PowerBook To Get Dual-Core G4?

[DakotaGuy]

The G3 running at 1.2 Ghz with at 200 mhz bus will smoke any G4 crunching float/integer non-altivec code.

The key phrase is "non-altivec code" and OSX and most of Apple's programs are designed to use alti-vec to improve performance. Day to day tasks like converting a CD with iTunes uses alti-vec to drastically improve performance. Even on non-altivec code, I think your imaginary 1.2Ghz G3 would have a hard time keeping up with the current 1.5Ghz G4. I don't even think a 750fx can clock to 1.2Ghz, maybe it can, I just don't see Apple dumping the G4 to go back to a G3.

 

[eric_n_dfw]

It is not as simple as that. A dual processor computer would be closer to 1.5 times faster than the single processor computer. Dual-core might be closer to 2 times faster than the single processor. That is, assuming that the application doing the rendering takes advantage of a second core or processor. Roxio Toast 5's VCD rendering plug-in is a good test for this. It is dual-processor aware so you can use it for benchmarks if you have the time and patience.

FCP4 render speed comparisons between single/dual cpu machines: http://barefeats.com/fcp4.html

 

[kujo770]

750fx can't, but... 750gx!

The key phrase is "non-altivec code" and OSX and most of Apple's programs are designed to use alti-vec to improve performance. Day to day tasks like converting a CD with iTunes uses alti-vec to drastically improve performance. Even on non-altivec code, I think your imaginary 1.2Ghz G3 would have a hard time keeping up with the current 1.5Ghz G4. I don't even think a 750fx can clock to 1.2Ghz, maybe it can, I just don't see Apple dumping the G4 to go back to a G3.

Apple won't go back to the G3, but the G3 (IBM 750gx) is shipping @ 1.1GHz with 1MB L2 running @ 1.1GHz! 😎 It is available from Powerlogix for Beige, B&W, and early G4 towers breathing new life into these older units. If the mulitplier is available and enough cooling... G3 1.2GHz should be a possibility.

 

[G4-power]

Nah ... DDR400 runs at 200MHz and the double data rate gives it the name DDR400.

The first DDR ram was DDR266 which was double data rate PC133 RAM.

Ah, I see. Thought I might be wrong in that.

 

[AidenShaw]

IBM XLC and XLF were used for all tests....
The linux used was SUSE Enterprise 9 RC5
The OS X was 10.3.5 Server
Our code is all fortran 90 ... utilizing double precision...
We didnt have any single threads that addressed more than 2 GB memory per processor

Buy the way... The reason OS X was out preformed is...
OS X has very poor/slow memory management.....

Good testing. Just one question, though.

Did you test both 32-bit and 64-bit SuSe? (Or are there both for the PPC - I couldn't find much PPC info on the SuSe website)


If your threads don't need more than 31-bits, in theory it shouldn't make much difference to G5 optimized code - both 32-bit and 64-bit should be about the same. (If you app uses lots of pointers, the 64-bit could be somewhat slower than the 32-bit.)

Thanks in advance...

 

[peharri]

Yeah the G4.5 is what the world has been waiting for. Or, hey, how about a quadra and a half on your desktop ; )

It's Apple, so it'll probably be the "G4 Extreme", to fit with Airport Extreme and Quartz Extreme. Dude!

If it's a blazing fast dual-core at 2Ghz that fits inside a Powerbook without heat issues, then for all we care, call it Cr@ppy Chip®. 😛

Agreed. This story seems immensely speculative at the moment but I seriously hope it goes somewhere. I think a dual-core 2GHz "G4 Extreme" would be an improvement on a more regular 2GHz G5 myself (and if iMac 3G rumours have any truth to them, it seems unlikely that 2GHz G5s are going to appear anywhere but PowerMacs for now anyway - the rumours have 1.6 and 1.8GHz G5s in the new iMacs.)

