Wherefore Art Thou, Sahara?
What ever happened to rumors of "Sahara", the super fast G3 from IBM? I thought it was supposed to easily clock at 1 GHz and beyond, and there was a lot of speculation that it would also support VMX. (Which IBM finally confirmed is indeed Altivec.)
Let's face it...Apple doesn't like Motorola. They only use the G4 because of their major investment in pushing Altivec, and Altivec-enhanced applications, on the public as a way to counteract the Megahertz Myth. Without Altivec, the G4 is really no better than a G3 for software that doesn't specifically utilize Altivec for speed enhancements. Rumor had it that IBM had G3 chips at 1 GHz a long while ago, but Apple could not use them because they clocked faster than Motorola's G4.
Up until now, the assumption has been that one of two things will happen with Apple's machines in the near future:
1 - Once the PowerMacs/PowerBooks/Xserves get the PPC 970, Apple will be free to use the fastest G4 chips available on the iMac/iBook/eMac lines. This seems an obvious choice, but whether or not the PPC 970 or some variant of it will be suitable for laptop use remains to be seen.
-or-
2 - Depending on yields and specs, Apple could eliminate the G4 entirely and move to the PPC 970 across the board. The Pro line could use the 1.8 to 2.5 GHz parts, while the Consumer line could use the 1.2 to 1.8 parts. And if the PPC 970 lives up to the hype (2x integer and 3x floating point speeds vs. the G4) then using ANY chip other than the PPC 970 on ANY of Apple's machines may be perceived as "crippling them" by consumers. (Who'd want a G4 at half the speed of a 970?)
However, there is a 3rd option that hasn't been discussed:
3 - Apple moves the Pro line of machines to the PPC 970, while moving the consumer line of machines to a new IBM G3+Altivec variant, running at speeds of 1 GHz and above.
Either option #2 or #3 eliminates Motorola entirely, which gets rid of a lot of old baggage at once. And with Apple buying all their chips from one source, the quantity pricing from IBM would have to be better than if Apple were dividing the money between both IBM and Motorola.
So again I ask...where is the "Sahara"? Does anyone "in the know" recall the details on possible specs? The IBM G3 chips used in the iBooks have been known to beat similarly clocked G4s at non-Altivec enhanced applications, due to the larger L2 cache. If you added VMX/Altivec to those chips, and pushed the clock speed past 1 GHz with IBM's 200 MHz front-side bus, wouldn't they blow away ANY Motorola G4 chips still rumored for release?
Hopefully someone out there can set the record straight on IBMs "Sahara" and other G3+VMX variant chips. (Moki maybe?) Do they still exist, or were they just figments of someone's imagination?
-- Ensoniq
Let's face it...Apple doesn't like Motorola. They only use the G4 because of their major investment in pushing Altivec, and Altivec-enhanced applications, on the public as a way to counteract the Megahertz Myth. Without Altivec, the G4 is really no better than a G3 for software that doesn't specifically utilize Altivec for speed enhancements. Rumor had it that IBM had G3 chips at 1 GHz a long while ago, but Apple could not use them because they clocked faster than Motorola's G4.
Up until now, the assumption has been that one of two things will happen with Apple's machines in the near future:
1 - Once the PowerMacs/PowerBooks/Xserves get the PPC 970, Apple will be free to use the fastest G4 chips available on the iMac/iBook/eMac lines. This seems an obvious choice, but whether or not the PPC 970 or some variant of it will be suitable for laptop use remains to be seen.
-or-
2 - Depending on yields and specs, Apple could eliminate the G4 entirely and move to the PPC 970 across the board. The Pro line could use the 1.8 to 2.5 GHz parts, while the Consumer line could use the 1.2 to 1.8 parts. And if the PPC 970 lives up to the hype (2x integer and 3x floating point speeds vs. the G4) then using ANY chip other than the PPC 970 on ANY of Apple's machines may be perceived as "crippling them" by consumers. (Who'd want a G4 at half the speed of a 970?)
However, there is a 3rd option that hasn't been discussed:
3 - Apple moves the Pro line of machines to the PPC 970, while moving the consumer line of machines to a new IBM G3+Altivec variant, running at speeds of 1 GHz and above.
Either option #2 or #3 eliminates Motorola entirely, which gets rid of a lot of old baggage at once. And with Apple buying all their chips from one source, the quantity pricing from IBM would have to be better than if Apple were dividing the money between both IBM and Motorola.
So again I ask...where is the "Sahara"? Does anyone "in the know" recall the details on possible specs? The IBM G3 chips used in the iBooks have been known to beat similarly clocked G4s at non-Altivec enhanced applications, due to the larger L2 cache. If you added VMX/Altivec to those chips, and pushed the clock speed past 1 GHz with IBM's 200 MHz front-side bus, wouldn't they blow away ANY Motorola G4 chips still rumored for release?
Hopefully someone out there can set the record straight on IBMs "Sahara" and other G3+VMX variant chips. (Moki maybe?) Do they still exist, or were they just figments of someone's imagination?
-- Ensoniq
Comments
Originally posted by r-0X#Zapchud
AFAIK, Sahara is the IBM 750fx, which is used in the current iBooks.
Concur.
I have no idea however what Apple will use
Sahara - The current PPC 750FX G3
Gobi - The next G3, 1 GHz+ speed, reported by Think Secret.
