# New PowerMac G5's!!!!



## j79 (Jun 9, 2004)

http://www.apple.com/powermac

Up to 2.5 GHZ
1.25 BUS
8X Superdrive
Liquid Cooled!!!

SWEET!


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 9, 2004)

Who ordered?


----------



## garymum4d (Jun 9, 2004)

Zammy-Sam said:
			
		

> Who ordered?



ME! 

ordered 4.


----------



## garymum4d (Jun 9, 2004)

j79 said:
			
		

> http://www.apple.com/powermac
> 
> Up to 2.5 GHZ
> 1.25 BUS
> ...



Notice the pic on the site with the side open is NOT like the one recently released from the new workshop manual!


----------



## Captain Code (Jun 9, 2004)

garymum4d said:
			
		

> Notice the pic on the site with the side open is NOT like the one recently released from the new workshop manual!



Yeah, I was going to say that too.  I didn't think it was real.  Unless they haven't updated all the pics on the website yet, but I would think they would get them right before launch.

Liquid cooling is on the top end model only, but that's sweet anyways


----------



## Ripcord (Jun 9, 2004)

Finally.  This is turning out to be a decent week after all =)

I would have liked more than 2.5ghz, and I'm not that optimistic as a result that we'll see 3.0ghz this year, considering IBM/Apple's track record so far.  Not so happy that the lowest-end G5 is now $2000 - it would have been nicer to see, say, a single-processor 1.6ghz dropped to $1300 or something (the G4s are the same oh-so-overpriced price...)


----------



## Pengu (Jun 9, 2004)

I noticed that the Dual 1.8 now only has PCI, not PCI-X. Whats the deal there?


----------



## Captain Code (Jun 9, 2004)

Pengu said:
			
		

> I noticed that the Dual 1.8 now only has PCI, not PCI-X. Whats the deal there?



Seems like they just took the old 1.6 and put in 2 1.8GHz chips.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 9, 2004)

So, basically the previous top G5 powermac got the middle powermac and nothing changed, if the watercooling is just for the top end model? Or are these IBMs new processors?


----------



## diablojota (Jun 9, 2004)

I heard the 2.5 ghz is actually the 90nm processor...


----------



## Captain Code (Jun 9, 2004)

The top end model uses the 90nm chips.
http://www.apple.com/g5processor/ibmprocess.html
At least it looks like only the top end use the 90nm chips.  It doesn't really say, but the top end is the only one that's really different.


----------



## Pengu (Jun 9, 2004)

Just noticed the 1.8 also has max 4 GB ram. I was really hoping this time 'round apple wouldnt cripple the "low"-end model

I mean, PCI-X would be nice, but maybe I just don't need (or can't afford) the extra grunt of a dual 2ghz beast.. woe is me


----------



## Pengu (Jun 9, 2004)

This actually means, that a "previous" dual 1.8 is "better" than a current one? More memory. pci-x. they didnt add anything.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 9, 2004)

aren't all G5s built in 90nm?


----------



## diablojota (Jun 9, 2004)

No, the original G5's still used the 130nm process.  The Xserve took advantage of the 90nm.


----------



## jhawk28 (Jun 9, 2004)

Look, now they are liquid cooled!
"Take it up a notch without losing your cool. The top-of-the-line Power Mac G5 with dual 2.5GHz processors squeezes outrageous performance into tight quarters. To cool down those steaming circuits, Apple designed a sophisticated liquid cooling system that takes off the heat without bumping up the noise. Mac OS X dynamically adjusts the flow of the fluid and the speed of the fans based on temperature."

Joshua


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 9, 2004)

I am wondering why they have such a serious cooling prob that they are using liquid cooling solutions on the 2.5ghz model. I was told that cpus that are produced in 90nm should allow the chip to run at higher clocks producing the same temperature. Since the 130nm 2.0ghz model runs fine without water cooling I am a bit confused the 90nm 2.5ghz needs a new cooling system.


