G5 Specs for WWDC!

[Wonder Boy]

hooray for two optical drives!

 

[nmk]

So you're going to ignore a rumor in favor of something that you made up?
LOL

No, I'm going to ignore a rumor in favor of logic. You should try it some time.

 

[barnett25]

This is about the water cooling thing... I've only seen water cooling on hardcore geek modded PC's, not on any retail offerings from any major computer company. I think it would be a tech support and public relations nightmare, because so many people wouldn't know what to do, or how to use it. Besides, any malfunctions would probably be disastrous...

<sarcasm> Yeah, cause we all know that Apple doesn't innovate right? They won't do anything unless major pc companies do it first. </sarcasm>

 

[nighthawk]

Also, I think this rumor is garbage. I'm expecting Apple to release 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 Ghz models, with the latter two being dual. I don't think its reasonable to expect 3ghz models considering IBM's fabrication problems. I really don't see how it would be a letdown, as a dual 2.6 would be very competitive.

So what if Steve said they would be at 3ghz. He made a statement based on information he had a year ago. Things change. Deal with it.

It *may* be possible. PPC 975 is on a different production line than the 970FX, and may not be suffering with the same problems. IBM was very good about their original PPC 970 production quotas.

I agree with another poster that the bottom-end unit specs are not quite right. I would think that the bottom-end unit would be either a Dual 2Ghz or 2.2Ghz PPC 970FX. (Shipping within weeks)

Then shipping in the fall would be the mid-range unit could be the 2.5Ghz or 2.6Ghz and the 3.0Ghz top-of-the-line with the PCI-X.

 

[gopher]

PowerPC 975 info

I found this link which might be of interest:

http://macinsteins.org/newsletters/February_2004.html

 

[titaniumducky]

i bet these specs are pretty dead on. Dual Layer burners are only at 2.4x right now, so that's pretty accurate (i remember someone saying they wouldn't use a 2x superdrive). i seriously hope these machines can hold 4 internal harddrives...2 is just NOT ENOUGH!! two optical drives would be welcome, but after becoming accustomed to one, i don't see the need (other than to do direct duplications of DVD's without copying to the hard drisk).

1st optical drive: SuperDrive Extreme (Dual Layer 2.4x)
2nd optical drive: SuperDrive (Single Layer 8x as in eMac)

 

[7on]

Water-cooling is the only viable option now, since CPU have gotten so hot. And Water Cooling, if the component leaks, will be just as devastating as if a PowerMac's fan fails. A burnt processor is about as effective as a soaked one. Hopefully it will have water cooling, then there won't be any gripes about fan noise.

And I'm sure IBM and Apple learned their lesson in the past, get a big stockpile of these boys before shipping.

I sure hope this rumor is true -- because I can't help from being remembered about 2Ghz G5 rumor last year and everyone doubting that.

If they can get 3Ghz into a Powermac, I can see a G5 in Powerbooks in January.


And PCI-Extreme is the new replacement for PCI. All the PC venders are going with PCI-Extreme and it'd be foolish for Apple to keep going with PCI-X just to be different. Not to mention ATI and Nvidia are going with PCI-Extreme with their new GFX cards.

 

[appleface]

at least it's a good rumor. i would have been a pain to read all the "...Steve said 3.0... only 2.8 is outrageous... how can I live with this meager enhancement...." if nothing else, it makes me hope

 

[morkintosh]

as it always is

and here I just bought a dual 1.8 ...

 

[Frobozz]

Wow, 65W - that's going to be a lot of heat.....so look for a lot of noise....

But it will be nice to see real pro level graphics cards if its true..

D

For a Mac that may be a lot... but keep in mind the average P4 puts out over 110 Watts. Since we have 2 at 65, we're still pretty close on heat but will stomp the P4 on performance.

 

[Frobozz]

Water-cooling is the only viable option now, since CPU have gotten so hot. And Water Cooling, if the component leaks, will be just as devastating as if a PowerMac's fan fails. A burnt processor is about as effective as a soaked one. Hopefully it will have water cooling, then there won't be any gripes about fan noise.

I wouldn't mistake LIQUID cooling with WATER cooling. I know for a fact that IBM is integrating liquid cooling into both it's chips and it's motherboards ... and that this is something they've been working on for a long time now.

The liquids they use do not conduct electricity like water. You can submerge them in the liquid and it does not effect the electronics.

I am curious what the properties of these liquids would be, however. I can imagine if they are similar to water that they would need to control condensation...

