Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Originally posted by Rincewind42
Process size has no direct influence on what targets the chip is used for, insofar as a smaller process can certainly be used for the same tasks as a larger process. The advantages of a smaller process are less power, heat and a smaller package. Those advantages do tend to allow you to use chips in places they weren't usable in before.

Smaller process also means lower per-chip costs because you can get more on the same wafer.

Alternately you can fill the die area with other logic or cache and keep the price roughly the same.

I'm guessing we'll see the later, though the extra logic/cache will mean higher leakage current.

Anyone know details on the Power5 power reduction techniques? If they're just turning off the clock it seems there will be less of a benefit as leakage goes up... Are they gating power to the various sections yet? Seems like this would also have limited benefit if you've got to cycle power at a GHz rate...
 
Originally posted by csimmons
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.
i disagree, from the advances ibm is making(unlike moto) there is going to be some very fast g5's in the near future. why not just use single slower g5's in the consumers and duals at higher speeds in the pro's???why hold on to the g4 at all??? 90nm is going to be so sweet.
 
Re: Re: wait a minute

Originally posted by greenstork
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.

well it is coming fron the inquirer, so take it really with forceps, it will happen (I mean Tejas) but hey the Prescott is not even out yet, currently planed in November, at starting clock speed around 2.8GHz.
so I do not believe that the tejas will be there before 1 year.
but I might be wrong... but before the tejas, Intel will have to solve a serious problem, high clock speed means heat release (a lot), and to keep up with IBM and AMD, they are preping now high cache processor, so which also means heat release increased...
I mean soon you will need a fridge to cool down a P4...
 
Originally posted by greenstork
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.

You gotta have a more solid source than a very vague Inquirer report to make your pint. For starters, it doesn't say at what clockspeed it will debut. I highly doubt Intel will be at 5 ghz six months from now (they're stuck at 3.2 ghz now, aren't they?). And I especially doubt Intel will be anywhere near 7 ghz by the end of next year. Silly.
 
Will this new technology make the chip run faster???

eg: a dual 2Ghz G5 (0.130nm) and a dual 2Ghz G5 (0.90nm), would the 0.90nm chip run faster, have more power?????
 
Re: no please no

Originally posted by eric67
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

Yeah this is more like it, but how soon do we see dual 1.8's,2.0(and lower prices:D)
and when do we see the higher clockspeed? Nov and then Jan?
I'm waiting for my G5 until more dual comes out. I wonder if we'll ever have a G5 that will boot 9.2:D BOOO HISSSSSS
daniel
 
Originally posted by dongmin
You gotta have a more solid source than a very vague Inquirer report to make your pint.

The folks at Slashdot give this report some creedence. I know it seems a bit far-fetched but hardly silly IMO. Intel exploits the MHz myth/gap better than anyone.
 
Re: Re: G5 Powerbook

Originally posted by greenstork
A PC emulator already runs on a G5. It's not Virtual PC but it's just as good. The emulator is called WinTel

Um, no. All reports are that WinTel/Bochs is *far* too slow for any sort of useful work.
 
if you want a peek at the future look very closely to IBM. Apple see's this and so do i. did you know that ibm is working on technology that will make all ram obsolete?? even hard drives in the near future. there will be memory banks per say like on star trek and ibm is making it happen. what better to mate to a new 980 chip then a solid state harddrive/memory built into one device. its coming 2005/2006 anyways forget intel and windows.
 
maybe but

Originally posted by greenstork
The folks at Slashdot give this report some creedence. I know it seems a bit far-fetched but hardly silly IMO. Intel exploits the MHz myth/gap better than anyone.
during the recent Intel Development Meeting there were not such announcements from Intel side, so it looks to me more like excited guests who misunderstood what they have been told, and it end up in theinquirer hears...
 
Re: G5 Powerbook

Originally posted by manu chao
I won't buy a G5 Powerbook until VirtualPC (if ever???) runs on a G5. And since dual G4s (e.g. @1.25Ghz) seem to be faster with MP-aware, non-G5-optimised programs than single G5s (e.g. @1.6Ghz), I am still hoping for something like a dual 1.33 Ghz 17'' Powerbook.

are you the musician????

This is Cerati.
 
Re: Re: G5 Powerbook

Originally posted by greenstork
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

Have you actually USED Wintel? Unless you are the developer or the folks selling it, I cannot possibly imagine how you can say Just As Good as VPC.
VPC was slow on a good day with a fast machine. With a dual G5, running Win2K and Office Wintel is a pokey slow dog. Its awful to the point of unusability. In fact, on Dual 1 and 1,25 G4 and any flavor of G5 which I use at work (university) Wintel has been bogged down with Win2K or XP severely.
I would urge potential users who need X86 emulation to be wary of the Wintel product and use it first before basing a purchase decision on its "just as good" G5 availbility.
Plus, on another notem, the openosx priduct line and support are quationable. The support in my case for purchased products was abyssmal. Where I come from, poor support and communication = poor company. But alas, the wheels of university purchasing turn slowly and they STILL manage to buy from them, thus Wintel. And its very slow and buggy. IME, in XP Pro is doies not even function at least 45% of the time. Now, the website suggestes NOT using 2k or XP. Well, in a university or corporate environment its basically NT or 2K or XP. 98 is so insecure on a corporate net its not safe, and for the record, it runs better, but still poorly. Not acceptible for even web design standards checking and such, IME/O.
 
Re: Re: Re: G5 Powerbook

Originally posted by dongmin
The 1 million dollar question: is it faster than VPC?

ANSWER:
far from it.
On a dual G4 @ 1.0 with a gig of RAM, using a fully patched Win2K its far slower.

