PPC 970 on 90 nm process relaesed in november [Archive]

Powerdoc

08-03-2003, 10:18 AM

Also from MacBidouille (http://www.macbidouille.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2003-08-02#6293)

Translation :
IBM should start to produce the PPC 970 on 90 nm process in november. They are working on debugging the last little problems of production on that process, and should be produced in large quantities in late january 2004. This chip will have two advantages among the current 970 :
- he should reach the maximum clockspeed of 2,8 ghz, before being replaced by the 980.
- it will be for almost sure, the first 64 bit chip to enter in a laptop. The agenda still continue to give us a powerbook G5 in february/march 2004.

This rumor do not seem to look much incredible. However they did not speak of a larger cache. If this rumor is true, it's seems that we will have to wait for the 980 before getting this new feature.

Mount_my_floppy

08-03-2003, 10:23 AM

Correct me if I am wrong but hasn't AMD already demo`ed the althon 64 in a laptop?

Either way, I`m going to have to get a Rev A G5, I just cannot wait.. *Drool*

Powerdoc

08-03-2003, 10:30 AM

Matsu

08-03-2003, 10:32 AM

Whose eggs will you be cooking?

Powerdoc

08-03-2003, 10:33 AM

Originally posted by Matsu
Whose eggs will you be cooking?

Not mine, they are more usefull for something else :D

Spart

08-03-2003, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by Mount_my_floppy
Correct me if I am wrong but hasn't AMD already demo`ed the althon 64 in a laptop?

Either way, I`m going to have to get a Rev A G5, I just cannot wait.. *Drool*

Demos, bah. What matters is that it has been released and available to the public. Intel showed us a water-cooled P4 @ 4GHz over a year ago. IBM could probably show us a water cooled 3GHz G5 at WWDC, but you can bet that they've never gotten enough chips running at that speed to outfit a single decent-sized computer lab. What good is that? Good for showboating simply because you can, I suppose.

Apple doesn't like to demo products faster than what they sell, contrary to what Intel & AMD do on a regular basis. This is mainly because most PC buyers have accepted that there's always something new around the corner, and any time is a good time to buy. It seems harder to convince Mac owners of this. Even with the recent release of the G5, I know someone who is stupidly holding out because of what's next.

:grumble:

Mount_my_floppy

08-03-2003, 04:17 PM

Well yeah besides that, the thing was no portable than an iMac and its battery life was very very small..

Henriok

08-03-2003, 04:20 PM

You can actually buy a 64-bit SparcLE powered laptop today frpn Tadpole, and it's not a frying pan. It seems like a great deal for folks who like Sun. They start at $3000.
Have a look! (http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/exec.php?p=prod-note-sparcle)

A PowerBook G5 @ 2 GHz would kick some serious SparcLE butt though..

hasapi

08-03-2003, 07:05 PM

I realise this is a tight timeframe - but getting the G5 into the PB by MWSF would awesome (as usual we will have to wait for delivery sometime later by end of Q1 04).

We could get 1.6G PB's straight off the bat!, maybe have 1.33-1.42 7457's for now until the next update which will be 970!. :D

Rhumgod

08-04-2003, 10:17 AM

Originally posted by hasapi
We could get 1.6G PB's straight off the bat!, maybe have 1.33-1.42 7457's for now until the next update which will be 970!. :D

You are putting faith in Motorola, which is something I have completely given up doing. :no:

Dr_Holistic

08-04-2003, 03:18 PM

Rumor has it that Motorola has had a few more problems... looks like we might not be seeing the Up-Date to the Powerbook line for a few more months!

Well, maybe Apple will just get fed up with Motorola and just skip this product release and do a big G5 release in time for Christmas sales!

Yevgeny

08-04-2003, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Rhumgod
You are putting faith in Motorola, which is something I have completely given up doing. :no:

Moto has so tainted how I view PPC updates that I find it difficult to believe that a die shrunk 970 will be available so soon. I know that IBM is competent in ways that Moto can only dream of, but I still want to think that IBM's roadmaps are nothing but pure marketing lies. Curse you Motorola for makig me such a skeptic :mad:

THT

08-05-2003, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by Powerdoc
- it will be for almost sure, the first 64 bit chip to enter in a laptop. The agenda still continue to give us a powerbook G5 in february/march 2004.