 

[DGFan]

No, I'm going to ignore a rumor in favor of logic. You should try it some time.

What logic are you using to come up with 2.6? Apple isn't selling any 2.2-2.6Ghz machines. I don't believe any highly reputable sources have indicated that IBM is producing those in mass quantities.

Oh wait!! Those things would be rumors too (see, I can use logic).

So without using any "rumor" how did you come up with 2.6? Yep, you pulled it out of your a$$.

 

[nmk]

What logic are you using to come up with 2.6? Apple isn't selling any 2.2-2.6Ghz machines. I don't believe any highly reputable sources have indicated that IBM is producing those in mass quantities.

Oh wait!! Those things would be rumors too (see, I can use logic).

So without using any "rumor" how did you come up with 2.6? Yep, you pulled it out of your a$$.

I said I dismissed the rumor in favor of logic. The specs were just speculation, as I said this is what I "EXPECTED". This means they are not based on any information, rather just a best case scenario that I came up with (call it a hunch). Read the post (and try to understand it) before you repond.

So to make it simple for you:

1) Rumor was dismissed on the basis of logic
2) Specifications were just speculation

I hope you understand now.

Oh wait!! Those things would be rumors too (see, I can use logic).

Congratulations

 

[keysersoze]

New G5
Code Name: "Furnace"


Now, I wonder how mofo expensive these puppies are going to cost?!?

 

[mangoduck]

any one of these things would be great, but all of them at once? there's a new proc model AND the 3ghz landmark AND high-definition audio AND pci express AND mac-compatible fire gl cards AND dual layer dvd writing.

if these specs are alleged fact then i would doubt the accuracy of their source, and if it's just wild speculation then it's exactly that, wild and excessive. i hope i'm wrong.

 

[paulypants]

Also, I think this rumor is garbage. I'm expecting Apple to release 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 Ghz models, with the latter two being dual. I don't think its reasonable to expect 3ghz models considering IBM's fabrication problems. I really don't see how it would be a letdown, as a dual 2.6 would be very competitive.

So what if Steve said they would be at 3ghz. He made a statement based on information he had a year ago. Things change. Deal with it.

indeed i am hopeful but sceptical, especially this far in advance of WWDC

but keep in mind also that IBM's fabrication problems have only been documented with the POWER4 derivative PPC 970FX which runs cool enough to fit in the 1U enclosure that is the XServe

This rumor specifies the use of the the PPC 975 which is a POWER5 derivative and may reach speeds of 3.8GHz eventually but also run hotter than the PPC970FX

as anything rumor-related I take it with a grain of salt (and then sell my G4 in expectation of the G5 rev B!!!)

 

[SyndicateX]

Argh! Some of you are so nieve and pessemistic! Allright, in regards to you who are complaining that they cant make IBM produce 3ghz when they cant produce 970fx's. You cant stick a 975 in a xserve and scale it down, there is not enough room in a 1u server for all the components necessary to handle the heat it produces.

Secondly, and I have been saying this for 4 months, IBM announced 2.5 ghz fx's in FEBRUARY! ... http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5158615.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed ... now, maybe its just me and Ive fallen off my rocker, but I have never known apple to release a product with specs that have been out for over 4-6 months. 2.6ghz MAX!? Wow, what would that say about apple and IBM, 100mhz jump in half a year. That is not the kind of publicity apple or IBM needs, as apple needs to wow every single chance it can. dual 3ghz 64bit processors utilizing hyperthreading (making the computer basically believe it is 4 3ghz processors) wows people that are still using PC's, 2.6 gets nothing. You dismiss these rumors because your thinking "logically"? If apple used your logic, they would have been out of business in the 80's.

http://home.businesswire.com/portal...newsLang=en&beanID=928376271&viewID=news_view

IBM announced in March the POWER5, saying that it would be shipping later this year in the worlds most advanced computers. Now seeing as apple is one of their larger partners, wouldnt that LOGICALLY put apple in the drivers seat to releasing this chip? Its not based on the 970 (POWER4) so the same problems that are stifiling the production of the xserve will not apply to this processor. If anything, I think apple COULD possibly offer these specs, but 3.4-3.8ghz should not be too far considering it has been rumored to max out at 3.8gh, and being IBM's most advanced processor ever! Now heating is another issue, but if apple can manage to take a 17" laptop with a dvd burner, wireless, backlight keyboard, awesome portably graphics card, and everything else you could want into a 1" thin frame, I think they can handle finding a way to manage the heat in a gigantic case.

So I would suggest you research your facts before you go dismissing attainable rumors in spite of your skewed logic.