----------



## Captain Code (Jun 9, 2004)

Maybe it doesn't need it but they want to make it as quiet as possible.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 9, 2004)

So, actually there are just the two processors that are liquid cooled, right? Did the amount of fans decrease in the top end model so it's more quite compared to the other models? 
I just read about a loudness comparison with the old dual G4 powermacs which were known to be pretty loud and they said it's half as loud as those.. 
To me it sounds a bit like the_top_end_model_buyers will be some kind of involuntary beta-testers


----------



## diablojota (Jun 9, 2004)

Zammy-Sam said:
			
		

> So, actually there are just the two processors that are liquid cooled, right? Did the amount of fans decrease in the top end model so it's more quite compared to the other models?
> I just read about a loudness comparison with the old dual G4 powermacs which were known to be pretty loud and they said it's half as loud as those..
> To me it sounds a bit like the_top_end_model_buyers will be some kind of involuntary beta-testers


The fans remain the same, they just spin slower, and will adjust as processors heat up.  The flow of the liquid cooling is also controlled.
I don't feel that these people will be beta testers.  Liquid cooling has been around for a long time.  Not a new technology.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 9, 2004)

I am just thinking of the nightmare that liquid braking out and mess up those two wonderful G5s..
But the slower spinning fans sounds convincing to me. I was just wondering if they will have any lower noise, when they have the same amount of fans in there.


----------



## fryke (Jun 9, 2004)

It's a disaster. A major disappointment. And the old story all over again. Apple 'released' the iPod mini in January, and I've yet to see one on the market (here in Europe). Apple promised 3 GHz and delivered 2.5, which reminds me of that old Motorola mishap. Apple hasn't updated their displays to match the PowerBooks and PowerMacs. I'm ranting, yes. If I were in for a new desktop Mac, I'd probably buy the 2.5 GHz model and shut up. It's still a nice machine. Well... I'm disappointed. And I hope that Steve Jobs is not too proud of these 'new' machines, because in fact it's only the 2.5 GHz model that's a new machine. The others are merely updated a bit. (And is it me or has buying a PowerMac just got a bit more expensive, too?)


----------



## ged3000 (Jun 9, 2004)

but, on the other hand, what with all these new releases, less than a month before WWDC, Im assuming that apple arent showing us everything theyve got in store.

A lot of whats come out in the last coupla weeks has really wowed me, so surely Apple are gonna have something thats even better than all this new stuff to announce at WWCD? Something other than new G5 - style LCDs and Tiger, maybe?

*crosses fingers for G5 powerbooks*


----------



## Randman (Jun 9, 2004)

> It's a disaster. A major disappointment.


 Hmm, let's try and be a little over-dramatic now. 



> "When we made that prediction, we just didn't realize the challenges moving to 90 nanometer would present. It turned out to be a much bigger challenge than anyone expected. All-in-all, no we are not getting to 3GHz anytime soon."


 -- Tom Boger, Apple's Director of Power Mac Product Marketing

Hmm, I prefer the honesty. I'd rather have them do it right then try and do it according to the calendar. Besides, liquid cooled isn't new? The line has been improved and we haven't heard the end of it. The iMacs could go G5, iTMS Europe, iTMS Canada, AirPort Express, new iPods, new monitors, a preview of Tiger, the possibility of 3Ghz by year's end as well as the possibility of a PB G5 by year's end. 

Gee, give the dog a bone, why don't you?


----------



## Captain Code (Jun 9, 2004)

I don't think Tom Boger was talking about how hard it is to make the Mac use the 90nm processors, because the 2.5GHz machine(and XServes) is already.  I think what he really means is that IBM is having a tough time getting their 90nm fabrication up to speed.  

After all, a CPU is a CPU, and you can put it in the computer easily.  It's producing them that is hard.

I just hope they really get the 2.5GHz machines out in July, and not the end of July, or early September.


----------



## Randman (Jun 9, 2004)

Although I do agree about the Mini. Heck, it's difficult to impossible to find in many parts of the US still. But I'd rather have a sell-out then overstock.


----------



## ex2bot (Jun 9, 2004)

I just bought the low-end model (educational pricing). Very exciting. I got the Radeon 9600 instead of the NVidia chip and a combo drive, since I have a dvd burner on my iMac.

I was waiting for Apple to relase the new ones. I for one am impressed by dual 2.5. It's got to be quite a bit faster than anything else out there--at least for a couple months.

Doug


----------



## MacFreak (Jun 9, 2004)

I am disappointed that motherboard is not Rev 2 and it's still Rev 1. I have been waiting for Rev 2. However the G5 2.5ghz is 90 nm with liquid cooler and I can't complain about it. I am going to buy this machine anyway. I am not going to wait till Jan for new rev2.

My suspect is only reason that Apple need to push increased speed bump for PowerMac Dual 1.8ghz to 2.5ghz. Apple can take g5 1.6 ghz out and to move to new iMac coming during WWDC. Possible? Umm... I think so. Who want iMac? Not me.


