or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › eWeek article on Smeagol and Q37
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

eWeek article on Smeagol and Q37 - Page 6

post #201 of 402
Just to bring something up from about three pages ago, concerning naming paradigms......

*cough prepares for geekiest nerdiest post in history cough*

About the IBM-------->HAL thing?

Arthur C. Clarke, who wrote "2001: A Space Odyssey" (no, Kubrick only directed, though Clarke gave him a co-writing credit) has insisted that this was a coincidence. People laugh about it now, but IBM was quite pissed back in the day.

Clarke maintains that the name comes from "Heuristically programmed ALgorythmic computer" whatever that means.

Full details can be found in Clarke's book "The Lost Worlds of 2001"

There. I feel better now.

Back to the GPUL/970/G5 of which I am getting heartily sick. Can't we talk about the 980 instead?
post #202 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by haunebu
I agree. It's not like Apple's gonna say "Oh, wow, this new chip just landed. I guess we better hack it into Jaguar!"

The more likely scenario is that when news reached Apple that the 970 was coming in ahead of schedule (which it appears to be doing), Apple realized that they could release the machine sooner, except that Panther wouldn't be ready. So they started rolling the necessary subset of functionality into Jaguar so that they'd have something to ship the machines with.

This would probably have happened several months ago, at least. Alternately, they were careful and launched a Jaguar-on-970 project even before it was clear that Panther wouldn't ship with the 970s, just because they knew that projects had a way of slipping behind schedule. After all, I'm sure they're more eager than we are to ship a 970-based Mac as soon as is practicable.

Now for a bit of a tangent: we have a contribution from AppleLust's Joe Carson. It's something of an intemperate rant, he stubbornly refuses to link to or even credit the sites he gleans his information from, and he offers the MacBidouille benchmarks as given. He also says something about the Opteron that I'm not sure about:

Quote:
The pseudo-64 bit Opteron can run 32 bit x86 code directly, and it an run it's own specially cranked up extensions for 64 bit... but not simultaneously. You an run your old software and Windows as is, but if you need to run a 64 bit x86 app, you have to shut own the machine and reboot into a 64 bit operating system, While in 64 bit mode you cannot run your old 32 bit x86 apps or operating systems. Oops!

As I understood it, the Opteron has to switch between "64 bit mode" and "32 bit mode." I was unaware that this required a system reboot? and frankly I'd be surprised if it did. Anyone more familiar with the processor care to comment? Or is this article as slapdash as it reads?
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #203 of 402
***NEWSFLASH***

Renouned Mac online journalist Joe C. Carson was found dead in his home last night, apparently after overdosing on crack
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
post #204 of 402
Quote:
The pseudo-64 bit Opteron can run 32 bit x86 code directly, and it an run it's own specially cranked up extensions for 64 bit... but not simultaneously. You an run your old software and Windows as is, but if you need to run a 64 bit x86 app, you have to shut own the machine and reboot into a 64 bit operating system, While in 64 bit mode you cannot run your old 32 bit x86 apps or operating systems. Oops!

This is bunk. Check out Ars Technica's artile on the x86-64 ISA, specifically the following (emphasis mine):

Quote:
These modes are set for each segment of code on a per-segment basis by means of two bits in the segment's code segment descriptor. The chip examines these two bits so that it knows whether to treat a particular chunk of code as 32-bit or 64-bit.

In addition, there are other Opteron tests around the net (http://aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=55000251 for one) that benchmarked the Opteron running both 32 and 64 bit code, and nary a reboot was mentioned. I don't know where Joe Carson got this reboot idea from, but he's probably on crack.

[Edit: Sheesh, he OD'd!!]
post #205 of 402
Wow, I just read the article. Who the hell is this guy anyway?!
Quote:
That way AMD has side-stepped the obtuse refusal of developers to learn a new processor instruction set.

Dude, it's not the developers, its all the old apps! Maybe he should look up 'compiler' in the dictionary!! Besides, we're not all obtuse...
Quote:
despite the fact that every 64 bit RISC processor in existence...will stomp "faster" 32 bit Intel processors

500 MHz UltraSPARC, anyone? Truly bizarre.
post #206 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by moki
There will be some heavy things about at WWDC just don't expect to be able to carry 'em home.

so.... it's bigger than a breadbox?
post #207 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by BuonRotto
so.... it's bigger than a breadbox?

Yep. Time to start hittin' the weight room.
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
post #208 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by moki
Yep. Time to start hittin' the weight room.

Well, I wasn't carrying my Xserve around much - though I am a sissy-girl.

