Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
dxp4acu said:
Oh wow!! If you look carefully at the pictures on this page:

http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/index.html

you will see a G5 poster in the background!

WE'RE GETTING G5 MACS!!! The day has finally arrived!!!

I can't believe it.

Actually, I think you're confused. G5 Macs have been around for almost a year already, in the PowerMac.


I think what you meant to say is that since the word G5 looks rectangular, and a Powerbook from the top is rectangular, Pythagorean's theorem of Relativity (and his closely associated "How to discover a secret cousin") states that Powerbook G5's will be released at WWDC.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.
-Matt
 
nVIDIA or ATI in new G5?

I think clearly some manner of G5 upgrade is coming. I don't expect it to be less than 2.5GHz at the top end - it _has_ been a _year_ since the 2GHz was introduced, almost. Whether we get PCI Extreme on this round is a good question. But drilling down to a smaller detail - what video card will be in these new G5's?

If Apple goes for the top consumer cards, it would be a choice between the nv40-based nVIDIA GeForce Ultra 6800 and ATI's new X800 line. The former is the overall performance king, while the latter offers much lower power consumption and does not nudge over into the slot next door, like the nVIDIA does with its massive heatsink/fan combo. And in some benches, the X800 defeats the nVIDIA.

My money would be on the X800 - but will it be the full, top-end ($499 retail) 16-pipeline or the somewhat scaled down 12-pipeline X800 "Pro" ??

Thoughts?




blakespot
 
blakespot said:
I think clearly some manner of G5 upgrade is coming. I don't expect it to be less than 2.5GHz at the top end - it _has_ been a _year_ since the 2GHz was introduced, almost. Whether we get PCI Extreme on this round is a good question. But drilling down to a smaller detail - what video card will be in these new G5's?

If Apple goes for the top consumer cards, it would be a choice between the nv40-based nVIDIA GeForce Ultra 6800 and ATI's new X800 line. The former is the overall performance king, while the latter offers much lower power consumption and does not nudge over into the slot next door, like the nVIDIA does with its massive heatsink/fan combo. And in some benches, the X800 defeats the nVIDIA.

My money would be on the X800 - but will it be the full, top-end ($499 retail) 16-pipeline or the somewhat scaled down 12-pipeline X800 "Pro" ??

Thoughts?




blakespot

I hope that by moving to PCI Express, we can start using PC versions of the graphics cards instead of waiting for designated mac versions. I don't know what needs to be done or if its difficult, but that would be a positive.
I haven't seen every benchmark out there, but I think NVidia tend to come out infront on OpenGL stuff which would be a plus on the Mac front. Having said that, there are rumors at the Rage3d forum that ATI are rewriting from scratch openGl drivers (on the windows side), maybe that might have some sort of flow on effect.
 
Bigheadache said:
I hope that by moving to PCI Express, we can start using PC versions of the graphics cards instead of waiting for designated mac versions. I don't know what needs to be done or if its difficult, but that would be a positive.
I haven't seen every benchmark out there, but I think NVidia tend to come out infront on OpenGL stuff which would be a plus on the Mac front. Having said that, there are rumors at the Rage3d forum that ATI are rewriting from scratch openGl drivers (on the windows side), maybe that might have some sort of flow on effect.

I don't think it will make much of a difference from the situation that exists today... I mean the only difference seems to be a bios change and support for the Apple magical display connector, so I don't see what difference a bus interface change would make.

-Wyrm
 
Wyrm said:
I don't think it will make much of a difference from the situation that exists today... I mean the only difference seems to be a bios change and support for the Apple magical display connector, so I don't see what difference a bus interface change would make.

-Wyrm

that would be a shame, a bus interface wouldn't make a change as you say, but for consumers it a plus as if we can take advantage of PC card production runs, instead of waiting for manufacturers to come out later with mac versions. I don't claim to know why there is a difference, but uniformity with PC versions would be a plus for the average consumer.
 
Bigheadache said:
that would be a shame, a bus interface wouldn't make a change as you say, but for consumers it a plus as if we can take advantage of PC card production runs, instead of waiting for manufacturers to come out later with mac versions. I don't claim to know why there is a difference, but uniformity with PC versions would be a plus for the average consumer.

Recall that the Rage 128 and the GeForce 3 debuted on the Mac before PC. I think that rather acceptibly high-end consumer cards have long been available for the Mac, albeit at a higher price tag than their PC brethren. I think the Mac's "problem" here is that, while OpenGL is arguably a more robust and clen way of doing 3D, Microsoft has done a very good job of adding effect after effect to DirectX with hardware vendors implementing the specs in hardware immediately. While it is theoretically possible to see this type of featureset/hardware marriage in the OpenGL world, we're not seeing it at present.

