Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

mamamia · Jan 28, 2003, 03:44 PM

Just thinking:

When I first heard about the speedbumps today, i thought that it was a good omen for ppc 970-based pmacs in the nearer future. i thought that if they 970's were really still more than six months off, apple would have held off upgrading the powermacs maybe another few months in order to bridge the gap a bit more effectively. however, the fact that they are still using the 7455, and we know that 7457s are coming down the pipe, makes me wonder if we won't see another g4 powermac upgrade sometime in the future before we hit the 970.

catch my drift? if there was only be going to be one more update before the 970, then whey wouldn't they have used the 7457s from the start, even if they had to delay the powermacs a month?

Eug · Jan 28, 2003, 03:47 PM

Being discussed here.

Superchicken · Jan 28, 2003, 03:48 PM

cause the Power Macs are already trounced in bench marks... they don't need to be more so.
Heck apple could upgrade these in like 5 months.

DrBoar · Jan 30, 2003, 05:00 AM

the fact that there is a new version of the G4 in the pipeline means nothing for the IBM970.

The new G4 is made for many more customers than Apple so Apple does not "have to" use it. If Apple had production amounts of 970 today and they had a contract to use a specified amount of new G4s they could still have the 970 in the servers and towers and the new G4 in the portable and iMacs.

A faster/cooler G4 with true DDR support is not a bad thing that would stop or delay the introduction of the 970.

When the 970 is out ( and it does not consume to mcuh power) Apple could in principle replace CPUs with 970 in one big swoop from the low end iBook to the high end server. However having new motherboards and all the rest for 6 diffrent lines of computer at the same time would be a enormous task.

A more realistic way would be to introduce the 970 stepwise when the line isup for revison anyhow. My guess is that they start in the towers and servers then the iMac and eMac can follow (heat issues solved)

Later when the 970 is smaller and cooler it can migrate into the portable. Depending on how long time that takes as well as the arrival time of the (hot) 970 and the new G4 every combination is possible. From having new G4s arriving in the next servers and towers and then migrating downwards over time to the new G4 being used not at all or only in the low end and portable.

The future is clearly 970 and not the G4s. But if the new G4s can be used with no or small motherboard changes they can be quite usefull stop gap measures.

So to conclude we will migrate from the current G3 and G4 line up to the 970. If and how a "G4plus" come into this all depends on timing and expected performance.

BenRoethig · Jan 30, 2003, 07:25 AM

The 970 is going to debut on the new towers with Apple's ohter machines to get them later. The 7457 is probably meant for the Powerbook, iMac, and eMac.

Sarc · Jan 30, 2003, 04:57 PM

I think it will shut everyone up, right from day one.
Just-like-Safari-did.
Remember all the trolling that there was before Safari came out ?
You could see threads almost every day complaining mostly about speed.
Suddenly, and overnight they where all silenced, and replaced with great speed ! cool feature this ! and comments like that.

Apple is listening, and they will answer. Time is all they need.

slinkyjinks · Jan 30, 2003, 05:01 PM

i may be ignorant but, why is it talked about like it's the holy grail or something? will the jump from the current crop of g4s be all that spectacular? will it sit down and roll over, too?

DaveNinja · Jan 30, 2003, 05:53 PM

It will be snappier

Eug · Jan 30, 2003, 06:24 PM

Originally posted by slinkyjinks:
i may be ignorant but, why is it talked about like it's the holy grail or something? will the jump from the current crop of g4s be all that spectacular? will it sit down and roll over, too?

The current crop of G4s are supposed to max out at 1 GHz. The fact that they've made it to 1.42 MHz is an accomplishment in itself. Actually, Motorola only sells up to 1 GHz chips it seems (except to Apple). The next versions of the G4s are supposed to go higher, but they don't yet exist, and in fact they have not yet even been announced. (Motorola supposedly historically announces their chips long before they actually ship.) And the next G4 is still a pretty limited design for desktop computers.

The PPC970 is radically new design, yet maintains PPC and Altivec compatibility, in a 64-bit chip. It will START at 1.4-1.8 GHz, with the expectation that 1.4 GHz of a PPC970 is much faster than a G4 7455 at 1.42 GHz. It should also scale for some time, and it's got the backing of IBM. And best of all, it has already been announced, and is set to start shipping by 2003H2, which means we may actually see it in an Xserve or possibly even the PowerMac within a year from now (or hopefully less).

