2000 iMac compared to the 2010 iPhone

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AdamH

Ars Praetorian
547
  • #1
    2000
    iMac
    Operating System - Mac OS 9.0.4
    Processor - 500 MHz PowerPC G3 CPU, 128MB Memory
    Graphics - ATI Rage 128 Pro, 8MB of memory (8 million triangles)
    Screen - 786K pixels
    Data Transfer Speeds - 1.3-12.5 MB/s (DVD-ROM-1/100 Ethernet)
    Storage - 30GB Hard Drive
    Dimensions - 15.0 x 15.0 x 17.1 inches
    Weight - 34.7 pounds

    2010
    iPhone 4
    Operating System - iOS 4.0
    Processor - 1 Ghz ARM A4 CPU, 512MB Memory
    Graphics - PowerVR SGX 535, uses system memory (28 million triangles)
    Screen - 614K pixels
    Data Transfer Speeds - .04-20MB/s (3G-WiFi)
    Storage - 32GB Flash Drive
    Dimensions - 4.5 x 2.31 x .31 inches
    Weight - 4.8 ounces


    What will the device be like in 2020?
     
    H

    HydraMac

    Ars Praefectus
    4,868
  • #5
    The best I could find is that a Cortex A8 has about 2.0 DMIPS/MHz which is probably ball-park to a G3 of that era, I know the PPC970 a.k.a G5 ran about 2.9 DMIPS/MHz. Considering the A4 Apple chip clocks 1GHz in the iPad, we don't yet know how fast it is in iPhone4, it could probably do 2x's the instructions per second. Sure this isn't the only measure of performance but the iPad doesn't seem to be lacking CPU/GPU muscle for what it is and could probably clean that old iMac's clock all while sipping the mAh's.
     
    P

    Pods

    Ars Praefectus
    3,582
  • #7
    Except, Professor, that it's no $200 phone. I speak as a British buyer who's probably about to buy the iPhone 4 outright, at $741, because I don't intend to stay put for the 18-24 months of a contract and I can get cheap airtime rates wherever I go.

    Even so, that's two-thirds the cost of those old iMacs, overall more useful and obviously the iPhone has the benefit of portability. The basic point is true!

    A few revisions from now, the iPad (for instance) will be half its current thickness and weight, with the same battery life and a 'Retina display', mature iOS software that gets stuff done (and not simply feeds a user with consumption) and we'll boggle that we ever lumbered with such clunky devices back in 2010.

    Or Apple will run out of ideas. Sooner or later they've got to jump the shark, no?

    S.
     
    pokrface

    pokrface

    Senior Technology Editor
    21,084
    Ars Staff
  • #13
    I suspect that we'll see the same high-level trends played out in the next ten years that always are played out over ten year intervals--statistics that serve as vitally important differentiators in one generation of hardware become so high that they cease to matter over several subsequent generations, and new statistics that we wouldn't even conceive of become the differentiators. Things we cared about 20 years ago in our computers (4 MB of RAM versus 8 MB! 25 MHz versus 33 MHz!) don't even register today--seriously, when was the last time you really cared about how many MHz your CPU was cranking out? Conversely, in 1990, there's no way I would have even known to care about how many triangles per second my video card could do (and IIRC it was an Orchid something-or-other with a Tseng ET4000 chip hooked into the ISA bus of my 386/25, so the answer is "not very many"). Maybe in 2020 we'll look back at the iPhone 4 and say that it was crap because it couldn't output nearly as many 3d olfactory-enhanced quads as the current-gen iPhone.

    Mmmm, olfactory-enhanced quads...
     
    S

    Stupendous Man

    Ars Praefectus
    3,025
  • #18
    StarKruzr":3rzhevbe said:
    MightySpoon":3rzhevbe said:
    I'd preemptively multitask your head, but I've been posting from my iPhone.
    Click to expand...
    I wonder when either Android or iOS will finally let us upload stuff in the browser. Would be nice for those threads that are "useless without pics."

    I couldn't even do it with jailbreak on my 3GS.
    Click to expand...

    According to Wikipedia, Android 2.2, which should be getting rolled out any day now.
     
    not

    not

    Ars Praefectus
    3,618
  • #20
    The most interesting performance improvements are definitely those coming to handheld devices. Desktop CPUs have been fairly stagnant for years, but that tech and its performance is becoming revolutionary again as it migrates down to Phones and MIDs.

    It'll be interesting to see what software and products emerge out of a 2020 handheld platform with performance that rivals today's desktops.
     
    H

    HydraMac

    Ars Praefectus
    4,868
  • #25
    jeanlain":2loky0mc said:
    a4h5":2loky0mc said:
    What will the device be like in 2020?
    Click to expand...
    Like a phone with the processing power memory, storage, and screen resolution of a 2010 iMac. :eek:
    Click to expand...

    That is probably even a little understated. Look at the advancements in the GPU's between that 2000 iMac vs. a current iPhone/iPad. I would venture to say that todays iPad games are significantly better than what could be played on an iMac 10 years ago. What was the king of fps's way back when? Quake 3? Compare a vintage Q3 screencap to an iPad game like Call of Duty: Zombies HD and the iPad looks better wrt textures, geometry and lighting by far. I am using the iPad comparison because it is the closest thing to an iPhone4 spec-wise that we have to compare, CPU and screen res etc.
     
