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.
Motorola 1.5GHz G4... G4 PowerBooks?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
but if the powertune 90 nm G5s are available... why would apple not use them in the powerbooks????
This has gotten absurd. Another tiny speed bumped G4... what a joke.
This has gotten absurd. Another tiny speed bumped G4... what a joke.
I think this rumor is debunked by this cnet article:
By Ina Fried
CNET News.com
February 23, 2004, 12:39 PM PT
_Add your opinion
Forward in Format for
Motorola on Monday announced a faster PowerPC chip that could be used in speedier Apple Computer laptops.
Motorola said it is now producing samples of a 1.42GHz PowerPC processor, a chip analysts say might soon find its way into the PowerBook, Apple's high-end laptop. Motorola said the chip has a typical power consumption of less than 20 watts, a level that makes it suitable for laptops. The chip also contains multimedia instructions that are required for chips that Apple bills as G4 processors.
"It certainly would be a fit for a portable Mac," Mercury Research analyst Dean McCarron said. "It's obviously up to Apple whether they would do that versus using an IBM (chip)."
A Motorola representative declined to comment on whether Apple might be interested in the chip. In a press release, Motorola said the chip is designed for a wide range of uses, including in computing as well as embedded, noncomputer, tasks.
An Apple representative also declined to comment, citing its policy of not discussing future products.
Motorola made the chips for the first Mac in 1984 and was the provider of the "68000" chips that powered all Macs until the PowerPC arrived in the mid-1990s. Originally a joint effort of IBM and Motorola, both companies now make PowerPC chips independently. IBM is the sole supplier of G5 chips, while Apple has used both companies at various times to supply other PowerPC processors.
A 1.42GHz chip would give a speed boost to the PowerBook line, but such a processor could also eventually wind up in Apple's more consumer-oriented iBook line, considering that Apple moved it to the G4 processor last fall.
The PowerBook line was last updated in September, when Apple added 15-inch aluminum models at up to 1.25GHz and a 17-inch model running at 1.33GHz.
While Mac fans are no doubt curious whether Apple adopts the chip, McCarron noted that the Mac market is only a fraction of Motorola's business, with most of its sales coming from noncomputer uses.
"Motorola traditionally has done a tremendous amount of volume in the embedded space whether it be for automotive, laser printers or some other type of controller."
The big question for many Mac users is when Apple will make the debut of its first G5 laptop. When it introduced the chip, Apple has said that it would take some time for it to reach the portable market because of its power requirements.
However, analysts say that now that IBM has moved the G5 line to its 90-nanometer manufacturing process, a G5 PowerBook should not be far off.
"I doubt it would be later than July or August," said Peter Glaskowsky, editor in chief of Microprocessor Report. "If everything had been just on a slightly different schedule we might have seen them at Macworld."
Apple is already using that lower-power chip in its rack-mounted Xserve G5.
By Ina Fried
CNET News.com
February 23, 2004, 12:39 PM PT
_Add your opinion
Forward in Format for
Motorola on Monday announced a faster PowerPC chip that could be used in speedier Apple Computer laptops.
Motorola said it is now producing samples of a 1.42GHz PowerPC processor, a chip analysts say might soon find its way into the PowerBook, Apple's high-end laptop. Motorola said the chip has a typical power consumption of less than 20 watts, a level that makes it suitable for laptops. The chip also contains multimedia instructions that are required for chips that Apple bills as G4 processors.
"It certainly would be a fit for a portable Mac," Mercury Research analyst Dean McCarron said. "It's obviously up to Apple whether they would do that versus using an IBM (chip)."
A Motorola representative declined to comment on whether Apple might be interested in the chip. In a press release, Motorola said the chip is designed for a wide range of uses, including in computing as well as embedded, noncomputer, tasks.
An Apple representative also declined to comment, citing its policy of not discussing future products.
Motorola made the chips for the first Mac in 1984 and was the provider of the "68000" chips that powered all Macs until the PowerPC arrived in the mid-1990s. Originally a joint effort of IBM and Motorola, both companies now make PowerPC chips independently. IBM is the sole supplier of G5 chips, while Apple has used both companies at various times to supply other PowerPC processors.
