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.
Is Motorola KILLING Apple?
- Thread starter MacManiac1224
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Getting back on the topic
I think you are right that Motorola tries to keep pace, but in the last two years they hardly did. In fact on performance the gap widens more and more to the Intel/AMD world. It doesn't help to have the better core design in your processor when you can't make those puppies flying. And even if for more and more users raw power isn't the only thing they are concerned about with a new machine, there are still a lot of pros out there who just need as much power as they can get. For those people the price of a machine is secondary in most cases, because time is money. If I run mainly Photoshop on my workstation I hardly find any argument anymore why I should use a Mac. The underlying OS is not really important, since PS works exactly the same within the application. I doubt that a machine like that, used for a certain task is outdated faster than any Mac these days. Those times are over, it is equal. If you are running a lot of different tasks on your machine the OS plays maybe a bigger role, but even then... Standard (pro) apps work the same on both platforms, and in most cases faster these days on a Windows box.
Don't get me wrong on that, I'm a Mac user since 12 years and it was always my preferred platform, no matter if for busniness or private use. But even I start to think about it meanwhile to maybe get a Non-Mac if they don't get things faster straight. Loyality is something very important for me and I stayed with Apple even in hard times. But my workstation isn't just a hobby, I have to make money with it. And what counts is the result. The faster I get it, the better I stay competetive. From a certain point on I can't be picky anymore, if I run Windows or MacOS X under my apps, time is money.
Last year I bought a G4/733 Quicksilver to pass the time until they introduce really fast and new high-end machines. I didn't feel like buying the top of the line G4 since I considered it wasting money, I wanted to save the money for somthing really fast. But that's 6 months ago and it is almost May now. Where are the significantly faster machines? Not even announced, while Intel/AMD have processors with more than 2GHz! The money is burning in my pocket and wants/has to be spent. I start to become impatient.
So even if the G5 will be as amazing as everybody hopes, AMD is introducing the Hammer soon, so will the G5 really be faster then? Nobody knows so far.
But one thing is for sure... if the G5 isn't there by summer, I will switch systems for the tasks that demand real power. I can't wait any longer then.
So somehow Motorola is killing Apple with their lack of perfomance. The pro users are very important for Apple and they start to become pissed and want to spend their money for boxes without an Apple label, if nothing happens very quickly. Sad for apple, since they have great products, but that's how it is, when you are dependend on one chip manufacturer these days.
That Apple sticks with "old technology" in their machines isn't surprising at all for me. I am pretty sure that also Apple didn't expect that it would take Motorola that long to finish the G5. The designs are probably finished since months, just the processor is missing. To put the old processor into the new board would be probably more complicated as we might think and the few % of better performance overall wouldn't be worth it.
I don't know what to expect from the future for Apple, they are healthy still but that can change very quickly as we know. It is all depending on finally getting lightning fast processors to be an alternative to other platforms again. At the moment the Mac is like a fully equipped luxury Mercedes with the engine of a lawn mower. And if I have a Mercedes, then I want to move it fast if necessary and not just going 50 km/h at the max.
groovebuster
I think you are right that Motorola tries to keep pace, but in the last two years they hardly did. In fact on performance the gap widens more and more to the Intel/AMD world. It doesn't help to have the better core design in your processor when you can't make those puppies flying. And even if for more and more users raw power isn't the only thing they are concerned about with a new machine, there are still a lot of pros out there who just need as much power as they can get. For those people the price of a machine is secondary in most cases, because time is money. If I run mainly Photoshop on my workstation I hardly find any argument anymore why I should use a Mac. The underlying OS is not really important, since PS works exactly the same within the application. I doubt that a machine like that, used for a certain task is outdated faster than any Mac these days. Those times are over, it is equal. If you are running a lot of different tasks on your machine the OS plays maybe a bigger role, but even then... Standard (pro) apps work the same on both platforms, and in most cases faster these days on a Windows box.
Don't get me wrong on that, I'm a Mac user since 12 years and it was always my preferred platform, no matter if for busniness or private use. But even I start to think about it meanwhile to maybe get a Non-Mac if they don't get things faster straight. Loyality is something very important for me and I stayed with Apple even in hard times. But my workstation isn't just a hobby, I have to make money with it. And what counts is the result. The faster I get it, the better I stay competetive. From a certain point on I can't be picky anymore, if I run Windows or MacOS X under my apps, time is money.
