Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Apple 2.5 ghz

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 9, 2004 8:36:38 PM

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/09/apple_g5_promis...


That burst some bubble.I have read link and argue how many time on SOI technologie.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by juin on 06/09/04 09:26 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

More about : apple ghz

June 10, 2004 1:06:35 AM

Haha who's the hell is left to say AMD can do it flawlessly now?

Xeon

<font color=orange>Scratch Here To Reveal Prize</font color=orange>
June 10, 2004 1:22:31 AM

lol id agree that it looks like ibm's 90nm process also lead to increase temps and unforseen ratings. But I dont htink anyone ever said it would be done flawlessly. You do realize there are cahnces taht the reason amd is the last out with such parts is that they may have known this would happen and are perhaps trying to geta solution before going volume. Im sure they are working closely with ibm to try and work something out. Dont take this one cpu release as a sign of amd's release. Its true its not a good sign, but its stilll possible mad can work out enough of the kinks before release. AMD has been in production of 90nm parts for about a year now, its very possible they have taken things slow knowing what they had to deal with.

I also think ibm was kind of rushed to market with that chip for apple, they dont usually care to take time on cpus.

No one can say amd will haave as bad a time when they are ready for full release. Perhaps they already had the problems and are trying to respin or revise the chip to bring it in line.
Related resources
June 10, 2004 3:22:48 AM

LOL. Apple implementing liquid cooling. That's a pretty good one. People are getting 3.5 GHz on stock air heatsinks. Apple can't even get 2.5 GHz without liquid. They may get to 3 Ghz with liquid nitrogen.
June 10, 2004 6:17:46 AM

no one has ever mentioned overclocking on a mac, i guess its impossible, but id like to see how power pc chips scale.
June 10, 2004 1:44:49 PM

Yeah liquid cooling already at 2.5ghz. I know that huge compared to PC terms but that aint give them much room in the future for newer chips for anything past liquid cooling has extreme maintance costs.

Mobile Barton 2500+ @ 2420mhz 11x220 1.7v
Asus A7N8X Dlx 440 FSB
1gb Geil GD pc3500 Dual Channel (2-3-3-6)
Segata 80gb SATA 8.5ms seek
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro to XT(420/730)
June 11, 2004 3:39:13 AM

Seems to me that we are missing something a little more important here...sure we can laugh that Apple requires liquid cooling on a 2.5GHz cpu, but look at what they have done to cool it. What is on cooligies site (the company who came up with the technology) is to me impressive. Its more elegant solution surely than cooling a cpu by jet engine. Given the choice, I would rather have a hotter CPU being cooled efficiently and near silently than a cooler one being cooled by something that sounds like it belongs on the deck of an Aircraft carrier. Ideally of course you would have a cool cpu being cooled by fluid silently :) 
June 11, 2004 4:25:46 AM

AMD TDP of 105 watt inlcude dual core or not.Many think it include dual core.IBM result on 90NM SOI suggest otherwise.IBM manufacturing service have debug AMD SOI on 130NM there all chance AMD will end with the same result.90NM will be a dead end for many small corporation.IBM will have to rethink it strategy.

i need to change useur name.
June 11, 2004 7:58:16 AM

again, you have no evidence to back that up other then apple's use of water cooling. there have been no tests on the hardware that confirm it is as bad as intel's 90nm shift or if its changed at all. who knows why appple made the move at this point? no one does. your jumping to conclusions. and evne if it is true, you have to say its possible amd may be the last out becuase ibm is working out the kinks with amd? apple was so pushy about a new chip line that they forced ibm's hand, which may have forced them to release to them an untuned 90nm part. still what your saying and anyone else is saying is all speculation at this point.

i also call into question the tdp number of 105W, thats still under debate as to if thats the offical number or not. if it is, then as amd usually does, this is the max output of any processor in the line. now if dual core chips really will be pin compatible , then one owuld have to assume that number, whatever it is, covers dual core as well.
June 11, 2004 8:32:39 AM

>LOL. Apple implementing liquid cooling. That's a pretty
>good one. People are getting 3.5 GHz on stock air
>heatsinks. Apple can't even get 2.5 GHz without liquid.
>They may get to 3 Ghz with liquid nitrogen.

What a silly argument.. first, clockspeed really doesnt matter. A G5 @2.5 GHz should be faster than a 3.4 P4 (or A64) for a lot of things, if not most things if only the compilers where anywhere as good as x86 compilers.

Secondly, who says the G5 *requires* liquid cooling ? maybe its just that this form of cooling is cheaper and/or more silent than conventional air cooling. I personally like the idea of cheap&reliable liquid cooling for mainstream PC's.

