iBook G3's

arn

macrumors god
Original poster
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
14,536
1,817
Per a MacSurfer.com link, MacUser.co.uk posted a report on the new iBook. From their sources, it appears G3's seem to be throttled at 700mhz presently:

However, Apple has been unable to procure G3 chips running at faster than 700MHz – despite the announcement of a 1GHz version from IBM last year, this product is yet to ship. Apple has also so far rejected calls to move the iBook – which is its last remaining G3-based product – to the G4 processor. Sources have indicated that this is in order to maintain a distinction between its consumer and professional portable lines...

They also mention that the iBook may need a redesign to incorporate a G4... but appears to be speculation on their part.
 

allpar

macrumors 6502
May 20, 2002
299
35
Redesign for G4s?

As one who has a G4 upgrade in his G3, I don't understand why a G4 would require a motherboard redesign.
 

King Cobra

macrumors 603
Mar 2, 2002
5,403
0
I would not be at all surprised if the iBooks are updated to a G4 in some 6 to 8 months. I think that the iBooks deserve a G4, mostly because I heard somewhere that high speed G3 chips were becoming hard to manufacture, or something along those lines, resulting in high costs. Once these iBooks are updated once more some 6 months time from now, they SHOULD have a G4 in them. Although, a 700MHz G3 is already rather fast.
__________________

Any time is a great time for iPod.
Working on avatar and new signature...
Planning to retire current signature.
 

arn

macrumors god
Original poster
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
14,536
1,817
Re: Redesign for G4s?

Originally posted by allpar
As one who has a G4 upgrade in his G3, I don't understand why a G4 would require a motherboard redesign.
I think it they presume it would be case design due to heat issues...

again - that part is all speculation.

arn
 

dantec

macrumors 6502a
Nov 6, 2001
605
0
California
Firstly, I think Motorola needs a kick in the butt...

Secondly, G3's must be getting expensive to manufacture because there isn't much market for them (iBooks vs. Powermac's, Powerbook's, iMac's & eMacs). From what I have understood, PowerPC's that are used in computers & devices are different, making IBM manufacture a relatively small amount of a special chip. (Correct me if i'm wrong)

Thirdly, I do not believe at all that there are problems with G3's running at 1ghz. If there where why was the chip announced.

Fourthly, the iBook can't support Quartz Extreme (now 16mb of ram), so it should get all the help it can get. I have heard that some parts of Quartz are Alvitec optimized, but I have no proof.

Finally, even S.J. admitted that OS X needs a G4. We will see if 10.2. has any optimizations at all besides Quartz extreme, which might save this iBook.
 

King Cobra

macrumors 603
Mar 2, 2002
5,403
0
Originally posted by dantec
Finally, even S.J. admitted that OS X needs a G4. We will see if 10.2. has any optimizations at all besides Quartz extreme, which might save this iBook.
Originally posted by dantec
Finally, even S.J. admitted that OS X needs a G4. We will see if 10.2. has any optimizations at all besides Quartz extreme, which might save this iBook.
No offense, but after reading what Backtothemac had posted about running a Jaguar beta on his iBook, I think he would not be happy. He says that his iBook runs plenty fast on a G3.

As for Jaguar on iBooks (say, G3 vs. G4) I think dantec and B2TM are correct. OS X 10.2 would probably run much faster than any previous versions of OS, but dantec may be accurate in saying that OS X needs the G4. So a G4 iBook does seem critical for the future of OS X in, say, 2003. I will wait for that.

On a quick note, my theory of 3-way processors, since the iBook, the only new Apple computer, shipped with a G3, we probably will not see a G5 at New York. If you haven't seen my theory, here it is:

Here is my theory about 3-way processors:
There are three types of processors that are of the main focus: the G3, the G4 and the G5. It would make the least bit of sense for Apple to use three lines of computer chips on five lines of products. What would consumers think? I would assume safely that it would be much easier for Apple to use only two types of processors: one for the basic consumer and one for the pro models. Since both models must suit people who will not want something slow, and since the G3 would not perform as well with OS X as a G4, since OS X uses the G4 V. Engine, the G3 would be almost useless for a processor. Also, as someone mentioned, the price of high speed G3 chips is too high, so in order to compete with speed, Apple would have to use G4 chips.
__________________

Any time is a great time for iPod.
Working on avatar and new signature...
Planning to retire current signature.
 

