New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Switcher Hangout The place for switchers to discuss their new machines, and how to work with OS X. General support can be had here for newbie stuff, like "How do I restart my new iMac?" :)

Why Dual Ghz 2.7 ?? , Why not Dual Ghz 3.0 ?


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
robbiemullen

 
robbiemullen's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 25, 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 199
robbiemullen is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: Power Mac G5 1.6Ghz,w/ 1.2Gb ram,+17" Apple studio Display..Mac Book Pro 2GHz w/ 1.5gb ram

robbiemullen is offline
I really thought the next power mac G5 was going to be a Dual Ghz 3.0, why get rid of the Ghz 2.5 drop it to Ghz 2.3 and release a Dual Ghz 2.7 ??

Anyone know where i can get good cheap hard drives for my powermac Ghz 1.6 G5 ????
QUOTE Thanks
Mr Sprout

 
Mr Sprout's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 26, 2005
Posts: 105
Mr Sprout is on a distinguished road

Mr Sprout is offline
Apple said 3 ghz yes, but unpredicted results meant the processor speed has "hit the wall" as steve jobs put it. Basically they predicted processors would get faster and faster using their current methods but they didnt. Its not just with IBM but with intel and AMD aswell. Dont worry 3 ghz will come, just not as soon as expected.
QUOTE Thanks
robbiemullen

 
robbiemullen's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 25, 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 199
robbiemullen is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: Power Mac G5 1.6Ghz,w/ 1.2Gb ram,+17" Apple studio Display..Mac Book Pro 2GHz w/ 1.5gb ram

robbiemullen is offline
What if AMD made processors for Apple, instead of IBM. there mite have been Dual core processors and then two Dual core processor in the machines, so it would be like having 4 single processors !!! sweet
QUOTE Thanks
MAC-simus

 
MAC-simus's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 08, 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 442
MAC-simus has a spectacular aura about
Mac Specs: 2GHz C2D macbook

MAC-simus is offline
apple systems are based on power PC processors. its not as simple as it sounds to "take AMD and put it in apple"
QUOTE Thanks
mynameis

 
Member Since: Sep 30, 2004
Posts: 3,378
mynameis is just really nicemynameis is just really nicemynameis is just really nicemynameis is just really nice

mynameis is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbiemullen
then two Dual core processor
There is a dual core G5(970MP) but they haven't implemented it yet. I haven't seen the Dual Core AMD processors for sale yet. I want to see a dual core, dual processor Xeon HT machine, thats like 8, kind of...
QUOTE Thanks
shaun89

 
shaun89's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 09, 2004
Posts: 1,072
shaun89 will become famous soon enough

shaun89 is offline
wat does dual core even mean ???
QUOTE Thanks
robbiemullen

 
robbiemullen's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 25, 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 199
robbiemullen is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: Power Mac G5 1.6Ghz,w/ 1.2Gb ram,+17" Apple studio Display..Mac Book Pro 2GHz w/ 1.5gb ram

robbiemullen is offline
its like two processors in one. a processor is a single chip,this will be like two chips on the one processsor,its because they can get the semi conductor material so small, it goes into mad physics and stuff, like crystal lattices and crap.thats why in the production of processors everything has to been so perfect and clean. you really are dealing with nano measurements.if something is off by an amazing little difference like .01% it can make a big difference. like pentium "celron" chips are basically pentium chips that have some sort of defect that happened at the production stage,and Intel sell them off cheaper,its just the exact same chip,but with some very tiny defect.
QUOTE Thanks
mmoy

 
Member Since: Mar 05, 2005
Posts: 282
mmoy is an unknown at this point

mmoy is offline
> Apple said 3 ghz yes, but unpredicted results meant the
> processor speed has "hit the wall" as steve jobs put it.
> Basically they predicted processors would get faster and faster
> using their current methods but they didnt. Its not just with
> IBM but with intel and AMD aswell. Dont worry 3 ghz will
> come, just not as soon as expected.

The companies have hit the wall with-regard-to frequency speeds for their current chip technologies. I think that PPC is at
130 nanometers. The next shrink would be at 90 nanometers.
AMD is ramping up at 90 and Intel is working on 65 so Intel is
leading the pack here.

There were some benchmarks on AMD's new Venice core and
they were very impressive in terms of power consumption and
performance and top end. AMD can make faster chips with the
process shrink to 90 nm.

> What if AMD made processors for Apple, instead of IBM.
> there mite have been Dual core processors and then two
> Dual core processor in the machines, so it would be like
> having 4 single processors !!! sweet

AMD has their own production constraints and there have been
some talk in that they have some problems making enough of
the highest-performing parts.

AMD's chips top out at 2.6 Ghz though I think that they're
going to get a little more headroom with 90 NM. But dual-core
will be very, very nice. The AMD K8 architecture was designed
as a multi-core architecture which gives it an advantage over
MC chips from Intel. I don't know the history of PPC very well
and can't comment there.

> apple systems are based on power PC processors. its not as
> simple as it sounds to "take AMD and put it in apple"

Digital ported VMS from VAX to Alpha and HP took it and ported it to Itanium. Microsoft ported Windows-32 from x86 to PowerPC, MIPs and Alpha. And ported Windows to Itanium and
x86-64. Sun ported Solaris to x86 and x86-64.

It isn't easy to do but it's been done. Many times.

AMD chips are cheaper because they have the advantage of
more volume so per-unit costs are lower. Can PowerPC gain
there? I think that would be hard to do unless Macs become
a lot more popular.

> There is a dual core G5(970MP) but they haven't
> implemented it yet. I haven't seen the Dual Core AMD
> processors for sale yet. I want to see a dual core, dual
> processor Xeon HT machine, thats like 8, kind of...

There's an article at http://www.aceshardware.com/forums/r...9046&forumid=1 saying that Sabre has 145 of them and is using them for their online airfare search system.

I saw a web page at hp's site where they are selling AMD DUal Core systems. I don't have a link handy though. My next system will probably be a dual-core AMD notebook system. Not sure what I'm going to run on it though.
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« Mail and Safari: Better alternatives? | File/Folder Synchronization apps »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sticky Mouse on Dual 1.8 GHz G5 DRBOB64 Apple Desktops 2 11-07-2004 07:15 PM
dual 1.25 powermac g4....worth it? jonmichael23 Apple Desktops 1 01-26-2004 01:42 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:10 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?