Last year I bought a G4/733 Quicksilver to pass the time until they introduce really fast and new high-end machines. I didn't feel like buying the top of the line G4 since I considered it wasting money, I wanted to save the money for somthing really fast. But that's 6 months ago and it is almost May now. Where are the significantly faster machines? Not even announced, while Intel/AMD have processors with more than 2GHz! The money is burning in my pocket and wants/has to be spent. I start to become impatient.
So even if the G5 will be as amazing as everybody hopes, AMD is introducing the Hammer soon, so will the G5 really be faster then? Nobody knows so far.
But one thing is for sure... if the G5 isn't there by summer, I will switch systems for the tasks that demand real power. I can't wait any longer then.
So somehow Motorola is killing Apple with their lack of perfomance. The pro users are very important for Apple and they start to become pissed and want to spend their money for boxes without an Apple label, if nothing happens very quickly. Sad for apple, since they have great products, but that's how it is, when you are dependend on one chip manufacturer these days.
That Apple sticks with "old technology" in their machines isn't surprising at all for me. I am pretty sure that also Apple didn't expect that it would take Motorola that long to finish the G5. The designs are probably finished since months, just the processor is missing. To put the old processor into the new board would be probably more complicated as we might think and the few % of better performance overall wouldn't be worth it.
I don't know what to expect from the future for Apple, they are healthy still but that can change very quickly as we know. It is all depending on finally getting lightning fast processors to be an alternative to other platforms again. At the moment the Mac is like a fully equipped luxury Mercedes with the engine of a lawn mower. And if I have a Mercedes, then I want to move it fast if necessary and not just going 50 km/h at the max.
groovebuster
Re: Re: Getting back on the topic
You have some valid points, but remember that in a time when the industry was accepting very few Macintosh, if Motorola had released what they had available for the price it would cost to make it, Apple surely would not be around today.
They actually have the new CPU's already, but if they released the G5 one year after the G4, they surely would have shot themselves in the foot.
One thing that does prove that MHz doesn't mean performance.. go to www.tomshardware.com and look at the comparison between the P4 and the Athlon. Actually you will find that a 1.4 GHz Athlon outperformed a 2.0 GHz P4. Remember that performance is relative to the task at hand. THe G4 really kicks @$$ in true graphics processing, while the PC take the cake for office apps.
I would like to see a video car GPU based on the graphics power of the G4...He He He
You have some valid points, but remember that in a time when the industry was accepting very few Macintosh, if Motorola had released what they had available for the price it would cost to make it, Apple surely would not be around today.
They actually have the new CPU's already, but if they released the G5 one year after the G4, they surely would have shot themselves in the foot.
One thing that does prove that MHz doesn't mean performance.. go to www.tomshardware.com and look at the comparison between the P4 and the Athlon. Actually you will find that a 1.4 GHz Athlon outperformed a 2.0 GHz P4. Remember that performance is relative to the task at hand. THe G4 really kicks @$$ in true graphics processing, while the PC take the cake for office apps.
I would like to see a video car GPU based on the graphics power of the G4...He He He
I seriously doubt that they have the new CPU's already. Do you think Apple would not release those new CPU's if they had them? I don't. Apple would have loved to have a huge performance gap in their favor. But right now, it's not.
Yes, performance is relative to the task at hand. However, if you have a task that doesn't utilitize AltiVec, then you won't see the G4's strength.
I have never seen an Athlon 1.4GHz beating a P4A 2.4GHz (P4A's are the only P4's at 2.4GHz) in any test at Tom's Hardware, or anywhere else. That's just wishful thinking. However, I did see an overclocked Athlon XP at 1.918GHz keeping pace with a P4A at 2.4GHz with 400MHz RAM (usually coming neck-and-neck), but generally falling behind a P4A at 2.4GHz with 533MHz RAM. (http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/020402/p4_2400-08.html)
If you notice, each progressively higher clocked P4A gets less percentage better in the scores. In the first test (I think I have percent better then math right, but I'm a bit rusty) a 2.4GHz P4A scores 4% better then a 2.2GHz P4A, 10% better then 2.0GHz P4A, and 17% better then a 1.8GHz P4A. (A 2.0GHz P4A scores 8% better then a 2.0GHz P4). Logically, if megahertz was simply an indication of speed (such as FLOPS), then the 2.4GHz P4A should be 10% faster then the 2.2GHz P4A, 20% faster then the 2GHz P4A, and 30% faster then the 1.8GHz P4A.