Hmm... did Macworld UK bite on this rumour?

Oh, we can have a Powerbook G5 now, it just seems Apple is unwilling.

This rumor do not seem to look much incredible. However they did not speak of a larger cache. If this rumor is true, it's seems that we will have to wait for the 980 before getting this new feature.

I'm still thinking Q2 04 is the absolute earliest we will see 90 nm parts from IBM, and plus 3 months for Apple machines using them. There's probably one last 130 nm revision coming for the 130 nm 970, a 2.4 or 2.5 GHz version assuming IBM will follow the "pipeline depth to clock rate" convention and produce a faster clocked 970 than an Athlon.

However, I think this could be really good if IBM ships a 512 KB L2 90 nm 970 chip along with a 1 MB L2 970. The 512 KB version would be perfect for low end Macs while a prospective 1 MB L2 970 would go into professional Macs.

THT

08-05-2003, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by Henriok
You can actually buy a 64-bit SparcLE powered laptop today frpn Tadpole, and it's not a frying pan. It seems like a great deal for folks who like Sun. They start at $3000.
Have a look! (http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/exec.php?p=prod-note-sparcle)

A PowerBook G5 @ 2 GHz would kick some serious SparcLE butt though..

Hmmm... would it be surprising if an iBook or a PowerBook G4 kicks some serious SparcLE butt? In integer, it actually would be very likely, but in FPU, it may be pretty close.

hasapi

08-05-2003, 07:53 PM

It is seems like Apple's reliance on Moto could end as soon as the 970 gets the updated process.

970+ will enable PB's, the iBook G3's are 750's made by IBM, this chip may get Altivec.
The iMacs will continue with speed bumped 'cough' 7457's maybe till the 980's or even earlier with lower clocked 970+'s.

This is also unlikely, but come MWSF and SJ gets up and says that not only do we have the first 64bit G5 PB's, but also do you like our iMacs now that they have G5's as well!!!.

I suspect this plan was hatched the moment Moto canned its G5.

Hasta lavista Motorola! :devil:

Amorph

08-05-2003, 08:10 PM

Originally posted by hasapi
Hasta lavista Motorola! :devil:

Greg Jozwiak and Jon Rubinstein have both pointed out that Motorola's roadmap contains products that are useful to Apple.

I doubt we've seen the last of Motorola. Even their current lack of senior CPU designers isn't so much of an issue, because Apple has CPU designers on board (they worked closely with IBM engineers on the 970). Apple don't just take whatever they're given, and as far as I know they haven't since the 68k days.

Mot has been trying to turn around this year, and they've succeeded in unloading a lot of crap and streamlining things, and working around their chronic fabrication problems. I don't expect them to be transformed overnight, but if they are in fact on the rebound then Apple would be foolish to burn bridges with them. They've started talking about a "high performance PowerPC" scheduled for next year...

@homenow

08-05-2003, 08:36 PM

Originally posted by Yevgeny
Moto has so tainted how I view PPC updates that I find it difficult to believe that a die shrunk 970 will be available so soon. I know that IBM is competent in ways that Moto can only dream of, but I still want to think that IBM's roadmaps are nothing but pure marketing lies. Curse you Motorola for makig me such a skeptic :mad:

Comments have been said before about how IBM underestimates their product anouncements due to past legal problems. Case in point, the 970 was supposed to top out at 1.8 not 2.0 at initial release, and according to the anouncement about their blades that was pulled, they already have 2.5's on the 12 nm process. IBM stated that they would quickly migrate to the 9 nm process after the initial release of the 970. In my opinion, quickly in the microprocessor buisness is 1 to 2 quarters, 3 at the outset. The rumoured November time frame sounds about right, which puts them shipping chips by the end of the year.

