[Scotttheking]

This thread is for technical discussion of whatever is released.
Price complaints / discussion, general commenting (case design, etc) can go in the other threads.

[clarkgoble]

Here's the keybit (from the ARS "transcript")

[14:12] <iPalindrome> ONE MORE THING
[14:12] <iPalindrome> Shows the screenshot of the leak on the Apple web site
[14:12] <iPalindrome> Reaction to specs were
[14:12] <iPalindrome> 1. too good to be true
[14:12] <iPalindrome> 2. it's true
[14:12] <iPalindrome> 3. it's brilliant marketing on apple's part
[14:13] <iPalindrome> delivering today the world's fastest PC
[14:13] <iPalindrome> Chip
[14:13] <iPalindrome> System
[14:13] <iPalindrome> roduct
[14:14] <iPalindrome> O
[14:14] <iPalindrome> M
[14:14] <iPalindrome> F
[14:14] <iPalindrome> G
[14:14] <iPalindrome> NEW TOWARS!!!!1
[14:14] <iPalindrome> Partnership with IBM
[14:14] <iPalindrome> G5 is the name
[14:14] <iPalindrome> == Eat it motorola!
[14:14] <iPalindrome> It is a 64-bit processor
[14:14] <iPalindrome> World's 1st 64-bit desktop processor
[14:14] <iPalindrome> Runs 32-bit apps natively with no problem
[14:14] <iPalindrome> Runs at up to 2 GHz
[14:14] <iPalindrome> Fastest 64-bit processor ever
[14:15] <iPalindrome> 1 GHz front side bus
[14:15] <iPalindrome> Fastest fgront-side bus ever
[14:15] <iPalindrome> Built for full symmetric processing

[14:15] <iPalindrome> Designed for dual processors
[14:15] <iPalindrome> Entirely new architecture with industries highest bandwidth
[14:15] <iPalindrome> Massively parallel
[14:15] <iPalindrome> 12-unit core
[14:15] <iPalindrome> 215 in-flight instructions where the G4 is capable of 16
[14:16] <iPalindrome> optimized altivec with precision design
[14:16] <iPalindrome> 2 double prcision FUP
[14:16] <iPalindrome> 2 fully symmetric integer units
[14:16] <iPalindrome> 2 load-store units
[14:16] <iPalindrome> Massive branch-prediction logic
[14:16] <iPalindrome> I don't know what it does -- predicts branches
[14:16] <iPalindrome> It's a good thing

[14:16] <iPalindrome> New generation architecture
[14:16] <iPalindrome> IBM has done a phenomenal job
[14:16] <iPalindrome> WOrld's most advanced chip fabrication
[14:17] <iPalindrome> 130 nm process
[14:17] <iPalindrome> silicon on insulator
[14:17] <iPalindrome> 8 layer copper interconnects
[14:17] <iPalindrome> 38 million transistors
[14:17] <iPalindrome> 58 million that is
[14:17] <iPalindrome> 300 mm 12-inch wafers
[14:17] <iPalindrome> 130 nanometer that is
[14:17] <iPalindrome> Build it in a 3 billion state-of-the-art facility in Fishkill, NYH
[14:17] <iPalindrome> Built in the USA
[14:17] <iPalindrome> Close-up shots of the PPC 970 including pics from the thread in MAC
[14:18] <iPalindrome> Mac Ach that is
[14:18] <iPalindrome> All robots building them

[14:18] <iPalindrome> John Kelly III SVP of Technology Groups at IBM is onstage
[14:18] <iPalindrome> Dr. John E. Kelly, III:
[14:18] <iPalindrome> Great day for apple, developers and customers
[14:19] <iPalindrome> How did we catch up and pass the competition in one giant step?
[14:19] <iPalindrome> Went to IBM and took the core out of the Power4 and brought it down into the 64-bit desktop processor
[14:19] <iPalindrome> 2 GHz, 1 Ghz bus
[14:19] <iPalindrome> most advanced 130 nanometer tech
[14:19] <iPalindrome> gate length of under 50 nanometers
[14:19] <iPalindrome> 13 angstroms in the gate
[14:19] <iPalindrome> *Applause*
[14:19] <iPalindrome> == my hands hurt
[14:20] <iPalindrome> Only IBM in partnership with Apple can produce this kind of technology
[14:20] <iPalindrome> This is only the beginning
[14:20] <iPalindrome> IBM spends $5 billion annualy on R&D
[14:20] <iPalindrome> There are hundreds of IBM scientists working on the next generation of processors