----------



## mindbend (Jun 9, 2004)

Note: Viewpoints come from a very high end  and critical perspective.

The Bad

PCI-X not as good as PCI Express (?)
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,909447,00.asp
(Though I have to say, I don't think I use a single PCI slot in my current towers)

Photoshop is only 7% faster than a prorated G4 at 2.5 GHZ.

No new RAM format?

Video cards not super impressive

Still only two hard drive bays

Bibble performance test. Who the hell uses Bibble? I've never even heard of it. Enough with the trickery already.

Steve said 3 GHZ. Steve said 3 GHZ. Steve said 3 GHZ.
He has a history of saying things like that. My guess is that he does it to put the pressure on his own staff and the staff of Apple's providers. Didn't work this time.

64-bit is still basically a meaningless statement (not the 2.5's fault though).

---------

The Good

Video performance is ridiculous
http://www.apple.com/motion/video/
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/video/

Audio performance is crazy

Liquid Cooling.
The G5s I've seen in store are amazingly quiet. I hope this keeps it that way.

A DP G5 still kicks the crap out of anything I'm currently using.



---------

Side notes:

I predicted several times in these forums that there was NO WAY they were bringing out a 3GHZ. In fact, I predicted 2.5 tops many times. The koolaid is wearing off. Sucks to be right.


----------



## ex2bot (Jun 9, 2004)

Back when Jobs said 3 GHz it wasn't uncommon for some Windowz uzer to say, "So what? The Pentium will be at 4 GHz by then."

4 GHz probably didn't happen for Intel for similar reasons. Come on, Apple and IBM have almost literally done the impossible and kept up with Intel more or less for the past year. 

Time to mix up a new batch.

Of Koolaid, I mean.

Just to be clear.

About.

That.

Doug


----------



## mdnky (Jun 9, 2004)

Very disappointing day indeed...was all ready to buy the big dawg desktop...now I don't know what I'll do.  

On one side I need a new desktop...on the other I could get by for another few months with what I have.  Trying to figure out if I can justify the cost.  3ghz would have definitely been worth it, 2.5ghz isn't really worth it (IMO).  Looks like we won't see the 3 mark before 2005.


----------



## kendall (Jun 9, 2004)

how long before apple falls 2 ghz behind intel and amd again?  another year or so by the looks of it.  oh well.

basically in a year they managed to released ONE new powermac, the 2.5 ghz, while crippling the lowend 1.8 (no pci-x, only 4gb memory) and doing relatively nothing to the 2.0.

all the fancy graphs, graphics and terms (liquid cooled) on apple.com will surely make up for it though.


----------



## Captain Code (Jun 9, 2004)

The lowend is the same as the previous lowend except the processor.  They didn't "cripple" the 1.8, they just upped the proc in the low end.


----------



## monktus (Jun 9, 2004)

dktrickey said:
			
		

> Of Koolaid, I mean.



What the hell is Koolaid anyway?!

We're all disappointed by the lack of a 3GHz machine so far but the fact the G5 line is all dual now, as well as the other recent (and imminent) Good Things, I think Apple has done pretty well this last year. Intel and AMD haven't been doing quite what they hoped with their newest chips either so I don't think anyone can be too hard on Steve. I'd imagine if it was at all feasible to have the 3GHz out by now then it would have happened, after all I think Apple knows how important it is to push ahead with performance (and perceived performance) now that they've regained ground after the later G4 days.

And, liquid cooling (!)
And, Airport Express/other cool stuff to expect in the next few weeks


----------



## Ripcord (Jun 9, 2004)

Randman said:
			
		

> Gee, give the dog a bone, why don't you?



I agree to some extent, but sheesh, how many bones do we have to give the dog before we finally just say "heck with it" and put the poor ailing thing downn?


----------



## mindbend (Jun 9, 2004)

I have to say Stevo made a monster mistake by even mentioning 3 GHZ last year. I can't tell I many times I have heard people like myself say they were waiting exclusively for the 3GHZ model. And as is evidenced in this thread even, there are holdouts still for this mythical 3 GHZ machine. And, yes, once again I am one of them. I got myself all worked up over this last year to drop some heavy coin on 3 GHZ. 2.5 just won't cut it.

This, of course, is completely idioitic on my part. A 2.5 box still trounces anything I've got in the office now. But DAMMIT, once you've got 3 GHZ on the brain, you just can't let it go! If you're a total geek like me, you even develop spreadsheets ahead of time to precalculate things like approximated render times. Yum.

