7447/7457 - Page 5

[quote]Originally posted by Algol:
<strong> 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? </strong><hr></blockquote>

Motorola claimed the 7455A to run 1GHz @ 1.3V. They didn't officially tell us the speed the 1.85V versions can reach. But I can remember a product bulletin from June 2002 where they listet "XC7455ARX1167PCR", "XPC7455RX1100PC" and "PPC7455RX1067PB" (where XC is preproduction and PPC is full production, P = 1.85V/65°C).

"with production expected to commence in Q4 2003."

That's a long time to wait for something so underwhelming.

[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>

I think that when Apple announced these new machines they were not sure if the 7457 would be available so they quoted the 7455 specs. I think it is very suspecious that the 1.42ghz is still 6weeks from shipping according to the Apple store. I doubt very much that the 1.42ghz PM are going to be shipped with 7455's, I expect the L2 specifications to be updated soon.

So it looks like summer machines will ship like this...

PM's 7457
PB's & FP iMacs 7447
eMac 7455

And we will have to wait until MWSF2004 for the 970.

Q4 2003 is right in time to update the notebook line.

I don't think the 7457's release date will in any way impact the date that Apple chooses to unveil the 970, especially if the 970 starts out as a PowerMac exclusive. The 7457 can tide the notebook and iMac lines over at least until the 970 moves to .09 micron, at which point it can slip into the PowerBook, and leave the 7457 to power the iBook. I'm not sure which way the iMac/eMac will go, but they do tend to follow the PowerBook.

This delay makes me wonder when the 7457-RM will ship. 2005?

[ 02-10-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>I don't think the 7457's release date will in any way impact the date that Apple chooses to unveil the 970, especially if the 970 starts out as a PowerMac exclusive.
[ 02-10-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

I agree, it's just that I think the 970 is going to be longer comming than is expected on these boards given the recent comments.

It seems obvious that Apple will just drop the 7457 into the PM's as soon as they have sufficent stocks to do so. The press release says that Alpha samples of the MPC7457 and MPC7447 PowerPC processors are available today to selected customers. General market sampling is planned for March, with production expected to commence in Q4 2003. so I would expect "Selected customers" to get enough chips before September to pop them in ther top of the range PM's.

If anything the 17" PB's need the 7447 chip much more than any other Mac.

[ 02-10-2003: Message edited by: Addison ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by Addison:
<strong>

I agree, it's just that I think the 970 is going to be longer comming than is expected on these boards given the recent comments.

It seems obvious that Apple will just drop the 7457 into the PM's as soon as they have sufficent stocks to do so. The press release says that Alpha samples of the MPC7457 and MPC7447 PowerPC processors are available today to selected customers. General market sampling is planned for March, with production expected to commence in Q4 2003. so I would expect "Selected customers" to get enough chips before September to pop them in ther top of the range PM's.

If anything the 17" PB's need the 7447 chip much more than any other Mac.

[ 02-10-2003: Message edited by: Addison ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Who said they are for pmacs? The 970 is for pmacs and G4s will now go to the iMac, pBook, etc.

[quote]Originally posted by Addison:
<strong>

I agree, it's just that I think the 970 is going to be longer comming than is expected on these boards given the recent comments.

It seems obvious that Apple will just drop the 7457 into the PM's as soon as they have sufficent stocks to do so. The press release says that Alpha samples of the MPC7457 and MPC7447 PowerPC processors are available today to selected customers. General market sampling is planned for March, with production expected to commence in Q4 2003. so I would expect "Selected customers" to get enough chips before September to pop them in ther top of the range PM's.

If anything the 17" PB's need the 7447 chip much more than any other Mac.

[ 02-10-2003: Message edited by: Addison ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

This is roughly the same timeframe that IBM has given for the 970 :

[quote]
The PowerPC 970 is designed in IBM 0.13-micron CMOS silicon-on-insulator (SOI) technology and will be manufactured in IBM's new state-of-the-art 300-mm facility in East Fishkill, NY. Sampling is scheduled to begin in the second quarter of 2003 with production expected in the second half of 2003.
<hr></blockquote>

Though the second half of 03 is a broad target, so they could ship before Moto's new G4, at the same time, or after. I would hope for Apples sake that Moto and IBM have their chips far enough along that new Macs could be anounced at MacWorld this summer, or if that fails at least by the end of September.

