or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › 7447/7457
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

7447/7457 - Page 4

post #121 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Locomotive:
<strong>I think last year about this time Moto called Apple and said, "I cannot, I cannot, I cannot".
The Moto engine then trundled off to the roundhouse to rust.</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
post #122 of 215
Just to further confuse the issue.

IBM's G3 uses a 0.13µm process, mmmmmm. IBM allegedly manufactured G4's when Motorola had problems. The IBM roadmap show's them implementing SIMID. Sooooo, I conclude the next update will be (fill in the blank)

<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
post #123 of 215
This isn't exactly 7447/7557, but it involves Moto processors and I didn't want to start yet another processor thread.

This article was pointed out over at MacAch - it mentions a G6 from Moto that may be available by the end of 2003. It is apparently from MilitaryÂ*& Aerospace Electronics and is dated May 29, 2002. Anybody have some insight on the validity of this? Is there really a G6 desktop processor in the works, and will it really be available by the end of 2003 or soon thereafter?

<a href="http://www.infinibandta.org/parchives/clippings/msg00072.html" target="_blank">Infiniband Clippings</a>

Edit: Added pertinent quote:

[quote]There has been disappointment in the DSP world that the current proposed architecture for G5 (the MPC8500 series) is not AltiVec-enabled, leading many to continue banking on further improvements in the G4 line until release of the G6 -- perhaps by the end of 2003. The G5 architecture does, however, call for a built-in RapidIO interface, which also is something many in the industry are anticipating; the G6 is expected to have AltiVec and RapidIO, although performance parameters are defined by the telecommunications and computer industries, not the military. <hr></blockquote>

[ 02-05-2003: Message edited by: TJM ]</p>
"Mathematics is the language with which God has written the Universe" - Galileo Galilei
Reply
"Mathematics is the language with which God has written the Universe" - Galileo Galilei
Reply
post #124 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by TJM:
<strong> Is there really a G6 desktop processor in the works, and will it really be available by the end of 2003 or soon thereafter?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Motorolla has chips they call G5, and G6. These are embedded processors, they are not likely intended for Desktops, or even Laptops. They are probably for telecommunications equipment, or something similar, and totally unsuitable for Apple.
post #125 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by pey/coy-ote:
<strong>
They are probably for telecommunications equipment, or something similar, and totally unsuitable for Apple.</strong><hr></blockquote>

From the text above, it mentions computer industries...

"the G6 is expected to have AltiVec and RapidIO, although performance parameters are defined by the telecommunications and computer industries, not the military.
post #126 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by sc_markt:
<strong>

From the text above, it mentions computer industries...

"the G6 is expected to have AltiVec and RapidIO, although performance parameters are defined by the telecommunications and computer industries, not the military.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Exactly my point. The G5 chips are obviously not suited to desktop use (at least by Apple) due to lack of Altivec. If the G6 does include Altivec, then there's no reason (in principle) that Apple couldn't use them. Technically, the G4 is an embedded chip, but that hasn't stopped its use as a desktop processor as well. It's the "end of 2003" that I find most intriguing - is this still on track for that timeframe, or has it been (very likely) delayed (or cancelled)?
"Mathematics is the language with which God has written the Universe" - Galileo Galilei
Reply
"Mathematics is the language with which God has written the Universe" - Galileo Galilei
Reply
post #127 of 215
I imagine that a G6 with altivec would do quite nicely in tablets and inexpensive notebooks.
Apple's I've owned: AppleTV2; Ipad2; Iphone4; Iphone3; 13" 2010 MBP; 13" CoreDuo MB; 14" iBook (1 Ghz g4); Powerbase 240; PB 5300; Newton; PB 800; Mac LC; Mac plus; Mac 512; Apple II+.
Reply
Apple's I've owned: AppleTV2; Ipad2; Iphone4; Iphone3; 13" 2010 MBP; 13" CoreDuo MB; 14" iBook (1 Ghz g4); Powerbase 240; PB 5300; Newton; PB 800; Mac LC; Mac plus; Mac 512; Apple II+.
Reply
post #128 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Ompus:
<strong>I imagine that a G6 with altivec would do quite nicely in tablets and inexpensive notebooks.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I doubt it. A new core will probably increase complexity and therefore heat and power, relative to a G4 on the same process. If Motorola retains the G4 but moves it to a smaller process (i.e. 7457-RM and beyond) then it will be the best choice for low end notebooks (or an IBM G3 w/VMX and RIO). The G6 might simply be such a thing, however, given the minimal redesign efforts Motorola has been putting out.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #129 of 215
This is now available from Motorola's web site.

