G5 Specs for WWDC!

[ffakr]

So if people can upgrade and come up with a way to cool the cube there is no reason believe that Apple cannot come up with some way to cool the same. There is absolutely no reason for the single processor G5 towers to be the size they are. There is a huge space where the second processors would be. I am not saying that the G5 will be in a cube any time soon, but how about a desktop "pizza" box or a mini-tower half the size of the current G5.

I don't think we'll see a cube... not because Apple can't put a .09 micron G5 into one, but rather because the last cube was a huge failure.
iWill is releasing a dual Opteron Small Form Factor PC (like a tiny Shuttle PC), so there is no reason why Apple can't put a G5 in a small form factor and cool it with a heat pipe/radiator and a large but quiet low rpm fan.

 

[Mord]

The MPC7450 runs at 4 watts at 400mhz, and I find it extraordinarily unlikely that it would jump to nearly three times that in a mere 50mhz climb. Mind showing me your source for the 11.5 watt claim?

Also, you've said that people have upgraded the machines with this and that and the other, but what you're not specifying is how those were cooled. Every modification I've ever seen has required extensive changes in how the box was cooled, and that's precisely my point. On top of that that, even the 1.2ghz G4 and Radeon 9800 card would still be cooler than the G5's support system, and that's the major stumbling block.

the cube did not use a 7450 did it it used the 7400 it's never going to happen but it is possible

the radon 9800 needs no extra cooling and the duals need a 3000rpm fan and a beefyer power supply

no one is syaing g5 powerbooks are imposible because they are not and if they are possible then why not a cube

it's never going to happen and i know that all i am saying is it is possible which it is at the moment with a 1.4Ghz 970fx

 

[jsw]

It's been around for five years and hasn't sold well in the past two, but is iconic and essential? Right now, the iPod is the main thing for which Apple is known.

The don't need to drop the iMac line, just totally rethink it. For one thing, it is not a true all-in-one right now (external speakers). For another, the 15" iMac is $500 more than the combo-drive eMac which is the same machine (which a bigger albeit CRT monitor). The 17" iMac is $800 more than the identical (expect again CRT) Superdrive eMac.

... it is so overpriced ...

Agreed. The iMac is stunningly overpriced for what you get in terms of horsepower, especially given its nearly complete lack of upgradeability.

However, the form factor is iconic, and it would be unfortunate for Apple ("Think Different") to lose such a distinct product.

It would seem to me that Apple should keep (or improve) the visually powerful form factor while adding in upgradeability and/or lowering price.

BTW, the iMac works without the external speakers, it's just that the one internal speaker isn't all that amazing (when are they ever?). An iMac with Bluetooth keyboard and mouse and Airport inside is pretty enough that even my Mom would approve - one wire (the plug).

The G5 is, well, upgradeable and, in the lower end, affordable for a tower, but it should never be called beautiful. It's a giant, heavy, heatsink. A bit industrial for the masses.

The eMac is a great value but not beautiful, really, either.

I'd like to see the iMac improved so that it sells better; it makes a very definite Apple statement that none of the other desktops do (at least as well).

 

[Mav451]

I don't remember where I've read it. I remember reading it though and I remember that the Opteron's floating point performance isn't anything exceptional. Take a look at the Viriginia Tech profile webpage in apple.com. The guy is talking about the floating point performance of Opteron,Itanium 2 and G5 and he also stated that Opteron's floating point performance was much lower than the other two.

The Opteron has a weak FPU? Where are you getting your information from? Even the regular Athlon has good FPU performance.

 

[pjkelnhofer]

I don't think we'll see a cube... not because Apple can't put a .09 micron G5 into one, but rather because the last cube was a huge failure.
iWill is releasing a dual Opteron Small Form Factor PC (like a tiny Shuttle PC), so there is no reason why Apple can't put a G5 in a small form factor and cool it with a heat pipe/radiator and a large but quiet low rpm fan.

So we agree. I don't think anyone really expects to see a G5 cube (not soon, not ever), but there is no technical reason that Apple could not find a way to fit a single processor G5 into a much, much smaller form factor than the G5 tower (which is pretty darn big).