Third, the G5 is a 66mm² small cpu. So even if it would dissapate only ~60W TDP, it would have a similar thermal density as a 3.4 GHz Prescott, which is *more* than reason enough to consider liquid cooling if you don't like jet engine fans and/or sizzling hot chips.

I wouldn't be too fast to ridicule this, neither the system cooling, nor the chip.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
June 12, 2004 2:37:51 AM

Third, the G5 is a 66mm² small cpu. So even if it would dissapate only ~60W TDP, it would have a similar thermal density as a 3.4 GHz Prescott, which is *more* than reason enough to consider liquid cooling if you don't like jet engine fans and/or sizzling hot chips.

You got a point it size\watt is about the same as prescott but does not feature a ratio logic transistor\cache similar to Prescott.

i need to change useur name.
June 12, 2004 2:51:14 AM

Conclusion have you read IBM eng lately there are all in the same boat 90NM offer a Dielectric too small it leak nothing can help on that unless you got a low K eff.As far as i know only intel have paper on that and it not before 45 NM.Intel trasmeta TSMC UMC enginner lean toward this also.You can find new article from the automate desing conference.


90NM cannot be up toune or upgrade the industry have take a wrong path nothing can help on this.Intel chief technologie officer made that clear.A very large variation happen in the atomic layer and behavior.I put more it simple if a 4 layer of atom in area and the others it only 2 the variation is 100% while on 130NM it will be 8 or 6 layer variation of 33%.Unless you can have a tech to control atoms your srew.(no to take for actuale real fact just a simple exemple)

i need to change useur name.
June 12, 2004 4:06:14 AM

sorry, im trying to follow you, but some of it im just not understanding.

but if i follow correctly, you think 90nm is a dead end. which i disagree with. plus, id doubt that intel's CTO really would know that for sure he could say such a thing. Maybe intel found that out about the behavior of thier process, i did hear about that, but you or anyone has no idea about the other processes out there. ibm hasnt made a such a claim. its possible its not so bad all around. ill grant that on any shrink, as you get smaller, the ease of transition grows worse, but its very possible that SOI made it possible to postpone these problems longer then SS with intel .

i just wait for hard data, this speculating is getting no where.
June 12, 2004 10:01:53 AM

Third, the G5 is a 66mm² small cpu. So even if it would dissapate only ~60W TDP, it would have a similar thermal density as a 3.4 GHz Prescott,

Yes and there are other differences as well.

which is *more* than reason enough to consider liquid cooling if you don't like jet engine fans and/or sizzling hot chips.

For instance, prescott features hyperthreading, and is not build on soi

But I do'nt see what that has to do with anything.

You got a point it size\watt is about the same as prescott but does not feature a ratio logic transistor\cache similar to Prescott.

<font color=blue>and if you find this post confusing to read, you have a hard time finding my responses hidden between copy/pasted quotes, it is because <b>it doesn't use any form of quote tags !!!</b></font color=blue>

i need to change useur name.

<A HREF="http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html" target="_new">learn to quote </A>first.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
June 12, 2004 4:02:57 PM

um i ddi say i agreed that no matter what process, getting smaller in scale would get more difficult with each process.

my point is that differnt techniques yield differnt results, as you illustrated for me. as you can see from your own numbers, different techniques yield different results. Im not arguing it isnt still difficult, just that there are options to lessen the blow.

besides, the point on this thread is taht you cant judge apple's use of water cooling as ibm has failed to produce for 90nm, when there are plenty of reasons apple might do water cooling.
June 14, 2004 8:44:10 PM

For Intel and IBM power projection was too low and
VCC was increase for normalization.The result may differ but they are in the same range.Scotty is twice as large and have twice the logic transistor of a G5 and have twice the watt consumation.That simplistic nut hold some true.

i need to change useur name.
June 14, 2004 9:45:55 PM

im sitll waiting to see hard facts from actual product, which we wont see for a bit im sure.
June 14, 2004 10:48:25 PM

You know, for normal posting, I don't really harass people about spelling and grammer. But when you are discussing complicated issues like atomic structures and heat dissipation, it severly impedes understanding when you misspell, skip words, and fail to use punctuation. It also calls into question how much you know what you're talking about, if you can't seem to put a coherent post. Not trying to rip into you, but do you think anyone would have taken Watson and Crick seriously if their paper on genetics looked like this:

"long time peopl have thought smalest thing in human body was blood. now that not true. Infermation stored insid tiny double helics inside each sel. This pased to babys by parent."

See what I mean?