There's the whole issue of timing, but I would sorely be tempted to get a "G4 Extreme" PowerBook if such a thing came out.

 

[G4-power]

couldn't they rebrand the chip from freescale with the g5 name? it will be confusing for us but they could 😉

It would confuse consumers quite much. This far, Apple has given the G-series number to only one series, like 750-, 74xx, 970-. Excluding 601/602/603/604. I think the average Joe thinks G5 as a 64-bit processor, so a 32-bit G5 would confuse people. Wonder though what name they come up with to the dual-core processors. The Freescale (Moto) e700 could be called G5 (or G6), but hard to say what the e600 could be called. If these chips come to the Mac lineup, we'll see.

My take on the G4 vs. G5 is that both have their advantages and disadvantages. On the same clock, they're close. G5 is 64-bit and has newer architecture, but they've pumped all out of the G4 in application design. Of course there are G5 optimized aps, but their numbers are few. Though, optimising to the G5 doesn't do much over G4 optimising, IMHO.
A dual-core G4 will perform better than a single G5 at same wattages, because it was made a low-power chip from the start up.
When the G4's came up, they had the the problem that G5 to G4 has now (no 64-bit code for G5), with AltiVec. Apps that used AltiVec gained speed over the G3 wonderfully. But with non-AltiVec FPU processing, the G4 just doesn't even try to make an impression over G3. In everyday-use, a 350 MHz PM G4 outperforms an iBook G3 500 MHz easily, as in OS UI, iTunes...but apps witout AltiVec support...well, you can guess.

 

[SiliconAddict]

The G5 won't show up in PBs until the heat-resistant gloves are made small enough to allow typing on the keyboard while wearing them 😉

OK. This was meant as a joke and this post isn't targeting you jjmaximum.
But I'm starting to get really annoyed with people who automatically assume that a 90nm 1.8Ghz G5 is going to burn down to the earth's core. Look at the bloody specs people!! 🙄
Such a chip bundled with IBM's CPU speed scaling tech that was released earlier this year and a low speed fan and heat piping should easily be able to do the job if not in the 15" PowerBook then definitely in the 17".
Personally what I think is happening is Apple went back to IBM after seeing what Intel put into the Pentium M and asked for something that is more power conservitive. Heat in a 1.8Ghz chip is a relativly minor issue right now. Battery life is another matter. The M is a solid chip when it comes to battery life conservation. The G4 is too but its performance to battery life ratio sucks butt. Apple could get a G5 in a PowerBook NOW. The issue is would people be happy with a 2+/- hour battery life on their laptop. I think by and large the answer would be no.

 

[Abstract]

Apple won't go back to the G3, but the G3 (IBM 750gx) is shipping @ 1.1GHz with 1MB L2 running @ 1.1GHz! 😎 It is available from Powerlogix for Beige, B&W, and early G4 towers breathing new life into these older units. If the mulitplier is available and enough cooling... G3 1.2GHz should be a possibility.

I think I saw someone post something exactly like this earlier at Macrumors .........in 2002.

And for all those people who oh so desperately need a G5 Powerbook: Why not just hope that the best mobile chip goes into the Powerbook? If Apple can announce the dual core G4 PBs at MWSF in January, and they're the best chip that can be squeezed into a PB, then why is this a bad thing? Realistically, I don't think we'll see a G5 in a Powerbook soon, not even by August 2005.

First, there are current troubles with IBM producing these chips, so they have to get production in check. Then there's the high demand from all the video game vendors who will take priority simply because Apple won't nearly be IBM's biggest customer for these 970s. To fit a decent speed G5 into a Powerbook, IBM has to do something about power consumption and heat beforehand, because there's no way they're going to fit one into a PB enclosure. And to produce these improved chips, it may be a good idea for them to get production issues on the CURRENT chips in check.

The G5 has to be improved A LOT, and with how much trouble Apple is going to have with fitting these into a PB enclosure, I'm thinking it'll come out in Paris 2005 (13 months from now).