[14:20] <iPalindrome> == IBM may be publishing a road map
[14:20] <iPalindrome> SJ:
[14:21] <iPalindrome> We've been wating a long time for this
[14:21] <iPalindrome> Been working with IBM for a couple of years on it
[14:21] <iPalindrome> SYSTEM:
[14:21] <iPalindrome> G5 system Controller
[14:21] <iPalindrome> WOrld's fastest ASIC
[14:21] <iPalindrome> ponit to point architecdture
[14:21] <iPalindrome> dedicated bahdnwidth to main memory for each subsyswtem
[14:21] <iPalindrome> Apple designed
[14:21] <iPalindrome> State of the art IBM fabrication
[14:21] <iPalindrome> == sj islayin out the system architecture on the screen
[14:22] <iPalindrome> 8 GBPS OF BANDWIDTH
[14:22] <iPalindrome> When you add to processes
[14:22] <iPalindrome> Indepdendent busses
[14:22] <iPalindrome> 16 gbps of bandwidth
[14:22] <iPalindrome> p2p interfaces
[14:22] <iPalindrome> No slowdown from 2nd processor
[14:22] <iPalindrome> 400 MHz 128-bit DDR Memory
[14:22] <iPalindrome> 6.4 Gbps of bandwidth
[14:22] <iPalindrome> == slowdown is now the RAm
[14:22] <iPalindrome> AGP 8x pro grpahics
[14:22] <iPalindrome> 2 GBps of bandwidth
[14:22] <iPalindrome> Latest chips from NVIDIA and ATI
[14:23] <iPalindrome> Power for PRO cards
[14:23] <iPalindrome> I/O:
[14:23] <iPalindrome> 133 MHz PCI-X
[14:23] <iPalindrome> 2 GB ps of bandwidth
[14:23] <iPalindrome> HyperTransport interconnect
[14:23] <iPalindrome> 1 133 MHz 64-bit slot
[14:23] <iPalindrome> 2 100 MHz 64-bit slots
[14:23] <iPalindrome> Storage:

[clarkgoble]

Here are the benchmarks

[14:32] <iPalindrome> SPECmarks coming up
[14:32] <iPalindrome> Using gcc 3.3
[14:33] <iPalindrome> VeriTest idnepdnent test lab
[14:33] <iPalindrome> Single processor tests:

[14:33] <iPalindrome> Single P4, Single Xeon, Single G5
[14:33] <iPalindrome> SPEC int2000 scores (respecdtively)
[14:33] <iPalindrome> 880 - P4, 836 - Xeon, 800 - G5
[14:34] <iPalindrome> SpecFP2000 693, 646, 890 on the FPU
[14:34] <iPalindrome> 10% slower in integer
[14:34] <iPalindrome> 21% faster on FPU
[14:34] <iPalindrome> This is on single-processor systems
[14:34] <iPalindrome> Dual processor comparison
[14:34] <iPalindrome> Dual Xeon vs. G5
[14:34] <iPalindrome> No Dual P4 available
[14:34] <iPalindrome> Single P4 reference, Dual Xeon, Dual G5
[14:34] <iPalindrome> SPEC int-rate: 10.3, 16.7, 17.2
[14:35] <iPalindrome> G5 wins
[14:35] <iPalindrome> SPECfp-rate
[14:35] <iPalindrome> 8.1, 11.1, 15.7

[clarkgoble]

While the benchmarks are likely, given Steve's past, to be carefully chosen, they still make the Mac seem like a screamer.

[14:54] <iPalindrome> Summarize
[14:54] <iPalindrome> PHotoshop: 2x faster than a dual 3.0 GHz Xeon
[14:54] <iPalindrome> Luxology 2.3x faster
[14:54] <iPalindrome> Wolfram Research: 2.3x faster
[14:54] <iPalindrome> emagic logic: infinite since the demo didn't work
[14:54] <iPalindrome> SJ:
[14:55] <iPalindrome> Apple has caught has caught up and passed the PC on both integer and FPU
[14:55] <iPalindrome> FUTURE:
[14:55] <iPalindrome> Within 12 months, IBM will be at 3.0 GHz
[14:55] <iPalindrome> And those processorsw ill be in Apples of course

I'd like to see how the Opterons compare to them as well as some more "objective" benchmarks.

