PowerBook Updates? Dual G4 Core?

[dguisinger]

Everyone loves to doubt that the G5 will be in a powerbook anytime soon.
But I think if there is a reason not to its because Apple favors design over functionailiy.

I don't have the specs in front of me, but lets review what the specs would show:
1) PC laptops which are about 1 1/2 times as thick have Pentium 4 processors (not the Pentium M, there are desktop CPUs in some notebooks)
2) The 970FX has less of a heat problem than a Pentium 4, and is even more acceptable than the new 90nm Pentium 4s which have really, really bad heat problems.
3) Apple loves to tout their thin powerbooks as a major feature. While it wow's people, most people would be perfectly happy with a notebook as thick as my Latitude D800.

If the G5 has less heat than a P4, and a P4 can go in most standard sized notebooks; and Apple has gotten the G5 in a user-servicable computer that is 2" thick (remember, that means there is extra space, components aren't packed so tightly with strange connectors / assemblies), there is very few reasons as to why they can't get it in a notebook.

The problem I see with the dual-core chips is as follows:
1 - Its not a 64-bit CPU from what I've read
2 - Once Apple puts a G5 in a notebook it will likely be a single core for battery life, how do you do that? Notice Apple has had a hard time doing a single CPU desktop ever since they put dual CPUs in the late-G4 powermacs due to horrible clock speed comparisons. Once its done, customers consider it a feature lost if you retract from it!
3 - Optimizing towards another CPU design (everytime you change something minor means compilers need to update) isn't fun, I would beleive Apple wouldn't support a new family of CPUs from Freescale if their future CPUs are coming from IBM. While its a similar CPU to the G4, I'm sure there is a bunch of small pipeline changes as the G4 was maxing out.... these changes would complicate compilers & application speed for non-optimized apps ... and of course each binary can only be optimized for a single CPU... so is it optimized fora G4, G5, or this new dual-core chip?

At the end of the day, there will be no dual-core G4 powerbook. Its a bad decision, plus the chip isnt complete; and beyond that -- Apple probably had planned to have a G5 notebook for Macworld; hence the long delay. They either have it done or dont. If they do, I'm not sure why they'd have a quiet announcement. If its not done, they will be releaseing small speed bumps, and will do the G5 in a few months.

 

[Marble]

I wonder whether these rumors mean much for the simultaneous iBook bump that was rumored to come with the "Powerbook G5" a while ago.

 

[virus1]

Not entirely true. A dual core can be more power efficient then a dual processor configuration. Next, the dual core processor would be based upon the 90-nm process, the current crop is running on the 130-nm. The 1.67GHz could be 90-nm as well. While IBM has had issues with the process, as has Intel, there are others that have seen an decrease in power requirements with the 90-nm process.

ah.. I was getting dual core and dual processor confused again. lol

 

[dguisinger]

I wonder whether these rumors mean much for the simultaneous iBook bump that was rumored to come with the "Powerbook G5" a while ago.

Well, from my experience in the electronics design business: If Apple were to do a G5 powerbook and G5 ibook at the same time, using the same motherboard...... just different CPU speeds and GPU daughterboards (or dont solder on some ports for FW800), they would save a ton of money. It costs alot of money to design, test, and manufacturer several designs. We typically design a single PCB with multiple product models because it saves thousands on small projects. When you get to the level of Apple, it saves millions. They only need to make one design....test it, build it, heck, stocking parts is an issue for any company like Apple or Dell that does Just-in-Time manufacturing. My guess would be there may be some truth to the iBook G5 rumors. There never was anyone who said you cant run a G5 at 1.2GHz instead of 2GHz.

 

[oskar]

Spot on HiRez, hype that mostly seems to affect those in this forum mostly, which sorta knocks holes that Mac users are smarter than peecee lusers. So there'll still be a few clueless around here thinking G5 will save their tiny feeble worlds, no biggie, I think the bigger picture types will figure it out quickly and the public in general really wasn't sure what a G5 was that much so I think the damages would be minimal.