 

[jsw]

So if people can upgrade and come up with a way to cool the cube there is no reason believe that Apple cannot come up with some way to cool the same. There is absolutely no reason for the single processor G5 towers to be the size they are. There is a huge space where the second processors would be. I am not saying that the G5 will be in a cube any time soon, but how about a desktop "pizza" box or a mini-tower half the size of the current G5.

Honestly, even the dual G5's don't need to be so big. There's a lot of unused space in there which I have a hard time believing is absolutely required for cooling purposes.

And, while I love my G5 (must say that... writing post on it, don't want it to crash...), it's a complicated love, as most loves are. It's fast and upgradeable and has, amazingly, given me no problems in nine months (unusual perhaps for a first rev). But... it is a beast. It weighs over 40 pounds. And I can't figure out why it has to be so darn big. I mean, if they were anchoring everything to the case and using it as a giant heat sink, then, well, maybe I guess it makes some sense, but that's not the case.

So I think all G5's could be smaller. Or at least use the space for more drives.

 

[Mav451]

So we agree. I don't think anyone really expects to see a G5 cube (not soon, not ever), but there is no technical reason that Apple could not find a way to fit a single processor G5 into a much, much smaller form factor than the G5 tower (which is pretty darn big).

Haha of course, technically. Athlon XPs have long been part of the Shuttle line (that started SFF in the first place a few years ago). Those things go from 40-50W (60ish if you got a 3200+ Barton in there)...and since a single G5 is 25W or so (someone correct me), this should be GRAVY.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Actually, I went and read about that drive, and it's not at all a dual-layer device. It is, however, a dual-format (meaning it supports both DVD+ and DVD-) and so is positioned to work with both major standards in the industry. The fastest dual-layer drive is less than 4x at the moment, because the Sony DRU-700A is $199 and records 2.4x DVD+R DL, 8x DVD-/+R, 4x DVD-/+RW, and 24x CD-RW.

I had to go back and re-read the site before linking it and I almost second-guessed it, but MacNN, MacMinute, and MacCentral are all calling it dual-layer, based on LaCie's press release.

 

[jsw]

So we agree. I don't think anyone really expects to see a G5 cube (not soon, not ever), but there is no technical reason that Apple could not find a way to fit a single processor G5 into a much, much smaller form factor than the G5 tower (which is pretty darn big).

On the plus side, once the current G5's go out of date, I'm going to buy another one and use the two of them as the base for a coffee table.

Seriously, these cases must have an awesome crush rating. I think 80% of the weight of the entire G5 is the darn case.

 

[jsw]

Instead of just a smaller case, what I would truly like to see (not to be confused with "ever expect to see in my lifetime") is for Apple to produce a prosumer-level version of their Xserve G5 and RAID lines. I'd like separate cases for my drives, my optical units, my graphics card, etc., and I'd like one or two G5's per smaller case, then I'd like to see the whole thing stackable and interconnected with appropriate connections. Sort of like a mini-rack.

That way, I can go out and buy what I need/can afford, and when the newer, faster G5's come out, I can add them in. Yeah, I can sort of do that now with Xgrid, but I still end up with way too much case volume. If I can afford only one 2.0GHz G5 (or whatever the low-end one will be soon), I can buy it - then add on as I can afford to do so. Perhaps I need to add in pairs. Whatever. It's a solveable problem. And I think that prosumers would go for it. It's by no means a new idea, but I've never seen it pitched at non-business/non-university/non-government buyers.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

I'm joining this thread a little late, but...

The 3Ghz machine will come. As soon as Steve made that promise I started saving up for it. I think that whatever Apple unveils at WWDC will represent a maximum effort on their part - it will be the best they can muster. I just hope that the new machines come with new video cards. It would be nice if Apple can convince ATI and NVIDIA to develop video cards for Macs on a parallel time frame with their Wintel counterparts.

 

[ffakr]

I'm sorry, but there is next to no chance of there being a G5 cube, for a variety of reasons. The most basic one is that the chip under the hood is already six times as hot as the original machine if you use a 2.0ghz 970FX (24.5w as opposed to 4w). Add on the 1.0ghz FSB instead of a 100mhz FSB (tenfold increase), PC3200 RAM instead of PC100, a modern graphics card instead of the Rage 128... You're talking about a fifteen-fold increase in heat, which is going to take either a lot of noise or a lot of money to cool in the same space. Technical issues aside, there's a market perception of the cube as being too pricey for what you get, aside from a niche market where people have bought them long after for their coolness factor.