A 1.42GHz chip would give a speed boost to the PowerBook line, but such a processor could also eventually wind up in Apple's more consumer-oriented iBook line, considering that Apple moved it to the G4 processor last fall.
The PowerBook line was last updated in September, when Apple added 15-inch aluminum models at up to 1.25GHz and a 17-inch model running at 1.33GHz.
While Mac fans are no doubt curious whether Apple adopts the chip, McCarron noted that the Mac market is only a fraction of Motorola's business, with most of its sales coming from noncomputer uses.
"Motorola traditionally has done a tremendous amount of volume in the embedded space whether it be for automotive, laser printers or some other type of controller."
The big question for many Mac users is when Apple will make the debut of its first G5 laptop. When it introduced the chip, Apple has said that it would take some time for it to reach the portable market because of its power requirements.
However, analysts say that now that IBM has moved the G5 line to its 90-nanometer manufacturing process, a G5 PowerBook should not be far off.
"I doubt it would be later than July or August," said Peter Glaskowsky, editor in chief of Microprocessor Report. "If everything had been just on a slightly different schedule we might have seen them at Macworld."
Apple is already using that lower-power chip in its rack-mounted Xserve G5.
Not only are the increments meager...
But it takes FOREVER to even get chips from them due to PISS POOR YIELDS!
Hello Motto.
OOps!
Bye bye Motto.
But it takes FOREVER to even get chips from them due to PISS POOR YIELDS!
Hello Motto.
OOps!
Bye bye Motto.
Also, a decked out Powerbook is $4224...with a 17" screen and a DVD burner. Might be slower in the hard drive department, 5400 rpm (or 4200 if you want to save $125), but you can buy a 200-gig 7200rpm LaCie drive for just $200 at Amazon...I think a little bit more if you want FW800.
I see this leading to 3 possibilities:
1) PB revisions will be announced in the very near future with these new G4 chips. This would signify that G5 PBs are still a ways off, and these new G4 PBs will act as an interim update until the G5s are ready - probably in 6-8 months or so.
2) these G4s will not be used in PBs and the next PB update WILL be G5 PBs. When this will be however, is still up in the air, but might be in 3-4 months, a shorter time frame than the above scenario.
3) these G4 chips are not meant for the PBs at all and will be deployed into the iMacs (meaning G5 iMacs are a ways off) or into iBooks and eMacs - and who knows about the PBs!
And lastly, there seems to be a lot of people complaining that this announcement might indeed signal there will be no G5 PBs for a while. To them I say quit thinking you're entitled to whatever you want whenever you want it. The G5 PBs will be released when they are technologically ready to be released and no sooner. Patience is a virtue.
1) PB revisions will be announced in the very near future with these new G4 chips. This would signify that G5 PBs are still a ways off, and these new G4 PBs will act as an interim update until the G5s are ready - probably in 6-8 months or so.
2) these G4s will not be used in PBs and the next PB update WILL be G5 PBs. When this will be however, is still up in the air, but might be in 3-4 months, a shorter time frame than the above scenario.
3) these G4 chips are not meant for the PBs at all and will be deployed into the iMacs (meaning G5 iMacs are a ways off) or into iBooks and eMacs - and who knows about the PBs!
And lastly, there seems to be a lot of people complaining that this announcement might indeed signal there will be no G5 PBs for a while. To them I say quit thinking you're entitled to whatever you want whenever you want it. The G5 PBs will be released when they are technologically ready to be released and no sooner. Patience is a virtue.
hahahahaha
*rolls on the floor laughing for like 5 min*
wouldnt it be hilarious if apple did wait till macworld 2005 to release G5 powerbooks but then had them be dual processor?
hahahahahahaha
i know its not going to happen but it would be great just to see the look on everyones faces
*resumes rolling on the floor laughing*
*rolls on the floor laughing for like 5 min*
wouldnt it be hilarious if apple did wait till macworld 2005 to release G5 powerbooks but then had them be dual processor?
hahahahahahaha
i know its not going to happen but it would be great just to see the look on everyones faces
*resumes rolling on the floor laughing*
The comments on this board are so funny...
You know, everyone on this board just seems to get completely rattled by news like this. It's like "oh, how could Apple do this to us and make me wait another year to spend my money on a PB G5". Well, I learned last summer to take all of these PB G5 rumors with a major grain of salt.
