G5 in volume

[MacRumors]

The Register reports that the G5 has been cleared for volume production:


According to our mole, the G5 is tentatively being produced in three versions: 1.2GHz, 1.4GHz and 1.6GHz. We say 'tentatively' because there still appears to be some concern that there will be insufficient 1.6GHz parts for a commercial release. Says our source: "The chips that are testing at 1GHz are being set aside in case there are not enough 1.6GHz chips to release that machine."

 

[SPG]

No mention of a dual processor machine though, an oversight? Or is Apple not going to make a DP1.6ghz flagship...my mouth waters just thinking about it.

 

[Falleron]

Lets keep everything crossed!!!

 

[atlascott]

Yow!!

Ok, I have been diggin my ass out of debt for 2 years now, and if this is a reality, I will go out and buy myself a new birthday present in late January, even if it means new debt! A new G5! Wowie kazowie!

 

[Brent Turbo]

Source?

Considering this particular "source" is known for making up a lot of crap off the top of his/her head, I'd take this news with a grain of salt.

I hate how as Mac users, we always have to rely on hope to get us by. It's like "once we get (insert upcoming technology), THEN Apple's going to take a bigger market share and people are going to convert like crazy." I could name a grocery list of products that had that kind of hype, but I don't have an hour to type it out.

The biggies:
PowerPC
Powermac G3
Powermac G4
OS X
Virtually every major Powerbook/iBook update

All of these were supposed to be the products that pushed Apple out of the 5% zone.

 

[ThlayliTheFierce]

Where did you get that this source is known for making things up? How do you know it's even the same one as before? You need to stop making up crap off the top of your head. Of course we shouldn't take it as fact! It's a rumor!

 

[PretendPCuser]

How about iMac

In the grocery list of things that were going to get Apple out of the 5%, one was the iMac. Or was that what got Apple out of the 3-4% TO 5% place we are in now.

According to an older article from the Register, the G5 is supposed to be significantly faster in ALL Photoshop tests, not just the ones Apple knows it has an advantage in. Supposedly the G4 beats the Pentium 4 in some Photoshop tests, but gets beat in others. Will be nice if a G5 betters it in all the tests.

Looking forward to it, and going back (or further) in debt, may be an option.

 

[britboy]

Even if the G5 doesn't launch with a top speed of 1.6Ghz, it's still going to be a lot closer to the 1.6Ghz maximum that you can get from AMD, the best pc processor out there...

 

[SPG]

I am much less concerned with Apple's marketshare than with the ability to do video effects and video compositing faster...much faster. Small speed bumps make a big difference when you're on deadline, and big speed increases make life easier all the time.
_________________
Where's my DPG5?

 

[SPG]

Hey SPG, You are still an idiot! marketshare increases revenues which increase $ available for R&D you dolt.
_______________
Still waiting for your DPG5.

 

[ThlayliTheFierce]

Yes but AMD has their performance rating thing to confuse stupid consumers.

 

[Brent Turbo]

Market share

I agree with SPG...

The only reason I want to see Apple get a better market share is because that will mean more money into hardware and software development.

Case in point: Adobe Photoshop for OSX. You know that when Windows XP launched, Adobe had its whole line of products tested and ready to go. They're taking their sweet-ass time with OSX ports because they're making all of their money on the PC versions. If Apple had a larger market share, we'd all be running OSX full-time, with all of our favorite applications -- native.

But for now, I'm going to have to keep lubricating my startup disk control panel for all the use it's getting. And yes, I feel ashamed for starting a paragraph with "But."

 

[Macmaniac]

My hopes for G5 and G4 Macs

Me an my friend (Devote mac fans)(He wants my cube poster from mac world New York) Have some wish list items for apple.

