I remeber the 9600/350 Mhz was the fastest consumer computer ever made. And that was three/four years ago! Apple really stalled after that though. About the same time that Jobs came back hmmm... Anyway, I'm sure it hadn't anything to do with his return. But I can't help keep wondering what the heck Motorola were doing back then.
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.
Quicksilver Benchmarks, etc.
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nostalgia....
I remember a long while ago, this company was the first to break the barrier for speed by a few-fold. The fastest chips around were 200Mhz G3s. They made special systems with 2 150Mhz G3s and one had 4 200Mhz G3s. They advertised it as a 800Mhz G3. But since the G3 can't multi-process as we all know, each chip does 1/2 the chip before it. 375Mhz effective was still almost double what was available. I even remember, it was exactly 5 years ago. My freind said that it was a shame no computers were 300Mhz yet, I showed him the ad, he was blown away. If only Apple had a 2.5x lead over PCs we'd all be living like kings. I still yearn for the day where I wouldn't need to prove my Mac's power until it's 2 years old. If Apple was as powerful now as they were a while ago, the mac would be a 128-bit/256-bit Altivec 2Ghz G5, and we'd all own one for $8,000, but be glad because it would burn PCs for about 18 months, then we'd still have an edge for 24 months and we'd upgrade our ram so we could keep ot for 6 months after that. Then when we got slower than our PC counterparts, we'd buy a 6Ghz model. If Apple pushes out a G5 at OVER 1Ghz we'll have an unreasonable edge. My wish is for Apple to make a pro-laptop that is faster than the top of the line PC. When that day comes, it will be sweeeeeeeeet.
_______________
(And it will come damn it!)
I remember a long while ago, this company was the first to break the barrier for speed by a few-fold. The fastest chips around were 200Mhz G3s. They made special systems with 2 150Mhz G3s and one had 4 200Mhz G3s. They advertised it as a 800Mhz G3. But since the G3 can't multi-process as we all know, each chip does 1/2 the chip before it. 375Mhz effective was still almost double what was available. I even remember, it was exactly 5 years ago. My freind said that it was a shame no computers were 300Mhz yet, I showed him the ad, he was blown away. If only Apple had a 2.5x lead over PCs we'd all be living like kings. I still yearn for the day where I wouldn't need to prove my Mac's power until it's 2 years old. If Apple was as powerful now as they were a while ago, the mac would be a 128-bit/256-bit Altivec 2Ghz G5, and we'd all own one for $8,000, but be glad because it would burn PCs for about 18 months, then we'd still have an edge for 24 months and we'd upgrade our ram so we could keep ot for 6 months after that. Then when we got slower than our PC counterparts, we'd buy a 6Ghz model. If Apple pushes out a G5 at OVER 1Ghz we'll have an unreasonable edge. My wish is for Apple to make a pro-laptop that is faster than the top of the line PC. When that day comes, it will be sweeeeeeeeet.
_______________
(And it will come damn it!)
Note: If Apple pushes out a +1Ghz G5 in JANUARY. Impossible? Maybe, but since Apple has taken control of their CPUs themselves again
Also that 4 Processor 200Mhz G3 was $12,999.
Also that company went bankrupt about 4 months later.
Also that 4 Processor 200Mhz G3 was $12,999.
Also that company went bankrupt about 4 months later.
Yes MasterOSX, a Mac will one day crush a PC with its bare finger.
Until then lets just allow Windows to make sure PCs are completely inferior.
Unfortunately i was reading an article in Macuser magazine which said a testing of the G5 by motorola was taking place sometime next month, which normally means the chip will be launched a year later than that.
I think Apple needs to release the G5 early to mid 2002, Apple needs to catch up to the PC, from what we have heard even a G5 with a low clock speed would kick ass.
Macs are still paying the price for the "stuck at 500Mhz" blunder motorola created.
Until then lets just allow Windows to make sure PCs are completely inferior.
Unfortunately i was reading an article in Macuser magazine which said a testing of the G5 by motorola was taking place sometime next month, which normally means the chip will be launched a year later than that.
I think Apple needs to release the G5 early to mid 2002, Apple needs to catch up to the PC, from what we have heard even a G5 with a low clock speed would kick ass.
Macs are still paying the price for the "stuck at 500Mhz" blunder motorola created.
Damn Motorola.
Remember all those "future OS" projects Apple had? They finally stopped them in '96 (I think) and redefined them as the OSX project (not the actual name). In 5 years they had a good portion of the MacOS matched or improved. I believe by around MacOS X 10.3 none of us will eve miss OS9 anymore.
I'm confident thee same will apply to Apple taking control over their CPUs again. Around the time of the Dual500 (bad excuse for the 700Mhz G4 they should've had) Apple moved some of the (final?) development of their CPUs on-campus. Apple might (should) buy off the CPU-development assets off Motorola. It's not worth the 500M Motorola wants, I think Apple could get it for 200. Correct me if i'm wrong here, but mostly G4s are made by motorola, and G3s are made by IBM right? If Apple let IBM, the G3 would be up to +1Ghz by now. The G4 is holding the G3 back. If Apple wanted to they could overclock the iMacs A WHOLE FREAKIN' LOT, I mean the G3s could work in laptops w/o any modification (for heat anyway). The imac has no fan, the tricky issue will be when Apple wants to put it BACK in and let the G3s run up as fast as they can. My theory is that Apple will unleash the G3 up 200Mhz when they get LCDs in them. No one will care about the fans if they have 1100Mhz G3s and 14" LCDs.
The G5 will involve mostly Apple and IBM (I think) and thus should prove to be one killer processor. FYI The G5 is stable up to about 1Ghz now, and they have models that run at 1.8Ghz. Unfortunatly they crash and require enough power for 4 G4s (total systems) but hey, they've got lots of time.
Remember all those "future OS" projects Apple had? They finally stopped them in '96 (I think) and redefined them as the OSX project (not the actual name). In 5 years they had a good portion of the MacOS matched or improved. I believe by around MacOS X 10.3 none of us will eve miss OS9 anymore.
I'm confident thee same will apply to Apple taking control over their CPUs again. Around the time of the Dual500 (bad excuse for the 700Mhz G4 they should've had) Apple moved some of the (final?) development of their CPUs on-campus. Apple might (should) buy off the CPU-development assets off Motorola. It's not worth the 500M Motorola wants, I think Apple could get it for 200. Correct me if i'm wrong here, but mostly G4s are made by motorola, and G3s are made by IBM right? If Apple let IBM, the G3 would be up to +1Ghz by now. The G4 is holding the G3 back. If Apple wanted to they could overclock the iMacs A WHOLE FREAKIN' LOT, I mean the G3s could work in laptops w/o any modification (for heat anyway). The imac has no fan, the tricky issue will be when Apple wants to put it BACK in and let the G3s run up as fast as they can. My theory is that Apple will unleash the G3 up 200Mhz when they get LCDs in them. No one will care about the fans if they have 1100Mhz G3s and 14" LCDs.
The G5 will involve mostly Apple and IBM (I think) and thus should prove to be one killer processor. FYI The G5 is stable up to about 1Ghz now, and they have models that run at 1.8Ghz. Unfortunatly they crash and require enough power for 4 G4s (total systems) but hey, they've got lots of time.
How fast is the fpu in the G4 anyways? The fpu in the 604e-processors were almost twise as fast as those in the G3. But the cpu was much slower. That's why an upgraded grey machine could be faster than an actual G3. But how fast is the fpu in the G4 compared to 604e? Have anyone seen any tests, is there any difference at all? Curious!
Intel will screw is self with it's gay Xeon processor. It is super like G4. I'm supprised intel is going that way.