or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › [Closed due to flaky BB] Next Powermac 970 with up to 2,5 GHZ ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Closed due to flaky BB] Next Powermac 970 with up to 2,5 GHZ ?

post #1 of 477
Thread Starter 
IBM will show prototypes of PPC 970 servers with up to 2,5 GHz when they will be released. Until now I only knew about up to 1,8 GHz for the PPC970...

<a href="http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/ciw-27.02.03-000/" target="_blank">http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/ciw-27.02.03-000/</a>

[ 03-06-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
post #2 of 477
<a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker %2Fdata%2Fciw-27.02.03-000%2F&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools" target="_blank">Google translation for the lazy</a>
post #3 of 477
<a href="http://www-5.ibm.com/de/pressroom/cebit2003/en/highlights/powerpcblade.html" target="_blank">IBM's press release</a>.


<img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
post #4 of 477
This has some good implications. First it shows how IBM under promises and over delivers; a rarity in the tech world. Also the 970 yields much be great. I'm assuming that the bus on the 2.5GHz is 1.25GHz (625MHz DDR). Impressive to say the least. Unless they are going for an elaborate bus ratio scheme.
post #5 of 477
Is that a 2.5 GHz PPC 970 in my pants or...
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #6 of 477
Damn!! Moki !! someonew was sandbanging!! <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
The world belongs to who wants it , now who deserves it.
Reply
The world belongs to who wants it , now who deserves it.
Reply
post #7 of 477
I know we all want duals, but at 2.5GHz wouls a single be fast enough?
Apple Computer, Inc.

AKA the Microsoft R&D Department
Reply
Apple Computer, Inc.

AKA the Microsoft R&D Department
Reply
post #8 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by Derrick 61:
<strong>I know we all want duals, but at 2.5GHz wouls a single be fast enough?</strong><hr></blockquote>

A 1.8 GHz PPC970's SpecInt numbers are approximately equal to a 2.4 GHz P4 and it's SpecFP numbers are closer to a 2.8 GHz P4s, so I don't think I'd be complaining with just one...
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #9 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by Derrick 61:
<strong>I know we all want duals, but at 2.5GHz wouls a single be fast enough?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hard to tell with out some concrete comparisons, but if the 970 had SMT... I would wager a singel 2.5GHz 970 would beat the pants off a dual 1.42GHz G4. But I don't think the 970 has SMT capabilities. But even without SMT, with the bus improvements, 2 FP units; it's too close to call.
post #10 of 477
we know the chip is out there, so what would the rest
of the powermac look like?
The world belongs to who wants it , now who deserves it.
Reply
The world belongs to who wants it , now who deserves it.
Reply
post #11 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by amarone:
<strong><a href="http://www-5.ibm.com/de/pressroom/cebit2003/en/highlights/powerpcblade.html" target="_blank">IBM's press release</a>.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I may be slow but it's the first time I officially see Altivec Vector/SIMD unit. I mean it's not simply Altivec-compatible, but Altivec.

So when is the party?!

[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: costique ]</p>
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. Putts Law
Reply
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. Putts Law
Reply
post #12 of 477
Are there any SPEC data for the G4 out there? Just for the fun of it I want to calculate the performance increase from a single G4/400 to a dual 2 GHz 970.

If IBM is demoing the 970 with altivec in mid Mars is there anyone that Apple will wait until 2004 to use the 970? Or wait for the G5 or migrate to ADM <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

Me think it is time to get higher frame rates in th FPS games in Mac than PC <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
post #13 of 477
I hope that Apple releases a dual 2.5ghz 970 for the "price-is-no-object" professionals. That would get apple some respect.
post #14 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by costique:
<strong>So when is the party?!</strong><hr></blockquote>

Look for some mention around CeBIT or WWDC, unless Apple wants to hold it's own little party, ala iMac DV.
...we have assumed control
Reply
...we have assumed control
Reply
post #15 of 477
Whoa! Much better than I ever imagined! :eek:
post #16 of 477
Programmer has a weird habit of hinting at 'things going well at IBM'. I hope we will not jump straight to 3GHz. In 2006.
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. Putts Law
Reply
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. Putts Law
Reply
post #17 of 477
Holy Crap!!! If IBM is getting 1.8-2.5 Ghz on 0.13 microns....what would speeds likely be when they shrink to 0.09?
It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think.
Reply
It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think.
Reply
post #18 of 477
wow, this will spank pc's...it will be sick! :eek:


2.5 is up there, thats almost 3GHz! (intel tops)


perhaps PPC is healthy again
0 People Found This Reply Helpful
Reply
0 People Found This Reply Helpful
Reply
post #19 of 477
it's party time, boys.

tribal!

post #20 of 477
If this is true, it's amazing. Steve was not kidding when he said we'd close the MHz gap. A 1.1GHz leap in clock speed accompanied by a much more significant leap in performance... wow. Just wow.

