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.
Powerbook and PowerMac Updates - October 19th?
- Thread starter Superhob
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have been following this thread and it has really helped me to understand which PowerMacs are on the market and will be on the market. Thanks to everyone who has posted. I have taken my 400 MHz tower as far as it will go and am anxious to upgrade. I am still unclear about a few things though and I am hoping that someone might be able to clarify:
1. It sounds like software will be rewritten once the new Macintels are released in 2006/2007. If I buy a new PPC based computer next week, does this mean that in a couple of years, when Macintels are the new Macs, that new software will not be compatable with my PPC based Mac? Will new software and software updates that are written for Macintels not work as smoothly on my PPC Mac? Wil there be new software that won't work at all?
2. How would the speed of a dual dual core tower compare with the expected speed of a Macintel?
3. If dual dual core is only for the new top end model, I probably won't be abe to afford it. I will buy a dual 2.7 instead. Currently this will give me the speed I need for motion graphics work, and I can't wait. But if Macintels end up being much faster machines, and software starts being written for Macintel speedy machines, will a dual 2.7 Mhz all of a sudden be really slow?
I would like to buy a computer that I will be happy with for a few years. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Kent
1. It sounds like software will be rewritten once the new Macintels are released in 2006/2007. If I buy a new PPC based computer next week, does this mean that in a couple of years, when Macintels are the new Macs, that new software will not be compatable with my PPC based Mac? Will new software and software updates that are written for Macintels not work as smoothly on my PPC Mac? Wil there be new software that won't work at all?
2. How would the speed of a dual dual core tower compare with the expected speed of a Macintel?
3. If dual dual core is only for the new top end model, I probably won't be abe to afford it. I will buy a dual 2.7 instead. Currently this will give me the speed I need for motion graphics work, and I can't wait. But if Macintels end up being much faster machines, and software starts being written for Macintel speedy machines, will a dual 2.7 Mhz all of a sudden be really slow?
I would like to buy a computer that I will be happy with for a few years. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Kent
krygiel said:
1.) The new software is going to be written in universal binary, so will support both MacIntel and PPC for a long time to come probably to 2010 and later.
2.) This is hard to answer a dual dual 2.5ghz ppc G5 eould probaly equate to a single 8ghz G5 chip . Intle Powermacs are expected in 2007 so theyll probably be dual dual core 3.5ghz or something like that, personally I don't think they will be greatly faster than a dual dual G5. If dual core G5's are released this week, I'm buying one and I expect it to keep till 2008-9.
3.) No. Again universla binaries mean software has two embedded code architectures and therfore will run nice on not only PPC architecture but Intel to, so no need to worry your dual 2.7 or whatever you buy will last you a long time.
~Shard~ said:Thanks AidenShaw, very informative. I always learn a great deal of technical information from your posts.
PCI: The original specification 'Peripheral Component Interface', @ Rev 2.2
PCI-X: The latest version 64 bits at: PCI-X 66, PCI-X 133, PCI-X 266 and PCI-X 533 [4.3GBps]
Bus Spec Transfer Rate Throughput Rate
PCI; 33MHz, 32-bit 133MBps -
PCI-Express x1 250MBps -
AGP 2x 533MBps -
PCI-Express x4 1,000MBps -
AGP 4x 1,066MBps -
AGP 8x 2,133MBps -
PCI-Express x16 4,000MBps -
PCI Express Bus Description
A Description of the new Serial PCI Bus "PCI Express".
The PCI Express [PCIe] bus defines the Electrical, topology and protocol for the physical layer of a point to point serial interface over copper wire or optical fiber. In addition to the Physical Layer, the PCI Express specification also covers the Transaction Layer and Data Link Layer. The Physical Layer resides with Layer 1, and the Data Link Layer resides with Layer 2 of the OSI protocol model.
PCI Express is the new serial bus addition to the PCI series of specifications. How ever the electrical and mechanical interface for PCI Express is not compatible with the PCI bus interface. This is a serial bus which uses two low-voltage differential LVDS pairs, at 2.5Gb/s in each direction [one transmit, and one receive pair]. A PCI Express link is comprised of these two unidirectional differential pairs each operating at 2.5Gbps to achieve a basic over all throughput of 5Gbps [before accounting for over-head]. PCI Express uses 8B/10B encoding [each 8 bit byte is translated into a 10 bit character in order to equalize the numbers of 1's and 0's sent, and the encoded signal contains an embedded clock]. PCI Express supports 1x [2.5Gbps], 2x, 4x, 8x, 12x, 16x, and 32x bus widths [transmit / receive pairs]; 2.5Gigabits/second per Lane per Direction. The 8B/10B changes the data transfer numbers to 250MBps per lane, raw data [B= Bytes, b=Bits]. The reduction in throughput is accounted for under the protocol section.