[rustyclockwork]

THE G5

THE UGLIEST THING THEY EVER DESIGNED

I'll get this fast mofo... but my quicksilver will be the one displayed on the desk... I'll hide the secret ugly weapon.

Jobs did it soooo right with the price, bravo on the tech specs...

the future is now,

J

[rustyclockwork]

hmmmm.... maybe not so ugly, I reall like the clutter-less interior design

J

[exsilio]

I love everything about the new G5...except for the looks. Truly uninspired. Talk about shock and awe! But not in the good way. I kept wishing it was April 1st.

That being said, will it prevent me from buying one? Nope...I will be happy to get rid of my VERY loud PowerVac G4.

[goose]

Looks like the PowerMac is back to supporting only one optical drive.....

Edit: Internally that is.

[docholiday]

Amazing performance and amazing features and FINALLY quiet. This baby will smoke anything from the competition for quite a while... I have been waiting to buy a new machine for a long time now and so have a lot of other people. Now people, who do need the power WILL get the power they need in addition to a great operating system.

As for the design, I think it looks professional. This is what a pro machine should look like: efficient, sleek, and still beautiful. Keep the crazy casings for consumer-level products.

"I've been waiting for this for a long time" (Phil Shiller right before the performance bakeoffs)
- Believe me Phil, so have we...

[kupan787]

Didn't everyone trash on the looks of the Quicksilver? And the MDD Tower? I think once you see these in person, people will like them much better. I am reserving my judgement until I see one at the Apple store.

But did it stop my purchase, nope

[dfbennett]

Is it just me or is there only one 5.25" drive bay internally? If so, that seems like a huge step back from the MDD G4s. Oh well, I'm not replacing my Sawtooth 350 until Janurary(post Macworld) or around then, so we'll see if they can come up with a G5 tower in my price range(1500-1600) or if I'll just end up getting whatever the top of the line iMac will be at the time.

[typoon]

Cool I have Sept to save for a new machine. I like the case design, the specs are just well NUTS, quad zone climate control? that is just crazy. The Craziest and best thing of all. 8GB of RAM.

[scottiB]

Only two serial ATA drive bays is kind of goofy (like Scottheking, I have four in my DP/800).

[tooki]

Some observations:

It requires RAM modules in pairs. The last time we saw this was with the NuBus Power Macs.

The 1.6GHz model is "hobbled" compared to the 1.8 and 2.0DP models:

-4x PC2700 RAM slots instead of 8x PC3200 ones
-3x regular PCI slots instead of 1x 133MHz PCI-X and 2x 100MHz PCI-X

tooki

[quandarry]

g4 desktops...still available...

just came back from the apple store website and according to the description are os9 bootable!

is this new?

[rm199]

The ATI 9800Pro option is a good call, for a minute I was thinking they had made a typo!

RM

[Eug]

Originally posted by tooki:
Some observations:

It requires RAM modules in pairs. The last time we saw this was with the NuBus Power Macs.

Yep, and it's a good thing. This probably means dual channel DDR400, a BIG step up from plain ol' DDR400. This is how Intel achieves it's so-called 800 MHz FSB: 2 x (200 x 2)

I'm disappointed with the single optical drive bay though.

[scottiB]

Originally posted by quandarry:
g4 desktops...still available...

just came back from the apple store website and according to the description are os9 bootable!

is this new?

They've always been available for education.

[tooki]

Nope, not new. Been there the whole time that Mac OS X-only machines have existed.

tooki

[tooki]

Originally posted by Eug:
Yep, and it's a good thing. This probably means dual channel DDR400, a BIG step up from plain ol' DDR400. This is how Intel achieves it's so-called 800 MHz FSB: 2 x (200 x 2)

From what I can tell, it's normal PC3200 (DDR400) RAM.

It uses it in pairs because it's a 128-bit memory bus.

tooki

[Timo]

Originally posted by Eug:
I'm disappointed with the single optical drive bay though.

