz's bus is. It's 167MHz. It's not some magical 167MHz that "uses DDR more effectively" than the other (DP1GHz) 167MHz bus. Both of them do 1.3GB/sec. As for it being a 7470 or not, I doubt it is. I think it's more likely that they've just gotten the yields up on the high clocking 7455s (they were selling 1.167GHz 7455s a few days before the release of the powermac).
 
I remember the days when everyone thought the Apollo would reach 1.4GHz....

Guys, it isn't the 7470.

However, I'd put my money on seeing the 7470 sometime from November-January, and G5s in March-August.

We all know that the iMac will probably use the G4 for a LONG time, but the PowerMacs certainly don't need to.
 
Just my opinion: The chips aren't "overclocked" to run at 1.25GHz. They make a batch of chips, then they test them at various speeds. If they all run reliably at 1GHz they slap a 1GHz label on them and sell them as 1GHz. If they all work reliably at 1.25GHz they slap a 1.25GHz label on etc.. It's just that as the manufacturing process gets better/more refined they get more and more 1.25s coming out of the tests. The process must have reached a stage where enough are coming out to sell commercially, that's all. The chips haven't had anything done to them.

As for the L3 cache? Well I don't know but I doubt it can be commercially viable to have two separate highly complex production lines going. Remember the P3/Celeron? Take a P3, turn off half its L2 cache, hey presto you have a Celeron!!!

Please don't flame me, it's just a thought!
 
Originally posted by macwannabe
Just my opinion: The chips aren't "overclocked" to run at 1.25GHz. They make a batch of chips, then they test them at various speeds. If they all run reliably at 1GHz they slap a 1GHz label on them and sell them as 1GHz. If they all work reliably at 1.25GHz they slap a 1.25GHz label on etc.. It's just that as the manufacturing process gets better/more refined they get more and more 1.25s coming out of the tests. The process must have reached a stage where enough are coming out to sell commercially, that's all. The chips haven't had anything done to them.

....

Please don't flame me, it's just a thought!
Click to expand...

You have no need to apologize. You are describing standard operating procedure. Chips off the same line have varying levels of quality. The manufacturer tests each at its maximum designed speed, let's say for argument's sake that's 1.5 GHz. If it passes, then it is labeled as a 1.5 GHz chip and sold as such. If it fails, then the clock reduced to--oh, let's say 1.25 GHz--and tested again. If it passes the test at 1.25 GHz, it is labeled as a 1.25 GHz chip and sold as such. If again the chip fails the test, it is tested at successful lower clock speeds until it passes--if it passes.

If you run an overclocked processor, then you are running it at a speed at which the chip has proven to be unreliable. Despite someone's bandying about the names of computer manufacturers we never heard of, reputable computer manufacturers don't do that. We all know from personal experience how reliable Macs are. We can be assured that Apple is not overclocking its processors.
 
I went down to the local mac store and asked the experts there about the chip. They said they couldn't disclose such information but reasured me that the dual 1.25 isn't overclocked. So now its up either waiting for enough 7455 chips that can run at 1.25GHz or slapping in 7470s. I guess we'll have to see comes out.

By the way the new PM case looks better in person but the crome drives get dirty so easily from finger prints.
 
Originally posted by MisterMe


You have no need to apologize. You are describing standard operating procedure. Chips off the same line have varying levels of quality. The manufacturer tests each at its maximum designed speed, let's say for argument's sake that's 1.5 GHz. If it passes, then it is labeled as a 1.5 GHz chip and sold as such. If it fails, then the clock reduced to--oh, let's say 1.25 GHz--and tested again. If it passes the test at 1.25 GHz, it is labeled as a 1.25 GHz chip and sold as such. If again the chip fails the test, it is tested at successful lower clock speeds until it passes--if it passes.

If you run an overclocked processor, then you are running it at a speed at which the chip has proven to be unreliable. Despite someone's bandying about the names of computer manufacturers we never heard of, reputable computer manufacturers don't do that. We all know from personal experience how reliable Macs are. We can be assured that Apple is not overclocking its processors.
Click to expand...

What you are saying is pretty much true. There are exceptions. Intel has on several occasions been getting more processors that pass at the higher speed than they have orders. What they will do at that point is test for as many as they need at the highest speed until they get enough and stamp those that pass at that speed rating. They test the untested chips and failed chips at the next speed rating they require. The end result is you can have many processors that can run at higher speeds than they are officially labeled as running at.
 
!!!!!!?!!

Are you guys dumb or what?!!! Okay, I don't want to start anything, but I think it's very clear that the 1.25 is not going to be a 7470, nor overclocked!!!!!!

All the specs for all the machines are outlined on the goddamn G4 specs page, even for the 1.25 despite the fact that it hasn't been released!!! It says, just like for the 1Ghz, that the 1.25 has a 167Mhz FSB!!!!! If it was DDR it would be 333Mhz! Christ!

And I'm sure motorola will have 1.25Ghz 7455's in 6-8 weeks. They've had 1Ghz ones for over 6 months now!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back