Low Power G5 Coming Soon?

[Maxx Power]

3) The x600M is a worse performer than the 9700M, unless there's been some kind of tomfoolery with the naming schemes agains. Generally, the x600 is roughly on par with the previous generations upper-middle level GPUs, and the 9700M is a top-end card that's only very recently been supplanted by the 9800M.

This isn't true. 9700M is the mobile version of the 9600XT, this I think we all know. Just as well, the x600 series is based on the 9600XT with PCIE as well, with the desktop version having much faster ram speeds. Just for kicks, see below:

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_con...9097910067CE5B3418522EA8BB6A62BA0170FC23901B4

 

[wrldwzrd89]

This isn't true. 9700M is the mobile version of the 9600XT, this I think we all know. Just as well, the x600 series is based on the 9600XT with PCIE as well, with the desktop version having much faster ram speeds. Just for kicks, see below:

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_con...9097910067CE5B3418522EA8BB6A62BA0170FC23901B4

How could that be? That doesn't make much sense. I'd think that the 9700M would be based on the 9700, not the 9600XT. Your comment about the X600 being based on the 9600XT does make sense, given the names.

 

[Maxx Power]

How could that be? That doesn't make much sense. I'd think that the 9700M would be based on the 9700, not the 9600XT. Your comment about the X600 being based on the 9600XT does make sense, given the names.

I know it sounds misleading, but the 9700M was the mobile variant of the 9600XT. ATI used a very confusing naming convention here, and they continue to mislead the consumers as well. For details read reviews done anywhere on the internet, AnandTech is a good source, or if you want, use the resources at ATI's website as well.

 

[Maxx Power]

How could that be? That doesn't make much sense. I'd think that the 9700M would be based on the 9700, not the 9600XT. Your comment about the X600 being based on the 9600XT does make sense, given the names.

Oh, and also do realize that the 9700M has four pixel pipes with 2 vertex pipes using 130nm process low-K. This practically screams 9600XT.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

I know it sounds misleading, but the 9700M was the mobile variant of the 9600XT. ATI used a very confusing naming convention here, and they continue to mislead the consumers as well. For details read reviews done anywhere on the internet, AnandTech is a good source, or if you want, use the resources at ATI's website as well.

That is VERY strange naming on ATI's part (they should have called it the 9600XT-M), but I believe you, Maxx Power.

 

[Maxx Power]

That is VERY strange naming on ATI's part (they should have called it the 9600XT-M), but I believe you, Maxx Power.

Thanks!! Hehe. Now, where's that kid with my latte ?

 

[bryng]

What, no Radeon Mobility 9800? I woulda thought it had a reasonable chance if being in an upgrade, particularly a G4 one ...

 

[Maxx Power]

What, no Radeon Mobility 9800? I woulda thought it had a reasonable chance if being in an upgrade, particularly a G4 one ...

I'm no expert, but looking at the target segment of the Radeon Mobility 9800, I'd say craming that into a PowerBook format, assuming they still keep their semi-thin-and-light profile, would be a chore and a half. It would be as hard as to put a G5 in the case if at least thermally, since the 9800M at full blast would consume upwards of 30 watts. Putting both a next gen CPU which would likely produce more heat and a next gen GPU that is targeted at hardcore gamers on the go gives you a laptop with a built-in coffee warmer.

There is no point to put that in a powerbook the way I see it anyway, that is intended to be a gamer's laptop replacement. And gaming is not Apple's cup of tea, especially in their laptops, besides, a lot of the games these days on the G4 platform is CPU bound in one way or another, putting in a faster graphics card doesn't make sense, although the PCI-E lane deduction technology pioneered by ATI in their newest series of mobile GPU's is definitely worth a good look. Good luck getting PCI-E to work fully on a G4 platform though, your bandwidth from CPU to the video card is limited by the FSB, which in this case would be 166, a huge bottleneck, or rather, a tiny bottle's neck.

 

[WankerWeasel]

We're not gonna see a low power consumption G5 chip any time soon that's for sure. Dual core, but not low power comsumption. Keep telling yourself that the G5 PowerBook is comming soon, mabe some day you'll believe it.

 

[wdlove]

We're not gonna see a low power consumption G5 chip any time soon that's for sure. Dual core, but not low power consumption. Keep telling yourself that the G5 PowerBook is coming soon, maybe some day you'll believe it.

Hopefully we will know something definitive a month from now. Sometime in the first quarter of '05 there should be a G5 update. We can be sure that someday we will see a G5 PowerBook. Could a Dual Core arrive sooner than we think!

 

[Pringolian]

PowerBook G5 1.6Ghz and 1.8Ghz

I keep telling myself this, so I am starting to believe it!

There is going to be a G5 PowerBook between 1.6Ghz and 1.8Ghz in the first quarter of 2005.

* The PowerBooks were not updated when the iBook closed the gap between the machines about 4+ weeks ago. That is what I call 'a sign'

* If they are going to be updated in January, it has to be Keynote worthy and 166/200mhz doesn't cut it even with a tiny little bump in the bus speeds which is a dead cert whatver happens!

* If they don't update quite substantially in Jan then there are going to be a lot of mobile power users left very, very unhappy.

* There have been little leaks and lots of rumours saying that a low power G5 for the PowerBook is not as far off as we think

I believe that they will be announcing their introduction in January for shipping in March (delayed until April/May).

Tiger will not be released without Revised PowerBooks and PowerMacs, I think that is a pretty dead cert too....

Not long now - I N T E R E S T I N G....

 

[jadam]

Personally I would much rather see a 8641D based Powerbook then a 970(LowPower) version. In all fairness the 8641D is vastly superior, even the single core version would kick ass. DDR2, OnDie memory controller, lower power usage, Rapid IO/PCI Express BUS, Better Velocity Engine, 1mb L2 cache, all the goodies :-D

Im personally waiting until after MWSF for new powerbooks because im am dying to upgrade and I really really want some new tech that will last me a while, dual core G4 or even a G5 would suffice.

 

[dgdosen]

Is there any more word on any release at MacWorld?

It's so quiet, it's like people are avoiding the subject - maybe they're afraid of getting sued...