Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
g5
- Thread starter Hakon
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
.....
Indeed.. welcome!
But I do recommend reading a couple of hardware rumor threads before asking this....
I't's not an easy question to answer but let me try to summarize all other rumors/speculations:
"G5" will probalbly be the PPC 970 (from IBM)
"G5" will probably be 64 bits (requires OS X 10.3?)
"G5" will probably come this fall....
Hopefully Steve will announce theam at MWNY (this summer), but don't be surprized if you won't hear anything until early next year (MWSF?).
One thing for sure: it will be a kick ass (read: kick Intel) computer!
Indeed.. welcome!
But I do recommend reading a couple of hardware rumor threads before asking this....
I't's not an easy question to answer but let me try to summarize all other rumors/speculations:
"G5" will probalbly be the PPC 970 (from IBM)
"G5" will probably be 64 bits (requires OS X 10.3?)
"G5" will probably come this fall....
Hopefully Steve will announce theam at MWNY (this summer), but don't be surprized if you won't hear anything until early next year (MWSF?).
One thing for sure: it will be a kick ass (read: kick Intel) computer!
Steve better announce a 970 g5 this fall.Look at the product line and its plain as day the Motorola chips are not advancing. base powermac 2 years ago 800 now only a gig . Gee thats a whole 100 mhz a year! base imac 700 now 800. Motorola is not going anywhere and if Apple is to see better sales they better get off this stalled wagon> If not why the heck would anyone want to by another machine to get 100 or 200 more megahertz.Thats the boat iam in. what point in upgrading to a new powermac if my machine is only 200 mhz behind? might as well get an upgrade card ! Still I have hope that Apple has seen the light when it comes to drag your butt motorola and will jump out of that Parked Wagon and hop on the IBM Mustang going by.
I don't think Apple should brand the new processor the G5. I think they should emphasise how totally new it is and how it's 64bit. While the PPC970 will have comparable performance to the P4 it will run at a much lower clockspeed, hence from a marketing point of view it's good to emphasise its 64bit nature. The could of course just call it the PPC970, or the G64.
Makes sense. I like the idea of putting 64 in the name you really want to emphasize the strong part of the proccessor.
Actually, the increase is way greater
Base PowerMac G4 2 years ago [released January 2001] was 466mhz, and the range was 466/533/667/733
It was Jauary 2002 that the base was 800, and the range was 800/933/1ghzDP.
So, really, the 2-year mhz range increase is 534mhz on the low-end and 687mhz on the high end [except that the new one is DP, so performance-wise much more], so we are actually looking at systems with clock-speeds around twice as fast as two years ago. Not bad if you ask me.
reference: http://history.eis.net.au/ [Use the scrolling list on the right.]
Base PowerMac G4 2 years ago [released January 2001] was 466mhz, and the range was 466/533/667/733
It was Jauary 2002 that the base was 800, and the range was 800/933/1ghzDP.
So, really, the 2-year mhz range increase is 534mhz on the low-end and 687mhz on the high end [except that the new one is DP, so performance-wise much more], so we are actually looking at systems with clock-speeds around twice as fast as two years ago. Not bad if you ask me.
reference: http://history.eis.net.au/ [Use the scrolling list on the right.]
I wonder,why everyone is so sure about
Motorola not building the G5.Especially,if it was said to be a huge performer(well,if you believe the rumors.)Maybe the G5 from Motorola will be the high end,and the PPC 970 will be for Imacs and Powerbooks.The fact,that Motorola is bad in progressing with the G4 doesn´t show automatically,that they are out of the game.
Motorola not building the G5.Especially,if it was said to be a huge performer(well,if you believe the rumors.)Maybe the G5 from Motorola will be the high end,and the PPC 970 will be for Imacs and Powerbooks.The fact,that Motorola is bad in progressing with the G4 doesn´t show automatically,that they are out of the game.
Re: I wonder,why everyone is so sure about
Hasn't Moto already earmarked their G5 as an embeded chip rather than a desktop one? Given their focus on heat disapation and power over speed as well as their track record on the G4, i would think that using a Moto chip instead of the 970 would not be a good idea. (even in the unlikely event of Moto producing something better than the 970 which has been kept really really quiet and will be released soon)
You know what they say, once burned, always weary, (or something like that)
Hasn't Moto already earmarked their G5 as an embeded chip rather than a desktop one? Given their focus on heat disapation and power over speed as well as their track record on the G4, i would think that using a Moto chip instead of the 970 would not be a good idea. (even in the unlikely event of Moto producing something better than the 970 which has been kept really really quiet and will be released soon)
You know what they say, once burned, always weary, (or something like that)
Zaid,this is all about rumors and if I read a rumor,that says that Motorola puts a lot of money in developing a G5 which is said to perform like nothing else on the market,and then abandons it,I think this to be quite strange.Even if Apple is the only customer,what do they do(Apple)with their 4 billion dollars?
