powerbook G5?

I am sure that when the G5 will find its way into the powerbook, it won't run at clock speeds as the powermac and xserve. And in the 90nm production and let's say a clock of 1,6Ghz or 1,8Ghz it shouldn't heat that much. Anyway, I am quite sure it won't have a handle ;)
 
I'm pretty sure the G5 has power management capabilities much like the G4, maybe even better. Like scale the CPU frequency down on-the-fly when it's not busy.
 
I think the current G5 already does this? I don't remember for sure, but I do remember that you could choose to set the machine to scale already.
 
Okay, our we forgetting the G4 PowerBook came out almost two years after the G4 PowerMacs. The only reason Apple released the PowerBook G3 at the same time as the Power Macintosh G3 was because the G3 is basically a 603ev with a special cache method.

Hope you guys aren't surprised when a year from now you are still asking when the PowerBook G5s are coming out. Apple won't release a G5 PowerBook until it can match the clock speed of the previous PowerBook G4. Do you really think that Apple/IBM has the ability to put a G5 at 1.5 GHz in a PowerBook today?
 
I am not sure where I read such an article, but didn't they once show, that the 90nm G5 at 1.6 or 1.8Ghz (am not sure anymore) would waste less energy than the 1.33Ghz G4 in the (now) previous powerbooks? Right now I think: the less energy consumption -> the less heat the processor produces. Am not sure if these values really correlate. But if they do and the G5 really consumes less energy, I see no reason why it would take another year for the G5 powerbook beside marketing
 
You have noticed the physical differences between the Xserve G5 and the Xserve G4, right? Why do you think they added the air intakes on the face of the Xserve G5 when that space had been used for an additional drive bay on the Xserve G4?

I think heat is still a problem with the G5 that can not be avoided. The Xserve form factor change shows that even with the new G5 processors, they needed more circulation that the previous G4 based model.
 
RacerX said:
You have noticed the physical differences between the Xserve G5 and the Xserve G4, right? Why do you think they added the air intakes on the face of the Xserve G5 when that space had been used for an additional drive bay on the Xserve G4?

I think heat is still a problem with the G5 that can not be avoided. The Xserve form factor change shows that even with the new G5 processors, they needed more circulation that the previous G4 based model.
Click to expand...

Well, I can't say it's fair to compare dual 2 GHz G5 processors with dual 1.33 GHz G4s ;)
Now, if those were dual 2GHz G4s, they'd have to remove another drive bay and cut away half of the motherboard to make room for the fans and heatsinks.

I don't know if you've looked at the power consumption figures for the G4 and the G5, but you'll see the G5 has a far lower wattage than e.g. the PPC7455 which was used in PowerBooks up to 1 GHz (867 MHz, perhaps, not sure).

RacerX said:
Okay, our we forgetting the G4 PowerBook came out almost two years after the G4 PowerMacs. The only reason Apple released the PowerBook G3 at the same time as the Power Macintosh G3 was because the G3 is basically a 603ev with a special cache method.
Click to expand...

You should take a look at the amazing cooling technology of the original PCI graphics G4 from 1999 :)

http://www.bekkoame.ne.jp/~t-imai/image/g402a.jpg

They did have other reasons for delaying the PowerBook G4, though. The iMacs and iBooks had the highest priority at that time to make the Mac popular in the PC markets. The PowerBook G4 couldn't have been simple to design, and it was very different from the G3s.
And Motorola simply couldn't supply enough G4 processors at that time to fill in the portable market too, - something that shouldn't be a problem with IBM's super-modern mass production facilities.
 
ksv said:
You should take a look at the amazing cooling technology of the original PCI graphics G4 from 1999 :)
Click to expand...

Yep, right up there with the cooling technology used in the PPC 604 series systems.

Hmmm, how long was it before they made their first PPC 604/604e/604ev PowerBook?

Wasn't it never?

The first generation of the G4 processors ran much hotter than those used in the first PowerBook G4s. Even though Motorola wasn't able to move much in the MHz range in that time, they did make advances in the amount of heat the G4 gave off.

Less we forget, Motorola's main reason for the use of PowerPC based processors was the embedded processor market. Speed comes in a distant second to environmental performance (heat/energy usage). IBM uses these processors in workstations and servers, so their priorities are closer to Apple's (in the desktop area at least).

But I'm sure you knew all that already... you just wanted to keep the thread going, right? ;)
 
Something worth noting:

The CPU cache memory (L2 or L3) is what consumes most of the power and produces most of the heat inside the CPU. I figure the backside L3 cache on desktops is ok, but look at how the L2 cache is now doubled (512K) in the 4774 G4's, most noticeable in the iBooks.

I don't know how much difference it would make if they cut the L2 cache of the G5 down to 256K instead of a full 512K. It might make a difference in heat/power consumption. On a G4, L2 cache would be important, but the G5 has a faster system bus so the CPU can empty and fill its cache quicker than the G4 can. That just might compensate for smaller L2 cache, if it means fitting it into a laptop.
 
RacerX said:
Okay, our we forgetting the G4 PowerBook came out almost two years after the G4 PowerMacs.
Click to expand...

And exactly how well did this strategy work for them?

Yes, 3% market share overall. Nice.

