or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › power mac won't get any faster
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

power mac won't get any faster  

post #1 of 297
Thread Starter 
The latest news.

Power Mac will be stuck at rougly 2.5GHz for the next 3 years.

This is a known fact.

Every processor company is hitting a power wall and its not likely to change.

The next power mac are 2.5GHz multicore designs.

powerbook will use motorola embedded devices because they have a better future (all chip designers now are shifting from raw speed to power consumption as their main focus)
post #2 of 297
125/51041 (top .2449%)-Amie Street - awesome independent DRM-free music
People really have got to stop thinking there is only one operating system, one economic system, one religion, and one...
125/51041 (top .2449%)-Amie Street - awesome independent DRM-free music
People really have got to stop thinking there is only one operating system, one economic system, one religion, and one...
post #3 of 297
Not sure what speed they will be but all is headed towards dual-core deigns. Freescale embedded chips look good for a powerbook (iBook) but can they deliver.

A single dual 9XX core from IBM may be a good powerbook chip even at reduced voltage...Delivery time for IBM dual-core?
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
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
post #4 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
This is a known fact.

Link?

Oh wait, aren't you the guy who last year said:

Quote:
The PowerBook G5 has 2 MCMs with 2 processor each

4 processor PowerBook G5 with modified 440 core with altivec

Link

Right. You speak many facts....
post #5 of 297
Thread Starter 
plans change
post #6 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by kupan787
Link?

Oh wait, aren't you the guy who last year said:



Link

Right. You speak many facts....

Well, in all fairness, he does have a good point. Clock speed is likely to move sideways or even downwards with dual-core designs, even though performance will improve dramatically.

We've been hitting a bit of a wall on the PC side of the fence for the past couple of years here. For example, I'm using a 2.1GHz P4 that I built a little over 2 years ago, which for most purposes is still pretty competitive with the latest and greatest chips that are currently shipping. 2005 however is going to be mighty interesting.
post #7 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Chagi
even though performance will improve dramatically.

To be fair, that depends on the aplication. If you are using a single threaded aplication, then preformance will go down if you are using a multi CPU computer. This preformance hit diminishes if you are using many aplications at the same time though.
post #8 of 297
Go on, then.

Nr9.

Rumour has it that Apple has samples of dual core chips in August.

Getting on for two months now.

Rumour says IBM will begin production in January.

So, what kind of schedule are we on, Nr9?

A Jan' ramp for a March announcement?

So, 2.5 gig and no further? I guess that means no 'bump' to 2.8 in Jan'?

Why bother when dual core designs are right around the corner? Who would buy a 2.8 rev' when it's common knowledge Wintel are going dual core and that Apple is going to have to go with that in order to protect what PowerMac marketshare they do have.

Timeline, Nr9?

Mid' 2005 is my guess at latest. Otherwise it would be a major shock for AMD to beat IBM to dual core designs.

Apple must strike out the stadium this time after the lacklustre rev B PowerMac update.

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...
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...
post #9 of 297
Can you confirm the 'Antares' chip aka 970fx dual core based on Power5 architecture?

I thought this chip may take us to 3 gig? Supposedly has deeper pipelines with variable depth according to integer, floating point with more efficient 'instruction cracking' to offset length of pipelines.

Deeper pipelines = more ghz.

Go over to Thinksecret's message boards, Nr9 and check out Morpheus' posts on the 'next gen' IBM cpu.

So, you have my attention.

Lemon Bon Bon 8)
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...
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...
post #10 of 297
Can you confirm the 'Antares' chip aka 970fx dual core based on Power5 architecture?

I thought this chip may take us to 3 gig? Supposedly has deeper pipelines with variable depth according to integer, floating point with more efficient 'instruction cracking' to offset length of pipelines.

Deeper pipelines = more ghz.

Go over to Thinksecret's message boards, Nr9 and check out Morpheus' posts on the 'next gen' IBM cpu.

So, you have my attention.

Lemon Bon Bon 8)
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...
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...
post #11 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
The latest news.

Power Mac will be stuck at rougly 2.5GHz for the next 3 years.

This is a known fact.

Every processor company is hitting a power wall and its not likely to change.

The next power mac are 2.5GHz multicore designs.

powerbook will use motorola embedded devices because they have a better future (all chip designers now are shifting from raw speed to power consumption as their main focus)

I am more confident that your intelligence will not improve in the next 3 coming years. (like every adult)

The PPC 970 was supposed to reach 3 ghz. I am confident that we will se faster G5.
However you are right that manufacturers are becoming more focused on raw power rather than clockspeed marketing.
post #12 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Can you confirm the 'Antares' chip aka 970fx dual core based on Power5 architecture?

I thought this chip may take us to 3 gig? Supposedly has deeper pipelines with variable depth according to integer, floating point with more efficient 'instruction cracking' to offset length of pipelines.

Deeper pipelines = more ghz.

Go over to Thinksecret's message boards, Nr9 and check out Morpheus' posts on the 'next gen' IBM cpu.

So, you have my attention.

Lemon Bon Bon 8)

Antares is being worked on - this much I do know. From what I know, the 970 series will not go much beyond 3.25 GHZ, but we should see a clockrate increase to go along with architectural refinement, L2 increase, and the addition of more cores.

The Power5 derivative should be around at some point next year, with dual cores and multi-threading still in the pipeline from big blue.

As for the PowerBooks, the low-voltage 970 is progressing and there is a specific dual-core 970 designed for laptops that is being worked on - similar to the Pentium M in increasing the cache. The PB chip will be based off the current 970 architecture and not yet incorporate the Power5 derivative, though that is in the planning for the future.
post #13 of 297
Hannibal's latest post on Ars has me wondering if there will be no POWER5-lite, simply enhancements to the 970's existing design. This fits well with the 970MP rumors, and ... other things.

I agree with Nr9 that the clock rate race is, by and large, over for now. I've been waiting for this to happen for some time, and it looks like it has finally come to pass. IBM might be able to push the 970 family's clock rate a bit higher (i.e. the low 3's) with process and pipeline refinements, but it won't be a dramatic leap and most of the performance increases will come from other directions (e.g. multiple cores, execution unit level improvements, improved memory architectures). Same for Intel/AMD.

It'll be interesting to see if the rather high promised clock rates for the POWER6 actually come to fruition, and how they accomplish that. But that is 2-3 years out.



Note: the title of this thread is very deceptive. The PowerMac's performance will improve substantially, but its clock rate won't get significantly higher. More effort will have to go into writing high performance multi-threaded software, but software developers have had it too easy for too long and most software is horribly inefficient on modern hardware.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
post #14 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Programmer
Hannibal's latest post on Ars has me wondering if there will be no POWER5-lite, simply enhancements to the 970's existing design. This fits well with the 970MP rumors, and ... other things.


From what I've been told, all dual-core designs for desktops are POWER5 based. The only dual-cores based off the current design (with modifications) are the "mobile solution" versions that we'd see in PowerBooks.

The POWER5 derivatives were meant for the end of this year, but with all the delays IBM has seen the latest estimates would put their availability sometime near summer.
post #15 of 297
Thread Starter 
eric-z:

the future of software development is toward heavily threaded apps

lemon bon bon:

deeper pipelines is cancelled.
the higher frequency proved to be too power hungry and the chips are melting down. you dont know how many next generation processor projects were cancelled due to power problems.

powerdoc:
antares won't reach 3GHz

programmer:
the high clock rate design of POWER6 is officially cancelled. IBM will switch into aggressively multi-core designs, and try to design low power cores.
this is what happened:
they were designing the POWER6, everything looked fine, until they looked at the power consumption, which was over 200 watts per core. then, they cancelled the design because there was no way to fix it.
post #16 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
the future of software development is toward heavily threaded apps

Multicore, Multi-processor machines / clustured computing... Apple is ahead of the herd on these with Xgrid and Tiger... We will see better and faster Power Macs.

The title of this thread is wrong.
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
post #17 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
this is what happened:
they were designing the POWER6, everything looked fine, until they looked at the power consumption, which was over 200 watts per core. then, they cancelled the design because there was no way to fix it.

That is a bit of a stretch, IBM could always buy the technology from somebody else to fix the problem. Just because IBM is unwilling or unable to fix the power disapation issue with it's 90nm process doesn't imply that others won't overcome the issues.

What is undeniable is that IBM has some of the hottest chips out there on 130 & 90nm processes. Especially considering performance of the 970 series.

Personally I do believe that IBM is stuck at 2.5GHz and maybe isn't even truely there yet. It would be interesting to learn just how well the 2.5GHz chips are yielding. My suspicion is the yield truely sucks based on what appears to be random thermal performance of the chips. It appears that this is the result of a couple of things: IBM's sucky 90nm process and their design tools that apparently could use some sort of diet.

As to multiple cores I think this is exactly what a portable needs especially if power management can be done core by core. What is interesting is how far Freescale is along with these chips. Having to wait what is now only a couple of months for the new years production would not be that bad. Waiting until late into 2005 would not be so good. The reality is that Apple needs portable upgrades real soon, so I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of Freescales processors is already for production.

Dave
post #18 of 297
Thread Starter 
wizard69, its not just IBM

EVERYONE has power problems. its the physical limitation of CPUs
post #19 of 297
What technology is IBM suppose to buy to fix "Their" problem? You mean someone has something better that will work with the 970 design?
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
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
post #20 of 297
Mr. MacPhisto, very interesting. Thankyou.

Nr9. Likewise.

I suppose even at 2.5 dual core. You're going to get a very impressive chip. Especially as you dual the dual core.

X sees four cpus. That is going to kick-ass 3D rendering along some. Especially with increase programability of GPUs as co-processors.

I am happy with this scenario. I would still like IBM to touch down on 3 gig, though.

Quote:
but software developers have had it too easy for too long and most software is horribly inefficient on modern hardware

I don't think I've seen a computer stretch since the days of the c64. The programmers of that machine pushed it way beyond its limits. Big sprites. More than 8 appearing on screen at a given time. Fitting games into a tiny 64k!!! The most diverse array of games ever.

It seems that code is middle of the road...for the average machine. Knowing as they do, the next fastest machine will pick up the bloatware tab.

Just my perception. It took Amiga programmers ages just to get smooth hardware scrolling! Something c64 programmers cracked early-ish on in its life.

That aside,

I find it hard to believe we won't squeak over the 3 gig milestone. Even if it halts right there.

It will be great, after all these years, Intel's Prescott cannot go dual core under its current power outtage..? So they downclock...or go for the Pentium-M which is really lower clocked.

Which means we could see an Antares dual core at 3 gig! And a Pentium dual core at...2-2.5 gig?

And the 970fx is ahead of AMD64 in mhz?

What won't be happening is dual core Pentiums at 4 gig? Or the 5 gig Intel once boasted about?

After all that mhz talk...PPC might eventually come out on top next year?



It seems more and more the refinement of 'X' via 'Spotlight' features that make your existing machine faster in the sense of 'more productive' is the way to go. And with Apple's 'X-Grid' and emphasis on multi-threading...they're ahead of the game. Time to make programming an art? Like it was in the days of the old Apple II and the c64?

Seems to me...are we really unlocking the power we already have? Or are we about to..? eg with things like meta-data and more refined and optimised code with newer versions of compilers?

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...
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...
post #21 of 297
Well, IBM was going for 10 GHz at the start of all this die-shrinking....Guess they forgot about physics (at least the marketing department did)

IBM Going to 10GHz
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
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
post #22 of 297
Thread Starter 
programming wasn't an art back then

it was inelegant and unportable

people won't try to squeeze as much performance out of a piece of hardware, they will try to thread their apps as much as possible using modern programming paradigms and they will see an increase in application performance linear to the # of cores.

I would imagine that single threaded general purpose performance won't increase for the next few years in any processor architecture.

if you require really good performance for a specific algorithm, it would be a better bet to have computers would come with FPGAs, or you would have FPGA PCI cards, and high performance applications will load programming files for critical algorithms onto these FPGAs to run them through custom logic.
post #23 of 297
One thing to note on the 3GHZ thing - IBM can currently build 970FX chips that hit 3GHZ. They couldn't build them en masse when Apple needed them for an update and Apple had concerns about the dissipation. Apple is focused on making quiet machines. The new dual-2.5GHZ machines are very quiet. 3GHZ 970FX chips are stable, but too hot for Apple to have an interest in them - at least at the moment. Because there is no market for IBM to put them in, they are not manufacturing them (though Apple does have some).

The next generation should scale past 3GHZ, even with multiple cores. IBM has gotten many of the power leakage issues under control at 90nm and will attempt to go to 65nm at some point next year - though the focus will no longer be on scalability, but rather on addition of cache and cores. The new 970s derived from the POWER5 have been specifically engineered for this and should face fewer problems in transition.