I'm curious. Let's say one wanted to have two optical devices -- you'd put the fastest one in the G5 and put the next on the FW800 chain.

Are there that many optical applications that max out FW800, or 400, for that matter?

[redJag]

How would a single 1.6 Ghz G5 compare to dual 1.25 Ghz G4s? It seems to me that the duals would win in the majority of real world applications (maybe benchmarks, too, are they dual aware?). Yet the price points indicate a better computer from the G5 (maybe just marketing reasons though). I know you get a bunch of new stuff with the G5 but the only thing I'd really like is the quality audio. Hmm.

[chrisutley]

The specs ROCK! Hella fast!!!

I think the MDD machines are freaking UGLY! They needed a new case design, but it didn't make sense with the G5 already on the drawing board. So what do they do? They slap some chrome on the front of an old design? YUK!

I thought the new 17" was sort of ugly in photos, but in person it looks great. Perhaps the new G5 will be the same, and if not who really cares because with Panther running on those fast mofo's ...... hooooooooooooweeeeeeeeeee - fast - fast - fast.

[clarkgoble]

A bunch of people have noted that Apple was doing its typical stuff in regards to the benchmarks. The spec benchmarks quoted were running gcc on the Xeons. When you run Intel's compiler they are about 10 - 20% faster. Further the Apple benchmarks were lower than the estimated benchmarks widely distributed in the spring. This means that not only is the 970/G5 slower than equivalent PC chips, but it is much slower than top of the line AMD systems which are scoring around 1100 on Specs while the 2 GHz G5 is getting around 800.

This may change quickly when IBM starts producing the 3 GHz 970 - presumably at their new fab plant. But when those will be out is anyones guess.

Don't get me wrong. I'm amazingly excited about these machines and wish they were out before September. But the PC world is advancing and we're still slightly behind the curve.

[scottiB]

Originally posted by redJag:
How would a single 1.6 Ghz G5 compare to dual 1.25 Ghz G4s? It seems to me that the duals would win in the majority of real world applications (maybe benchmarks, too, are they dual aware?). Yet the price points indicate a better computer from the G5 (maybe just marketing reasons though). I know you get a bunch of new stuff with the G5 but the only thing I'd really like is the quality audio. Hmm.

Even with the 1.6's slightly lesser config (in comparison to the 1.8 and 2x2.0), I bet it would pretty much spank any G4/DP.

Bandwidth...
Bandwidth...
Bandwidth...

From this point, I would never consider a G4 tower. Ever.

[york28]

One thing that I'm not clear on is if it will be possible to add a second G5 to the low end model, for example, to get some extra kick out of it? Not right away, but maybe a year os so later, once the CPU prices come down.

I hope so.

[x user]

Why would they go through all that extra trouble to hobble the 1.6 model? It makes no sense whatsoever.

[Scotttheking]

Originally posted by york28:
One thing that I'm not clear on is if it will be possible to add a second G5 to the low end model, for example, to get some extra kick out of it? Not right away, but maybe a year os so later, once the CPU prices come down.

I hope so.

No

[ChrisB]

Originally posted by clarkgoble:
A bunch of people have noted that Apple was doing its typical stuff in regards to the benchmarks. The spec benchmarks quoted were running gcc on the Xeons. When you run Intel's compiler they are about 10 - 20% faster. Further the Apple benchmarks were lower than the estimated benchmarks widely distributed in the spring. This means that not only is the 970/G5 slower than equivalent PC chips, but it is much slower than top of the line AMD systems which are scoring around 1100 on Specs while the 2 GHz G5 is getting around 800.

This may change quickly when IBM starts producing the 3 GHz 970 - presumably at their new fab plant. But when those will be out is anyones guess.

Don't get me wrong. I'm amazingly excited about these machines and wish they were out before September. But the PC world is advancing and we're still slightly behind the curve.

It is true that everyone uses benchmark software that is "independent" but still skewed to score the best for the processor that you are trying to benchmark. It's too bad that we can't get Intel's compiler to work on these processor's and try to get some comperable numbers, using the same spec standard that other PC evaluators use.