Ahh yes the G5 our hopes were for 1.3 ghz G5 but this sounds enven better!(Take that PC speed people)

We would like to see:
1 ghz G4 iMac with a 17 or 19in screen. A model like this was posted several months ago.(With cool picture)
1.2 ghz G5 Titanium powerbook, just makes my mouth water.
800 mhz G4 iBook more speed makes more fun with a low price tag would be nice

These ideas are a little far fetched (The Titanum Powerbook is a little much)
Still A real fast iMac with a larger screen would attarct gamers who want speed and screen size(Their 60gb hard drive that comes with it, is bigger than the high end dells out there which only have 40gb included)
We may see 6% market share in the future.
Yes I know its crazy but hey its apple they never cease to amaze me (The iPod was the shocker

 

[SPG]

Sure a new iMac with a G4 and a bigger screen would be nice, but I like to think that Apple may be thinking "out of the box" on a machine that will be considered revolutionary like the original iMac was. If it is too similar in form, i t runs the risk of being dismissed as just a re-skin. I hope Apple surprises us all with something really breakthrough...what? If I knew I would go work for Apple.

 

[atlascott]

Video Card...

Nice to see Apple increasing the board/processor/bus speed. But they REALLY need to have better video cards in ALL their machines, especially the iMac and iBook, with ATI RAGE processors--just cannot run the 3d games and such as they were meant to be...

 

[ThlayliTheFierce]

No, what they REALLY need is bus speed and hard drive speed. Most people don't play 3d games on their Mac (at least not as a primary use). While I agree that a better video card can do a lot for a computer's speed as a whole, at this point the Mac's main bottlenecks are bus speed and hard drive speed. The PowerMac G5's need to have a 400 Mhz bus, ATA-100 (if not 133), and DDR at least, or I (along with many others) will be very disappointed.

 

[joey j]

> the Mac's main bottlenecks are bus speed

Low clockspeed helps


> and hard drive speed.

Doesn't Apple already ship 7200 rpm HDs in all the G4s? Although I would
like to see 10k rpm HDs, maybe an 8 mb cache too . Heat would probably
be a problem, and it would cost you dearly, but there's still a market for
it (read: me)


> The PowerMac G5's need to have a 400 Mhz bus,

... so presumably Apple requires RAM which operates to spec at 400 mhz ...


> ATA-100 (if not 133),

So I take it you've found an IDE hard drive that tops out in excess of 100 MB/s?

 

[Falleron]

The PowerMac 733 has a 5400Rpm as standard

 

[spikey]

AMD confuses customers with dumb names.
Intel confuses customers with clock speed.
Apple confuses customers with megahertz myth.

All the f**kers do it. Right now the best chip is the athlon.


Is it just me who has noticed how much more optimistic these rumors are becoming. I thought originally the G5 entry level was going to be at 800Mhz, now its at 1.2.Ghz.
Im not saying its wrong, but we have seen it before with macworld new york and the imac.

 

[SPG]

The G5 needs to be a speedy machine, the "Power Users" are looking for a good boost in real productivity. I know I am, and if Apple doesn't deliver I will be dissappointed, but not upset, and I will not switch to a PC.
If the G5 debuts in January with any machine over 1ghz and especially a DP 1ghz, I will jump up and down going "whoo! whoo!" and break out the credit card on the spot to replace at least one of the older G4's here.
That's the difference, Apple will still sell a slower machine to anyone who really needs one, but not a whole lot to the people who already have them unless the new G5 is a BIG step forward.

 

[evildead]

Originally posted by SPG
The G5 needs to be a speedy machine, the "Power Users" are looking for a good boost in real productivity. I know I am, and if Apple doesn't deliver I will be dissappointed, but not upset, and I will not switch to a PC.
If the G5 debuts in January with any machine over 1ghz and especially a DP 1ghz, I will jump up and down going "whoo! whoo!" and break out the credit card on the spot to replace at least one of the older G4's here.
That's the difference, Apple will still sell a slower machine to anyone who really needs one, but not a whole lot to the people who already have them unless the new G5 is a BIG step forward.

I agree.. these baby seteps of mior speed bumbs are not going to make any power users go out and replace their Macs. The G5 needs to be a major upgrade:

USB 2.0
FireWire 2.0 (or gigagware.. what ever theya are calling it)
DDR Memeory
ATA 133 HD and a BIG one
and a 1.5+ Ghz CPU

Im not that conserned about the CPU.. I want DDR memory. RAM is a major bottle neck in modern Desktops.

