I'm going to have to take that back a bit -- the mobo I mentioned has apparently slipped again, due to the reasons I mentioned earlier. What will be at MacWorld will most likely NOT be the DDR implementation I mentioned, but rather, a less ambitious one.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<bad taste>
<gansta>
Hey Yo Moki
</gansta>
</bad taste> not working? Oh well ...
Does this triangulate?
MOSR
"A very exciting rumor that is coming out of Cupertino: expect 8X AGP, 800Mbps Firewire, AND USB2 on the next generation of PowerMac. Sounds good to us...."
Or is this good news? As in, we might see plan A with DDR after all?
[edit, pushed return like a dumb-ass before I was ready]
"A very exciting rumor that is coming out of Cupertino: expect 8X AGP, 800Mbps Firewire, AND USB2 on the next generation of PowerMac. Sounds good to us...."
Or is this good news? As in, we might see plan A with DDR after all?
[edit, pushed return like a dumb-ass before I was ready]
The only thing Moki really mentioned was the chipset DSPs, so the MOSR rumour doesn't counter what he said. Of course if he wants to share more I wouldn't object...
<strong>Curiouser and curiouser, no? </strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, yes and no... that particular article seems to indicate that those "low end" machines are just using failed POWER4s where one of the two cores was stillborn. I don't think a true consumer level POWER4 has materialized (yet).
I think it would be very cool if Apple had two completely different PowerPC designs to choose from, one from Moto and one from IBM (both with AltiVec & BookE compliance). Even better if they all spoke RapidIO. AIM would finally come to fruition, well after it had been declared dead.
Well, yes and no... that particular article seems to indicate that those "low end" machines are just using failed POWER4s where one of the two cores was stillborn. I don't think a true consumer level POWER4 has materialized (yet).
I think it would be very cool if Apple had two completely different PowerPC designs to choose from, one from Moto and one from IBM (both with AltiVec & BookE compliance). Even better if they all spoke RapidIO. AIM would finally come to fruition, well after it had been declared dead.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right.. when we talk hypothetically about "consumer POWER chips," the AltiVec unit(s) are implied, right? It would be silly of Apple to lose it after building what JYD called a "software empire" on it.
Well, yes and no... that particular article seems to indicate that those "low end" machines are just using failed POWER4s where one of the two cores was stillborn. I don't think a true consumer level POWER4 has materialized (yet).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Of course... but there are some interesting signs being shown by IBM (in a good way), and MOT (in a bad way), no?
<strong>Of course... but there are some interesting signs being shown by IBM (in a good way), and MOT (in a bad way), no?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well I for one found it kinda strange that all of a sudden the G4 upgrade market (for G4 based systems) is finally gonna happen AND at speeds pretty dern close to 'todays' PowerMac's.
Being the owner of the 1st AGP PowerMac I've been stuck at 450Mhz for years and no upgrade path to speak of... Well that's gonna change in just over a month and I'll finally be able to add some speed to the system. Sorry but I'm the type that finds it really hard to 're-buy-into' the same class CPU. At work it's a different story (not my money) but at home (with a wife) getting the same CPU is a lot harder to sell. "G4 you already have a G4... yadda yadda yadda"
Well something MUST HAVE changed to allow those upgrade card makers to finally provide support for these machines. After all you know they WOULD HAVE been selling them today (if they could) and since two different mfgs announced support so close to one another I'm pretty sure whatever problem existed wasn't a technology related one but a political one.
Just speculation here but:
Apple to MOT: "We want an exclusive on all of your >500Mhz G4s"
MOT to Apple: "So long as MOT is used in top end Macs and/or if you pay an extra $x per CPU"
Well it looks like either Apple said... nahhh go ahead and sell the CPUs to whoever you like (not likely) or something else happend and the deal was broke by Apple or MOT.
While I/we LOVE the idea of a G4 based upgrade path without having to buy a new box you have to know Apple must HATE IT. Apple don't make a dime outta the deal! Well all I know is something had to change.
Moki... what do you think of the CELL architecture being developed by IBM/Sony/Toshiba (and hopefully Apple ) IBM has stated that this can be used from pda's,phones up to powerful servers. Plus since Sony is the biggest electronics maker in the world and there are more playstations than any other console talk about economies of scale... do you think this could be used for future Mac's?