As for Motorolla, who knows when they will get their fabs working. I wish they would just contract IBM to get 7457's out, but unless Apple has a contract that stipulates IBM as a backup supplier I would be willing to bet that Moto will just try to fab it themselves with as much luck as they have for the history of the G4...what a shame.

As for Apple, it would be nice to see them get a consumer Mac out there that could really pull some switchers over. They have the software and services, especially with iTunes Music Store. They have the press working for them in a lot of fronts. They have competative portables, though they are due for an update, and they have the G5's. Now all they need is a good, competative (price/performance) consumer computer out in time for Xmass (by Nov 25th) to go with the iPod, iTMS (for Windows as well), and Panther to really get some Buzz going for the Mac platform. Top it off with iChat VC technology and Quicktime adoption by AOL and we may see Apples stock prices double by year end....

hasapi

08-05-2003, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by Amorph
Mot has been trying to turn around this year, and they've succeeded in unloading a lot of crap and streamlining things, and working around their chronic fabrication problems. I don't expect them to be transformed overnight, but if they are in fact on the rebound then Apple would be foolish to burn bridges with them. They've started talking about a "high performance PowerPC" scheduled for next year...

I hear you, but do you expect Apple to state anything else, whilst they are still buying critical product from Moto?.

"They've started talking about a "<motorola>high performance PowerPC" scheduled for next year... " :lol: Good one, ad that to the oxymoron list.

I dont get it, Apple already has a REAL roadmap with SHIPPING 'high performance" processors from a plant that can provide the very best proesses with 980's (Power5's) on the drawing board. I agree with having a backup supplier, very prudent, but i very much doubt theyll be able to provide that service!

My speculative post looks like it will happen, only time will tell.

Sorry Amorph, ad me to the Moto skeptics list :\

Programmer

08-05-2003, 09:22 PM

Motorola has had problems for a long time due to their fabs. Last year they announced that they are basically dropping their fabs and throwing their hat in with (IIRC) Philips and STI Microelectronics who are building a new advanced fab. When this happens its a whole new ballgame. Even an Olympic sprinter can't do great things with a ball & chain on his leg. I'm not saying Moto will suddenly spring to the top, but if they solve their biggest problem then the troubles of the last 5 years shouldn't be used to predict their future.

IBM is providing Apple with a solid roadmap, but it leaves Apple with a single supplier (again). Having Moto back in the ballgame is a good thing.

@homenow

08-05-2003, 10:33 PM

Originally posted by Programmer
Motorola has had problems for a long time due to their fabs. Last year they announced that they are basically dropping their fabs and throwing their hat in with (IIRC) Philips and STI Microelectronics who are building a new advanced fab. When this happens its a whole new ballgame. Even an Olympic sprinter can't do great things with a ball & chain on his leg. I'm not saying Moto will suddenly spring to the top, but if they solve their biggest problem then the troubles of the last 5 years shouldn't be used to predict their future.

IBM is providing Apple with a solid roadmap, but it leaves Apple with a single supplier (again). Having Moto back in the ballgame is a good thing.

If Moto would contract out their fabs to IBM, who has proven processes I might feel better about a roadmap that they put out. But Moto dosnt just have a fab problem, it seams to me that they are yet to fully recover from the "brain drain" that I remember talked about a few years ago when Intel hired a bunch of their engineers away.

IBM dosnt seam to have suffered there, and they have a solid direction anounced with proven Fab track record. If anything IBM underestimates what they deliver....the biggest problem I see is IBM bieng able to deliver enough chips, yet to date I dont think FishKill is at capacity so we have some room to grow there.

What is more, they seam to have a vested interest, at least for now, in the success of the PowerPC in the server/desktop arena. Motorolla dosnt, and hasnt since Apple killed the clones. A worst case scenerio, IBM takes us through the 980, at which time Apple has a large enough adoption of OS X to have a truely "portable" OS, and development kit to automatically build FAT bionaries for multiple hardware platforms...The biggest problem that I see for Apple is keeping the momentum in the low end arena for the next 12 months....but we will see.