A system like that would make me start to feal an inferiority complex come on... and I might just have to trade in my Quickslilver

 

[GPTurismo]

I will believe it when I see it.

I am perfectly happy with my Dual G4 800. Photoshop runs fast enough in classic to satisfy me.

But I think the 1.1 Gigs of ram helps. LOL.

But the thing I am tired of is people screaming about MGHZ. Even if Macs did win the MGHZ wars, they wouldn't gain market share.

Mac's really don't win users due to power, and numbers, but usually due to elegance, style and simplicity. And I think if they pushed those thigns harder, they will start to get more share.

Think of the Volkswagon Beetle. They are very expensive for the size car, but people are paying for lifestyle. Me, on the other hand, got a Ford Focus and used the other 5 Grand I saved not buying a Beetle and got my Dual G4 800 to live the Mac lifestyle. = )

I'll quit ranting now.

-GPT

 

[ThlayliTheFierce]

Joey J, ok, yeah, it would need ram operating at 400 mhz, so if it used DDR it would be at 266 mhz. Small mistake. But you can't tell me that 133 mhz bus is going to be faster than a 400 mhz bus. Now, there is an ATA-133 spec that Maxtor put out, and I believe I read that Maxtor and others are going to come out with drives for it soon. I'm not sure if it's out right now. That's why I said, if you'll read carefully, "ATA-100 (if not 133)". Note the "if not". And ATA-100 is faster than ATA-66, enough to make a difference. Of course the ATA-100 is just a burst-speed, but it does make a difference.

 

[AlphaTech]

ATA133 drives are out there

Maxtor has the DiamondMax D540X which is an Ultra ATA133 drive (only 5400 rpm) in capacities up to 160GB.

I could see the drive makers going over 200GB during next year, considering the past trend of size increases.

One of the good things about the 5400 rpm drive is they are not all that expensive (right around $300 depending on where you get them). I have actually seen them on the shelves at CompUSA for that price (very surprising that they didn't jack it way up).

With ATA RAID cards (there are ATA 133 RAID cards available for the Mac) you can put in 4 drives, stripe them and have a kick ass system. Considering you would get somewhere between 3 and 4 times the single drive in performance when using the four drives.

Just thinking about having a G5 1.xGHz system with four 160GB drives in a RAID configuration makes me drool. Think about it, essentially having a 625GB drive (after formatting and converting the size to real numbers) spinning at between 10,800 and 16,200 rpm and writing at 4x the ATA133 speeds. That is the beauty of going with the Stripe method, it all componds. Granted, you need to use identical drives, which can be costly when you add it all up. I think it would still be cheaper then getting the system from Apple with the current SCSI configuration they offer with two or three hard drives.

Who knows, maybe there will be drives at sizes closer to the 200GB mark (or over it) by the time the G5 hits the stores. Talk about a true super computer.

 

[joey j]

>it would need ram operating at 400 mhz, so if it used DDR it would be at
266 mhz. Small mistake. But you can't tell me that 133 mhz bus is going
to be faster than a 400 mhz bus.

The G5 rumors claim 400 mhz FSB. Where is all this RAM (that can
handle 400 mhz FSBs) anyway? Or have I missed something?


>Now, there is an ATA-133 spec that Maxtor put out, and I believe I read
that Maxtor and others are going to come out with drives for it soon. I'm
not sure if it's out right now. That's why I said, if you'll read
carefully, "ATA-100 (if not 133)". Note the "if not".

I was planning to (rhetorically) ask if you'd found an IDE HD that tops
out at 133 MB/s, but figured that you'd have enough trouble finding one
that tops out at half that, so I posed 100 MB/s instead. So again, where
are these >= 70 MB/s IDE HDs anyway?


> And ATA-100 is faster than ATA-66, eno ugh to make a difference. Of
course the ATA-100 is just a burst-speed, but it does make a difference.

If IDE drives (take a typical high-end consumer drive, 7200 rpm) top out
at (say) 60 MB/s, precisely how is ATA-100 going to speed them up? I'm
assuming that 7200 RPM IDE hard drives don't surpass ~60 MB/s (peak read
or write).