So yes, it will be SNAPPIER! (TM)

voodoo · Jan 30, 2003, 06:43 PM

What is the deal about 970? Snappiness naturally.

Combined with the MOTHER of a motherboard in uses it is going to feel considerably more snappy than the current top of the line G4s.

Snappy, snappier, snappiest, PPC970.

voodoo · Jan 30, 2003, 06:46 PM

Oh I have faith in the 970, but I also had faith in the G4... Still, I think you are right on the money. The PPC970 will most certainly shut people up for a while.

It's just that time is the only thing Apple doesn't have.

douthat · Jan 30, 2003, 06:52 PM

The big deal is that the G4 is stagnating and is causing Apple to fall behind the rest of the computer industry in terms of speed. It is not able to keep up with the rest of the market and is giving everyone lots of headaches. IBM's PPC970 will be a 64bit (vs a 32bit G4) chip that will have much better SMP support and 57% more transistors per chip than the G4 and will be made on the .13micrometer process vs the .18micrometer process. In addition the 970 will have 50% more L1 cahce and twice the L2 cache (on a 900MHz DDR bus, too!). According to IBM the 970 @ 1.4 GHz to 1.8 GHz will be comparable to a 2.8GHz Pentium 4.

... and that's not using Photoshop

<opinion>I suspect the PPC970 to be released in early Q4 '03, and will be integrated into Apple machines by March '04</opinion>

FauxCaster · Jan 30, 2003, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by voodoo:
Oh I have faith in the 970, but I also had faith in the G4... Still, I think you are right on the money. The PPC970 will most certainly shut people up for a while.

It's just that time is the only thing Apple doesn't have.

If Apple is listening, then I think we should all do some more complaining. Now if only Quark would listen...I'd have nothing to complain about about but the open/save dialog boxes

Superchicken · Jan 30, 2003, 08:15 PM

I put my faith in God... in my opinion... God blows a PPC 970 and a Pentium 4 both out of the water. Heck God can even take on IBM's power 4

aaanorton · Jan 30, 2003, 08:36 PM

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
I put my faith in God... in my opinion... God blows a PPC 970 and a Pentium 4 both out of the water. Heck God can even take on IBM's power 4

I knew it was only a matter of time... Stuff it.

Superchicken · Jan 30, 2003, 08:52 PM

Basically it's set to scale about as well as the P4 has, but it's built better, it's got IBM behind it and... yeah some tech people have said it'll be about twice as fast as the same Mhz G4... so a 1.4Ghz PPC 970 might be comparable to an over 2Ghz G4, and sure as heck beat out most P4s on the market.
It won't send us flying above the P4s but it'll get us going. To at least comaprable speeds, and who cares if we're woopin the PC, our OS Is still less bloated and uhh oh you can also use a lot more than 4 gigs of RAm with these chips.

tr · Jan 30, 2003, 08:58 PM

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
I put my faith in God... in my opinion... God blows a PPC 970 and a Pentium 4 both out of the water. Heck God can even take on IBM's power 4

okay, guys, religion goes into the lounge (where there always seems to be 10 or 12 topics on the subject

)

tr

Superchicken · Jan 30, 2003, 08:59 PM

stuff it where... and what is it?

By the way I think God out profforms you too

Superchicken · Jan 30, 2003, 09:00 PM

Christianity is in every aspect of who I am.. besides the lounge bores me.

Anand · Jan 30, 2003, 09:33 PM

Back on topic... Yes I also feel that the 970 will give back the speed crown to the Mac. Right now, for as bad as the G4 is, there is only a 20-30% disadvantage on many apps as compared to a 3 Ghz P4. A 1.8 Ghz 970 is specing roughly 700% better than the G4. Just think how much faster your mac is going to get! And don't forget that altivec is there as well. With the bandwith, things that take advantage of altivec should really fly!

Agent69 · Jan 30, 2003, 09:59 PM

"Live in the now!!!"