Programmer

08-05-2003, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by @homenow
But Moto dosnt just have a fab problem, it seams to me that they are yet to fully recover from the "brain drain" that I remember talked about a few years ago when Intel hired a bunch of their engineers away.

While its true that they lost many engineers, they didn't lose them all. We don't seem to be disagreeing here -- I'm not predicting that they're going to suddenly come out with a G5 class processor. They could, however, easily take the memory controller and RIO interface from their 8xxx series host processors and mate them to the 7457 on a 9nm process, and that would result in a fast low power processor.

Amorph

08-06-2003, 12:01 AM

Originally posted by @homenow
If Moto would contract out their fabs to IBM, who has proven processes I might feel better about a roadmap that they put out. But Moto dosnt just have a fab problem, it seams to me that they are yet to fully recover from the "brain drain" that I remember talked about a few years ago when Intel hired a bunch of their engineers away.

Philips and STM are not newcomers to fab tech, and for that matter neither is Motorola. Mot SPS's chief problems have been malignant, metastatic Dilbertoma, lots of excess baggage and no money. All their other ills are just symptoms.

As I mentioned, Apple can contribute their not inconsiderable brain trust to Motorola's efforts in order to produce a high performance PowerPC. Really, the G4 isn't that far from fitting that description. Replace MaxBus with an onboard memory controller and a fast packet-based bus (RapidIO or HT, or even ApplePI - the controller could be made modular via OCEAN, so that Mot could make RIO and API versions of the same processor); add another FPU. Done. It would still lose to the 970 running most compiler-output code, but it could beat the 970 in the embedded space, where code is hand-tuned (and also in any other circumstance where the code was hand-tuned - Apple is quite fond of doing that, actually).

Don't forget that IBM is incredibly expensive, and Motorola is not exactly swimming in cash right now. They've used IBM as a last-resort backup for a reason.

What is more, they seam to have a vested interest, at least for now, in the success of the PowerPC in the server/desktop arena. Motorolla dosnt, and hasnt since Apple killed the clones. A worst case scenerio, IBM takes us through the 980, at which time Apple has a large enough adoption of OS X to have a truely "portable" OS, and development kit to automatically build FAT bionaries for multiple hardware platforms...The biggest problem that I see for Apple is keeping the momentum in the low end arena for the next 12 months....but we will see.

IBM had a considerable amount of interest in CHRP/PREP, and in OpenDoc (based, like MS' COM, on IBM's SOM technology), and in Pink, and in Taligent. I can't remember for sure, but they might have gotten OS/2 booted on the PowerPC. They even designed and published a CHRP board. I don't think that at this point anyone is still aching over the cancellation of the clones. AIM is dead as a formal alliance, but it seems to be doing well as an informal confederacy.

Mot should stick around for three simple reasons: Their design approach is different than IBM's, and thus the two combined offer Apple more options than either one could; Apple is a huge and steady and needed customer for Mot SPS, which, combined with SPS's brain drain, gives Apple a great deal of leverage and influence in CPU design; and finally, two vendors are better than one.

As I've been saying for a while now, Mot is trying to turn around, and they've been showing results. They've got an alliance together that obviates their fab problems and gives them a clear path to 90nm and smaller processes. I'm with Programmer in betting that the next few years won't be like the last 5 for Motorola SPS, and believe me, I'm skeptical of Motorola myself. But we'll see soon enough.

CubeDude

08-06-2003, 12:09 AM

It'd be cool to see IBM and Mot in a war over Apple. IBM would probably crush Mot like a bug, but it'd be nice to see where Mot gets before the bug crushing.

hasapi

08-06-2003, 02:49 AM

Originally posted by Programmer
They could, however, easily take the memory controller and RIO interface from their 8xxx series host processors and mate them to the 7457 on a 9nm process, and that would result in a fast low power processor.

I like it, its just that they cannot even fab 130nm 7457's with any real success?, I agree this would be ideal in several of apple's consumer products and good for apple/us to have vendor options. I suspect, however, that the horse has already bolted. Firstly, the 90nm 970 will be out by years end (approx), that would satisfy all of apples products except for the ibook which currently uses a <10W 750.

