Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

beb · Jul 22, 2002, 09:31 PM

Is it a G4 or a G5? How fast is it? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

KidRed · Jul 22, 2002, 09:36 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by ajprice:
KidRed, in a word, no. I think the original pic shows a metal plate because it has a panel missing over the drive bays. Like I said when I posted, It's what I think it "might be", and I think the front might not be a complete case.<hr /></blockquote>No, actually, if real, I believe that will be chrome just like the Apple logo. Why put a metal face there if it were incomplete? Doesn't make sence. It would be metal just like in the pic if real. Also, there's packing tape around the edges and side, meaning the entire tower was covered for shipping. You would'nt do that for an incomplete case. I understand if you simply don't wish to alter you image, that's cool. I was just curious to see what it would look like and it's hard to tell with the non chrome face that you have.

suhail · Jul 22, 2002, 10:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by zazou:
The Metal piece is definitely part of the new machine.

It has a static-plastic cover over it and the removal tab is very clear.

OK PS wizards, alter this one with the new face-plate:

<img src="http://www.dfcreative.com/G4TI.jpg" alt=" - " /><hr /></blockquote>That looks awesome, did you do that yourself? Good work!

Superchicken · Jul 22, 2002, 11:49 PM

hehe that Xpower mac looks really nice <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
And I dono... I think those air intakes are probably gona look fine in person, but like... gahh they just look so bad to me!
And from my understanding the G5's no where near development ready.
It's probably just a fast G4.

Stephane · Jul 23, 2002, 04:02 AM

did you notice that before the PM G4 was out, nearly all the fakes found on the web were ugly and much uglier than the real G4 when it went out. Now, I think new fakes are much nicer and tend to make Apple own designs a little shy.
Maybe Apple has more hard times now to do earthshaking designs or we, users, are just harder to satisfy.
To make short : who prefers the Xserve-like fake PM G4 and who prefers the "Turbine Quicksilver" from Macbidouille ?

sickboy_MacOsX · Jul 23, 2002, 05:01 AM

One of the reasons that the pics i saw earlier today could be so crappy is that
1. They might be recognized as to the person who released the pics, and Steve Jobs is someone i dont think anyone wants mad at, so they had to alter the pic to make it so it was un identifiable.

I think it could be the real thing, as was mentioned earlier when the Quicksilvers were announced all the pics were kinds crappy. So this keeps in check with previous "Spy Pics"

Could have been taken by a small digital camera so no one would notice what was going on.

Notice how all the protective plastic (Which keeps in check with previous Release Models I have seen that were in development when i was working at company X.

I seriously belive we will be seeing these within the next month or 2. And I could see how there could be a MOBO for both a G4/or G5 as the G5 is slated for MWSF '03.
Why make 2 different motherboards when it is so close to release time. in this Hard time of economic downfall, it could be an Apple Money Saving technique.

Dan Szwarc · Jul 23, 2002, 07:40 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />To all of you guys who said this must be a development case... what the hell? Apple doesn't send out development cases with their dev systems. They just send out dev systems in old cases. They're testing out the system itself, not how the developers like how it looks.<hr /></blockquote>When I said development case, I didn't mean prototype of what the case would look like, but rather a case used only for the development of the new mobo, architecture, form and function. In other words a "mule" (to use the automotive term). Like putting a new V8 intended for a mustang in a Tempo and driving it around town to test it (this HAS been done).

I think this case (if real) should give us an indication that Apple intends to have 2 5 1/4 bays (for CD/DVD, etc.), more HDs inside, and probably ports on the front not for air, but for USB2 and FW (what else would they be for?). An old case just wouldn't do for these additions. But a modified one would.

Will Apple keep the basic stylings of the quicksilver case for the next G4? Maybe. I'm sure they'd like to introduce a brand new, slick as s#!t case for the G5 whenever that comes out.

That cleaned up version actually doesn't look that bad! I'll let time decide.

el_humpo · Jul 23, 2002, 08:37 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Stephane:
To make short : who prefers the Xserve-like fake PM G4 and who prefers the "Turbine Quicksilver" from Macbidouille ?<hr /></blockquote>Gimme the Xserve-G4 any day! The Turbine is uuuuuuugly.

InterfaceGuy · Jul 23, 2002, 03:55 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />The folks over at MacRumors broke the story of prototype pictures of the new PowerMac enclosure and motherboard, very similar to several snapshots which MOSR has had access to for several weeks under embargo from the source. Now that the cat is out of the bag, we can openly discuss the new enclosure as well as certain details of the new motherboard, and we'll be doing that during the week ahead.<hr /></blockquote>I find this quite funny. MacRumors posts an article and MacOSRumors posts afterwards claiming they knew about it beforehand. Cool.