<a href="http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/MPC7457FS.pdf" target="_blank">MPC7457FS Fact Sheet</a>
post #130 of 215
133/166MHz bus...sigh, why even bother?

How fast might they get? 1.66GHz? Then maybe Apple could do duals, and we could have 3.3GHz of processing power on a 166MHz bus.

post #131 of 215
So when is this chip going to be available? Why is apple not using it?
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
post #132 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Algol:
<strong>So when is this chip going to be available? Why is apple not using it?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, since Motorola has a fact sheet available, I'd say soon. Maybe the high end Powermac will have it.
post #133 of 215
They probably just didn't make volume production in time for Apple's latest round of updates. My prediction is still a complete lineup refresh this summer (Aug-Sept) with the 7447/7457 in the consumer and notebook machines, and the 970 in the towers. WWDC is a likely place for the 970 to be first mentioned by Apple since 64-bitness is a thing developers care about.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #134 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>They probably just didn't make volume production in time for Apple's latest round of updates. My prediction is still a complete lineup refresh this summer (Aug-Sept) with the 7447/7457 in the consumer and notebook machines, and the 970 in the towers. WWDC is a likely place for the 970 to be first mentioned by Apple since 64-bitness is a thing developers care about.</strong><hr></blockquote>

When is WWDC?

Man apple has been in the dumps with the G4 so long it is hard to imagine them ever getting back on their feet. I figure if the 7457 was about ready apple would have just waited. I mean the 1.42Ghz 7455 isn't ready yet anyway. They are not shipping for a few weeks still.

If motorola claims that the 7455 can only go 1Ghz, but apple has them going 1.42Ghz, I imagine Motorola's claim that the 7457's top speed is 1.3ghz is incorrent. Do you think we will see 1.6Ghz 7457 soon? This really does seem like a waiting period right now.

Also, because of the 970's huge performance jump, apple will have to update their other lines at or around the same time. So maybe, come september apple will update everything again. I can't wait.
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
post #135 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Algol:
<strong>
When is WWDC?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

May.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #136 of 215
[quote] Man apple has been in the dumps with the G4 so long it is hard to imagine them ever getting back on their feet. <hr></blockquote>

You sound completely fed up, Agol!



As for the '57'. So, so. Maybe it is not insignificant that Apple has almost updated everything in the last month-ish!!!

By the time May's conference zips around, Apple will surely have to mention the 64-bit question. And...and a month of lost sales won't make a blind bit of difference to a New York 970 intro'. As sales dip before a conference anyhow!

IT could also explain the less than spectacular updates to the imac2. ie, Apple went as close as they could with what they had. All the updates are less than spectacular from a cpu point of view. Like a technical bottleneck or 'sandbagging' for something completely new in the Summer which will turn the whole line-up upside down again. Therefore, 'sync' updates to the whole line in the Winter. 970 arrives in New York and come late Summer?

'57s' rip roar into iMac 2 with 1 - 1.4/6 gig machines.

Powerbooks with 1 gig to 1.4 gig.

iBooks on updates IBM G3s breaking the 1 gig barrier.

eMacs upto 1.4 gig.

POWERMacs get the fabled 'G5'.

Just my supposition.

Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #137 of 215
I think this is impressive:

7457 @ 1 GHz = 7.5 W
7457 @ 1.3 GHz = 12.6 W
This would be very nice in an notebook!

That's less than half of what 7455 uses.
post #138 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Henriok:
<strong>I think this is impressive:

7457 @ 1 GHz = 7.5 W
7457 @ 1.3 GHz = 12.6 W
This would be very nice in an notebook!

