AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Arrival date for dual-core Power Mac?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Arrival date for dual-core Power Mac?

post #1 of 40
9/6/04 at 8:03pm
Thread Starter 
I've been reading a lot lately about AMD and Intel working on dual-core processors. I think I recall reading that Apple might use a dual-core G4 in the next power book update, but has anyone heard anything (speculation or information) about a dual-core G5 Power Mac? I hoping to buy a new Power Mac in about 10-12 months and I'm curious if that technology will be available by then.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 40
9/6/04 at 8:14pm
10-12 months probally! Not much commitment there but then agian Apple and IBM fully expected to be at 3GHz by now.

Do realize that right at this moment the Power5 is dual core all that is required to deliver an chip to Apple is to add Alt-vec and delete non server features. It is not a big deal for IBM in my opinion for the next generation. There is a good possibility though that the current genration could go (970MP) dual core in a short period of time.

Now how well the different implementations would work out is a open question. There is a large body of evidence that what is really needed is a chip with an on board memory controller. So maybe the 970MP won't be what everybody is hoping for.

Dave


Quote:
Originally posted by xedgelockx
I've been reading a lot lately about AMD and Intel working on dual-core processors. I think I recall reading that Apple might use a dual-core G4 in the next power book update, but has anyone heard anything (speculation or information) about a dual-core G5 Power Mac? I hoping to buy a new Power Mac in about 10-12 months and I'm curious if that technology will be available by then.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 40
9/7/04 at 3:09am
Quote:
Originally posted by xedgelockx
Apple might use a dual-core [...] I hoping to buy a new Power Mac in about 10-12 months and I'm curious if that technology will be available by then.

Both IBM and Freescale are hard at work bringing dual core offerings of their G4 and G5 lines respectively. However I'm quite certain that they are not something you'lll see in Macs this year. But they might show up just in time for your next purchase.

From what we rumormongers know IBM seems to be ahead of Freescale in this race. IBM have several years head start in developing dual core chips and they currently have several offerings on the server side and some on the embedded custom chip side. Freescale have no current dual core in production that I know of.

My guess that we will see IBM's PPC 970MP this spring at the earliest and Freescale's e600-based MPC 86xx in about a year.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 40
9/7/04 at 11:43am
Wouldn't that be a sexy machine and again give us a nice little advantage.... dual dual-core chips... mmm ... from the sounds of it AMD and Intel are still concentrating on just having 1 dual-core processor in machines for the next few years.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #5 of 40
9/7/04 at 6:02pm
what is the use of a dual core? what does it mean exactly as far as performance?
"An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest."
"Those who would give up essential liberties to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither." -Ben Franklin
Reply
"An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest."
"Those who would give up essential liberties to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither." -Ben Franklin
Reply
post #6 of 40
9/7/04 at 6:09pm
DC 2006.
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 #7 of 40
9/8/04 at 1:40am
Quote:
Originally posted by hypoluxa
what is the use of a dual core? what does it mean exactly as far as performance?

This has been the topic many times before. In short: It means little in repect to performance but it means a lot i repect to production cost and complexity of the whole system. Depending how it's contructed some speed can be gained from sharing resources and reduced length of communication paths between the cores. Some performance can also be lost due to bottleneckes in busses to other components in the system. Like the dual core Athlons AMD has demonstrated where the two cores share one memory controller on die where as two single core Athlons have a controller each. There is a potential bottle neck in such a configuration. I don't think it'll be an issue in real world performance though.

We know very little of how Freescale and IBM will implement the dual core designs that we are talking about here. IBM have some really good designs already though.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 40
9/8/04 at 7:18am
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker
DC 2006.

I think you are too pessimitic -- the rumoured 970MP design is done in such a way that very little R&D is needed to build it. They may not be able to push the clock rates, but they should be able to quickly deliver 2 cores.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #9 of 40
9/8/04 at 9:43am
Would OS/X see a dual core processor as two processors? I.e. Would only software designed for MP be able to take advantage of dual core processors ?
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 40
9/8/04 at 9:51am
Yes, dual core is very little different from dual separate processors.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 40
9/8/04 at 9:57am
Supposedly the 970MP is being sampled by Apple now. Volume production would likely commence Q1 2005. That should make for a mid 2005 delivery. I expect to see one more refresh of the Powermacs with 970fx and then the lineup change to DC.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #12 of 40
9/8/04 at 12:27pm
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Supposedly the 970MP is being sampled by Apple now. Volume production would likely commence Q1 2005. That should make for a mid 2005 delivery. I expect to see one more refresh of the Powermacs with 970fx and then the lineup change to DC.

supposedly? where did you read this? i'm just wondering, cuz i'm curious.
I think I think...therefore, I think I am.