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>

Who said they are for pmacs? The 970 is for pmacs and G4s will now go to the iMac, pBook, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You miss understand me, I think Apple will drop the 7457 into the PM's until the 970's are ready.

I agree that PM's will go 970 and possibly PB's later on. I would also expect the 7457-RM to find it's way into iMacs.

[quote]Originally posted by Addison:
<strong>

I think that when Apple announced these new machines they were not sure if the 7457 would be available so they quoted the 7455 specs. I think it is very suspecious that the 1.42ghz is still 6weeks from shipping according to the Apple store. I doubt very much that the 1.42ghz PM are going to be shipped with 7455's, I expect the L2 specifications to be updated soon. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Note that the Xserve page also lists 256K L2 cache. And your theory about Apple not knowing when the 7457s would be announced is ridiculous. Apple knows well in advance what's going into its machines. Apple knows what the specs of the 1.42 GHz G4 will be, and whether it'll be a 7457 or a 7455. There are only three explanations for the tech specs listings.

Either the web-monkey forgot to put "256 or 512 KB L2 cache" or the 1.42 GHz is a MPC7455.

[quote]Originally posted by Addison:
<strong>

If anything the 17" PB's need the 7447 chip much more than any other Mac.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The 17" PB would be using the 7457...

[quote]That's a long time to wait for something so underwhelming.

<hr></blockquote>



Now then...

I think Amorph said it.

Basically the 970 and the 'revised' (again...) G4 will pass one another mid flight as the 970 crashes into the 'power'Mac range and the G4 into the consumer line.

This looks, predictably, like a total 'fall' revamp. I think it is no coincidence that Apple have revamped almost their entire lineup over the last month or so over the winter period. I think we'll see a similar, even more aggressive, move come late Summer. With the 970s spectacular at New York. A great way for Macworld New York to bow out I'd say.

Let's face it. Apple cpu problems can't go on with slight...incremental bumps while x86 ville are dawning on a new 64 bit ages and a Pentium 4 cruising to 4 gig. Something's got to give. It's getting beyond a joke. The last iMac 2 update barely moved, much like the disastrous 'power'Mac bump last Summer. And the eMacs? Don't go there. They're cheaper. Let's leave it at that..., eh?

Can you really imagine 'power'Macs on dual 1.6 gig on a crummy 166 bus to the years end? Not even a funny joke. With 3.6-4 gig Pentium 4 and Athlon 64s beaten the living jeeeezus out of the poor G4 in Lightwave and Photoshop benches...sorry...stop the nightmare Lemon. The 970 is coming.

Anyhow. Who knows what will transpire.

It's just been so long...Apple surely must have been working on something seizmic to get us back kicking x86 booty. (Say with Geordie accent!)

I've got faith in Moki's tea leaves.

Unsurprising first half 2003 and a great 2nd half.

The recent X-serve/X-Raid annoucements give hints that apple 'means business'. We're just gonna have to wait a little longer, that's all.

Lemon Bon Bon

[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>This delay makes me wonder when the 7457-RM will ship. 2005? </strong><hr></blockquote>

Since the leaked roadmap listed the MPC 7457-RM as a proposal, I believe 2005 to be quite optimistic <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

This about clinches it for me. Motorola will not be supplying processors to Apple as soon as Apple can make the change to IBM or whoever. For whatever reason, Motorola wouldn't pony up the R&D to design a true desktop processor and they will lose Apple's business. Too bad really.

<strong>Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon:
Let's face it. Apple cpu problems can't go on with slight...incremental bumps while x86 ville are dawning on a new 64 bit ages and a Pentium 4 cruising to 4 gig. Something's got to give.</strong>

Well, incremental bumps is the way to go because it maximizes the dollars. It would be bad (for Apple) to waste CPU increments. AMD and Intel always incremented by 50 to 200 MHz at a time, but did it every quarter instead of 6 months like PowerPC. Apple needs to have a quarterly update cycle really if they want to catch up in MHz.