The G3 chip will most likely scale up ok, for now and until apple desides on when to use the 970+ in the imacs/emacs/pb's we expect G4's to continue. How Moto intends to maintain those orders, i dont know, but certainly looks shaky from where im sitting, despite amorphs very valid points.

User Tron

08-06-2003, 07:32 AM

Originally posted by hasapi
I like it, its just that they cannot even fab 130nm 7457's with any real success?

Source? So far no problems have been reported besides some doubtfull rumors. Robert from Powerlogix seems to be very pleased with the 7457 and is confident that Mot will deliver. (http://www.cubeowner.com/forums//index.php?s=&act=ST&f=19&t=3011&st=0)

End of Line

Henriok

08-06-2003, 07:44 AM

Originally posted by User Tron
Source? So far no problems have been reported besides some doubtfull rumors. From Chip Architect.com in Nov 2000 (http://chip-architect.com/news/2000_11_25_AMD_process_tech.html), MacCentral in Apr 2001 (http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2001/04/10/mot/), The Register in Apr 2001 (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/18188.html). It states that AMD/Motorola will bring HiP7 into service in 2001. AMD did i Dresden, but Motorola haven't shipped ANY production processor using HiP7 as far as i know.

AirSluf

08-06-2003, 08:43 AM

Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.

Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.

Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.

User Tron

08-06-2003, 09:47 AM

Originally posted by Henriok
From Chip Architect.com in Nov 2000 (http://chip-architect.com/news/2000_11_25_AMD_process_tech.html), MacCentral in Apr 2001 (http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2001/04/10/mot/), The Register in Apr 2001 (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/18188.html). It states that AMD/Motorola will bring HiP7 into service in 2001. AMD did i Dresden, but Motorola haven't shipped ANY production processor using HiP7 as far as i know.

I was refering the 7457 time line. Motorola isn't the only company that's having problems with 0.13, TSMC was struggling aswell. Major fault was to skip 0.15 altogether, this caused a big gap as Mot didn't see risk in the big jump.
Pushing the 7455 to 1.42GHz on 0.18 is quite an achievement which aleast raised my hope for faster progression once 0.13 is up and running. Of course we are talking about a firm which missed many timelines, but judging from the past I'd say if small companies like Powerlogix has already got samples for some time now, release shouldn't be far away.

End of Line

boots

08-06-2003, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by Programmer
While its true that they lost many engineers, they didn't lose them all. We don't seem to be disagreeing here -- I'm not predicting that they're going to suddenly come out with a G5 class processor. They could, however, easily take the memory controller and RIO interface from their 8xxx series host processors and mate them to the 7457 on a 9nm process, and that would result in a fast low power processor.

I wonder, if you build a machine that looks like this

[RAM] == [CPU] --rio-- [core logic] -- AGP

or

[RAM] == [CPU] --HT-- [AGP-HT bridge] -- AGP

(where the RAM controller is built onto the processor)

The RAM is now kinda far away from the AGP side of the machine. Quartz Extreme could cause flooding of the CPU with AGP DMA requests to read the RAM contents as windows are moved and refreshed.. probably not good for the poor CPU trying to get its own work done.

Of course if the window server evolves so that it can keep window backing stores in VRAM then that issue might fade. But now you have a need for a lot of VRAM which makes it tougher to get into those low end machines or laptops.

AirSluf

08-06-2003, 11:20 AM

Programmer

08-06-2003, 11:50 AM

Originally posted by boots
The RAM is now kinda far away from the AGP side of the machine. Quartz Extreme could cause flooding of the CPU with AGP DMA requests to read the RAM contents as windows are moved and refreshed.. probably not good for the poor CPU trying to get its own work done.

This isn't as much of an issue as you might think. AGP/GPU transactions tend to be very heavily pipelined and designed for long latencies. AGP 8x only uses about 2 GB/sec of bandwidth, so a decent memory setup (DDR333 or better) can support that and still keep the CPU fed. The CPU tends to want lower-latency access to memory so this is actually better arrangement. And just because the CPU is on the same chip as the memory controller doesn't mean that the CPU's operation is in any way interfered with by external memory accesses (aside from the bandwidth consumption which the CPU mitigates via its L1/L2 caches).