If they can up the performance significantly, using any chip at all, then that's good enough. 🙂

 

[JoePike]

G4 Extreme

I would agree that this dual-core chip will likely get branded with something like "G4 Extreme". Calling it a G5 wouldn't be quite right, because it's not 64-bit, and I don't think it warrants a jump to the G6 name as some have suggested. G4 Extreme would make the most sense to me. And I would buy one.

-Joe

 

[beatle888]

Realistically, I don't think we'll see a G5 in a Powerbook soon, not even by August 2005.

that ridiculous 🙄

 

[SiliconAddict]

Do people pull this stuff out of thin air?!?!

I think I saw someone post something exactly like this earlier at Macrumors .........in 2002.

And for all those people who oh so desperately need a G5 Powerbook: Why not just hope that the best mobile chip goes into the Powerbook?

Because then two years down the road when everything is optimized for the G5 (Note I said G5 not 64-bitness.) our laptops are going to look pathetic. Thanks but if I'm spending close to $4,000 on a laptop it isn't going to contain a CPU that in all likelihood is going to be EOLed by next summer.

If Apple can announce the dual core G4 PBs at MWSF in January, and they're the best chip that can be squeezed into a PB, then why is this a bad thing?

See above.

Realistically, I don't think we'll see a G5 in a Powerbook soon, not even by August 2005.

Apple will be screwed if they don't get a G5 in a PowerBook by summer at the latest. Realisticly Moto won't be delivering a dual core CPU anytime soon. If we are talking another year with a craptastic G4 in its current state the PC world is going to make chopped dog food out of the current G4's, and that's even if Moto can squeeze a few more speedbumps out of the current gen G4. Sorry folks but as I have harped on before the Pentium M and new AMD mobile CPUs are making Apple's mobile hardware look... 🙁

First, there are current troubles with IBM producing these chips, so they have to get production in check.

Which multiple news sources have stated will be rectified by 1st quarter '05.

Then there's the high demand from all the video game vendors who will take priority simply because Apple won't nearly be IBM's biggest customer for these 970s.

No company is putting a G5 into their game system. MS is putting a PowerPC chip in but its NOT going to be a direct transplant from the Mac to the XBox and the Sony chip that is being developed won't be out until 2006 anyways. (That is the spec release timeframe for the PS3.) Sorry but that excuse doesn't fly either.

To fit a decent speed G5 into a Powerbook, IBM has to do something about power consumption and heat beforehand, because there's no way they're going to fit one into a PB enclosure.

Why? Have you EVEN LOOKED at the power requirements of a 90nm 1.8Ghz G5? Have you compaired it to the current gen G4?!?!?

And to produce these improved chips, it may be a good idea for them to get production issues on the CURRENT chips in check.

The only thing that is holding IBM back right now is the painful trans to the 90nm process. Do you think Moto is going to have any better luck in that trans? Yah right. Once IBM gets the process down and the yeilds up shipments should start flowing.

The G5 has to be improved A LOT

Where the heck do people pull this from?!?!? How so?

and with how much trouble Apple is going to have with fitting these into a PB enclosure

Ahhh you are obviously a hardware engineer who knows what Apple is going through. Please enlightening us with the specifics of the problems they are having putting a low end G5 into a PowerBook?

If they can up the performance significantly, using any chip at all, then that's good enough.

Not good enough. Not by a long shot if they have to continue with Moto's timeframes for product releases.

 

[idkew]

barefeats compares several processors including dual g4s with g5s

i predict the dual g4 will be faster than the g5

mature g4 vs new g5..... hummmm

 

[g3ski]

So, help me to clear this up:

If a 1 THz Chip takes an hour to render a movie with a "really good" (tm) application, the dual 1 THz Chip would ideally only take 30 minutes. How long would a Dual Core take? Is it a second processor in the same enclosure or a trick to benefit more from what's alreay there?

