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.
IBM at 90nm by Q4?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Honestly, I think it would not be very wise to put a G5 in a iMac. I think the pro line and the consumer line should be kept separated; i.e., G5's in the Power Mac, Power Book and Xserve, G4's in the iMac, iBook and eMac. That way, there won't be too much of a canibalization in sales, and there's a very distinctive product line, like it used to be back in the day.
Just my opinion.
Just my opinion.
The 7457 in the iMac with 2MB L3 cache or no L3 cache but 400MHz effective FSB is more than enough for the iMac along with a ATI 9600 GPU.
But it would be nice to get a headless desktop version of the PowerMac G5 for a typical corporate user who doesn't need all the features of the G5 but would prefer it over an iMac.
But it would be nice to get a headless desktop version of the PowerMac G5 for a typical corporate user who doesn't need all the features of the G5 but would prefer it over an iMac.
Apple *has* switched processors without changing form factors. The original G3 powerbook was in the 3400 case.
And besides, the PowerBook enclosure right now is just about perfect.
Anyhow, I wouldn't be surprised to see another PowerBook revision this year, even so close to the last update. Frankly, I bet we'll see iBooks move to G4s in October, and PowerBooks move to G5s in November or December, leaving a PowerMac update for January.
Terribly optimistic, yes, but also entirely possible. Apple has seen their laptop marketshare skyrocket, and a move like this would certainly help that along.
Anyhow, I wouldn't be surprised to see another PowerBook revision this year, even so close to the last update. Frankly, I bet we'll see iBooks move to G4s in October, and PowerBooks move to G5s in November or December, leaving a PowerMac update for January.
Terribly optimistic, yes, but also entirely possible. Apple has seen their laptop marketshare skyrocket, and a move like this would certainly help that along.
I think Steve J is going to go for speed any where he can get it. He's squeezing as much as possible out of Panther and I can't see him sitting around on a faster chip for very long.
If that's the case then he will go for a speed bump in the PM as soon as it is available, probably around Feb 04. I would bet on 2.4 Ghz to 2.6 Ghz. If you look at the new G5 case it is hard to believe that they were not engineered to go a hell of a lot faster than 2 Ghz.
If the 90 nm chips allow for use in the iMac then I think that will also be announced, but at lower speeds than the PM. With the PM moving out the door at a good clip the next task will be to establish the same level of excitement in the iMac range, and that means a G5.
A G5 PB will also be brought into production as soon as it is ready, regardless of how long the G4 models have been on the market. By the end of the year the excitement of an Al case for the 15" will have dropped significantly and, let's face it, we'll all be wanting a G5 PB when it's announced.
The introduction of IBM into the mix with the G5 allows Apple to move away from a small speed bump every year to a situation where they can move up performance significantly every 6 months. The real challenge will be for the users to get used to Macs moving up in the world so fast that they will want to but a new one faster than ever before.
If that's the case then he will go for a speed bump in the PM as soon as it is available, probably around Feb 04. I would bet on 2.4 Ghz to 2.6 Ghz. If you look at the new G5 case it is hard to believe that they were not engineered to go a hell of a lot faster than 2 Ghz.
If the 90 nm chips allow for use in the iMac then I think that will also be announced, but at lower speeds than the PM. With the PM moving out the door at a good clip the next task will be to establish the same level of excitement in the iMac range, and that means a G5.
A G5 PB will also be brought into production as soon as it is ready, regardless of how long the G4 models have been on the market. By the end of the year the excitement of an Al case for the 15" will have dropped significantly and, let's face it, we'll all be wanting a G5 PB when it's announced.
The introduction of IBM into the mix with the G5 allows Apple to move away from a small speed bump every year to a situation where they can move up performance significantly every 6 months. The real challenge will be for the users to get used to Macs moving up in the world so fast that they will want to but a new one faster than ever before.
A sale is a sale.
If Apple can increase market share by selling a kick-ass iMac and still make a profit doing it, then that's a good thing. You can argue that there's a higher profit margin on the G5 desktop but if they sell n-times more iMacs because they have a G5 processor and are as fast as consumer PCs then what do Apple care about how they got that profit.
I also don't know which day in the past you're talking about but there's always been G3 iMacs at the same time as G3 PowerMacs, and G4 iMacs at the same time as G4 PowerMacs. Crippling computers just to make them less powerful than the Pro line just cripples sales.
