Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Rumored Timeline: G4, 970 and Beyond

all that meaty goodness

Come on apple announce a quad set up, I can do with some serious power for my 3d work but I refuse to buy a pc. I dont want an xserve because I would like to see my 3d files up on screen and would love to move the camera angels around picking up extra detail..Also with the arrival of new macs let hope they bring out softimage for mac....mmmmmm quad processors!

I'm currently running a 400 mhz G4 tower with 1.25 gigs of ram and an ati 8500 and its getting a little too s.l.o.w..the speed increase will be a welcome.
 
Re: What if..

Originally posted by ryanweb
Remember how everybody expected Chimera to become the new Apple browser, and then, boom, we've got Safari based on KDE?
Why everybody is so sure that Apple will even use PPC 970?
Why not Opteron from AMD? I've read an interview with head of AMD and he sounded very confident about this new chip, like he already have a very big customer to sell it to.
Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Why the hell would Apple switch to Opteron with the 970 available in the near future? It would only require either a) writing a PowerPC emulator or b) forcing ISVs to port their software, again to a new processor platform, and right after most of them finally released software for MacOS X. There is ZERO reason for Apple to switch to AMD, x86 or any other non-PowerPC processor architecture at this time, if only due to the massive PR nightmare that it would cause.

As for AMD's big customer, I believe that honor goes to IBM. And before you bring up mentions of Apple & AMD talking about anything, realize that they are both in the HyperTransport consortium, and thus likely talk about it often.
 
Hmm.

I don't see the current PowerPC 970 in the PowerBook. But then I could be surprised. It's pretty warm from what I've heard. I've seen a presentation about it being in a Blade server.

I asked if it'd run Mac OS X and they kinda chuckled but wouldn't say yes or no, which I found intriguing a tiny bit.

personally, I'm really hoping on the July time frame. Though I don't know if I could swing what I'd want if it came out (high end system, lotsa ram and big LCD.

Though I'd mortgage a few things to do it. The PowerPC 970 is an amazing chip. just hope Apple doesn't raise prices too much to use it, hope they come in about where the PowerMacs are now.
 
MacBidoodoo is wrong

You won't be seeing 64 proc systems from Apple. That's going in the opposite direction of the industry.

IBM, Sun and Intel are are looking to move to more efficient systems using Multithreaded Cores. A Processor like the PPC 970 requires a FSB for EACH processor. That's one hell of a complex board if you're talking 64 Procs. Not going to happen.

What you may see is eventual Dual and even Quad cores as we move to 90nm and 65nm Fab technology. Then you will see SMT to each core giving you a Logical 64 Processor system with as little as 8 Physical Procs. Now THAT's an Motherboard you can build and not go broke.
 
Re: all that meaty goodness

Originally posted by silvergunuk
...I dont want an xserve because I would like to see my 3d files up on screen...
Click to expand...

I assume you mean you want a monitor attached to the machine, which you can do with an XServe, please see the tech specs at http://www.apple.com/xserve/design.html

Nevertheless, an XServe is probably not what you need as a workstation (this is why they are in the 1U form factor - they are meant as servers 🙂 )
 
I just gotta say...

Since Apple seems to be trying to push away their continuing problems with the "Megahertz Myth" by upping the ante to 64-bits, and AMD seems to have the same idea, there will be a great deal of "buyer education" on the part of Intel showing that 64-bitness is not the be-all-end-all of performance. They'll produce benchmarks that show you get little or no benefit from the new chips. BUT, I believe these benchmarks (as they usually are) will be blurry because they'll do something like run the 32-bit version of Photoshop on a 970 (or Opteron) vs their latest P4 and say "Look how slow your precious 64-bits are!". Only when the 64-bit native software starts coming in will the difference be noted.

TO THAT END, here's what I think we'll see at WWDC.

Announcement and Demo of the PPC970
Announcement and Demo of Panter with 64-bit support
Announcement and Demo of Metrowerks and other dev packages with 64-bit support

and then the "Oh, and one more thing..." will be

Announcement of immediate availability of "YIKES-style" systems that sport the basic motherboard of the coming 970 powermacs (inside the el capitan case) as a high end (and probably expensive) development/test station so developers can start bringing their software to 970 compatibility before the systems hit the street en masse.

I mean... Intel swears up and down that Itanium 1 was a development platform... and scooted the chip out in expensive, limited quantities to lots of their major software developers. Now, I'm sure that Adobe has had their paws on the 970 for quite a while, but smaller developers need to get a hold of these things quickly now, and it seems to me that WWDC is the place to offer proto-development models of the systems.

Ya think?