Apple needs a but kicking, Tiger rocking, greatly speeded up Powerbook like yesterday and the Freescale 64 bit G4 is just the ticket. If some don't get it, they're loss.

OK, so maybe it could be a dual core processor... but don't you think that Apple would still call it a PBG5? Just to make it clear that it is better than a G4 that was released 2+ years ago? I personally don't think that Apple will be able to put the same processor they use on PowerMac G5's and the iMac G5's into a laptop just yet (maybe not for a long time). But I think that they could use a mobile processor that works like the G5, not necessarily a Freescale dual core. We really don't know what they're working on, and it's anybody's guess.

So this is what I think, and like me, many others give their opinions, and little actually give facts on this site calles macRUMORS. I think it is more ignorant to be telling people that they don't know anything, when the truth of the matter is that nobody knows anything for sure, and if they did, they probably wouldn't say it. So I think that there has been too much bickering about trying to convince people of something that you don't know either.

 

[GFLPraxis]

Dual core Mac mini anyone?

w00t!

I wouldn't get much for mine, not with the dent under the ethernet port.

Lucky you. My dent is right on the power plug, and makes it almost impossible to charge. You have to get the charger in at just the right angle and put pressure on it to charge

 

[GFLPraxis]

The problem I see with the dual-core chips is as follows:
1 - Its not a 64-bit CPU from what I've read

Who needs 64-bit in a notebook? You're not going to be using more than 4 GB of RAM in a PB yet.

2 - Once Apple puts a G5 in a notebook it will likely be a single core for battery life, how do you do that? Notice Apple has had a hard time doing a single CPU desktop ever since they put dual CPUs in the late-G4 powermacs due to horrible clock speed comparisons. Once its done, customers consider it a feature lost if you retract from it!

IBM is working on dual core G5s.
Or maybe we'll have G5 iBook and dual core G4 PB's?

 

[hob]

I'm gonna jump on the bandwagon right now:

G5 POWERBOOKZ THIS T00SDAY!!!11!!1!



(I've been staying restrained but I truly believe in the next 16 days we will see something!!)

Hob

P.S - don't you guys have anything better to do at 12.30am?! I mean at least I have the... 5 hour... time difference... *ahem*

 

[dguisinger]

Who needs 64-bit in a notebook? You're not going to be using more than 4 GB of RAM in a PB yet.
IBM is working on dual core G5s.
Or maybe we'll have G5 iBook and dual core G4 PB's?

64-bit isn't just about memory. The 32-bit revolution was primarly driven by the need of memory. But these days, you don't need to hold that much in memory compared to where teh 32-bit limit is.

However, 64-bit integer math is much faster on a G5 than a G4. While you may not use that; there are people that do. And as you see more and more G5 based machines; more and more software developers will take advantage of the math.

If Apple does not do a G5 notebook, then they create a problem. Around half of Apple's CPU sales are notebooks, if not more. At this rate, G5 has a low market share and developers can't code to really take advantage of the G5 in masses unless they want multiple versions of a binary, to lose performance more than they should on a G4, or lose compatiblity. By moving the notebooks to the G5, Apple accelerates the adoption of G5 improvements....The world doesn't revolve just around floating point; 64-bit integers are used quite commonly in my code... but I've never needed 64-bit address space.

So before telling the world that 64-bit runs slower because code is 2x the size; memory boundries are 2x as wide, and no one needs the extra memory... remember that it allows the CPU to natively handle 64-bit math which is becoming more and more common; and is infact a big improvement in speed if you use an app that really uses it.

 

[MegaSignal]

Yup - You're right

Dual core would ROCK and be better than a skillet power sucking G5 that so many uninformed uneducated whine about and for in these here forums. The only problem is I thought they weren't due for another quarter or so.

Those going "huh? Freescale? Dual Core?" or you annoying "G5 Rulez" types who need a bitchsmack of what the Powerbook REALLY needs, read this article at The Register. As fast as the G5, cooler than the G5, less power consumption than the G5 and, oh yes, 64 bit too!!!

Well said.