Simple fact of the matter is that had Steve not said anything about 3GHZ I would already have placed an order for the 2.5. Now I'm going to hold out yet again, hoping that maybe winter brings the big boy. Actually, I have to say, there's a very decent chance I may cave before then. We'll see.

This is a perfect example of why Apple are so secret about product announcement, because if they announce too soon, nobody buys anything. Big problem. As evidenced last year, the G5s sold decent, but were slightly under expectations (see recent shareholders meeting info).


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Jun 9, 2004)

I'm sure that IBM mentioned something to Apple about 3GHz before Apple mentioned something about 3GHz to us.  It's not entirely Apple's fault, though.  Sure, Steve came out and boasted the 3GHz chip before it existed -- you didn't see IBM doing that.  But, as said before, he's a visionary, and not a perfect one at that, so his job partly entails riling people up over their next big thing.  But he's still an amazing man that built an amazing company, just not bulletproof.

2.5GHz was expected -- those holding their breath for 3.0GHz I believe hold their breath knowingly in vain, as I think it's pretty much assured that a dual 3.0GHz machine won't suddenly materialize at the WWDC.  Disappointing, yes; unexpected, no.  We knew we weren't gonna make it, and I'll bet that quite a few of us had doubts hearing "3.0GHz" at the last expo/conference.  I know I did.

Still, we've got a lot to look forward to... a color iPod, which has been guaranteed by members of this site, and a preview of Tiger, which I'm betting will be so good that we'll have a hard time sitting still until it's released.  Plus, I hope we'll get to see AirPort Express in action, much like the iChat demos of yesteryear.

Not too bad, even though we missed some marks.  Expectedly underwhelming, yet unexpected (AirPort Express -- who saw that one coming?).  Still got some excellent hardware to work with and a new OS on the way (keep on your toes, Rempel, I got old machines begging to run it!).


----------



## fleur-de-lis (Jun 10, 2004)

Since the two low-end models are stuffed with so much -- existing -- technology, is it conceivable this is what they meant by clearing out their old stock, and the 2.5GHz is the low-end next generation (the other two models being released at WWDC)?  Needlessly complicated and wishful thinking I know... but surely this can't be all their is??


----------



## Randman (Jun 10, 2004)

> I can't tell I many times I have heard people like myself say they were waiting exclusively for the 3GHZ model. And as is evidenced in this thread even, there are holdouts still for this mythical 3 GHZ machine. And, yes, once again I am one of them. I got myself all worked up over this last year to drop some heavy coin on 3 GHZ. 2.5 just won't cut it.
> 
> This, of course, is completely idioitic on my part. A 2.5 box still trounces anything I've got in the office now. But DAMMIT, once you've got 3 GHZ on the brain, you just can't let it go!


 Perfectly said, Mindbend, perfectly said.
  One of the new 2.5s will blow the doors off anything any one here does.
    I can see it now. As soon as the 3s come out, people will be yelling for 3.2s.


----------



## Cat (Jun 10, 2004)

Meanwhile Apple stock has gone through the roof: >30$
If 2.5 really would be such an immense failure, I woudl suppose the stock would go down. Apparently everybody is either:
a) already well aware of all the 90nm issues
b) thrilled by the 25% increase in clockspeed which bring the Mac ever closer to Intel/AMD in terms of MHz (even though the comaprison is flawed)

Apple's speed bump, while not what we all hoped and expected, is still a much better jump than Intel/AMD's in the last year. As has already been pointed out, the wintel crowd said "so what we'll be at 4GHz and counting by next year". Well, they are not: they are still at 3.4GHz and with pretty much the same problems. Apple however jumped from 2 to 2.5 GHz. OK, it's not what Steve promised, but still pretty good. I bet we'll see extensive comparisons at the WWDC. The whole architecture is still damn impressive and they just made it 25% faster: now they need to show the real-world increase. I bet we'll be awed.
The Dual 2GHz already claimed the performance crown. There was controversy of course, and rightfully so. Marketing =/= reality. However, what about now? Now we've got Dual 2.5 GHz systems: let's see how they perform before we start whining.
What if now we can rightfully claim the perfomance crown? That would be awesome. Steve on stage: "Last year we claimed the fastest consumer desktop computer on earth and they didn't believe us. Well, I'd like to invite Phil on stage and see what Photoshop thinks about our new liquid cooled 2.5 GHz system." Oohs and Aahs ensue from the crowd as the new PowerMac consistently and undoubtably outperforms the Dual Dell. That would be nice, and it is not unrealistic.