It's about the same as dual processor G4 or G5.....except the dual core chip is more efficient than the dual processor setup. It should also be cooler.

 

[maxvamp]

SiliconAddict... Nice Rant

I think we all need to digress a little here. It is getting real hard to see the forest.

In all reality, I doubt that technical performance of either a dual core G4 or a Single G5 is going to have as much of an impact on the next powerbook, as the perception that it may bring.

This is political season, and not just for politicians. Whatever goes into the next rev has to influence the Apple stock though the investing community. If Jobs came out and said (" THREE MORE YEARS OF A G4!!! " ) I think that the Apple stock would take a hit. Steve is going to at some point have to announce something that sounds like a move forward, and not stagnant.

No matter how you dice it, the G4 is yesterday's processor. The G5 is perceived to be the latest best thing. Performance, and need for 64-bitness be damned.

Now, with that said, there is the possibility that the Freescale e700 with dual cores may bring Motorolas back to the Mac. These are 64-bit, and should be dual core. This may be the chip that eventually finds it's way into the PowerBook.

Just my 2 cents. Read carefully, then flame away.

Max. 🙂

 

[RBR2]

IBM Production Problems

First, there are current troubles with IBM producing these chips, so they have to get production in check. Then there's the high demand from all the video game vendors who will take priority simply because Apple won't nearly be IBM's biggest customer for these 970s. To fit a decent speed G5 into a Powerbook, IBM has to do something about power consumption and heat beforehand, because there's no way they're going to fit one into a PB enclosure. And to produce these improved chips, it may be a good idea for them to get production issues on the CURRENT chips in check.

The G5 has to be improved A LOT, and with how much trouble Apple is going to have with fitting these into a PB enclosure, I'm thinking it'll come out in Paris 2005 (13 months from now).

If they can up the performance significantly, using any chip at all, then that's good enough. 🙂

Agreed. Recent news items indicate the yields which IBM is achieving on G5 production may be even lower than earlier believed and there is growing doubt that IBM can supply sufficient chips (certainly in the short term) for current PowerMac sales and the believed to be G5 iMac sales. This may leave Apple in an untenable position of not being able to produce enough units to keep the retail market viable.

"Once upon a time..." Steve said that it is good to have choices. It may be that we are approaching the time when choices have to be made as to which chips will be used to keep the company afloat if IBM can not *rapidly* solve their production problems. Perhaps some dual core G4s will keep the PowerBook/iBook line going because it looks to be a long time before there will be a G5 PowerBook. Perhaps Marklar may need to surface with an AMD processor, which, by the way, has been announced as shipping from the German Fab in a 90 nm process. I sure hope Apple have kept Marklar up to date.

I have confidence that IBM will find a solution to their current problem. They have too much riding on the success of their 90 nm process to do otherwise. There is no telling when IBM will resolve their production problems though. You do not know what you do not know. They could solve it next week. It might be that they have to change the process altogether if this process can not be sorted out. There are a great many uncertainties right now.

 

[Maxx Power]

The key phrase is "non-altivec code" and OSX and most of Apple's programs are designed to use alti-vec to improve performance. Day to day tasks like converting a CD with iTunes uses alti-vec to drastically improve performance. Even on non-altivec code, I think your imaginary 1.2Ghz G3 would have a hard time keeping up with the current 1.5Ghz G4. I don't even think a 750fx can clock to 1.2Ghz, maybe it can, I just don't see Apple dumping the G4 to go back to a G3.

There apparently is a G3 1.2Ghz upgrade for the Pismo Powerbook now. A pismo powerbook with that upgrade was just sold on Ebay a few days ago. If you think the 1.2 Ghz G3 would have a hard time keeping pace with a 1.5 Ghz G4 on non-VMX code, think again. According to one benchmark posted here in this thread, at 800 Mhz, I quote "In Cinebench a P4 with 800 Mhz would get 80 CB, a G4-800 gets 65 CB and G3 has about 84 CB."