Simply because Intel is at 2.4GHz doesn't mean it is 140% ahead (it IS ahead, just not anywhere that much) of Motorola.
Anyway, end of rant.
Yes, performance is relative to the task at hand. However, if you have a task that doesn't utilitize AltiVec, then you won't see the G4's strength.
I have never seen an Athlon 1.4GHz beating a P4A 2.4GHz (P4A's are the only P4's at 2.4GHz) in any test at Tom's Hardware, or anywhere else. That's just wishful thinking. However, I did see an overclocked Athlon XP at 1.918GHz keeping pace with a P4A at 2.4GHz with 400MHz RAM (usually coming neck-and-neck), but generally falling behind a P4A at 2.4GHz with 533MHz RAM. (http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/020402/p4_2400-08.html)
If you notice, each progressively higher clocked P4A gets less percentage better in the scores. In the first test (I think I have percent better then math right, but I'm a bit rusty) a 2.4GHz P4A scores 4% better then a 2.2GHz P4A, 10% better then 2.0GHz P4A, and 17% better then a 1.8GHz P4A. (A 2.0GHz P4A scores 8% better then a 2.0GHz P4). Logically, if megahertz was simply an indication of speed (such as FLOPS), then the 2.4GHz P4A should be 10% faster then the 2.2GHz P4A, 20% faster then the 2GHz P4A, and 30% faster then the 1.8GHz P4A.
Simply because Intel is at 2.4GHz doesn't mean it is 140% ahead (it IS ahead, just not anywhere that much) of Motorola.
Anyway, end of rant.
Re: Re: Re: Getting back on the topic
Why would they have shot themselves in the foot? The G3 processor is really an oldy meanwhile and like the G3 and the G4 where coexisting for years now, they will do the same with the G4 and the G5. The G4s will be in the consumer products, the G5 in the pro machines. Don't forget that Apple is just one of several customers for their Chips. And fact is that they had problems the past 2 years to really speed up their G3s and G4s. I doubt that there is a masterplan behind it. It is just that they had problems to make progress. Of course there is prototypes of the G5 already, but considering the problems with the G4 I am pretty sure it is not a question of marketing by motorola that it is not released so far, it is just not ready to be manufactured in big quantities and reasonable clock-speed. Also the G4 was late when they introduced it.
I know about the fact the the Athlon is faster than the P4 because of the design flaws Intel built into it. But a 1.4 GHz Athlon isn't state of the art anyway anymore. You get the Athlon MP 2GHz for 299$. A 1GHz G4 outperforms a 2 GHz Athlon? Both as MP systems? I don't think so... even not with Altivec. I sat at a dual Athlon 1.8Ghz lately and the machine was blazingly fast. The DP G4 1Ghz right beside was slower in general, no matter what. I am an Apple fan since 12 years, but that demonstration how noticeably slower the Hi-End Mac is compared to a windows box almost made me cry. And you get the MP Athlons clocked higher meanwhile at 2 GHz. So Apple and Motorola have to do something quickly. Just another speed bump of the G4s to maybe 1.2 or 1.4 GHz won't make it, especially not with that antique board around it. And it's not that Intel and AMD won't improve their processor speed too. And what about the Hammer? Maybe a lot of us folks stop cheering about the G5 so much when in real world tests it turns out, that the Hammer is faster than the G5... you never know.
groovebuster
Originally posted by Mad Max
You have some valid points, but remember that in a time when the industry was accepting very few Macintosh, if Motorola had released what they had available for the price it would cost to make it, Apple surely would not be around today.
They actually have the new CPU's already, but if they released the G5 one year after the G4, they surely would have shot themselves in the foot.
One thing that does prove that MHz doesn't mean performance.. go to www.tomshardware.com and look at the comparison between the P4 and the Athlon. Actually you will find that a 1.4 GHz Athlon outperformed a 2.0 GHz P4. Remember that performance is relative to the task at hand. THe G4 really kicks @$$ in true graphics processing, while the PC take the cake for office apps.