Backtothemac

macrumors 601
Jan 3, 2002
4,206
0
San Destin Florida
Originally posted by dantec
Firstly, I think Motorola needs a kick in the butt...

Secondly, G3's must be getting expensive to manufacture because there isn't much market for them (iBooks vs. Powermac's, Powerbook's, iMac's & eMacs). From what I have understood, PowerPC's that are used in computers & devices are different, making IBM manufacture a relatively small amount of a special chip. (Correct me if i'm wrong)

Thirdly, I do not believe at all that there are problems with G3's running at 1ghz. If there where why was the chip announced.

Fourthly, the iBook can't support Quartz Extreme (now 16mb of ram), so it should get all the help it can get. I have heard that some parts of Quartz are Alvitec optimized, but I have no proof.

Finally, even S.J. admitted that OS X needs a G4. We will see if 10.2. has any optimizations at all besides Quartz extreme, which might save this iBook.
Man, I never thought I would see so many people continue to speculate of on feature of the OS ;)

Let me clear this up once and for all. Everyone listening. At least the iBook 600's that have the 8 meg ati will get a benifit. I am seeing huge, and I mean absolutly friggin huge differences in 10.1 and 10.2. I have been running the beta for a few days, and cannot get a spinning beachball. At all! The only time I get one is when IE is rendering HTML (will that ever change?) So. To clarify, QE will work, and these new iBooks will be even smoother than mine. Hey anyone want a used iBook...JJ
 

iGav

macrumors G3
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
Thirdly, I do not believe at all that there are problems with G3's running at 1ghz. If there where why was the chip announced.
Maybe IBM are getting the Motorola syndrome and announcing chips (remember the 500Mhz G4?? heh heh) before they can actually produce them in bulk...... :p

Actually I shouldn't joke about the possibilities of IBM doing a Moto with regards to the PPC chip....... that's too scary a thought!!!! :p :p :p
 

os4

macrumors newbie
Jun 6, 2001
18
0
Originally posted by dantec
Firstly, I think Motorola needs a kick in the butt...

Fourthly, the iBook can't support Quartz Extreme (now 16mb of ram), so it should get all the help it can get. I have heard that some parts of Quartz are Alvitec optimized, but I have no proof.

Finally, even S.J. admitted that OS X needs a G4. We will see if 10.2. has any optimizations at all besides Quartz extreme, which might save this iBook.

If you read any spec info concerning Quartz Extreme, it clearly states that 32Mb is the optimal amount, NOT the required amount. Anyway, if the requirement for Apple to release hardware is that it must perfectly support the company's FUTURE software releases, when would we ever get new hardware?! So what if Apple released information about Quartz Extreme? A person that buys a computer today has made the decision that he needs it today, not tomorrow. Everyone loves to whine about "I bought my computer yesterday, and today Apple released a new machine ... Damn Apple for doing that to me!"

I have been running 10.2 on a 500 Mhz iBook and I have to totally disagree with whoever claimed that 10.2 screams on a G3. I get the redesigned blue beach ball all the time. In fact, the Finder crashes frequently, and there don't appear very many optimizations in place yet. Let's hope that is what the next 8 weeks before MWNY will bring. I do admit that many of the new features (e.g., search and spring-loaded folders) are awesome. I can't wait to have the final release.
 

SPG

macrumors 65816
Jul 24, 2001
1,083
0
In the shadow of the Space Needle.
I don't think that any of us are surprised that the iBook still has a G3, dissapointed, but not surprised. The iBook may be a small machine with a small screen, but it is still meant to be a "digital hub" and all the digital hub stuff that deals with video benefits from altivec, hell MPEG2 transcoding for DVD demands altivec, and even OSX benefits greatly from it. If I were going to buy a laptop this week I don't think that the iBook would be my first choice, especially when you see what laeftover and used G4tiBooks are going for.
 

AlejandroGonzo

macrumors member
May 5, 2002
34
0
Aurora, CO
Oh cmon. If the new software were being released in 2 years, maybe, but 10.2 comes out this summer. Don't be a sucker.

In the P.C. world, ANY new computer will be able to run P.C. programs for a good deal in the future (or at least longer than a couple months). You might try to bad mouth P.C.s, and there are lots of things wrong with them, but that is how it should be.
 

~/indigo

macrumors newbie
May 18, 2002
10
0
Ontario
Don't be worried about the G3 in the iBook. It has a HUGE L2 cache and a decent clock on it. It is far from being a "bad computer."