It's not only Apple that is pushing for speed increases, but IBM's engineers are as well. Imagine the feeling of competition and pride that now exists among both the IBM and Apple engineers. For the first time in a long time, both firms can strike back at their competitors and win. For the first time in a long time, they can go to engineering conferences and trade shows and hold their heads a little higher than the other guys.
IBM invested a lot in their microprocessor plant and they see that their efforts will only increase production demand from Apple. IBM is doing everything they can to win more of Apple's business and help grow Apple's G5 appeal.
IBM invested a lot in their microprocessor plant and they see that their efforts will only increase production demand from Apple. IBM is doing everything they can to win more of Apple's business and help grow Apple's G5 appeal.
Another thought
It's also possible that we won't see a revision to the PM line, but an addition to the top end.
Keep the current 3 models and add a dual 2.5 (ish) model to the top end at a higher price while lowering (ever so slightly) the cost of the single 1.6 and 1.8.
It's also possible that we won't see a revision to the PM line, but an addition to the top end.
Keep the current 3 models and add a dual 2.5 (ish) model to the top end at a higher price while lowering (ever so slightly) the cost of the single 1.6 and 1.8.
cool new PB
WOW!!
I'm so glad that the new 23" G6 PowerPad with built-in RAID is shipping next week. https://forums.macrumors.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
I'm really curious to see just how they managed to get the holo emitters working in such a small package. https://forums.macrumors.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
But does anyone really believe that OS M fully supports temporal peripherals. https://forums.macrumors.com/images/icons/icon6.gif
Oh, wait, which multiverse is this?
MUC
WOW!!
I'm so glad that the new 23" G6 PowerPad with built-in RAID is shipping next week. https://forums.macrumors.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
I'm really curious to see just how they managed to get the holo emitters working in such a small package. https://forums.macrumors.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
But does anyone really believe that OS M fully supports temporal peripherals. https://forums.macrumors.com/images/icons/icon6.gif
Oh, wait, which multiverse is this?
MUC
Re: G5 Powerbook
A PC emulator already runs on a G5. It's not Virtual PC but it's just as good. The emulator is called WinTel and is put out by an open source company called OpenOSX. It's G5 optimized to run all the Windows operating systems, check it out:
WinTel 1.0.1
A PC emulator already runs on a G5. It's not Virtual PC but it's just as good. The emulator is called WinTel and is put out by an open source company called OpenOSX. It's G5 optimized to run all the Windows operating systems, check it out:
WinTel 1.0.1
heat production
euh.... not really
current P4 are releasing around 75W and +, and the next generation to come (Prescott) at 2.8GHz is generating...103W!!!!!
so who is speaking about PPC970 being to hot????
euh.... not really
current P4 are releasing around 75W and +, and the next generation to come (Prescott) at 2.8GHz is generating...103W!!!!!
so who is speaking about PPC970 being to hot????
Re: heat production
No joke!! My first impression was that the G5 was kinda warm, but take a glance at the competition and it is ice cold...
I think Sears is going to start carrying Pentium4 ovens - cooks food in half the time!
No joke!! My first impression was that the G5 was kinda warm, but take a glance at the competition and it is ice cold...
I think Sears is going to start carrying Pentium4 ovens - cooks food in half the time!
I'll preface my response by saying that I think a computer only needs to be so fast unless you are doing video rendering or photoshop work all day. That said, if IBM and Apple want to truly compete for the fastest compter, they are facing some tough competition from Intel and others, and very soon.
Word on the street has Intel cranking out 5-7 Ghz chips with 2MB of L2 Cache and a 4000Mhz frontside bus speed as soon as the end of next year. If Apple and IBM want to compete with this, they need to get cracking. I would argue however, that this is just too much speed and completely unnecessary.
It makes sense that a chip upgrade will take place by the end of 2003, beginning of 2004 since we can't expect the G5 to jump directly from 2.0 Ghz right to 3.0 Ghz by next summer. There should be something in between that time and if the 90nm process is in place and shipping by the end of 2003, it fits in perfectly with Apple's chips speed increase projections.