Sorry, all you portable G5ers - the G4 is simply too efficient - too fast - too altivec - to ever be completely eliminated from consideration with regard to portables (and even desktops - http://www.apple.com/macmini/). While I still do not think much of their cell phones, Moto did well with the G4 - and many (both inside and outside of Cupertino) have been trying to reinvent the wheel ever since...

 

[swissmann]

Why not implement a dual core G4 chip and call it a G5. It seems like it is a big enough difference that it could justify Apple calling it the next generation chip hence calling it a G5. I wonder if this rumor and the leaks in HTML code referencing a G5 Powerbook are the same???

 

[hob]

Why not implement a dual core G4 chip and call it a G5. It seems like it is a big enough difference that it could justify Apple calling it the next generation chip hence calling it a G5. I wonder if this rumor and the leaks in HTML code referencing a G5 Powerbook are the same???

Would Surprise Me At All

 

[risc]

Two words "AS IF!" - Why would Apple introduce a dual core PowerBook with no fan fare? You don't seriously believe next week you'll jump on apple.com and think you'll be able to order these? This is the kind of product Apple would love to hype up at a keynote, and rightly so the PowerBook is getting very long in the tooth, I expect a minimal update any day now and a real update when Apple have a chance to hype it.

 

[JordanNZ]

New Freescale chip... "Mobile G5" anyone?

 

[jmsait19]

Lucky you. My dent is right on the power plug, and makes it almost impossible to charge. You have to get the charger in at just the right angle and put pressure on it to charge

Yea. My dent is on the back right corner of the top! when its closed you can see the dent in all its blazing glory. but im hoping that when they replace the lcd because i have the white spot AlBook problem, they put a new top of the case on. heres to wishful thinking

 

[noelister]

I will be eagerly waiting until Tuesday. Even though that is what I have been doing for quite some time now. All I can say is that I hope Steve doesn't let me down on the next powerbook.

 

[khammack]

But I can't help thinking, haven't we been saying "Powerbook updates next tuesday!" for the past 6 months?

Yes. Yes you have.

-kev

 

[MegaSignal]

Why not implement a dual core G4 chip and call it a G5. It seems like it is a big enough difference that it could justify Apple calling it the next generation chip hence calling it a G5. I wonder if this rumor and the leaks in HTML code referencing a G5 Powerbook are the same???

Probably because the marketing folks at Apple want to reserve the "G5" moniker for 64-bit processing in the same way the IBM 970fx does...? Hard to say - others have said that the G4 does, infact, support 64-bit, but who knows?

I guess it's a little different than simply renaming a Pontiac, as in the case of the "G6". . .http://www.pontiac.com/g6/index.jsp

 

[brap]

So all of a sudden, everybody loves Motorola again!

Technology, she's a fickle mistress.

 

[jrk]

I know others have speculated in both directions on the feasibility of a dual-core notebook processor, but a quick look at the Freescale fact sheets indicates that the 90nm dual-core processor (e600 MPC8641D) has a power dissipation almost exactly the same as the current 130nm G4 in the shipping Powerbooks at the same 1.5ghz. Thus, it is certainly within the realm of possibility -- from a thermal/power design standpoint -- to use these in a new Powerbook. Indeed, as you'll see soon enough from the directions Intel, AMD, and IBM all take over the next ~12 months with their power-optimized laptop chips (Pentium-M, et al.), everyone is quickly realizing that multiple cores and similar parallel architectures scale performance/Watt much, much better than increasing clock speed. In short, this isn't just a far-fetched fantasy in Mac land -- pretty much every performance thin-and-light laptop will have dual cores in 12-18 months time, at the latest, with first launches coming over the next few months.

The real kicker with a dual-core e600 Powerbook, though, comes on two fronts: total system power, and performance.

