PowerMac G5's...what speed bumps can be expected?

acedickson

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Dec 6, 2004
727
0
ATL
My wife and I were at CompUSA recently and decided we'd get a PowerMac G5 as our next desktop. I'm curious what speed bumps might be expected for the line. Mainly the Dual 2.0GHz and the Dual 2.5Ghz. If they bump the Dual 1.8Ghz to the current Dual 2.0GHz with all the current specs (PCI-X, 8MB DDR support) that'd probably be the machine for me.

Anyways, I got off subject. What might be expected whenever the next revision is? I'm going to buy a PB in June so it'll be June or later 2005 before I buy. Should be a revision by then.
 

daveL

macrumors 68020
Jun 18, 2003
2,425
0
Montana
This is a subject of great speculation, and I think the bottom line is that nobody even has much of a guess. Next week, 6 months from now, minor speed bump, dual core G6, who knows? Now we'll get the 20 people saying: Well it's been sooo long since the last update ... the stock of PMs are very low ... Jobs promised ... whatever.
 

Chip NoVaMac

macrumors G3
Dec 25, 2003
8,889
25
Northern Virginia
I know the feeling. Last week CompUSA was offering 36 months interest free. I waited till Wednesday to see if there were going to be any updates. And then things got away from me that prevented me from taking advantage of the special financing.

I just hope there is speed bumps in the PM line before the next financing special at CompUSA.
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
CaptainCaveMann said:
You may need to work on your sentence structure... Aren't one word answers considered spam?

Anyway, I'm hoping for 3.0GHz G5s by mid year so that the iMac can get some sort of upgrade too.
 

BornAgainMac

macrumors 603
Feb 4, 2004
6,349
3,211
Florida Resident
3 Ghz is expected from everyone. It's possible the same 2.5 Ghz will be introduced with a lower price or other hardware features. I was really shocked that my 2.0 1st revision wasn't that much different than the 2nd revision. Maybe G6?
 

awesomebase

macrumors regular
Jan 6, 2004
100
0
Maryland
Power over-rated...

I bought my dual 1.8GHz G5 (with no PCI-X and only 4 memory slots) and it is by far the most powerful machine I've owned. I'm hard pressed to think of any really good reason to get anything faster. I've literally done the following, all at the same time: 1) play a DVD movie, 2) scan photos on my Epson scanner, 3) buy and play music from iTunes, 4) have my .Mac mail, gmail, and Entourage mail all open, 5) run iPhoto and iChat 6) run Filemaker Pro 7 and Omni Graffle. There are a good half-dozen other programs and utilities I had running as well with not even a hiccup in the system. I have 1GB of RAM installed. I can't even fathom what the extra speed would do for me at this point. In fact, I would probably rather do one or both of the following instead:
1) get the new ATI X800 video card and/or 2) add 1GB to 2GB more of RAM.
I did swap out my hard drive for two 300GB Serial ATAs, but other than that, this machine is a dream! And I bought it used direct from Apple for a great price! You can't go wrong with these machines, I think they're fantasticly powerful! Have fun and don't worry so much about the speeds... there are people running 400MHz G3 towers and doing everything they need to do on their systems. :D
 

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Oct 5, 2004
1,518
0
mad jew said:
You may need to work on your sentence structure... Aren't one word answers considered spam?

Anyway, I'm hoping for 3.0GHz G5s by mid year so that the iMac can get some sort of upgrade too.
Spam? Isnt spam what you get in your EMAIL? It could be advertising,scams,people wanting money? I dont see how 3.0 could be considered spam. Nerd
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
CaptainCaveMann said:
Spam? Isnt spam what you get in your EMAIL? It could be advertising,scams,people wanting money? I dont see how 3.0 could be considered spam. Nerd
I'm not complaining about one word answers but I'm pretty sure edesignuk classes them as spam in which case he'll delete the post in many cases. You're right though, I don't really think '3.0' could be classed as spam. If it were up to me, I'd leave it, hopefully the mods will too. :)
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,026
PDX
Back on topic <ahem>

AFAIK, It is likely that there will be dual-core 970's @ 3 Ghz and/or 970GX's at same clock speed (max or thereabouts).

Think Secret and a variety of other random sites have mentioned this likelihood in the coming months.