I think and hope consumers will look beyond this need for raw speed and value lower power, quieter computers. I say this only now that we have the G5 and would have never said this last year. I think above 2.0 or 3.0 Ghz PPC, we just don't need more speed, I'd rather have ultra-power-efficiency instead. Bring back the silent cube and make way for G5 Powerbooks. If you can fit a 2 GHz chip into a Powerbook, who really needs more than this, especially in light of the fact that we will soon be using 64-bit applications, providing an enormous speed boost that is completely independant of clock speed.
Word on the street has Intel cranking out 5-7 Ghz chips with 2MB of L2 Cache and a 4000Mhz frontside bus speed as soon as the end of next year. If Apple and IBM want to compete with this, they need to get cracking. I would argue however, that this is just too much speed and completely unnecessary.
It makes sense that a chip upgrade will take place by the end of 2003, beginning of 2004 since we can't expect the G5 to jump directly from 2.0 Ghz right to 3.0 Ghz by next summer. There should be something in between that time and if the 90nm process is in place and shipping by the end of 2003, it fits in perfectly with Apple's chips speed increase projections.
I think and hope consumers will look beyond this need for raw speed and value lower power, quieter computers. I say this only now that we have the G5 and would have never said this last year. I think above 2.0 or 3.0 Ghz PPC, we just don't need more speed, I'd rather have ultra-power-efficiency instead. Bring back the silent cube and make way for G5 Powerbooks. If you can fit a 2 GHz chip into a Powerbook, who really needs more than this, especially in light of the fact that we will soon be using 64-bit applications, providing an enormous speed boost that is completely independant of clock speed.
wait a minute
this news is not new.
It was released few month ago by macbidouille.com (www.hardmac.com for the english version). they were also claiming 90nm by the end of this year; but in your computer not before Jan 2004; or June 2004. Actually this is what Steve said again during Apple Expo Paris...3GHz by June next year (but then Dual 3GHz, it's really going to smoke P4 Prescott)
Originally posted by GUSTO
So correct me if I am wrong
These new chip are ready THIS YEAR!? and will be shipped THIS YEAR!? so we could see these new chips in new powemacs??? aswel as powerbooks???
I am going to buy a dual G5 this week, but now with this new info should I hold off for these new G5 chips?????
And if these chips get into new powermacs when do you think they will see the light of day?
this news is not new.
It was released few month ago by macbidouille.com (www.hardmac.com for the english version). they were also claiming 90nm by the end of this year; but in your computer not before Jan 2004; or June 2004. Actually this is what Steve said again during Apple Expo Paris...3GHz by June next year (but then Dual 3GHz, it's really going to smoke P4 Prescott)
no please no
no that's not the way to go. 1.8GHz single, then all models dual (1.8, 2.0 and 2.5) that is the way it's meant to be successfull
no that's not the way to go. 1.8GHz single, then all models dual (1.8, 2.0 and 2.5) that is the way it's meant to be successfull
Re: wait a minute
The Prescott isn't going to be what Apple is up against by the middle to end of 2004. It's going to be the Tejas and Nehalem and my guess is that they will either be on par or faster than a 3.0 Ghz G5.
The Prescott isn't going to be what Apple is up against by the middle to end of 2004. It's going to be the Tejas and Nehalem and my guess is that they will either be on par or faster than a 3.0 Ghz G5.
Re: heat production
The 103W is neither confirmed or denied by Intel, but they have said that they don't think 100W is such a bad number... (!?!)
Worth noting that Prescott is fabbed at 90nm. Smaller size doesn't always mean lower power anymore... If the die is filled with caches, your transistors leak like sieves, and the clock is ramped up to fight the MHz battle, then power is going to continue to climb...
The 103W is neither confirmed or denied by Intel, but they have said that they don't think 100W is such a bad number... (!?!)
Worth noting that Prescott is fabbed at 90nm. Smaller size doesn't always mean lower power anymore... If the die is filled with caches, your transistors leak like sieves, and the clock is ramped up to fight the MHz battle, then power is going to continue to climb...
YES
exactly what I think...
having a fantastic OS taking full advantage of 2 processors and not having the machine for that.........
PLEASE APPLE makes them all DUAL G5
exactly what I think...
having a fantastic OS taking full advantage of 2 processors and not having the machine for that.........
PLEASE APPLE makes them all DUAL G5