I can't even turn on FSAA on my GeForce 4Ti under OS X. If I buy a new G5 and opt to spend an extra $400 to get the high-end vidcard, will I then be able to use basic FSAA? The video driver feature situation under OS X needs serious addressing.



blakespot
 
Bigheadache said:
that would be a shame, a bus interface wouldn't make a change as you say, but for consumers it a plus as if we can take advantage of PC card production runs, instead of waiting for manufacturers to come out later with mac versions. I don't claim to know why there is a difference, but uniformity with PC versions would be a plus for the average consumer.

Well, video cards are very much compatible except for two things: drivers for the chip on the board... these are sorely lacking for anything but the ones ATi ships and Apple OEMs. The other thing is the ROM on the board, this needs to be flashed, and while you can do this, it usually requires a PC and some risk. Some boards once flashed still don't work because they aren't exactly the same.

Video cards are one of the few things you cannot make dual-platform easily.
 
It could be easy

Krevnik said:
The other thing is the ROM on the board, this needs to be flashed....

Video cards are one of the few things you cannot make dual-platform easily.


It would be easy if the Macs worked with the standard ROM, wouldn't it?

Does Apple really need to have proprietary ROMs? Of course not - but they choose to.
 
AidenShaw said:
It would be easy if the Macs worked with the standard ROM, wouldn't it?

Does Apple really need to have proprietary ROMs? Of course not - but they choose to.


There are, among other things, little endian / big endian issues between the Mac and PC architectures.



blakespot
 
blakespot said:
There are, among other things, little endian / big endian issues between the Mac and PC architectures.

Any endian issues which the driver can't fix could be handled via a mode bit in the standard ROM.

The video card manufacturers would be happy to enhance the standard ROM with an endian mode bit, if it meant that they would only have to build and support one ROM image. (A common ROM should also mean that much more of the driver would be common between standard systems and Macs.)

Note that I didn't say that there were no reasons that Apple couldn't use common ROMs today - I said that they *could* use them if they wanted to. It might not be trivial, and it might not apply to legacy PC cards.
 
Another thing beside the new iMac G5 was the news that all the current Apple models are also made in China. Well, those Taiwan companies have factories here so maybe. The new aluminum LCD display is made here.

I hope I can buy a new G5 iMac next month, my old lime green beast is too much trouble even for background music handling. It's just too bad that mainland dealers don't have much say when they can get their stock. There are also universities and colleges that seem to get theirs first.

Anyway, let's wait couple of weeks and see. The cam pic I was mentioning is probably deleted by now and showed a fuzzy pic about 40 iMacs lined up. It could be claimed to be from Taiwan, unless you know the guy who took it.
 
Are we sure? No. This is mere speculation still and the second article only reinforces what Mac Rumors thinks. Sure, a G5 update would be nice, but is it NEEDED? Duel Proc G5's simply run OS X very very well. Anything that lags at all on my G4 Powerbook is completed instantaneously (and there's not much that doesn't happen like this on my G4 either...the G5 just makes it smoother and takes the lags out). One thing that I so far love about my mac is even though new powerbooks have come out since I got my 1 GHz 12 incher (albiet...small updates), I don't really want for anything....not even the bigger disc that is on them now. I bought a external 120 GB hard disk and that plus the 40 that came with mine lets me do everything and anything I ask of my PB. Now if G5 Powerbooks were to come out....WHOA NELLY! I'd be standing ther with credit card in hand! :D

If I was planning a purchase now, would I wait til the new ones came out? No....because when they come out the next question would be would I wait for the ....I would never postphone a purchase unless I had VERY good information and this, to me, while it seems liek a guarantee, it probably is not and I would just go buy what I want now. Would I be mad? Maybe a little, but I would still be happy because I am using a computer that is probably one of the best built computers on the planet and it would still be way fast for what I need it for.
 
tortoise said:
Blue Gene isn't SMP. It is a fine-grained message passing architecture, kind of a modern remake of the old 1980s massively parallel supercomputers, with gobs of relatively simple processors. In a sense, it is basically a computing cluster that has been cut down to fit in a box, and with the same limitations on what it is useful for.

The poor multiprocessor scalability isn't intrinsic to the PPC, it was an explicit design choice. The Power series processors actually do have all the glue logic and memory hardware to scale extremely well in multiprocessor environments. These features were probably not included for two reasons. First, it was likely a cost saving measure by Apple and IBM, as vanilla SMP systems are much less costly to produce. Second, IBM may not want to cannibalize the sale of their Power systems. The additional features don't come cheap; with its huge cache, onboard memory management, and ccNUMA, the Opteron has a substantially larger die size than the PPC970 for the same fab process which translates into cost.