Mojave - The G3 after Gobi, reported by Naked Mole Rat as follows:
But what lies beyond Gobi? Instead of continuing to rev the PowerPC G3?s hoary 7xx architecture, the Blade?s yurt-carriers aver, Gobi?s planned successor, code-named MojaveMP, will based on the nascent Viper template, which in turn will represent a grand union between the 7xx and IBM?s 4xx series of embedded processors.
Mojave, which will start at 1.6 GHz, will be based on a 0.10-nanometer process and feature dynamic voltage and frequency scaling. As a result, this bantamweight will be able to run at its base speed at 1.2 V and eat up only a Callista Flockhart-size 10 W.
Okay...so I named the wrong desert but the questions still remain...is there any newer info available on the Gobi and Mojave chips from IBM?
I still contend that if you take an IBM G3 with a 200 MHz front-side bus, 512k of L2 cache, and slap VMX/Altivec on it, it would be entirely capable of replacing (if not surpassing in speed) a Motorola G4 at the same clockspeed. So if IBM can produce this chip, what need is there for the Motorola G4?
The question is...does IBM have plans to produce this chip?
-- Ensoniq
Originally posted by Ensoniq
I still contend that if you take an IBM G3 with a 200 MHz front-side bus, 512k of L2 cache, and slap VMX/Altivec on it, it would be entirely capable of replacing (if not surpassing in speed) a Motorola G4 at the same clockspeed. So if IBM can produce this chip, what need is there for the Motorola G4?
The question is...does IBM have plans to produce this chip?
-- Ensoniq
It wouldn't surprise me if IBM started producing something like this, but hopefully with an even faster FSB, since even a 200MHz one is really not very much, especially will it not be the time such a chip hits the surface of earth.
Of course, I might not be taking the eventual soon-to-be-announced chip that happends to have been secretly produced for a while, and is availiable in large enough quanta for the next iBook update
Originally posted by r-0X#Zapchud
It wouldn't surprise me if IBM started producing something like this, but hopefully with an even faster FSB, since even a 200MHz one is really not very much, especially will it not be the time such a chip hits the surface of earth.
Of course, I might not be taking the eventual soon-to-be-announced chip that happends to have been secretly produced for a while, and is availiable in large enough quanta for the next iBook update
You guys are thinking in the wrong direction. We'll probably never see any of those chips with a 200 MHz 60x FSB... it'll have no FSB at all. The 440 series is a system-on-chip architecture and "grand unification" with that means a 7x0 descended core with a memory controller, I/O devices, DMA engine, and (most likely) RapidIO interface. This is infinitely more interesting than a G3 with a slightly faster bus. Its also much more likely to be something both Motorola and IBM will build to compete with eachother.
not where are you.
thats it
Originally posted by gsfmark
wherfore art thou means why are you.
not where are you.
thats it
Wherefore art thou an inconstant presence (and laggardly to boot?) thou Gobi?
And which doest thou rather? Untested Gobi, or constant Apollo (G4)?
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Wherefore art thou an inconstant presence (and laggardly to boot?) thou Gobi?
And which doest thou rather? Untested Gobi, or constant Apollo (G4)?
i apologize for my (mis)interpretation... nice recovery.
Cheers
Scott
Edit: Looks like someone else already pointed it out.
Originally posted by Programmer
You guys are thinking in the wrong direction. We'll probably never see any of those chips with a 200 MHz 60x FSB... it'll have no FSB at all. The 440 series is a system-on-chip architecture and "grand unification" with that means a 7x0 descended core with a memory controller, I/O devices, DMA engine, and (most likely) RapidIO interface. This is infinitely more interesting than a G3 with a slightly faster bus. Its also much more likely to be something both Motorola and IBM will build to compete with eachother.
That makes alot of sense and I agree
But a 200MHz 60x FSB (100MHz DDR) is what is in the Sahara right now, but Apple only uses half of it...
Originally posted by CharlesS
Wherefore doth people constantly misinterpret the line "Wherefore art thou Romeo?" Is it that they readeth not the passage or that they stinketh at understanding it?
i would definitely go with they stink at understanding it....
us silly americans...
Originally posted by gsfmark
i would definitely go with they stink at understanding it....
us silly americans...
Yeah, I'm sure all English-speaking people outside of America understand Elizabethan English.
Hey, I'm American and I read Shakespeare for pleasure.
Originally posted by KeilwerthReborn
Yeah, I'm sure all English-speaking people outside of America understand Elizabethan English.
Hey, I'm American and I read Shakespeare for pleasure.
Yeah, but in this particular case, to misinterpret that line is to completely miss the point of the whole passage. Juliet is wondering why the man she loves has to be this person that she's supposed to hate. That's why she asks, "Why are you Romeo?" Also, "What's in a name?" is also found in this passage.
Originally posted by CharlesS
Yeah, but in this particular case, to misinterpret that line is to completely miss the point of the whole passage. Juliet is wondering why the man she loves has to be this person that she's supposed to hate. That's why she asks, "Why are you Romeo?" Also, "What's in a name?" is also found in this passage.
So this thread is really about the origins of the code-name "Sahara"!
Originally posted by TJM
So this thread is really about the origins of the code-name "Sahara"!
That is true, although I'm sure that a Sahara by any other name would smell as sweet.