PowerPC · Jul 23, 2002, 05:10 PM

Optimistic:
1.16Ghz, 1.24Ghz, Dual 1.32Ghz (1.33Ghz in available late sept)
all on 130nm
512k L2
2MB L3
166Mhz FSB
333Mhz BSB
ATA-100
8X AGP

Safer Bet:
996Mhz, 1.07Ghz, Dual 1.24Ghz

Peder Rice · Jul 23, 2002, 05:55 PM

Hey PowerPC, I like your guess. That's about what I've been predicting, except that I'm guessing we'll see 4MB L3 caches.

PowerPC · Jul 23, 2002, 06:32 PM

having that extra 2MB of L3 cache would push the price over 3k on the top machine. Not something apple wants right now....

Mongrel · Jul 23, 2002, 06:33 PM

Here's my guess:

(and yes, I used this in the 10.3 discussion too, I'm a rat, I know. But really, it suits this discussion better anyhow.)

<img src="http://thermobiostar.tripod.com/photos/finalp_mac_big.jpg" alt=" - " />

.mac comes home!!!

Instead of a power button, the new generation of Macs will have a built-in card slider, like a pay-at-the pump gas station. We'll get charged $6.00 ($12 for DP) to turn on or reset our computers. Each additional user on that machine adds .50 to each boot fee.

Steve will justify this by asking, "How often do you really need to restart Mac OS X anyway?"

zazou · Jul 23, 2002, 06:39 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Mongrel:
Here's my guess:

....<hr /></blockquote>Will the boohoo-ing ever end?

No, this was not more appropriate here. Thanks for playing.

Mongrel · Jul 23, 2002, 07:00 PM

Oh, fragile zealot, it was all in good fun.

Please do not pout.

Fyre4ce · Jul 23, 2002, 08:49 PM

Still, no one has answered my question: Can Apple legally issue a cease and desist order if the pictures were fake?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />originally posted by PowerPC:
Optimistic:
1.16Ghz, 1.24Ghz, Dual 1.33Ghz (1.33Ghz in available late sept)
all on 130nm
512k L2
2MB L3
166Mhz FSB
333Mhz BSB
ATA-100
8X AGP<hr /></blockquote>Oh man, I'd be as happy as a pig in sh!t. I would like to see ATA/133, with BTO RAID options, but I'd settle for ATA/100.

On the whole case thing, I like the Xserve style one better, because it has more drive bays, and doesn't have those same handles. Can we lose the handles already, please?

EDIT: fixed tags

[ 07-23-2002, 10:00 PM: Message edited by: Fyre4ce ]

x user · Jul 23, 2002, 10:02 PM

Face it guys, this may be real,but it's OLD. There is no guarenty that the new PM's will look anything like this, as MOSR is saying...

Peder Rice · Jul 23, 2002, 10:23 PM

We'll just have to see, won't we?

mamamia · Jul 23, 2002, 11:08 PM

i can answer Fyre4ce's legal question about whether apple can legally issue a cease and desist if the picture is fake.

simple answer: no.
if this isn't a real apple product/design/idea, they have no claim to it.

reality based answer - if you get one of these letters, you better comply.
if the image does happen to be an apple product/design/idea (i.e. their intellectual property), then they can sue you for damages ( lost sales, etc) that they incur because of your unlawful use of those images. the catch here is that we really don't know if these are genuine until apple decides to release the product itself.

this puts the rumor site in an interesting situation. if they believe the pics are fake, then they can play chicken with apple and ignore the cease and desist (but then lose credibility when they are revealed to be fake!) if they believes the pics are real, they would be well advised to comply (but lose the revenue from all the hits they are generating!)

hmmmm.

sickboy_MacOsX · Jul 23, 2002, 11:18 PM

Well about the specs of the New G4's

The New Machine Pics we saw are real
(This coming from a friend of mine who works at apple and verified by a Couple Co-Workers of mine, who are in Cupertino working with Apple on some new Software specs for our products)

1. The case is real (Sorry no POS Unit Attached hehehe)
2. 166 Front Side
3. 300 Back Side
4. up to 2.5 GB of Ram
5. G4 and G5 Slots (But if you try and open the G5 Slot without a Processor, your warranty is Void, because it will short out the MOBO (This Might Change)
6. Will be announced when Apple Releases OS X 10.2
5. Super Drives on both Highend Models
7. the 2 USB Ports in back and the 2 Firewire Ports in Back are both USB and FW 2.0
8. and the 2 FW Ports up front are FW 1.0

The Chips will be like this

1.0 GHz (low end) 1.2 (Mid) (With Dual Processor Option) 1.4 (high) (Again with Dual Processors Available)

Thats all I know....

iThink Therefore iMac

TNproud2b · Jul 24, 2002, 12:22 AM

Support for 2.5GB of RAM?