I would like to see a video car GPU based on the graphics power of the G4...He He He
Why would they have shot themselves in the foot? The G3 processor is really an oldy meanwhile and like the G3 and the G4 where coexisting for years now, they will do the same with the G4 and the G5. The G4s will be in the consumer products, the G5 in the pro machines. Don't forget that Apple is just one of several customers for their Chips. And fact is that they had problems the past 2 years to really speed up their G3s and G4s. I doubt that there is a masterplan behind it. It is just that they had problems to make progress. Of course there is prototypes of the G5 already, but considering the problems with the G4 I am pretty sure it is not a question of marketing by motorola that it is not released so far, it is just not ready to be manufactured in big quantities and reasonable clock-speed. Also the G4 was late when they introduced it.
I know about the fact the the Athlon is faster than the P4 because of the design flaws Intel built into it. But a 1.4 GHz Athlon isn't state of the art anyway anymore. You get the Athlon MP 2GHz for 299$. A 1GHz G4 outperforms a 2 GHz Athlon? Both as MP systems? I don't think so... even not with Altivec. I sat at a dual Athlon 1.8Ghz lately and the machine was blazingly fast. The DP G4 1Ghz right beside was slower in general, no matter what. I am an Apple fan since 12 years, but that demonstration how noticeably slower the Hi-End Mac is compared to a windows box almost made me cry. And you get the MP Athlons clocked higher meanwhile at 2 GHz. So Apple and Motorola have to do something quickly. Just another speed bump of the G4s to maybe 1.2 or 1.4 GHz won't make it, especially not with that antique board around it. And it's not that Intel and AMD won't improve their processor speed too. And what about the Hammer? Maybe a lot of us folks stop cheering about the G5 so much when in real world tests it turns out, that the Hammer is faster than the G5... you never know.
groovebuster
I wish we could get insider information from Motorola. Does anyone know anyone that works in the semi-conductor labs at Motorola? Is it top secret? Does Steve Jobs have a closed circuit camera set up at the front entrance so he can observe going ons?
Let me go off on a tangent here; when I was young I saw some of those Pink Panther movies and remembered Clouseau's butler, the Chinese guy. I forgot his name but anyway, one of his jobs was to attack Clouseau when he came home so the Inspector could practice his martial arts skills. I thought their bouts were hilarious. I always fantasized that as some kind of dream job. It'd be cool if Steve and I could have an arrangement like that.
Let me go off on a tangent here; when I was young I saw some of those Pink Panther movies and remembered Clouseau's butler, the Chinese guy. I forgot his name but anyway, one of his jobs was to attack Clouseau when he came home so the Inspector could practice his martial arts skills. I thought their bouts were hilarious. I always fantasized that as some kind of dream job. It'd be cool if Steve and I could have an arrangement like that.
How long have we seen the celeron processors being marketted along with the pee3's and pee4's??? Are the celeron's considered 'dated' or 'oldies'?? Probably by people that are in the know, but the average consumer probably just looks at the speed numbers and figures that most are created equal (even though they are not).
Oh and groovebuster, where did you find a 1.8GHz and 2GHz Athlon??? They don't exist. The top speed for the Athlon XP processor is 1.73GHz (XP 2100+). I have also seen those (the 2100+) chips in a retail package listing for $257 (US$). See for yourself at http://www.googlegear.com/jsp/ProductList.jsp?ThirdCategoryCode=010413 if you don't believe me. They also list the real speed rating of the processors, not just the name number. Those retail packages include a heat sink, fan and 3 year warranty. The OEM ones only have a 30 day warranty, which is why the site also recommends getting the retail version.
Don't give numbers that are that false... they show up in neon colors over here. Just like if I said I had seen/used a G4 dual 2GHz system... don't exist (yet at least) unless I meant that combined it was 2GHz which also isn't true.
Oh and groovebuster, where did you find a 1.8GHz and 2GHz Athlon??? They don't exist. The top speed for the Athlon XP processor is 1.73GHz (XP 2100+). I have also seen those (the 2100+) chips in a retail package listing for $257 (US$). See for yourself at http://www.googlegear.com/jsp/ProductList.jsp?ThirdCategoryCode=010413 if you don't believe me. They also list the real speed rating of the processors, not just the name number. Those retail packages include a heat sink, fan and 3 year warranty. The OEM ones only have a 30 day warranty, which is why the site also recommends getting the retail version.
Don't give numbers that are that false... they show up in neon colors over here. Just like if I said I had seen/used a G4 dual 2GHz system... don't exist (yet at least) unless I meant that combined it was 2GHz which also isn't true.
