G5 Dual Core 3ghz could it be?

MacTruck

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 27, 2005
1,242
0
One Endless Loop
Anyone think the dual core G5 will still materialize? Any idea when this could happen? Think they will release a Powermac update on a non event? I feel like something will happen soon, don't know why.

I NEED SUPER DUPER COMPUTER SPEED... for websurfing and email. WHAHHHAAA!



From the Superhero manual... (The Hall of Justice computer was a MAC)!
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
A dual 2.0-2.3 GHz is more likely unless IBM suddenly makes a 60-75% cut in power and heat with the switch to PPC970GX.

That's if Apple didn't change the Max Power/Heat specs.
 

ksz

macrumors 68000
Oct 28, 2003
1,670
60
San Jose, CA
I too hope that a dual-core PPC PowerMac is in the pipeline, but it should have forward-looking chipset technologies (PCIe, SATA-II, DDR-whatever) or it will be Disappointment City yet again.
 

MacTruck

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 27, 2005
1,242
0
One Endless Loop
ksz said:
I too hope that a dual-core PPC PowerMac is in the pipeline, but it should have forward-looking chipset technologies (PCIe, SATA-II, DDR-whatever) or it will be Disappointment City yet again.

I agree. But you know what? I have a DUAL LAYER DVD burner and no dang dual layer discs. Can't find them for under $4 a piece and thats if I can find them and none are 4x just 2.4x. Kind of like SATA drives. Try to find the 400gb Seagate SATA drive locally anywhare. They all still use PATA. I don't think I have ever seen a SATA II drive anywhere yet. So these technologies are great only if they are supported.

Give me a mac that uses PC video cards then I will be happy. Ohhhh, will that be the Mactel? (mouth watering)
 

ksz

macrumors 68000
Oct 28, 2003
1,670
60
San Jose, CA
MacTruck said:
I agree. But you know what? I have a DUAL LAYER DVD burner and no dang dual layer discs. Can't find them for under $4 a piece and thats if I can find them and none are 4x just 2.4x. Kind of like SATA drives. Try to find the 400gb Seagate SATA drive locally anywhare. They all still use PATA. I don't think I have ever seen a SATA II drive anywhere yet. So these technologies are great only if they are supported.

Give me a mac that uses PC video cards then I will be happy. Ohhhh, will that be the Mactel? (mouth watering)
Yes I am aware of the dual-layer disc problem, but I still favor forward-looking technologies. Some technologies will be adopted more slowly than others, but if I am to spend $3000 on a PM, I want it to incorporate the latest existing technologies. Hitachi, Samsung and Western Digital have SATA-II drives on the market (http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2454&p=1). I expect the PM to have a 4-5 year lifespan, and in that time I have every confidence in a widespread adoption of SATA-II. My point: Don't cripple the machine's future right from the start.

Your standards may vary.
 

Gokhan

macrumors 6502a
Oct 7, 2003
703
0
London
hmm

i would not be surprised if ibm do achieve this just to stick 2 fingers up at apple anything is possible in the computer market ANYTHING

remember when apple nearly went bust !!!
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
Gokhan said:
i would not be surprised if ibm do achieve this just to stick 2 fingers up at apple anything is possible in the computer market ANYTHING

remember when apple nearly went bust !!!
Don't forget nVidia, they got down to $3 million in the bank before they got the company turned around.
 

eXan

macrumors 601
Jan 10, 2005
4,713
18
Russia
Can somebody answer my question - will 300 MHz increase over 2.7 GHz make you return home faster from work? I bet most of you will not even notice this increase!!

Also, if Apple went to dual cores, will they make single CPU Power Macs with dual cores or Dual with dual cores?

Which is better - to have dual core CPU or to have dual CPU?
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,388
42
1123.6536.5321
I would say doubtful, but of course I could be wrong. If something like this was in the pipeline though, I don't think Apple would have made its choice to dump IBM and go with Intel - I think the lack of progress of technologies such as this are part of the reasons Apple made its switch.