PowerMac G5, iMac G5, eMac Specs

[Frobozz]

Was an extra 200mhz all IBM could manage after all this time?

It _could_ be dual core .... which reduces the cost to produce the Powermacs significantly due to heat disspation advantages and lower number of chips required.

The math is compelling. They need 50% LESS chips to sell a dual CORE PM instead of a dual single core. That saves them money, time, heat, and motherboard design.

Could be interesting to see. That's the real question mark to me: are they dual core?

 

[AppleFoussa]

When will they hit three

Seriously though! Apple isgoing little step by lil step. THat is if the rumors are true. dual 3.0 would be Phat.

 

[dongmin]

vote for dual cores

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say these specs are for dual cores, at least for the top two models. Either that or TS is completely wrong.

My rationale: Apple has ALWAYS dropped the previous top-of-the-line to the middle. Even with the recent PowerBook speed bump, which got only a 167mhz increase, Apple upped the middle model to 1.5 ghz, the previous top-of-the-line.

If Apple is sticking to single core 970s, the middle should be at least 2.5 ghz. Instead, they're at 2.3 which leads me to believe that these are completely new chips, i.e. dual cores.

 

[vtprinz]

As much as you may be upset, the PowerMac hasn't been a focus of Apple's sales strategy for years. Consumers and pro-sumers rule their financials and a poor PowerMac sales figure won't drastically impact their bottom line.

With that said, Apple's current line up is adequate for all but high end HD video work. So they do need to improve that. They need a top of the line beast machine for their professional clients. A lot of us on this forum may be clamoring for it-- but we are BY FAR in the minority.

On a consumer standpoint maybe, but overall I disagree. Look at all the research that is being done now on the G5's. Here at tech we put together the 3rd fastest supercomputer in the world just from clustered consumer-level PMs. All of us in the forums don't mean squat to Apple as far as their PM development plan, but universities and big businesses do, and if anyone is going to keep the PM's alive, it's them. I just hope their keeping on Apple's tail about this. Apple stands to lose huge profits if the PC world really brings the power I've been hearing about. Even a single university looking to put together a cluster could be a huge percentage of Apples PM sales, and from what I remember/have heard, Apples largest revenue percentage comes from the PMs (or one of the largest at least)

 

[DPazdanISU]

WTF

wtf is going on with apple stock. Are stock holders idiots. I would assume nobody would want to cash out until apple starts declining in sales....i don't know its ilogical to me! I'm just venting cuz i bought some recently

 

[ifjake]

If it's true I'm very disappointed. After all that time, 3ghz is the bare minimum. We also need more RAM than 512 MB, faster RAM than the PC3200 and the possibility to have more than 8 Gigs. At least the DVD burner is dual-layer. Let's just hope that there will be 2 double core processors in the high-end model.

you're not the first to say this, but you people have got to be kidding with the more than 8GB RAM. 16GB? so you have 10,000 dollars to unload on a computer? and 512 isn't shabby at all, for a minimum. you want more you pay for more. i dunno for a lot of people it's been like "we want more more more" all for the sake of just being "more." PowerMacs are niche. the only people who really need it even at it's current configuration are media professionals; graphic design, film, and audio. and even then moving all that stuff from dedicated machines to software is just barely beginning to catch on. everyone else could either more than make due with an iMac, or they need power beyond the capabilities of a personal computer.

 

[Cooknn]

I find it sad that Microsoft will be getting 3Ghz G5's before Apple does.

I think it would be funny if Apple leaked bad info just to spite Think Secret. I can see Steve on stage unveiling a big banner with 3Ghz on it. Anything less is a dissappointment...

June 2003 - "Within 12 months, we will be at 3GHz," Jobs said. "Believe me, this architecture has legs."

 

[Frobozz]

I don't know why this is receiving so many negative respones, just because of the PowerMacs? Come on no one buys the dang things anyway because they are way overpriced.

Key here is Apple's main prosumer computer the iMac is now a deal as long as they dont increase prices. It seems most every complaint you get from users is Video Card and RAM. Well no complaining now, plus they threw in Bluetooth. I don't remember seeing faster SuperDrives being inclued though?

Basically now I can buy the computer I wanted with only two slight modifications - wifi and more 512 additional RAM. Ahh I am excited!!!

I agree with you about 80%. To me, we're all complaining about a machine that most people interested in a Mac don't need. However, I am an avid gamer and I do 3D modelling and video production. As a gamer I supplement my Mac experience (always buy the Mac version if it's avialable) with a PS2, PC, a Gameboy Advance, and a PSP. I cover my bases. But when it comes to professional level apps, even 3D will run pretty damn good on a iMac.

The thing is, I need the PowerMacs for what I do but those iMacs are darn close. I have a dual monitor setup with a 23" HD LCD and and 18.1 LCD second monitor. No iMac can replace that. I also need a top of the line graphics card... no dice there on an iMac. And, sadly, I really do need every CPU cycle when rendering video or 3D.