Perchance we'll finally be seeing the much rumored iTMS Wurlitzer. I could see Steve keeping that on the side of the stage for each keynote, cranking out Beach Boys tunes...
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
Reply
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
Reply
post #209 of 402
well...at least we will be able to SEE what is bigger then a breadbox.
post #210 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Shaktai
So be it! Here is a (cough) revised list.
...[*] Availability? 1 or 2 single processor 970 based Macs in 30 to 60 days.[*] Dual processors to follow with the release of Panther, sometime in the fall.
...

I have a gut feeling that what was wrong with the original list was the whole "first lets release a wimpy single processor version on a hacked version of Jaguar" business. How about having an all dual lineup and waiting for Panther? I think that would make a bit more of a splash: Apple would have machines which really would trash Pentiums. The demos would show them trashing Pentiums and as they became available it would be pretty clear that they really do trash Pentiums. If you have a bunch of singles coming out on a hacked version of Jaguar, sure they will trash the current G4s, but the people at PC magazine are going to run a bunch of benchmarks showing that these new machines are still slower than the P4 and by the time the duals come out the news value of the new chip will have evaporated.
post #211 of 402
Steve Jobs is going to introduce a new chip tower. In fact it won't be a tower, nor a cube, but a brand new mac . The Apple. This computer will definitively mix art with value. Imagine a computer with the shape of an apple. The cut size of the apple will have the DVD r slot in.

Just 10 days more to wait . Cannot wait any longer to see this mervellous mastercraft piece of design.

Yes , you have understand it well : SJ will introduce the Apple
post #212 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by BuonRotto
so.... it's bigger than a breadbox?

It's this big:



Introducing the G1945.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #213 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
Steve Jobs is going to introduce a new chip tower. In fact it won't be a tower, nor a cube, but a brand new mac . The Apple. This computer will definitively mix art with value. Imagine a computer with the shape of an apple. The cut size of the apple will have the DVD r slot in.

Just 10 days more to wait . Cannot wait any longer to see this mervellous mastercraft piece of design.

Yes , you have understand it well : SJ will introduce the Apple

Is this a parody of Kormac?
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
post #214 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by moki
Yep. Time to start hittin' the weight room.

Hmmmm. There's a post in the WWDC thread that made me think of an Apple branded blade server running the rumored xGrid clustering software. Would a full rack of blades be heavy enough?
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
Reply
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
Reply
post #215 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by JBL
I have a gut feeling that what was wrong with the original list was the whole "first lets release a wimpy single processor version on a hacked version of Jaguar" business. How about having an all dual lineup and waiting for Panther? . . .

The changes to Jaguar are minor according to IBM, and will not slow down the 970. It just will not run Mac 64-bit applications, of which there are none and won't be for a little while. There is no reason a Smeagol version of Jaguar would not run on both dual and single processor G5 Power Macs.
post #216 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
... think of an Apple branded blade server running the rumored xGrid clustering software. Would a full rack of blades be heavy enough?

My thread from a year ago "Blade Runner ~ Modular Mac " Sounds better now that IBM has announced their intentions to release a 970 powered blade for their blade chassis. LINK

What about Apple just licensing OSX Server to IBM for these 2.5 GHz blades?

Aphelion ...
OSX + Duals, Quads & Octos = World Domination
Reply
OSX + Duals, Quads & Octos = World Domination
Reply
post #217 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
The changes to Jaguar are minor according to IBM, and will not slow down the 970. It just will not run Mac 64-bit applications, of which there are none and won't be for a little while. There is no reason a Smeagol version of Jaguar would not run on both dual and single processor G5 Power Macs.

The point was not that it wouldn't run but that it wouldn't run as fast.
post #218 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Barto
Is this a parody of Kormac?



Kormac ? : i don't know, but a parody : yes definitively
post #219 of 402
After have compelling various threads and rumor my feeling is that Apple will only release the single PPC 970 running on Smeagol. How did i manage to go to this conclusion ? few points :

1) The dual PPC 970 will be based upon NUMA architecture and more precisely the chip will communicate via Hypertransport. This is a new technology, more difficult to do than a single mobo without it. So my guess is (and some rumors said so) that the single mobo are ready but not the DP. I'll add that it's possible that Steve show a demo of this beast, but will say that it won't ship until september.

2) The only reason of Smeagol is to support the PPC 970 before the release of Panther (due in september). If there is not PPC 970, there is no need of smeagol. Apple do not work for nothing, especially when a real 64 bit os in on the way : panther.
post #220 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
After have compelling various threads and rumor my feeling is that Apple will only release the single PPC 970 running on Smeagol. How did i manage to go to this conclusion ? few points :

1) The dual PPC 970 will be based upon NUMA architecture and more precisely the chip will communicate via Hypertransport. This is a new technology, more difficult to do than a single mobo without it. So my guess is (and some rumors said so) that the single mobo are ready but not the DP. I'll add that it's possible that Steve show a demo of this beast, but will say that it won't ship until september.