Before you all get too excited, remember that IBM has its own purposes for these chips, and the yields might be low enough that far ahead of spec that there are only enough 2.5GHz 970s to appear in a pricey (by our standards) IBM server.

If that's not the case, and IBM can offer 2.5GHz 970s in quantities that Apple can use and afford... PAAAAAARTY!

[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
"...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 #21 of 477
Given Fred Anderson latest words that Apple wants to increase market share from 3 to 5 percent, not short term profits. I don't believe that PPC970 based computers will carry a premium over today's range.

The prices will be in line with the chip's cost. Given that Apple currently uses rare high speed tested chips for their top of the line, the 970 may actually come in cheaper.

The complete bill of materials will decide the machine's cost. I believe the 970 based machines will be a relative bargain.
post #22 of 477
"Hard to tell with out some concrete comparisons, but if the 970 had SMT... I would wager a singel 2.5GHz 970 would beat the pants off a dual 1.42GHz G4. But I don't think the 970 has SMT capabilities. But even without SMT, with the bus improvements, 2 FP units; it's too close to call."

the raw performance of 2 1.42 G4 vs. 1 970 may be equal.... but a 970 would spank 2 G4s in single thread performance, which for MOST things is far more important. that being said... don't start counting on 2.5GHz macs shipping anytime soon... if they do - great; but it is far more likely that initial clocks will be more conservative, and scale consistantly from there. If a 1.8 GHz part shows up in the top of the line machine relatively soon, it is nothing to complain about... depending on the definition of "relatively soon"... and again.... its not the GHz gap that is important... but the total execution time for any given task... clock rates are secondary at best
i freebase user interface
Reply
i freebase user interface
Reply
post #23 of 477
I've been waiting for Hannibals second 970 article for MONTHS. Where is it?
post #24 of 477
Man, Apple will be going back into the heavy Hollywood business...this baby and a 64-bit edition of Shake would be kickass.
post #25 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by grad student:
<strong>the raw performance of 2 1.42 G4 vs. 1 970 may be equal.... but a 970 would spank 2 G4s in single thread performance, which for MOST things is far more important. that being said... don't start counting on 2.5GHz macs shipping anytime soon... if they do - great; but it is far more likely that initial clocks will be more conservative, and scale consistantly from there. If a 1.8 GHz part shows up in the top of the line machine relatively soon, it is nothing to complain about... depending on the definition of "relatively soon"... and again.... its not the GHz gap that is important... but the total execution time for any given task... clock rates are secondary at best</strong><hr></blockquote>


Actually, you need to remember that Altivec operations are essentially bus bound and that the 970's bus will be completely superior to the G4 hack. So a single 970 will absolutely crush any dual G4 system when it comes to altivec operations as well as for single threaded apps. There won't be any comparsion.
King Felix
Reply
King Felix
Reply
post #26 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>I've been waiting for Hannibals second 970 article for MONTHS. Where is it?</strong><hr></blockquote>

He's still trying to pick his jaw up off the floor.
"...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 #27 of 477
Well, that bit of info that was collected from IBM's website tells me that they plan on slapping the LIVING $HIT out of Intel, since Itanic sales and expectations have fallen FAR short of what Intel has claimed. IBM seems to be planning a major STOMP-A-THON. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

And for some strange reason, I keep thinking that IBM *could* (if there was an arrangement with Apple) to license OS X to run on some of those boxes that IBM is going to produce. Yes, I know IBM will be pushing LINUX, but let's face it, OS X is already far ahead in many respects and might be exactly what some users/companies want instead of a Micro$oft solution or a LINUX solution. In any event, it looks like it's PAYBACK TIME.

--
Ed M.
post #28 of 477
How many people have a feeling that IBM is planning a 2 prong attack on the Wintel monopoly they helped create in the mid 80's? IBM's R&D on Linux is nothing compared to what it was on OS/2. They are preparing some beefy desktop processors that seem to beat the pants off anything planned for AMD or Intel. Plus they are hedging their bets with offering PowerPC AND Intel servers and desktops. Offer and push PowerPC + Linux, and if they want Intel and MS then give it to them. they make $$ either way but it promotes PPC+Linux in a way that no other company can. Eventually people will 'get it' and you may see some significant developments in the future regarding PPC and or Linux.
post #29 of 477
That press release says the 970 runs at frequences from 1.8 to 2.5 Ghz. So what happened to everything below 1.8? Are they really not even going to make anything less than 1.8 now? What are we missing here?
post #30 of 477
I think they are referring to the Blade specs and not the general speed spread of the 970. If Apple wanted 1.4GHz for portables I'm sure IBM could provide.
post #31 of 477
Stupid question, but does anybody have an idea of how much these blade severs cost? My thinking is that if they are say $10-20K, than we are not going to be seeing them in a powermac anytime soon. However, if they are only 1-2K than we are all in business!
And yes, a PC can be had cheaper but I want a MAC!
Reply
And yes, a PC can be had cheaper but I want a MAC!
Reply
post #32 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>That press release says the 970 runs at frequences from 1.8 to 2.5 Ghz. So what happened to everything below 1.8? Are they really not even going to make anything less than 1.8 now? What are we missing here?</strong><hr></blockquote>

IBM wont be using anything below 1.8 Ghz for thier blade servers, it isnt saying that there will not be processors under 1.8 Ghz. The real questions we need answered now are:
  • What is the cost breakdown of these chips, and how does that compare to the G4
  • What is the fastest chips that IBM will sell to an outside vendor in quantity.