----------



## Captain Code (Jun 10, 2004)

It looks like the investors were actually well informed in the last few days and didn't let rumors sway their decisions.  That's almost unheard of when it comes to Apple stock!

There won't be anything higher than the 2.5GHz for a while.  If they released anything faster in the next few weeks it'd have to be a lot more money than the current top machine is.  They wouldn't be able to drop the 1.8 and 2.0 machines and then make the 2.5 the low end only a few weeks after they announced them.

That would cause outrage, and they would have to upgrade everyone to the respective new model, which would do nothing for selling off old stock.

What I have always wondered is what do they do with computers that don't sell?  They must not sell each and every one of them produced.


----------



## diablojota (Jun 10, 2004)

I saw a recent possibility to cover the 3 ghz blunder.  Perhaps these chips (assuming that they are capable of making them now, are creating such low yields) that Apple will create a "high-end" graphics/workstation, ala xStation.  This would be a much more expensive unit, not selling in high quantities and can take advantage of the 3ghz at the low yield rates.  This would also fulfill Jobs' promise of 3ghz in 1 year.  And also aligning with the recent comments of the 3ghz not being in a PowerMac anytime soon.


----------



## mindbend (Jun 10, 2004)

Apple's Technology and Performance Overview PDF implies that all G5 chips are 90nm.:

pg. 9
State-of-the-Art Process Technology from IBM The PowerPC G5 is fabricated in one of IBMs world-class semiconductor manufacturing facilities. It uses 90-nanometer circuitry with more than 400 meters (1300 feet) of ultrathin copper wiringless than 1/1000 the width of a human hair.

http://www.mcb3.com/click.asp?x=16e01.341f.1515203


----------



## fryke (Jun 10, 2004)

Randman said: "mm, I prefer the honesty. I'd rather have them do it right then try and do it according to the calendar. *Besides, liquid cooled isn't new? The line has been improved and we haven't heard the end of it.* The iMacs could go G5, iTMS Europe, iTMS Canada, AirPort Express, new iPods, new monitors, a preview of Tiger, the possibility of 3Ghz by year's end as well as the possibility of a PB G5 by year's end. - Gee, give the dog a bone, why don't you?"

Please _do_ read all of what I write bevore jumping to an answer. I said: "...because in fact it's only the 2.5 GHz model that's a new machine. The others are merely updated a bit." I didn't in any way deny that the liquid cooling wasn't, well, cool. But then again: If that's a necessity to be even able to deliver 2.5 GHz, then it's not _that_ cool, is it?

Also: "iMacs could go G5" etc... Not right now, if the same Apple source who apologized for the 2.5 instead of 3.0 GHz is right. Face it: It's a disappointment for many, since Steve Jobs himself promised more. They could've made a statement about this promise in January (when these 2.5 GHz machines were ready, already, if you take a close look at the rumours for MWSF'04). But I guess they had to wait another few months to find out that IBM couldn't make it (?).


----------



## diablojota (Jun 10, 2004)

They're not.  The first introduction of the 90nm chip was with the xServe.  Now they are in the 2.5ghz G5.  I would not be surprised that the 2.0 and 1.8 are still 130nm since they can produce those very easily with high yield returns.


----------



## diablojota (Jun 10, 2004)

mindbend said:
			
		

> Apple's Technology and Performance Overview PDF implies that all G5 chips are 90nm.:
> 
> pg. 9
> State-of-the-Art Process Technology from IBM The PowerPC G5 is fabricated in one of IBMs world-class semiconductor manufacturing facilities. It uses 90-nanometer circuitry with more than 400 meters (1300 feet) of ultrathin copper wiringless than 1/1000 the width of a human hair.
> ...


http://download.info.apple.com/Apple_Support_Area/Manuals/desktops/PowerMacG5_TO_072903.pdf


> The PowerPC G5 is fabricated in one of IBMs world-class semiconductor manufacturing
> facilities. It uses 130-nanometer circuitry with more than 1130 feet of ultrathin wiring<snip>


----------



## kendall (Jun 11, 2004)

Captain Code said:
			
		

> The lowend is the same as the previous lowend except the processor.  They didn't "cripple" the 1.8, they just upped the proc in the low end.




i may be wrong but i believe $1999 was the price of the previous 1.8GHz DP that is NOW crippled (no pci-X, only 4gb ram) for the oh so lovely price of $1999.  so no my friend, IT IS NOT THE SAME and you are now paying MORE for LESS.

can i refill your glass of koolaid?


