New Macs liquid cooled too...

[gone_fishin]

quote
"Samples of the product are expected toward the end of the year, with prices ranging from about $25 to $30." end quote

Wow!

But the end of that year has come and gone.

[HAL-9000]

Originally Posted by kronchev

too bad its useless to us with real computers

death: they still put out less than 20 watts of heat. there is NO point in them having it except as a gimmick and to try to justify the huge, unnecessary cost that macs incur.

Apple's have changed a lot over the past three years. I look on that Mac and see AGP 8x, 1.25Ghz bus, dually 64-bitters at 2.5Ghz with 1MB of cache and DDR-800 memory interconnects. I can throw a FX-6800 in there with native drivers. And DoomIII, the only game that has really grabbed my attention as of late, will release the same day for the Mac as the PC which I think at this rate will be in 2007 or so... :shrug: The thing also runs Lightwave, one of my fave programs, rather well.

Macs also have a 64-bit operating system so the 64-bit part actually means something, unlike in Wintel world (yes Penguins, Linux can run 64-bit too, I know! I know!). And its based on Free BSD, essentially you are running a really nice 64-bit RISC Unix station with a really pretty UI and mainstream software, for 3 grand. Thats not exactly pain and suffering. I don't own a Mac, haven't for about three years, but if I was average prosumer Joe (non-modtweaker) looking for the best computer, (and if I actually bought and paid for all my software )I think I would take this Mac over a Dell.

[redleader]

Originally Posted by HAL-9000

Macs also have a 64-bit operating system so the 64-bit part actually means something, unlike in Wintel world (yes Penguins, Linux can run 64-bit too, I know! I know!). And its based on Free BSD, essentially you are running a really nice 64-bit RISC Unix station with a really pretty UI and mainstream software, for 3 grand. Thats not exactly pain and suffering. I don't own a Mac, haven't for about three years, but if I was average prosumer Joe (non-modtweaker) looking for the best computer, (and if I actually bought and paid for all my software )I think I would take this Mac over a Dell.

MacOS is 32 bit. Conversely there is 64 bit Windows for x86-64, although its pointless at the moment (much like 64 bit hardware without 64 bit applications or the need for expanded address space actually).

----

Looks like I'm wrong about the cooling. I wonder why they switched? All i saw was a quote about thermal density, but that seems suspicious to me. Afterall the heatpipe and waterblock both have copper bases. Is watercooling really all that much more effective then heatpipes? I doubt they're using any serious flow in these systems . . .

[HAL-9000]

Originally Posted by redleader

MacOS is 32 bit. Conversely there is 64 bit Windows for x86-64, although its pointless at the moment (much like 64 bit hardware without 64 bit applications or the need for expanded address space actually).

----

Looks like I'm wrong about the cooling. I wonder why they switched? All i saw was a quote about thermal density, but that seems suspicious to me. Afterall the heatpipe and waterblock both have copper bases. Is watercooling really all that much more effective then heatpipes? I doubt they're using any serious flow in these systems . . .

OSX comes in two flavors, 32-bit & 64 bit. The only 64-bit Doze currently available is Server 2003. There will have to be a Athlon Doze, and a Itanium Doze I think. 64-bit Doze for Athlons is in beta. I know because I test it right now on a Opteron.

Many applications, including the whole Adobe suite and Lightwave, amongst others, are compiled for OSX in 64-bit already for sale. You can plug 8GB in your G5 to run those applications. 32-bit can't address more than 4GB or so. So there is a difference. This isn't some fluke, its just one of the few times where its convenient that the hardware guys and the OS guys are in the same company. They were ready for the OS when the hardware was ready. And depending on Microsoft to make launch dates is a formula for doom. Look at the Itanium fiasco. Talk about egg all over Intel's face. This is the biggest goof they've made since their RDRAM adventures of yore.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not some apologist for Apple. But the facts are the facts....and those are the facts.

[Jag]

Here is a picture of the so called WC setup:



Take your guesses.

[jaydee]

Looks like a water cooled heat pipe? Has to be a heat pipe on the two CPU's as there is only one pipe coming off it. From there it looks as if it goes into an exchanger and then attached to another water cooled exchanger. Or maybe not?

[jaydee]

Well maybe not. It looks like the CPU's are water cooled and the heat pipes are for something else?

[Jag]

Maybe it's a crazy idea, but isn't the plate where the boards sits just a giant heatsink?

[jaydee]

Originally Posted by Jag

Maybe it's a crazy idea, but isn't the plate where the boards sits just a giant heatsink?