On the power side, while I pointed out that the power budget for the dual-core chip around 1.5ghz is quite near the current 130nm 7447 in the same clock range, the e600 is a highly integrated system-on-chip. It includes gigabit ethernet, PCI Express, Rapid-IO (likely used as a southbridge interface, in the case of a computer), AND a memory controller integrated into this one package. This takes the place of the TWO highest power-consumption chips in the current Powerbook (CPU and memory controller), as well as a variety of secondary chips (ethernet controller, etc. offload much of the logic for the "southbridge" and secondary controllers). In all, this means you can run a dual-core e600 in quite a bit less total system power than the current G4 systems, at the same clock rate.

Now, even running at the same clock rate, and even ignoring the entire second processor, the e600 is also dramatically higher-performance than the current 7447. It has twice the cache per-core, which provides a big boost, and it actually has a modern memory bus -- up to 8 times the bandwidth to memory and 8 times the actual achievable bandwidth into each core (as I understand it, DDR-333 memory is pretty useless on the 7447, which actually only consumes data at 166mhz single data-rate). In some sense, you can think of this as 16x the effective bandwidth, with 667mhz DDR2. This instantly fixes the one glaring problem which has been holding the G4 back so much with respect to the G5 -- and then some. And even better, all this bandwidth is available at super-low latency, since the memory controller is on-chip. In the case of the AMD Athlon 64 -- the only other mainstream processor with a fast on-chip memory controller -- this, alone, improved performance in the range of 10-20% per-clock, according to most estimates. And finally, if Apple actually uses this opportunity to make the leap to PCI Express, it will mean a jump in GPU-to-memory bandwidth of 2x or more. This may seem insignificant outside of games, but in fact, this is one of the major limiting factors in Quartz Extreme performance, as it is implemented today (using AGP texturing direct from host memory), and would likely provide a very healthy boost in system-wide performance.

Anyway, I just wanted to set out a somewhat comprehensive perspective on why the dual-core e600 G4 makes so much practical, non-pie-in-the-skie sense right now, if only Apple can actually get supplied with them and avoid the marketing trap of the "G5 transition." The e600 is hands-down the highest-performance, lowest system cost, most power-efficient option on the table for the next 6-12 months, barring some absolutely incredible work from IBM. Even then, it's still a very strong choice, just not the only one.

 

[BJU1223]

i still think it just going to be a minor speed bump ... if it was something big they would of announced it during the keynote ... i think the g5 would be release along with tiger when it is realease ... there better not be a big upgrade tuesday because my 1.5MHz 15" powerbook should arrive tommorrow and is BTO so i can't return it!

 

[BJU1223]

i still think it just going to be a minor speed bump ... if it was something big they would of announced it during the keynote ... i think the g5 would be release along with tiger when it is realease ... there better not be a big upgrade tuesday because my 1.5MHz 15" powerbook should arrive tommorrow and is BTO so i can't return it!

 

[Trowaman]

All i can say is it will be about 36 hours until we know. Let's hope something happens with their laptop line, it's starting to get a little weak.

Also, what will be eMac's fate? Lower prices and fast processor? Will a 17" monitor appear to go with the mac mini? Will the Powermac ever hit 3 Ghz considering it has not been updated since last spring? So many quesitons, so few answers.

 

[TheSith]

I will be eagerly waiting until Tuesday. Even though that is what I have been doing for quite some time now. All I can say is that I hope Steve doesn't let me down on the next powerbook.

Same here..

I just hope they release something Tuesday..

 

[h00ligan]

caught up

you guys are so caught up that apple is going to need a major launch event.. for what? a laptop thatis well overdue?

sure they'll run ads.. and try to get sales.. but they need no massive launch event to plug a new pb.. if anything they can have some in store thing.

point is.. they will release it and people will say.. so what.. it's about time.

they may marvel at the design.. but the speed thing is so far beyond most users.. my gf just asked me why she needed more than 256 megs of ram and said it wasn't worth spending $60 on.. but we all KNOW her ibook would be much faster with 512 or 768.. since hte os is using almost all that 256 anyway.

point is.. if they have it.. they will announce it.. the pb line is so lacking they aren't going to WAIT if they can get one out now.

now, that said.. even if they are announced tomorrow.. would they actually ship pre june?