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 my G5 really running at 3GHz?
- Thread starter rabidz7
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So, tell me which G5 can run Lion/ML/Sea Lion [1] (see non-aqua buttons on 1st screenshot and scroll bar on the 2nd screenshot)?
[1] By Sea Lion I mean Mavericks
The buttons on the first screenshot are Aqua, All of Mac OS X's UI is Aqua whatever the release.
It's called "theming".
Also please note: there are Open Firmware commands that you can run that will make OF report that the system is running faster.
It was common when Leopard came out, because it's installer did a pure processor MHz test to see if it should install.
Faking Out the Leopard Installer with Open Firmware.
It also works within the OS, I have used it to allow iChat AV to use multi-person video chats on a system that was "officially" too slow for them. (And found out why - ran like molasses.)
This does *NOT* speed up the system in any way. It purely makes the firmware report a faster speed.
It was common when Leopard came out, because it's installer did a pure processor MHz test to see if it should install.
Faking Out the Leopard Installer with Open Firmware.
It also works within the OS, I have used it to allow iChat AV to use multi-person video chats on a system that was "officially" too slow for them. (And found out why - ran like molasses.)
This does *NOT* speed up the system in any way. It purely makes the firmware report a faster speed.
Rabidz stop wasting our time. Stop making nonsense threads like this one.
Did you even read the whole thread?
READ:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/25114/
As I said before, it is not possible to do this.
I don't know who are you trying to impress, but you're failing every time.
Can someone please ban Rabidz?
So, tell me which G5 can run Lion/ML/Sea Lion [1] (see non-aqua buttons on 1st screenshot and scroll bar on the 2nd screenshot)?
[1] By Sea Lion I mean Mavericks
Um, the one with a new motherboard and CPU that is hackintoshed...
New Motherboard? New CPU? Hackintoshed? Are you even listening to yourself? How do you sleep at night, seriously?
That's not a G5, that's not a PowerPC.
Oh please...
Listening to apple-people talking about the difficulty of overclocking seems banal for anyone who's even for a moment been part of the overclocking scene on the Wintel-side.
Yes, Apple certainly does not favor overclocking and they did a thorough job of demotivating overclocking on the G5's, not to speak of the inherently overclocking unfriendliness of the G5's thermal profile, but does the poster seriously think that that kludge of an LCS is the most efficient cooling system around?
I'd have a lighter time believing that the quad could not go higher, if it was not for the (very public) existence of that pesky 2,7 MP... and even that runs rock solid with default cooling. Face it, most probably IBM was able to drive the the G5 beyond the 3 GHz barrier, but Apple did not want to go there - they had already had enough grief from dragging IBM along and had already gotten friendly with intel.
-
That said, do not interpret this comment in such a way, that I would for a minute believe the OP's actually managed to overclock his quad.
rabidz7, please stop fooling around with your quad - you might actually break it, and then there would be one less quad left in the world - something I'm sure none of us would want...
I guess only someone from IBM could tell how it really was...
You may find this old MR thread interesting: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/31443/
Yeah...
showthread.php?t=31443 said:
20-25 Ghz in 2010-2011, at a 45 nm process? Forget about when, I don't think 25+ Ghz at a 45 nm process is even possible. The distance between the gates at that lithography would be too long for such speeds - unless you would implement a dumb "straight line" approach as Intel did with the P4, to boost clock rates while sacrificing power... Not to speak of the iceberg you would have to mount on such a CPU to prevent it from melting...
As it happens, IBM never took the POWER5 beyond 2,3 Ghz...
RGDS,
What a funny thread to read 10 years later. Can we finally put these rumors to rest that Apple is thinking of a switch to Intel? 25GHz Power 9900 on 45nm!!!! Powerbook G5 @ 10GHz just around the corner!
Only a small minority in that thread understood why it would not be possible.
Apple already have plans switching to Intel before OS X was only released to consumers
This is the screenshot of the app compiler from 10.0 developer preview 2, notice the Intel option in it. Apple accidentally leaked about the Intel switch, but people thought that they're just leftovers when porting NextStep to PPC, and didn't notice that Apple is really switching to Intel 7 years later after this DP of OS X
Source:http://archive.arstechnica.com/reviews/4q99/macos-x-dp2/m-macos-x-dp2-8.html
This is the screenshot of the app compiler from 10.0 developer preview 2, notice the Intel option in it. Apple accidentally leaked about the Intel switch, but people thought that they're just leftovers when porting NextStep to PPC, and didn't notice that Apple is really switching to Intel 7 years later after this DP of OS X
Source:http://archive.arstechnica.com/reviews/4q99/macos-x-dp2/m-macos-x-dp2-8.html
The "Rhapsody" Developer Previews were publicly available on Intel. Apple even hinted early on that the early Mac OS X Server, even after release, would run on Intel hardware. Then they did an about-face and removed Intel support before the desktop-oriented Mac OS X previews (or Mac OS X Server's public pre-Aqua release.)