Pentium 4 increases to 4 GHz probably won't happen until Q2 04. The 3.2 GHz P4 is hitting its power limits at 130 nm, and there isn't much stretch left. They'll probably get to 3.2 GHz in the next 4 months or so, than 3.6 GHz when a 90 nm P4 ships at the end of the year, maybe Q1 04. The big thing will be the quad data rate 200 MHz processor bus representing a marketing number of 800 MHz bitrate for its bus. That's the PPC 970's bus bitrate!

The Opteron won't be in Apple's space. (If AMD has it there they will be in trouble financially.) The Itaniums aren't in Apple's space. The Athlon 64 is now due in September.

<strong>Can you really imagine 'power'Macs on dual 1.6 gig on a crummy 166 bus to the years end?</strong>

Well, yes I can. It's not funny obviously.

<strong>It's just been so long...Apple surely must have been working on something seizmic to get us back kicking x86 booty. (Say with Geordie accent!)</strong>

I'm hoping for by this time next year:

Dual PPC 970 1.8 GHz Power Macs
Dual PPC 7457 1.5 GHz Powerbooks (there's lots of pcb space if backside cache is eliminated)
PPC 7457 1.5 GHz iMacs (with backside cache)
PPC 7457 1.3 GHz iBooks (without backside cache)

and a Cube-like tower with a 1.3 GHz 7457 for $800.

So do you think we will really see the PPC970 this year? At a glance it would seem obvious that we would. But coud it just be that we a hoping so much that we have overlooked the fact. I don't see why the 7457 can't have a faster bus. why can't moto make it faster than 200Mhz? I don't see why that is so hard for them. It does seem that the 7457 and the 970 will be out at the same time, so this could be very interesting for apple. hehe!

[quote]Originally posted by THT:
<strong>[qb]
I'm hoping for by this time next year:

Dual PPC 970 1.8 GHz Power Macs
Dual PPC 7457 1.5 GHz Powerbooks (there's lots of pcb space if backside cache is eliminated)
PPC 7457 1.5 GHz iMacs (with backside cache)
PPC 7457 1.3 GHz iBooks (without backside cache)

and a Cube-like tower with a 1.3 GHz 7457 for $800. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Just asking, but if reports that the 970 are twice as fast at the same clock as the MPC 7455, which should hold pretty much true for the MPC 7457(since nothing really changed other that L2 cache, then why not a 1.0GHz-1.4GHz in the powerbooks/imacs/ibooks???? Or, an IBM version of the G4 based on the G3 w/ altivec????

Just asking.

I think the .13µ 970 will be to hot and power hungry to go into a laptop at anything over 1.2Ghz. Later on when we see the .9µ we will probable see a 970 PowerBook.

[quote]This delay makes me wonder when the 7457-RM will ship. 2005? <hr></blockquote>

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


<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

Lemon Bon Bon

[quote]Originally posted by Addison:
<strong>

You miss understand me, I think Apple will drop the 7457 into the PM's until the 970's are ready.

I agree that PM's will go 970 and possibly PB's later on. I would also expect the 7457-RM to find it's way into iMacs.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't think there will be anymore G4s in the pmacs. We have no reason to believe that the G4 can scale much higher seeing that the past update broke the 'high becomes low' trend Apple has followed recently. I would rather Apple wait and do nothing for a few months longer and release the 970 then use use the G4 for another 6 months. I want the 970 this year, so that means no more G4s

AMEN!

<strong>Originally posted by rickag:
Just asking, but if reports that the 970 are twice as fast at the same clock as the MPC 7455, which should hold pretty much true for the MPC 7457(since nothing really changed other that L2 cache, then why not a 1.0GHz-1.4GHz in the powerbooks/imacs/ibooks???? Or, an IBM version of the G4 based on the G3 w/ altivec????</strong>

It was wishful thinking. Everything is pretty much up in the air. We don't even know when Apple will use the 7457, and that should be a no brainer. But I suppose I can speculate.

As for the my wishful thinking, I was just thinking that duals provide a better experience, and using dual PPC 970 CPUs would be a bit too much for a laptop while a single PPC 970 will probaby too expensive for iMacs and iBooks. That leaves the 7457.

One other thing I find interesting is that 10.3 is rumoured to be targeted for around September. The update to a 64-bit version of the OS would certain be a major revision number.