<strong>AIM would finally come to fruition, well after it had been declared dead.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Assuming its not common knowledge, I?ll mention that after the last MWNY (QS 867 + dual800's), Steve said that when he got to Apple, the AIM alliance had fallen to shambles. The processors at that show were supposedly the first product from a slowly revitalizing AIM. Though perhaps that was just feel good nonsense, especially considering Mot did all the work on those processors, and the ones in the next upgrade too. Though his statement(which I can't find, and could be a figment of my imagination) might of held some relevance to future developments.
<strong>Assuming its not common knowledge, I?ll mention that after the last MWNY (QS 867 + dual800's), Steve said that when he got to Apple, the AIM alliance had fallen to shambles. The processors at that show were supposedly the first product from a slowly revitalizing AIM. Though perhaps that was just feel good nonsense, especially considering Mot did all the work on those processors, and the ones in the next upgrade too. Though his statement(which I can't find, and could be a figment of my imagination) might of held some relevance to future developments.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wasn't that soon after IBM had started fabbing G4's under license from Moto in order to get enough to satisfy Apple? I guess that would be a first step to bringing AIM back to life.
"What IBM is almost certainly getting ready to announce is what have been called the Regatta-L machines, where L stands for low end. Not much is known about these machines, but it is very likely that they will use single-core Power4 processors - most likely dud parts that can't be used in pSeries 670 and pSeries 690 servers or in the iSeries line - to create uniprocessor, two-way, four-way, and maybe even six-way or eight-way configurations. Odds are that the smallest forthcoming Regatta-L machines will be called the pSeries 630 - we guess that this will be uniprocessor and dual-capable models - and the pSeries 650 - perhaps with four-way and six-way capability like existing pSeries machines. "
Could this split the 'power'Mac market into two?
The current range with a 'sgi' level further up the pricing bracket. Especially in light of recent 'high end' software aquisitions..? Shake et al?
In light of Prog' and Moki said...these may not be the actual 'G5' but evidence of IBM's move into the 'pro-sumer' space.
The 'e500' as per Motorola 8450? (8540?) THT has doubts. Cept it's modular. For Apple devices. It may have its uses in terms of portability? Do we know its cooling requirements? Unless certain features are taken into the 7500. If the core runs at 1 gig. If moto make a 'dual' e500 core then...they'd claim an effective '2 gighz'? Bolt on enhanced altivec and fpc and you get your 'numbers' in terms of throughput via Rio?
The Power4 architecture seems to offer Apple potential on so many fronts.
Mhz wise. It seems to have room to stretch its legs. In real performance terms, it's a clear leader in integer and a killer in fpu with room to grow. The ability to add cores while expensive now seems to offer a real 'upgrade' path for the 'power'Mac line ('power' as in how it currently stands...) to head into Sgi style territory...while return to competivity in its current market.
If next generation machines are both on the 'book e' architecture...the AIM alliance, even indirectly, is back on track and seems to give Apple options. Something, for the last 18 months, it doesn't seem to have had. Seems Apple have toughed it out and that the 'G4' may be 'retired' soon.
Or...perhaps Apple will use IBM for a move into low end Sgi workstation market and Moto's next chip for current 'power'Mac markets. Or single and dual core IBMs for 'powe'Macs and Moto's chip for general purpose and low power devices. (Cept Moto's current chips still run hot in Powerbooks...)
Gut instinct tells me Apple have finally had enough of Motorola and we'll see its deaththrows from now until San Fran next year. G4 .13 Xserve at 1 to 1.4 gig. And early next year, same G4, stretched a little further but in a Rio framework.
Then next Summer for IBM in said Rio framework. Cept this time...the processor will be 64 bit.
All the stuff on these boards is vague enough to confusing. You can take much of it any way you like. Even from a non-techie viewpoint...it looks like Moto is dutifully serving its G4 on its way out of the 'power'Mac line. It'll stay for Consumer...but IBM is picking up the bat with renewed interest in the 'desktop/console' space?
Hmmm. All very intriguing...but I don't think I'm gonna get what I 'want' this Summer or early next year. The realist in me says, 'G5'? IBM, this time next year. (They may call that the 64 bit G5 and the G4 in the Rio the 32 bit G5?)