Five slots?

166MHz FSB does not divide into 1200 nor 1400MHz in such a manner as to allow a 1/2 denominator.

< skeptical of this 'information'.

HashPipeK · Jul 24, 2002, 12:43 AM

that thing is ugly. hope they release something better. and lets hope for fast f8cking mobo

zazou · Jul 24, 2002, 01:17 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sickboy_MacOsX:

5. G4 and G5 Slots (But if you try and open the G5 Slot without a Processor, your warranty is Void, because it will short out the MOBO (This Might Change)
<hr /></blockquote>2 CPU slots?!?!?

I don't think so. There would never, has never in PC (sic) history, be a mother/logic board with 2 cpu sockets.

That in itself is way to much to believe.

Besides, if the images were anything to go on the CPU socket is pretty obvious.

KidRed · Jul 24, 2002, 01:25 AM

As mentioned on another board, the vents may or may not be for cooling the cpu, but rather the 2 vertical mounted drives above.

sickboy_MacOsX · Jul 24, 2002, 03:44 AM

Couldnt the new MOBO be a money saving technique by Apple to cut down on production costs??
Thats what Myself and the other guys i work with were thinking..

TNproud2b · Jul 24, 2002, 10:02 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by zazou:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sickboy_MacOsX:

5. G4 and G5 Slots (But if you try and open the G5 Slot without a Processor, your warranty is Void, because it will short out the MOBO (This Might Change)
<hr /></blockquote>2 CPU slots?!?!?

I don't think so. There would never, has never in PC (sic) history, be a mother/logic board with 2 cpu sockets.

That in itself is way to much to believe.

Besides, if the images were anything to go on the CPU socket is pretty obvious.<hr /></blockquote>Actually, there were several motherboards that supported both 'slot 1' and 'socket' (PPGA) versions of the Pentium/Celeron - but not at the same time.

If the 'G5' can be supported by the existing 'G4' motherboard - then the 'G5' is probably gonna suck.

[ 07-24-2002, 10:10 AM: Message edited by: TNproud2b ]

PowerPC · Jul 24, 2002, 11:17 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sickboy_MacOsX:
Well about the specs of the New G4's
The Chips will be like this

1.0 GHz (low end) 1.2 (Mid) (With Dual Processor Option) 1.4 (high) (Again with Dual Processors Available)

Thats all I know....

iThink Therefore iMac

<hr /></blockquote>The correct answer would be this:
166 x 6.5 = 1,079Mhz
166 x 7.5 = 1,245Mhz
166 x 8.5 = 1,411Mhz

and the BSB would have to be 333Mhz. not 300Mhz

i still stand by my prediction of 996, 1.16Ghz, 1.24Ghz (dual)

Peder Rice · Jul 24, 2002, 12:46 PM

Wouldn't it suck if we didn't see the 7470, but rather saw an upgraded Apollo? 1.33GHz, but only a 133MHz system bus? Man, that would suck.

gumby5647 · Jul 24, 2002, 02:09 PM

unless they moved the 7455 to 130nm, there is no way it could get to 1.33ghz

actually a 1.07Ghz 7455 on a 166Mhz FSB and a 333Mhz BSB would surprise a lot of people..

The Placid Casual · Jul 24, 2002, 02:11 PM

I wouldn't place too much weight on the specs posted above (by sickboy_MacOsX), they seem to have come from a conversation a few of us had on MacNN IRC chat, in which some of us were chatting about the possible specs...

The log has been around for a while, and the information matches exactly...it is not from an apple leak, and seems to be just lifted from a our conversation...

hmm

Peace,

Marc

[ 07-24-2002, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: Marc2211 ]

PowerPC · Jul 24, 2002, 02:21 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by gumby5647:
unless they moved the 7455 to 130nm, there is no way it could get to 1.33ghz

actually a 1.07Ghz 7455 on a 166Mhz FSB and a 333Mhz BSB would surprise a lot of people..<hr /></blockquote>um yeah, what he said

Don@ATS · Jul 24, 2002, 02:39 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Mongrel:
Here's my guess:

(and yes, I used this in the 10.3 discussion too, I'm a rat, I know. But really, it suits this discussion better anyhow.)

