Are we on the verge of processor breakthrough?

[The Return of the 'nut]

As some of you know, I'm planning on buying a 20 inch iMac G5 when I get back home but I've started fearing that perhaps we are sitting on products that are going to be trounced in their next update and that that update may come relatively soon.

By the gaming console announcements this week it appears IBM has made many breakthroughs in processor technology and is prepared to deliver on them this year and early next year. Triple cores, cells, new processes, new designs, etc. The fact that these are going into 300-400 dollar consoles also makes me think there could be significant cost savings with new processors.

So, will Apple reap the benefits of this soon? Will we be seeing widespread multicore processor usage in Apple's lineup. If this really is the year of HD it's going to require a lot of processor power and right now Apple reccomends a dual G5. So, for the iMac to be HD native would require a multicore G5.

What I'm worried about is that we may see multicore iMacs by fall.

[Wrao]

Hm. I too am planning on getting an iMac g5 soon, specifically because, while my powerbook is plenty powerful, I tax it to death with all the audio stuff I've been doing lately. I figured the iMac g5 would probably be more power than I would know what to do with, but then, I thought that about my powerbook when I got it, and now a year later I'm already at the brink with stuff that I do nearly everyday.

I hadn't really thought about the possibility that multicore chips would suddenly find themselves all over the map re:apple computers. I guess it could be likely, but I doubt it would be in the fall. Seems a little bit too soon, especially since they'll probably upgrade the towers with multicore chips before they get to the iMacs, since the iMacs already cut into the tower's sales substantially.(at least, it seems that way)

I dunno, I'm not all that worried about it. I'm going to buy my iMac g5 when I can, and it will be great, and I probably won't need any new computers for a long time to come, and if I do, well, fortunately apple computers have great resell value, and eBay is always brimming with them. I would say it's not a bad idea to get the computer you want now, if you have the means, and use the hell out of it, and really enjoy it, and then should something truly big come out in 6 months, sell it, and use the cash towards getting that new thing. Ultimately you lose a little money, but you get to have a kickass computer the whole time.

[Kickaha]

Also, remember that those console prices are loss-leaders for the companies selling them. They lose money on each sale, they make their revenue on the games and licensing. I'm expecting an outcry over over-priced Macs again by those who only hear that 'the new consoles use the same chips as Macs, but are several times faster, and 1/4 the price'. Very different chips, very different market. Won't stop the talk though.

[sunrain]

Hey Kick: Off topic question. When will you reach your 2,000th post?

[Mac+]

Great topic 'nut.

I'm almost in the same boat as you. Want to upgrade to the 20" G5 iMac. However, lately I have been plagued by the following four thoughts/niggles in relation to going for the G5 in the iMac:
Music apps that have been coded right really benefit from dual processors! (and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this too Wrao)
G5s are capable of being able to access up to 8GB of RAM ... the iMac is limited to only 2GB?
G5 system bus is 1/3 on consumer Macs, yet 1/2 on Pro Macs - ideally I'd like the fastest FSB I can get.
new processor developments - dual core?


Also, this has got me thinking of holding off a bit longer as well:
So, will Apple reap the benefits of this soon? Will we be seeing widespread multicore processor usage in Apple's lineup. If this really is the year of HD it's going to require a lot of processor power and right now Apple reccomends a dual G5. So, for the iMac to be HD native would require a multicore G5.
I'd like to think we're at a breakthrough point (wouldn't everybody) but I just don't know. WWDC is coming up - wait and see I guess. :\

As for a possible iMac multicore revision in the Fall (Spt/Oct/Nov)? - I doubt it - but would be happy to be proved wrong, provided I did not just succumb and buy a 20" G5 iMac. ;)

[torifile]

If this really is the year of HD...


And 2003 was the "year of the notebook". But the powerbook line received a grand total of one update following that announcement and the iBook line received two. And neither of those updates were revolutionary in the slightest. Take what SJ says with a grain of salt.

[ghoti]

2005 is also the year of the rooster (according to the Chinese calendar).

[Mac+]

And 2003 was the "year of the notebook". But the powerbook line received a grand total of one update following that announcement and the iBook line received two. And neither of those updates were revolutionary in the slightest. Take what SJ says with a grain of salt.Agreed SJ is the master of spin ... but perhaps he was referring to the fact that the 12" and 17" models were just introduced. Granted, they dragged their feet with the 15" Aluminiumisation, but his "year of the notebook" could be taken many ways. :\

Anyway, I'm certainly hoping to see some HD related products/technology unveiled at the WWDC.