Where did you get this bit about NUMA? NUMA is a performance hit on any system where it's not strictly necessary, there's no real reason to make the 970 systems NUMA at all. Apple has to design a new memory controller for the 970, and either they did so in a brain-damaged fashion tha requires two memory controllers (which I find incredibly hard to believe) or it's a straight and normal memory architecture.

There's no significant difference between dual and single 970 systems from the perspective of memory architecture unless Apple is doing something incredibly stupid (or supporting dual processor systems using an architecture designed for 64-processor systems!).
All these worlds are belong to us, except Europa. Take off no zigs there.
Reply
All these worlds are belong to us, except Europa. Take off no zigs there.
Reply
post #221 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
After have compelling various threads and rumor my feeling is that Apple will only release the single PPC 970 running on Smeagol. How did i manage to go to this conclusion ? few points :

1) The dual PPC 970 will be based upon NUMA architecture and more precisely the chip will communicate via Hypertransport. This is a new technology, more difficult to do than a single mobo without it. So my guess is (and some rumors said so) that the single mobo are ready but not the DP. I'll add that it's possible that Steve show a demo of this beast, but will say that it won't ship until september.

2) The only reason of Smeagol is to support the PPC 970 before the release of Panther (due in september). If there is not PPC 970, there is no need of smeagol. Apple do not work for nothing, especially when a real 64 bit os in on the way : panther.

Actually I am thinking of the same thing....

Single CPU PM comes out first running Smeagol

then....later in September

Dual CPUs PM come but only running 10.3
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
post #222 of 402
also someone dropped a hint "producer"? (which i do not know if it was based on fact or not) saying the lowend 970 would use the nforce video-subsystem.

would this lend it credence?
post #223 of 402
...and why can't 10.2.7 just be an update to 10.2.6 if Panther isn't due 'til September? 10.2.6 still has problems.
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
post #224 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Bigc
...and why can't 10.2.7 just be an update to 10.2.6 if Panther isn't due 'til September? 10.2.6 still has problems.

So does 10.1.5

I just threw my two cents in on the WWDC topic regarding this issue. Basically, the Smeagol -> Panther thing is the only way Apple could start seeding 64-bit OS's effectively.
All these worlds are belong to us, except Europa. Take off no zigs there.
Reply
All these worlds are belong to us, except Europa. Take off no zigs there.
Reply
post #225 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Anonymous Karma
Where did you get this bit about NUMA? NUMA is a performance hit on any system where it's not strictly necessary, there's no real reason to make the 970 systems NUMA at all. Apple has to design a new memory controller for the 970, and either they did so in a brain-damaged fashion tha requires two memory controllers (which I find incredibly hard to believe) or it's a straight and normal memory architecture.

There's no significant difference between dual and single 970 systems from the perspective of memory architecture unless Apple is doing something incredibly stupid (or supporting dual processor systems using an architecture designed for 64-processor systems!).

I am not sure for NUMA, even if Amorh (which in him, i have the deepest faith : thanks in advance for the cookie ) thinks it will arrive.
However Hypertransport is on the way, and i am not sure that HT can work without a NUMA architecture, because HT is supposed to linked two chips altogether.
I will add, that if they choose this complicated architecture, it would be also a good reason to explain why the dual mobo are not ready.
post #226 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Leonis
Single CPU PM comes out first running Smeagol

then....later in September

Dual CPUs PM come but only running 10.3

Wouldnt make sense, unless we are seeing another "Yikez".. And most people learnt NOT to do this again.. Especially since people now know that PPC 970 is comming and that the hardware needs a major overhaul.
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
post #227 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
Wouldnt make sense, unless we are seeing another "Yikez".. And most people learnt NOT to do this again.. Especially since people now know that PPC 970 is comming and that the hardware needs a major overhaul.

It's very different from Yikes, the single ppc 970 mobo, will be a brand new architecture with a new bus, and not a G4 on a G3 mobo like the Yikes.
The only limitation will be Smeagol, but i think that the buyers of this machine will have a free upgrade for panther.

