Discussion: The G3's Future

T

tree

Christmas
I own as processors G3 (white iBook), PIII (Dell Latitude), Athlon Xp (white product). In the pcworld my PIII looks old stuff because most pcs are now sold with a P4 and using P4instructions isn't a bottleneck anymore. I am aware that Apple is started to accept orders for the G5 and that Prescott and Athlon64 are comming. The only model that contains a G3 is the white iBook(nearly the same as 12 inch Powerbook except cpu) because the G3iMac is discontinued and replaced by G4 models.

(link removed because of major off-topicness by fryke.)
 
I would think Apple would still have to keep a few G3 in low-end iBooks and eMacs, but it makes sense to gradually push the entire range forward. Jaguar on an old G3 is fine, but Panther and later cat OSes to come are going to be a challenge.
 
The eMac is a G4... the only G3 computer Apple sells anymore is the iBook, and I'm sure that it'll go the way of 68K and 60X soon enough.
 
I wasn't aware that the "e" had a 4. As long as Apple has some entry-level offering. The suped-up G5s are going to sell, but there's always a market for entry-level buyers (and switchers).
 
The actual performance difference between the G3 and G4 for most instructions is less than 15%. The big boost comes from the addition of the Altivec on the G4.

IBM has shown some interest in adding the Altivec to the G3 processor. The question at that point is if the G3 is still a G3 or a G4 or something in between.

If Motorola stops making processors, expect to see IBM to start pushing this new version of the G3. IBM is not going to stop making G3 processors even if Apple were to drop it from their products. IBM still makes PPC604e processors to day, almost 6 years after Apple stopped selling PPC604e based systems.

Oh, another difference between the G3 and G4 is that the design of the cache of the G3 stops it from being a good chip for multiprocessing (the design was actually based on the PPC603e architecture) were as the G4 doesn't have that limitation (being based on the architecture of the PPC604e). IBM has never felt any need to make the G3 multiprocessor enabled as they sell most of their chips in the embedded market were the G3 alone is more than adequate for the jobs it does.
 
Well, if IBM put Altivec onto a 750FX-based chip and PowerLogix then put that chip onto a Lombard upgrade... I would be pretty happy.

Although, it does come down to wattage/performance ratio. If IBM-made G3+ chips drain less power than G4s, then those would definitely make it into the iBook. However, I have seen PBG3s get longer battery life by switching from the 300-400Mhz G3 to a 500Mhz G4 chip.

Anyone know how much a 1Ghz 750FX chip draws compared to a 1Ghz 74xx chip?
 
Well, the G5 DID come out, so that means that the G4 will replace the G3s spot. The G4 is probably going down in price (G4 tower, and soon all the others, since newer models will be released.).
Doesn't really matter about G3s now, they're just..... getting old. Apple is moving on:)
 
If IBM actually brings out an AltiVec enabled PowerPC 75x processor (whatever the number...), Apple wouldn't have any problems selling those as G4s, because at least from a user perspective, AltiVec was the one thing setting it apart from the G3s. If they can deliver a wide range of speeds for those processors (say 900-1500 MHz), the lower-end could be used for eMacs and iBooks, while the higher-end chips could be used for the iMacs and PowerBooks - until there's a viable G5 for the PowerBooks (that would also make it into the iMacs, as they've had more or less the same processor speeds in recent years).
 
Originally posted by Krevinek
However, I have seen PBG3s get longer battery life by switching from the 300-400Mhz G3 to a 500Mhz G4 chip.
Click to expand...

About 6 months ago I replace the original G3/266 processor in my Wallstreet with a G4/500. Yes, the battery seems to last longer... and the keyboard doesn't seem to get nearly as hot as it did with the old G3 (ca. 1998).

I was expecting the heat issue to get better (chips aren't made the same way now as they were back in the 20th century ;) ). The thing that tipped me towards the G4/500 over the G3/500 was that Mac OS X made use of the Altivec and I knew that the Altivec would help make up for the fact that I can't upgrade the video on my system.