Originally posted by Ifeelbloated
I wish we could get insider information from Motorola. Does anyone know anyone that works in the semi-conductor labs at Motorola? Is it top secret? Does Steve Jobs have a closed circuit camera set up at the front entrance so he can observe going ons?
Let me go off on a tangent here; when I was young I saw some of those Pink Panther movies and remembered Clouseau's butler, the Chinese guy. I forgot his name but anyway, one of his jobs was to attack Clouseau when he came home so the Inspector could practice his martial arts skills. I thought their bouts were hilarious. I always fantasized that as some kind of dream job. It'd be cool if Steve and I could have an arrangement like that.
Kato!!!!
He was probably using an Athlon XP 1800+ (1.53GHz), and a rig with the top dual Athlon, which is the Athlon MP 2000+ (1.67GHz). AMD put those version numbers on the CPU's specifically so that end users who didn't know better would assume an AMD Athlon XP/MP 1800+ was 1.8GHz, etc. That move by AMD really irked me.
Also, the best price I've seen for a single Athlon MP 2000 chip is $261 (including shipping) on www.pricewatch.com, but the warranty sucks.
Also, the best price I've seen for a single Athlon MP 2000 chip is $261 (including shipping) on www.pricewatch.com, but the warranty sucks.
PCUser... to hell with pricewatch.com... look at www.googlegear.com for parts... they have the AMD XP 2100+ for the $257 I posted (as of today, not last week). They also have the MP 2000+ listed at $268 WITH a 3 year warranty... plus it includes the heat sink and fan (NOT an OEM version). I haven't ordered from them (yet) so I don't know what they do for shipping. Really worth looking into.
Pricewatch.com is a sampling of many vendors, not just the lowest ones. It lists product info (such as warranty), price, shipping, and company. Right now the best price/warranty/shipping I can find on pricewatch for the Athlon MP 2000+ is *drumroll* GoogleGear. But if someone comes up with a better price/warranty/shipping setup, I can find out about it. Why lock yourself into vendor?
BTW, the price I quoted was from today, not last week. Where did last week come from?
(I removed the comment about the XP/MP thing because the first time I read your post I didn't notice that you mentioned the price of the MP. Doh!)
BTW, the price I quoted was from today, not last week. Where did last week come from?
(I removed the comment about the XP/MP thing because the first time I read your post I didn't notice that you mentioned the price of the MP. Doh!)
I know that the MP and XP are different, hence me listing BOTH with their listed prices (both right from googlegear.com's site).
Are you getting prices on OEM or retail versions??? I am listing the retails since they have the 3 year warranty (you mentioned crappy warranty) as well as a heat sink and fan (good to have the ones AMD knows are rated for those chips).
Are you getting prices on OEM or retail versions??? I am listing the retails since they have the 3 year warranty (you mentioned crappy warranty) as well as a heat sink and fan (good to have the ones AMD knows are rated for those chips).
Both. Pricewatch doesn't just list retail or OEM, it lists whatever the vendors it checks are selling it for. GoogleGear is listed as selling OEM with 30 day warranty for $261 with $10-$12 shipping, and then a few entries later as retail with 3 year warranty for $268 with $10-$12 shipping. With heatsink and fan, as well. Hmm, sounds like the same deal you quoted to me. And if I was looking for the best deal and looking to purchase today, I would go through GoogleGear... because they beat out the other vendors.
This time GoogleGear was the best. If someone else beat GoogleGear, I'd go with them. I don't just buy from one vendor. Why should I?
(The closest deal listed is from "Jazz Technology", but it doesn't have 3 year warranty.)
This time GoogleGear was the best. If someone else beat GoogleGear, I'd go with them. I don't just buy from one vendor. Why should I?
(The closest deal listed is from "Jazz Technology", but it doesn't have 3 year warranty.)
And just WHAT exactly...........
does all this PC crap have to do with the price of powdered mouse testicles in Taiwan?
Nada.
Neither does it have anything to do with the A/I/M alliance.
does all this PC crap have to do with the price of powdered mouse testicles in Taiwan?
Nada.
Neither does it have anything to do with the A/I/M alliance.
I usually check prices between a few vendors that have done well by me in the past. I also have a local guy that usually matches the prices from online, or comes damn close to it. He is close enough that I can go there and pick it up (eliminates shipping charges). If I do need it faster, it's typically $8 shipping and I have it the following morning.