I do not know how they would be used in a PM line-up. It is possible that they may all be dual-core and that the GX was "just in case" or a parallel plan. More likely is the low-end being a single GX, the mid-range being either, and the high-end being mad dual-core action. Couldn't say whether the dual-core will replace the dual-processor config, or if it will be both, resulting in pseudo-quad-processor machines.

Guess the speeds, it's all speculation. Water-cooling required. That would be a lot of power, me thinks.

Perhaps Tiger figures in there somewhere too...
 

relimw

macrumors 6502a
May 6, 2004
611
0
SC
CaptainCaveMann said:
Spam? Isnt spam what you get in your EMAIL? It could be advertising,scams,people wanting money? I dont see how 3.0 could be considered spam. Nerd
Now, now, no need to get testy.
I thought spam was heavily processed 'meat'. :D

The generally expected bump will be dual 3.0GHz, with the rare rumour of a 3.2GHz processor. The 3.2 isn't very likely tho, unless IBM has made significant progress in boosting yields.
 

relimw

macrumors 6502a
May 6, 2004
611
0
SC
blackfox said:
Think Secret and a variety of other random sites have mentioned this likelihood in the coming months.

I do not know how they would be used in a PM line-up. It is possible that they may all be dual-core and that the GX was "just in case" or a parallel plan. More likely is the low-end being a single GX, the mid-range being either, and the high-end being mad dual-core action. Couldn't say whether the dual-core will replace the dual-processor config, or if it will be both, resulting in pseudo-quad-processor machines.

Perhaps Tiger figures in there somewhere too...
Hmm, that would be really cool, a dual core, dual processor G5 at 3GHz.... yum :cool:

Were does everybody get the idea that 'Tiger figures in there somewhere'?
Why the heck would there be a design requirement for Tiger?
 

Chip NoVaMac

macrumors G3
Dec 25, 2003
8,889
25
Northern Virginia
awesomebase said:
I bought my dual 1.8GHz G5 (with no PCI-X and only 4 memory slots) and it is by far the most powerful machine I've owned. I'm hard pressed to think of any really good reason to get anything faster. I've literally done the following, all at the same time: 1) play a DVD movie, 2) scan photos on my Epson scanner, 3) buy and play music from iTunes, 4) have my .Mac mail, gmail, and Entourage mail all open, 5) run iPhoto and iChat 6) run Filemaker Pro 7 and Omni Graffle. There are a good half-dozen other programs and utilities I had running as well with not even a hiccup in the system. I have 1GB of RAM installed. I can't even fathom what the extra speed would do for me at this point.
To be fair I do/did most of the things you mentioned on my lowly PB 1ghz rev. B.
 

Grimace

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2003
3,539
31
with Hamburglar.
2.0 Ghz G5 (single);
512MB RAM (4GB capacity - same as the current SP 1.8)
80GB HD;
16x DL SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra

2.3 Ghz G5 (dual);
512MB RAM
160GB HD;
16x DL SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra

2.5 Ghz G5 (dual);
512MB RAM
160GB HD;
16x DL SuperDrive
ATI 9600XT

2.8 Ghz G5 (dual);
512MB RAM
250GB HD;
16x DL SuperDrive
ATI 9600XT

From the sources in tune with the manufacturing of the G5 chips, IBM ran into major headaches getting faster speeds. As much as I hate to say it, don't expect any 3.0 Ghz machines just yet.
 

Lacero

macrumors 604
Jan 20, 2005
6,639
2
No kidding. I went from a G4 867Mhz to the dual 1.8Ghz G5 and the speed-up was nothing short of phenomenal. The FSB of 900Mhz does wonders for smooth multi-tasking among different apps.

At any given time during a really busy day, I would be editing in FCP, rendering a sequence in After Effects, burning a DVD in Toast, compressing videos in Compressor, compressing AIFFs to AC3 in A.Pack, retrieving mail, downloading off BitTorrent and using iTunes, ALL AT THE SAME TIME. Dual processors makes even navigating in Finder smooth given all these programs running at the same time.

