gugy said:
Yeh, a new PM G5 at NAB would be just the ticket for me. Anyone know of IBM's plans for G5s? How much faster can they make the 970mp? What about the possibility of 4 duals?
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.
Intel PowerMacs? Apple Phone? MacBooks Ship Date?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeh, a new PM G5 at NAB would be just the ticket for me. Anyone know of IBM's plans for G5s? How much faster can they make the 970mp? What about the possibility of 4 duals?
Id rather wait and let the software makers take their time, theres nothing worse than a rushed program.
Cant wait to start hearing some of the reviews of the MacBook Pro's
Cant wait to start hearing some of the reviews of the MacBook Pro's
nagromme said:
Eh, unless you want a Conroe based PC, hope they come out in the fall. Apple would be in bad shape to transition the powermac to intel perhaps a full year before essential apps like photoshop are native to it. Nobody wants a workhorse that does't have any work to do, and selling off stock of quads will still leave some wanting to buy a working fast mac instead of one that's waiting. Also, apple looks lame if they wait and introduce a top end computer with an old chip. So Conroe late fall, transition done before 2007, adobe software coming soon, and all will be well.
Hunabku said:
IBM just released a Blade server based on the 970MP:
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/bladecenter/js21/index.html
Blade servers are even higher density than Apple Xserves and IBM manages to place 2x dual core 2.5ghz 970MP in the blade .. all without any need for liquid cooling.
And IBM at ISCCC presented a paper on the 970MP and 970GX and showed performance figures for these processors at 3Ghz as reported at RWT:
http://www.realworldtech.com/forums...PostNum=4058&Thread=1&entryID=62544&roomID=11
37.7/48.8 SPEC int/FP rate @ 3 GHz for 970MP
For reference against the core duo in the imac:
32.6/27.1 SPEC int/FP rate @ 2Ghz
Even the single core 970GX beats the core duo at specfp_rate
I think the only reason why apple wouldn't release this chip is that they wouldn't be able to display fancy graphs saying how much faster the "intel powermac" would be compared to the previous G5 Powermac.
i think that has to do with the recent trademarks of terms like "boombox" and "hi-fi" or whatever that surfaced a few weeks ago. There isn't really much info on it but rumor has it those are Apple branded iPod speakers..ScottB said:
Multimedia said:
I am working at a advertisment agency. We ordered, and have recieved a iMac 2 ghz intel... As many here use adobe CS2 for illustrations and creative design work, we are looking at performance. Becuase of Adobe we will NOT buy Intel macs for our designers and video work becuase it is just to slow in Rosetta.
It would not be all to foreign if someone broke into Apple they would find a Intel Mac Pro standing there ready done just being used as a Itunes server...
I think Apple has it up running working fine but it is the support programs for PRO users that is the biggest thing, and why we do not have a announcment in our hands of a Mac Pro.
The iMac is great snappy and fast, but under PowerPC programs it is as my PBG4 1.25 512MB, running the whole CS2 suite...
I would still want for video work a Quad G5 with 16 GB ram etc. etc. etc.
Working in the creative busniess this is still the monster till we have native pro apps.
swedeykx said:
The CPU isn't ready, unless they go with the P4. Anything else would either be too slow or the cost would be prohibitive.
It's nice to hear that even under Rosetta CS2 can match your PB. I am an occassional user of Pohotshop and have no intentions of upgrading from CS2 to CS3 when it is shipped as that perfomance will do nicely.
As for movie editing, I will get Final Cut Pro next month (fingers crossed) and the MBP should be up to the challenge!
I believe none. The other day an employee at the Apple Store told me they'd have the first one in the store in a few weeks, and I'd think they'd be getting it early on in the shipping, b/c, I mean, they are the store, haha. (ok, it's the morning, I'm stupid, ok?)Analog Kid said:
Dm84 said:
Ugg, please! The situation with Adobe is no where close to Quark - yet. If Adobe waits and releases CS3, at the latest, by April 07 (18 month point), they will be fine. If this were the same as Quark, then CS3 would not be universal when first released, and take another year or new release to get there.
I am no Quark or Adobe fan as they both have had their problems. I do not be grudge Adobe for saying "hey, we just released CS2 and didn't know about the Intel switch with enough time to make it universal. Since these machines won't be available until summer 06, and pro machines until 07, that is right inline with our normal upgrade time so we will make CS3 universal." Is it really their fault Apple moved up the timelines AND actually delivered? No!
Will this kill ID? No! You are forgetting many BUSINESSES will not rush to buy these first Intel machines. ID was out for many years but it wasn't until you couldn't really buy a mac w/o OS9 that they all started switching over to ID vs Quark. Second, you are forgetting they price bundle Adobe provides that Quark can't compete with. Illustrator and Photoshop are still must haves regardless if you use Quark or ID. Third, I have been to two conferences where both Quark and Adobe have been showcasing their products. 5 out of 10 times I passed their booth I would hear or see the Quark people troubleshooting their product and/or saying "it should (will) work like that" once the final product is released." I didn't hear that once from the Adobe booth.