Dharvabinky
 
I was believing most of this information just fine until I came across this:
The Xstation is a highly professional super computer with up to 64 processors (mini. 4). It will be equiped with the latest GPU and support a high quantity of memory. Price between 10000 and 75000$ (maybe more).The Xstation will aim people using some big apps as Maya and other CAD and high resolution video softwares.
Click to expand...
I work for Sun Microsystems as an SSE and I've worked first-hand on the Enterprise 10000, which features 64 processors, as well as SunFire 12000 and 15000 which feature up to 100+ processors.

Let me tell you, you do not want to be working in the same room as one of these beasts, let alone on a Cinema Display attached to a video card inside one of these things. The fan noise and environmental issues would be considered a hazardous working environment if you spent 8 hours a day in the same room as one.

I seriously cannot see Apple trying to compete in the supercomputing market. If they were to have a supercomputer offering, it would not have a graphics card option. It would be used for rendering Maya projects or After Effects or compositing or some other highly processor intensive task that could be offloaded from a PowerMac workstation to it.

Also, Sun spends $2 billion a year on R&D developing these systems. Apple would not spend that kind of money and try to enter an already crowded market to compete with the likes of Sun, Fujitsu, HP, and IBM.

We might see 2U 4-way or (highly unlikely, just too dense) 8-way boxes.
 
Re: MacWhispers...

Originally posted by leo
But this is exactly what MacWhispers claims: 970 PBs soon and new motherboards. This is really getting interesting. Let's see who's gonna win this game, MacBidouille or MacWhispers... 😀
Click to expand...

You know it is possible for them to both be wrong. It is not a binary outcome variable.
 
Originally posted by deadduck
No this is what database developers like me to sell our customers high bandwidth with raid sub-systems
Click to expand...

Wow, you sell your customers single processor Pentium 4 machines for their databases? That sounds very unimpressive.

Remember, unlike the 970, the P4 that you are referring is incapable of multiprocessing. That alone is a major advantage for the 970. The 970 will also have a superior FSB to the P4 (450 mhz double pumped vs. 200 mhz quad quad pumped). It should match up very well and beat the P4 based machines by a substantial margin in many tasks.
 
Re: Apple in the Enterprise

Originally posted by CybrCyfr
After redirecting our (my software company) technology goals tward the perception that Apple will soon tackle the high-end Enterprise markets, this is very good news! I was hoping not to sink the ship in hopes of "Apple Enterprise".
Click to expand...
I don't mean to offend, but if you have bet your entire company's enterprise server strategy on a product that doesn't even exist yet, you're probably going to be losing your job soon...

Seriously, Apple cannot compete with the likes of Sun, HP, IBM, and Fujitsu in the Enterprise server (larger than 4 procs) market, and the Xserves are not competing on price/performance with the Dells in the entry level server market.

The only thing Xserves are good for are some specialty niche markets like AfterEffects rendering and such.

Apple makes great workstations, and I love their PowerBooks, but they have a long way to go if they want to play in the Enterprise server market, and I think if they were smart they would stay out of it. Especially the low-end market... Dell is just killing everyone in that market and a cheap 2-way or 4-way Linux server is going to give you way more price/performance than a similarly configured Xserve.
 
"i didn't mention the emac or imac cause i assumed my grandma or the library comp lab don't need 64-bit computing power i'll clarify a bit more next time "

If the threadsharing feature is a reality, these computers could be part of the library search engine, or a render farm for other work.....



Apple has no choice but to have the 970 shipping by august. If they go any later than that, they miss the back to school purchases, which is a big market. There is no way Apple wont target this market. I would like to think they have learned a thing or two from their last fizzuckups.

Now they need to start a ad campaign targetted at all those entering freshmen. Something along the lines of (you will have enough stress with classes), (ready to use your campus t1 outta the box), or (everything a dorm room needs{theater, music, place to do work,etc}).

Now that is how to add market share, that and slightly more aggressive student discount.
 
I guess I can hold out for a 970 based FP iMac. I hope at a minimum they put in a GeforceGo FX.

For the most part I'm happy with the 1Ghz G4 performance and there still seems to be room for improvement there with OS X and Quartz optimization.

Things look pretty decent on the Apple front. It's still a work-in-progress but looking good.
 
Originally posted by BlainKBanquier
Mac Biduouille now has benchmarks for the 970...
Click to expand...
Oh please oh please oh please oh please oh please oh please let these numbers reflect actual reality!

I assume all those benchmarks use Altivec, and, if they're accurate, they really show the true power of the technology and how much it was hamstrung on the G4 by glacial bus speeds.

If MacBidouille is right, I'm going to have to borrow my new .sig from them:

"Mes amis fans de Mac, notre attente va être récompensée. Nous avons fini de défendre une cause difficile. Apple va devenir le roi du monde!"
 
Originally posted by BlainKBanquier
Mac Biduouille now has benchmarks for the 970...
Click to expand...

