The G5 myth

[Sun Baked]

Intel Xeon X5570 compared Power6

Likely if Power6-lite was around Apple would be at half the cores (4) and drastically smaller cache.

It has been around awhile and likely won't be replaced until next year, so still even if the had gotten the Power5-lite and Power6-Lite there would still be some thumb twiddling while Intel catches up and jumps ahead.

 

[flopticalcube]

Intel Xeon X5570 compared Power6

Likely if Power6-lite was around Apple would be at half the cores (4) and drastically smaller cache.

It has been around awhile and likely won't be replaced until next year, so still even if the had gotten the Power5-lite and Power6-Lite there would still be some thumb twiddling while Intel catches up and jumps ahead.

4.7GHz?!?!

How much power does it draw?

 

[MisterMe]

4.7GHz?!?!

How much power does it draw?

Perhaps, this might help.

 

[MacBH928]

so the g5 was really better but development stopped because intel was working on a faster pace and it was too hot for laptops so Apple quit on them?

suppose Apple believed in IBM and kept IBM chips, will we see G6 and G7 beating intel chips?

last but not least, do G5 machines got any special place in the hart of the consumers? are they collectables ? are they higher priced?

 

[Sun Baked]

Perhaps, this might help.

OK, got it the Power6 with the addition of Altivec and power saving features replaced the G5 family.

Was wondering where the desktop version went ... cool enough for blades at least.

Would have been the so-called G6 on the old roadmap, holding its own against the current Xeon and being replaced next year, but not in the same power class. So no laptops even remotely in the picture.

 

[FourCandles]

suppose Apple believed in IBM and kept IBM chips, will we see G6 and G7 beating intel chips?

Indeed. And, as it's Tuesday tomorrow, we could have been debating the arrival of the new G7 PowerBooks

 

[Berlepsch]

so the g5 was really better but development stopped because intel was working on a faster pace and it was too hot for laptops so Apple quit on them?

suppose Apple believed in IBM and kept IBM chips, will we see G6 and G7 beating intel chips?

last but not least, do G5 machines got any special place in the hart of the consumers? are they collectables ? are they higher priced?

It was obvious several years ago that the race for higher clock speeds was over due to the leak currents at speeds above 3-4 GHz, and CPU producers offered multicore processors instead.
The IBM approach was either too limited in scope (Cell architecture as used in the PS3) or too expensive and energy consuming (multicore Power 6). Intel's core architecture offers a much better relation of cost / computing power / energy consumption compared to IBM, and that is why Apple has switched.

 

[iPhoneNYC]

And today, G5 refers to a Net Jet. "G5 baby, G5"

 

[Quad 2.5 G5 =)]

yeah also take into account that PPC CPU's were kind of at a stand still. if you look at benchmarks you will see that Intel has stepped up the game each step of the way as where PPC kind of stayed in the same territories.

not to say that with today's technology they couldn't be faster. but just saying they were kind of 'stuck'

The one place that the PowerPC 970 made a large step was from single core (970fx)to dual core(970MP), My Quad 2.5 will beat any other G5 PowerMac, and also any other PPC Macs ever made. The G5 PowerMacs are still very capable and expandable, especially the Dual-Core models, because of their PCI Express slots.

 

[MacBH928]

This is very interesting

So now the G5 really still exists , it just evolved into Power6?
Now it is used by servers and in ps3?

I really thought those were Apple only chips and once they stopped buying them IBM had to terminate the production.

Question is, why those using Power6 have not switched to intel!
If intel is cheaper and faster

 

[Tortellino]

how many consumers use number crunching? Most apple consumers are in media and creative industry not in calculating DNA's or such(note most).

If you consider image editing in Photoshop, or press preparation for offset printing, or video editing - they are mostly number crunching, and they are not done in video cards, and G5 was very good at it in its day. Technology marches on, and other processors overtook G5 in terms of performance. Nothing unusual about that.

and here where it gets me, Apple are known to have bad games support. Now I hear that consoles(Dedicated gaming machines) use powerpc chips. Hmm...
what is Apple doing wrong in that sector? Is it the graphics card?

It's the programming interfaces (API) and the OS support. The hardware was good, it's the software that was not very supportive.

 

[Tortellino]

Question is, why those using Power6 have not switched to intel!
If intel is cheaper and faster

Faster at certain things, but not necessarily all. Different CPU architectures are better at different things. PowerPC processors are still used in some military applications, enterprise level servers and gaming consoles. Also probably in consumer devices like washing machines or microwave ovens. No processor is the best in every area, and compromises have to be made. So eventually the CPU choice is determined by priorities set by any given task.

 

[yg17]

This is very interesting

So now the G5 really still exists , it just evolved into Power6?
Now it is used by servers and in ps3?

I really thought those were Apple only chips and once they stopped buying them IBM had to terminate the production.

Question is, why those using Power6 have not switched to intel!
If intel is cheaper and faster

Because there are specialized areas where PPC chips are better than Intel chips, but for general computing for average people like you and me, Intel chips are better. PPC chips still have a niche market. Hell, chances are, your car has a PPC chip in it somewhere, they're still used extensively in the automotive industry.

Besides, it's not as simple as just switching to Intel. Apple had the money and resources to undergo a transition to Intel, other companies still using PPC chips may not, nor is it really even necessary, like in the case of a car's computer, processor speed is not that important. The PPC chips used now are more than capable of doing the job, there's no benefit to switching to Intel.