[quote]Originally posted by THT:
<strong>[qb]That leaves the 7457.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Speculating is quite entertaining

Why not a G3 w/ Altivec, I believe it's somewhere on IBM's roadmap? 1GHz, 4 stage pipeline, very low power, already on 0.13µm process?

[quote]Originally posted by THT:
<strong>[qb]Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon:
Let's face it. Apple cpu problems can't go on with slight...incremental bumps while x86 ville are dawning on a new 64 bit ages and a Pentium 4 cruising to 4 gig. Something's got to give.</strong>

Well, incremental bumps is the way to go because it maximizes the dollars. It would be bad (for Apple) to waste CPU increments. AMD and Intel always incremented by 50 to 200 MHz at a time, but did it every quarter instead of 6 months like PowerPC. Apple needs to have a quarterly update cycle really if they want to catch up in MHz.

Pentium 4 increases to 4 GHz probably won't happen until Q2 04. The 3.2 GHz P4 is hitting its power limits at 130 nm, and there isn't much stretch left. They'll probably get to 3.2 GHz in the next 4 months or so, than 3.6 GHz when a 90 nm P4 ships at the end of the year, maybe Q1 04. The big thing will be the quad data rate 200 MHz processor bus representing a marketing number of 800 MHz bitrate for its bus. That's the PPC 970's bus bitrate!

The Opteron won't be in Apple's space. (If AMD has it there they will be in trouble financially.) The Itaniums aren't in Apple's space. The Athlon 64 is now due in September.

<strong>Can you really imagine 'power'Macs on dual 1.6 gig on a crummy 166 bus to the years end?</strong>

Well, yes I can. It's not funny obviously.

<strong>It's just been so long...Apple surely must have been working on something seizmic to get us back kicking x86 booty. (Say with Geordie accent!)</strong>

I'm hoping for by this time next year:

Dual PPC 970 1.8 GHz Power Macs
Dual PPC 7457 1.5 GHz Powerbooks (there's lots of pcb space if backside cache is eliminated)
PPC 7457 1.5 GHz iMacs (with backside cache)
PPC 7457 1.3 GHz iBooks (without backside cache)

and a Cube-like tower with a 1.3 GHz 7457 for $800. [/QB]<hr></blockquote>

Incramental upgrades done too often could potentially cost more money. Apple needs to get the most "bang for the buck" on their upgrades. I dont think that there is anything wrong with the 6 month (aproximate) cycle that they are on now, however, right now they could probably get away with 3/year till they catch up. The biggest problem that I see with their strategy is:

• Apple has not been agressive enough in addressing other shortcomings of their systems, such as bus speed in the consumer lines and USB2 adoption
• Apple has again "waffeled" on the MP Pr line, which sends mixed signals to its userbase and developer community
• Apple is not agressive enough in Processor speeds boosts in their consumer line. There is room to "grow" here if they keep the MP pro lines, and SP consumer lines. The iMac should have been at 1.25 Ghz with the last upgrade to make it more competative with the overall market.

Now I do realize that processor speeds and design (G4) are limiting Apples ability to push the envalope any further in this arena. However they could do more to adress limitations in other components like the AGP system, drive speed, etc. This is even more possable in their consumer line, which is competing with systems with as much as twice the speed in both the processor and memory.

Based upon the recent updates, it appears from the outside that Apple is doing everything that they can to improve their hardware but remain hamstrung by the top end performance of the G4, which causes a trickle-down effect limiting the rest of the line-up. The hope of a roughly simultaneous arrival of the 7457 and the 970 now seems ill-founded. With production scheduled to commence in Q4 it seems unlikely that commercial volumes of the 7457 would be available until 2004.

In trying to understand the logic behind Apple 's current line-up, one small ray of hope emerges.

First two assumptions: Apple has decided to abandon the G4 since not upgrade is not foreseeable until next year, and the 13 nm 970 may run too hot above 1.2 GHz for the PowerBooks and iMacs,

Apple may have held back on 1.25 GHz machines so that they would have room to introduce a 1.2 GHz 970 in August/September. This would also explain the "place-holder" appearance of the current line-up.