 

[ffakr]

yes... lets all laugh at the man who says apple will be using a technology that exists already. one that is proven to cool much better and is real. not fake as many of you seem to think.

I will say this in bold capital letters so no one misses it...


WATER COOLED CPU TECHNOLOGY IS REAL AND HAS EXISTED FOR AT LEAST 2 YEARS NOW. IT DOES NOT GET ANYTHING WET.

Water cooling has been around on PCs for a while, true. It's been around in computing (mainframes) for like 3 decades in fact.
It's not a mainstream solution though, and it doesn't remove the need for fans in a system.

Right now, water cooling is a high end solution that is pretty much reserved for overclockers in the PC world. Water cooling is often quieter than more passive air cooling but a water cooling kit contains a radiator which is cooled by a fan and a water pump. Both of these generate noise, but the fan can be quieter since it is generally larger (120mm) and it doesn't need to run as fast since the system is more efficient.

A typical water cooling solution for the PC usually contains a number of heat transfer blocks, generally a block with two hose connections and a water channel. There is, at a minimum, one heat transfer block for the CPU, though some systems include blocks for the motherboard and/or video chipset. Once the blocks are in place, you have to cut tubing to fit between the blocks and the pump/radiator assembly. these are usually compression fit, the tubing material us usually some type of plastic like the kind you find in refrigerator icemaker kits. When the system is assembled, you fill the system with distilled water. Distilled water is important to prevent 'scuming', mineral buildup, and shorts in the case of a leak.

Now, why Apple won't do this.
It's expensive in terms of installation and hardware.
It's more prone to failure.. I had similar tubing fail twice on my refrigerator.. the second failure nescessitated me cutting up some of our pergo to dry the floor out.
It's more prone to user caused problems.. what happens if you need to top it off and you (as the owner) don't use distilled water?
It's heavier.. water, copper heat exchanger blocks, radiators, pumps.
and finally...
Apple doesn't need water cooling!

Why would Apple put in water cooling when their G5 case does a fine job of air cooling already? Where is the need? Maybe (and this is a huge longshot) Apple could offer a water cooled 'silent' tower for places like sound studios. I don't see this being a base feature though.

Now, I've seen a lot of people claiming that the Max wattage for the G5 is significantly higher than the typical wattage.
Where is the support for this contention? The Max wattage for the AthlonXP, Athlon64 and P4 are actually quite close to the typical wattage. As far as I've seen, there is ZERO evidence that the PPC 970 isn't typical in this regard. Even if IBM doesn't publish Max wattage, we should be able to deduce the theoretical max wattage of a G5 if IBM publishes the core voltage and amperage of the PPC 970.

 

[Windowlicker]

I'm probably going out on a limb by saying this, but I'd not be surprised if Apple barely sells any 1.6 GHz G5's.

The 1.6's do sell well. I'm working at this apple reseller/apple care service and I can tell you all the g5 models have a market. I'm not quite sure if the 2x1,8 & 2x2 are selling better, but anyway the 1.6's are certainly not gathering dust on the shelves.

 

[thatwendigo]

do-be-do

The Croquer numbers are in line with things I've been pointing out for a while. I don't think I'll go out on a limb at this point - the technology just isn't clear enough at the moment to warrant that. However, I find that there's nothing at all unbelievable about any of the aspects that they've claimed.

My reasons:
1) The Power5 Servers are shipping. As many of us have heard, the buzz is that the 975/980 (whatever IBM decides to call them) revised processors will be based off of this very same technology, and they're being designed concurrently. Linear scaling, with the assumption that IBM keeps the same performance boost that they did with the Power4 to 970 redesign (1.3ghz to 2.0ghz), we arrive at a 975 clockspeed of 3.08ghz (2ghz Power5, scaled to 154% clock). However, this doesn't tell the whole story. since the Power5 uses on-die memory control (DDR and DDR2), and a lot of advanced interconnect technology, and gains 40-100% performance over its predecessor.

2) PCI-Express is in. The cards exist and PC OEMs are about to start shipping them.

3) Double-Layered DVDs are possible and coming to market. Pioneer Demoed the DVR AO6 (Apple's current burner) as capable of dual-layer with a firmware rewrite at CES 2004. They will not officially support the format until the DVR A09 in late 2004, or so the company has claimed, but products can be surprise-announced and Apple might have secured a deal on the firmware.