We get to think of life as an inexhaustible well. Yet everything happens only a certain number of times, and a very small number, really. How many more...
Reply
I think I think...therefore, I think I am.

We get to think of life as an inexhaustible well. Yet everything happens only a certain number of times, and a very small number, really. How many more...
Reply
post #13 of 40
9/8/04 at 12:46pm
Thinksecret on Antares

Quote:
IBM will reportedly deliver the first prototypes to Cupertino in August and is projected to wrap up its own testing and begin production in January; this timetable suggests that customers could see the new processor in Apple products sometime in 2005.

Looking good for a mid 2005 launch providing IBM doesn't run into any significant snags.

So I think we hit 3Ghz by then with a Feb refresh taking us up to about 2.8Ghz tops.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #14 of 40
9/8/04 at 1:10pm
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Thinksecret on Antares



Looking good for a mid 2005 launch providing IBM doesn't run into any significant snags.

So I think we hit 3Ghz by then with a Feb refresh taking us up to about 2.8Ghz tops.

2.8Ghz tops

That has to be totally embarrassing for IBM, and frustrating for Apple.

And no I am not trying to be negative just stating the obvious.
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 #15 of 40
9/8/04 at 1:42pm
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker
2.8Ghz tops

That has to be totally embarrassing for IBM, and frustrating for Apple.

And no I am not trying to be negative just stating the obvious.

Only in the sense that Steve Jobs predicted 3Ghz. Personally I have always felt that was a very ambitious statement because the 970 isn't as hyper pipelined as a Pentium 4. Who knows though they may just hit 3Ghz I wouldn't put it past them.

I am eager to see what Apple does with dual core cpu in the line. I hope they drop the entry level PM back down to the $1499 level and have a 4 core system at the high end.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #16 of 40
9/8/04 at 1:55pm
Clockspeed isn't everything... look at AMD right now... 2.4ghz is their top speed clockspeed but yet their Opterons and FX-53 chips whoop ass. Just because they can't hit 3ghz doesn't mean anything.

Now if they don't put on-chip mem controllers and 1mb l2 cache next chip... then I'd have to say that chip would be an embarassment for IBM.

If they hit dual core... who cares if it is 3ghz... dual dual-core chips... would a difference between 2.8 and 3ghz really matter?

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #17 of 40
9/8/04 at 2:27pm
Quote:
Originally posted by emig647
If they hit dual core... who cares if it is 3ghz... dual dual-core chips... would a difference between 2.8 and 3ghz really matter?

He he, not at all . Bring them on!
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 40
9/8/04 at 2:58pm
*drools*

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #19 of 40
9/8/04 at 5:46pm
Wall Street Journal (print edition) had an article today with Intel claiming that they were going to bring dual core CPUs to market in 2005; for desktops, laptops & servers...

Said they couldn't work the 'more MHz/GHz =more computing power' angle anymore...!
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #20 of 40
9/8/04 at 6:34pm
Quote:
Originally posted by MacRonin
Wall Street Journal (print edition) had an article today with Intel claiming that they were going to bring dual core CPUs to market in 2005; for desktops, laptops & servers...

Said they couldn't work the 'more MHz/GHz =more computing power' angle anymore...!

Yes for those that want more info check anandtech's IDF(Intel Developer Forum) for more info. Intel will be shipping DC in 2005 and in 2006 DC is going to be pervasive amongst their lineup. Even the laptops will have DC in most of their offerings.

This bodes well for all of us because IBM will surely be keeping up the pace here as well.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #21 of 40
9/9/04 at 12:30am
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
This bodes well for all of us because IBM will surely be keeping up the pace here as well.

I am not so sure about that. It is true IBM has already experience in dual core designs, but this has only to do with server chips. For the Macintosh, this means we will easily have dual core in Power Mac and XServe (well, after the current problems that IBM is facing are resolved). But what about the Powerbooks? Apart the scheduled announcement of dual core PowerPC processors from Freescale this fall (the only ones that could be used in a slim notebook like a Powerbook), there is nothing in the horizon. We are left with the hope that things will go well on Freescale's side. And it remains to see if Apple finally chooses to go with the RapidIO interface that those chips will bring with them.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 40
9/9/04 at 8:07am
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
I am not so sure about that. It is true IBM has already experience in dual core designs, but this has only to do with server chips. For the Macintosh, this means we will easily have dual core in Power Mac and XServe (well, after the current problems that IBM is facing are resolved). But what about the Powerbooks? Apart the scheduled announcement of dual core PowerPC processors from Freescale this fall (the only ones that could be used in a slim notebook like a Powerbook), there is nothing in the horizon. We are left with the hope that things will go well on Freescale's side. And it remains to see if Apple finally chooses to go with the RapidIO interface that those chips will bring with them.

You make it sound as if there is a huge difference between Server versus Workstation CPU. There isn't much of a difference other than the Server chips are beefier in crucial areas. Stripping out stuff to make a Workstation cpu is likely easier.

Powerbooks. Well that depends on what IBM does for the next cpu revision. See Rickag's post in the huge PM thread. IBM has options that they can utilize to reduce dissipation. Apple may go Freescale or they might go G5 if IBM can produce a G5 running 10-15% cooler.

I don't think Apple wants Freescale on their premium laptops. The iBook? Fine. But consumers will likely want a G5 in the top Powerbooks.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #23 of 40
9/9/04 at 8:21am
well from what i understand IBM's server work is exactly what will lead to better technologies for the laptop chips. Because these arent just servers but racks and operate with little ventialation, are very thin blah blah. So i thought that was what was gonna push the innovation of a chip like the g5 for a laptop or a dual core g4.

i would just be happy with the dual core dammit! they need to get that out for me before i buy one of those damn things
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 40
9/9/04 at 9:02am
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
I am not so sure about that. It is true IBM has already experience in dual core designs, but this has only to do with server chips.

Note entirely true, they have experience with custom ASIC designs based on embedded PowerPCs like the 440 core. With the BlueGene/L-processor as a prime example. It's a high performance, dual core processor with extremely low power consumption.

The 970 is derived from a dual core design after all and they would've been stupid if they didn't se dual core procesosrs for the consumer segment down the line.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 40
9/9/04 at 9:46am
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
You make it sound as if there is a huge difference between Server versus Workstation CPU. There isn't much of a difference other than the Server chips are beefier in crucial areas. Stripping out stuff to make a Workstation cpu is likely easier.

I don't think I said something different from what you are saying now .

Quote:

I don't think Apple wants Freescale on their premium laptops. The iBook? Fine. But consumers will likely want a G5 in the top Powerbooks.

I have a similar feeling. But right now, Freescale is the only option for Apple's notebooks. I guess we will see next year.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 40
9/9/04 at 9:54am
Quote:
Originally posted by Henriok
Note entirely true, they have experience with custom ASIC designs based on embedded PowerPCs like the 440 core. With the BlueGene/L-processor as a prime example. It's a high performance, dual core processor with extremely low power consumption.

That's exactly the problem. The 440 core, if I am not mistaken, cannot exceed 700 MHz in clock frequency. You can of course use many of them (4?) in a Powerbook and have a strong system, but only when you run specialized software that knows how to exploit this architecture.

At this time, IBM has nothing that could be used in the Powerbooks. At least nothing concrete for which information would be publicly available. I have no problem to be proved wrong on this, if someone can shed some light.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 40
9/9/04 at 10:11am
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
That's exactly the problem. The 440 core, if I am not mistaken, cannot exceed 700 MHz in clock frequency. You can of course use many of them (4?) in a Powerbook and have a strong system, but only when you run specialized software that knows how to exploit this architecture.

I'm not saying that IBM should use the 440 core, nor the POWER5. All I'm saying is that they have plenty of experience of doing dual core processors, and they have delivered them for several years. That's something that no competitor have done. AMD, Intel and Freescale are new to this game, IBM is not.
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 40
9/9/04 at 10:16am
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
That's exactly the problem. The 440 core, if I am not mistaken, cannot exceed 700 MHz in clock frequency.

I though that IBM offered a model called the 440GX that clocks to 800Mhz?
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 40
9/9/04 at 10:36am
Quote:
Originally posted by Henriok
All I'm saying is that they have plenty of experience of doing dual core processors, and they have delivered them for several years. That's something that no competitor have done. AMD, Intel and Freescale are new to this game, IBM is not.