This leaves a couple of scenarios (assuming that the 970 will be available in Q3):

Great:
PowerMac 1.8, 1.6, 1.4 GHz 970
iMac 1.2 GHz 970
PowerBook 1.2 GHz 970
iBook, 1 GHz new G3

Not so Great:
PowerMac 1.8, 1.6, 1.4 GHz 970
iMac 1.25 GHz 7455
PowerBook 1.25 GHz 7455
iBook, 1 GHz new G4

The first scenario would have the iMacs and PowerBooks switching over to the 9 nm 970 for future upgrades. The second scenario would leave the PowerBooks and consumer line following the G4 map for 18 months to 2 years.

An all IBM line-up may be pure fantasy, but a guy has gotta be able to dream.

The 74XX won't narrow the gap with the PC world, but it will be welcomed by Apple wherever economy and power-consumption matter. So in October, envision a line-up like this:

Xserve: dual 1.6 7457
Powerbook: 1.3 - 1.6 7457
iMac: 1.3 - 1.6 7457
eMac: 1.3 7447
iBook: 1.0-1.3 7447

Eventually, only the iBook, eMac and new iPad will remain on the 74xx...

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>...past update broke the 'high becomes low' trend Apple has followed recently.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sorry, exactly what "trend" is that?

[quote] I want the 970 this year, so that means no more G4s <hr></blockquote>

Praise the LORD!



Ompus called it. There will a place for the G4 where its 'qualities' are called for. But they JUST WON'T BE IN A BAD ASS POWER-TOWER!

(Pictures the 970 launch. People...Applelites over the world rejoiced...women and children singing and dancing in the streets...G4 brown nosers and G4 bashers unite in perfect harmony over the ORGASMIC power of the 970...Mac journalists shed tears of joy as they go back to the drawing board to engineer new benches to try and measure a 970 Word scroll...Lemon Bon Bon opening his wallet...and taking a tower bashing vowe of silence...)

Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />

A 64 bit version of the OS is not required to properly run on the 970 is it?? It may not be optimised but would still function correct? I sure hope this is not holding up the chip's intro.

[quote]Originally posted by Vvmp:
<strong>A 64 bit version of the OS is not required to properly run on the 970 is it??</strong><hr></blockquote>

It shouldn't be.

If the motherboard changed significantly - and in some ways it would have to - then the OS will have to be updated accordingly. Some people have asserted that Apple is behind schedule with the chipsets that will accompany the 970. That might be a bigger problem.

At any rate, if Apple's not concerned with making OS X run as fast as possible on the 970 right out of the starting gate, it should not be that difficult to get it 64 bit ready.

[quote]<strong>I sure hope this is not holding up the chip's intro.</strong><hr></blockquote>

IBM has said that production begins in the second half of this year. Notwithstanding the people who seem to think that March occurs in the second half of this year , I wouldn't expect the 970 before late summer at the very earliest. Apple might do a paper release in July, but I'm not expecting more than that.

[ 02-11-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

If I'm not mistaken, doesn't the fiscal 2H of 03 begin in March/April 03?

I believe there was some controversy as to whether IBM was referring to the fiscal or actual (for lack of a better term) 2H.

<strong>Originally posted by JCG:
Incramental upgrades done too often could potentially cost more money. Apple needs to get the most "bang for the buck" on their upgrades.</strong>

I think this problem can be mitigated if Apple kept a very very small inventory like they did a couple of years ago and varied their price points in shorter cycles. I'd like to see a time where they can just introduce a new higher machine anytime, like quarterly, and everything cascades down from there.

I guess Dell has no problem with this since they don't have a channel to protect, just their inventory, what little they do have.

<strong>Apple has not been agressive enough in addressing other shortcomings of their systems, such as bus speed in the consumer lines and USB2 adoption</strong>

Bus speed can't be helped. USB2 is a political.

<strong>Apple has again "waffeled" on the MP Pr line, which sends mixed signals to its userbase and developer community</strong>

Agree here. The Power Macs should be permanantly dual processor. The 1 GHz Power Mac now sold should be a dual 1 GHz for $1799. I think dual processor 15" and 17" Powerbooks are also doable with the 130 nm 7457.