----------



## ex2bot (Jun 11, 2004)

Nope. The previous DP 1.8 was $2499 or $2599. Midrange. The low-end was the single 1.6, at first $1999, then $1799.

The new dp 1.8 does have less, but it also costs significantly less.

Doug


----------



## soulseek (Jun 11, 2004)

kendall said:
			
		

> i may be wrong but i believe $1999 was the price of the previous 1.8GHz DP that is NOW crippled (no pci-X, only 4gb ram) for the oh so lovely price of $1999.  so no my friend, IT IS NOT THE SAME and you are now paying MORE for LESS.
> 
> can i refill your glass of koolaid?




i dont know if ur wrong concerning the price... but...
the previous dp 1.8 didnt have a 90nm processor
and it didnt come with the Nvidia GeForece FX 5200 Ultra... did it? 

u can take ur koolaid back


----------



## diablojota (Jun 11, 2004)

soulseek said:
			
		

> i dont know if ur wrong concerning the price... but...
> the previous dp 1.8 didnt have a 90nm processor
> and it didnt come with the Nvidia GeForece FX 5200 Ultra... did it?
> 
> u can take ur koolaid back


I still don't believe the 1.8 is 90nm.  The 2.0 and 2.5 are (ala xServe with the intro of the 90nm processor).


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 11, 2004)

Diablo, take a look at this. I think your german can handle it, huh? 
They say all new G5 procs are built in 90nm. There are spec pdfs attached


----------



## mdnky (Jun 11, 2004)

mindbend said:
			
		

> This, of course, is completely idioitic on my part. A 2.5 box still trounces anything I've got in the office now. But DAMMIT, once you've got 3 GHZ on the brain, you just can't let it go!
> 
> Simple fact of the matter is that had Steve not said anything about 3GHZ I would already have placed an order for the 2.5. Now I'm going to hold out yet again, hoping that maybe winter brings the big boy. Actually, I have to say, there's a very decent chance I may cave before then. We'll see.



Look at what I'm still using for a desktop...300mhz G3!  Trounce isn't a good way of putting it on my side...slaughter might be a better description.  But I agree, I'm going to hold out unless business becomes too heavy or something goes wrong with mine.  It's been a great 5 to 6 years so far, what can a few more months hurt?  That is unless I really see some impressive numbers coming off that dual 2.5 model <G>.

The interesting thing is the 500mhz jump from 2.0ghz...maybe we'll start seeing larger jumps spread over a year from now on, or sometime in winter a 2.5 to 3.x line-up...who knows.   It does seem like they might be setting us up for a large increase in the future.


----------



## diablojota (Jun 11, 2004)

Zammy-Sam said:
			
		

> Diablo, take a look at this. I think your german can handle it, huh?
> They say all new G5 procs are built in 90nm. There are spec pdfs attached


I stand corrected.   Thank you Zammy...


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 11, 2004)

the question now: what's the benefit? Less heat? Less energy consumption? More capable for overclocking?


----------



## soulseek (Jun 11, 2004)

90nm processors ? less heat.... so automatically not much need for fans, therefore not as loud...
i dont know if it affects performance however...


anyways, we all know the G5s are the fastest desktop computers on the planet right now... 
but what i found interesting in this update was the watercooling system...
... paves the way for future g5 powerbooks ???


----------



## diablojota (Jun 11, 2004)

soulseek said:
			
		

> 90nm processors ? less heat.... so automatically not much need for fans, therefore not as loud...
> i dont know if it affects performance however...
> 
> 
> ...



90nm produces less eat and lower energy consumption.
However, the size of the heatsinks on the G5 definitely show that the water cooling is still not enough to keep it cool enough to cram in the small form factor of a portable.


----------



## soulseek (Jun 11, 2004)

the water cooling is introduced in a DUAL 2.5ghz system... thats a lot of heat. 

a G5 powerbook woul run at a lower (single) processor rate ... im sure theyll manage somethin by january


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 11, 2004)

they better do! However, I wonder how they will compete the iMac G5s then


----------



## ged3000 (Jun 11, 2004)

I agree with soulseek. Im interested top see where this water cooling will be used next.


