G5 in PB

[thatwendigo]

Do you remember how long it took Apple to put a G4 in a PowerBook when the G4 processor came out? It was at least 2 years.

PowerBook G4 - introduced 2001.01.09 at US$2,599 and $3,499
PowerMac G4 - G4/350 introduced 1999.10.13 at US$1,599

The span, according to Low End Mac, is one year, two months, and twenty-six days. If you were to assume the same timeframe for the G5, then we'd see one almost exactly on the August/September border. I don't think it will be that quick, but I suppose it might be possible if enough sacrifices are made.

For those without much of a sense of history:
PowerBook G4 (Rev A)
MPC7410 (4-5w peak) 400mhz on 100mhz FSB
128MB PC100 SO-DIMM
ATI Rage 128 Mobility 8MB
15.2" Active-TFT (1152x768 max)
10GB ATA66 4200RPM
2x DVD-ROM
USB 1.1 (2 ports)
FireWire (1 port)
IR Port
10/100 Ethernet
56k v.90 modem
PC Card slot
$2,599

PowerMac G4 (Rev D - "Five Slot")
Dual MPC7410 533mhz on 133mhz FSB
128MB PC133
nVidia GeForce 2MX 32MB (first AGP 4x)
no monitor
60GB ATA66
8/4/32x CD-RW
4 64-bit PCI slots
56k modem
FireWire (2 ports)
USB 1.1 (2 ports)
10/100/1000 Ethernet
Airport slot and antenna
$2,499

Higher clock, dual processors, higher FSB, higher optical and HD, more ports, better networking, and Airport, all while being cheaper than the portable... Doesn't bode well for the much-vaunted G5 portable, especialy since the G4 in that version was a mere 4-5 watts, as opposed to the 970fx's 25 watts.

 

[BrianKonarsMac]

thats what my sister was telling me to do. I'm probably gonna get that. Thanks

I really do not see the need for a G5 for myself. Like I really need Office to open up in .5 seconds

this is exactly the problem with the G5...people think ooh 64 bits its twice the speed!! wrong!!! the G5 is a floating point monster, games, simulations, number crunching, etc. it's amazing. For anything like word processing and email, or just basic computing, you'll notice ZERO difference between a G5 and a G4. Trust me I use both.

 

[SiliconAddict]

First of all, I have every right in the world to speculate what I THINK Apple is going to do.

No problems with people speculating on what apple may do. Its when people come off as THIS IS IT! No G5's until next Summer or Spring or whenever. Its started to wear thin on the nerves.

 

[cb911]

about the screen protector... if you really want to spend money on a piece of cloth, go for it. (although if you get a good cloth you can also use it to clean your screen).

but when i had my TiBook i just stuck a piece of A4 paper in there, and it was fine.

now with the new AlPBs there's alot bigger gap between the keyboard and screen, i don't think you'll have any problems with that.

 

[Abstract]

Geez, you're spending/wasting so much money on stuff you don't really need, and this is after you buy a laptop that's superfluous for what you do. Got money to blow, do you?

Just get some RAM, get the 64MB video card, get the 5400RPM HDD, and get a new backpack. Sorry, but Triple 5 Soul isn't exactly the type of backpack you should put your expensive PB in. In a good laptop backpack, the laptop sits in a pocket that doesn't touch the bottom of the bag. If you put your PB in your T5Soul backpack, then it'll bang against the floor when you put the bag down. I'm not saying that you need to have a laptop backpack to keep a laptop in, because you really don't "need" one. My friend uses his regular backpack, and his laptop is fine. But if you're willing to spend so much money to get the best and most expensive 17" PB, I'd get the stuff that's most useful first. You really don't need a screen protector. I don't have one, and its fine. Do you really want to buy a cloth?

My Oakley pouch/wipe works great.

 

[SiliconAddict]

OK where to begin.

Power expenditure, as you well know, is a big deal. Unless those 7200 RPM drives are going to be heavily cached and thus not tapped as often, they're probably only a good idea on laptops that are intended to be wall-plugged "desktop replacement."

The drives have a number of advanced power management features. Our laptops at work have these drives in them (IBM T41's to be specific.) and we are still getting 3.5-4 hours out of the laptop.