LVDS stands for: Low Voltage Differential Signaling.
LVDS Electrical Interface
LVDS Single Link Interface Circuit
The basic LVDS interface is a single differential link in either one or both directions. Each link requires a termination resistor at the far [receiver] end. The nominal resistor values used is 100 ohms, but would depend on the cable or PWB trace impedance used. LVDS is a scalable bus; one uni-directional link or multiple links may be used. The LVDS graphic above indicates a 1-meter length, but the PCIe specification only allows a 20 inch trace. Refer to the LVDS page for additional information
PCI Express Status
The PCI Express bus started showing up on Mother Boards in 2004 as an addition (using a new connector) to the PCI interface, and will coexist and out-pace parallel PCI at the rate PCI took over from the ISA bus. One common PCIe implementation seems to have two 1x PCI Express slots [for expansion boards] and one 16x PCIe slot [used to replace the AGP slot], then some number of standard parallel (classic) PCI slots [3 to 4 connectors]. Because of the large number of PCI boards fielded it may be some time before the PCI expansion slots disappear from mother-boards, but may disappear faster because the PCIe 1x connector is so much smaller then the PCI connector. The 1x PCIe slots will support a bandwidth of 5Gbps, and the 16x PCIe slot will support 80Gbps. Refer to this page for a comparison of Video bus through-put for different expansion buses.
I see some Mother Board manufacturers using the term PCI-E to represent PCI Express card slots, this is an incorrect usage [PCIe]. PCI Express is not compatible with the standard PCI bus. The PCI Express connectors, signal voltage levels, and signal format are different then with PCI. The physical size of PCI Express cards have the same dimensions as standard PCI cards. The main physical difference between the two bus formats lay with the connectors. PCI Express comes as either standard or low-profile form factors.
Additional Notes: Some software written for the PCI bus may be compatible with the PCIe bus. PCI Express was originally developed at Intel by the Arapahoe working group. Later called 3GIO, "third-generation input/output". Now that the spec has been transferred to the PCI Special Interest Group (PCI-SIG) it was renamed PCI Express.
PCI Express Pinout
The pinout for expansion slots found on Personal Computers is listed below. Two types of PCIe connectors are common on PCs; the 1x connector which is used for a normal board expansion slot and the 16x connector which is used as a video card expansion slot. The 4x and 8x style connectors have not yet been seen residing on any mother-board.
PCI-Express 1x Connector Pinout and 1x signal names.
PCI-Express 4x Connector Pinout and 4x signal names.
PCI-Express 8x Connector Pinout and 8x signal names.
PCI-Express 16x Connector Pinout and 16x signal names.
taken from:
http://www.interfacebus.com/Design_Connector_PCI_Express.html
Definitely being updated. Shipping times on both the PowerMac's and PowerBooks have increased over the last few days in the AppleStore here in Australia.
aussie_geek
aussie_geek
That's mostly true - software will need to be recompiled and tested for the MacIntel systems. Jobs says it's trivial, Chizen says that it's a lot of work. Depending on the application, either one or something in the middle will be true.krygiel said:
Many apps will have fat binaries compatible with both. Some new apps will be OSX86-only, some old apps will never make the OSX86 jump.krygiel said:
High quality software should work the same on both. Other stuff might not be as well tested on one or the other, so you'll see apps that work better on PPC or on OSX86.krygiel said:
Some new apps will be OSX86-only, that's guaranteed.
It should be comparable to the dual dual-core MacIntels (or the dual dual-core x86 systems that are already available or due to be out in the next few weeks).krygiel said:
Eventually, the dual 2.7 will seem very slow, but it will be on or near the top of the heap for quite some time.krygiel said:
AidenShaw said:
What makes you say that? I was under the impression that all apps here on out will work on both.