That's what I am saying too. IBM is first and old in this game. The question now, is if Apple will manage to go dual core well before the competitors. Of course this is not totally left to Apple, IBM will play a major role here, but it would be sad to see IBM's experience on such technologies not become a strategic advantage for Apple, when the competitors say clearly they will take the IBM route (multi-core and efficiency).
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 40
9/9/04 at 10:39am
Quote:
Originally posted by Eric_Z
I though that IBM offered a model called the 440GX that clocks to 800Mhz?

Yes, that's right but it doesn't change nothing in a radical way.
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 40
9/13/04 at 11:08am
IBM 'readying dual-core G5'

Freescale to detail dual-core PowerPC G4

Dual-core G4 on the way
Want to join a distributed computing project
to aid cancer research? Try Folding@Home We
could use your unused cpu cycles. I'm the
team captain of Crunchers4life Team 39709.
We could use your help!
Reply
Want to join a distributed computing project
to aid cancer research? Try Folding@Home We
could use your unused cpu cycles. I'm the
team captain of Crunchers4life Team 39709.
We could use your help!
Reply
post #32 of 40
9/22/04 at 7:59am
When you look at how long it's taking Apple to fill orders for
a current G5 2.5 tower with anything BTO, it seems like we'll have plenty of time to save for a dual core Antares Quadra Mac.

The general idea coming out in all of these posts is WAIT!

You'll be glad you did.

In the meantime you can always order a new HD display and have it ready for your new tower when it becomes available.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 40
9/22/04 at 8:40am
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker
DC 2006.

Dito.

Freescale Dual-Core G4: Q1/2006
IBM Dual-Core G5: Q1/2005
Waiting for the Power Mac G5 since Oktober 2001
Reply
Waiting for the Power Mac G5 since Oktober 2001
Reply
post #34 of 40
9/22/04 at 9:22am
Quote:
Originally posted by Fat Freddy
Freescale Dual-Core G4: Q1/2006

I think this is just a tad pessimistic..

Quote:
Originally posted by Fat Freddy
IBM Dual-Core G5: Q1/2005

..and this a tad optimistic.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 40
9/22/04 at 9:37am
I have to say teh Q1 2005 for g5 dual coare.... is definitely not gonna happen. Thats a major over haul of the whole system in 6-9 months from announcement of the current g5s... or 3-6 months from shipment of the high end version.

Apple would shoot themselves in the foot after stressing out on the shipment of these g5s.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #36 of 40
9/22/04 at 9:48am
We'll see

Today... dual across the line
Waiting for the Power Mac G5 since Oktober 2001
Reply
Waiting for the Power Mac G5 since Oktober 2001
Reply
post #37 of 40
9/22/04 at 10:21am
Quote:
Originally posted by Fat Freddy
We'll see

Today... dual across the line

You seem to be very certain or to know something others here ignore .
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 40
9/22/04 at 8:43pm
Quote:
Originally posted by emig647
I have to say teh Q1 2005 for g5 dual coare.... is definitely not gonna happen. Thats a major over haul of the whole system in 6-9 months from announcement of the current g5s... or 3-6 months from shipment of the high end version.

Apple would shoot themselves in the foot after stressing out on the shipment of these g5s.

Actually, according to the 970MP document floating around it would hardly involve any changes to the existing systems at all. Drop the dual core chip into the exiting CPU slots and ship them out the door.

I'd say that Q1 is optimistic alright -- March at the earliest. Q2 more likely.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #39 of 40
9/22/04 at 8:48pm
I don't think Dual Core Powermacs are coming until late summer. Not because Apple won't be able to get the chips but because after the next refresh I think we just have to wait out another revision.

I'm hoping the next refresh brings PCI Express and more motherboard tweaks. Then Apple need only slap in the DC CPUs on the next refresh. I also want to see them move the entry level Powermac back to $1500 and reduce the price of the Xserves by $500 across the board.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #40 of 40
9/23/04 at 7:18am
I hope that you are right about spring/summer 2005 for these long awaited machines.

In the mean time, it might be best to put your money in your company matched savings fund, 6 month CD or under the matress.

I figure, by the time these machines are ready to go, I'll have enough saved for a loaded Quadra Tower AND a 30" display AND a good quality
analog to digital interface running ProBand with 64 bit sound quality.

Me SO excited! :-)
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Arrival date for dual-core Power Mac?