That's less than half of what 7455 uses.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes, rather impressive. The 7447 is probably even lower power and cheaper thanks to reduced pin count and no L3 cache tags & controller. We might see it appear in iBooks or PowerBooks. Unless of course IBM delivers a G3 w/ VMX at an even lower power level.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #139 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>The 7447 is probably even lower power and cheaper thanks to reduced pin count and no L3 cache tags & controller. We might see it appear in iBooks or PowerBooks.</strong><hr></blockquote>Hardly. Apple have never in the past used these 744x-processors. I don't expect them to do so now. I don't think the performance loss justifies the lower power consumption.

But.. if a 7457 @ 1 GHz draws just 7.5 Ws, what's (cool.. it rhymes keeping them from putting two of those in PowerBooks? Certainly not issues with power or heat, and there's certainly room for them in the PowerBook 17".

And.. the same goes for PowerMacs and Servers.. What's stopping them from putting four 7457 in those babies? Certainly not excessive heat emissions.

[ 02-08-2003: Message edited by: Henriok ]</p>
post #140 of 215
memory limitations would appear to make 4 G4's pointless most of the time. A rapidIO G4 might cure that problem, but 970's will be ready by then. I can imagine how much faster a fast FSB G4 would be? Maybe not PPC970 league fast, but certainly enough to make a DP laptop very interesting.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #141 of 215
I've heard it suggested on this board that the '57 will be a pin compatible with the '55. If that's the case, why wouldn't Apple go with the '57 across the board as soon as they become available?
post #142 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Bacon:
<strong>why wouldn't Apple go with the '57 across the board as soon as they become available?</strong><hr></blockquote>Probably to avoid delivery problems from Motorola? And.. the new processors might be more expensive than the old.. just because they are so new and cool *pun intended*
post #143 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Henriok:
<strong>Probably to avoid delivery problems from Motorola? And.. the new processors might be more expensive than the old.. just because they are so new and cool *pun intended*</strong><hr></blockquote>


...I would think that if they are die shrunk 7455s, then they should be cheaper as far more will come off one wafer. So, cheaper, faster, cooler sounds pretty damn good to me.


....and just a thought, as no one has yet to see a 1.42 inthe wild, maybe this delay on the 1.42 is that the yare indeed using the die shrunk 7457.

[ 02-08-2003: Message edited by: mooseman ]</p>
post #144 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by mooseman:
<strong>
....and just a thought, as no one has yet to see a 1.42 inthe wild, maybe this delay on the 1.42 is that the yare indeed using the die shrunk 7457.</strong><hr></blockquote>

If they are, then Apple's tech specs page has an error, since they mention their G4s have 256K of L2 instead of 512K. Maybe somebody with a new 2x1250 MHz G4 can pull off his heatsink and look at the stamp?
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #145 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

If they are, then Apple's tech specs page has an error, since they mention their G4s have 256K of L2 instead of 512K. Maybe somebody with a new 2x1250 MHz G4 can pull off his heatsink and look at the stamp?</strong><hr></blockquote>


Well maybe they will just post an errata sheet and add 512k L2
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 #146 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Bigc:
<strong>

Well maybe they will just post an errata sheet and add 512k L2</strong><hr></blockquote>

Huh? You expect Apple to list a typographical erratum made by the web-monkey???

<img src="confused.gif" border="0">
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #147 of 215
Yeah, your right they'll probably just change the number to 512 and not say anything. Anyone volunteer to check the Apple site hourly and keep us up-to-date :cool:
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 #148 of 215
The simplest explanation is just that the 7457/7447 is not yet available in sufficient quantities for Apple to use. That and they are trying to get rid of their existing stockpile of 7455s.

