Evangelion said:
I do know a bit
. Yes, fast FSB is a good thing. I would much rather have a fast FSB than a slow FSB. But FSB alone does not make CPU fast or slow. Like I said, why does G4 compete so well against G5, even though G5 has over three times as much FSB-bandwidth as G4 does?
uses a different technology, altivec
"the Velocity Engine, embodied in the G4 processors, expands the current PowerPC architecture through addition of a 128-bit vector execution unit that operates concurrently with existing integer and floating-point units. This provides for highly parallel operations, allowing for simultaneous execution of up to 16 operations in a single clock cycle. This new approach expands the processor's capabilities to concurrently address high-bandwidth data processing (such as streaming video) and the algorithmic intensive computations which today are handled off-chip by other devices, such as graphics, audio, and modem functions.The AltiVec instruction set allows operation on multiple bits within the 128-bit wide registers. This combination of new instructions, operation in parallel on multiple bits, and wider registers, provide speed enhancements of up to 30x on operations that are common in media processing."
if it did not have it the g4 would be kerput against the g5
If it's not an significant update, why is there a several pages long thread about it?
if we right a thread about a powermac 2.6 would that mean its a big update?
the real answer is we are mac enthusiasts
The "1GHz G5" was merely an example I used to get the point across as to what Apple would have to do in order to put G5 in a PB. No need to take it literally.
the reason i took it literally is beacause you made an argument for it
of course a 1.67 g5 is going to beat a 1ghz g5
Lots and lots of people talk about the need of having faster FSB. Yet the G4 does relatively well even with it's slower FSB.
they do that for a reason
"the PowerPC G5 features an industry-leading 1GHz frontside bus for each processor, offering a staggering 16GBps throughput on dual 2GHz PowerPC G5 systems. Thats a huge leap over todays Power Mac G4, with a bus speed of 167MHz. That means you wont have a bottleneck getting information to the chip for processing."
the faster you get that info in and outta that chip the better
Huh? Are you talking about G4 being slightly faster than G5 or G5 being slightly faster than G4? regardless, the difference between the two is not that great.
yeah sorry i ment the g5 is slightly faster than the g4, but its not great,
G5 would win some benchmarks while G4 would win others. While G5 has architectural improvements, it also has some drawbacks. It has longer pipeline than G4 does, and it has higher memory-latency. Velocity-engine is better on the G4 as (IIRC) is the integer-units.
if its over all we are talking abou the g4 doesnt really stand a chance, the 64bit g5 wipes the floor with it,
point was that if G5 was put in to laptop today, they would have to underclock it so much that it would be slower than G4 would be
i totally agree with you. but i never said anything about puting a g5 in a powerbook untill they can get a 1.8 or 2ghz in there, after all whats the point? so your right yeah but it was never me arguing that point