4) The original 130nm process 970s displaced 50w at 2.0ghz. To have their successors gain 50% of the clock rate at only 30% heat increase is pretty good engineering. If the 975 is a 130nm part, it will allow headroom for ramping and heat improvement when he 90nm process is ironed out. Meanwhile, IBM's 130nm line at Fishkill could have been cranking these puppies out for the last six months to ensure delivery.

Incidentally, has anyone else noticed the "90 days, same as cash" adds on the store? I think we're seeing major updates come WWDC.

How many watts do the current 2, 1.8, and 1.6 processors run at?
How much more noise would their be between a dual 2 GHz now and a dual 3 GHz?

In order: ~50 watts, ~30 watts, and ~22 watts at peak (for the 130nm parts), from what I've been able to find

Noise? Negligible change in a full tower with Apple's heat management design. I've listened to the dual 1.8ghz and the dual 2.0, and the heat difference is comparable.

Maybe everyone here is much richer than me. In Australia, the 1.6GHz G5 begins at AU$3199. The dual 1.8GHz system, is AU$4399. That's a big difference. It's roughly equivalent to adding a quality 17" flat panel CRT and an extra gigabyte of RAM to the 1.6, or to put it another way, being able to buy a combo drive eMac as well for the kids or spouse.

In the US, the price difference is a much more reasonable $700 ($1,799 to $2,499), and that will possibly buy you the same things if you're going cheap and don't mind skimping on features for that LCD. It's a much tighter difference, though.

Apple has priced the run-out OS9 booting dual 1.25GHz G4 only a few hundred AU$ cheaper than the 1.6GHz system...of course all the usual disclaimers apply (no FW800, louder fans, inferior video card, no SATA, no front-mount I/O ports, and of course, slower for practically all single CPU aware tasks and slower even on certain SMP-aware tasks).

Once again, I think this is more of an international price issue, stemming from the infamous practices of Apple Australia. The dual 1.25ghz G4 is $1,599 here in the states, and the single is $1,299, though that leaves out some substantial difference between them and the newer towers. You get PC2700 RAM, PATA HDs, The Radeon 9000 Pro, and a combo drive on the standard models. It's really a tradeoff and pretty obvious that Apple wants people to move to OS X rather than OS 9.

If IBM is having a tough time sending out a processor that powers a xserve, these updates the frenchies have listed can't be true. If they were true, Apple would take the so call 975 chip, scale it down, and plop it in the xserve. Although these specs will happen some day in the future, I don't think it will be at WWDC in 2004.

No, they couldn't, because the 970 and the 975 are unlikely to be pin-compatible. The move to the newer processors would require a motherboard redesign that could very well have to take into account the likely features of the new chip. The 970FX is a perfectly good server chip, one that will continue to work well in an environment where proven technology and a constant power supply and cooling system can be counted on, but it's just not the speed demon that the 975 could easily be.

i bet these specs are pretty dead on. Dual Layer burners are only at 2.4x right now, so that's pretty accurate (i remember someone saying they wouldn't use a 2x superdrive). i seriously hope these machines can hold 4 internal harddrives...2 is just NOT ENOUGH!! two optical drives would be welcome, but after becoming accustomed to one, i don't see the need (other than to do direct duplications of DVD's without copying to the hard drisk).

Two optical drives would allow the new Pioneer DVR AO7 that burns 8x DVD+/-R and 4x DVD+/-RW, along with a 2.4x Sony dual-layer DVD+/-RW. I championed the idea of an expansion of storage capacity not long ago, and I can see this being done rather easily with a slight rearrangement and resizing of the case. We'll see, though.

IBM is having difficulties producing 2GHz chips (PPC 970FX) in quantities. What makes you believe they will suddenly be capable of shipping chips rated at 3GHz? If they were able to do so, as mentioned by another poster, why don't they put underclocked samples of that wonder chip into the Xserves?

Five words: Motherboard redesign and pin incompatibility.

Do you know the specs of the 975 then? As far as I know its existence has only been rumoured. So do we have any confirmation that such a processors already exists and if it does, is it likely to appear in the next PM revision? If in fact the PPC 975 is ready why has Apple been waiting so long?

We know what the Power5 is, and that it's shipping before WWDC.

Dual layer in all doesn't make sense not to have dual layer in low end

Cost.

Why no dual-processor, or top-end graphics? Cost. It all comes down to economics in the end, and what Apple thinks they can sell without breaking themselves in the process.

Man ...... be happy over 3 GHz and be Happy that AMD and Intel will not even have a chance against this machine ! The fastet Athlon 64 FX has 2.4 ! And AMD lets it rising slowly in 200 MHz steps.