Wait. Blue Gene COULD be SMP. You reallty don't know. Here's what Blue Gene is....it's a IBM AIX/SP cluster. IE, a super computer. SP clusters consist of many nodes and each node could have SMP on it. Would it matter? No, because SP would still manage things like those two CPU's were essentially one. The messaging interface (mostlikely Miranet or some other low latency networking infrastructure) is a HUGE part of it. You WANT SP clusters to have crazy I/O ability because the less time you have to wait for each node to get it's piece to work on, the less time the calculation will take. All said and done, each node COULD be a SMP machine. Most likely, ieach node may not be a SMP mahcine but it definitely could. From the sounds of the description I found on IBM's website, Blue Gene is probably using the blade power servers that IBM has been working on. Blue Gene/L, when complete, will fill 64 racks.

What does this mean to Mac users? If I remember right, the CPU in these may be a 975.
 
gorkonapple said:
What does this mean to Mac users? If I remember right, the CPU in these may be a 975.

The unannounced and unconfirmed 975? Everything I can find says it uses it own chip based on the PowerPC 440 and it runs at 700 MHz. Doesn't sound like the next generation of the G5.
 
blakespot said:
...I can't even turn on FSAA on my GeForce 4Ti under OS X. If I buy a new G5 and opt to spend an extra $400 to get the high-end vidcard, will I then be able to use basic FSAA? The video driver feature situation under OS X needs serious addressing.



blakespot

you can only turn on fsaa if the card is retail, not oem, at least with ati cards.
 
Trying to get back to the PowerMac8,1 part of the topic. We have seen the designation for PowerMac, iMac, and eMacs.

What are the names for the PowerBooks and iBooks? How come no one noticed the appearance of a new iBook before the G4's came out?
 
gorkonapple said:
Are we sure? No. This is mere speculation still and the second article only reinforces what Mac Rumors thinks. Sure, a G5 update would be nice, but is it NEEDED?

Actually, yes, updates are needed. Apple needs, if nothing else, to justify the relatively high pricing for their midrange (iMac) and high end (Power Mac) lines compared to similar x86 based offerings. There are two ways to achieve pricing parity . . . one is to lower prices (which has not happened for a year) and the other is to increase performance while holding prices firm. Twelve months is a long time in the computer world to not do at least one of these for the G5 line.

gorkonapple said:
If I was planning a purchase now, would I wait til the new ones came out? No....

Absolutely. Why wouldn't anyone wait three more weeks to either get the latest gear or get price cuts on the current offerings? Only in the most extreme examples could someone justify purchasing an Apple desktop today.
 
if Apple were to stop using that crazy ADC then it might be more feasable to have the ability to use off-the-shelf PC graphics cards, but at this point, not gonna happen... and that sucks major because I really could use a GPU upgrade and the PC GPU boards are just going down in price since the X800 series and the 6800 series were announced, not to mention the X600 series. I'd purchase a Radeon 9600XT given the choice right now, but no, I'm stuck with my GeForce 4 MX.

Something really needs to be done about this situation.
 
gorkonapple said:
If I was planning a purchase now, would I wait til the new ones came out? No....because when they come out the next question would be would I wait for the ....I would never postphone a purchase unless I had VERY good information and this, to me, while it seems liek a guarantee, it probably is not and I would just go buy what I want now. Would I be mad? Maybe a little, but I would still be happy because I am using a computer that is probably one of the best built computers on the planet and it would still be way fast for what I need it for.

Just to be safe, I would never buy within a few weeks of any Steve Keynote. There is always a good chance something new is going to arrive (of course it may not ship for several months).
 
I'm ready to buy a G5 and 23" Cinema Display. The current $500 rebate on the display is very tempting, but I have to think that once the new G5s are announced, the current dual 2 GHz may very well drop by the better part of $500 anyway. I don't see any reason to buy now even if someone is looking to get one of the current models.
 
pjkelnhofer said:
Just to be safe, I would never buy within a few weeks of any Steve Keynote. There is always a good chance something new is going to arrive (of course it may not ship for several months).