----------



## fryke (Jun 11, 2004)

Let's assume that Apple _COULD_ use a 1.6 GHz 970FX in a PowerBook in, say, Autumn. (Just assuming, remember.) If they'd have to make it slightly heavier than the current PowerBooks and using some highly sophisticated cooling scheme etc., I just don't see it using less power than the current G4 PowerBooks. Also, 1.5 GHz G4s are no slouches compared to an 1.6 GHz G5 - and we have yet to see any _real_ benefit of 64bit computing. Portable devices most probably also tend _not_ to be used for those highly computational tasks.

So: In a next round of PowerBooks, *I'd* like to see a bit more power at better battery life while at the same time putting out less heat. I guess we all don't know whether there's even _going_ to be another G4 processor generation for Macs from Motorola or rather FreeScale. IBM seems to have killed the plans to create that 750VX processor, which would basically be a "G3 with AltiVec" a.k.a. G4. So I guess we'll see a rather small PowerBook upgrade in Autumn (1.6, 1.7 Ghz G4 7447?) and 6-8 months later the first PowerBook G5, probably with a specially engineered G5 for 'smaller form factors', i.e. the iMac G5 and the PowerBook G5.


----------



## hulkaros (Jun 11, 2004)

What about Dual G4 PowerBooks until a REAL G5 solution will come?


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 11, 2004)

guess this would be dedicated to the 17inch model..


----------



## diablojota (Jun 11, 2004)

Well, as nice as a dual G4 would be, I wonder if they could even keep that thing cool enough.


----------



## pds (Jun 11, 2004)

Hey Hulky

Boom!


----------



## Cat (Jun 11, 2004)

Isn't there a new processor from Freescale/Motorola, the e600 or e700 which could be a good candidate for future PowerBooks?



> Delivering Higher Performance: The e600 and e700 Cores and Platforms
> The next planned step in Freescales performance roadmap is the e600 core and corresponding e600 platform. An enhanced version of the high-performance G4 core used in the award-winning, high-performance MPC74xx family of PowerPC host processors, the e600 core is planned to scale beyond 2 GHz and to support chip multiprocessing (CMP) while maintaining full compatibility with the PowerPC instruction set architecture. Like its G4 predecessor, the superscalar e600 core is designed to issue four instructions per clock cycle (three instructions plus one branch) into eleven independent execution units, and to include a full 128-bit implementation of Freescale's advanced AltiVec Single Instruction Multiple Data (SIMD) vector processing technology.
> 
> Freescale Semiconductor also disclosed today at SNDF its plans to develop the next-generation 32/64-bit e700 PowerPC core and corresponding e700 platform. Processor products engineered around Freescales forthcoming e700 SoC platform are planned to be capable of running both 32-bit and 64-bit software and scaling to 3 GHz and beyond in next-generation process technologies.


----------



## Captain Code (Jun 11, 2004)

kendall said:
			
		

> i may be wrong but i believe $1999 was the price of the previous 1.8GHz DP that is NOW crippled (no pci-X, only 4gb ram) for the oh so lovely price of $1999.  so no my friend, IT IS NOT THE SAME and you are now paying MORE for LESS.
> 
> can i refill your glass of koolaid?




Don't think so.
The 1.6 was $2499
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/06/09/apple/
go to "Compared to older models" on that page.

So, now you have the same case/mobo/ram/etc. as the previous config, but you get dual 1.8s instead of a single 1.6 for $200.00 more than previous.

You can have your koolaid back.


----------



## hulkaros (Jun 11, 2004)

WOW!

Most impressive!


----------



## fryke (Jun 11, 2004)

*cough* 1.8 *cough*. (it was the 1.8 that was 2499, not the 1.6...)


----------



## Captain Code (Jun 11, 2004)

fryke said:
			
		

> *cough* 1.8 *cough*. (it was the 1.8 that was 2499, not the 1.6...)



Yeah, doh.  So 1799 for the 1.6 before, now 1999 for the dual 1.8


----------



## ksv (Jun 12, 2004)

Captain Code said:
			
		

> Yeah, doh.  So 1799 for the 1.6 before, now 1999 for the dual 1.8



I don't think that is too impressive, though. Those processors are probably far cheaper to produce than the G4s were in the beginning, and the rest of the specs are the same as the old 1.6 GHz except from the 8x SuperDrive which didn't cost Apple anything.

If you compare the new dual 2.0 GHz to the old dual 1.8 GHz, you'll see that the only change is the 10% faster processors and the SuperDrive. Is that even worth the extra $100?