WOW. WOW. WOW. If these are real, we are in for a treat.

The photoshop actions test took a Dual 1.42 G4 72 seconds. A dual 1.8 970 took 24 seconds.... and a single 3.06 P4 took 58 seconds.

Again, _if_ these are accurate we are in for a return to the top of the heap. They also claim the dual processor performance, due to the motherboard, will go from a 50% speed increase on G4's to 90% on ther 970s.

It looks as though a lot of this is due to the new motherboards.
 
Originally posted by G4scott
HOLY SH*T!!!

This is cool...

Everybody say "F*CK Motorola!"

It looks like Apple has a very nice processor plan for the coming year, and if IBM keeps up the good work, we'll be kickin pee-cee ass, AND taking names... So many names, you'll need that 64-way xStation to process them all...

Man I feel good...

What a wonderful way to start the week

And these are just rumors...

Everybody say it again! "F*CK MOTOROLA!!!"

hehe 😎

oh, and deadduck, while those certainly are nice for games and all, they're just an over-hyped 800mhz bus. It's only really a 200mhz bus that's been quadrupled... Besides, the 970 can handle that wonderful 6.4gb/s throughput, just like those mobos. That, and the 970 will require a 450, or even 900mhz system bus...

I'm sure that the 970 will wipe the floor with everything the pee-cee world can offer...

oh, and everybody say "F*CK MOORE'S LAW!!!" (I just thought that was necessary 😀 )
Click to expand...


g4scott, dont blow your wad just yet. these are rumors.
 
Enter Apple for Enterprise

Apple has slowly, steadily been making their move on the Enterprise.

Here's what they've come up with so far:
  • OS X Server - This puppy has full enterprise management capabilities. It can do everything that a major enterprise can do in Unix... but easier. It can manage the heck out of Mac clients, and also does wonders with Windows and Unix clients. And it has unlimited users, which makes it a killer deal compared to Windows.
  • OS X Client - A wonderful network citizen, OS X is made for enterprise admins. Tools like Mac Manager give admins the ability to control anything they want... or nothing. OS X makes a great client of any server on any network OS. Also things like Safari, native XML, native PostScript, Rendezvous, and so many other features of OS X make it extremely capable for a huge variety of functions (look at how many Safari plug-ins there are, and it's not even released yet!).
  • Xserve and RAID - these are great for traditional mac markets like educational labs, video capture, Quicktime streaming, etc. But they also make great enterprise tools. You can run a mid-sized corporation off one of these no problem. And they cluster nicely. And they run all the big-time powerful Unix tools. AND they cost a fraction of the comparable Sun and SGI boxes.
  • eMac - This is a great enterprise desktop. A big screen, nice features, and a low price. It's the Mac that is un-flashy enough to get budget approval.
  • PowerBook/iBook - The PowerBook is hands-down the best laptop out there, and the iBook is a great package for the price. Corporations are going increasingly mobile, and these great tools for them.
  • Keynote - Finally Apple moves into Microsoft's sacrosanct domain. Of course we all hope this is just the beginning.
  • iCal, Addressbook, Mail.app - all of these are pretty primitive now, but they hint at great things to come. I expect these to all get many more features and tighter integration with the next integer release of each one.

So that's what they have so far, all of which points to a pretty good package for the enterprise. And what's supposed to be coming down the pipe?
  • Xstation or whatever - Sounds like this puppy will be big enough to run most enterprises (I understand that for a bank, a mere 64 processors is laughable). And the clustering capabilities of the Xserve can only get better. Rumor is that Apple is working on a lot in this direction.
  • PPC 970 or whatever - Apple is aware of and addressing the MHz gap and the perceived performance gap. They've also been making great strides to decrease the price gap.
  • iPad or whatever - Rumors of a tablet continue, and the enterprise is the most obvious place to deploy them.
  • Appleworks or whatever - many believe that Keynote was just the first blow in an attack on the dominance of MS Office. Apple is allegedly making Office compatibility a priority so that Mac users can be totally free of buggy MS crap.
Apple is truly showing a capability for dominance in the consumer market with the intense consumer capabilities of 10.2, iLife, iTunes Store, etc.. Meanwhile their move on the enterprise is going on quietly and rather unnoticed. Corporations are installing Xserves all over the place. Once the IT staff gets their hands on one of those... they go out and buy a PowerBook. Then they're totally sold, and it's just a matter of making the argument to their execs. As Apple provides more tools, that argument will get stronger and stronger.

I don't expect Apple to take over the world this year... but maybe this decade.
 
Re: Enter Apple for Enterprise

Originally posted by Toe
So that's what they have so far, all of which points to a pretty good package for the enterprise.
Click to expand...
Admit it... You work for Apple, don't you? 😉

Anyone that thinks a company looking for a high end transaction processing system, such as a bank or a telco with an Oracle server sitting in front of 20 or 30 terabytes of customer account and billing records is going to switch to a platform designed by Apple just because the CIO likes his powerbook, is seriously wack!