But when it comes down to just a speed issue, there's a LOT less reason to need a PowerMac than there was even 2 years ago. Unless you're doing crazy stuff with your Mac (sorry Photoshop doesn't count anymore) an iMac will do.

 

[Squire]

Hey all,

I'm quite happy with my 3month old Dual 2.0GHz powermac - however i would love to get hold of one of those new DVD+RW DL drives (featured in the possible PM update) on its own. Where would i be able to find the actual model number of those drives and get a gold of a Mac compatible one?

How easy would it be to get hold of and install? Would Tiger (pre-ordered) just 'work' with it?

FireArse,
I just installed one of those bad-ass drives in my iMac G4 (1 GHz, 17") about three weeks ago. It burns everything, including dual layer. (Or rather, it's supposed to. I haven't splurged on DL discs yet.) The model I have is an LG GSA-4163B. After installing Patchburn, it just "worked" with CDs and DVDs. The best thing is, the drive was only about $75 US. Check out the drive compatibility database at www.xlr8yourmac.com.

Squire

 

[deputy_doofy]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say these specs are for dual cores, at least for the top two models. Either that or TS is completely wrong.

My rationale: Apple has ALWAYS dropped the previous top-of-the-line to the middle. Even with the recent PowerBook speed bump, which got only a 167mhz increase, Apple upped the middle model to 1.5 ghz, the previous top-of-the-line.

If Apple is sticking to single core 970s, the middle should be at least 2.5 ghz. Instead, they're at 2.3 which leads me to believe that these are completely new chips, i.e. dual cores.

This, also, sounds reasonable to me. Supposedly, the 970GX could maintain the same speeds at with less heat, or higher speeds at the current heat dissipation.
I forget the exact figure, but something like 24% speed increase at same heat (if I'm remembering even remotely correctly).
So...
1.8 + 24% = 2.2
2.0 + 24% = 2.48
2.5 + 24% = 3.1

So, I'd think, if they simply used the same old stuff, they'd do 2.2, 2.5, and 3.1.
Just my 2 (Doofy) ¢.

 

[paulypants]

Good for the iMacs if true. PowerMacs? Ugh. I feel sick.
Hopefully Apple is feeding TS false info somehow...

 

[Matty-Andy]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say these specs are for dual cores, at least for the top two models. Either that or TS is completely wrong.

My rationale: Apple has ALWAYS dropped the previous top-of-the-line to the middle. Even with the recent PowerBook speed bump, which got only a 167mhz increase, Apple upped the middle model to 1.5 ghz, the previous top-of-the-line.

If Apple is sticking to single core 970s, the middle should be at least 2.5 ghz. Instead, they're at 2.3 which leads me to believe that these are completely new chips, i.e. dual cores.

Perhaps they're still having yeild issues with the 2.5s. That along with trying to keep some space between the mid and top end models would explain the dual 2.3s...

 

[dicklacara]

wtf is going on with apple stock. Are stock holders idiots. I would assume nobody would want to cash out until apple starts declining in sales....i don't know its ilogical to me! I'm just venting cuz i bought some recently

The guidance given for Q3 2005 was less than what the analysts wanted to hear. It was up, but conservative.

 

[Frobozz]

On a consumer standpoint maybe, but overall I disagree. Look at all the research that is being done now on the G5's. Here at tech we put together the 3rd fastest supercomputer in the world just from clustered consumer-level PMs. All of us in the forums don't mean squat to Apple as far as their PM development plan, but universities and big businesses do, and if anyone is going to keep the PM's alive, it's them. I just hope their keeping on Apple's tail about this. Apple stands to lose huge profits if the PC world really brings the power I've been hearing about. Even a single university looking to put together a cluster could be a huge percentage of Apples PM sales, and from what I remember/have heard, Apples largest revenue percentage comes from the PMs (or one of the largest at least)

Well, I think you're in the minority. Most clusers will be xServes, which do not generate the redundant heat and failure points that a stand alone PowerMac will produce. However, it's totally sweet that you guys did that... but I'm curious why you didn't go with xServe cluster nodes?

You make an interesting point, though. More and more the scientific and industrial professions are buying Macs. But consider this: 5 years ao the numbers were freakishly miniscule. Ever since OS X, xServe and the G5 came out, the adoption of the Macintosh as a research platform has skyrocketed. That proves that the platform is viable dispite minor aborrations in performance (plus or minus) to the x86/Windows platform.

 

[lem0nayde]

What is the real world effect of Dual Core?

Does anyone know what the real world effect of having dual-core chips would be? What kind of speed increase would we see? Would 2 dual core chips be like having a quad-processor machine?

I hang my ignorance out for all to see....

 

[vtprinz]

but I'm curious why you didn't go with xServe cluster nodes?

Started out with PM's, I think they switched it all over to xserves after about a year. Not sure. If so, I wonder what happened to all those PMs....

Either way it started a trend. Within a year of being rated 3rd a handful of other universities followed suit and started putting together their own G5 clusters.