I think fryke is right, Apple would just call a G3+Altivec a G4. I could see IBM pushing them up towards 2 GHz over the next couple years as long as they have at least one customer (Apple) ask for the higher clock speed.
 
Don't rule out the G3 totally -- it does surprisingly well in mobile devices, such as the iBook, it's becoming inexpensive to produce, and, well, the iBook is not the only mobile device that Apple sells... ;)
 
Originally posted by RacerX
The thing that tipped me towards the G4/500 over the G3/500 was that Mac OS X made use of the Altivec and I knew that the Altivec would help make up for the fact that I can't upgrade the video on my system.
Click to expand...

Well, I am focused on Altivec for two reasons:

1) It can make the Wallstreet/Lombard able to play DVDs under OS X (if you tweak a couple files, but there is an Altivec decoder written by Apple). It also does improve OS X performance noticably. (I saw the change from a 604e 300Mhz to G4 400Mhz in my 8600 using a Voodoo 5, before I switched to a Radeon)

2) I do development, and Altivec does make a difference with some of the apps I write. It also helps testing Altivec code to have an Altivec-equipped processor.
 
All I know is that it's going to be another few years before I get a new Mac (I currently have a Nov 2002 iBook), and if Panther runs crappy on it, I'll... have to trick someone into getting a bad haircut.

I'll be a villain with a budget.::evil:: ::ha::
 
From what I see, Panther will run on the same hardware that 10.2 will run on, with the same performance... except:

When you use journaling (which I think is turned on by default in Panther now), file vault, and other 'on-the-fly' features that add a little overhead to the normal every-day usage.

Plus you will not be able to use certain features that require more extensive hardware (like Pixlet... but most of us here wouldn't need to worry about that).
 
Off-topic a bit but: Did anybody else notice that tree posted this? Has somebody taken over his account?

On-topic: I think it's stupid if they discontinue the G3s. If they did they should offer all G3 owners a 50% off on a G4. It'd only be fair. :)
 
Originally posted by Trip
On-topic: I think it's stupid if they discontinue the G3s. If they did they should offer all G3 owners a 50% off on a G4. It'd only be fair. :)
Click to expand...

<sarcasm>
Ooo, if that is the case, I should get 50% off a G3 system because they 'discontinued' the 604...
</sarcasm>

In all honesty, they won't give a discount. There is a difference between discontinued and unsupported, and I doubt Apple will drop G3 support in OS X for a few years.

Plus, just because Apple doesn't feel the chip is useful in their new models, doesn't mean it is a dead chip.
 
updated the title of the thread to not be so misleading :)

---

my opinion... the g3 should be updated with altivec, the g3 is pretty damned efficient for portable applications, and i think would do well in future laptops :)
 
Just because Apple doesn't use the G3 doesn't mean the PPC 750 series will die off. The G3 will die because that's what Apple calls the PPC 750, and when they stop shipping it the G3 is dead, though in name only.

I don't see the reason of adding Altivec to the G3, since they already did that and made an entirely new processor.
 
Originally posted by arden
I don't see the reason of adding Altivec to the G3, since they already did that and made an entirely new processor.
Click to expand...

As many have probably stated, the 750 was based on the 603e... a more power efficient, although originally not as nice processor than the 604e.

The 74xx is based on the 604e architecture, which is more powerful, but not quite as efficient in terms of heat/power.

So actually, there would be something to gain from Altivec on the G3.
 
Seeing that PowerBooks & iBooks probably _won't_ go dual processor in the near future (1-3 years), the rumoured AltiVec-enabled G3 processor from IBM would make pretty good sense for the portable computers. Apple could call it anything, basically, but for marketing-reasons, it could just call it a G4 processor.

The main reason (for me) to use IBM's G3+ (let's call it that for the moment) rather than Motorola's G4s is that IBM/Apple seems a much better partnership than Motorola/Apple right now. Motorola has already said a few times that their main interest is not in desktop computing for the PowerPC platform anymore. However: IBM has put much energy into the G5 and has its own interest in the chips as desktop chips. The G3+ also seems a pretty viable solution for 1U rack systems (cheap ones). IBM can sell those with Linux.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top