Apple Store G5 Estimated Ship
Anyone notice that the Estimated Ship times in the Apple Store for the Power Mac G5 line all went to 3-5 business days? The Estimated Ship used to be 1 day for the 2.0GHz and 2.3GHz and around 2-3 days for the 2.7GHz. Could something new be coming?
Anyone notice that the Estimated Ship times in the Apple Store for the Power Mac G5 line all went to 3-5 business days? The Estimated Ship used to be 1 day for the 2.0GHz and 2.3GHz and around 2-3 days for the 2.7GHz. Could something new be coming?
Jobs is wearing rose-coloured glasses
Apps compiled for x86-only will only work on x86. There will be some of those. For example, if a current Windows/Linux app with extensive hand-coded SSE assembly language is ported to OSX86, the developer may decide not to do the extra work to support the end-of-life PPC systems, and release it OSX86-only.
Jobs is painting a very rosy picture of the binary compatibility of OSXPPC and OSX86.
In the real world, supporting both architectures costs the developers time and money - and if they don't feel that there's an ROI on supporting PPC you'll get an OSX86-only app.
Over time, as PPC systems fade into the sunset, developers will decide to drop the PPC support - again because the ROI for doing the additional development and testing is not there. You probably won't care by that time, because your dual octo-core 64-bit Intel system will make that final dual-dual PPC system seem about as relevant as a Bondi iMac!
And then there's the upcoming port from x86 to x64 to worry about... How many apps will go there, and conversely, how many apps will be only OSX64 and drop PPC and x86 support? Nobody knows today....
Xcode apps compiled into fat binaries (Apple's marketing name for this is "Universal Binaries" - but that's obvious hyperbole) that are tested on both architectures will work on both.922 said:
Apps compiled for x86-only will only work on x86. There will be some of those. For example, if a current Windows/Linux app with extensive hand-coded SSE assembly language is ported to OSX86, the developer may decide not to do the extra work to support the end-of-life PPC systems, and release it OSX86-only.
Jobs is painting a very rosy picture of the binary compatibility of OSXPPC and OSX86.
In the real world, supporting both architectures costs the developers time and money - and if they don't feel that there's an ROI on supporting PPC you'll get an OSX86-only app.
Over time, as PPC systems fade into the sunset, developers will decide to drop the PPC support - again because the ROI for doing the additional development and testing is not there. You probably won't care by that time, because your dual octo-core 64-bit Intel system will make that final dual-dual PPC system seem about as relevant as a Bondi iMac!
And then there's the upcoming port from x86 to x64 to worry about... How many apps will go there, and conversely, how many apps will be only OSX64 and drop PPC and x86 support? Nobody knows today....
Freebart said:
What gave it away? The announcement from Apple that this Wednesday they will be having an event to discuss pro innovations?
Freebart said:
Well since Apple publicly announced they are having an event on Wednesday to announce Pro innovations which will without a doubt include the PowerMac.... no.
~Shard~ said:Well since Apple publicly announced they are having an event on Wednesday to announce Pro innovations which will without a doubt include the PowerMac.... no.
If there isn't a PowerMac update I think I'd have to roll over in my grave (assuming I was dead)
EricNau said:If there isn't a PowerMac update I think I'd have to roll over in my grave (assuming I was dead)
You and me both. I'm pretty much willing to put money on PowerMac updates this Wednesday.
We will continue to see PPC apps for years to come....why?
1.Universal binaries
2.At this moment 100% of mac owners have PPC, meaning when the Intels are released, for a long time the majority of Mac users will own PPC
3.The developers can't profit when almost all Mac owners will own a PPC and not an Intel, so they need to develop for both.
4.SSL won't catch up to Altivec for a while, meaning if they release the Apps that use Altivec only for Intel, natively...they will run slower, defeating the whole purpose of the Intel switch in the first place
5.REMEMBER...this is a transition...it is not sudden.
6.Rosetta can only emulate a G3
7.Pro Machines won't be Intel for a long time, only regular consumer based models will get Intel first
8.All the pro apps is where the money is at.
1.Universal binaries
2.At this moment 100% of mac owners have PPC, meaning when the Intels are released, for a long time the majority of Mac users will own PPC
3.The developers can't profit when almost all Mac owners will own a PPC and not an Intel, so they need to develop for both.