[Wickers]

Interesting,

I have also wondered just how/if the PPC chips in the latest from MS and Sony could tie into the computing field. After reading into cell, it seems like that's the overall plan.

[curiousuburb]

iMac and eMac just got a bump (CPU, DL DVD, 64MB VRAM GPU upgrade for Core Image support).

Multi-core chips will likely first appear in the PowerMacs and probably won't make the low end this yr.
I hold out a small chance that the 17" PowerBook might also get a new processor. 15 maybe.

If I were betting on new processors for desktops, I wouldn't wait on the 20" iMac.
I'd wager it won't get bumped again until early '06.

Just my .034 CDN

[Wrao]

Great topic 'nut.

I'm almost in the same boat as you. Want to upgrade to the 20" G5 iMac. However, lately I have been plagued by the following four thoughts/niggles in relation to going for the G5 in the iMac:[list=1]
Music apps that have been coded right really benefit from dual processors! (and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this too Wrao)


No doubt, a music app that has been coded to take advantage of dual processors would really benefit from them. That said, I currently top out at 40-50 tracks with medium effects in garageband. Once that happens I have to lock down 10 or more to start adding more tracks, which slows the whole process down considerably.

While a dual processor g5 would undoubtedly be ultimately a lot faster with audio stuff. The difference between my 1.25 ghz powerbook and a 2.0ghz g5 iMac is astounding. If for nothing more than the 7200 RPM hard drive and 2 GB of RAM I will get(ram for iMac is way cheaper than ram for powerbook)

Of course, there is always the unlikely chance that I'll get my iMac, be able to smoothly record 50+ tracks with moderate effects, and then 6 months later finding myself wishing I could smoothly record 80 tracks :p

But really, when it gets to be that many tracks, there are usually always ways to trim it down and produce a better track in the end.

Interestingly enough, garageband is more of a process hog than it's bigger brother's Logic express and Pro. Sometime this summer I intend to invest in Logic, and when that happens, I should be able to record more tracks with more effects just by default, let alone with a fancy new iMac g5.

I stand by the fact that assuming there is a substantial processor upgrade for the iMacs in 5-6 months, I will be able to sell my $2000 iMac for $1700-$1800 optimistically, and use that cash towards buying a new one, if the processor upgrade is substantial enough that is.

[Mac+]

Thanks for the reply Wrao - have you tried GB on a G5 iMac already to *know* that the difference is astounding, or is that speculation?

I do not run GB on my trusty Ti550 - but I did try it on my sister's work computer - a 12" 867 AlPB - the experience sucked big time. Probably not enough RAM though.

Anyway, I personally love Live and want to add dp to my set-up. I'd be interested to hear some feedback from those that went the G5 iMac route for music apps. I am sorely tempted by the G5 iMac for so many reasons ... but, at the same time, I want to make sure that I will not be frustrated a year or so down the track. :\

[Wrao]

Thanks for the reply Wrao - have you tried GB on a G5 iMac already to *know* that the difference is astounding, or is that speculation?

I have not yet demoed the new g5s with garageband. But I do recall that even on the old model with 256 RAM, everything loaded *way* quicker than anything loads on my powerbook. Unfortunately, due to having 256 RAM, it could barely handle 10 tracks. But I would have 2 GB of RAM in it, and it would be good.

[CobaltFire]

I can't say anything about GarangeBand, but iMovieHD is SIGNIFICANTLY faster on my 15" PB Al (1.25, 512) than on my GF's iMac G5 17" (1.8/768). This was working with the exact same clips, on the exact same OS (same updates and all). Maybe this is just a fluke, but I am thinking that the iMacs are further crippled than people think. As in, some processors need a high FSB just to run properly, and it looks to me like the G5's are one of those. In other words, that crippled FSB may be robbing the processor of most of it's power for large files and the like. Keep in mind that the clips I was working with were rather large (4.85GB each, 4 clips at once with multiple copies running) so I don't know. Also, the imac has a 256MB and a 512MB, so it is being robbed of half of it's mem bandwidth too. That might solve the problem there as well. Just thought that I would let you guys know.

[The Return of the 'nut]

well, certainly seems like something is wrong there, and I'm fairly certain it isn't FSB speed. It really should not be a close comparison between those two and I haven't seen any other reports backing your experience up.

[CobaltFire]

Yeah, I thought it was a fluke as well, but you never know. Remember that a G4 is, clock for clock, about as fast as a G5 with the 1/3 FSB. So her machine should have smoked mine, but for some reason it didn't. I think I figured it out though, and I think I was kinda stupid. I was decoding DiVX clips, and I think I forgot to install the codec on her machine... My bad.