I'm really not sure why you keep pulling these numbers out. You are using clock speed to directly guage power consumption and waste heat production. That's not even close to realistic.

First off, as noted in another post.. the cube didn't use a 4w processor. It used a 7400 and eventually a 7410, not a 7450.

If you look at ALL the technologies used in a new machine compared to an old machine, you'll find that pretty much all of them use components that require a lower voltage due to their smaller lithography. Sure, PC 3200 runs faster than PC 100. It runs at 200MHz (ddr) instead of 100MHz, but the memory chips are smaller, more dense (more memory for fewer chips) and they run on a lower voltage. I'm sure you know that wattage is voltage x amperage. PC 100 is 3.3 volt while PC 3200 is 1.8 volt. Finding current draw on dimms isn't easy, but to follow your reasoning that new components are 4-15x more power consuming than cube era tech, our memory would require nearly 8-30x more amps than SDRAM. I find this fairly unlikely, don't you?

The same point is valid when comparing the central chipset of the systems. Cube, 100MHz chipset built on, I'm guessing, a .18-.22 micron process. Clock speed, 100 MHz. Current G5 chipset is built on a .13 micron process (the next rev of the chipset will be .09 micron since Apple specifically said the chipset will be built on the same technology as the processors). U3 chipset is built on a significantly smaller process resulting in a lower required voltage. U3 also runs at 500MHz (DDR). It's clock speed is actually 1/4 of the PPC 970 which is built on the same process. Remember that the wattage difference between a 1.6GHz G5 and a 2GHz G5 processor is nearly a factor of 2 [as in, the 1.6 uses about half the wattage]... that's for a 20% decrease in clock speed. The U3 chipset runs at a 75% lower clockspeed than the PPC 970. Apples to Oranges? Yes.. but I'd have to imagine that the U3 can't be significantly larger than the PPC 970 so these figures should make a useful comparison.

 

[ffakr]

I'm joining this thread a little late, but...

The 3Ghz machine will come. As soon as Steve made that promise I started saving up for it. I think that whatever Apple unveils at WWDC will represent a maximum effort on their part - it will be the best they can muster. I just hope that the new machines come with new video cards. It would be nice if Apple can convince ATI and NVIDIA to develop video cards for Macs on a parallel time frame with their Wintel counterparts.

Remember, S Jobs doesn't manufacture processors. He made that claim because IBM said, 'hey stevie baby, don't worry... we'll be doing 3 Gigs within 12 months'
also remember that Prescott was due by December of last year (after a previous slip). Remember that AMD was to be shipping .09 micron Opterons last quarter... Heck, remember that Motorola was supposed to be shipping 2 GHz G4s last year with DDR front side buses.

Chip product lines slip all the time. I don't understand why everyone would think Jobs was intentionally lying if he can't ship 3GHz by WWDC. Intel was supposed to be running 3.6 GHz Prescotts by summer and they haven't released the 3.4s yet.

Personally, I expect a big bump at WWDC (though I expected one in January too).
I'd say.. 65% chance of a PPC 970fx clocking up to between 2.6-2.8 GHz. I figure, maybe, a 35% chance of a new processor built off of the Power5 that could clock up to 3GHz. I think that's probably pretty optomisitic on the high end.. but who knows outside Apple hardware?

 

[SyndicateX]

Ooooh god, please dont turn this into a G5 Cubes Are Coming!!! thread...It came, it went, and no one really cared. let it die.

R.I.P. Little Cube.

 

[pjkelnhofer]

I'm joining this thread a little late, but...

The 3Ghz machine will come. As soon as Steve made that promise I started saving up for it. I think that whatever Apple unveils at WWDC will represent a maximum effort on their part - it will be the best they can muster.

Nothing like a little blind faith to keep you going. I agree the 3 GHz machine will come, someday. Right now, there is no evidence apart from Steve promise to make us believe it is coming any time soon. If Apple does arrive with a 3 GHz chip (be it, 970, 975, 980, Power5, anything) from IBM, it will have been one of the best keep secrets in chip making.