The Opteron and Athlon FX chips do smoke the G5 on some things, though. If the 975 is what it could be, then quite a few of those advantages disappear and Apple very well could be on top of the world again. Just be careful not to fall into the megahertz myth yourself... AMD already knows this, and so do Apple and IBM.

Also, I think this rumor is garbage. I'm expecting Apple to release 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 Ghz models, with the latter two being dual. I don't think its reasonable to expect 3ghz models considering IBM's fabrication problems. I really don't see how it would be a letdown, as a dual 2.6 would be very competitive.

So what if Steve said they would be at 3ghz. He made a statement based on information he had a year ago. Things change. Deal with it.

The Power5 is not 90nm, and that's where all the problems have been. If Apple and IBM step back to proven 130nm technology to design the 975 and then drop the die size in 8 months to a year, they have plenty of time and space to work out the crosstalk and fabrication issues before it really matters.

Steve has more information to make his statements than any of us, and Apple started planning this move two or more years before the G5 was announced. It's not at all inconceivable that the next step was always intended to be another processor. Nothing in his keynote said "We will have 970 chips at 3.0ghz." The only promise was that Apple and IBM would be there.

 

[Palador]

Apple will not do water cooling. The technology isnt ready for the computing masses unless they can find a way to make a completely sealed system that will last ~5 years without any kind of user input. As far as I know, that hasnt happened.

Also, I dont think there will be 3GHz shipping by the end of this year, let along by the end of the summer. All of the evidence (except for this rumor of course) is pointing towards 2.6GHz as the most they could deliver reliably.

 

[Gherkin]

I HAVE A QUESTION.

You know how around a year ago, the fastest Apple processor was around 1.5 GHz? Everyone always said then that even though there were 3.2 GHz Intels around, that the Apple processors were still comparable for various reasons. Does this mean that if we get 3 GHz in an Apple machine, that they will blow away Intels offerings?

 

[DGFan]

I said I dismissed the rumor in favor of logic. The specs were just speculation, as I said this is what I "EXPECTED". This means they are not based on any information, rather just a best case scenario that I came up with (call it a hunch). Read the post (and try to understand it) before you repond.

So to make it simple for you:

1) Rumor was dismissed on the basis of logic
2) Specifications were just speculation

I hope you understand now.


Congratulations

LOL
So you interpret my original post in a very strange way, using this as a basis for an insult. And then go on to "prove" how correct you are based on your misunderstanding.

Very nice.
Very nice, indeed.

 

[ffakr]

Argh! Some of you are so nieve and pessemistic! Allright, in regards to you who are complaining that they cant make IBM produce 3ghz when they cant produce 970fx's. You cant stick a 975 in a xserve and scale it down, there is not enough room in a 1u server for all the components necessary to handle the heat it produces.

sorry, that's BS. First, we have no confirmed info that the 975 actually exists (though I believe it does) and we have ZERO real info on its heat output.
What we do know, however:
* The Xeon and Opteron generate 80-90 Watts, typical heat, while the PPC 970 is in the upper 50s at 2GHz typical.
* The Power5 was designed with advanced power saving features (not present in the PPC 970's parent, the Power4)
* MANY vendors ship Dual Xeon and Dual Opteron 1U servers without cooling issues.
* There is actually at least one 1U Quad Opteron Server that I've seen for sale. Saying that two 975s produce too much heat for a 1U is tantamount to saying that the 975 on .09 micron will generate twice as much heat as a .13 micron Opteron. I find this extremely unlikely.

Secondly, and I have been saying this for 4 months, IBM announced 2.5 ghz fx's in FEBRUARY! ... http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5158615.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed ... now, maybe its just me and Ive fallen off my rocker, but I have never known apple to release a product with specs that have been out for over 4-6 months. 2.6ghz MAX!? Wow, what would that say about apple and IBM, 100mhz jump in half a year. That is not the kind of publicity apple or IBM needs, as apple needs to wow every single chance it can. dual 3ghz 64bit processors utilizing hyperthreading (making the computer basically believe it is 4 3ghz processors) wows people that are still using PC's, 2.6 gets nothing. You dismiss these rumors because your thinking "logically"? If apple used your logic, they would have been out of business in the 80's.

http://home.businesswire.com/portal...newsLang=en&beanID=928376271&viewID=news_view

Um, you do realize that your link points to an article that says "IBM is expected to announce". It doesn't indicate that IBM announced anything.
I've not seen any indication that IBM actually announced a 2.5GHz part yet.
If IBM did announce a 2.5GHz part, wouldn't you expect to find it at http://chips.ibm.com ? My search for "970fx" didn't yield anything of the sort.