Apple is a non-player in the enterprise market.

Name one company that runs Oracle on an XServe.

I don't even think Oracle has been ported to OS X.
 
Re: Re: Enter Apple for Enterprise

Admit it... You work for Apple, don't you?
Maybe I should. I don't even work for an enterprise... just a small, all-Mac company.

Anyone that thinks a company looking for a high end transaction processing system, such as a bank or a telco with an Oracle server sitting in front of 20 or 30 terabytes of customer account and billing records is going to switch to a platform designed by Apple just because the CIO likes his powerbook, is seriously wack!
But once they realize that that ultra-cool PowerBook runs full, unadulterated BSD Unix, they are impressed. I've shown my TiBook to Unix geeks and seen the light spread over their faces like dawn on the beach. It's like all their dreams come true.

They might not switch OSes... until they need an upgrade or until they want to deploy a new system. One advantage of the Mac is the ZERO per-user licensing fee, which can result in MILLIONS in savings. That's not chump-change, even for the big boys. The incredible low price of the Xserve doesn't hurt either, nor does the incredible ease of management. They can deploy a rack-full of Xserves before they can get a single regular Unix box running stably.

Apple is a non-player in the enterprise market.
Pretty-much... for now. I don't think that is the future though. Plenty of companies have bought an Xserve to try it. i doubt they're disappointed. And it's not like they have to do major porting... it's just unix. It can run mySQL as well as a Sun box.

Name one company that runs Oracle on an XServe.
No. Well... I can't. But I think the Post Office does. And I've been to Xserve seminars where there are geeks from the big IT departments at enterprises, and they seem very impressed. The best i can tell you is that the American Chemical Society (a BIG association) is working on deploying Xserves. But I can guarantee that some larger businesses are as well.

I don't even think Oracle has been ported to OS X.
Ellison, the president of Oracle, sits on Apple's board and is buds with Steve. I don't know if 9i works in Aqua, but it certainly runs in command-line, which is all enterprise IT geeks expect anyway.
 
Re: Re: Re: Enter Apple for Enterprise

P.S. I don't think banks will use Xserves either (for now)... they use room-sized computers. But I do think that regular enterprise companies that just do normal business functions will consider Macs for both servers and clients. Why not, when the cost savings is so huge?

And also, the single-source cargument is a load of crap. If companies really believed that they can't rely on a single company, then why the heck do they rely on Microsoft fo all of their software? Apple is single-source hardware (which is extremely high-quality hardware, BTW), and allows for complete open-source on the software, which is the really important aspect.
 
I disagree with the people that say..."Apple has to shift every computer they build to the 970 right from the start or they won't be able to sell them anymore." The eMac and iMac have a much different customer base. They should stay with the G4 increasing clock speed until it proves economical to make these systems 970 based.

Not every PC out there are running 3.06Ghz PIV processors. The G4's still will out muscle consumer Celeron and Duron processors. A lot of the lower price point computers run these processors. I think we will see a single 1.25 and 1.33 Ghz G4 in the iMac and eMac before they move to a 970 based system. I would rather see an iMac for $999 (if that would ever happen) with a 1.25G4 then one for $1,999 with a 1.4Ghz 970. The G4 is still a great consumer processor and is very capable and fast for everyday tasks. Value needs to be addressed first when it comes to the e and i series.

For now anyways...where is that 1Ghz eMac combo drive for $999???? That is what I would like to see so I can afford to upgrade my old iMac 400...
 
enterprise server BS

I was reading an Ingram Micro distribution magazine and saw a full page add for windows server enterprise edition.

put that rumor to rest
 
Originally posted by Shadowfax
thinking about that, it seems odd to imagine that apple could take 6 months of people waiting to buy a new mac, but i suppose stranger things have happened... (3.5 month wait on 17 powerbooks?)
Click to expand...

What the heck we've waited years, whats 6 months?
Hey I would love it if it were to happen in June, but its not just about the processor for me or many others or we would have bailed long ago. life is good!
daniel
 
happiness

Personally I would be happy if they just improved the bus speeds in lower end models. 100mhz in a g4 machine really limits the processor. Maybe standerdizing a faster bus speed would help. My eMac is super cool but it could have been better.
 
Originally posted by Abercrombieboy
For now anyways...where is that 1Ghz eMac combo drive for $999???? That is what I would like to see so I can afford to upgrade my old iMac 400...
Click to expand...

It's here! Let us all rejoice now in the first Apple to break one GHz for less than 1000 bucks!!! HALLELUJAH!!!!!!

Uh, sorry... Guess i got a little carried away....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back