Look at the bright side, if you just keep saving until the 3 GHz comes out, the longer it takes bigger monitor you can buy to go with it.

Personally, I am still much, much more interested in seeing a lower priced, smaller profile, single processer G5 desktop at any speed, than a $3000 dual 3 GHz beast. One would be good for sales, the other is for nothing but bragging rights!

 

[Mav451]

...Chip product lines slip all the time. I don't understand why everyone would think Jobs was intentionally lying if he can't ship 3GHz by WWDC. Intel was supposed to be running 3.6 GHz Prescotts by summer and they haven't released the 3.2s yet...

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=19-116-176&depa=0

3.2E's (aka Prescott) have been available for the past few weeks...that said, clock per clock, the Northwood 3.2C's (800fsb) are still better performers, so its kind of a moot point that Intel released the 3.2E anyway 0_*

 

[pjkelnhofer]

Chip product lines slip all the time. I don't understand why everyone would think Jobs was intentionally lying if he can't ship 3GHz by WWDC. Intel was supposed to be running 3.6 GHz Prescotts by summer and they haven't released the 3.2s yet.

I don't think he was lying at all. I think that he fully expected IBM to be supplying Apple with 3 GHz chips "within a year" when he said it. The question is whether or not IBM will be able to deliver on his promise. I think everyone here feels like Apple got burned by Motorola and is very, very afraid of it history repeating itself.

 

[ffakr]

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=19-116-176&depa=0

3.2E's (aka Prescott) have been available for the past few weeks...that said, clock per clock, the Northwood 3.2C's (800fsb) are still better performers, so its kind of a moot point that Intel released the 3.2E anyway 0_*

I'm sorry.. that was totally a mistake on my part and I'll correct it. I meant to say that the 3.4 GHz Prescotts aren't available yet. I think the 3.2s were available pretty much at launch time.

On another note, in response to ThatWendigo's comments on power requirements being linked to speed...
I didn't spend a lot of time, but I did find some rough numbers on wattage for different memory speeds.

1 stick of PC 100 ~7 watts
1 stick of DDR ~10 watts
1 stick of PC 133 ~12 watts

anyone have any with more accurate numbers on the wattage for various memory standards? These numbers are pretty much what I expected to see, but there was no indication if different DDR speeds affect wattage.

 

[AndrewMT]

You are indeed right on the dual-layer drives. The PC world, I believe only has a single adopter of the dual-layer technology as of yet...so if Apple were to release that, I can only imagine the prices would be positively exorbitant (as if PMacs needed to be any more expensive *_*).

*There are rumors, on certain DVD forums (yes they exist ) that perhaps a firmware update, for the latest 8x DVD+/-RW drives would enable such technology in the existing drives out in the market today.

The dual layer drives are not as expensive as the DVD-RW drives were when they first came out. The sony drive is only $200, and it will be a BTU option if released.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Don't you think its likely that, whether or not the 3Ghz promise is attainable, we will still see a rev B machine with a speed bump and a redesigned motherboard/case that is less noisy or cooler? I would have to think that the new machines will incorporate more than just a faster CPU, given the amount of time since the G5's last update. I'm sure that even if IBM's timetable has slipped, Apple hasn't been sitting on its (collective) hands.

Besides, the longer I wait, the more I can spend on whatever shows up!

 

[thatwendigo]

The G4 cube didn't ship with a 7450.. it shipped with a 7400 which was rev'ed to a 7410 before the cube was retired. 11.5 sounds about right to me.

I referenced the chip specifically from Motorola PDFs not too long ago, and the heat of the processor was 4 watts. I must have been thinking something else when I said 7450, but my source for the processors in machines is lowendmac.com and they've got it as the 7400. In April of 2001, it switched to the 7410, about three months before the product line was killed.

This site has the 7400 part as 5 watts at 400mhz, which is about what I recall reading in the Motorola PDF (which I was reading late at night and stupiidly didn't hold on to or bookmark).