Apple may yet receive 3GHZ 970FX chips with PowerTune if they can find a way to keep them cool while also keeping the PowerMacs fairly quiet.

Also of note on the IBM campus, there are lots more Apple engineers and QA people on the Fishkill campus - and they've been working a lot of OT developing mobile chips and nextgen 970s. The increase started over three months ago - so it may confirm that Apple is abandoning Motorola.

If all goes as planned, even with a few hiccups, there would be enough G5 variations available by next summer to have all Apple products running on G5s. This includes iBooks using slower G5s than the PowerBooks (though the iBooks would still be faster than they are today).
post #24 of 297
Thread Starter 
the 3GHz chips can't run at all

they go up to 130 celsius with aggressive water cooling

they just melt down. your processor life is probably measured in days.

it was the same problem with the canned motorola G5s
post #25 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
the 3GHz chips can't run at all

they go up to 130 celsius with aggressive water cooling

they just melt down. your processor life is probably measured in days.

it was the same problem with the canned motorola G5s

No they do not. I know engineers up at Fishkill who work on this and that is not true. It was six months ago, but it is not the case as of my last contact with them more recently.

3GHZ 970FX chips are stable and their dissipation is under 75W. I will not release the exact numbers because it is not my place, but the 3GHZ chips do not melt down nor do they run at 130 celsius when aggressively cooled. They don't even run at 130 Fahrenheit when properly cooled. The biggest issue with Apple is noise.

Let me know where you get your info from. I get mine directly from the people who make them.
post #26 of 297
Thread Starter 
i make them
post #27 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
i make them

You make them up?
TD
TD
post #28 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by tadunne
You make them up?

Yes. Then he places it in his crack pipe and smokes it.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
post #29 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
i make them

I am a name not a number. If you are number 9 who is number 1?
Wll I have my G5 so I am off to get a life; apart from this post...
Wll I have my G5 so I am off to get a life; apart from this post...
post #30 of 297
I don't get the thing about dual core designs solving power consumption problems with high clock rate processors. TANSTAAFL. A dual core processor doubles the transistor count of a processor. It will have higher power requirements. Like almost double the power requirements of a single core version at the same clock rate. It is a tradeoff like all things are.

The upcoming 65 nm and 50/45 nm nodes will present incredible challenges undoubtedly, even moreso than 90 nm, but they will eventually come. Maybe not Moore's "law" quick, but they'll be coming. Other areas where the market is behind in is power management and cooling technologies. Thermoelectric materials could be developed to cool chips at the transistor, die level, and to conserve power at the same time. Manufacturers may have to bite the bullet and move to phase-change cooling systems to cool higher clock rate systems.
post #31 of 297
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by THT
I don't get the thing about dual core designs solving power consumption problems with high clock rate processors. TANSTAAFL. A dual core processor doubles the transistor count of a processor. It will have higher power requirements. Like almost double the power requirements of a single core version at the same clock rate. It is a tradeoff like all things are.

The upcoming 65 nm and 50/45 nm nodes will present incredible challenges undoubtedly, even moreso than 90 nm, but they will eventually come. Maybe not Moore's "law" quick, but they'll be coming. Other areas where the market is behind in is power management and cooling technologies. Thermoelectric materials could be developed to cool chips at the transistor, die level, and to conserve power at the same time. Manufacturers may have to bite the bullet and move to phase-change cooling systems to cool higher clock rate systems.

it solves it because it is twice the area hence easier to cool. Also, you don't have to drive the voltage up(which you have to do if you want to up the frequency instead) power is proportional to voltage ^2 so that matters a lot

you are wrong about faster processors coming. ask ibm, intel and amd
post #32 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
it solves it because it is twice the area hence easier to cool. Also, you don't have to drive the voltage up(which you have to do if you want to up the frequency instead) power is proportional to voltage ^2 so that matters a lot . . .



No and yes. If a chip has twice the area it is easier to cool only if in has the same circuitry spread over that area, so the heat density is less. However, when it also has twice the circuitry the power is double. The heat density is not changed and there is twice the heat to dissipate.