If the yeilds of the 2.5 Ghz chips are good enough to cost the same as the 1.42 G4, and large enough to fullfill IBM's needs for their blade servers as well as a High end Dual 2.5 Ghz PM, then everyone will be happy. Happier still if IBM could produce 970's with appropriate cost savings at even lower speeds, say down to 1 Ghz, and meet the demands of the high end and low end of Apple's product line, and Apple gave us a total switch to the 970's by year end. But that is just dreaming <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
post #33 of 477
if IBM can make a 1.8 chip as easily and as cheaply as a 1.6 chip...why make the 1.6?? i think what they are saying/doing is manufacturing chips and the high volume/low yield is at 1.8.....and some of the chips are faster...up to 2.5....weeeeeeeee

the iMac FP can go to the kids room and i can justify a tower...."but honey, this is twice as fast....i can read my email and post at AI in half the time...."

g
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
post #34 of 477
I'm waiting for the first post that states...

"Okay I'm thinking of purchasing a 2.5 GHz 970 Powermac this fall for school , but I'm wondering if I should just wait for the Dua; 3 Ghz that we have all heard rumored... Any advice?"

I guess my big fear is that Apple (in logic-defying typicalness) does not adopt the 970.





MSKR
"Just tell them that Ben Franklin said it, and everyone will believe the sentiment."
Reply
"Just tell them that Ben Franklin said it, and everyone will believe the sentiment."
Reply
post #35 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by thegelding:
<strong>if IBM can make a 1.8 chip as easily and as cheaply as a 1.6 chip...why make the 1.6?? i think what they are saying/doing is manufacturing chips and the high volume/low yield is at 1.8.....and some of the chips are faster...up to 2.5....weeeeeeeee

g</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because a 1.6GHz will use less power and be cooler than a 1.8. Especially when considering usage in a portable.
post #36 of 477
Also, don't forget the lower voltage 970s, which trade speed for power consumption.

Those won't be in the 1.8-2.5GHz range. However, they might still be cool enough for at least the two bigger PowerBooks, in which case we'll be seeing ~2GHz 970 PowerBooks this year.

This all seems too good to be true, doesn't it?
"...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 #37 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>I think they are referring to the Blade specs and not the general speed spread of the 970. If Apple wanted 1.4GHz for portables I'm sure IBM could provide.</strong><hr></blockquote>Perhaps, but that's not the way it reads to me. In the paragraph with those specs, they're discussing the 970, not the Blade, as I read it.

Eh, these IBM server people probably just aren't used to these rabid Mac users clinging onto every number.

What's this about low-power 970s? Is there any official info on that?
post #38 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>Perhaps, but that's not the way it reads to me. In the paragraph with those specs, they're discussing the 970, not the Blade, as I read it.

Eh, these IBM server people probably just aren't used to these rabid Mac users clinging onto every number.

What's this about low-power 970s? Is there any official info on that?</strong><hr></blockquote>
There's not much publicly official info on anything to do with the 970 besides some non technical press releases and a presentation PDF. Hannibal from Ars has some private info he was supposed to disclose in part 2 of his epic 970 saga article but has yet to do so. Personally, knowing his bias, I think he is afraid of showing his findings in that it totally obliterates anything on the x86 side or processor design.
post #39 of 477
[quote]Originally posted by os10geek:
<strong>I hope that Apple releases a dual 2.5ghz 970 for the "price-is-no-object" professionals. That would get apple some respect. </strong><hr></blockquote>


Apple better not abandon the dual processor scheme now.
we were begging for it for the longest time. As I said in past. I wish I had an industry leading PowerHouse 3D workstation, or Server that had an Apple logo on it.

You really need duals to render.

I was just pricing a Dual Xeon configuration, but decided to wait for Q2 when intel releases these 800MHz FSB Xeons, and a new high performance moptherboard to match.

However, now I'm waiting to see a MP 970 in action.

Can anyone say Maya Unlimited 5.0 for OS X?

A dual 970 @ 2.4GHz could be an extremely impressive 3D workstation for Apple.

Imaginge a 2U Xserve with Quad 970's. Start a freakin renderfarm.
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
post #40 of 477
Just curious... Without a release date, how do we know these aren't the specs for a second generation of 970s?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › [Closed due to flaky BB] Next Powermac 970 with up to 2,5 GHZ ?