Freescale Debuts Faster, Cooler G4
acsinc writes "The Register reports that Freescale (Motorola's chip division) has launched the 90nm G4, and is planning a dual core version for next year. The chip is faster -- over 1.5GHz -- and cooler than the old chip, but it is also pin compatible. This ought to help provide a speed bump for PowerBooks, which still don't have G5s."
probably a sneaky little trick like Intel use with the miraculous HT technology i suppose it doesn't really matter if its pin compatible or not, Apple will just have to whack out a new motherboard. Its not like you can just go and build yourself a laptop from bits you can buy off the shelf (granted if you had the will you could but why would you unless you have access to necessary fabs, to make your contraption a laptop), an I assume Apple stick a fair markup on the powerbooks any way, so they could probably eat any initial development costs and keep thing at relatively the same price.
My that is rather cunning...!?
So when the dual core G4s do come out I could run 2 separate operating systems simultaneously? That's odd, how (and which ones) is that pulled off. Getting a dual boot mac is enough of a pain in the ass, to have it multi boot is, yeah I don't see that happening.
I boycott signatures
And the other benefit is that people will start getting rid of G4's to try to get a nice shiny new G5. Everyone who i thinking about a Powerbook, but can't quite justify it is waiting for the G5.
Personally, I'm more interested in a dual-core G4 powerbook. I do a few things that would possibly benefit from 64bit address space, but usually not on my laptop. On the other hand, I do a lot of highly parallel stuff while on the go, and so I would notice a lot more of an improvement from a dual core CPU. Not to mention the fact that a dual 1.5GHz machine will run a lot cooler than a 3GHz one (since power is roughly proportional to the square of the clock speed for ICs), not to mention the fact that the G4s have a history of being significantly cooler than the G5s. A dual 2GHz G4 would be really nice (not that my 1.5GHz PowerBook feels slow, but more speed is always nice)
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
What some people don't realize, is that more than the extra Mhz that this processor provides, it does up the bus speed to 200Mhz (current 1.5Ghz G4s are at 167Mhz). That is a pretty hefty increase, so they should perform quite well...
:) The common 7200 RPM drives and high end video use a lot of power and generate a lot of heat...
But having said that, I (who own a 1.5Ghz 15' Powerbook) would rather see the G5 in a laptop.
While the G5 is a GREAT processor, the 64bitness is not it's strongest points. The G5 is simply a very efficient processor... But still, most apps are not CPU constrained, but Bandwidth constrained. In fact, I would bet that a 2Ghz G4 on a 200Mhz bus would still be outperformed by a 1.6Ghz G5 on a 800Mhz bus.
What I would like to see would be a ~ 1.5Ghz G5 laptop with a 1Ghz bus and a 7200rpm disk and a good video card. They could do that right, and not have heat problems. But it wouldn't be cheap...
Interestingly, if you don't believe how much things OTHER than the processor can impact performance, if you have a PowerBook (especially one with a 4200RPM drive) - Run XBench, note the score, then plug it into a 7200RPM firewire drive, and run it again (using the firewire drive instead of the internal). Note the score. That one little change should give you a pretty good speed boost!
So, can I replace the 800MHz G4 in my iBook with one of these?
This is the Constitution.This is the Constitution under the Bush administration. Any questions?
How can you have compatable pinout on a dual core cpu?
As others have pointed out, the newly released version is not dual core. But more to the point, what's to prevent the dual core version from having the same, or substantially same, pinout? No matter how many processing units you have on the chip, you still only need one address bus, one data bus, one clock, etc. Maybe multiple cores would require a few extra signals -- I'm certainly not a chip designer -- but it seems unlikely that the pinouts would have to be very different.