Look back over this thread... search for comments from 'justafriend' (AI search is broken for me).
Some highlights but I might have missed some:
---------------[ 1st post ]-------------
Here's your inside info on IBM PPC designs:
IBM has developed Power4. For the workstation.
On the low-end is a 1 chip, dual core design. High-end is a 1 chip, quad core... Shipping 4th quarter, 2002.
No word on any relation to these proc's and Apple. However, if this chip begins shipping in Q4, that would mean Sept., which would work out well if new Power Macs utilizing this chip were intro'd during MWNY...
---------------[ 2nd post ]-------------
For clarification purposes, what's been out since last year is the SERVER version. This is a WORKSTATION version - a derivative of the server chip... this isn't out yet ;o
---------------[ 3rd post ]-------------
Unfortunately, no direct public reference. I posed a question to my acquantance in IBM, and was told that the answer to the specific question I asked was "IBM Confidential". Then, it was followed by, "but what I can tell you..." and that's what I posted here.
<strong>So after reading about the new IBM chip it looks like 'justafriend' was dead on.
Dave</strong><hr></blockquote>
If you're referring to the POWER4 derivative chip for the desktop and lowend server, I highly doubt that it will have dual and quad cores. But it's likely justafriend got the scoop on the IBM processor to be previewed on October 15.
OTOH, maybe he's just referring to the POWER4 that is being packaged in single (dual cores) and dual (quad core) configurations on "lowend" AIX Servers and will likely be used in some RS/6000 workstaions.
The Mods are now unregistered. Anarchy! Anarchy! Anarchy! How I've dreamed of this day. Now that its here, I must admit I'm a little afraid. Forget the anarchy. Restore the Mods! Restore the Mods!
Comments
<strong>
I'm going to have to take that back a bit -- the mobo I mentioned has apparently slipped again, due to the reasons I mentioned earlier. What will be at MacWorld will most likely NOT be the DDR implementation I mentioned, but rather, a less ambitious one.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<bad taste>
<gansta>
Hey Yo Moki
</gansta>
</bad taste> not working? Oh well ...
Does this triangulate?
MOSR
"A very exciting rumor that is coming out of Cupertino: expect 8X AGP, 800Mbps Firewire, AND USB2 on the next generation of PowerMac. Sounds good to us...."
Or is this good news? As in, we might see plan A with DDR after all?
[edit, pushed return like a dumb-ass before I was ready]
[ 06-17-2002: Message edited by: OverToasty ]</p>
<strong>
<bad taste>
<gansta>
Hey Yo Moki
</gansta>
</bad taste> not working? Oh well ...
Does this triangulate?
MOSR
"A very exciting rumor that is coming out of Cupertino: expect 8X AGP, 800Mbps Firewire, AND USB2 on the next generation of PowerMac. Sounds good to us...."
Or is this good news? As in, we might see plan A with DDR after all?
[edit, pushed return like a dumb-ass before I was ready]
[ 06-17-2002: Message edited by: OverToasty ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
The only thing Moki really mentioned was the chipset DSPs, so the MOSR rumour doesn't counter what he said. Of course if he wants to share more I wouldn't object...
<strong>Hmmmm...:
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/25722.html"; target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/25722.html</a></strong><hr></blockquote>;
Curiouser and curiouser, no?
<strong>Curiouser and curiouser, no?
Well, yes and no... that particular article seems to indicate that those "low end" machines are just using failed POWER4s where one of the two cores was stillborn. I don't think a true consumer level POWER4 has materialized (yet).
I think it would be very cool if Apple had two completely different PowerPC designs to choose from, one from Moto and one from IBM (both with AltiVec & BookE compliance). Even better if they all spoke RapidIO. AIM would finally come to fruition, well after it had been declared dead.
<strong>
Well, yes and no... that particular article seems to indicate that those "low end" machines are just using failed POWER4s where one of the two cores was stillborn. I don't think a true consumer level POWER4 has materialized (yet).
I think it would be very cool if Apple had two completely different PowerPC designs to choose from, one from Moto and one from IBM (both with AltiVec & BookE compliance). Even better if they all spoke RapidIO. AIM would finally come to fruition, well after it had been declared dead.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right.. when we talk hypothetically about "consumer POWER chips," the AltiVec unit(s) are implied, right? It would be silly of Apple to lose it after building what JYD called a "software empire" on it.