Garth

aaanorton · Jan 30, 2003, 10:14 PM

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
By the way I think God out profforms you too

Is he a good speller?

itistoday · Jan 30, 2003, 10:19 PM

Originally posted by tr:
okay, guys, religion goes into the lounge (where there always seems to be 10 or 12 topics on the subject )

tr

amen to that.

dtriska · Jan 30, 2003, 11:00 PM

Originally posted by Anand:
Just think how much faster your mac is going to get!

Yeah, the 970 is probably going to keep me on a desktop Mac instead of jumping to a PowerBook. In fact, I think my dual 450 can holdout until spring of 2004. I'll try to pick up a second revision Power Mac G5 (or whatever it's called) before my education discount disappears at that time. That should be a nice jump in speed.

Oh, and nice sig, Agent69.

michaelb · Jan 31, 2003, 12:50 AM

Originally posted by dtriska:
Oh, and nice sig, Agent69.

Better not tell bible boy up there.

Why is it that the mods immediately pounce on interesting-but-perceptably-off-topic threads such as "how overpriced PowerMacs are in Australia" and move them to the lounge, but dumbass threads like this hang around?

JNG · Jan 31, 2003, 02:40 AM

Quick reminder...there's no confirmation that this chip will be used in any Apple products. It is merely a theory. (Just for clarity's sake.)

mfessenden · Jan 31, 2003, 09:09 AM

Apple and Motorola have squeezed about as much speed out of the G4 as they can right now. Add to that that the G4s in current machines aren't DDR aware, and the crappy motherboard...Apple's "Pro" machines don't look so pro anymore.

The dual machines were really just a ploy to muddy the fact that Apple's machines weren't as fast as P4 machines. Plus, Motorola has not announced a real succesor to the G4-class chips, and appears to be disinterested in developing one.

Add all this up, and it spells trouble for Apple. They need a new processor, and Motorola doesn't seem to be cutting it anymore. There have been no annoucements as of yet...but IBM's chip appears to be Apple's best bet.

Disgruntled Head of C-3PO · 10:40 AM

Mind you 95% of the people here that want the chip so bad don't actually NEED it.

mfessenden · Jan 31, 2003, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Mind you 95% of the people here that want the chip so bad actually NEED it.

True...but I run Lightwave on an aging Dual 500. I've been torn between getting myself a really great PC for serious work, but want to stay with Apple. The idea of a 970-based machine makes me pause...Apple really needs a pro-level workstation.

Granted, the 970...if used..would probably only be available in the XServe and maybe the "Ultimate" tower configuration. It'll probably not tickle down to the iMacs other machines for a bit.

Disgruntled Head of C-3PO · Jan 31, 2003, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by mfessenden:
True...but I run Lightwave on an aging Dual 500. I've been torn between getting myself a really great PC for serious work, but want to stay with Apple. The idea of a 970-based machine makes me pause...Apple really needs a pro-level workstation.

If you are doing 3D you really shouldn't be doing it on a Mac anyway.

Thain Esh Kelch · Jan 31, 2003, 11:04 AM

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Mind you 95% of the people here that want the chip so bad don't actually NEED it.

Try to play a good quality FPS on a mac, and you will see why we need this chip.

Thain Esh Kelch · Jan 31, 2003, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
If you are doing 3D you really shouldn't be doing it on a Mac anyway.

And thats exactly why we need this chip for christ sake...

aaanorton · Jan 31, 2003, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Mind you 95% of the people here that want the chip so bad don't actually NEED it.

Really? I thought it was 92%. Where did you get your numbers? Smart guy.

Disgruntled Head of C-3PO · Jan 31, 2003, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by Thain Esh Kelch:
And thats exactly why we need this chip for christ sake...

Games and 3D are not for Mac's NOT because of the stupid CPU but because of the software.

Mac game ports are always slower on a Mac even though the Mac's CPU is much higher.

Maya is slower for OSX because it has not been optimized for Mac's. Also there is more and better 3D software for PC's.

Mac's are great, but they are not for everything.

Superchicken · Jan 31, 2003, 01:51 PM

However 3D is a creative space which suggests apple... and they bought Shake... hence we do NEED the 970.
And one thing to think about. I think SJ doesn't wanna give Moto any more cash than needed, so I'd say the PPC 970 will show up pretty fast in the iMac.

cowerd · Jan 31, 2003, 01:57 PM

Maya is slower for OSX because it has not been optimized for Mac's. Also there is more and better 3D software for PC's.