[The Mick]

The one set of technical details that I kept waiting to hear more about was 64-bit performance. We all know it's a 64-bit CPU, and it runs existing 32-bit apps fast as hell, but there was absolutely nothing about OSX 10.3 having a 64-bit version, or any upcoming apps being recompiled for 64-bit operation. In fact, all that was said was "We've got a 64-bit CPU and it's fast! Hooray!". It was said that "recompiling" would give you some advantages, but is this process actually going to make a 64-bit version of the app? I don't think so.

I was reading through the G5 whitepaper and it's odd. The CPU is a fully 64-bit chip, the front-side bus is 64-bit DDR, and the memory bus has dual 64-bit DDR channels. So this bad-ass is a fully 64-bit optimized platform, but it seems we're stuck running 32-bit apps on it for now. AMD is coming out with the Athlon64 soon, and it will quickly be followed by the 64-bit version of Windows XP. Apple may have the first 64-bit desktop machine, but it seems Micro$oft will have the first 64-bit desktop OS. Bummer.

P.S. I'm still stoked about the new Powermac, wow!

[dfbennett]

Originally posted by Timo:
I'm curious. Let's say one wanted to have two optical devices -- you'd put the fastest one in the G5 and put the next on the FW800 chain.

Are there that many optical applications that max out FW800, or 400, for that matter?

That's not the point. The point is, that is seems stupid that apple took away the internal bay. Now those of use who like having two optical drives will have to have an external drive, and the clutter that comes along with that. It's not a huge deal for me, but I must say for a tower that they say they painstakingly designed, it seems like a glaring omission. Spec wise, the G5 is awesome. Things like optical in/out are great, but the overall look and lack of a second optical drive are kind of a bummer.

[Scotttheking]

Originally posted by The Mick:
The one set of technical details that I kept waiting to hear more about was 64-bit performance. We all know it's a 64-bit CPU, and it runs existing 32-bit apps fast as hell, but there was absolutely nothing about OSX 10.3 having a 64-bit version, or any upcoming apps being recompiled for 64-bit operation. In fact, all that was said was "We've got a 64-bit CPU and it's fast! Hooray!". It was said that "recompiling" would give you some advantages, but is this process actually going to make a 64-bit version of the app? I don't think so.

I was reading through the G5 whitepaper and it's odd. The CPU is a fully 64-bit chip, the front-side bus is 64-bit DDR, and the memory bus has dual 64-bit DDR channels. So this bad-ass is a fully 64-bit optimized platform, but it seems we're stuck running 32-bit apps on it for now. AMD is coming out with the Athlon64 soon, and it will quickly be followed by the 64-bit version of Windows XP. Apple may have the first 64-bit desktop machine, but it seems Micro$oft will have the first 64-bit desktop OS. Bummer.

P.S. I'm still stoked about the new Powermac, wow!

10.3 will be 64bit for the G5, and many of apple's apps, as well as many third party apps that can take advantage of it, will be recompiled.
All you have to do is recompile in 64bit mode, assuming the code is 64bit clean.

[The Mick]

Reading over the specs some more I realized that the front-side bus is not a traditional 64-bit DDR bus, but actually a combination of 2 independant unidirectional 32-bit DDR busses, one going in, one coming out. Sure it runs at 500MHz DDR (1GHz effective) but wouldn't this be a hinderance to 64-bit performance since 64-bit instructions and data would have to be split?

[The Mick]

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
10.3 will be 64bit for the G5, and many of apple's apps, as well as many third party apps that can take advantage of it, will be recompiled.
All you have to do is recompile in 64bit mode, assuming the code is 64bit clean.

Do you have a link to anything to confirm this? 10.3 being 64-bit was not mentioned at all today.

[clarkgoble]

The closest I saw was

Built for Mac OS X:
The Power Mac G5 runs all of your software — and runs it faster — with a version of Mac OS X Jaguar specially tuned for the PowerPC G5 processor, providing a seamless transition to 64-bit power.

At
http://www.apple.com/powermac/

[The Mick]

Originally posted by clarkgoble:
The closest I saw was

Built for Mac OS X:
The Power Mac G5 runs all of your software — and runs it faster — with a version of Mac OS X Jaguar specially tuned for the PowerPC G5 processor, providing a seamless transition to 64-bit power.

At
http://www.apple.com/powermac/

That is a really vague implication of a 64-bit OS. I'd think that somewhere during the long preview of 10.3 and the G5 they would have mentioned a move to an enhanced 64-bit OS. They only said the phrase "64-bit" in conjunction with the CPU.