The thing that really gets me is that so many people have their own wild ideas about what Apple will do "in the next 3 months" or "in the next 6 months". None of us know! Don't let yourself think for just one second that just because that is what you want to have happen, that is what will happen. Everyone seems to color their predictions with their desires.
Myself: I bought a 1.25 G4 Powerbook last November, put 1 GB of memory in it, and it rocks. I use it every day and it is powerful enough for what I do (music mostly). It will be powerful enough for me for the next 12-18 months, and that way I can skip all the inevitable problems that will surface with the rev. A G5 PowerBook, and upgrade when the rev. B dual processor 2.5 ghz. monster G5 fuel-cell, liquid cooled PowerBook is released, or whenever the price/performance ratio is compelling enough to upgrade.
Really folks, the G4 PowerBooks are great machines right now. It's going to take Apple a while to make a G5 PB that is as good on the performance/battery life ratio as the G4 is, and they would never release a product that was worse than the current line. Buy a G4 PB now and you won't be dissapointed.
You know, everyone on this board just seems to get completely rattled by news like this. It's like "oh, how could Apple do this to us and make me wait another year to spend my money on a PB G5". Well, I learned last summer to take all of these PB G5 rumors with a major grain of salt.
The thing that really gets me is that so many people have their own wild ideas about what Apple will do "in the next 3 months" or "in the next 6 months". None of us know! Don't let yourself think for just one second that just because that is what you want to have happen, that is what will happen. Everyone seems to color their predictions with their desires.
Myself: I bought a 1.25 G4 Powerbook last November, put 1 GB of memory in it, and it rocks. I use it every day and it is powerful enough for what I do (music mostly). It will be powerful enough for me for the next 12-18 months, and that way I can skip all the inevitable problems that will surface with the rev. A G5 PowerBook, and upgrade when the rev. B dual processor 2.5 ghz. monster G5 fuel-cell, liquid cooled PowerBook is released, or whenever the price/performance ratio is compelling enough to upgrade.
Really folks, the G4 PowerBooks are great machines right now. It's going to take Apple a while to make a G5 PB that is as good on the performance/battery life ratio as the G4 is, and they would never release a product that was worse than the current line. Buy a G4 PB now and you won't be dissapointed.
Re: The comments on this board are so funny...
Exactly - very well put. There is nothing wrong with the current G4 PowerBooks and they are excellent machines. G5 PBs will be released when they are ready to be released!
Exactly - very well put. There is nothing wrong with the current G4 PowerBooks and they are excellent machines. G5 PBs will be released when they are ready to be released!
the g56 wont be out for several months or even a year, remember how long it took to get g3s out of apple lap tops its not going to be that long but close
you cant just slap a 64 bit chip into a 32 it notebook apple has to redesign the entire computer and theyll probably change the case design too
ps all the p**ing and moning in the world isnt going to change this
Apple didn't just start work on this Yesterday
Again,
AMD has a 64 bit laptop for sale now.
Via and other motherboard makers are already building motherboards with the same characteristics that Apple needs to build for a G5, Now.
Apple is Lucky because the G5 is no where as hot or as watt hungry as the AMD chip.
It's entirely possible for Apple to technically build a DTR, at least, G5 Now.
Here's the thing.
Apple needs to remember that it's Not competing with Intel. It's competing with AMD.
The kinds of buyers of Apple, at least tech buyers, are interested in 64 bit processors, and OS X.
But, many of them would take an AMD chip,
in spit of it being loaded with WinXP,
and then build a dual boot system, with Linux.
Apple machine of course would be better,
but the longer they wait the more Lost Sales go by.
But, that's just my opinion.
I'm part of the cult, so I'll wait.
But, I'd like to see Apple continue it's Sales Growth.
Again,
AMD has a 64 bit laptop for sale now.
Via and other motherboard makers are already building motherboards with the same characteristics that Apple needs to build for a G5, Now.
Apple is Lucky because the G5 is no where as hot or as watt hungry as the AMD chip.
It's entirely possible for Apple to technically build a DTR, at least, G5 Now.
Here's the thing.
Apple needs to remember that it's Not competing with Intel. It's competing with AMD.
The kinds of buyers of Apple, at least tech buyers, are interested in 64 bit processors, and OS X.