Apple's hardware offerings for the past quite a few years have been miserable. They've been quite embarassing to the Mac community, Apple, etc. The G5 was a nice kick in the butt (nearly a year ago, now it's starting to get embarassing again) but by and large the things that keep saving Apple are savvy design and some very good long-term and short-term moves in the software space. Hardware may be where the profit is, but they certainly haven't been even coming close to selling the hardware because of the merits of the hardware.

It would be a Very Bad Thing if in late April 2005 we're still asking "where are the G5 portables?". Previous (poor) track record is not a valid excuse.

I'm guessing we'll be saying "where are our 3.0ghz Powermacs?" (or 2.6+ghz for that matter) at that time as well. I hope I'm wrong, though.
 
Ripcord said:
And exactly how well did this strategy work for them?
Click to expand...
We can continue this discussion when you learn the difference between marketing strategies and hardware limitations. But as you seem to think that the release date of the original PowerBook G4 and the future release of a PowerBook G5 (and a G5/3.0 GHz) are dictated by the marketing department, I have nothing further to say (I tend to stick with factual discussions).
 
RacerX said:
We can continue this discussion when you learn the difference between marketing strategies and hardware limitations. But as you seem to think that the release date of the original PowerBook G4 and the future release of a PowerBook G5 (and a G5/3.0 GHz) are dictated by the marketing department, I have nothing further to say (I tend to stick with factual discussions).
Click to expand...

You also seemed to almost completely ignore what ksv said about the considerably lower energy consumption of the G5. I don't know much on the matter, but if you're ignoring ksv's comment just because you can't admit you might be wrong then that's rather sad. I hope that's not the case, though.
 
celeborn said:
You also seemed to almost completely ignore what ksv said about the considerably lower energy consumption of the G5. I don't know much on the matter, but if you're ignoring ksv's comment just because you can't admit you might be wrong then that's rather sad. I hope that's not the case, though.
Click to expand...


Lower energy consumption doesnt necessarily mean that a 2GHz G5 will be as cool or cooler than a 1.5GHz G4. It's actually rather obvious that it doesn't translate that way given the Xserve G5 form factor compared to the G4 as RacerX pointed out. How about the 9 fans in a PM G5?

1.5GHz is pretty good for a notebook, PC or Mac. As long as the G4 keeps gaining in performance, what exactly is the problem? Is 64-bit really necessary for a notebook? Nobody for the last decade but Tadpole seemed to think so and their notebooks new cost $7000-$15000. Realistically, everyone freaking over the G5 notebook really has no need for a G5 in a notebook, they just have an underlying desire to have the latest and greatest despite whether they need it or not.
 
celeborn said:
You also seemed to almost completely ignore what ksv said about the considerably lower energy consumption of the G5.
Click to expand...

Not at all, because of the design of the G5 it requires less energy... but is also more prone to failure do to over heating. There is a give and take involved. Fifteen years of studying the industry (both Mac related processors and and processors used in Unix systems) gives me a pretty good understanding of what is happening and why. Those of us who had been watch the industry were not surprised by the G5 when it was released and have a strong understanding of it's properties long before anyone knew if Apple had signed on to use it at all. It also helps to have been following IBM's processor line for the last five years (POWER3, POWER3-II and POWER4 development along with PPC 750 and 4xx series processors).

And I'm confident that ksv is aware of it (even if you are not).

I don't know much on the matter, but if you're ignoring ksv's comment just because you can't admit you might be wrong then that's rather sad. I hope that's not the case, though.
Click to expand...

Did you have an actual point?

Making comments like yours which are aimed at posters rather than the subject is much more sad. Even if I didn't agree with Ripcord, at least he was more on topic than you.

Do you have something on topic to say? I've pointed out the physical limitations. I've pointed out that over coming these limitations can be both daunting and completely out of Apple's hands.

Do you have something to add?
 
As a general post.... I posted to let people know the "what"s and "why"s of the idea of a PowerBook G5. I think the measure of hostility in this thread is odd given that technology has never been a clockwork industry. It has always jumped and stalled, that is the nature of it.

I would venture that most of us have been in it long enough to know this. Though some of the posts, sadly, seem to prove me wrong in that respect.

As the old saying goes: don't shoot the messenger.
 
Everyone should chill just a little bit. :) People are getting more overheated talking about a G5 PB than an actual one.
I'd love to see a G5 PB, but I do believe we'll be around next April waiting for one, at the earliest.
And I have to disagree with Ripcord about Apple being dismal lately. The market is strong, though it could be stronger. But the lineup is getting better and better. Now the lowest-end Mac is 1Ghz. That's a pretty big jump in itself.
 
Randman, I agree and disagree with you. You are dead on that the product line-up is looking much better.
I wouldn't use the word 'dismal', but I would say that Apple is apparently having problems with quality, quantity and updates. True, Apple does not need to refresh a line as often as say a Dell or HP, but they do need to provide a better dynamic when it comes to updates. Steve said 3gh by Summer. This is going to be a major blow if Apple doesn't produce. The market analysists and financiers are going to bash Apple, the stock price will drop down to the low 20's, etc.
Also, with the difficulty of releasing products globally, especially since more and more of their revenue comes from foreign countries is also not a particularly warming thought.
I love Apple, but they really need to focus in on some way of improving some of their practices.
As for a G5 PB, I would say that it will be announced in September/October with availability in December/January.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top