Take those numbers, extrapolate linearly to 1.2 for G3 and 1.5 for G4, you'll see why your statement can't remain erect.

Apple does what it can to save face, which is why when G4 was at 500Mhz and stuck at that, the ibooks were not allowed to use the faster G3's. As well as before the iBook G4's came out, G3's were never allowed to be at their full potential by capping the bus artifcially to 100 Mhz when G3 can do double that, and according to the PDF's from IBM, at 200 Mhz bus, the G3 gets a huge performance boost in SPEC benchmarks as well as other general purpose applications.

Non-AltiVec code exists in most software not developed by apple. That's the majority of the software avaliable for Mac. Besides, only certain tasks can be Vectorized and is beneficial to be managed by the VMX unit instead of the traditional FPU/Integer Pipelines. Not all code, infact, Most Compiled Code can not be vectorized, it will either slow it down, or add padding to bloat the code.

 

[RBR2]

AAPL: Buy/Sell/Hold?

This is political season, and not just for politicians. Whatever goes into the next rev has to influence the Apple stock though the investing community. If Jobs came out and said (" THREE MORE YEARS OF A G4!!! " ) I think that the Apple stock would take a hit. Steve is going to at some point have to announce something that sounds like a move forward, and not stagnant.

No matter how you dice it, the G4 is yesterday's processor. The G5 is perceived to be the latest best thing. Performance, and need for 64-bitness be damned.

Now, with that said, there is the possibility that the Freescale e700 with dual cores may bring Motorolas back to the Mac. These are 64-bit, and should be dual core. This may be the chip that eventually finds it's way into the PowerBook.

Just my 2 cents. Read carefully, then flame away.

Max. 🙂

What the financial community is focusing on at the moment is the lack of any product on the shelves to sell which will soon impact sales revenues. That will affect the share price and the buy/sell ratings. At the moment several of the analysts are in the "hold" mode, but have made it fairly clear that "sell" ratings are just around the corner if Apple can not get product shipping quickly.

 

[maxvamp]

RE: AAPL: Buy/Sell/Hold?

Agreed.

Apple needs to do everything they can to keep the stock from shifting to SELL.

I just want to **buy** a new machine... but my wife says I have to many machines as it is.

Can you trade a wife for a Dual G5 2.5 GHz? <grin>

Max.

 

[echeck]

Can you trade a wife for a Dual G5 2.5 GHz?

Probably can, but I don't know if it would be legal. 😉

 

[maxvamp]

She probably wouldn't go for it anyhow...

Max.

 

[idkew]

She probably wouldn't go for it anyhow...

Max.

you could train her to come back after the trade.

the key is repetition. keep the lessons short, and give her treats when she succeeds.

 

[rdowns]

Agreed.

Apple needs to do everything they can to keep the stock from shifting to SELL.

I just want to **buy** a new machine... but my wife says I have to many machines as it is.

Can you trade a wife for a Dual G5 2.5 GHz? <grin>

Max.

Do what I did. Negotiate a shoe to machine ratio. I can have one machine for every X pairs of shoes you own. Sadly, I'd need 2 more rooms to have as many machines as the ratio allows.

 

[cb911]

wow, this is some interesting news.... i'd been reading about the e600 & e700... dual-core G4 2GHz+ would be awesome!

i've been wondering what would happen since it looks like it will be a while yet before the G5 comes to PowerBooks... 😀

 

[Sun Baked]

wow, this is some interesting news.... i'd been reading about the e600 & e700... dual-core G4 2GHz+ would be awesome!

i've been wondering what would happen since it looks like it will be a while yet before the G5 comes to PowerBooks... 😀

Don't know the Power5 has some really cool power saving features, if the Power5-UL also has them it would make a PowerBook more likely than a dual core PPC970.

The Power5 can stop clocking units when the processor thinks they won't be used, along with some thermal limit features that can automatically slow the clock down when it get too hot.