But, many of them would take an AMD chip,
in spit of it being loaded with WinXP,
and then build a dual boot system, with Linux.
Apple machine of course would be better,
but the longer they wait the more Lost Sales go by.
But, that's just my opinion.
I'm part of the cult, so I'll wait.
But, I'd like to see Apple continue it's Sales Growth.
AMD/Intel 64-bit with Windows XP 64-bit
Did you notice that Intel's new Prescott chip has the AMD64 64-bit extensions, and is compatible with Opteron/Athlon64?
Intel's still very much part of the competition.
And, BTW, most of the "tech" buyers aren't focussed on buying 64-bit systemw with 32-bit operating systems for running 32-bit applications. Only the "willy wavers" are buying 32-bit systems with 64-bit CPUs just because they see "64-bit" in the ad copy.
But it's Windows XP 64-Bit Edition...available now for free download (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/downloads/upgrade.asp).
When's Apple going to have 64-bit software - so far they've been mum on the topic....
Did you notice that Intel's new Prescott chip has the AMD64 64-bit extensions, and is compatible with Opteron/Athlon64?
Intel's still very much part of the competition.
And, BTW, most of the "tech" buyers aren't focussed on buying 64-bit systemw with 32-bit operating systems for running 32-bit applications. Only the "willy wavers" are buying 32-bit systems with 64-bit CPUs just because they see "64-bit" in the ad copy.
But it's Windows XP 64-Bit Edition...available now for free download (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/downloads/upgrade.asp).
When's Apple going to have 64-bit software - so far they've been mum on the topic....
Last June word was that the PPC 970 was costing Apple 25-35% less than the moto part. News around the web is saying Apple's paying $189 for their chips from Moto now. Which just happens to be exactly 30% less than their official price.
Methinks Moto has a pricematch guarantee. Probably Apple is paying $189 for both now.
Of course there were rumors the 970 was going to cost Apple $50 a while back. Since we haven't seen the 8-way mac yet, probably that's not correct.
I guess it's sacrilege but there are two features I'm waiting for before I shell out for a new PowerBook ... and a G5 chip isn't one of them.
[The crowd GASPS]
For me, what's missing from the 12" PowerBook is FireWire 800. I'd love a 7200 RPM drive option as well, but I'll bite the bullet and install a new internal drive myself if need be. I can't install a new port myself, though, so I'm waiting until Apple squeezes FW800 into its smallest PowerBook before I buy one.
Besides, I'm confident that when the PowerBook is first updated with a G5 option it'll either only be in the 17" model, or maybe the 17" and a high-end 15" option. The 12" ain't getting a G5 during the first go-round ... but if it gets FW800 I'll bite.
[The crowd GASPS]
For me, what's missing from the 12" PowerBook is FireWire 800. I'd love a 7200 RPM drive option as well, but I'll bite the bullet and install a new internal drive myself if need be. I can't install a new port myself, though, so I'm waiting until Apple squeezes FW800 into its smallest PowerBook before I buy one.
Besides, I'm confident that when the PowerBook is first updated with a G5 option it'll either only be in the 17" model, or maybe the 17" and a high-end 15" option. The 12" ain't getting a G5 during the first go-round ... but if it gets FW800 I'll bite.
Not to be nit picky, but I don't think you meant that the G56 would be out within a year...
Also, the G3 was released in a laptop at the same time it was released in a tower. I suspect that you meant the G4, there.
However, there is an important lesson to be learned from reviewing the cycle time from various chips. That lesson is that each and every one is different. So, there's a degree to which looking to history really won't tell us a thing about the G5.
I've said it before, and I'm sure I'll say it again, but I think that it would be a devastating mistake for Apple to maintain the PowerBook line with some G5s and some G4s. If they can't put the G5 into the 12", then they should discontinue the 12". And, I really can't believe that they could get it into the 17" and not into the 15"...
Re: Re: AMD/Intel 64-bit with Windows XP 64-bit
Good reply! I agree - outside of big server apps few applications need or could use more than 4 GiB of RAM per application.
My message was to the earlier post, though, which tried to imply that the "tech savvy" were only buying 64-bit CPUs.
The truly savvy are buying 32-bit systems for their 32-bit jobs, and only looking for 64-bit systems for "where it matters".