[Timo]

Originally posted by dfbennett:
That's not the point. The point is, that is seems stupid that apple took away the internal bay. Now those of use who like having two optical drives will have to have an external drive, and the clutter that comes along with that.

Well, looks like an external drive case can sit nicely on top...not so much clutter. And a bonus when it breaks!

[dfbennett]

I'm rewatching the video they showed during the keynote and I noticed two things. First, the door isn't really a door, just a removable panel, just like a wintel box and the motherboard is positioned just like wintel machine. So much for that unique apple design. Also, it appears that you have to remove a fan to get access to the ram expansion slots. Seems like a step down in the expansion and design department in terms of asthetics and overall design. The processing power is however astonishing.

[dfbennett]

Originally posted by Timo:
Well, looks like an external drive case can sit nicely on top...not so much clutter. And a bonus when it breaks!

It's more than that though. There's also the firewire and power cables. Also, we don't really know if a firewire CD drive will be able to sit on top and open without hitting the handles. For my Sawtooth, I had to buy a little plastic rack that sits atop the handles as the my firewire drive would hit the handles if I just sat it on top. It's hard to say if the G5 would need a similar rack or not.

[spacefreak]

Rev. B for me.

I gotta try and get my money's worth out of this 6-month old Dual 1.25.

[Eug]

Originally posted by tooki:
From what I can tell, it's normal PC3200 (DDR400) RAM.

It uses it in pairs because it's a 128-bit memory bus.

Same thing.

Dual channel RAM is simply a pair of standard DDR400 installed on a motherboard with a dual 64-bit memory controllers.

From Crucial.com:

"What's dual-channel DDR?

To add to the confusion, enter dual-channel DDR. The terminology "dual-channel DDR" is being misused by some in the memory industry, which can mislead the consumer. The fact is there's no such thing as dual-channel DDR memory. There are, however, dual-channel platforms.

When properly used, the term "dual channel" refers to the DDR chipset on certain motherboards designed with two memory channels instead of one. The two channels handle memory-processing more efficiently by utilizing the theoretical bandwidth of the two modules, thus reducing system latencies, the timing delays that inherently occur with one memory module. For example, one controller reads and writes data while the second controller prepares for the next access, hence, eliminating the reset and setup delays that occur before one memory module can begin the read/write process all over again. Think of it like two relay runners. The first runner runs one leg while the second runner sets up and prepares to receive the baton smoothly and carry on the task at hand without delay. While performance gains from dual-channel chipsets aren't huge, they can increase bandwidth by as much as 10 percent. To those seeking to push the performance envelope, that 10 percent can be very important.

So the next time you come across a product that's touted and sold as dual-channel DDR, know this: It's simply two DDR memory modules, packaged and marketed as a specialty product or a must-have "kit." If indeed you have a dual-channel platform and you want to take advantage of the performance gain it offers, our advice is to opt for high quality and service over expensive packaging, and simply purchase your DDR memory in pairs. However, be very careful to order two modules with the exact same specifications; the modules must be identical to each other to perform correctly."

[cacarr1]

Questions for all of you...
when I get my shiny new G5 next January, will I be able to remove my current hard drive and add it as a second drive (thereby keeping all of my files)? Or what...?

Just curious as I'm not clear on the newer hard drives they're touting.
Thanks.

[awcopus]

I am sold on the technology horsepower under the hood, but will wait to buy my new dual G5 PowerMac until the machines ship with 10.3.

If Apple had released these machines at the same time they announced them, I'm pretty sure I would have made an impulse buy. I was really caught up in the action at the SOHO store. Alas...I came home...chilled out with a beer....and began to think.

Impulse buying is now impossible, literally. So thinking is our next best option.

Why wait until the machine ships with 10.3? Why not? If you place your order today, will you get the machine tomorrow? No. In July? No. August, machines will trickle to the early adopters, but not with Panther preinstalled..some version of Jaguar (Smeagol?). How stable will that be? Stability is an issue for me because I'm a video editor, and by then I'll be in a project.