There is absolutely no way to put a PPC 970 on a G4 mobo, the bus is not the same. If the G4 fitted with Yikes, it's because he supported two bus : the MPX and the old one of the G3. The ppc 970 support only one type of bus. That's why there is very slight chance to see upgrade cards based upon this chip. Or if they arrive they will communicate via an intermediate memory controller who will communicate with the old mobo via the MPX bus. This indirect bus connection will reduce dramitacally all performances.
Apple must be happy of this, if people wants to enjoy the new chip, they will have to buy a new mac.
post #228 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
However Hypertransport is on the way, and i am not sure that HT can work without a NUMA architecture, because HT is supposed to linked two chips altogether.

HyperTransport is for more than just linking two processors together...
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
post #229 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by moki
HyperTransport is for more than just linking two processors together...

I thought I read somewhere that one of the things it could do is connect the graphics card in some way to the system.
post #230 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by sc_markt
I thought I read somewhere that one of the things it could do is connect the graphics card in some way to the system.

Right - it does this on the nForce (lower-end model with built in graphics).

HyperTransport is just a point-to-point bus protocol. They could only be using it to link the south bridge and ATA controller for all we know.
All these worlds are belong to us, except Europa. Take off no zigs there.
Reply
All these worlds are belong to us, except Europa. Take off no zigs there.
Reply
post #231 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
It's very different from Yikes, the single ppc 970 mobo, will be a brand new architecture with a new bus, and not a G4 on a G3 mobo like the Yikes.

Therefore the quotes. What I meant was that they release a single processor 970 with 'less' supreme hardware in it, like maybe AGP 4x instead of 8x for example. Doing this would allow Apple to make even better machines when they release the dual models, and therefore look better for people buying new machines.
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
post #232 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
Therefore the quotes. What I meant was that they release a single processor 970 with 'less' supreme hardware in it, like maybe AGP 4x instead of 8x for example. Doing this would allow Apple to make even better machines when they release the dual models, and therefore look better for people buying new machines.

I don't think there is any real reason to cut back on the lower level machines overall system, unless it has a substantial impact on cost. (Like the L3cache did). You may see variances in things like graphics cards, drives and amounts of RAM, but other then that, the duals will sell themselves. The extra processor is THE reason for buying one. Except for necessary differences I suspect the single and duals will run pretty much on identical system hardware. The limiting factor is not Apple's desire but more likely availability.

(Dang, and I was really wanting that dual 1.8 on my birthday, the day after. )
Mac User since '86 and Apple II before that.
Reply
Mac User since '86 and Apple II before that.
Reply
post #233 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Shaktai
I don't think there is any real reason to cut back on the lower level machines overall system, unless it has a substantial impact on cost. (Like the L3cache did). You may see variances in things like graphics cards, drives and amounts of RAM, but other then that, the duals will sell themselves. The extra processor is THE reason for buying one. Except for necessary differences I suspect the single and duals will run pretty much on identical system hardware. The limiting factor is not Apple's desire but more likely availability.

Well.. They did release the Yikez, didnt they?
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
post #234 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by moki
HyperTransport is for more than just linking two processors together...

You really WANT me to get a stroke from your posts, don't you moki?

Anyway, I seriously doubt we will see a two-teir architecture from Apple.

With Yikes!, Apple took the G3 architecture and slapped a G4 in that. Apple could do that because the G4 runs natively using a G3 bus.

However, to develop a 2T architecture with the 970, Apple would need to develop two distinct chipsets. It would probably be cheaper for Apple to develop one expensive chipset and have it as standard across the line, than to spend all the money developing two chipsets.

Barto
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
post #235 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Barto
You really WANT me to get a stroke from your posts, don't you moki?

Anyway, I seriously doubt we will see a two-teir architecture from Apple.

With Yikes!, Apple took the G3 architecture and slapped a G4 in that. Apple could do that because the G4 runs natively using a G3 bus.

However, to develop a 2T architecture with the 970, Apple would need to develop two distinct chipsets. It would probably be cheaper for Apple to develop one expensive chipset and have it as standard across the line, than to spend all the money developing two chipsets.

Barto

Why would they need to produce 2 distinct chipsets?

You design one chipset that does everything you need. In this instance that would have 2 seperate ApplePI busses to connect to 2 970 and hook up to the (hopefully) DDR400 dual bank RAM system and to the rest of the system.

So, on a dual processor system you use the full memory controller (companion chip whatever) with one chip providing the memory requirements for two processors. No NUMA or anything stupid like that (and it IS stupid in a dual processor design), minimal changes to the current system we all tolerate.

On a single processor system only one of the two processors is hooked up, so the memory controller is only using a subset of its capabilities.