<strong>Apple is not agressive enough in Processor speeds boosts in their consumer line. There is room to "grow" here if they keep the MP pro lines, and SP consumer lines. The iMac should have been at 1.25 Ghz with the last upgrade to make it more competative with the overall market.</strong>

I don't think this can be helped without a larger stratification in processor clock rates, but you have a point here. Power Macs get 1.4 GHz duals with backside cache. iMacs get 1.25 GHz singles without backside cache. However, I think the iMac line needs to be driven down another $200 or $300 for it to be competitive with the overall market.

<strong>However they could do more to adress limitations in other components like the AGP system, drive speed, etc. This is even more possable in their consumer line, which is competing with systems with as much as twice the speed in both the processor and memory.</strong>

I think Apple's main problem here is that the low end costs too much. I've been pricing out some low end Dells, and a machine can be had for less than $800 and a decent machine for less than $1100 (including monitors). This means that the base eMac needs to cost $799 and the base iMac needs to cost $999 or so. If they were around there, I think a lot of us would be more comfortable with purchasing the all-in-ones. Which AGP bus and which graphics card starts to become too technical for the vast majority of buyers at these price points, so I don't Apple would have that much to worry about with their current low end specs.

[quote]Originally posted by neumac:
<strong>This leaves a couple of scenarios (assuming that the 970 will be available in Q3):

Great:
PowerMac 1.8, 1.6, 1.4 GHz 970
iMac 1.2 GHz 970
PowerBook 1.2 GHz 970
An all IBM line-up may be pure fantasy, but a guy has gotta be able to dream.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You know that Apple did the same thing when they introduce the G3 ! That was "Pro-Go-Whoa" ! I can't remember if the web site was closed for a week with just this sentence. See this <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/19980509035420/http://www.apple.com/" target="_blank">link.</a>

I really hope that Apple will do the same thing with the 970.

[quote] I really hope that Apple will do the same thing with the 970.

<hr></blockquote>

Me too.

Apple really have come a long way in five years. They need to go alot further still...

Lemon Bon Bon

I think it was mentioned here before that we might see a 64bit version of the OS at the WWDC to get developers up to speed. If not by then, either Apple figures there's no need to update the OS for the 970 and apps will run just fine unaltered, or we are in for a longer wait than expected. Maybe '04? I need my 970 PPC injection NOW!

[quote]Originally posted by Spart:
<strong>If I'm not mistaken, doesn't the fiscal 2H of 03 begin in March/April 03?

I believe there was some controversy as to whether IBM was referring to the fiscal or actual (for lack of a better term) 2H.</strong><hr></blockquote>


You are mistaken.


IBM's fiscal and calendar years are pretty much aligned, and the timeline they specified back in the MDF was unambiguious even without that information. Aug-Sept is the most likely arrival date, barring any engineering delays.

The 970 will require a minor update to the OS, but it should get a whole set of 64-bit APIs so that developers can start building 64-bit applications. Since Apple has had 64-bit hardware for a long time, FreeBSD is 64-bit clean, and all of the other code is relatively new this shouldn't really be a problem. I expect them to roll out the 64-bit interfaces as WWDC as part of a 10.3 preview.

Apple might have had OSX running on Power 3/4 machines from IBM.. so they might have had at least 2 years of turning OSX into a full fledged 64-bit OS. Off to a running start..

How do we know for sure that 10.2.3 is not 64bit? Would there be anyway of checking? Apple has been known to release things and not tell people, like itunes 3. Also IBM even says that they are releasing their own servers with the 970 in them later this year. <a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1001-984353.html?tag=fd_top" target="_blank">http://news.com.com/2100-1001-984353.html?tag=fd_top</a>
So I guess that means Apple will be able to as well, right? No more doubts here? I can't wait...

[quote] We've been dealing with this very issue in-house at our studio. We really want to move to Shake, but we need a render farm. I have heard all the arguments for the Mac as a render farm from stability to performance to whatever. But, we've been dealing with this for some time and the owners of the studio have a hard time shelling out $3,500 per Mac machine when they can purchase four Windows equivalents that would get the job done in less than half of the time as the Mac.
<hr></blockquote>

X-grid and 970 power?

Renderfarm in the making?

The '57' just aint the answer. Naff fp.

Any reason Apple can do render farms in light of their surprise entry in business territory with X-serve/X-raid.

Lemon Bon Bon :confused: <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />