If the heat is the problem with the G5, then Apple should find a way to get the heat to recharge the battery, just like a steam engine... 😛
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 G5... Not Yet...
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
AidenShaw
macrumors P6
dual core - it's dual processor on a single chip
Freescale (originally Motorola Semiconductor) has announced plans and sampling for a single "G4-like" chip that has two complete G4 CPUs on one chip.
It would probably be a bit larger than the current G4 package (does anyone who's read the 8641D spec know how much?), but much smaller than two G4s and all the ancillary chips that they'd need.
jasylonian said:
Freescale (originally Motorola Semiconductor) has announced plans and sampling for a single "G4-like" chip that has two complete G4 CPUs on one chip.
It would probably be a bit larger than the current G4 package (does anyone who's read the 8641D spec know how much?), but much smaller than two G4s and all the ancillary chips that they'd need.
It seems the PPC just can't keep up. Perhaps it's time for Apple to dump it for something else?
stealthboy said:
Well the main problem with the current laptops is not so much IMO limited by the CPU speed. The main problem the current PB line has is a craptastic FSB. The FSB on these things is 200MHz which is really the bottleneck of the system.
Switching to a G5 would gain you a better FSB but in all likelihood you wouldn't really gain any CPU power. The FSB would help the overall system. Additionally, going to a G5 would presumably mean the system was supported longer in the future and also work better if/when the OS is optimized for the G5. There's also the fact that they are 64 bit and the added memory but I don't think these are significant advantages.
The FSB gains can also be accomplished by the new single/dual core G4 chips people are also waiting for. So these also would be welcome additions.
AidenShaw said:
It supposed to be pin compatible, which means that overall, it's the same size. That's one of the advantages that Freescale will take advantage of. The bus is faster so modifications still need to be made to some of the components, but still easier then a new design.
archer75 said:
Do you like something from Intel? Like the chip that was to take over, the Itanic? Go jump on that ship and enjoy the ride.
but remember kids, articles like this are neccesary, espcially since all those people were really expecting G5's this week. 🙄
Why I would like a G5
I use my 1.25 Albook, with 1.5gb of ram to run OpenDX and Matlab, both of these would greatly benefit from more ram 4+gb and more speed. I use my machine for serious engineering, however as I am an oilfield engineer in my real life and a student in my time off I am unable to lug a dual 2.5gb machine about with me, doesnt go well on helicopters. I need the speed and graphics card but hate windows to much to go else where having used a mac since my first SE in 1989. I think that for those of us that value speed a bit thicker, heavier and louder would not be as much of a pain as benefit of the extra speed.
I use my 1.25 Albook, with 1.5gb of ram to run OpenDX and Matlab, both of these would greatly benefit from more ram 4+gb and more speed. I use my machine for serious engineering, however as I am an oilfield engineer in my real life and a student in my time off I am unable to lug a dual 2.5gb machine about with me, doesnt go well on helicopters. I need the speed and graphics card but hate windows to much to go else where having used a mac since my first SE in 1989. I think that for those of us that value speed a bit thicker, heavier and louder would not be as much of a pain as benefit of the extra speed.
stealthboy said:
JFreak
macrumors 68040
stealthboy said:
on-location recording and live front-of-house mixing with protools. that's what i do on a weekly basis. i run my G4 laptop about 85% cpu stress for at least four hours every gig and cannot afford a single hiccup. i would really appreciate a good speed boost for powerbooks, as it's really not feasible at all to carry desktops on the road.
JFreak
macrumors 68040
Surreal said:
8 * 24bit * 192000/sec --> 4.4MB/s
surely any FSB will eat that for breakfast 😉
anyway, i think you can get better clarity with 44.1kHz sessions if you just buy better preamps. and i'm not guessing here. take a focusrite octopre for example, which is not even very high-end unit, but it just kicks ass recorded at 44.1kHz compared to the motu at 192k, assuming that we are not comparing the +20kHz frequencies 😀
(i dislike logic, too. protools is my choice.)
Better to keep the heat output down, running a steam turbine from your laptop would add considerable cost and noise.
HL-Audio said:
First, Freescale has announced plans, and The Register has reported that the 8461s will sample in the *second half* of this year. That's 5 to 11 months from now before the first of these chips sees the light.Lanbrown said:
Second, Freescale does not claim that the 8461s will be pin compatible with the 7xx7 chips currently in apple laptops. They DO say the 7448 is pin compatible, so logic says the 8461s are not, otherwise Freescale would be very sure to mention it. The 8461 and the dual-core 8461D would require an entirely new motherboard anyway (but apparently no system controller) due to on-die memory controllers (REAL DDR!!), on-die GigE (!!!), on-die PCI-Express(!!!!), and FSB up to 677 (!). All for just "starting at 15W" (of course this is nearly identical to the power dissipation IBM claims for a similarly clocked 970FX that everyone says is so hot...) Just read the freescale page and you will be enlightened. Lets hope these chips actually become reality before 2007.
I'll give you one reason...
One reason why people might be impatient for a PB G5 is so we can finally get the top of the line G4s on the iBook! 😛
One reason why people might be impatient for a PB G5 is so we can finally get the top of the line G4s on the iBook! 😛
Xapplimatic
macrumors 6502
Pale Fire said:
Are you freeagin kidding me??? Not that much faster?? OK... a few points to consider on purchasing a PB G4 today, or a PB G5 Q2 or Q3 at the latest:
A G4 is obsolete the second you buy it. Clearly 32 bit apps are not the future, and they will drop off in numbers incredibly in the coming 3-4 years as 64 bit G5s are plentiful, cheaper, and in large circulation. Why invest in a time bomb?
G4s can address more memory than the PB can hold, that's not the issue.
*The G5 bus isn't just merely faster, it's FOUR - SIX TIMES faster, *NOT* including the fact that it can pull 2x32bits.. 32 this way, 32 that way, at the same time... which definitely clears up the FSB rainbow swirls crunch!
*Next G5 revisions get AltiVec 2. Don't expect any new improvements to the aging G4 architecture.. FreeScale already promised they aren't going to change the bus format (they prefer their slug to HyperTransport!)
IBM already said it has system-on-a-G5-chip designs in testing... which means a massive reduction in hardware size, number of components, heat production, and an increase in overall reliability. Yes, they implied it was especially going to help Apple.. as in, it's for Macs. Watch and wait.. PBs may shrink to iMac Mini size plus a whale of a screen attached.. or become the back side of the screen, like an iMac G5 lite, to go... (likely if battery tech improves massively)..
The lowest available clocked G5 is faster than the fastest available clocked G4. That's no joke, and it would produce far less heat to under clock a G5 than max out a G4... and it would be far more reliable in terms of MTBF! (Mean time between failures).
>... I can wait for the G5.. I aint buying anything 32bit again... and I don't want to be tethered to a desk either. (I shouldn't be surprised that I've seen a couple people lugging their iMacG5s around.. that 64-bit HyperTransport FSB is really hard to give up once you've tasted it.)
Xapplimatic said:
I totally agree. If I'm going to invest $2000 in a top end professional laptop I don't want to buy dated technology.
I'm no expert but one can assume that Tiger's successor may be 2 yrs away and will be optimised for g5. I would expect a new Mac to have at least a 3 year shelf life. I don't think you could say that about the current g4 chips.
Future proof for as long as possible
I think people want a machine thats future proof for as long as possible, Tiger is around the corner. I do use my PB to render while I am on the road and away from a desktop. Shooting On Digital backs like the phaseone and leaf Valeo is nicer to have it attached to a G5 rather than a G4. Its the power range, design for power users.
I think people want a machine thats future proof for as long as possible, Tiger is around the corner. I do use my PB to render while I am on the road and away from a desktop. Shooting On Digital backs like the phaseone and leaf Valeo is nicer to have it attached to a G5 rather than a G4. Its the power range, design for power users.
is this link old?
http://lowendmac.com/rumormill/05/0202.html
just wondering if someone has seen it yet
http://lowendmac.com/rumormill/05/0202.html
just wondering if someone has seen it yet
zac4mac
macrumors 6502
All-devourer said -" First, Freescale has announced plans, and The Register has reported that the 8461s will sample in the *second half* of this year. That's 5 to 11 months from now before the first of these chips sees the light."
Talking with a friend in Austin at the G4 fab, he said they got first silicon of what sounds like the single core 8641(first Freescale chips at 90nm) in December. Haven't heard anything concrete about the dual core yet, but he said they should have first run on those "soon".
I'm expecting the dual core G4s to be commercially available the latter part of this year to the first part of next year.
Z
Talking with a friend in Austin at the G4 fab, he said they got first silicon of what sounds like the single core 8641(first Freescale chips at 90nm) in December. Haven't heard anything concrete about the dual core yet, but he said they should have first run on those "soon".
I'm expecting the dual core G4s to be commercially available the latter part of this year to the first part of next year.
Z
ultra light
Well I'm hoping for something in the direction of an ultra-light PB with a 10.4" screen.
Well I'm hoping for something in the direction of an ultra-light PB with a 10.4" screen.
wPod
macrumors 68000
i think its the best choice. when i first switched to an iBook a few years ago i switched for the OS and for the small size and full functionality of the iBook (and PB but it was only in the 15" tiBook at that time). i really think more people would be drawn away from the PB line if it was big and bulky than the few people who would buy it just b/c it has a G5 in it!!! apple knows what they are doing! especially in the portable sector, which by the way is becoming a larger seller than desktops (even for PC users). so i say to apple keep the cool form factor of the PB, it is still pretty powerfull!!!
AidenShaw
macrumors P6
you bought the "64-bit myth", apparently
Then why does Apple itself recommend that most applications should stay 32-bit? Because most applications don't need 32-bit, and because changing to 64-bit causes severe compatibility problems.
With 10.4's extremely lame 64-bit support (no 64-bit Carbon or Cocoa, so only terminal apps can use 64-bit - NO 64-BIT GRAPHICS or GUI APPS) most applications CAN'T go to 64-bit.
Your prediction will eventually become true, but within the roughly two to three year lifespan of a laptop it will not happen. Until
you won't have to worry about a 32-bit (G4, 8461D or whatever) being obsolete in a laptop. Even in a desktop, 64-bit applications are going to be quite rare with Tiger's lame 64-bit support.
Tiger's 64-bit support is good for VAtech and the other batch scientific clusters, but pretty useless for most people.
Actually, it is relevant. Until there are a large number of systems with more than 4 GiB of RAM, there won't be a large market for 64-bit software. Chicken and egg.
The why does a G4 PowerBook come so close in speed to the G5 iMac? (http://www.barefeats.com/imacg5.html) Maybe because FSB is just one part of the equation?
Or maybe because if your app is only pushing or pulling you only have a 32-bit bus with the PPC970?
And it's also no fact.
PB G4 = 1.67 GHz
iM G5 = 1.6 GHz
Simply confused here. The FSB on the PPC970 is not HT. There is no HT bus on the PPC970. IBM doesn't use HT in any shipping PowerPC chip.
Not even AMD uses HT for the FSB on the Opterons and other x64 chips. HT has too much latency for a memory FSB - the Opterons have an on-die memory controller so that the FSB runs at up to 2.4 GHz and 128-bits wide.
Xapplimatic said:
Then why does Apple itself recommend that most applications should stay 32-bit? Because most applications don't need 32-bit, and because changing to 64-bit causes severe compatibility problems.
With 10.4's extremely lame 64-bit support (no 64-bit Carbon or Cocoa, so only terminal apps can use 64-bit - NO 64-BIT GRAPHICS or GUI APPS) most applications CAN'T go to 64-bit.
Your prediction will eventually become true, but within the roughly two to three year lifespan of a laptop it will not happen. Until
a) most systems have 64-bit CPUs
b) a follow-on major release to Tiger actually supports 64-bit across the board
c) most systems have 8 GiB of RAM or more
b) a follow-on major release to Tiger actually supports 64-bit across the board
c) most systems have 8 GiB of RAM or more
you won't have to worry about a 32-bit (G4, 8461D or whatever) being obsolete in a laptop. Even in a desktop, 64-bit applications are going to be quite rare with Tiger's lame 64-bit support.
Tiger's 64-bit support is good for VAtech and the other batch scientific clusters, but pretty useless for most people.
Xapplimatic said:
Actually, it is relevant. Until there are a large number of systems with more than 4 GiB of RAM, there won't be a large market for 64-bit software. Chicken and egg.
Xapplimatic said:
The why does a G4 PowerBook come so close in speed to the G5 iMac? (http://www.barefeats.com/imacg5.html) Maybe because FSB is just one part of the equation?
Or maybe because if your app is only pushing or pulling you only have a 32-bit bus with the PPC970?
Xapplimatic said:
And it's also no fact.
PB G4 = 1.67 GHz
iM G5 = 1.6 GHz
Xapplimatic said:
Simply confused here. The FSB on the PPC970 is not HT. There is no HT bus on the PPC970. IBM doesn't use HT in any shipping PowerPC chip.
Not even AMD uses HT for the FSB on the Opterons and other x64 chips. HT has too much latency for a memory FSB - the Opterons have an on-die memory controller so that the FSB runs at up to 2.4 GHz and 128-bits wide.