"If I owned this place and hell, I'd rent out this place and live in hell" - Toombs
June 15, 2004 12:02:45 AM

LOL. I really can't say I disagree.

I don't like bashing none native speakers for not being able to write perfect english either (especially since I can't myself, and am not a native English speaker/writer myselve), but Juin clearly doesn't even *TRY*. He is too lazy to use quote's, url tags, reread his posts and correct errors which even he ought to see, or just try to use a correct gramar or spelling; instead, he just types in something which is (I think) a literal "translation" from french, and if the word is somewhat similar, he'll just use french spelling, et, etc,.. I mean serioulsy, even in French they have punctuation you know...

I find this extremely irritating, and frankly appalling for someone who has posted a few thousand posts here over the years. Its even very "hautaine" (sorry, don't know the english word, something like rude/impolite/) to expect everyone to try hard to read and understand (rather: interprete) your posts when you're not making the slightest effort to make yourselve understood.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
June 15, 2004 2:52:17 AM

here are some images of the cooling system:

<A HREF="http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=501" target="_new">http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=501&lt;/A>

i really have a hard time believing this is becuase of the cpus... i just cant accept that ibm's process would have turned out so poor that it takes all of that to cool it at decent sound levels. im thinking more and more that this is style move by apple, something to get themselves more popular with some enthusiasts and such. until i see someone actaully test the chip, i have a hard time believing its the chip's heat.
June 15, 2004 7:55:01 AM

> im thinking more and more that this is style move by
>apple,

Whaaaaaaaahaha LMAO ! Yeah, that sounds credible, that cooling setup was completely unnessecary, its just a design gimmic. too bad they completely hide it though, can't even see that if you open up a G5 ! Get real trooper.

No, its obvious those chips aren't too easy to cool, which can be explained in part by their tiny size, but looking at that, I'd say those 2.5 GHz models are nothing but overclocked 2 GHz parts.

Do note however, those heatpipes aren't connect to the back of the cpu's, but more likely the VRM's.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
June 15, 2004 11:19:08 PM

oh i appreciate the wake up call lol :p 

always nice to see that, i havent laughed in your face yet :p 

actually im thinking pretty much in reality here thank you.
see what my feeling is either these are not the 90nm parts or if they are, this cooling is nto neccesary to keep it cool per say, but possible to keep the entire system quite. who knows, it could be they wil also use it on the video card to keep it silent. since you dont seem to understand marketing, silent running is a plus and selling point. it can be a bonus...

i never said it was completely unnessecary, dont put words in my mouth. i just said i find it hard to eblive ibm's prcess failed so completely that cooling requires such measures... prescotts dont need that kind of cooling.. you think amd chips will also require this? they are after all working with ibm.

my point still stands, until we see hard evidence and numbers from testing, you cant say the cooling was required, just as much as i could say it isnt.

all i can say is, if this is required, then ibm failed miserably...
June 16, 2004 7:48:38 AM

Ah, k, seems I missunderstood your point. Agreed, you could most likely cool it with loud prescott style aircooling as well.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
June 20, 2004 3:37:04 AM

I would have to agree with you here.

It is in apple nature to make a machine as quite as possible. They have prided themselve in the past on this, especially with the lovely G4 Cube which was completly fanless. Unfortunalty for apple the had to bring the cube to EoL due early to Motorla crapping out at 500Mhz. (there is an upgrade now however. you upgrade to 1Ghz now.

but thats nearther here nore there.

i beleive apple has said things in the past about having a quite workstation is important to productivity too.

Just as they have said te Intel's or AMDs chip are power hungry... Bad Move of coarse because oneday they mave to eat their own words.

All in all, it is somewhat of a gimmic... but it's a gimmic that ppl want.

Sad tho that its built wrong. <A HREF="http://www.apple.com/powermac/design.html" target="_new">cooling solution 1</A> ,<A HREF="http://www.appleinsider.com/images/G5internalcooling2.j..." target="_new">2</A> ,<A HREF="http://www.appleinsider.com/images/G5internalcoolingsma..." target="_new">3</A>

<b><A HREF="http://www.digitalgunfire.com" target="_new">DigitalGunfire-Industrial EBM</A></b>
ASUS P4S8X-P4 2.4B - 2x512M DDR333 - ATI 9500Pro - WD80G HD(8M) - SAMSUNG SV0844D 8G HD - LG 16X DVD - Yamaha F1 CDRW<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by cdpage on 06/19/04 11:45 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
June 20, 2004 5:01:28 AM

I have look a bit on your digital gunfire stuff not bad

i need to change useur name.
!