The advantage of using this approach is scale: only supporting one chipset. The disadvantage is a more complex chip set to design initially, but you get to amortise the design costs over more chips because of scale. Each individual chip is more expensive to produce, but it is a tiny fraction of the cost of supporting two designs.
post #236 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by moki
HyperTransport is for more than just linking two processors together...

Interesting phrasing of that statement, Moki. Tell me, did you carefully choose this phrasing (implying that they would use it for processor linking and more), or was it carelessness and what you really meant was that HyperTransport is used for other things than connecting processors?

Possible things to wire together with HyperTransport: memory controllers, processors, I/O chips, GPUs.

I just read a white paper on HT. It is more flexible than I remember and can support fairly long connections (> 0.5 meters) which can be across connectors and cables. ATI and nVidia are both on the consortium. This is purely speculation, but I would love to see Apple define an video card standard that uses HT as the connection. 12.8 GB/sec of Quartz Extreme goodness. That would certainly make people working in the 3D graphics industry sit up and take notice.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #237 of 402
post #238 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by JRG
Why would they need to produce 2 distinct chipsets?

For an architectually different low-end and high-end Power Mac, you would need 2 distinct chipsets. This is what some people here are proposing. This is not a good idea, as it would probably be cheaper just to have a single-teir architecture.

This has NOTHING to do with dual/single processors.

Remember, the Power Mac G5 will use a different architecture from northbridge/southbridge. This is not a shared bus "every device is the same" as MPX.

This is a unidirectional point to point bus which requires a companion chip for each 970

It would make the most sense for Apple to include a northbridge with seperate companion chips which are connected to the northbridge with HyperTransport. Dual and quad CPUs, maybe even more, would be feisable with this design.

In terms of a HyperTransport graphics card, who cares about industry standards when you have 12.8GB/s???

Barto
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
post #239 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Barto
For an architectually different low-end and high-end Power Mac, you would need 2 distinct chipsets. This is what some people here are proposing. This is not a good idea, as it would probably be cheaper just to have a single-teir architecture.

This has NOTHING to do with dual/single processors.

Remember, the Power Mac G5 will use a different architecture from northbridge/southbridge. This is not a shared bus "every device is the same" as MPX.

This is a unidirectional point to point bus which requires a companion chip for each 970

So what? A uni-directional bus makes no difference. At all. In any way.
The companion chip is not some magical entity where the 970 will not work without it. The 970 is a CPU. It executes instructions. It executes instructions on data.
The 970 relies on another chip to: read an address from the processor, get the memory at that address and supply it to the processor. That is a memory controller. You do not need:

970 <=> Companion Chip <=> North bridge

Because a north bridge chip is essentially a memory controller, and is really a PC Centric term. You would have this:

RAM
||
970 <=> Memory Controller
^
||
System Controller

(if these don't come out right, everything hooks into the Memory Controller)

If you want dual 970's

RAM
||
970 <=> Memory Controller <=> 970
^
||
System Controller

Now in both instanes the memory controller chip can be the same, if there isn't a second 970 chip then that part of the memory controller is inactive. The <=> represents an Apple PI interface, so there are two seperate interfaces to the memory controller. Each 970 in the system thinks it is the only one there and happily goes about doing its thing: Executing Instructions. All you need are different daughter cards.

Now there is also another instance where you could easily use the same memory controller to create a higher end machine with better performance:
RAM RAM
|| ||
970 <=> Memory Controller <=> 970
^
||
System Controller

Now here is the same memory controller supporting dual banks of RAM. The chip detects how many banks of RAM are hooked up and only uses what it has access to. And this can also be supported just on the daughter card (becuase that is where I think the RAM will be located).

Quote:

It would make the most sense for Apple to include a northbridge with seperate companion chips which are connected to the northbridge with HyperTransport. Dual and quad CPUs, maybe even more, would be feisable with this design.

In terms of a HyperTransport graphics card, who cares about industry standards when you have 12.8GB/s???

Barto

Well, it is much harder to get people to build for you if you don't support IS interfaces. Replacing AGP with a much higher bandwidth solution would be nifty.
post #240 of 402
Quote:
Originally posted by Programmer
I just read a white paper on HT. It is more flexible than I remember ...

I've been going nuts with this for nearly a year now! Both RIO an HT have so much upside and are such a departure from 'normal'.... Crazy schematics of all sorts scream to be drawn!

The serious questions seem to come down to: Is it possible that Darwin/Mac OS X will support 'non-standard'/NUMA architectures RSN? This seems like more work than making it run on 64-bit hardware.

But if Smeagol's precious is 'One ring to bind them all'... and 'ring' refers to a NUMA architecture -> BWAHAHAHAAAA.

Shake this.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › eWeek article on Smeagol and Q37