This pdf shows the MPC7410 running between 4 and 4.5 watts at 400mhz, which is lower than the 5 watts of the other site. By comparison, the much later MPC7455 at 1.0ghz runs between 22 and 25 watts. That's a clock increase of 150%, but a heat increase of roughly 400%. The MPC7447A in the current PowerBooks runs at 1.5ghz and 11-12 watts. Make of it what you will.

I'm not sure where you are getting your figures on the power requirements for the U3 chipset though. I just looked at our dual G5 and the chipsets are on the back of the motherboard. They apparently use the case as a heat sink.

I don't have a dualie to be looking at, but I did investigate this claim with a local Apple repair shop that had dualies in the store. When talking to employees, I was told that the case was not being used as a heatsink, and that the ASIC was just under a heatpipe that's about the same as the one that cools the processor and SuperDrive in my eMac.

I never said the ASIC was 60 watts or anything ridiculous like that, but it does need a heatpipe just to cool it, which was never the case with the G4.

So if people can upgrade and come up with a way to cool the cube there is no reason believe that Apple cannot come up with some way to cool the same.

Sure, it's possible that they might make a small case that would hold it all, but it wouldn't be as quiet as macs have been (with the exception of the MDD). If Apple was willing to give that up, then I have no doubt that something could be done to cram a G5 into a tiny box, but I think it's completely against what the company has stood for in the past.

Incidentally, since I don't want to reply specifically to one line of Hector's post with a whole quote, 3000RPM fans tend to 30-40 decibels, and the Radeon 9800 has its own fan that adds even more noise. That's two fans right there. How man more would be needed for a G5?

There is absolutely no reason for the single processor G5 towers to be the size they are. There is a huge space where the second processors would be. I am not saying that the G5 will be in a cube any time soon, but how about a desktop "pizza" box or a mini-tower half the size of the current G5.

Cost is my guess. Apple doesn't run a business on volume and they need to keep parts similar wherever they can in order to control costs. Haven't you ever wondered why there's only four major non-enterprise form factors with minor variations?

Honestly, even the dual G5's don't need to be so big. There's a lot of unused space in there which I have a hard time believing is absolutely required for cooling purposes.

Nine fans and airflow, so that there could be a hotter, faster processor inside is my guess. I mean, really... Am I the only one to consider that Apple might have created the chassis with some future event in mind? It seemed obvious to me that the usage of the cooling system was to keep noise down right now, and the scale with whatever was done later.

I'd say that they probably planned a 970 revision before the 975s, but missed because of the SSDOI wafers going bad at higher temps. Perhaps this combines with the temperature sensor rumors, and the reason they were cranking that high was some kind of thermal misreporting that lead to their burning out. Who knows? The basic idea I expect is that the 970FX was supposed to come to the desktop in January or February at around 2.4-2.6ghz, and then ramp to 3.0 or higher this summer when the 975s were introduced at WWDC.

I had to go back and re-read the site before linking it and I almost second-guessed it, but MacNN, MacMinute, and MacCentral are all calling it dual-layer, based on LaCie's press release.

Interesting, really... The press release and the stories all refer to the d2 drive as being the dual-layer one, but the LaCie page doesn't at all reference it when you find it in their optical offerings. Nothing in the product descriptions says anything about being DVD-R DL capable, which is exceedingly odd.

Maybe they won't add that until the June release that's mentioned in the announcement?

Instead of just a smaller case, what I would truly like to see (not to be confused with "ever expect to see in my lifetime") is for Apple to produce a prosumer-level version of their Xserve G5 and RAID lines. I'd like separate cases for my drives, my optical units, my graphics card, etc., and I'd like one or two G5's per smaller case, then I'd like to see the whole thing stackable and interconnected with appropriate connections. Sort of like a mini-rack.

I've already covered this more than once, from different angles and with different basic design philosophies, actually. There is a not-insignificant amount of research into this concept at a consumer level at the moment, and golly gee, one of the big people involved in it is IBM. The basic principle is sound enough, and it really is in-tune with the ideas behind the xGrid technology and Apples ever-increasing focus upon multiple processor computing.

I fully expect us to see something, at least in a storage and possible optical format, within the next few years. It's just more effficient to have a single large drive cluster on a network than it is to have all your files scattered across multiple machines, and while the technology is further expanded by Xsan and its brethren, Apple can be prettifying it for the home user.

