G5 in 2 flavors?

[dongmin]

Yeah, right on dude. Apple should put the G6s in the pro machines and save the G5s for the eMacs and iBooks. But wait, what about the iWalk??? Ok revise: G5s in the iWalks, G6s in the low end, and G7s in the Pros. Makes perfect sense, don't you think?

But you know what'd be really great? A system that sports dual architecture, i.e. both the PowerPC and x86 on a single motherboard!!! Different processors kick in for different tasks, e.g. if you're running photoshop filters, the PowerPC does the work, but if you're playing games or something, the AMD kicks in. How cool would that be?


(FYI, there are rumors, and then there are pure fantasies...)

 

[Catfish_Man]

Going to any machine...

...without a vector unit that can somehow be made to support Altivec would be really dumb for Apple. Even if it was faster at scalar code than Altivec is at vector (fat chance) it would be like saying to developers (especially Adobe): "We hate you! We're going to fsck up all your optimization work for the past 3-4 years. Have a nice day!". The only consolation would be that Apple's products would be the worst off. If a chip doesn't have Altivec support, Apple will not (and should not) use it.

(note: not Altivec, just Altivec support. I don't know whether you could write a runtime translater from Altivec to another similar vector unit, but it would be pretty cool)

 

[Mr. Anderson]

Shrek, its not personal - if you put a little thought into your threads there wouldn't be a problem. Like KC said, it might just be poor timing.

Again, I'm not out to sabotage your thread - what you had posted just didn't make any sense to me and I was responding. So don't let this stop you from starting a thread in the future.

And as for King Cobra - ask him about his Vacuum Of Infinite Density - or better yet, do a search for that. You're not the only one to get a little flak!

D

 

[Shrek]

Originally posted by dongmin
Yeah, right on dude. Apple should put the G6s in the pro machines and save the G5s for the eMacs and iBooks. But wait, what about the iWalk??? Ok revise: G5s in the iWalks, G6s in the low end, and G7s in the Pros. Makes perfect sense, don't you think?

Um, I was only saying that Apple might use G5s from two different companies. I never said a word about any G6's or G7's.

(FYI, there are rumors, and then there are pure fantasies...)

FYI, there are rumors, and then there is intelligent speculation.

 

[Shrek]

Well, a lot of guests have been looking at this thread; it has gotten an unusual number of hits in a relatively short amount of time. These guests seem to be really interested in this thread. Makes you wonder if a vast majority of them are Apple spies! HA! They'll probably all flee as soon as they read this post.

 

[snoopy]

Re: G5 in 2 flavors?

Originally posted by Shrek
I'm willing to speculate that the next generation of PowerPC processors will come in two flavors:

• 64-bit G5s without Altivec from IBM based on the Power4 design
  
  AND
  
• 32-bit G5s with Altivec from Motorola based on 90-nanometer technology
  [/LIST=A]

• 
  
  Nope. The 64-bit IBM PPC has an SIMD engine, which is surely Altivec. IBM has rights to Altivec.
  
  The second chip is just a 90-nanometer, faster G4. Why would they call it a G5? Steve will want to keep these two chips distinct. The 64 bit architecture and Power4 technology clearly gives the G5 a distinction.

 

[Shrek]

Re: Re: G5 in 2 flavors?

Originally posted by snoopy

Why would they call it a G5?

For the sake of marketing.

 

[Shrek]

Re: Re: G5 in 2 flavors?

Originally posted by snoopy

Nope. The 64-bit IBM PPC has an SIMD engine, which is surely Altivec. IBM has rights to Altivec.

Nope. Look here!

 

[Mr. Anderson]

Yes, but if you look at the macbidouille.com link i posted earlier, it says something exactly opposite.

We won't be able to know any more until October - unless Apple comes out with something in the mean time. But since they haven't even been able to ship the new 1.25s yet, I hardly think that will be the case.