Well these would be great options,a g5 from Motorola and the ppc 970....Ok,very unlikely,I will be happy if we get a ppc 970 this year.
Well these would be great options,a g5 from Motorola and the ppc 970....Ok,very unlikely,I will be happy if we get a ppc 970 this year.
Zaid is right....
Motorola already has a PowerPC 'G5' chip. It is an embedded systems chip - very low power, very low heat, very low general computational power because it is very specialized. It would not work in the desktop.
A few threads have discussed Motorola's efforts on new versions of the PPC 74xx series that we use now, and the 7457s and 7447s have been announced and released. They are generaly lower power, higher performance and seem to look more scalable [read overclock] than the G4 chips Apple uses now.
Motorola is rumored to have a new 32-bit chip in the works, similar to the 74xx series. If my memory is serving me, it is the fabled 85xx series of desktop processors, the so-called 'G5' people have been lusting over for the last 3 years.
I think that Apple could release 'G4' [7457/47] iBooks and eMacs, 'G5' [85xx] iMacs, Powerbooks and low-end PowerMacs, and PPC 970 'G6/xMac' workstations. Apple has used more than one generation of chips accross the line before [think 68020/30/40/HCs/LCs or 601/603/603e/604/604e], and I think that they could do it again - except much, much better - with their now simplified product lines.
Anyway, we'll see huh?
Motorola already has a PowerPC 'G5' chip. It is an embedded systems chip - very low power, very low heat, very low general computational power because it is very specialized. It would not work in the desktop.
A few threads have discussed Motorola's efforts on new versions of the PPC 74xx series that we use now, and the 7457s and 7447s have been announced and released. They are generaly lower power, higher performance and seem to look more scalable [read overclock] than the G4 chips Apple uses now.
Motorola is rumored to have a new 32-bit chip in the works, similar to the 74xx series. If my memory is serving me, it is the fabled 85xx series of desktop processors, the so-called 'G5' people have been lusting over for the last 3 years.
I think that Apple could release 'G4' [7457/47] iBooks and eMacs, 'G5' [85xx] iMacs, Powerbooks and low-end PowerMacs, and PPC 970 'G6/xMac' workstations. Apple has used more than one generation of chips accross the line before [think 68020/30/40/HCs/LCs or 601/603/603e/604/604e], and I think that they could do it again - except much, much better - with their now simplified product lines.
Anyway, we'll see huh?
Re: Zaid is right....
This would be cool, especially if the G4s were phased out rather rapidly. Also maybe we'd see the 970 making an apperance in the powerbooks (i sure hope so ), especially since at lower clock speeds (1.2 - 1.4 Ghz) the 970 supposedly runs quite cool with low power requirements (from an article on ArsTechnica a while back). This may improve even further when it's moved to a .09 process.
This would be cool, especially if the G4s were phased out rather rapidly. Also maybe we'd see the 970 making an apperance in the powerbooks (i sure hope so
), especially since at lower clock speeds (1.2 - 1.4 Ghz) the 970 supposedly runs quite cool with low power requirements (from an article on ArsTechnica a while back). This may improve even further when it's moved to a .09 process.
Originally posted by Pentium Killer
Zaid,this is all about rumors and if I read a rumor,that says that Motorola puts a lot of money in developing a G5 which is said to perform like nothing else on the market,and then abandons it,I think this to be quite strange.Even if Apple is the only customer,what do they do(Apple)with their 4 billion dollars?
Well these would be great options,a g5 from Motorola and the ppc 970....Ok,very unlikely,I will be happy if we get a ppc 970 this year.
Everyones rumored new chip outperforms everything on the market. Transmeta anyone???
It's all a waste of time until something is released. That is what annoys me about the 970 being the saving grace for Apple. Who knows that? Knowing IBM, the will only make it available after the market has blown by them. That is what they always do (think PC market, Lexmark etc)...
Besides, I though that Apple was all about the "experience" and that they did not worry about outright hardware performance.
Originally posted by yzedf
Everyones rumored new chip outperforms everything on the market. Transmeta anyone???
It's all a waste of time until something is released. That is what annoys me about the 970 being the saving grace for Apple. Who knows that? Knowing IBM, the will only make it available after the market has blown by them. That is what they always do (think PC market, Lexmark etc)...
Besides, I though that Apple was all about the "experience" and that they did not worry about outright hardware performance.