As for what others are saying about QE, it would NOT be the reason for performance increases on a system with a Rage 128 (sorry but that is just Jaguar being a bit snappier in general or it is your imagination). Perhaps they did a bit more work on the general 2D acceleration but QE is not supposed to make any calls that card would understand.

I think that the big issues keeping us from getting a G4 iBook are:
-heat dissipation
-differentiation from the TiBook line

If I didn't need AltiVec for some of the code I write, I would get one of these units in a second.

Jeff.
 

dongmin

macrumors 68000
Jan 3, 2002
1,708
0
1. As Arn noted, much of what the MacUserUK article says about Apple rolling out 700 mhz G3 is speculation.

2. My guess for why Apple didn't introduce G3s higher than 700 mhz is to distance it a bit from the PowerBooks. If the PowerBooks were at 1 ghz, I think Apple might have gone as high as 800 mhz, if not higher.

3. Five to six months from now, I think you'll see Apple push the Powerbooks to 1 ghz and move the iBooks to the G4, at 800 mhz for the top end.

4. Yes, the G4 would give it a boost but I don't think you can say that the new iBooks are somehow crippled and won't run 10.2 properly. The performance gains of the new architecture combined with the optimization of 10.2 should make the new iBook more than adequate for running OS X.
 

aarond12

macrumors 65816
May 20, 2002
1,098
49
Dallas, TX USA
Motherboard limitations

The current iBook motherboard only supports speeds up to 700MHz. I don't believe this is an issue of having difficulty getting G3s that will run faster than 700MHz. Yes, the heat might still be an issue, but I heard tell that IBM is using the .13 micron process for some of their faster G3s, which would (ideally) reduce heat.

-Aaron-
 

madamimadam

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2002
1,281
0
Really, to back up a lot of what someone was saying (sorry, I can not be bothered looking at who you are) it makes sense that Apple will only have 2 processors out at a time. Also, Apple would not release a rack mount server that has a slower processor than their new machines at NY, especially since the rack mounts won't be shipping 'til around that time anyway.
It is obvious that NY = G4 with DAMN cool upgrades. I know there will be lots of whining about no G5s but the fact of the matter is that this G4 is EVERYTHING we need. I know I have no use for a 64-bit chip but I do for DDR, 66MHz PCI and ATA100.

How does this relate, well, CRT iMacs and iBooks have to stay at G3 for now until the G5 is released, probably at SF but I don't care to speculate. Then the PowerMacs and Xserves are going up to G5, then the CRT iMacs and iBooks will go to "slow" G4 while the LCD iMac and eMac will be "mid" G4 and the Powerbook will become "fast" G4.

Oh, and by the way, this may only be a 100MHz boost on the clock but these new iBooks are pretty mean for a consumer laptop.
 

Backtothemac

macrumors 601
Jan 3, 2002
4,206
0
San Destin Florida
Originally posted by os4
I have been running 10.2 on a 500 Mhz iBook and I have to totally disagree with whoever claimed that 10.2 screams on a G3. I get the redesigned blue beach ball all the time. In fact, the Finder crashes frequently, and there don't appear very many optimizations in place yet. Let's hope that is what the next 8 weeks before MWNY will bring. I do admit that many of the new features (e.g., search and spring-loaded folders) are awesome. I can't wait to have the final release.
Couple of questions. 1st) How much memory do you have in your iBook. 2nd) Do you have 10.2 on its own partition. 3rd) Remember there is a huge performance difference in 66 to 100 MHZ bus.

I am just saying what I know. Believe me QE is being used by the card. The iBook has better fps than my iMac with 2 times the video memory!
 

dantec

macrumors 6502a
Nov 6, 2001
605
0
California
Look...

This proves that QE will NOT run on iBooks (taken from www.apple.com/macosx/newversion/).

*nVidia: GeForce2MX, GeForce3, GeForce4 Ti, GeForce4 or GeForce4MX. ATI: any AGP Radeon card. 32MB VRAM recommended for optimum performance.
So am I blind or do you see ATI Rage 128??? I agree with Indigo.

You said your iBook gets lots more FPS when it plays Quake... That has nothing to do with QE. 10.2. probably has another 25% OpenGL increase in performance...

The G4 is probably not present in a iBook because of the difference with a Powerbook.

About the CRT iMac, I think that will go the way of the cube at MWNY. Maybe we will see a new lowend iMac...
 

dantec

macrumors 6502a
Nov 6, 2001
605
0
California
Just a reminder, Quartz Extreme is for 2D graphics. Quake uses 3D... OpenGL graphics. Not the same thing...