IBM announced in March the POWER5, saying that it would be shipping later this year in the worlds most advanced computers. Now seeing as apple is one of their larger partners, wouldnt that LOGICALLY put apple in the drivers seat to releasing this chip?

No.
The Power5 is a very expensive, very complex, very large multi-core Power cpu. IBM has announced 2 AIX servers that will carry the Power5. The low end one starts at $10,000 (and scales quickly up). I believe the other starts at around $40,000 (but I could be mistaken).
Apple has nothing to do with the Power5, it's designed for a totally different market.

Its not based on the 970 (POWER4) so the same problems that are stifiling the production of the xserve will not apply to this processor.

Um, the Power5 is produced on a .13 micron process. That is why it doesn't face the same production problems as the PPC 970. It's also one reason (among many) why it is being released at around 2GHz, NOT at 3.4-3.8 GHz.

If anything, I think apple COULD possibly offer these specs, but 3.4-3.8ghz should not be too far considering it has been rumored to max out at 3.8gh, and being IBM's most advanced processor ever! Now heating is another issue, but if apple can manage to take a 17" laptop with a dvd burner, wireless, backlight keyboard, awesome portably graphics card, and everything else you could want into a 1" thin frame, I think they can handle finding a way to manage the heat in a gigantic case.

I'm really not sure what the heck you're talking about. You must be confusing the rumored PPC 975 with a Power5. They would be very different beasts.
A Power5 has multiple cores on one cpu die, along with large L2 caches. Even a basic dual core Power5 is supposed to be nearly 300 Million transistors.. and I think they were saying over 120 watts. It's totally designed, from the ground up for powerful servers.
A 975 (if it exists) will likely be a modified single core of a Power5 with Altivec added on (Power5 doesn't support Altivec), and less cache. The transistors will be rearranged to allow for the die shrink to .09 micron. It will be produced with thiner transistor gates, and the pipelines will likely be elongated. It will be very differnet compared to a Power5.

So I would suggest you research your facts before you go dismissing attainable rumors in spite of your skewed logic.

amen

 

[thatwendigo]

Argh! Some of you are so nieve and pessemistic! Allright, in regards to you who are complaining that they cant make IBM produce 3ghz when they cant produce 970fx's. You cant stick a 975 in a xserve and scale it down, there is not enough room in a 1u server for all the components necessary to handle the heat it produces.

Pin-incompatibility could be a big deal, too. The 970 uses a scheme that IBM calls 576-GBA, and the Power5 uses 5400. Nevermind that the Power5 uses on-die memory control (usually a pin change), and a different architecture, quite aside ffrom heat.

Secondly, and I have been saying this for 4 months, IBM announced 2.5 ghz fx's in FEBRUARY! ... http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5158615.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed ...

Thanks for the link. I thought I remembered this, but I didn't really want to go digging for even more muck.

IBM announced in March the POWER5, saying that it would be shipping later this year in the worlds most advanced computers. Now seeing as apple is one of their larger partners, wouldnt that LOGICALLY put apple in the drivers seat to releasing this chip?

Here's where we take a massive, screechingly different path in our reasoning. The Power5 is a high-power, high fault-tolerance Big Iron server chip, not something intended for workstations or desktop computers. It's like the Power4 on steroids, and so the 975 will be its little brother. Odds are that the 975 will be higher clock because it will be less hefty on the corporate mainframe characteristics (like thicker oxides on the gates and more cores and cache per chip). IBM will be driving the Power5, but I'd be willing to lay money they're working with Apple on the PPC 975.

If anything, I think apple COULD possibly offer these specs, but 3.4-3.8ghz should not be too far considering it has been rumored to max out at 3.8gh, and being IBM's most advanced processor ever!

The Power5 is probably the most advanced thing that IBM has ever created. It's a dual-core, eight logical processor, sixteen virtual processor (SMT) design. Each unit is sold as something called an MCM, or mmulti-chip module, which is then slotted into a two MCM unit called a book. Each book presents the server with the idea that is has 32 processors to work with, all of them on incredible bandwidth that would make the current Opterons and G5s cry like babies.

It is not, however, a chip that goes over 3.0ghz yet. The debut models are around 2.0ghz core clock, which will likely scale over 3.0ghz on the consumer version (the 975).

So I would suggest you research your facts before you go dismissing attainable rumors in spite of your skewed logic.

Facts are wonderful things.