In my opinion, spending a few extra dollars to get the 3 year warranty plus the heat sink and fan is a good deal. Considering how much heat sinks can go for (up to $15-$20 with or without fans). That's usually the deciding factor for me. I am waiting for a guy to want my 1.4GH AMD Athlon (thunderbird) before I order up the XP 2100+. I also have to check and see if the current bios level on my motherboard will work with it, or if I need to wait for another revision to come out.
Have fun with the new chips... and hope you have good dip to go along with them
Spoke too soon... I just checked, and there is a new bios update out (F9) that supports both the XP 2100+ and the 2200+... guess they are coming out with another chip soon (if it isn't out already).
In my opinion, spending a few extra dollars to get the 3 year warranty plus the heat sink and fan is a good deal. Considering how much heat sinks can go for (up to $15-$20 with or without fans). That's usually the deciding factor for me. I am waiting for a guy to want my 1.4GH AMD Athlon (thunderbird) before I order up the XP 2100+. I also have to check and see if the current bios level on my motherboard will work with it, or if I need to wait for another revision to come out.
Have fun with the new chips... and hope you have good dip to go along with them
Spoke too soon... I just checked, and there is a new bios update out (F9) that supports both the XP 2100+ and the 2200+... guess they are coming out with another chip soon (if it isn't out already).
Re: Getting back on the topic
Every once in a while, I realize that I've taken something for granted too long and get in a rut. I've long accepted the premise that Mac's generally 'last longer'. For the most part, I have done so because I read many TCO comparisons spanning one or more upgrades.
The Mac was great for upgrading because the supporting components were generally high-end that would be useful for longer durations. And, Apple made this practical with the daughercard architecture.
When one upgraded an x86 machine in a major way, component incompatabilities would compell additional upgrades, adding to the upgrade cost.
Well, I haven't seen any TCO comparisons for more than four years. I am now beginning to wonder if I can any longer accept the 'Mac's last longer' premise.
Another aspect to this, how do the product cycles of Mac's compare with those of Dell, Gateway, and other x86 makers? That is, is the PowerMac at 9 months for speed bump upgrades and 18 months for motherboard upgrades (I just made this figures up BTW.). If Dell, for example, has shorter upgrade cycles, then this would be to Dell's favor. Offering an improved widget does not necessarily make yesterday's widget obsolete. In fact, until broadband and even more digital hub applications pervade the market, the average Joe can get along quite nicely with older computers.
Although, Apple's MacOS X, is a contradiction to that last point.
Cheers,
Eirik
Every once in a while, I realize that I've taken something for granted too long and get in a rut. I've long accepted the premise that Mac's generally 'last longer'. For the most part, I have done so because I read many TCO comparisons spanning one or more upgrades.
The Mac was great for upgrading because the supporting components were generally high-end that would be useful for longer durations. And, Apple made this practical with the daughercard architecture.
When one upgraded an x86 machine in a major way, component incompatabilities would compell additional upgrades, adding to the upgrade cost.
Well, I haven't seen any TCO comparisons for more than four years. I am now beginning to wonder if I can any longer accept the 'Mac's last longer' premise.
Another aspect to this, how do the product cycles of Mac's compare with those of Dell, Gateway, and other x86 makers? That is, is the PowerMac at 9 months for speed bump upgrades and 18 months for motherboard upgrades (I just made this figures up BTW.). If Dell, for example, has shorter upgrade cycles, then this would be to Dell's favor. Offering an improved widget does not necessarily make yesterday's widget obsolete. In fact, until broadband and even more digital hub applications pervade the market, the average Joe can get along quite nicely with older computers.
Although, Apple's MacOS X, is a contradiction to that last point.
Cheers,
Eirik
My AMD stock just went up!
Here are the hard facts. read this article before continuing...and notice the benchmarks.
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011031/index.html
All I am saying is that MHz doesn't mean performance. An 1800+ Athlon (1533MHz) outperforms a 2 GHz P4. There is more than 466MHz Difference (467 to be exact) between the two. Is this not proof that regardless of the naming shceme, MHz don't matter anymore?
Personally, I am glad that you all are looking so closely at the Athlon processors (Stock going up, evil laugh). And I assure you that the Hammer A.K.A. the K8 is going to change the industry radically (If you had seen the Hammer running 32 bit Windows and 64 bit Linux on the same CPU at the same time, you just know....).