Programmer

08-06-2003, 11:52 AM

Amorph

08-06-2003, 01:08 PM

Originally posted by Programmer
They could, however, easily take the memory controller and RIO interface from their 8xxx series host processors and mate them to the 7457 on a 9nm process, and that would result in a fast low power processor.

If they fab a 7457 on a 9nm process they'll leave the entire industry in the dust. :D

Eight processor iBooks, here we come!

Yevgeny

08-06-2003, 01:12 PM

Originally posted by AirSluf
Not a sure thing at all, just look at the G4 intro debacle. Plenty of good performing samples (out of how many 100's of wafers we may never know), enough to do all the R&D for the 500 Mhz G4 introduction. Then Mot was unable to fab 500Mhz units for several months and forced Apple to do the infamous "Downgrade". Onsies and twosies are meaningless when thousands are the enrtering argumant for a viable product.

One profound difference between Moto then and IBM now is that IBM wants to get into the chip fab business. It is in IBM's interests to show that they can do die shrinks, get production up, etc. IBM is motivated because if they do well, then they stand to win chip outsourcing contracts from TSMC and other Taiwanese fabbing companies. IBM wants to compete, and they want to get to 90 nm ASAP. This is in direct contrast to Moto which obviously wants to strangle its semiconductor division and pretend that they never made chips.

Amorph

08-06-2003, 01:33 PM

Originally posted by Yevgeny
IBM wants to compete, and they want to get to 90 nm ASAP. This is in direct contrast to Moto.

Umm, Moto wants to get to 90nm so badly that they were talking openly late last year about skipping the 130nm node altogether, and they partnered with several other companies on a 90nm fab (Crolles).

Granted, the motivation is different, because Mot SPS is just trying to avoid getting axed as unprofitable. But companies (and company divisions) can be dangerous when they're up against a wall...

Transcendental Octothorpe

08-06-2003, 02:06 PM

I don't believe that you can seperate chip design from fab so easily.

From what I understand, chips need to be designed for manufacturability.

Just saying that Mot's design may actually have something to do with their fab problems, so having someone else fab them isn't necessarily a magic cure-all.

Powerdoc

08-06-2003, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe
I don't believe that you can seperate chip design from fab so easily.

From what I understand, chips need to be designed for manufacturability.

Just saying that Mot's design may actually have something to do with their fab problems, so having someone else fab them isn't necessarily a magic cure-all.
good point. :)

Amorph

08-06-2003, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe
I don't believe that you can seperate chip design from fab so easily.

From what I understand, chips need to be designed for manufacturability.

The great bulk of them, however, are not designed well enough to be manufactured amid dustbunnies. Mot actually shut off the fans in their fabs to save money!

You do have a point in that Mot has made some gambles with process technology that didn't pay off, and they're currently struggling to get that tech working on 130nm. So it's not an either/or thing.

Just saying that Mot's design may actually have something to do with their fab problems, so having someone else fab them isn't necessarily a magic cure-all.

As I understand it, the original 500MHz ceiling was imposed by a design flaw in the L1 cache, and the 7450 bowed in with a laundry list of errata, so this is certainly possible. But there are more mundane reasons for Mot's inability to fabricate CPUs in quantity.

AirSluf

08-06-2003, 04:15 PM

hasapi

08-06-2003, 04:35 PM

Originally posted by User Tron
Source? So far no problems have been reported besides some doubtfull rumors. Robert from Powerlogix seems to be very pleased with the 7457 and is confident that Mot will deliver. (http://www.cubeowner.com/forums//index.php?s=&act=ST&f=19&t=3011&st=0)

End of Line

Source?, Sure! apple.com, can you find an apple product that is running >1GHz, that is not in PMac?. And how long has apple gleefuly remained at 1GHZ for the majority of its products. Oh yeah, Moto's doing a great job, everyone give them a round of applause! :err:

Yevgeny

08-06-2003, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by AirSluf
Future-wise though, (and back in synch with your sub-thread) even with the fab at Crolles, I don't know what the chances are for Mot's recovery in PPC production. My impression was much of that fab was dedicated to joint chip and process R&D pursuits in the telecom sector, a bit of a stretch to use it as a life-ring for one partners major product line, although anythings possible.