4.SSL won't catch up to Altivec for a while, meaning if they release the Apps that use Altivec only for Intel, natively...they will run slower, defeating the whole purpose of the Intel switch in the first place
5.REMEMBER...this is a transition...it is not sudden.
6.Rosetta can only emulate a G3
7.Pro Machines won't be Intel for a long time, only regular consumer based models will get Intel first
8.All the pro apps is where the money is at.
You make a lot of good points, I just think you need to qualify some of the statements though.
Yep, but how long is a long time?
I think you mean SSE not SSL. Anyway, I don't know enough of the details to agree or disagree, but Apple's point now is to write to the Accelerate Framework which makes this moot.
Yep, spot on. It's a transition and 2006 is a problematic year purchase-wise. Get an intel machine early and run Adobe et al slowly, or wait on PPC while drooling over the new intel machines...
Speculation. We don't know this for sure. It seems likely, but what about Powerbooks? They are Pro machines and they desperately need serious updating.
Really? I guess you'd have to define what you mean by money. Profit per unit or total revenues by product or market segment or total profits by product or market segment or...?
iQuit said:
Yep, but how long is a long time?
iQuit said:
I think you mean SSE not SSL. Anyway, I don't know enough of the details to agree or disagree, but Apple's point now is to write to the Accelerate Framework which makes this moot.
iQuit said:
Yep, spot on. It's a transition and 2006 is a problematic year purchase-wise. Get an intel machine early and run Adobe et al slowly, or wait on PPC while drooling over the new intel machines...
iQuit said:
Speculation. We don't know this for sure. It seems likely, but what about Powerbooks? They are Pro machines and they desperately need serious updating.
iQuit said:
Really? I guess you'd have to define what you mean by money. Profit per unit or total revenues by product or market segment or total profits by product or market segment or...?
EricNau said:If there isn't a PowerMac update I think I'd have to roll over in my grave (assuming I was dead)
Didnt they just get updated a few months ago?
They need to hold off on all the updates and just put all their effort into the IntelliMacs already.
iBunny said:
So you reckon they should go a whole year without updating the line, until the Intel Macs are ready?
I don't think many people would be too happy with that.
iQuit said:
That's a pretty big assumption. Apple has said that PowerPC will be phased out by the end of 2007. They never said anything about model information. Ever think the possibility of "holdover" PowerPC machines?
Then why are they at record profits when the pro machines aren't selling worth a darn? This may have been true a couple years ago, but its not true now.
Do folks here remember last week when that "17 yr. old kid" had that spoof page of the new HD powerbooks?.The link is around somewhere but I lost it..
Anyway.I did some snooping around and this "kid" is a pretty good graphics artist and web designer..His spoofed page is gone but I get a sneeky suspicion that page was real and will be the main powerbook page come wednesday..
I know..The spoofed page only showed the 7600 or 7700 ATI but still..
That's my prediction..
Powerbooks in HD. 1.9 and 2.1 Ghz..
With all the nifty busses and DDR-2 memory people are talking about
Anyway.I did some snooping around and this "kid" is a pretty good graphics artist and web designer..His spoofed page is gone but I get a sneeky suspicion that page was real and will be the main powerbook page come wednesday..
I know..The spoofed page only showed the 7600 or 7700 ATI but still..
That's my prediction..
Powerbooks in HD. 1.9 and 2.1 Ghz..
With all the nifty busses and DDR-2 memory people are talking about
When do people think Apple will add HDMI to machines and screens to stay ahead of the video DRM (HDCP) curve?
aswitcher said:
HDMI is indeed becoming more prevalent - it would be very progressive of Apple to adopt it for their displays and machines. Unfortunately, I don't know if they will anytime soon.
~Shard~ said:HDMI is indeed becoming more prevalent - it would be very progressive of Apple to adopt it for their displays and machines. Unfortunately, I don't know if they will anytime soon.
Maybe when the form factors change accross the line with the switch to Intel. I can see Apple switching out the DVI on the Cinema Displays to HDMI in a year or so. I've got a funny idea that when the PS3 hits with its BluRay drive and dual-HDMI outputs both of those features will rapidly become more prevalent. All logic points to Apple supporting both standards, so they only have to wait and see if Sony can plow the way. The PS3 is expected in March of 2006 (spring at the very least) which is right about the time the core of the Apple lineup will be making the switch to Intel.
I can't wait to see what'll happen...