D

 

[Shrek]

Somehow I have this gut feeling that by the time the 1.25s are ready to ship, Motorola's G5s will be heading our way, but not in professional systems. No, they will be unveiled in the iMac, iBook, and eMac. But the prices on the 1.25 PowerMacs will drop significantly as a result and will eventually be phased out as the IBM G5s arrive.

Dukestreet, the difference between you and I is that you are focusing entirely on rumor websites (in which many cannot be trusted) alone for your resources, while I am focusing on the rumors but adding in logic and common sense to them as well.

 

[vniow]

Originally posted by Shrek
Somehow I have this gut feeling that by the time the 1.25s are ready to ship, Motorola's G5s will be heading our way, but not in professional systems. No, they will be unveiled in the iMac, iBook, and eMac. But the prices on the 1.25 PowerMacs will drop significantly as a result and will eventually be phased out as the IBM G5s arrive.

Okay, for sake of argument lets say this actually happens. Moto releases what will be known as a G5 and Apple puts it in the iMacs, eMacs and iBooks. So since the 1.25s are going to be shipping soon, (way before January) then the iMac will have a G5 of say 1ghz and the Powermac will have a dual G4. Now what looks more powerful on paper, a G4 or a G5? Here's what I predict:
In January, Apple releases new hardware. The Powermac line gets converted to G5 while the 'i' line gets a speed bump. They will recieve a low-heat-and-power Moto G5 or maybe a further derivative of the IBM Power4 in the summer.

 

[Dr_Floyd]

Man i love reading these posts

 

[vniow]

You should read some of his 'letters to Apple' threads.
kdng Shrek.

 

[Shrek]

Originally posted by edvniow


Okay, for sake of argument lets say this actually happens. Moto releases what will be known as a G5 and Apple puts it in the iMacs, eMacs and iBooks. So since the 1.25s are going to be shipping soon, (way before January) then the iMac will have a G5 of say 1ghz and the Powermac will have a dual G4. Now what looks more powerful on paper, a G4 or a G5? Here's what I predict:
In January, Apple releases new hardware. The Powermac line gets converted to G5 while the 'i' line gets a speed bump. They will recieve a low-heat-and-power Moto G5 or maybe a further derivative of the IBM Power4 in the summer.

The reason why I insisted that they give the iMac, iBook, and eMac a G5 first is because I think it would be stupid if they gave the PowerMac, PowerBook, and XServe a G5 first and then had to replace it with a 64-bit G5 just a couple months later! Too much effort in too little time IMO. Besides, those PowerMac G4's are still DP. Hey, even in the PC world most servers and workstations don't get moved to next generation chips first. It is always the desktops and notebooks that are the first to get the new chips.

 

[Mr. Anderson]

Originally posted by Shrek

The reason why I insisted that they give the iMac, iBook, and eMac a G5 first is because I think it would be stupid if they gave the PowerMac, PowerBook, and XServe a G5 first and then had to replace it with a 64-bit G5 just a couple months later!

Ok, what planet are you pretending to be on this week? There's no way Apple would put a faster, more powerful chip in the consumer and low end machines first. It would make no sense what so ever. Regardless of the fact that the new PowerMacs are just rolling out.

The new chips will go in the bigger, more expensive machines first.

D

 

[Shrek]

Nope. I disagree entirely.

Consumer machines are more popular than professional machines, so it is critical that consumer machines get the new chips first.

 

[vniow]

Originally posted by Shrek
Nope. I disagree entirely.

Consumer machines are more popular than professional machines, so it is critical that consumer machines get the new chips first.

Popular, yes, but image and marketing are also present. How do you think Apple would look if they put more powerful chios in their 'i' machines before the Pro ones? Which need it more?

 

[Shrek]

Again I say, PowerMacs and XServes are already DP, so would they would still initially have more power than the "i" Series machines. As for the PowerBook, those should get DP upgrades to turn them into mobile workstations.

