Dazabrit@yahoo. said:
MacMinute Article - Going back to the original point of this thread!!! Was posted v.long time ago though - but he should know what hes talkin about.
The article in question.
Gee, and that was published in
February, which means that he predicted this summer and
missed.
"With all this new technology, a PowerBook G5 should be much faster and last about as long as a PowerBook G4 in average usage," he said.
While his claims that the G5 will be "much faster" than the G4, the iMac G5 isn't proving this to be true in any great stride, and the scaling is roughly comparable with clock increase. That means that, were the G4 to be ramped to equal clock (say, 1.8ghz at 10w with the 7448), it would hang in with the 97fx and
consume less power, thus giving it even more battery life.
"PowerTune should increase that ratio to more than 2:1, possibly enabling an honest five-hour battery life with very light use." However, he noted that the numbers depend heavily on Apple's choice of LCD in the new PowerBooks.
With very light use.
With very light use.
With very light use.
With very light use
Hmmm... Now, I seem to recall that I said that PowerTune wouldn't do a damned thing if it was put on a processor that was in constant usage, like one for professional applications that certain posters just
have to have. Is this sinking in yet?
Metatron said:
The G6 will not be an iron block. It is based on the same architecture, but scaled for a workstation without having the redudancies of a server chip.
For those who are apparently uninitiated into basic computing terminology, but who persist in trying to tell me what I'm talking about:
big iron - n - Enterprise scale, massively redundant and safe processor that typically trade off some performance for increased stability and error correction. The Power4 is such a proccesor, as is the Power5, the Itanium, and several others. They are usually hot and rely on massive investments in HVAC to maintain, and have massive power draw.
The "G6" is most likely going to be a descendent of the Power5 core, rather than the Power4, but that doesn't at all mean that it's coming out any time soon. However, unless it's being designed from the ground up (which some allege), it will probably be another port of existing core technologies with thinner gate oxides, fewer cores, less cache, and other cosst-saving measures. It
might be cooler, but the Power5 isn't cooler than the Power4, so there's little reason to believe that to be true.
And do not think that apple will not want to put a G6 in its powerbook at the same time of the Powermacs. "PowerBook revenue climbed 20 percent to $419 million" -complements of cnet. These things are beautiful and sale like hot caked, but people want real power.
Let me show you a little
history, hmmm?
Introduction of first G3 PowerMac: 11/11/1997 (233/266/300mhz beige G3)
Introduction of first G3 PowerBook: 11/15/1997 (250mhz PowerBook G3)
Introduction of first G4 PowerMac: 9/1/1999 (PowerMac PCI Graphics 350/400mhz)
Introduction of first G4 PowerBook: 1/9/2001 (PowerBook G4 450/500mhz)
Introduction of first G5 PowerMac: 6/23/2003 (PowerMac G5 1.6/1.8/2/0MP)
Introduction of first G5 Powerbook: ...
So, with the G3s there's a simultaneous release, but the heat was comparatively tiny even for portables and it was in a fat plastic case. With the G4s, there was a fifteen month wait, in which time the PowerMacs had climbed to 466, 533, 667, 733, and dual 533mhz machines that all blew out the offerings for the PowerBook.
Engineering doesn't change because marketing wants it to, nor does physics.
I did not contest that the G4 was a hoss said:
Freescale is playing ball right now. They're offering a chip in the forseeable future that clocks as high as the processors in the iMac,
but at less than half the heat and power. How man times to I have to repeat this? When a single 7447A at 1.5ghz competes with the 1.6 and 1.8ghz G5s, then a 1.8ghz G4 will compete even more favorably and quite possibly outrun it. When they roll out the 8461, there's not going to be much from the 970 (without a huge redesign) that can compete with it.
And "iPod revenue more than quadrupled to $537 million and accounted for 23 percent of total revenue." -complements of cnet. Not exactly a billion, but a quarter of your total revenue can make the low powermac/book sales not look so bad, especially if stock holders have nothing to argue about.
So you're knocked down from "doubled" to "a quarter" and it's just not a big deal.
Right.
The G6 is coming, the G5 has just about put out all it can. I don't expect if to top 2.8 ghz due to problems not seen to the 90nm transition. Remember the promise of 3 ghz. And the g6 was suppost to take us to almost 5ghz. It will happen, the the intoduction of a 3.0 - 3.4 ghz G6 this summer, while the G5 moves into the imac, emac, ibook which they will scale to 2.8ghz. As the G6 scales beyond 4ghz, the consumer line will go G6 in the low 3ghz range. Trust me, apple had no intition of puting a g5 in a consumer product before the the Powerbook. Kind of defeats the name -"power" book.
You're a big PC user, aren't you? The megahertz fixation you have is showing pretty badly, and it also speaks highly of how little you grasp the benefits of well designed dual-core systems. Apple will benefit more from a good dual-core than they will from 200mhz increase in the 970 or its derivatives. There's a lot of multithreading in the operating system and major applications, and that's going to matter a lot more in the future.
It's definitely more important than "64-bit" hype.