Now, using Win 98 its usable, and I have not done benchmarks, but VPC is quite peppy at win 98 as well. I would say its a toss up for speed leaning towards VPC. I have only tried Win2K and XP with a G5 using Wintel and that is dog slow.
 
Originally posted by GUSTO
Will this new technology make the chip run faster???

eg: a dual 2Ghz G5 (0.130nm) and a dual 2Ghz G5 (0.90nm), would the 0.90nm chip run faster, have more power?????

No, a 2Ghz G5 is a 2Ghz G5, regardless of the process that is was made with they will be the same speed. The power usage will be different, as the smaller process will use less power (assuming nothing else changes). What a process shrink does is allow for higher speeds of the processor. So while 2 Ghz might be the highest you can get a G5 at 130nm, you might be able to get a 2.5 or higher Ghz G5 on a 90 nm process.
 
Originally posted by ima_pseudonym
Apple *has* switched processors without changing form factors. The original G3 powerbook was in the 3400 case.

Ya got me there... nice call!

Still stand by my prediction, though.
 
Originally posted by Ambrose Chapel
hopefully this will push PBs into G5-land way before the end of '04. Steve announced Desktop G5s at WWDC 03, maybe he'll announce the PowerBook G5 at WWDC 04?? Here's hoping


The only thing I'm interested in from apple is something with a G5 in it. iMac is the ticket for me.....
 
Originally posted by Abstract
They won't have a G5 Powerbook until January 2006 (17 months or so from now) ;).


I would tend to agree.. There's simply no need for one yet.. The new G4's are plenty fast for a portable.
 
It would be interesting if Apple moved all lines to the G5.
Power Macs for performance -> fastest G5
iMac etc optimized for low cost and quiet - > slower G5, passive heatsink, low voltage, low power.
Perhaps G5 90nm at 1Ghz could get by with passive cooling.
 
Originally posted by bluedalmatian
Personally I'd rather see a G5 Xserve before a Powerbook.

at present the g4 PBs are doing very well but i've a feeling that the Xserve is flagging a little

Xserve is important. But basically, what Apple product line COULDN'T use a G5?

The G5 is the new G3. It'll be across the line before the G6 comes out in January so July 2005. Mark my words.

Originally posted by csimmons
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.

Back in the day, the iMac had a G3, and so did the Power Mac, and so did the Powerbook. Back in the day, the iBook G3 and PowerBook G3 coexisted peacefully.

Originally posted by ima_pseudonym
Apple *has* switched processors without changing form factors. The original G3 powerbook was in the 3400 case.

That was 1997, Apple was desperate, and Steve Jobs had not yet asserted his full control. That PowerBook G3 was a hack, it was overpriced, it didn't sell, and it ultimately failed. It will not be repeated. Apple is on secure enough ground that they don't need to do that again.

Originally posted by greenstork
The folks at Slashdot give this report some creedence. I know it seems a bit far-fetched but hardly silly IMO. Intel exploits the MHz myth/gap better than anyone.

The folks at Slashdot are mocking this even more than we are.

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=80306&cid=7077719

The article doesn't say the processor will have 64-bit extensions. The article doesn't say anything.
Some quotes:
_ "The Pentium V is likely..."
_ "The processor we believe..."
_ "The final design of this arrangement is not set in stone."
_ "...details have not been confirmed,..."
_ "... the source claimed..."
_ "The Pentium V could have..."
_ "...although this may be reserved for the next chip along, the Nehalem"

This isn't news, this is BS speculation.

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
if you want a peek at the future look very closely to IBM. Apple see's this and so do i. did you know that ibm is working on technology that will make all ram obsolete?? even hard drives in the near future. there will be memory banks per say like on star trek and ibm is making it happen. what better to mate to a new 980 chip then a solid state harddrive/memory built into one device. its coming 2005/2006 anyways forget intel and windows.

I would highly doubt that it will be released around 2005/2006. IBM's research is really, really long-term. It'll be awhile. But I anticipate it.
 
Originally posted by Tim Flynn
It would be interesting if Apple moved all lines to the G5.
Power Macs for performance -> fastest G5
iMac etc optimized for low cost and quiet - > slower G5, passive heatsink, low voltage, low power.
Perhaps G5 90nm at 1Ghz could get by with passive cooling.
this is what we will see,but at higher clocks and if anyone didnt hear me the first time hard drives and ram will be obsolete in 3 years and those with deep pockests two.
 
Intel @ 5-7 ghz

Rest assured, Intel is not heading for the kind of machine hinted at earlier, at least not in the mentioned time frame. New 64-bit extensions (with a new instruction set which must be compatible with AMD's instruction set, or no 64-bit Winduz for Intel) suddenly on chip within 6 months? Erm...no. 64-bit extensions rather than a true 64-bit implementation? Complete waste of time. Stacked chips that give out as much heat as current Pentiums? It might just melt through your desk. 5-7 Ghz isn't entirely out of the question, Intel like the big numbers, but it will probably have a pipeline about 2000 instructions deep. You'll need hyperthreading emulating more than two cpus to make that ****er efficient.

All that said, IBM still need to get a move on, Opteron is already kicking G5 ass and is a major threat.
 
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?

Hold your horses, cowboy!

IBM is shiping INITIAL processors to people (Apple presumably) in LATE December 2003. Apple typically sells alot of chips at introduction so tends to hoard chips for a while before introduction of a product or conversely assemble entire products sans chips awaiting the arrivalof the coveted chip.

That means at the very luckiest Apple will announce a G5 Powerbook in January it might ship as early as late February (ie 5 MONTHS from now).

Back to the Batcave Batman, we have to fire up the Bat Computer and reclaculate the arrival of the evil Riddler using the hard to detect 90um 970 chips.

Rocketman
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.