Just like in Mac OS 9, Quickdraw (2D) & OpenGL (3D).
 

os4

macrumors newbie
Jun 6, 2001
18
0
good point, Backtothemac

Originally posted by Backtothemac


Couple of questions. 1st) How much memory do you have in your iBook. 2nd) Do you have 10.2 on its own partition. 3rd) Remember there is a huge performance difference in 66 to 100 MHZ bus.

I am just saying what I know. Believe me QE is being used by the card. The iBook has better fps than my iMac with 2 times the video memory!

Good point, Backtothemac. I only have 384Mb RAM; so I did not max it out. 10.2 was the only thing on my 10Gig drive. I don't think the the partition or the size of the partition was an issue. But I do agree with the bus difference. I kicked myself (as everyone does) for buying my iBook six weeks before the upgrades came out in the fall with the 100Mhzbus.
 

blakespot

Administrator
Jun 4, 2000
1,316
50
Alexandria, VA
Originally posted by dantec
Just a reminder, Quartz Extreme is for 2D graphics. Quake uses 3D... OpenGL graphics. Not the same thing...

Just like in Mac OS 9, Quickdraw (2D) & OpenGL (3D).
Indeed nothing truly 3D is happening in Quartz Extreme...but it is using OpenGL. Presumably each window becomes a texture (mapped to an apparently 2D plane) and is moved about along that plane. It is not part of QE, but I imagine that you're just one OpenGL call away from being able to rotate, say, a terminal window about an axis.


blakespot
 

jamesbhai

macrumors member
May 20, 2002
43
0
Boston
ibook 3.5

I bought the new iBook last night and it is really, really fast. It is faster than my roommate's G4-500 TiBook with similar configurations. I have a bit more memory (384-256), but even so, if that is what it takes to have great performance, then this machine will be a keeper, even on X, for a few years to come.

My problem with X was that it was slow on previous G3s (I am running a Pismo 400) just for navigating and doing simple Finder functions that the targeted audience would notice. They won't notice if if takes a bit longer to render something in Photoshop. They need a machine that will run the Finder, Exploder, Office, iTunes and such without appearing to slow down for no apparent reason. The new iBook accomplishes this with extra room leftover.

I think there is a difference between 'optimum' and 'required.' The new iBooks are speedy under 10.1.4, will be even quicker under 10.2 and whatever Quartz Xtreme that it does take advantage of will provide for the speediest iBook performance to date and will be a great pickup for anyone short of people whose needs were already suited for Powerbooks.

When your required apps. all open in under 5 seconds and the Finder doesn't lag behind, that's all you need. I strongly doubt most iBook consumers would be able to tell the difference between the new models and a G4-500/600. If they can tell, they are probably better off with the Powerbook anyway.
 

Backtothemac

macrumors 601
Jan 3, 2002
4,206
0
San Destin Florida
Re: Look...

Originally posted by dantec
This proves that QE will NOT run on iBooks (taken from www.apple.com/macosx/newversion/).



So am I blind or do you see ATI Rage 128??? I agree with Indigo.

You said your iBook gets lots more FPS when it plays Quake... That has nothing to do with QE. 10.2. probably has another 25% OpenGL increase in performance...

The G4 is probably not present in a iBook because of the difference with a Powerbook.

About the CRT iMac, I think that will go the way of the cube at MWNY. Maybe we will see a new lowend iMac...
Who said anything about quake? I am talking about iTunes using the stock vis, and with G-Force. Yes, I understand the difference between 2d and 3d. The fact is that with 10.1 if I move a window or scroll through one, or run the mouse over the dock. Proc useage goes to near 100%. With 10.2 it hovers around 25-50% even with the largest window. That is 2D interface rendering. That is QE baby!
 

nero007

macrumors regular
Feb 25, 2002
109
0
Originally posted by os4
I do admit that many of the new features (e.g., search and spring-loaded folders) are awesome. I can't wait to have the final release.
What build are you running? Spring loaded folders aren't implemented on mine and I have the WWDC build.
 

nero007

macrumors regular
Feb 25, 2002
109
0
I heard that QE wasn't even implemented yet in the current build of Jaguar. Can anyone confirm/ disconfirm this? I'm running a G4 Dual 450 and haven't noticed much of an increase. Then again, I never really had any problems with 10.