You are correct about increasing voltage to achieve higher clock frequency. Power increases rapidly, not only because of the voltage squared relationship, but due to leakage current. The leakage current is in fact the principal problem at 90nm I believe.
post #33 of 297
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
No and yes. If a chip has twice the area it is easier to cool only if in has the same circuitry spread over that area, so the heat density is less. However, when it also has twice the circuitry the power is double. The heat density is not changed and there is twice the heat to dissipate.

You are correct about increasing voltage to achieve higher clock frequency. Power increases rapidly, not only because of the voltage squared relationship, but due to leakage current. The leakage current is in fact the principal problem at 90nm I believe.

eh, of course dual cores are going to be more power than single cores

but dual core are going to be a lot less power and a lot easier to cool than single cores that are running twice as fast. That's the motivation here. Single core CPUs already have heat densities reaching the limit.
post #34 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
you are wrong about faster processors coming. ask ibm, intel and amd

Actually, they really don't know. Based on current technology and knowledge, it seems like the clockrate wall is just about hit - but there are theoretical increases out there based on developing technology.

IBM engineers are publicly going to be very skeptical - everyone is. Behind closed doors, they are still working to drive clockrates up and ultimately find a balance. As I said, the 3GHZ 970FX does exist. The 130nm 3GHZ original 970 exists as well, though it is superhot and not plausible as a desktop chip. It was pushed to that limit by IBM engineers to test the chip. They tried on the 970 to go higher, but it did result in flame outs.

The 970FX did originally flame out at 3GHZ due to powerloss much higher than anticipated at the 90nm fab. However, IBM was dealing with new technology that they still had to refine. They have worked for nearly a year on the problems and have made quite a bit of headway. Their yields are improving and they've reduced power leakage by quite a bit, enabling the 3GHZ to get under control. Early in the run even the 2.5GHZ had problems and this affected the whole lineup. Problems with the fab became apparent and IBM engineers had to put in a lot of overtime, but things are calming down. They are now working quite a bit on anticipated problems at 65nm - something they are now committing more resources to due to the problems they encountered during the 90nm transition.
post #35 of 297
Thread Starter 
you seem to be making this up. 2.5GHz is the limit.

Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
Actually, they really don't know. Based on current technology and knowledge, it seems like the clockrate wall is just about hit - but there are theoretical increases out there based on developing technology.

IBM engineers are publicly going to be very skeptical - everyone is. Behind closed doors, they are still working to drive clockrates up and ultimately find a balance. As I said, the 3GHZ 970FX does exist. The 130nm 3GHZ original 970 exists as well, though it is superhot and not plausible as a desktop chip. It was pushed to that limit by IBM engineers to test the chip. They tried on the 970 to go higher, but it did result in flame outs.

The 970FX did originally flame out at 3GHZ due to powerloss much higher than anticipated at the 90nm fab. However, IBM was dealing with new technology that they still had to refine. They have worked for nearly a year on the problems and have made quite a bit of headway. Their yields are improving and they've reduced power leakage by quite a bit, enabling the 3GHZ to get under control. Early in the run even the 2.5GHZ had problems and this affected the whole lineup. Problems with the fab became apparent and IBM engineers had to put in a lot of overtime, but things are calming down. They are now working quite a bit on anticipated problems at 65nm - something they are now committing more resources to due to the problems they encountered during the 90nm transition.
post #36 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
i make them

You're 19 years old and working at IBM? Er... Not.
NOTICE: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information supplied herein, fahlman cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Unless otherwise indicated,...
NOTICE: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information supplied herein, fahlman cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Unless otherwise indicated,...
post #37 of 297
It doesn't really matter if the 3 GHz 970 runs or not -- the point is that clock rate scaling has reached its limit, at least for the currently understood technologies. Its possible something will come out of the blue to allow additional jumps, but right now it looks like increasing clock rate is too inefficient in terms of performance gain per unit of power consumed and the simple destructive effects of really high operating temperatures.

Adding transistors increases power consumption linearly and increases area at the same time. Increasing clock rate doesn't increase the area, and it increases power consumption in a super-linear fashion. Also, to accomplish higher clock rates pipelines have been getting longer which has resulted in significantly less than linear performance increases relative to clock rate. This means that performance has been increasing very slowly compared to power consumption, which is not a sustainable situation. The writing has been on the wall for years -- the future is multi-core, massively parallel, highly superscalar, and SIMD. This is what Cell is all about. Look at Sun's new SPARCs. It is also the direction GPUs have been going.