.mac comes home!!!

Instead of a power button, the new generation of Macs will have a built-in card slider, like a pay-at-the pump gas station. We'll get charged $6.00 ($12 for DP) to turn on or reset our computers. Each additional user on that machine adds .50 to each boot fee.

Steve will justify this by asking, "How often do you really need to restart Mac OS X anyway?"<hr /></blockquote>DOn't give them any ideas

The Placid Casual · Jul 24, 2002, 02:47 PM

How about a coin slot, so that you can for .Mac as you go along

[ 07-24-2002, 06:07 PM: Message edited by: Marc2211 ]

zazou · Jul 24, 2002, 02:57 PM

only 3 pages to turn it into a .Mac whine.

PowerPC · Jul 24, 2002, 03:01 PM

for all you people that like to predict CPU speeds here is a list of possible speeds.

133Mhz bus:
933Mhz (7)
1Ghz (7.5)
1.06Ghz (8)
1.13Ghz (8.5)
1.19Ghz (9)
1.26Ghz (9.5)
1.33Ghz (10)
1.39Ghz (10.5)
1.46Ghz (11)
1.52Ghz (11.5)

166Mhz Bus:
996Mhz (6)
1.07Ghz (6.5)
1.16Ghz (7)
1.24Ghz (7.5)
1.32Ghz (8)
1.41Ghz (8.5)
1.49Ghz (9)
1.57Ghz (9.5)
1.66Ghz (10)
1.74Ghz (10.5)

and so on and so forth.....

pure speculation follows:
a 7455 on 180nm with a 133Mhz bus would probably top out at 1.19Ghz. Or 1.16 with a 166Mhz bus.

The rumored 7470 on a 130nm with a 166Mhz bus would probably top out 1.41Ghz. (and i think that that would be pushing it)
Or. 1.39 with a 133Mhz bus.

or something to that effect

<img border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" title="" src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" />

[ 07-24-2002, 03:02 PM: Message edited by: PowerPC ]

Peder Rice · Jul 24, 2002, 03:54 PM

Don't forget that the rumored 7470 is supposed to have a rumored 12 pipeline stages, which would mean that it could scale to at least 1.4GHz. I'm guessing it could reach 2GHz.

PowerPC · Jul 24, 2002, 04:04 PM

ah yes, thats right. i forgot about that..

change that to a 1.66Ghz w/ 166Mhz Bus at the top..

2.0 is very very optimistic

CIA · Jul 24, 2002, 05:06 PM

Time will tell...

moki · Jul 24, 2002, 05:41 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Cipher13:
Nobody physically altered this machine. It's a PHOTOSHOP CROP JOB, which is my entire point!

40-50 models? Where'd you get that from?

Seriously, this is a FAKED IMAGE. It's not real.<hr /></blockquote>Alas, you are wrong.

one · Jul 24, 2002, 06:28 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by moki:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Cipher13:
Nobody physically altered this machine. It's a PHOTOSHOP CROP JOB, which is my entire point!
Seriously, this is a FAKED IMAGE. It's not real.<hr /></blockquote>Alas, you are wrong.<hr /></blockquote>Alas & alack, when did being wrong ever stop the Cipher (or even slow it down)? <img border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" title="" src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" />

KidRed · Jul 24, 2002, 09:02 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by moki:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Cipher13:
Nobody physically altered this machine. It's a PHOTOSHOP CROP JOB, which is my entire point!

40-50 models? Where'd you get that from?

Seriously, this is a FAKED IMAGE. It's not real.<hr /></blockquote>Alas, you are wrong.<hr /></blockquote>So then indirectly, you're saying these cases are legit? Just answer this if under NDA- Is you name Moki? Are tehse the stop gap units you spoke of? Why all the vents? Seems like either this is the starting point for the G5 case which will basically switch out chips with a small cosmetic touch up, or these chips are fast creating a lot of heat.

x user · Jul 24, 2002, 10:42 PM

You all are forgeting one major fact, We HAVE A PICTURE OF THE FREAKIN MOBO. And nowhere on it is an option for more than one processor slot. <img src="http://homepage.mac.com/macxracing/banner.jpg" alt=" - " />

DUHDUHDUH.