 

[nokiauk]

Hey all,

I'm quite happy with my 3month old Dual 2.0GHz powermac - however i would love to get hold of one of those new DVD+RW DL drives (featured in the possible PM update) on its own. Where would i be able to find the actual model number of those drives and get a gold of a Mac compatible one?

How easy would it be to get hold of and install? Would Tiger (pre-ordered) just 'work' with it?

Thanks,

FireArse

Just get a Pioneer 109 Drive and it should work, patchburn may be required however to get it to work with the i Apps

 

[Lord Blackadder]

This is good stuff. Especially the GPU bumps to the 9600. Still no 3GHz, but really, is 2.7 THAT terrible? (especially with the possibility of it being the 970MP, although I'm not optomistic). It would be nice to see 1GB RAM standard on the PowerMacs.

The iMac is poised to improve on its already big sales with these improvements - with the rumored 128MB 9600 GPU and faster G5 it will have more credible gaming performance.

 

[Private Public]

If Apple is sticking to single core 970s, the middle should be at least 2.5 ghz. Instead, they're at 2.3 which leads me to believe that these are completely new chips, i.e. dual cores.

Could be right.

But we know the dual 2.0 don't need to be liquid cooled and the dual 2.3 from the xserve doesn't need to be liquid cooled so they just use those two chips and clock up the high end to 2.7 and leave it liquid cooled.

I want to believe in 970MP.

 

[dornoforpyros]

doh! I can handel the fact that that my 1.8ghz G5 won't be so great 2 months after I bought it but the dual layer DVD burner kinda has me choked.

 

[PCM]

As has been said many times...IF the prices COME WAY DOWN...then this is a great update. BUt charging twice as much as a custom AMD machine that will SMOKE these things just doesn't fly any more.

 

[ITR 81]

I hope these are dual cores or atleast the 2.7 is.

I was really hoping for some kind of update to the PowerBooks so I could buy one by May. I guess I'll be out of luck for another 3 months or so.

 

[borgobello]

Why are you all so negative?

Think Secret says: performance gains far greater than the 200-300MHz bumps. Far greater can be double, more or even less. But overall performance of upgraded PowerMacs should be better than today's G5 at 3Ghz. AGP slot is enough powerful for the most existing graphic cards, and after all the unique graphic card I've upgraded is the B&W PCI Range 128 with a flashed Radeon 7500. If in the BTO options there will be an ATI X800, I think it will be enough for doing anything. Personally I'll prefer a fanless 9600XT. Only if cheap enough i will consider a graphic card upgrade, and only if it will not need high noise fan. RAM... only 8 Gb? I work great with 1.5 Gb now, If I'll take a new PowerMac probably I'l buy it with 2Gb, or even not (1 Gb can be enough, ore I'll take it from PC store)... Dual Layer DVD+-RW is what I need, does BlueRay disk's exist? I mean, can anyone buy them anyware?

 

[aethier]

True but so far most consumer PC Mobos available and soon to be available for Dual Core Processors will still only support one Processor for both Intel and AMD. Seeing how most PowerMacs are allready Dual Processor the difference won't be that big comparing Dual Processor Power Macs to Single Processor Dual Core AMD and Intel Machines.

I have seen the Anandtech articles about Dual Core and the performance does not impress me the least. In fact the Multitasking on Windows machines using Dual Proccessors or Dual Core is poor when comparing to OSX. OSX while not perfect at multitasking can still handle better than Windows. Remember OSX was built with SMP in mind and has much more optimizations in the OS to take advantage of multiple threads. Apple's entire PowerMac lineup has been built around Dual processors at times for years now and that's why OSX is better than Windows when we are talking about multitasking. In fact Apple has been building MP machines for the past 10 years since the days of the PowerPC 604.

Anyhow even if the next update is not Dual Core I imagine we should have Dual Cored PowerMacs or Xserve by the end of the year and hopefully we should be up to 3Ghz by then which would put Apple in the same leauge as AMD.

how can you possibly say you were not impressed by thoughs benchmarks. current powermac g5's cannot play doom3 at

A:>The same level of performance / graphical beauty as those machines
B:>Current powermacs cannot do that while ripping mp3's in the background, and maintain a framerate above 70. hell a powermac cannot even get above 50...

the Intel Pentium Extreme Edition, and Pentium D (dual core, both) are two very kick ass chips. even as a die hard mac user i am finding it hard to want to buy a powermac with the current intel / amd performance offerings. My powerbook (1.25 AL 15inch, fully equipped) better last me a while, as the next computer i buy is likely to be a home built amd or intel based compy. as much as i cannot stand windows, i cannot justify (as a student) spending so much more on a powermac, when i could build something much faster for less. at least i have my powerbook...

 

[gugy]

Well, If these PowerMac upgrades are not dual core, then is a very sad improvement. More than 2 years to reach Steve's promise of a 3ghz PowerMac? This must be a joke! What's up IBM?
I guess I'll have to look into the Imac or wait for a powerbook G5 probably at WWDC.