    M

    Mark_S_J

    Seniorius Lurkius
    1
  • #26
    There's no such thing as a $200 iPhone. You pay a lot more with your monthly plan which subsidizes the cost. Also some are missing the point of this article which was not to show how much better the iPhone is than the 2000 Mac was. It's to point out the rapid growth of electronic components. Heck, my phone is more powerful than the room-sized computers of the 50s
     
    D

    De4dshot

    Seniorius Lurkius
    1
  • #28
    Here's my take on the 2020 device:

    To establish what sort of electronic device might be available, you would need to look at cutting edge in 2010, then extrapolate... here are some ideas -- "skinput" allied with a HUD style display. The user accesses a menu using a "patch" on whatever wrist they used to wear a wristwatch. The "skinput" taps then change what the eye sees in the HUD.

    One enhancement would be for the display device to prject an apparant image virtually so that the eye can see a "screen" displayed at a reasonable viewing angle. Finally an ear bud (s) would allow the user to hear sounds (audio on video and also music)
     
    3

    3.1416

    Ars Tribunus Militum
    1,980
  • #29
    jeanlain":1d4lm37g said:
    I can imagine future "iPhones" to be integrated into some sorts of eyeglasses, by 2020-2030.
    Click to expand...
    Yes, and I think it will be sooner than that. Really we have most of the pieces today, we just need somebody to integrate them into a usable system.

    However, the UI we'll need to be rethought. Multitouch won't be up to the task.
    Click to expand...
    Stick a camera in the glasses for eye tracking. And possibly sensors for your fingers for typing and gesturing in the air.

    Then we'll move to cortical implants.
    Click to expand...
    And for once I will not be an early adopter.
     
    J

    JasterMereel

    Ars Legatus Legionis
    28,315
    Subscriptor
  • #34
    redsmurph":1ui7d1ym said:
    @The Professor:

    "Crazy to think my $200 phone is now more powerful than my $1200 desktop Mac was only ten years ago."

    An iPhone is $600-800 without a subscription.

    No offense to you, but why do people always forget that you pay the phone via the subscription?

    Cheers
    Click to expand...

    I believe that the "iPhone is $600-800 without a subscription" argument is a moot point (in the US at least). I say that because I would be paying AT&T the same per month regardless of the phone that I'm using. Let's say that I have a cheap dumbphone with a text msg plan. I would be paying $40 for voice + $5 for 200 texts. It doesn't matter if I have the cheapest phone out there, bring my own phone, or get the nicest phone in AT&T's lineup, I'm still paying the same each month once the upfront cost is out of the way. Let's do the smartphone option with the $25 2GB data plan. Same thing applies here. I could get the Palm Pixi Plus, which is free right now, or the 16G iPhone 4, which is $199. Either way, I'm paying the same amount per month ($70) for service and it doesn't matter after the upfront cost. Since it is built in and I can't get AT&T to lower my monthly service if I buy the phone outright, I'm off contract and going month-to-month, it only costs me $200 out of my pocket to get the iPhone 4.

    Now, in the US, T-Mobile is currently the only carrier that offers a discount on service if you bring your own phone. I wish other carriers would do this, but I doubt it'll happen anytime soon if ever. I actually expect T-Mobile to get rid of that option at some point in the future. I would definitely be a fan of paying $600 upfront for an iPhone 4 and then taking it to T-Mobile for $20/month cheaper service than AT&T would provide for the same/similar service. But most people would balk at paying that much upfront so in the US, we will continue to have the pricing structure that we do. Mainly because we're cheap bastards and sheep.
     
    Brad Oliver

    Brad Oliver

    Ars Tribunus Militum
    2,082
  • #35
    redsmurph":35btuzpr said:
    @The Professor:

    "Crazy to think my $200 phone is now more powerful than my $1200 desktop Mac was only ten years ago."

    An iPhone is $600-800 without a subscription.

    No offense to you, but why do people always forget that you pay the phone via the subscription?
    Click to expand...

    Would it help to point out that the iPod Touch is $200?
     
    J

    jsewell

    Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
    191
  • #36
    It's tempting when looking at this comparison, to extrapolate that in ten years our phones will resemble our current desktops in terms of power and functionality. But this misses the point that we're not witnessing a linear increase, but rather an exponential (and if Kurzweil is to be believed, a double-exponential) increase in computational power. If we truly are at the "knee" of the curve, our phone ten years from now could be ten or a hundred times as powerful as today's desktop. Anchors away -- singularity here we come. ;-)
     
    Arcturus

    Arcturus

    Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
    6,566
    Subscriptor
  • #37
    Brad Oliver":1qf8ttck said:
    redsmurph":1qf8ttck said:
    @The Professor:

    "Crazy to think my $200 phone is now more powerful than my $1200 desktop Mac was only ten years ago."

    An iPhone is $600-800 without a subscription.

    No offense to you, but why do people always forget that you pay the phone via the subscription?
    Click to expand...

    Would it help to point out that the iPod Touch is $200?
    Click to expand...
    Or that even at $600 you're better off in every metric for half the price and in your pocket?
     
    N

    nosferatu-man

    Ars Praefectus
    3,557
  • #40
    The Professor":dlnqip5s said:
    I don't think a 500MHz G3 iMac could edit and theme 720p video they way the iPhone 4 can with the new iMovie for iPhone.

    Crazy to think my $200 phone is now more powerful than my $1200 desktop Mac was only ten years ago.
    Click to expand...
    That's not the A4, though -- that's down to custom hardware. Still an astonishing point.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Jump to latest Follow Reply
    Jump to latest Follow Reply