It's the same mobo that was on e-bay months ago, and the date on it is early '01. (April?). I think, (personally) that this was a pre-quicksilver case, like a prototype for it, that they toned down a bit.

jock · Jul 24, 2002, 11:05 PM

Given the fact that this: <a href="http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002/07_jul/features/cw_macvspc2.htm" target="_blank">http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002/07_jul/features/cw_macvspc2.htm</a>
is doing the rounds, I sure hope that Apple have somewthing up their sleeve!

[ 07-24-2002, 11:06 PM: Message edited by: jock ]

tinrib · Jul 24, 2002, 11:15 PM

well they got a c&d letter from apple's lawyers - that lends it some credibility (although of course that could also be fake)

[edit: I hadn't read pages 2/3 - you all know about the c&d letter...]

[ 07-24-2002, 11:29 PM: Message edited by: tinrib ]

Mark T. · Jul 24, 2002, 11:35 PM

The C&D letters are BS. Thinksecret has the pics posted and they have been there since the 21st.

Here's the link...

<a href="http://www.pstheme.com/cgi-bin/think/ikonboard.cgi?s=3d3f492d3d4effff;act=ST;f=2;t=163" target="_blank">http://www.pstheme.com/cgi-bin/think/ikonboard.cgi?s=3d3f492d3d4effff;act=ST;f=2;t=163</a>

- Mark

iKevin · Jul 25, 2002, 06:14 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Peder Rice:
Don't forget that the rumored 7470 is supposed to have a rumored 12 pipeline stages, which would mean that it could scale to at least 1.4GHz. I'm guessing it could reach 2GHz.<hr /></blockquote>I find this totally hilarious! I keep reading about how this "new G4" will have a 12 stage pipeline. It wasn't very long ago that Apple was dissing the P4 because it used alot of pipeline stages to get higher mhz....now Apple may be doing the same thing....sorta debunks half of their mhz myth concept.

Dan Szwarc · Jul 25, 2002, 07:25 AM

Just because the mobo is G4 functional and "G5 ready" doesn't meant that there are two processor slots!

Remember, the processors are on a card so pin-to-pin differences in processors are not relevant. What matters is that the mobo can handle the G5 either in speed or "extra" pins.

It's just like popping a G4 Zif in your Blue and White G3.

Fyre4ce · Jul 25, 2002, 10:25 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PowerPC:
for all you people that like to predict CPU speeds here is a list of possible speeds.

133Mhz bus:
933Mhz (7)
1Ghz (7.5)
1.06Ghz (8)
1.13Ghz (8.5)
1.19Ghz (9)
1.26Ghz (9.5)
1.33Ghz (10)
1.39Ghz (10.5)
1.46Ghz (11)
1.52Ghz (11.5)

166Mhz Bus:
996Mhz (6)
1.07Ghz (6.5)
1.16Ghz (7)
1.24Ghz (7.5)
1.32Ghz (8)
1.41Ghz (8.5)
1.49Ghz (9)
1.57Ghz (9.5)
1.66Ghz (10)
1.74Ghz (10.5)

and so on and so forth.....

pure speculation follows:
a 7455 on 180nm with a 133Mhz bus would probably top out at 1.19Ghz. Or 1.16 with a 166Mhz bus.

The rumored 7470 on a 130nm with a 166Mhz bus would probably top out 1.41Ghz. (and i think that that would be pushing it)
Or. 1.39 with a 133Mhz bus.

or something to that effect

<img border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" title="" src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>You are forgetting two important things here. First of all, I think the multiplier is limited to 10x. Second of all, the bus speed is actually 166.66666666... MHz, not just 166.000. So your numbers are slightly off. This is more accurate, rounded off to nearest 10th of a MHz:

666.7 MHz
750.0 MHz
833.3 MHz
916.7 MHz
1000.0 MHz
1083.3 MHz
1166.7 MHz
1250.0 MHz
1333.3 MHz
1416.7 MHz
1500.0 MHz

Got it?

PowerPC · Jul 25, 2002, 10:54 AM

actually i believe these G4's have multipliers that can go to 16....

could be wrong though...

KidRed · Jul 25, 2002, 11:55 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by x user:
You all are forgeting one major fact, We HAVE A PICTURE OF THE FREAKIN MOBO. And nowhere on it is an option for more than one processor slot.

DUHDUHDUH.

It's the same mobo that was on e-bay months ago, and the date on it is early '01. (April?). I think, (personally) that this was a pre-quicksilver case, like a prototype for it, that they toned down a bit.<hr /></blockquote>Sorry, but I've heard from mulitple places about more then one motherboard, so duhduhduh this picture may not be the only one.