Maybe Moto will just design newer G4's and outsource production to IBM's Fishkill plant. No, they're probably too stupid to do something sensible like that.

I'm really looking forward to the day when Steve gets up on stage and announces that Moto is no more, and then cusses them out (probably not going to happen either).

Programmer

08-06-2003, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe
I don't believe that you can seperate chip design from fab so easily.

From what I understand, chips need to be designed for manufacturability.

Just saying that Mot's design may actually have something to do with their fab problems, so having someone else fab them isn't necessarily a magic cure-all.

True, although IBM's relative success fabbing the original G4 seems to indicate that Moto's problems are significantly in the actual production stage.

Bigc

08-06-2003, 09:22 PM

Originally posted by Yevgeny
Maybe Moto will just design newer G4's and outsource production to IBM's Fishkill plant. No, they're probably too stupid to do something sensible like that.

I'm really looking forward to the day when Steve gets up on stage and announces that Moto is no more, and then cusses them out (probably not going to happen either).

...or maybe it (Apple/MOT relationship) will come out if suit is ever filed with regards to MOT non-performance of contractural obligations whether implied or actually in writing (although I'd expect cash to exchange before the dirty laundry gets aired). (Note a "suit" is based solely on Stevies comment to one of the share holders at the last shareholder meeting when asked about Apple/MOT problems)

User Tron

08-07-2003, 01:05 AM

Originally posted by hasapi
Source?, Sure! apple.com, can you find an apple product that is running >1GHz, that is not in PMac?. And how long has apple gleefuly remained at 1GHZ for the majority of its products. Oh yeah, Moto's doing a great job, everyone give them a round of applause! :err:

I guess nobody here is applauding. But predicting the future from past is still a heurism. (Otherwise branch prediction or page replacement would be a piece of cake ;)) We all know how Mot has failed, no need to bring it up over and over again. Fact is that SPS Mot has to get their thing done or they're done. It seems to me that some here actually want Mot to fail as some kind of childish revenge. Get over it! What will Apple gain if Mot fails in comparison to what they gain when Mot succeeds? I well aware the Mot SPS has let down the mac fans but still I think everybody should hope that they get their act together and help the PPC to take the lead. Some forget that when Mot and IBM delivered the fastest CPUs Apple failed in delivering what the market wanted. Did you wish Apple to die at that time?

End of Line

DrBoar

08-07-2003, 01:43 AM

I would love that Motorola could get their G4 act together for the selfish reason that it would mean cheaper/faster G4 upgrades for my G4/400! For Apple a big stock of cool running 1.6 GHz G4 would be a big boost to their iMac/eMac and perhaps PB.

However I do find 1 GHz 970 by IBM more likely to be aviable than 1.6-1.8 GHz G4 by Motorola. We might even see the fabled 90nm 970 before we se G4s anyway near 2 GHz...

hasapi

08-07-2003, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by User Tron
I guess nobody here is applauding. But predicting the future from past is still a heurism. (Otherwise branch prediction or page replacement would be a piece of cake ;)) We all know how Mot has failed, no need to bring it up over and over again. Fact is that SPS Mot has to get their thing done or they're done. It seems to me that some here actually want Mot to fail as some kind of childish revenge. Get over it! What will Apple gain if Mot fails in comparison to what they gain when Mot succeeds? I well aware the Mot SPS has let down the mac fans but still I think everybody should hope that they get their act together and help the PPC to take the lead. Some forget that when Mot and IBM delivered the fastest CPUs Apple failed in delivering what the market wanted. Did you wish Apple to die at that time?

End of Line

Firstly, UserTron nothing personal, I was directing my frustration at Moto not you. Hint: I have a vested interest in Apple's success!