My point was, that Motorola continues to be a leading manufacturer of other technologies (look at their GSM phones). To say they can't improve their own processor is saying your fingernails won't grow back if you cut them.
If motorola and Apple released products that the market wasn't ready for, billions of dollars would be wasted on marketing and production.
In real-world tests (again) the G4 was (and still is) more than adequate. Until there is software that will take advantage of the G5 architecture, it would be a waste of time and money to market it.
Find someone who works for Adobe and ask about their product roadmap. Ask if it incorporates G5 instructions. You'll be surprised!
Here are the hard facts. read this article before continuing...and notice the benchmarks.
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011031/index.html
All I am saying is that MHz doesn't mean performance. An 1800+ Athlon (1533MHz) outperforms a 2 GHz P4. There is more than 466MHz Difference (467 to be exact) between the two. Is this not proof that regardless of the naming shceme, MHz don't matter anymore?
Personally, I am glad that you all are looking so closely at the Athlon processors
(Stock going up, evil laugh). And I assure you that the Hammer A.K.A. the K8 is going to change the industry radically (If you had seen the Hammer running 32 bit Windows and 64 bit Linux on the same CPU at the same time, you just know....).My point was, that Motorola continues to be a leading manufacturer of other technologies (look at their GSM phones). To say they can't improve their own processor is saying your fingernails won't grow back if you cut them.
If motorola and Apple released products that the market wasn't ready for, billions of dollars would be wasted on marketing and production.
In real-world tests (again) the G4 was (and still is) more than adequate. Until there is software that will take advantage of the G5 architecture, it would be a waste of time and money to market it.
Find someone who works for Adobe and ask about their product roadmap. Ask if it incorporates G5 instructions. You'll be surprised!
Re: My AMD stock just went up!
Very intriguing post!!! This thread needed a shot in the arm.
Your last paragraph, however, puzzles me. Its my understanding the software developers write their code to the OS and its API's, not the CPU. If a new CPU is involved, then they must recompile, provided a compiler is available. Is this what you mean by G5 instructions?
If Adobe were writing in machine language to get extra performance, I should think that that would be incredibly impractical.
This isn't to say that the CPU is entirely irrelevant in programming. In the case of the G4, for example, one should program algorithsm in the form of matrix operations to exploit AltiVec. AltiVec loves matrix operations!
Any of you programming studs mind confirming or correcting me?
I see that you work for a motherboard company in Taiwan, according to your profile. I noticed that my mouth started to water when I read this. Wow, we may have someone aboard with inside or first-hand knowledge of the Hammer and possibly the G5. I'm looking forward to reading more of your posts.
Eirik
Originally posted by Mad Max
Here are the hard facts. read this article before continuing...and notice the benchmarks.
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011031/index.html
All I am saying is that MHz doesn't mean performance. An 1800+ Athlon (1533MHz) outperforms a 2 GHz P4. There is more than 466MHz Difference (467 to be exact) between the two. Is this not proof that regardless of the naming shceme, MHz don't matter anymore?
Personally, I am glad that you all are looking so closely at the Athlon processors
My point was, that Motorola continues to be a leading manufacturer of other technologies (look at their GSM phones). To say they can't improve their own processor is saying your fingernails won't grow back if you cut them.
If motorola and Apple released products that the market wasn't ready for, billions of dollars would be wasted on marketing and production.
In real-world tests (again) the G4 was (and still is) more than adequate. Until there is software that will take advantage of the G5 architecture, it would be a waste of time and money to market it.
Find someone who works for Adobe and ask about their product roadmap. Ask if it incorporates G5 instructions. You'll be surprised!
Very intriguing post!!! This thread needed a shot in the arm.
Your last paragraph, however, puzzles me. Its my understanding the software developers write their code to the OS and its API's, not the CPU. If a new CPU is involved, then they must recompile, provided a compiler is available. Is this what you mean by G5 instructions?
If Adobe were writing in machine language to get extra performance, I should think that that would be incredibly impractical.
This isn't to say that the CPU is entirely irrelevant in programming. In the case of the G4, for example, one should program algorithsm in the form of matrix operations to exploit AltiVec. AltiVec loves matrix operations!
Any of you programming studs mind confirming or correcting me?
I see that you work for a motherboard company in Taiwan, according to your profile. I noticed that my mouth started to water when I read this. Wow, we may have someone aboard with inside or first-hand knowledge of the Hammer and possibly the G5. I'm looking forward to reading more of your posts.