Tom's hardware hard drive shootout

Unless you are forced to edit in the field, the PowerBook G4 is a bad choice for a Final Cut Pro "editing station."
The G5/1.8MP Power Mac was over TWO TIMES FASTER than the 17" PowerBook G4 (1.5GHz) running our FCP4 render tests!

Sure, that second, higher-clocked CPU had nothing to do with the results. It's all the 300mhz difference that did it...

Sorry missed the Multiprocessor quote. But still. Compair the benchmarks:

G5 1.8 937
G4 1.5 1236
G4 1.33 1268

If you extrapolate the numbers and the relative performance diff between the 1.33 and 1.5 G4 you can get an idea of where a 1.8GHZ G4 would take you. Unless they did some major changes adding 300MHz won't make that big of a diff. Also it should be noted that FC has been tweaked for the G5. The likelihood of Apple continuing to tweak their apps and OS for the G5 is pretty likely and in the future its a good bet the performance diff between the G4 and the G5 is going to be even greater as Apple standardizes on the G5.

We can point at known facts and the principles of physics, though. It doesn't mean that

What physics!?! This topic has been debated into the ground. There have been more then a few threads that have found that new 90nm G5 sub 2 GHz chips do not produce much, if any, more heat then current G4's, ditto with power consumption. Prior to IBM's move to the 90nm process yes a G5 PowerBook was not likely. But now? I bet it is. I won't speculate on the benchmarks of such a beast but the fact that the system but alone could be in the 400Mhz+ range vs the G4's 167Mhz system bus speaks to a likely performance increase.

The legitimate reason in this case is hobbling by the Motorola parent corporation, which is no longer an issue. If FreeScale can move away from their past and put this new Crolles facility to work for them, then good things could come for Apple.

I truly want to believe that. But the proof is in the product. Until Moto produces these new wonderful chips I don't believe it for a second. Moto has let down Apple time and again and has hurt Apple sales because of it, yes I'm aware the same could be said of IBM right now. Until they deliver the goods to Apple's door IMHO its pure vaporware.

 

[thatwendigo]

The drives have a number of advanced power management features. Our laptops at work have these drives in them (IBM T41's to be specific.) and we are still getting 3.5-4 hours out of the laptop.

Just read the article, and while I've seen allegations that 7200RPM drives actually provided a saving in power, the artcile doesn't back that up. They concede that there's a power loss, but don't ever say exactly how much. Instead, it reads like a cheerleading session for the power management of the Hitachi drive.

They're obviously faster, though.

I don't get what you are hinting at. 300 MHz would NOT account for benchmarks that are 2 times faster. Just as the leap from 1.33 to 1.5 doesn't dramatically increase the performance of the PowerBook. If anything what helps is the fact that FCP has been tweaked for the G5 another reason to have a G5 enabled PowerBook. Its a damn good bet that apple is going to continue to tweak their apps for the G5.

No, no, no... What I was saying was that the G5 being a dual-processor system, and that that's the reason for it being so incredibly higher performing. It's not just one, but two higher-clocked chips under the hood. That's what bolding the MP after the clockrate was intended to point out.

There have been more then a few threads that have found that new 90nm G5 sub 2 GHz chips do not produce much, if any, more heat then current G4's, ditto with power consumption.

Mind pointing me at one? Not that it will matter, since the G5 sub-2.0ghz chips really don't outperform the G4 by much, either.

Prior to IBM's move to the 90nm process yes a G5 PowerBook was not likely. But now? I bet it is. I won't speculate on the benchmarks of such a beast but the fact that the system but alone could be in the 400Mhz+ range vs the G4's 167Mhz system bus speaks to a likely performance increase.

So the fact that the 1.6ghz at 800mhz FSB doesn't scream past the 1.5ghz G4 at 167mhz doesn't strike you as at all odd? People like to trot out the FSB argument a lot, but the numbers aren't exactly there to support it in most applications.

I truly want to believe that. But the proof is in the product. Until Moto produces these new wonderful chips I don't believe it for a second. Moto has let down Apple time and again and has hurt Apple sales because of it, yes I'm aware the same could be said of IBM right now. Until they deliver the goods to Apple's door IMHO its pure vaporware.

They're already on target. The e500 is shipping to embedded markets as we speak, billed as a solution for telecom and VoIP implementations. It's a totally new chip, unlike the e300 and e600, though the e600 is going to be massively modified.