I agree, its in our collective/apple's interest in seeing Moto succeed and get out better G4's. Particularly, when at least 50% (shipping units) of apple's product line depends on them!.

I for one would like to see great G4's in the Consumer range, now that we have great G5's in the key part of the PRO range. Im sure ive said this before but moto should be credited with great low power/high performance G4's when the powerbooks were announced in 2001, they are now well behind the performance curve, as well as I dont see any IBM chips that are comparable in power/performance today. :smokey:

User Tron

08-07-2003, 02:10 AM

Originally posted by hasapi
Firstly, UserTron nothing personal, I was directing my frustration at Moto not you. Hint: I have a vested interest in Apple's success!

I agree, its in our collective/apple's interest in seeing Moto succeed and get out better G4's. Particularly, when at least 50% (shipping units) of apple's product line depends on them!.

I for one would like to see great G4's in the Consumer range, now that we have great G5's in the key part of the PRO range. Im sure ive said this before but moto should be credited with great low power/high performance G4's when the powerbooks were announced in 2001, they are now well behind the performance curve, as well as I dont see any IBM chips that are comparable in power/performance today. :smokey:

Nothing to be sorry about! Having a different opinion that mine is no crime (at least until I become ruler of world ;)). But seriously, I guess we agree a lot on this matter anyway.

End of Line

Yevgeny

08-07-2003, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by Bigc
...or maybe it (Apple/MOT relationship) will come out if suit is ever filed with regards to MOT non-performance of contractural obligations whether implied or actually in writing (although I'd expect cash to exchange before the dirty laundry gets aired). (Note a "suit" is based solely on Stevies comment to one of the share holders at the last shareholder meeting when asked about Apple/MOT problems)

Well that would be interesting. A real burn the bridges moment between Apple and Moto. My guess is that Moto didn't sign any contracts specifying yields. I would still be fine with Steve just saying in public (for ten to twenty minutes) what he really thinks about Moto. Heck, I would pay good money for such an event- kind of a moment of catharsis for all the Mac world. I would expect cash before Moto let Jobs verbally berate them. Moto has no self esteem, but they aren't into letting former customers trash them- it just looks bad.

709

08-07-2003, 10:37 AM

Originally posted by Yevgeny
I would still be fine with Steve just saying in public (for ten to twenty minutes) what he really thinks about Moto.
Ha! It will go down in history as the first internet stream with 'bleeps'. A Colin Farrell interview will seem like talking to the Pope in comparison. :D

DrBoar

08-08-2003, 02:11 AM

I am not looking forward for SJ to use 4 letter words about Moto rola (that is two 4 letter words in it self;) )

The important thing is getting out of the G4 for all towers/iMac and eMACs ASAP. The plans are for a 1.6 GHz G4 next year! Hardly impressive as a single CPU desktop in 2004. Even a dual G4 iMac would be run over by a G5 iMac. The 7457 can be a good stop gap CPU. But to be that it has to come out pretty soon in large number while IBM work on the migration of the 970 to 90nm as it appears to have no hope of matching the performance of a dieshrunk 970...

Here Moto has an excellent opportunity to shoot them self in the foot (feet?) by having manufacturing problems with the 7457 something they have a proven trackrecord of:no:

RBR

08-08-2003, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by DrBoar
I am not looking forward for SJ to use 4 letter words about Moto rola (that is two 4 letter words in it self;) )

The important thing is getting out of the G4 for all towers/iMac and eMACs ASAP. The plans are for a 1.6 GHz G4 next year! Hardly impressive as a single CPU desktop in 2004. Even a dual G4 iMac would be run over by a G5 iMac. The 7457 can be a good stop gap CPU. But to be that it has to come out pretty soon in large number while IBM work on the migration of the 970 to 90nm as it appears to have no hope of matching the performance of a dieshrunk 970...

Here Moto has an excellent opportunity to shoot them self in the foot (feet?) by having manufacturing problems with the 7457 something they have a proven trackrecord of:no:

Yea, Moto seems to be slipping again. Reports today indicate that the 7457 will come late this year, apparently due to process problems (and this is only at 130, not 90).