The 7447 would be appropriate for the consumer machines which don't have L3 caches anyhow. I know Apple hasn't used these variations in the past, but that doesn't mean they'll never consider it.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #149 of 215
Earliy in this thread, there is a post with a link to the new motorola pdf on the 7457. After looking over it again I have realized that it says the 7457 only has a 166Mhz bus. I thought the 7457 was supposed to have a 200mhz bus. Whats up here? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
post #150 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Algol:
<strong>Earliy in this thread, there is a post with a link to the new motorola pdf on the 7457. After looking over it again I have realized that it says the 7457 only has a 166Mhz bus. I thought the 7457 was supposed to have a 200mhz bus. Whats up here? :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>

It also says "up to 1.3 GHz," but we know better than that, don't we?
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #151 of 215
The 7455 is only listed as having a 133 MHz system bus. We know it's capable of 166 MHz. Motorola's really holding back a lot of information of the 7455 and it's reasonable to think they are doing the same for 7457. This early in the game we probably won't see the whole picture since it's not given to us.
post #152 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Henriok:
<strong>The 7455 is only listed as having a 133 MHz system bus. We know it's capable of 166 MHz. Motorola's really holding back a lot of information of the 7455 and it's reasonable to think they are doing the same for 7457. This early in the game we probably won't see the whole picture since it's not given to us.</strong><hr></blockquote>

My info says it can, ideed, run a 200MHz bus.
The people are so happy now, their heads are caving in.
Reply
The people are so happy now, their heads are caving in.
Reply
post #153 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Algol:
<strong>Earliy in this thread, there is a post with a link to the new motorola pdf on the 7457. After looking over it again I have realized that it says the 7457 only has a 166Mhz bus. I thought the 7457 was supposed to have a 200mhz bus. Whats up here? :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>

apple buy's all cpu's faster than 1.3 Mhz (with the faster bus). so the only cpu's motorola has left to sell in sufficient quantities are the slower ones.
in the mean time apple is stock pilling these chips for (another) updated summerline pm/imac/powerbook in about 4-6 months
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #154 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

If they are, then Apple's tech specs page has an error, since they mention their G4s have 256K of L2 instead of 512K. Maybe somebody with a new 2x1250 MHz G4 can pull off his heatsink and look at the stamp?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Anybody have any idea how much performance improvement 512K of L2 will make over 256K L2? Where will the improvements be seen?
post #155 of 215
Those old motorola PDFs that were leaked stated that the 7457 would be out by January. But we didn't see them. The bus speeds of new apple hardware have been left out of the specs. All the apple updates seem sort of like hold me overs. The cool 17" and 12" powerBooks not matching the 15" models updated just a month or so before. The iMacs have been updated to one new model and a reduced price old model. The PowerMacs are a bit faster but don't include the new 7457 that is supposed to be available by now. They only reduced prices on the emacs and the 17" PowerBook is still not shipping.

It really seems like all smoke and shadows to me. When are we going to get some real updates? Like the 970 or even the 7457. Maybe this summer or later. Who knows but I'm telling you smoke and shadows, smoke and shadows.
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
post #156 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by Henriok:
<strong>Apple have never in the past used these 744x-processors.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I found XC7445A RX867WF in PowerBook 12".
post #157 of 215
*deleted*

[ 02-10-2003: Message edited by: Henriok ]</p>
post #158 of 215
<strong>Originally posted by suguri:
I found XC7445A RX867WF in PowerBook 12".</strong>

Really? You would be the 1st recorded instance of Apple using a 744x G4. Interesting. You found out through a CPU checker program or taking apart your AlBook?
post #159 of 215
The 7447/7457 G4s are announced by Moto.
<a href="http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31437784" target="_blank">Moto 7447 & 7457 press release</a>

(edit: Sorry, I jumped the gun. Sampling now, production in Q4 2003. Go IBM!!!!)

[ 02-10-2003: Message edited by: CodeWarrior ]</p>
post #160 of 215
[quote]Originally posted by sc_markt:
<strong>

Anybody have any idea how much performance improvement 512K of L2 will make over 256K L2? Where will the improvements be seen?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, if you're AMD and desperate, it makes a big marketing difference. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

A AMD Athlon XP 2250 MHz w/256KB cache has a Quantispeed rating of 2800+

A AMD Athlon XP 2167 MHz w/512KB cache has a Quantispeed rating of 3000+

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

Tom's Hardware, Tech Report, etc. are not amused...especially when the old 2800+ beats the 3000+ in a majority of their benchmarks
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › 7447/7457