This was possible on my old G4 but the lag between clicks would have driven anyone crazy. On the G5, it's smooth as silk. Pretty darn amazing.
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
carletonmusic said:
2.0 Ghz G5 (single);
512MB RAM (4GB capacity - same as the current SP 1.8)
80GB HD;
16x DL SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra

2.3 Ghz G5 (dual);
512MB RAM
160GB HD;
16x DL SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra

2.5 Ghz G5 (dual);
512MB RAM
160GB HD;
16x DL SuperDrive
ATI 9600XT

2.8 Ghz G5 (dual);
512MB RAM
250GB HD;
16x DL SuperDrive
ATI 9600XT

From the sources in tune with the manufacturing of the G5 chips, IBM ran into major headaches getting faster speeds. As much as I hate to say it, don't expect any 3.0 Ghz machines just yet.

Yeah, that looks like the most realistic specs I've seen. Where EXACTLY did you get these? I'd be careful that Stevie doesn't come knocking on your door with a troupe of lawyers and a hefty financial request...
 

Rocksaurus

macrumors 6502a
Sep 14, 2003
652
0
California
Please tell me those specs are wrong... I have no problem with the clock speeds... but the Geforce 5200? Ew, STILL? Apple makes some *interesting* decisions in their hardware choices, but I really don't (want) to think they'll be so stupid as to continue to use this god awful video card in their PRO lineup. :eek:
 

destroyboredom

macrumors 6502
Dec 16, 2002
380
98
Washington, DC.
I'm with the rest that say no one really knows for sure. I know back in Dec. I was debating whether to hold out for 4 weeks for MWSF and just decided f-it the one day and ordered my Dual PM 2.0. Like the others have said the speed is amazing. I was coming from an 800mhz G3 iBook and 1.7GHZ P4 (400fsb) desktop. The ability to do true multi-tasking without a slow down or hicup is truly incredible.

I would say with nothing new in the rumor mill on on an update just order one up and enjoy it.
 

jared_kipe

macrumors 68030
Dec 8, 2003
2,967
1
Seattle
From what I hear, we may be seeing even bigger overhauls than it seems people around here are thinking. But I'm not naming my source, (Hector).
 

adamjay

macrumors 6502a
Feb 3, 2004
646
0
Indianapolis
my estimates are similar to carletonmusic's but with a bit more variation between the models. the models ARE in $500 increments ya know.

differences are in bold

2.0 Ghz G5 (single);
256MB RAM (4GB capacity - same as the current SP 1.8)
80GB HD;
8x DL SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra

2.0 Ghz G5 (dual);
512MB RAM
160GB HD;
16x DL SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra

2.5 Ghz G5 (dual);
512MB RAM
160GB HD;
16x DL SuperDrive
ATI 9600XT

2.8 Ghz G5 (dual);
512MB RAM
250GB HD; or 160GB in conjunction with $100 price cut on the top model
16x DL SuperDrive
ATI 9800XT

no matter what happens... i look forward to a 2.5ghz dualie refurb for $1999, 2 months after the new models start shipping. mmmm, that'd be tasty :)
 

advocate

macrumors regular
Jan 16, 2004
131
0
I'm hoping for a PowerMac lineup that will make me buy one.

Right now I'm in an interesting position. I have a perfectly good and well maintained Windows XP desktop. It's plenty fast, I can get all my work done with it, but somehow I just prefer working on my 15" PowerBook G4 1.25 GHz. Unfortunately, the PowerBook is always mobile with me, meaning I can't switch to it then depend on it not to have an accident and leave me without the use of my main machine, and it's a bit too slow for me to use for all of my work. There's nothing wrong with my current setup, but I want to switch my primary machine because I'm just more productive working in Mac OS. Unfortunately, there's nothing available that I can justify buying at the moment.

I wanted to like the Mac mini, I really really did. I even ordered one. Sadly, when I had the chance to play with a 1.42 GHz 512 MB demo unit before my order for the same came in (three weeks past the initial four week estimate) I was unimpressed by the complete lack of difference compared to my PowerBook. I realise it should only be about 15% faster at most, but side-by-side the two machines felt exactly the same. I cancelled my order, half because I was getting sick of being brushed off whenever I called to check on my incredibly late order with no updated ETAs, and half because of the lackluster performance compared to what I already have and consider to be too slow.

So, now, I'm looking at the other product lines. The eMac and iMac won't do; I have a good display already, I need to be able to use a real Windows XP desktop from time to time so I can't get rid of it, I have no desk space for another display, and I bought a nice KVM switch just so I don't have to play musical chairs. Okay, so I'm down to the PowerMacs.