Also, G3, G4 and G5 were brand names made up by Apple because G5 sounds better than PowerPC 970FX. And the PowerPC architecture goes far beyond what we know as G3, G4 and G5. The G5 chip itself may not be in much use today, it's the PowerPC architecture that still lives on in many forms. G5 is just one specific chip that uses a PPC architecture, just like Intel Core 2 Duo is just one chip that uses the x86 architecture

 

[jaw04005]

In the graphs it has the P4 3 ghz which was not released for years after the G5 2.0ghz dual. Yet the G5 still smokes it!.

What? The Power Mac G5 with Dual 2.0Ghz G5 processors was released in June of 2003. It didn't ship until later that summer.

I had already purchased two Dell Dimension desktops with Pentium 4 processors running at 3.06Ghz by then. The 3.06Ghz clock speed Pentium 4 was the first consumer chip to have hyper-threading and it debuted in November of 2002. Intel even had shipped an update to Pentium 4 3.0Ghz chip, upping its front side bus to 800Mhz in April of that year.

So, yes, a Pentium 4 chip at 3.0Ghz+ was available months before the Power Mac G5 was introduced.

This was right in the middle of the gigahertz race, and I remember wondering why the G5 didn't debut at 3.0Ghz. Ironically, at WWDC 2003 Steve Jobs made his famous promise that "the G5 would reach 3.0Ghz in 12 months."

Of course, that wouldn't happen until two and half years later after Jobs had already announced Apple's switch to Intel processors.

 

[allmIne]

This thread is funny. It's like the OP fell asleep five years ago, and woke up today

 

[trainguy77]

What? The Power Mac G5 with Dual 2.0Ghz G5 processors was released in June of 2003. It didn't ship until later that summer.

I had already purchased two Dell Dimension desktops with Pentium 4 processors running at 3.06Ghz by then. The 3.06Ghz clock speed Pentium 4 was the first consumer chip to have hyper-threading and it debuted in November of 2002. Intel even had shipped an update to Pentium 4 3.0Ghz chip, upping its front side bus to 800Mhz in April of that year.

So, yes, a Pentium 4 chip at 3.0Ghz+ was available months before the Power Mac G5 was introduced.

This was right in the middle of the gigahertz race, and I remember wondering why the G5 didn't debut at 3.0Ghz. Ironically, at WWDC 2003 Steve Jobs made his famous promise that "the G5 would reach 3.0Ghz in 12 months."

Of course, that wouldn't happen until three and half years later after Jobs had already announced Apple's switch to Intel processors.

I stand corrected. Regardless the g5 beats out the p4 3ghz any day.

 

[blackhand1001]

I stand corrected. Regardless the g5 beats out the p4 3ghz any day.

Yeah, but at the time the athlon 64 had the title of best performance and performance per clock beating out pentium 4 3.8 ghz at 2.2ghz and also did not run nearly as hot as the pentium 4's (especially prescott) or G5.
The first generation opteron (first 64bit x86, First integrated memory controller) which the Athlon 64 was based on is probably one of the largest milestones in x86 processors in the past 10 years.

In the graphs it has the P4 3 ghz which was not released for years after the G5 2.0ghz dual. Yet the G5 still smokes it!

Northwood Pentium 4 3.0ghz was released November 2002.

 

[trainguy77]

Yeah, but at the time the athlon 64 had the title of best performance and performance per clock beating out pentium 4 3.8 ghz at 2.2ghz and also did not run nearly as hot as the pentium 4's (especially prescott) or G5.
The first generation opteron (first 64bit x86, First integrated memory controller) which the Athlon 64 was based on is probably one of the largest milestones in x86 processors in the past 10 years.

Yet the G5 once again still beats them both on the barefeats link.

 

[blackhand1001]

Barefeats is obviously just a bit biased towards apple based on their page. And its not a common benchmark or a true measure of speed. Besides, in early 2006 before apples switch to Intel in its PowerMacs, Both athlon x2 64 and Intel Conroe (first core 2) were killing g5 in benchmarks.

 

[Dustman]

Indeed. And, as it's Tuesday tomorrow, we could have been debating the arrival of the new G7 PowerBooks

But then we'd still be listening to that same joke.. over.. and over again.

 

[MacBH928]

Thanx everyone for clearing the picture.
I guess although in its day the G5 was superior , it had a lot of media praising it as a supreme computer, and we all know Apple fans how they act around new products.

I am glad though that competition exists, cause I hate to see a monopoly because that limits the chances of variety and limits the possibilities .

Speaking of monopoly, will we ever see AMD chips in Apple? I guess only time will tell if Apple follows its way of adapting the fastest chip. Intel must slip for at least some time, they cant be up there forever

 

[GimmeSlack12]

Thanx everyone for clearing the picture.
I guess although in its day the G5 was superior , it had a lot of media praising it as a supreme computer, and we all know Apple fans how they act around new products.

What in the world made you think there was a "Myth" surrounding the G5? And why are we talking about it now??? The G5 has been out of production for almost 4 years.

And what does competition have to do with anything? What are you talking about?
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

 

[vaxt]

I'm still waiting for PowerBook G5s...

Next tuesday?????

 

[GimmeSlack12]

I'm still waiting for PowerBook G5s...

Next tuesday?????

That horse has been dead for some time my friend.