 

[vniow]

Originally posted by Shrek
Again I say, PowerMacs and XServes are already DP, so would they would still initially have more power than the "i" Series machines. As for the PowerBook, those should get DP upgrades to turn them into mobile workstations.

Let's play around with this scenereo a little biit shall we? The G4 gets bumbed up to say dual 1.8 Ghz, just to be optimistic. Now the pro line (all duals) tops out at that while the 'i' line gets a 1.6 Ghz G5. Lets look and see how this appears on paper:

Pro line: Dual 1.8 Ghz G4
Consumer line: 1.6 ghz G5

The average consumer will wonder why the pro line isn't a dual-G5 and why they should spend the extra money for an extra, outdated processor.
Yes, a Dual 1.8 G4 might be more powerful than a single 1.6 ghz G5, but if you just look at the specs, it appears that you're spending an extra amout of money for an inferior processor.

 

[JamesDP]

 

[vniow]

Shrek's not a troll, he just doesn't always think when he makes his threads. He's a lot better at it than when he started that's for sure and his ideas have sparked some helpful debate. He's not a troll.

 

[Mr. Anderson]

I have to ask this. Shrek - what are you going to be when you grow up? You're how old, 22? Have you graduated college? What's your background?

You're making assumptions here that have not been thought through fully, more emotional than practical or realistic. Like edvniow said - why put a more powerful chip in an i-machine? Consumers are a big part of Apple, but there are also quite a few pros out there. And you're also missing something - look at some of the DV software they've been buying up - this stuff needs 'super' power, multiprocessors and tons of memory. Apple will eventually get around to putting new chips in their i-machines but it won't be until later.

If what you're saying was valid, why haven't they upgraded the iBooks with G4s? Get to use the alti-vec code in the software and run faster? It won't happen any time soon and just realize that you might be trying to push your point too hard.

Sit back a wait and see what happens.

D

 

[Gaz]

Originally posted by dukestreet
I have to ask this. Shrek - what are you going to be when you grow up? You're how old, 22? Have you graduated college? What's your background?

Hey Duke, it seems you're wondering the same things as me. I did ask Shrek before as I'm just interested as he's of a similar age to me so I wanted to understand where his thoughts come from. I do love the enternal optismism though, it's a refreshing change to all the doom and gloom about.

I think the basic idea is sound enough and that it attempts to mimic the current situation of G4s and G3s. However from a marketting stand point you don't want to be calling to completely different chips the same thing. People get easily confussed and these forums clearly display this. The PowerMacs are a flagship for a reason. I don't know any manufacturer who puts their highest performing parts in their midrange machines (even for a month or two). I understand Shrek's logic and in essence the idea is ok but in practise it would never work.

Here's another though, the ibook and PowerBook (maybe imac and emac) will get speed bumps in the near future before the OS 9 restrictions are imposed, thus if this switch is hardware imposed in gives Apple a clear Window to start with introducing new PowerMacs and then filter in the other products in good time.

 

[iGav]

Originally posted by JamesDP

That raised a smile JamesDP...... (I too though do not think the Shrek is a troll.....)

Anyway's back to topic at hand....... G5's will be in the Pro machines first, and then filter down to the consumer models later.......

it'd more likely look like this.....

Pro line: Dual 1.8 Ghz G5
Consumer line: 1.6 ghz G4


Fact is, Apple ain't gonna put the most powerful processors in a bl@*dy eMac...... simple as that.......

 

[JamesDP]

Maybe if he actually had a Mac, he might have some credibility. As I've posted before, the whole "I'll switch as soon as all of my demands are met" thing is way played out.

I understand it's a rumor site and I enjoy the speculation as much as the next guy (this site has quickly become my number 2 hangout), but puh-leez. I sold my PC at a loss (hard to imagine since they depreciate so fast) just so I could afford to buy a Mac. And as I sit here giddily waiting for it to show up (since it was shipped a couple of days ago) I can't help but think that all of the time spent on poorly thought out suggestion letters and fantasies that have no basis in reality could have been better spent ... on a Mac.