Get used to it. If you're a software developer, its time to change how you write software.

It'll be interesting to see the next IBM POWER roadmap to see if Nr9 is right about their POWER6 plans.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
post #38 of 297
Thread Starter 
programmer is correct
post #39 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
From what I've been told, all dual-core designs for desktops are POWER5 based. The only dual-cores based off the current design (with modifications) are the "mobile solution" versions that we'd see in PowerBooks.

The POWER5 derivatives were meant for the end of this year, but with all the delays IBM has seen the latest estimates would put their availability sometime near summer.


Mr. MacPhisto,

Not many weeks ago the table of contents for a 970MP was circulating around, a dual core 970FX type chip from what I could tell. How does this fit with your information? Would this be the dual core PowerBook chip you speak of? Most folks believe it is for the next Power Mac upgrade, getting to a quad with two such chips. So far, your posts on IBM chips seem to be the most trustworthy. Are you able to shed any light on this 970MP thing?
post #40 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
Mr. MacPhisto,

Not many weeks ago the table of contents for a 970MP was circulating around, a dual core 970FX type chip from what I could tell. How does this fit with your information? Would this be the dual core PowerBook chip you speak of? Most folks believe it is for the next Power Mac upgrade, getting to a quad with two such chips. So far, your posts on IBM chips seem to be the most trustworthy. Are you able to shed any light on this 970MP thing?

The way I understand it, there are two multi-core chip designs underway. There is one based off the low-voltage 970 chip that is being specifically worked on for mobile use. There are some design enhancements over the standard desktop 970FX. I believe the major change is L2 increase. I don't believe there is significant architectural overhaul on the chip, but it is slated for mobile use, as stated. We'll first see a low-voltage single core, though a dual-core version may be on the market sometime during the second half of next year, barring any major hitches (and also depending largely on the 65nm shrink and how successful it is - I don't believe the mobile multi-core design is planned at 90nm). This is based off the current 970FX. I do not believe it is the 970MP and I think the 970MP designation is external from IBM. The Antares project, however, is POWER5 based and really a new generation. This would be the chip that Thinksecret reported on. I personally suspect we will see it in January, as ThinkSecret reported. Information I have received on the project indicates that each core will also have multi-threading capability. There are other refinements, but I'm not a chip guru nor do I want to put too much out there.

The mobile 970 is based off the low-voltage FX, as stated, and will come after the desktop multi-core chips. IBM is also working with Apple on mobile versions of Antares, though neither party is sure when those will be ready or what they will be like. The good news is that both parties are focusing on portable specific chips that are more L2 heavy. Have not asked if the pipeline length is the same as the 970FX, though I assume it is.

The Following is my opinion based on what I know:

I believe Apple will go 100% G5 come January, though there is a possibility the iBook will keep the G4 a bit longer, becoming the last to jump just as it was with the G3. I think a mobile G5 solution will be ready in January and that it will be placed in the PowerBooks. Lower clocked G5s could find their way into te iBooks coupled with slower memory, lesser GPU, etc.

The iMac is already G5, though I think we will see the new iMac sport dual-core G5s with the PowerMac have dual CPUs featuring the dual-core.

I think the eMac may get one more revision as a G4, though it may get discontinued altogether. We may finally see a box. I would favor the same configs as the iMac G5, minus the display cost (only a few hundred bucks). More expandability from the box, but you end up paying more if you want a new display and you miss out on the elegance. The new iMac actually gives some real advantage to the AIO because of minimal clutter.

If the iBook keeps the G4 (going up to 1.5GHZ maybe?) then I see it getting the G5 if the dual-core mobile version arrive by late summer, early fall (about a year from now).

Granted, there are still some "ifs". If IBM can deliver the desktop dual-core G5s for January shipment in quantity then Apple would experience a strong performance leap and jump to the head of the industry in chip technology, for a brief period. G5 PowerBooks would also help increase sales.

If IBM can deliver in quantity (not as big an "if" as it was 9 months ago, though still substantial in size) for the PowerBooks, iMacs, iBooks, and PowerMacs in time for a January/February release, Apple would hit record sales numbers. IBM would also hit records for its chip fabbing business. Both companies have strong incentives to do so.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › power mac won't get any faster