Looks like a big water block to me. The hoses are connected to it?

[Jag]

It seems to, don't know for sure.

[Groth]

Yeah, the big plate the CPU modules are bolted to is the water block.

The heatpipes look to be for cooling the voltage regulators.

[Starman97]

Originally Posted by Groth

Yeah, the big plate the CPU modules are bolted to is the water block.

The heatpipes look to be for cooling the voltage regulators.

Yep that's a lot like the original G5 CPU, it had 4 heat pipes on the CPU
and 2 on the Power Supply. The Vcore supply is on the CPU board.
Which makes sense since that supply has to deliver upwards of 20Amps.
It's a 4 Phase switching supply using integrated FET modules for each phase.
TONS of ceramic decoupling/supply filter caps.

Here's a link to an engineering drawing of the watercooling module
http://www.hardmac.com/news/photonew...terblockg5.jpg

And a Photo of one in assembly.
http://www.hardmac.com/news/photonews18/sideview.jpg
http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.p...1&page=2&pp=30

[Kbofwy]

More pics at Techseekers. I guess apple doesn't fear aluminum and water.

[BillA]

Originally Posted by pHaestus

Apple is INSANE if they are selling extremely expensive workstation class computers with POS pumps. In fact, I bet apple engineers know the MTBF far better than some bozo on the internet; care to wager?

Adequate (within safe CPU operating temperatures even in a hot room) and RELIABLE cooling at lower noise levels than air is the goal here; quite different from what DIY or aftermarket solutions go for.

exactly,
it is WCing - I'll say more after Apple does

[jaydee]

Originally Posted by unregistered

exactly,
it is WCing - I'll say more after Apple does

Any idea on what kind of coolant they are using with all that aluminum?


Got to hand it to them, it is a nice setup...

[redleader]

Originally Posted by HAL-9000

OSX comes in two flavors, 32-bit & 64 bit. The only 64-bit Doze currently available is Server 2003. There will have to be a Athlon Doze, and a Itanium Doze I think. 64-bit Doze for Athlons is in beta. I know because I test it right now on a Opteron.

Many applications, including the whole Adobe suite and Lightwave, amongst others, are compiled for OSX in 64-bit already for sale. You can plug 8GB in your G5 to run those applications. 32-bit can't address more than 4GB or so. So there is a difference. This isn't some fluke, its just one of the few times where its convenient that the hardware guys and the OS guys are in the same company. They were ready for the OS when the hardware was ready. And depending on Microsoft to make launch dates is a formula for doom. Look at the Itanium fiasco. Talk about egg all over Intel's face. This is the biggest goof they've made since their RDRAM adventures of yore.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not some apologist for Apple. But the facts are the facts....and those are the facts.

There is no 64 bit OSX and no 64 applications for said fictional OS. OS10.4 will probably be the first to have a 64 bit version.

Windows NT, 2000, XP and 2003 are or were made in 64 bit versions (remember NT was orginally designed to run on 64 bit Intel RISC chips and later ported to x86). Presently though only XP and 2003 are still available in 64 bit mode.

[jaydee]

OSX clarification.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/07/07/mac_os_x/

[redleader]

Yup, similar hacks as 32 bit windows has been doing for almost a decade to overcome the 4GB limit on 32 bit systems. Fortunately we've got a good 2.5 years before 32bit addressing becomes a real problem on the desktop, so MS, Intel, and Apple have time to get their problems sorted out.

Also, about 64 bit PS: PS can't even address >2GB of ram (its horrid memory management is a relec of the early 90s). Don't expect a 64 bit version thats actually 64 bit unless they get around to rewriting the app from scratch.

[Starman97]

Originally Posted by redleader

There is no 64 bit OSX and no 64 applications for said fictional OS. OS10.4 will probably be the first to have a 64 bit version.

Yep, it looks like Tiger (10.4) will have 64 bit pointer support for apps.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger/unix.html

Is this a 'true' 64-bit OS? dunno, I'll leave that debate to the ComputerSci majors,
but 'a 64-bit version of libSystem' seems to imply it's integrated into userland apps
if needed by them.

And the monitors... 2560x1600 LCD anyone... too bad that Geforce 6800ultra isnt
watercooled as well, I bet that fan makes quite the racket.
http://www.apple.com/displays/digital.html

Nothing a couple feet of tubing and a waterblock wouldnt solve, since you've already
got a pretty nice radiator and pump module in the CPU bay