Heh. IBM stomped all over the UNIX server market with the POWER4. They wouldn't be as big as they are now if they missed every opportunity. From what I've read, it looks like the 970 will be a little slower than the P4, with less than half the power usage. Prescott looks like a very fast chip, but the 970 on .09 micron (980?) should be able to keep up with it.
Re: Zaid is right....
G1 PPC 601
G2 PPC 603, PPC 603e, PPC 604, PPC 604e
G3 PPC 7xx
G4 PPC 7xxx
Prior to the PowerPC, Apple used various chips from Motorola as the Macintosh CPU. These included the 68000, 68020, 68030, 68040, and 680HC40. The LC was an inexpensive model of Macintosh computer. The LC stood for "low-cost color."
The "generations" implied in Apple's G3- and G4-based systems relate to PPC processors from IBM and Motorola:
G1 PPC 601
G2 PPC 603, PPC 603e, PPC 604, PPC 604e
G3 PPC 7xx
G4 PPC 7xxx
Prior to the PowerPC, Apple used various chips from Motorola as the Macintosh CPU. These included the 68000, 68020, 68030, 68040, and 680HC40. The LC was an inexpensive model of Macintosh computer. The LC stood for "low-cost color."
Re: Re: Zaid is right....
Well duh.
I did forget about the 'LC' moniker thing, but i do know that the thing that made them 'LC' was the lack of on-chip FPU and no math co-processor. My bad there
Well duh.
I did forget about the 'LC' moniker thing, but i do know that the thing that made them 'LC' was the lack of on-chip FPU and no math co-processor. My bad there
Re: Zaid is right....
The 7457 isnt going into mass production until 4th qtr this year. How the heck is that going to help apple and it still dont know how to use ddr? Motorola screwed apple this past 2 years plain and simple. Apple does have the best software but if the hardware isnt going anywhere? OOPs forgive me they did increase 100 mhz on the base imac, 200 mhz on the powermac in one year. that is sad and shows just how motorola could care a less about apple.Originally posted by primalman
Motorola already has a PowerPC 'G5' chip. It is an embedded systems chip - very low power, very low heat, very low general computational power because it is very specialized. It would not work in the desktop.
A few threads have discussed Motorola's efforts on new versions of the PPC 74xx series that we use now, and the 7457s and 7447s have been announced and released. They are generaly lower power, higher performance and seem to look more scalable [read overclock] than the G4 chips Apple uses now.
Motorola is rumored to have a new 32-bit chip in the works, similar to the 74xx series. If my memory is serving me, it is the fabled 85xx series of desktop processors, the so-called 'G5' people have been lusting over for the last 3 years.
I think that Apple could release 'G4' [7457/47] iBooks and eMacs, 'G5' [85xx] iMacs, Powerbooks and low-end PowerMacs, and PPC 970 'G6/xMac' workstations. Apple has used more than one generation of chips accross the line before [think 68020/30/40/HCs/LCs or 601/603/603e/604/604e], and I think that they could do it again - except much, much better - with their now simplified product lines.
Anyway, we'll see huh?
Instead of calling the new processor generation a "G5", because its a Powerpc, call it a "P5", Intel would love that!
I think Apple should still use Motorola (assuming Motorola still want to be part of the picture). The 7457 would be excellent in the low end systems (note the 7457-RM is a different beast).
And use the IBM 970 in the higher end models.
Why has Intel cranked up the performance? ... AMD !
Motorola didn't exactly have competition.
With IBM and Motorola making processors for Apple, there would be competition! Who wins ... us!
Here is a interesting status I heard last year at the embedded systems conference. I don't know how valid it is, but this is a rumor site! But I think it is accurate.
If you round to the nearest whole percent, where the market is all processors sold ( 4, 8,16, 32, 64bit), Windows on 32 bit rounds to 0% !
I think Apple should still use Motorola (assuming Motorola still want to be part of the picture). The 7457 would be excellent in the low end systems (note the 7457-RM is a different beast).
And use the IBM 970 in the higher end models.
Why has Intel cranked up the performance? ... AMD !
Motorola didn't exactly have competition.
With IBM and Motorola making processors for Apple, there would be competition! Who wins ... us!
Here is a interesting status I heard last year at the embedded systems conference. I don't know how valid it is, but this is a rumor site! But I think it is accurate.
If you round to the nearest whole percent, where the market is all processors sold ( 4, 8,16, 32, 64bit), Windows on 32 bit rounds to 0% !
Your argument does not hold a drop of water,Apple has had competition and its called WINTEL! Yes Motorola could care a less and that screws apple. I could care a less about toaster ovens, car computers,phones or any of the embedded systems. Im interested in Mac and where it is going. If Motorola aint taking it anywhere then by God find a cpu maker that will. If Apple dont they will pay the price because joe consumer will go elsewhere.