The PowerMacs. My desktop has an Athlon XP 2500+ CPU, which runs at 1.87 GHz. Ballpark, then, if I get a 1.8 GHz PowerMac G5 then I'll reproduce what I already have, except with a junk graphics card and cripped expansion, for $2000. Hmm. I don't have $2000 to spend on a machine that's as fast as a machine that I'm already outgrowing. I can't justify it.

If I get a dual 1.8 GHz machine, then I'll get a machine that's about 50% faster than my current machine for $2700. Right, I can justify $2000 for a complete system replacement that gives me that much of a performance increase, but not $2700. And I would still get a junk graphics card and cripped expansion. I'd have to spend another $750 to get a graphics card that's as good as what I have in my Windows desktop. $3500 is out of the question for a 50% increase in performance!

If I get a dual 2.0 GHz machine, then I'll get a machine that's about 70% faster than my current machine for $3300. Blink blink. That's getting into the major bucks category. At least the expansion wouldn't be crippled, but it's $750 on top of that to replace the graphics card leaving the total at $4050. I could buy a perfectly good car for that price!

And forget the dual 2.5 GHz. I mean, it's not like I don't have enough money to buy one squirreled away in savings, but I just can't justify dropping that kind of money on a computer.

So, what does that mean for me? It means that I want to buy a high end iMac G5, except without a display, and without it ending up being a Mac mini. That kind of money I can justify spending on switching from a working computer to another one just for some intangible OS benefits, even if the performance isn't as good as the system being replaced. More than that, though, and I'll want some serious bang for the buck.

I guess this all means I'll just have to wait, yet again, for a product that I can buy and be happy buying.
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,026
PDX
relimw said:
Were does everybody get the idea that 'Tiger figures in there somewhere'?
Why the heck would there be a design requirement for Tiger?
I was deliberately vague, as I have no head for tech, and just end up looking foolish.

Now that I am replying, however, might as well go ahead. I just thought it possible that Tiger was written/compiled (whatever) to take maximum advantage of all that processing power. Don't know how exactly, and ain't going to hazard a guess. I probably look stupid enough already...

Just in case, though...reading some of the other posts, it might be possible that we might see dual-core chips in the next PM revision, even if speeds haven't made it to 3ghz. In fact, maybe more likely because of that fact.
Makes for great PR and a decent power increase over single-core chips at same speed. Even if Apple goes single core with the GX, both the 970MP and 970GX have substantial design improvements over current 970FX's in PM's today (AFAIK).

I probably wont be able to afford one anyway...
 

acedickson

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Dec 6, 2004
727
0
ATL
advocate said:
My desktop has an Athlon XP 2500+ CPU, which runs at 1.87 GHz. Ballpark, then, if I get a 1.8 GHz PowerMac G5 then I'll reproduce what I already have...
Not quite. The FSB on the Athlon is 333MHz, while the PM 1.8GHz(single) has a 600MHz FSB. That's more important than clockspeed and would make a difference.

You also stated that it'd cost you $750 to upgrade to a comparable graphics card as in your PC. What GPU do you have in that machine? It's only a $500 upgrade to the 6800 Ultra DDL, $250 under your calculations. You'd only be able to take advantage of that GPU ith some serious video editing/creation. Plus, you'd need a 30inch Cinema Display or similar HD display, $3000+ n top of the PM.

The PC is close to the PM single 1.8 but not quite.
 

acedickson

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Dec 6, 2004
727
0
ATL
16x DL SuperDrive

That's another reason I've been waiting, the DL writing SD. So that when the media comes down within the next year my SD is ready to go. No buying a DL external or internal and doing a swap. Granted it's not comlicated to do but I'm lazy.

The next thing would be how long before the DL SuperDrives hit the PowerBooks?
 

BornAgainMac

macrumors 603
Feb 4, 2004
6,349
3,211
Florida Resident
16x DL SuperDrive is the only real upgrade. This situation reminds me when I bought my iMac G3. Even after years, the specs really didn't pass my setup.

My Setup:
450 Mhz iMac DV - 20 GB, 64 MB of Joke Memory
Upgraded within a month to
1 GB of Ram ~300 bucks and 80 GB drive ~300
External Firewire CD burner ~200

~2 years later from Apple
600 Mhz iMac Flower Power, CD Burner only, 60 GB, 128 MB ~

My older iMac spanks the newer iMac.