Eirik
everybody, chill!!! Motorola isn't killing Apple they're making the next generation EUV (Extreme Ultraviolet Lithography) chips. chips made with EUV will be able to have way smaller curcuit patterns printed on them. this will result in speeds of 10GHz or faster.....
Well, they're also working on Silicon Germanium hybrid semiconductors too. But, I haven't heard of a credible source saying we'll see anything from this or EUV anytime soon, such as in less than two years. Do you have a source on this EUV stuff?
Eirik
Re: Re: My AMD stock just went up!
You are not mistaken. I was trying to put it simply given Adobe (and other software companies) usually use the term "instructions" for end-users with little knowledge of programming...just to make their lives easier
You might also find that new advances in technology (or CPU cores to be more specific) usually will have a software that takes direct advantage of it. Of course, the software must be "backwards compatible" in order to get the most out of their sales.
My only point was to say, you can confirm with software vendors that they are currently "tweaking" the software to perform with the G5 specs... proof of the G5.... you decide.
About EUV... does the term "Non-disclosure Agreement" mean anything to you?!?! People have lost their jobs for saying less (I know what you wrote is available online freely, I just don't want to put anyone on the spot, like me for example).
All I am trying to do is say that Motorola is in a position to give Apple a big breath of Life. The times they are a'changin'
btw. the new AMD Thoroughbred CPU even kicks the P4 Northwoods @$$.
Money money muuunneee!
Originally posted by eirik
Your last paragraph, however, puzzles me. Its my understanding the software developers write their code to the OS and its API's, not the CPU. If a new CPU is involved, then they must recompile, provided a compiler is available. Is this what you mean by G5 instructions?
If Adobe were writing in machine language to get extra performance, I should think that that would be incredibly impractical.
This isn't to say that the CPU is entirely irrelevant in programming. In the case of the G4, for example, one should program algorithsm in the form of matrix operations to exploit AltiVec. AltiVec loves matrix operations!
Eirik
You are not mistaken. I was trying to put it simply given Adobe (and other software companies) usually use the term "instructions" for end-users with little knowledge of programming...just to make their lives easier
You might also find that new advances in technology (or CPU cores to be more specific) usually will have a software that takes direct advantage of it. Of course, the software must be "backwards compatible" in order to get the most out of their sales.
My only point was to say, you can confirm with software vendors that they are currently "tweaking" the software to perform with the G5 specs... proof of the G5.... you decide.
About EUV... does the term "Non-disclosure Agreement" mean anything to you?!?!
People have lost their jobs for saying less (I know what you wrote is available online freely, I just don't want to put anyone on the spot, like me for example).All I am trying to do is say that Motorola is in a position to give Apple a big breath of Life. The times they are a'changin'
btw. the new AMD Thoroughbred CPU even kicks the P4 Northwoods @$$.
Money money muuunneee!
Re: Re: Getting back on the topic
This is too true Now when you upgrade, it isn't just RAM...(although RAM doesn't hurt, he he he) but you usually find yourself with a new CPU, Motherboard, Memory and VGA card to boot! Given the cost of the High-end cards can be as much as USD$400 (finally found out what my motivation was to work for a Motherboard/VGA manufacturer )
This is too true
Now when you upgrade, it isn't just RAM...(although RAM doesn't hurt, he he he) but you usually find yourself with a new CPU, Motherboard, Memory and VGA card to boot! Given the cost of the High-end cards can be as much as USD$400 (finally found out what my motivation was to work for a Motherboard/VGA manufacturer )
So.........
Hypothetically,
If Moto OR IBM just scaled their existing dies down for EUV would that mean one could....say......put 4 G3 CPU's on the same size chip as an existing .13 cut chip?
How about 4 G4 CPU's on the same size chip as Apollo.
This would explain the comments about "the G4 has a lot of life left in it."
Perhaps Steve will pull something out of his orofice.
Hypothetically,
If Moto OR IBM just scaled their existing dies down for EUV would that mean one could....say......put 4 G3 CPU's on the same size chip as an existing .13 cut chip?
How about 4 G4 CPU's on the same size chip as Apollo.
This would explain the comments about "the G4 has a lot of life left in it."
Perhaps Steve will pull something out of his orofice.
Re: So.........
If there's one reason NOT to watch the MWNY keynote...Originally posted by mischief
Perhaps Steve will pull something out of his orofice.