Hell, who doesn't want a 1TB disk array? It's not like our Windows brethren won't be needing it in a few years for Longhorn.

Whatever. It's a solveable problem. And I think that prosumers would go for it. It's by no means a new idea, but I've never seen it pitched at non-business/non-university/non-government buyers.

You must not be reading my posts about possible future directions for Apple to go, then.

 

[thatwendigo]

I'm really not sure why you keep pulling these numbers out. You are using clock speed to directly guage power consumption and waste heat production. That's not even close to realistic.

First off, as noted in another post.. the cube didn't use a 4w processor. It used a 7400 and eventually a 7410, not a 7450.

I've corrected the mistaken chip name. I meant to say that it was the MPC7400 and then the 7410, but I've also cited my sources. Also, I don't use straight clock to gauge anything other than clockspeed, so I'd ask that you not put words in my mouth.

If you look at ALL the technologies used in a new machine compared to an old machine, you'll find that pretty much all of them use components that require a lower voltage due to their smaller lithography.

MPC7410 400mhz at 4-4.5 watts.
IBM 970FX 2.0ghz at 24.5 watts.

ATI Rage 128
ATI Radeon 9800XT
nVidia GeForce FX 5950
(at bottom, in order)

Your point was?

 

[uzombie]

I built one...

Haha of course, technically. Athlon XPs have long been part of the Shuttle line (that started SFF in the first place a few years ago). Those things go from 40-50W (60ish if you got a 3200+ Barton in there)...and since a single G5 is 25W or so (someone correct me), this should be GRAVY.

I built an SK43 withan Athlon XP 2800+(2.08ghz) CPU. The unit is rather cute (worded by my friend grrl I built it for). But its not quiet. The fans will kick up after a few hours of use. The BIOS has setting for smart fans (which can be overridden). The powersupply has a 40mm fan, and there is a heat-pipe unit over the processor that goes to an 80mm fan. Factor in a floppy drive, a cdrw, a 7200RPM HD and Gig of RAM and you are in a 'warm" factor. Add a fast AGP video card, and it just got louder. Still, far quieter than a G5 machine (side by side).

If Apple made a brick, with an external powersupply (like the cube) in a heat sink, and made the case a thick, heatsink...with your choice of display, ..it could be the equivalent of a smaller NeXT pizza box. Personal Pan size!

Could use a slot-load DVD-RW/+W, have three FW ports (2-FW800/1-FW400), three USB 2.0 ports, SATA drive, ADC/DVI out (nice to have an AGP8x slot) and one PCI-X slot. Make it two inches tall, 10 inches wide and 11 inches deep. Powersupply would be a heatsink brick. Wireless mouse, keyboard and networking. You could use the unit in an auto, a boat, a RV...

Dreaming...

 

[pjkelnhofer]

Sure, it's possible that they might make a small case that would hold it all, but it wouldn't be as quiet as macs have been (with the exception of the MDD). If Apple was willing to give that up, then I have no doubt that something could be done to cram a G5 into a tiny box, but I think it's completely against what the company has stood for in the past.... snip ...Nine fans and airflow, so that there could be a hotter, faster processor inside is my guess. I mean, really... Am I the only one to consider that Apple might have created the chassis with some future event in mind? It seemed obvious to me that the usage of the cooling system was to keep noise down right now, and the scale with whatever was done later.

You cannot tell me that there is not a tremendous amount of wasted space inside the single processor G5. I have total faith that Apple could make a smaller case, with half the RAM slots, 2 PCI slots, etc. and keep the G5 cool without sounding like a jet getting ready to take off. Consumers cannot buy a single 2.0 GHz machine? It just seems weird. Give us a two single proc machines (in a smaller case) and two dual proc machines (in the current G5 tower) instead of three choices all in the same box.

You must not be reading my posts about possible future directions for Apple to go, then.

As soon as I read his post about a home version of the Xgrid, I thought man I hope thatwendigo reads this!

 

[Mord]

the current chip that the cube can take at the moment and stay quiet (18db 80mm fan) is the 1.4GHz g4 7457 and that chip dissipates 25 watts according to moto data sheets

a g5 cube can be made now not that it will

look at the 9600 non-pro on ati's page certainly small enough and fanless