<strong>
Well, yes and no... that particular article seems to indicate that those "low end" machines are just using failed POWER4s where one of the two cores was stillborn. I don't think a true consumer level POWER4 has materialized (yet).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Of course... but there are some interesting signs being shown by IBM (in a good way), and MOT (in a bad way), no?
<strong>Of course... but there are some interesting signs being shown by IBM (in a good way), and MOT (in a bad way), no?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well I for one found it kinda strange that all of a sudden the G4 upgrade market (for G4 based systems) is finally gonna happen AND at speeds pretty dern close to 'todays' PowerMac's.
Being the owner of the 1st AGP PowerMac I've been stuck at 450Mhz for years and no upgrade path to speak of... Well that's gonna change in just over a month and I'll finally be able to add some speed to the system. Sorry but I'm the type that finds it really hard to 're-buy-into' the same class CPU. At work it's a different story (not my money) but at home (with a wife) getting the same CPU is a lot harder to sell. "G4 you already have a G4... yadda yadda yadda"
Well something MUST HAVE changed to allow those upgrade card makers to finally provide support for these machines. After all you know they WOULD HAVE been selling them today (if they could) and since two different mfgs announced support so close to one another I'm pretty sure whatever problem existed wasn't a technology related one but a political one.
Just speculation here but:
Apple to MOT: "We want an exclusive on all of your >500Mhz G4s"
MOT to Apple: "So long as MOT is used in top end Macs and/or if you pay an extra $x per CPU"
Well it looks like either Apple said... nahhh go ahead and sell the CPUs to whoever you like (not likely) or something else happend and the deal was broke by Apple or MOT.
While I/we LOVE the idea of a G4 based upgrade path without having to buy a new box you have to know Apple must HATE IT. Apple don't make a dime outta the deal! Well all I know is something had to change.
Dave
<strong>AIM would finally come to fruition, well after it had been declared dead.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Assuming its not common knowledge, I?ll mention that after the last MWNY (QS 867 + dual800's), Steve said that when he got to Apple, the AIM alliance had fallen to shambles. The processors at that show were supposedly the first product from a slowly revitalizing AIM. Though perhaps that was just feel good nonsense, especially considering Mot did all the work on those processors, and the ones in the next upgrade too. Though his statement(which I can't find, and could be a figment of my imagination) might of held some relevance to future developments.
[ 06-17-2002: Message edited by: nathan22t ]</p>
<strong>Assuming its not common knowledge, I?ll mention that after the last MWNY (QS 867 + dual800's), Steve said that when he got to Apple, the AIM alliance had fallen to shambles. The processors at that show were supposedly the first product from a slowly revitalizing AIM. Though perhaps that was just feel good nonsense, especially considering Mot did all the work on those processors, and the ones in the next upgrade too. Though his statement(which I can't find, and could be a figment of my imagination) might of held some relevance to future developments.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wasn't that soon after IBM had started fabbing G4's under license from Moto in order to get enough to satisfy Apple? I guess that would be a first step to bringing AIM back to life.
Could this split the 'power'Mac market into two?
The current range with a 'sgi' level further up the pricing bracket. Especially in light of recent 'high end' software aquisitions..? Shake et al?
In light of Prog' and Moki said...these may not be the actual 'G5' but evidence of IBM's move into the 'pro-sumer' space.
The 'e500' as per Motorola 8450? (8540?) THT has doubts. Cept it's modular. For Apple devices. It may have its uses in terms of portability? Do we know its cooling requirements? Unless certain features are taken into the 7500. If the core runs at 1 gig. If moto make a 'dual' e500 core then...they'd claim an effective '2 gighz'? Bolt on enhanced altivec and fpc and you get your 'numbers' in terms of throughput via Rio?
The Power4 architecture seems to offer Apple potential on so many fronts.
Mhz wise. It seems to have room to stretch its legs. In real performance terms, it's a clear leader in integer and a killer in fpu with room to grow. The ability to add cores while expensive now seems to offer a real 'upgrade' path for the 'power'Mac line ('power' as in how it currently stands...) to head into Sgi style territory...while return to competivity in its current market.