So, if you want to switch to Quark just because you might have to wait 6 months after a pro mac is released to get universal binary Adobe apps, be my guest. Personally, at this time, I do not be grudge Adobe for their decision. If they don't release it or miss an April 07 release time then I might agree but I am willing to wait and see.
My MacBook Pro Ship Date
My MacBook Pro 1.83 was ordered an hour after they were announced on January 10th with an upgraded 7200 RPM HD.
My "ship date" has been, and remains as of this morning, February 15th. Oddly, even though I paid an extra $15 for 2nd day shipping, the "delivered by" date is slated for the 21st. I assume one of these dates are wrong, and I've seen this in the past on previous orders (got them early.)
I'll keep you all posted.
My MacBook Pro 1.83 was ordered an hour after they were announced on January 10th with an upgraded 7200 RPM HD.
My "ship date" has been, and remains as of this morning, February 15th. Oddly, even though I paid an extra $15 for 2nd day shipping, the "delivered by" date is slated for the 21st. I assume one of these dates are wrong, and I've seen this in the past on previous orders (got them early.)
I'll keep you all posted.
Multimedia said:
I would agree. A Quad G5 is going to be as fast or faster than anything comparable on the PC or Mac for quite a while. And even if something is ~10% faster you won't notice it anyway.
I'm going from a desktop DP 1 GHz Quicksilver to a MacBook Pro 1.83. I also have a PC that I primarily use for games and some proprietary 3D apps that I use for freelance work.
thunng8 said:
This is not an apples to apples comparison....
The 970MP is a Desktop/Server/Workstation chip. The Core Duo is a mobile chip. The 970 is a furnace compared to the Core Duo.
Also, you will note that the Core Duo stacks up very well against the 970MP in Integer, even at 2/3's the clock rate. It is well known that the 970 is an FP monster.
For the applications that I'm using, I'd rather have very good Integer performance anyway, not FP. Most applications depend more heavily on Integer than FP performance.
- Kelson
In his most recent keynote at MWSF last month, Steve Jobs said that the Intel transition was ahead of schedule and would be completed by the end of this year. So I do expect the G5 Power Macs to be replaced with Intel Mac Pros before the end of 2006. Also, most Pro apps, with the exception of Adobe (expected for April 2007) will be Universal Binaries by then.Multimedia said:
thunng8 said:
Yeah, but I bet that bundle of little 40mm fans they put those blades make that thing sound like a jet taking off.
Steve Jobs Can Promise Anything He Likes
1) limited supplies of Woodcrest or Conroe processors for the first gen PowerMacIntels
2) first generation bugs in the hardware
3) waiting for 10.5 Leopard and the bugs 10.5.0 is likely to have
4) eminent San Francisco MacWorld 2007 announcements many veteran buyers will want to wait for before pulling the trigger
5) satisfactory powerful performance with the existing - and at that point very inexpensive - PPC Quads.
I'm sure if you think about it you can probably come up with five other reasons the complete difusion of the whole line will not realistically be completed until Spring 2007 - particularly if you factor in Adobe not shipping CS3 Universal before then.
I can see myself buying the last fastest Quad PPC PowerMac next year if I still think the 2.5 Quad is too slow. I'm just not that excited about PowerMacIntels like I am about the Core Duo MacBook Pros - IF they put FW 800 port back in when they finish the 17" version. Missing FW 800 on the eminent 15" model is real off putting for me.
On the other hand, if the speed of the PowerMacIntels leave these Quads in the dust, I may want to adopt earlier than usual. But I tend to fall one generation behind the leading model. I don't see getting into PowerMacIntels until the second generation is released and the first top of the line goes refurb.
Yes I know he said that. But that hoped for reality may be limited by five or more different factors contributing to slow early adoption of PowerMacIntels:MacinDoc said:
1) limited supplies of Woodcrest or Conroe processors for the first gen PowerMacIntels
2) first generation bugs in the hardware
3) waiting for 10.5 Leopard and the bugs 10.5.0 is likely to have
4) eminent San Francisco MacWorld 2007 announcements many veteran buyers will want to wait for before pulling the trigger
5) satisfactory powerful performance with the existing - and at that point very inexpensive - PPC Quads.
I'm sure if you think about it you can probably come up with five other reasons the complete difusion of the whole line will not realistically be completed until Spring 2007 - particularly if you factor in Adobe not shipping CS3 Universal before then.
I can see myself buying the last fastest Quad PPC PowerMac next year if I still think the 2.5 Quad is too slow.
I'm just not that excited about PowerMacIntels like I am about the Core Duo MacBook Pros - IF they put FW 800 port back in when they finish the 17" version. Missing FW 800 on the eminent 15" model is real off putting for me.On the other hand, if the speed of the PowerMacIntels leave these Quads in the dust, I may want to adopt earlier than usual. But I tend to fall one generation behind the leading model. I don't see getting into PowerMacIntels until the second generation is released and the first top of the line goes refurb.
Multimedia said:
Even in 10 months time the PPC Quads aren't going to be cheap. Apple must have dropped its profit margin (if only slightly) to make those beasts and we will likely see a small speed increase between now and the intel PM coming out anyway.