Yes but in that time where you would be throwing a fit because the damn thing isn't shipping yet, you could be having fun on your Dual Proc 2.0 GHz G5. Unless the reason there have not been updates is that Steve wanted it to be shipping THE DAY he announced it. I say screw it.....in the end your machine is ALWAYS going to be obsoleted. Unless you CAN wait and unless you REALLY need that clock speed bump, it's not worth the wait (to me). Besides, if your stuck on a G4 Power mac (say the first G4, not the latest G4), imagine how much faster everything would run on the Dual Proc 2.0 GHz G5 and how much MORE work you'd get done). You'd waste TIME waiting if your that far out of date. If your the compulsive type that must have the highest end Mac always, then I am glad I don't have YOUR credit card bill! :D
 
Unclezeppy said:
iMac G5 has been in production for almost a month, 1.8 and 2.0GHz models. They still looked the same (cam phone pic) but might have white egg shell that can change color, each user can have their own color when they log in or you can match the color with you home decor (just my guess based on their patents, what would be cool and couple of other things).

So there, too bad, I live close to the factory but can't buy them until US market gets them.
What you're saying makes NO SENSE. I'm not sure if it's because of your English or because you're just pulling stuff out of you-know-where. No way can an external plastic shell "change color" depending on who logs on to the computer. And I also highly doubt that Apple can maintain the existing form factor and put in a brand new G5 architecture, at 2.0 ghz to boot. Can you post that phone camera pic?

I love how these 'insider' reports start coming out of the woodwork in the weeks before a major event.
 
pjkelnhofer said:
Trying to get back to the PowerMac8,1 part of the topic. We have seen the designation for PowerMac, iMac, and eMacs.

What are the names for the PowerBooks and iBooks? How come no one noticed the appearance of a new iBook before the G4's came out?

I have no idea why Arn did not put this link into the original article (it was in my submission and somebody else also mentioned it in this thread):
http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=tam&page=products&subpage=newworld

It has a full list of all the codes and will answer your question.
 
gorkonapple said:
Yes but in that time where you would be throwing a fit because the damn thing isn't shipping yet, you could be having fun on your Dual Proc 2.0 GHz G5. Unless the reason there have not been updates is that Steve wanted it to be shipping THE DAY he announced it. I say screw it.....in the end your machine is ALWAYS going to be obsoleted. Unless you CAN wait and unless you REALLY need that clock speed bump, it's not worth the wait (to me). Besides, if your stuck on a G4 Power mac (say the first G4, not the latest G4), imagine how much faster everything would run on the Dual Proc 2.0 GHz G5 and how much MORE work you'd get done). You'd waste TIME waiting if your that far out of date. If your the compulsive type that must have the highest end Mac always, then I am glad I don't have YOUR credit card bill! :D

I am still stuck on my G3 iMac DV, so I plan to keep waiting until there is an all-in-one G5 solution for < $1500. Do I think it will happen anytime soon? Not a chance. I plan to keep my iMac for another year or two if necessary. However, when I do have the money/inclination to buy, I will definitely wait until after an update. After all, I have waited this long so far, what's a few more months.

If you are buying for business, it is a whole other world. If you need computers now then order the current model. If you are simply thinking about upgrading then I would still wait. At the very least, you will be able to afford a faster machine for the money you were going to spend anyhow.

My point is, that when a keynote is close at hand, if you can wait, and waiting won't hurt you, then wait. If your need is immediate order today (but don't go BTO, it could very well take just as long as if you waited for WWDC).

As far as shipping dates, I would expect to whatever gets announced to be much closer to shipping than the original G5's. It is one thing to tell people they need to wait three months for a brand new technology, it is quite different to announce an upgrade to that technology and say.. "Oh, by the way they will ship in September."
 
dongmin said:
What you're saying makes NO SENSE. I'm not sure if it's because of your English or because you're just pulling stuff out of you-know-where. No way can an external plastic shell "change color" depending on who logs on to the computer.

Why not? I can see two or three different ways to do it, actually, depening on just how Apple wanted to play the game. The first is to use fiberoptics with a couple of colored LEDs hidden in the base. You get colored light through a clear shell over a white background, and each user can store their preferences for which light to activate. This is likely the cheapest and most power efficient way to do things.

The other way, and I'm not as certain about this one, is the use of electroreactive polymers, which change states based on the amount of current passed through them. Instead of a white shell, you'd have a clear coat over the polymer substrate, which would similarly change based on the preferences of users. Almost certainly more expensive and power-hungry, but a more elegant and consistent way to accomplish the effect.

And I also highly doubt that Apple can maintain the existing form factor and put in a brand new G5 architecture, at 2.0 ghz to boot. Can you post that phone camera pic?

This I fully agree with, actually. The 970FX is still quite a bit hotter than the G4, though I wouldn't put it past Apple to have come up with some kind of trick that we aren't aware of. What a lot of people don't realize when I say that I doubt G5 iMac is coming right away is that I'm just pointing out that it will have to be a major revision just to control the heat, and that there are a number of factors that will have to be addressed. Power and heat are the largest worries, but I really think that a "headless iMac" would just be better off as a consumer tower with real expandability.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.