And, of course, if it "matters" then OS X is not a contender, since it is only 32-bit.
The "pseudo-savvy", however, get all excited at seeing "64-bit" in ad copy....
Good reply! I agree - outside of big server apps few applications need or could use more than 4 GiB of RAM per application.
My message was to the earlier post, though, which tried to imply that the "tech savvy" were only buying 64-bit CPUs.
The truly savvy are buying 32-bit systems for their 32-bit jobs, and only looking for 64-bit systems for "where it matters".
And, of course, if it "matters" then OS X is not a contender, since it is only 32-bit.
The "pseudo-savvy", however, get all excited at seeing "64-bit" in ad copy....
The .09 micron PPC 970fx chips are around 65 mm^2. That's quite a bit smaller than a .13 micron PPC 7447. The 7447 is slightly more than 98 mm^2. The smaller die size means that IBM can produce more chips per wafer. IBM also tends to have much better yeilds than Motorola so there is less junk per wafer.
The 970fx _should_ cost quite a bit less than the PPC 7447.
Overclocking is, by definition, pushing the clock speed of a processor past the vendor rating. Apple would be using overclocked G4 if, AND ONLY IF, Apple clocked the processors faster than Motorola's speed rating. This ISN'T the case. If you check the label on the processor of a dual 1.42 G4, you'll find cpus that are labeled 1.42 GHz.
The whole overclocking thing came from the fact that Apple was shipping the 1.42 when Motorola was only advertising the part as a 1.33 GHz. This doesn't mean that Motorola didn't have a 1.42 sort.. it just means that they were reserving them for Apple.
woa.. it's WAY more complicated than just that. You've got pipeline length, the number if instructions that can be executed per clock, the clock speed, the system bandwidth and efficiency, the quality of the branch prediction (Intel's is about the best there is)...
If I remember correctly, the G5 pipeline is generally listed as around 20, though in truth the pipe line is a different depth depending on what processor units are involved. The P4 is 23 stages.. Prescott P4 is 30 deep.
The G5 is more powerful than the P4 at the same clockspeed because (among other things) it can do more per clock. It's a very 'wide' processor that can do a lot of work at the same time.
No, the G4 isn't more powerful than a G5 at the same clock speed. The G5 has a higher IPC.. It can do more work in a given # of clocks than a G4. Some of the early benchmarks between the G4s and the G5s made the G4s look pretty good.. but that was running un-optimised G4 code. Pretty much every app thats spent a modicum of time optimising for the G5 has seen significant performance gains (except Photoshop apparently). In fact, we still haven't truely seen what the G5 can do. IBM has released the first truely optimised compiler and it's producing 30%+ faster code right out of the box. Just wait till the OS gets tuned for the G5 too.
Apple stated at some point, wish I remembered when, that the system controllers would continue to be produced on the same process as the PPC 970. Apple should have a die shrunk chipset ready with the PPC 970fx.
The motorola press release doesn't actually mention 1.5GHz.. only the rumor stories. The press release only mentions 1.42GHz http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail/0,,3861_3238_23,00.html
The 2GHz 970fx consumes power in the 20's. A 1.5GHz 970fx should be a very efficient processor. Also remember that the PPC 970 supports other bus mulipliers. If Apple decided that they couldn't get a .09 micron system controller to work in a notebook, they could clock it down to a third or a quarter of the CPU speed. This would be perfectly acceptable option for a first Gen G5 notebook.
Also, don't think for a second that a 1.5GHz G5 notebook wouldn't be faster than a 1.5 (or 1.42GHz) G4. Don't rely on old benchmarks of G4 tuned code on a G5 to determine the relative power. Cinebench performance on a dual 2GHz is 110% faster than a dual 1.42 after Cinebench was optimized for the G5. That's over twice the performance even though the G5 is only 40% faster by clock speed. http://www.barefeats.com/g5sum.html
The really interesting point here is that the 1.4 GHz 970fx is quite a bit cooler than the 1.4GHz 7447A. Check the Moto press release again.. http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail/0,,3861_3238_23,00.html
They are only comitting to under 20watts at 1.42 GHz.
How long did that post take you to write? That's quite a thorough, comprehensive post! You get an A for effort from me, ffakr! Well done!