Machines will be meeting demand by the end of August, early September, probably just in time for Seybold. Seybold would be a great time for Apple to release Panther and preinstall it on all Macs. By then we'll probably have had a chance to read reviews of the machine running Smeagol, and then we'll start reading about comparisons between Jaguar and Panther performance. That should be appetite whetting. Assuming the results are terrific at that point, I'll make my purchase around the beginning of October. Perfect timing to grab the Dual G5, both financially and productivity-wise, if my workflow stays on track.

If September passes with no Panther....well, then I'm going to be starting to think that I should wait until the January Expo for the revised PowerMacs. That's plan B.

[awcopus]

BTW, frustrating to me that Apple has released FCP4, probably the single most exciting suite of software ever released by Apple, and they didn't show it...not once....running on the G5. Mathematica is cool and everything, but I was a little upset that they didn't show off just how much faster FCP4 renders on these new machines. FCP4 is a landmark release and is Apple's attempt to capture major market share in the burgeoning video editing industry.

A minor d'oh, but a d'oh nonetheless.

Today was worth the wait, I guess, but now we have to wait again.....

[tooki]

Originally posted by Eug:
Same thing.

Dual channel RAM is simply a pair of standard DDR400 installed on a motherboard with a dual 64-bit memory controllers.

From Crucial.com:

"What's dual-channel DDR?

To add to the confusion, enter dual-channel DDR. The terminology "dual-channel DDR" is being misused by some in the memory industry, which can mislead the consumer. The fact is there's no such thing as dual-channel DDR memory. There are, however, dual-channel platforms.
<snip>"

Very interesting! Serves me right for not following PC technology, LOL.

thanks for the heads-up!

tooki

Edit: Actually, is it the same thing? It's unclear whether it's two 64-bit memory controllers, or one 128-bit controller. Surely, those operate significantly differently.

[Voltrage]

i think the smaller expansion potential (hard drive) may be less than ideal, but it is a perfectly logical decision on apple's part. the professional market that demands raid is now serviced much more capably by the xserve raid. there's probably a few power users out there that cram several 80 gigabyte hardrives into their g4s just to keep 10 gigabytes worth of files divided conveniently, but anyone that professionaly requires a raid solution has probably already picked up their xserve raid.

[clarkgoble]

One thing to keep in mind is that few features of the system need 64 bit. All the Darwin stuff and Unix stuff would take advantage of it with a single recompile. But I don't know how much software needs it. Perhaps mySQL would benefit from a recompile. I don't know about MPlayer and VLC. Maybe, maybe not. iMovie and FCP will. But system stuff? The file system probably can be optimized for 64 bit. But what on earth else needs 64 bits beyond perhaps the memory manager?

[tdehnke]

So for those of us on the road, the question is with 9 fans just how much heat does a single 1.6 G5 chip put out. Can they massage this chip into a 15" (17" is not a real road machine I think) case. If not what are we going to have to wait for.
I'm hoping people are right in their speculation that the chips will be easy to work with... but I think that the Year of the Laptop just got cut short. Apple is gonna be too focused on these things!!

Any techies got and idea of the heat produced by the hottest G4 VS the 1.6 G5.

[Eug]

Actually, is it the same thing? It's unclear whether it's two 64-bit memory controllers, or one 128-bit controller. Surely, those operate significantly differently.

Well, on the PC side they use that terminology interchangeably. The machines use a "128-bit" memory controller and dual-channel DDR in pairs.

You just have to make sure you buy identical RAM for each pair, or else the computer may switch to single-channel mode.

ie. You can run 512+512 and 1024+1024 for a total amount of 3 GB RAM, at full 800 MHz speed. However, if you try running 512+1024 and 512+1024 you get the same 3 GB RAM, but half the theoretical bandwidth.

So for those of us on the road, the question is with 9 fans just how much heat does a single 1.6 G5 chip put out.

Too much if you're talking laptops ("on the road"). A 1.2 would be tolerable maybe at 19 W, but a 1.8 runs at 42 W. Compare that to 15 W for a G4 1 GHz. However, the other problem is that the PPC 970 G5 doesn't seem to be built with power saving features in mind. It's built for desktops and servers.

[arkhem]

Tooki said earlier "It requires RAM modules in pairs. The last time we saw this was with the NuBus Power Macs." Actually you do not have to use pairs, but with that choice you will not be able to take advantage of the dual-channel platform.