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 12, 2004)

> If you compare the new dual 2.0 GHz to the old dual 1.8 GHz, you'll see that the only change is the 10% faster processors and the SuperDrive. Is that even worth the extra $100?


If you consider the 90nm construction and thus less heat and more silence for the fans, the $100 relativize more


----------



## caizer (Jun 12, 2004)

apple-x.net posted whole pictures of Cooling system of new G5. 
The website seems to be down now. 

Those pictures what they posted are looked like a guide line for internal purpose.

Hmm.. Steve might be upset. We know he is checking all the rumor web sites.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (Jun 12, 2004)

Pengu said:
			
		

> This actually means, that a "previous" dual 1.8 is "better" than a current one? More memory. pci-x. they didnt add anything.



Actually you have to look at as for an extra $200 they're giving you a dual 1.8Ghz vs saving $200 and just having a single 1.6GHz.  Which you can probably only get from a reseller now anyway if they still have them.
That's a very generous offering considering the CPU.


----------



## ex2bot (Jun 12, 2004)

Cat said:
			
		

> Isn't there a new processor from Freescale/Motorola, the e600 or e700 which could be a good candidate for future PowerBooks?



Cat,

I took that to be a press release by Motorola to try to avoid looking like inept nincompoops. They're apparently saying that this other company is developing their (Moto's) next gen chip that _someday_ will get to 3 GHz. Wow. When? 2012? I'm not impressed.

Doug


----------



## Cat (Jun 13, 2004)

Well, Freescale = Motorola ("wholly owned subsidiary"), so it's not some other company. Since the announcement/roadmap, the rumour mill has been churning happily along. 

While it is completly unclear if or when Apple will use these processors (or better:cores), still they could use them, either in the *Books or the e/iMac. Motorola designs for the embedded market: small space, small cooling. We have just heard Apple say that a G5 PowerBook and iMac are a LONG way off, looking a the pictures of the new liquid cooling system, there is absolutely no way that it would fit in to such small enclosures. Hence, it is increasingly probably that Apple will have to use somthing else that the G5. IBM could make a G3 + AltiVec (Mojave) if they wanted, but Motorola/Freescale is already set to produce them. 


> Which brings us to the Freescale e600/e700 System-on-a-Chip architecture.
> 
> Ever since a copy of Motorola's roadmap for its new Freescale Semiconductor spin-off was uncovered by XLR8YourMac, speculation has been running rampant about the possibility of the e600/e700 all-in-one (CPU, system controller, PCI, USB, Firewire, etc) chips being used in future low-end, compact Macs such as the rumored headless "iMac Mini."
> 
> The advantages of System-on-a-Chip architectures are numerous and include lower overall system cost, improved performance, and reduced development time/cost for computer makers (in this case Apple). Freescale's implementation which uses an enhanced PowerPC 745x core (in the e600) or Motorola 32/64-bit Book E "G5" core (e700) does seem promising -- and sources at Freescale report they've been in talks with Apple ever since the spin-off announcement about ways the two parties could work together to redeem Motorola's PowerPC technology for the Mac.


That's what the rumour mill is saying. The point simply is: where will the *Books and the iMac go next for their processors? The G5 can't be done and overclocking older cores hits a limit somewhere. How long can they keep it up? They will need a new processor sooner or later. Well, Motorola will produce them sooner or later.


----------



## MacFreak (Jun 14, 2004)

Found from http://www.hardmac.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2004-06-12#2279

Apple-X.net has been able to get some photos from the watercooling/liquid cooling system (LCS) found in the new PM G5 Dual 2.5GHz. The most impressive one is below.







This is a quite impressive system, as well as its complexity and its compactness. It also stop the floating around criticisms arguing that it was only a heat-pipe-based cooling device.
The liquid circulating inside the LCS is made of 80% water supplemented with corrosion inhibitors, antifreeze, and bacterial growth preventatives.
Can not wait to test if this device is really decreasing the overall noise of the computer.


Awesome!!! It does have pump?


----------



## fryke (Jun 14, 2004)

I also wonder about the noise of the new 2.0 GHz machine... Is it much quieter than the old 2.0 GHz one? Sure, it hasn't got the liquid cooling, but the 90nm chip should require less fan activity, or shouldn't it?


----------



## Ripcord (Jun 14, 2004)

Was the OLD 2.0ghz particularly noisy?  I NEVER hear mine at work...


----------



## Oscar Castillo (Jun 15, 2004)

Is all that truly necessary???


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 16, 2004)

what? The cooling for the Dual 2.5? Probably!


----------