If next generation machines are both on the 'book e' architecture...the AIM alliance, even indirectly, is back on track and seems to give Apple options. Something, for the last 18 months, it doesn't seem to have had. Seems Apple have toughed it out and that the 'G4' may be 'retired' soon.
Or...perhaps Apple will use IBM for a move into low end Sgi workstation market and Moto's next chip for current 'power'Mac markets. Or single and dual core IBMs for 'powe'Macs and Moto's chip for general purpose and low power devices. (Cept Moto's current chips still run hot in Powerbooks...)
Gut instinct tells me Apple have finally had enough of Motorola and we'll see its deaththrows from now until San Fran next year. G4 .13 Xserve at 1 to 1.4 gig. And early next year, same G4, stretched a little further but in a Rio framework.
Then next Summer for IBM in said Rio framework. Cept this time...the processor will be 64 bit.
All the stuff on these boards is vague enough to confusing. You can take much of it any way you like. Even from a non-techie viewpoint...it looks like Moto is dutifully serving its G4 on its way out of the 'power'Mac line. It'll stay for Consumer...but IBM is picking up the bat with renewed interest in the 'desktop/console' space?
Hmmm. All very intriguing...but I don't think I'm gonna get what I 'want' this Summer or early next year. The realist in me says, 'G5'? IBM, this time next year. (They may call that the 64 bit G5 and the G4 in the Rio the 32 bit G5?)
Lemon Bon Bon
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
[ 06-18-2002: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
Look back over this thread... search for comments from 'justafriend' (AI search is broken for me).
Some highlights but I might have missed some:
---------------[ 1st post ]-------------
Here's your inside info on IBM PPC designs:
IBM has developed Power4. For the workstation.
On the low-end is a 1 chip, dual core design. High-end is a 1 chip, quad core... Shipping 4th quarter, 2002.
No word on any relation to these proc's and Apple. However, if this chip begins shipping in Q4, that would mean Sept., which would work out well if new Power Macs utilizing this chip were intro'd during MWNY...
---------------[ 2nd post ]-------------
For clarification purposes, what's been out since last year is the SERVER version. This is a WORKSTATION version - a derivative of the server chip... this isn't out yet ;o
---------------[ 3rd post ]-------------
Unfortunately, no direct public reference. I posed a question to my acquantance in IBM, and was told that the answer to the specific question I asked was "IBM Confidential". Then, it was followed by, "but what I can tell you..." and that's what I posted here.
As an aside, Jamee Abdulhafiz is listed on this page ( <a href="http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/461/luddeaut.html"; target="_blank">http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/461/luddeaut.html</a>; ) as Senior Engineer and verification leader for a POWER4 derivative microprocessor...
So, there is some proof to the statement that Power4 derivatives are planned... Just no detail like what I was
-------------------------------------------
End of posts I could find...
-------------------------------------------
So after reading about the new IBM chip it looks like 'justafriend' was dead on.
Dave
<strong>So after reading about the new IBM chip it looks like 'justafriend' was dead on.
Dave</strong><hr></blockquote>
If you're referring to the POWER4 derivative chip for the desktop and lowend server, I highly doubt that it will have dual and quad cores. But it's likely justafriend got the scoop on the IBM processor to be previewed on October 15.
OTOH, maybe he's just referring to the POWER4 that is being packaged in single (dual cores) and dual (quad core) configurations on "lowend" AIX Servers and will likely be used in some RS/6000 workstaions.
<strong>OK, wait a second...
Has anyone actually tested an Xserve and is anyone well informed as to its real memory performance...?
Or is all this conjecture and dubbing of the Xserve DDR system a 'hack' and 'ineffective' interpolation of Jobs' Slide show?
Until we see some hard numbers this whole 'down on Xserve DDR hackery' seems like a lot of hot air.
..but better than what?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Here we go...
<a href="http://www.barefeats.com/xserve2.html"; target="_blank">http://www.barefeats.com/xserve2.html</a>;
MOOOODS!
G-News
<strong>Who revived this long dead thread?
MOOOODS!
G-News</strong><hr></blockquote>
The Mods are now unregistered. Anarchy! Anarchy! Anarchy! How I've dreamed of this day. Now that its here, I must admit I'm a little afraid. Forget the anarchy. Restore the Mods! Restore the Mods!
Screed ..."We're the Hooligans" <knock>