Maya 4.5 is DP aware, and not too pokey. Lightwave runs well, as does Cinema 4D considering the G4's piss poor floating point abilities. FormZ 4 will be out by the end of February and will be DP aware and partially altivec'd. Most major 3D packages do run on the Mac, its just that the G4 sucks for FP performance.

Care to elaborate on the more and better?

:XI: · Jan 31, 2003, 02:19 PM

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
If you are doing 3D you really shouldn't be doing it on a Mac anyway.

shouldn't? why not? is it dangerous? will it make mfessenden look bad?
i can do whatever i want on any computer i can buy, so can mfessenden and so can you.
we might be able to do it faster (as far as cpu speeds go) but what if we can't afford two computers? what if we {gasp} really do like the mac?

ok, so 'shouldn't' is your opinion, maybe even well known 'fact' but don't tell people what they should and should not be using their computers for. ok?

shatten22 · Jan 31, 2003, 02:44 PM

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Mind you 95% of the people here that want the chip so bad don't actually NEED it.

That's a moot point. People want (and should) get their money's worth. Even though XP is inferior, it is hard to watch the PC world taking the express lane while we are stuck with backwater country roads. With higher tolls too.

Apple has a strong presense in the minds of consumers now. If they can deliver a one-two knockout with the 970, they could claim a hefty share of the market. Or at least hefty for Apple.

g

Eug · Jan 31, 2003, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Mind you 95% of the people here that want the chip so bad don't actually NEED it.

Hmmm... I guess we don't need to run iMovie either.

Even consumer apps NEED a MUCH faster CPU. Hell, even Keynote and iPhoto would benefit from a faster CPU and GPU, with a faster memory bus.

mfessenden · Jan 31, 2003, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
If you are doing 3D you really shouldn't be doing it on a Mac anyway.

Damn! I should close up shop and call it a day then....

Angus_D · Jan 31, 2003, 05:27 PM

As far as the software vs hardware 3D thing goes, it's largely the fault of crappy drivers, innit?

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jan 31, 2003, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by Eug:
Hmmm... I guess we don't need to run iMovie either.

You know how many people actually use iMovie? I bet less then 20% of home users. You think Apple is going to put 970 chips in the Low end iMac's out the door?

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jan 31, 2003, 08:21 PM

Originally posted by mfessenden:
Damn! I should close up shop and call it a day then....

Stoopid comment. That is like saying Mac's are great CAD computers.

right

Eug · Jan 31, 2003, 10:25 PM

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
You know how many people actually use iMovie? I bet less then 20% of home users. You think Apple is going to put 970 chips in the Low end iMac's out the door?

Of course they are. But not initially. If the 970 is in the PowerMac by 2004, I'd expect it in the iMac by 2005.

That is the point of progress after all.

tycheung · Jan 31, 2003, 10:38 PM

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
I put my faith in God... in my opinion... God blows a PPC 970 and a Pentium 4 both out of the water. Heck God can even take on IBM's power 4

Well, if God is dual core and they can mass produce Gods in volume on a 0.09 micron process that would be sweet indeed. They should bench it against an Athlon64 as well as a PPC 970...

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Feb 1, 2003, 02:09 AM

Originally posted by Eug:
Of course they are. But not initially. If the 970 is in the PowerMac by 2004, I'd expect it in the iMac by 2005.

That is the point of progress after all.

Ya but that is a LOOONG way off and everyone is going to get their hopes up way before then.

pdot · Feb 1, 2003, 02:11 AM

A bit off topic, but AMD is going to push back their consumer 64bit CPU until September (http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...~66302,00.html) so that gives the PPC970 a bit more time to get ready and for Apple to appear more competitive.

Sarc · Feb 1, 2003, 02:40 AM

Originally posted by tycheung:
Well, if God is dual core and they can mass produce Gods in volume on a 0.09 micron process that would be sweet indeed. They should bench it against an Athlon64 as well as a PPC 970...

jeje good one

oscar · 04:28 AM

I have merged three 970 threads together Enjoy =)

Axo1ot1 · Feb 1, 2003, 03:39 AM

Is there a version of Windows that will even run on a 64 bit processor? I thought MS was dragging its feet on hooking that up...