To post a thought pertaining to the original title of the thread (although I'm enjoying all this speculation immensly.....don't stop ). Has anybody mentioned the prospect of Apple having to deliver the 970s earlier than they (or we) expected?
What if IBM is itching to get these out ASAP (not necesarily in Apple's boxes, but their own)? Might Apple have tied themselves to a schedule that they *gasp* don't control???
Is it possible that Apple just might have to introduce these boxes sooner rather than later or be overshadowed by an IBM pre-planned announcement?
The 970 might be low power compared to a Pentium4 or Athlon, but its still way too hot for the kind of portable and small machine uses that I suspect Apple would use it for.
True, but the 970 (low powered chip) uses less wattage than todays G4's as well. So it will be a good match for the powerbook and iMac, which use G4's in them today.
Quote:
The PowerBooks may get the low end 970s, but the iBook will get the other.
Which is basicly what I am saying. The IBM 850 (upgraded G3) would be great for future iBooks, and possibly a DLD (digital life-sytle device). 970 will filter into everything else.
I don't think it has to drop at all. I believe the 1.4GHz and 1.8GHz 970 CPU's will both use a fixed 450MHz external bus frequency, they are just using different integer multipliers (3x and 4x) to generate the core clock. That's my theory which fits with the mentioned clock rates (1.4, 1.8, 2.3 GHz)
You are think in terms of MaxBus. The 970 bus speed is based on a 4:1 scale of the processor (this was mentioend by IBM, if I recall correctly). So a 1.8GHz processor would have a 450MHz bus (900MHz double pumped). A 2.0GHz processor would have a 500MHz bus (1GHz double pumped), and a 1.2GHz processor would have a 300MHz bus (600MHz double pumped).
As far as I understand, there is no bus multiplier for the 970's bus.
I don't think it has to drop at all. I believe the 1.4GHz and 1.8GHz 970 CPU's will both use a fixed 450MHz external bus frequency, they are just using different integer multipliers (3x and 4x) to generate the core clock. That's my theory which fits with the mentioned clock rates (1.4, 1.8, 2.3 GHz)
The information from the MDF2002 presentation (not the slide show, but directly from the presenter) is that the FSB runs at half the processor clock. If this information is wrong then you're probably right, but at this point I have to believe the information from IBM and not from you.
PowerPC 850: Based on an extended G3 core (750/740) that will probably increase the pipeline to 10 stages or so, it will have 512KB L2 cache, 32bit core, made on 130nm process, at least 36bit memory addressing,and include Altivec. The bus will be a RapidIO (probably 2 16bit ports) and have a built-in memory controller for DDR-SDRAM. This will limit it's usage with SMP but considering the target market, this is not much of an issue. Power consumption will be a major design point. Expected: 4Q 03.
I sure am interested in knowing where that quote came from, or where I can find out more. If IBM is making a 32-bit PPC processor with AltiVec and a really good bus, that is the end of Motorola in Macs in my opinion. I think Apple would put it in the eMac and iMac as soon as they could revise the motherboards. It would be a significant boost in performance.
I sure am interested in knowing where that quote came from, or where I can find out more.
It was in a post hear about IBMs future/road map. I saw it mentioned in another forum as well (sorry, can't remember where), so I figured two mentions warrant something.
I tried searching IBMs website, and found nothing about a 850, not to say it doens't exist however.
To post a thought pertaining to the original title of the thread (although I'm enjoying all this speculation immensly.....don't stop ). Has anybody mentioned the prospect of Apple having to deliver the 970s earlier than they (or we) expected?
What if IBM is itching to get these out ASAP (not necesarily in Apple's boxes, but their own)? Might Apple have tied themselves to a schedule that they *gasp* don't control???
Is it possible that Apple just might have to introduce these boxes sooner rather than later or be overshadowed by an IBM pre-planned announcement?
Just thinking out loud here.....
Wow, maybe it's the time of night, but this strikes me as an incredibly insightful post. Seriously, I haven't heard anyone else mention this posibility, yet it makes a lot of sense. Anyone who has kept abreast of IBM news knows that they like to be highly vocal, and deliver new technologies either on time, or early. (Which basically means they're good at making conservative announcements and then meeting (or beating) them)
It really wouldn't surprise me if IBM is feeling the mounting pressure (from HP/Compaq and others) in the low/mid server market, and wants to get this new iron out there...
AMD had their big day with the whole "our bits go up to 64" thing, claiming first to market, blah blah blah...IBM wants to have their party too...just as soon as Apple's needs for iDrama can be met.
Is it possible that Apple just might have to introduce these boxes sooner rather than later or be overshadowed by an IBM pre-planned announcement?
Who knows the details of IBM-Apple agreements? Neither of the companies are stupid enough to compete with each other while depending on each other. Remember that without PPC970 Apple is pretty doomed to switch to Intel/AMD CPUs. Remember also that Apple is going to be the largest customer of IBM's. They should have somehow divided the market or something. In a wild speculation mode I can presume that Apple contributed to PPC970 development from the very beginning and who knows how. In fact, it's even possible that without Apple there wouldn't be any PPC970. I don't believe that Apple and IBM will offer competing products unless Apple ordered the PPC970 development at IBM 3 years ago in return for all rights reserved by IBM.
Anyway, in this situation they are not going to kill each other with PR.
i'm going to say they are wrong... in which case I hope I am, but everytime I make a prediction it has never become right... so I'm hoping my bad luck will give me good luck so that this whole 970 happens now... so all I have to worry about is the money to get one but with my luck I will finally be correct but in this case I don't want too.
Apple will release the 970 as the top end machine, even although the 970 included is actually the slowest they have available. It will blow away the G4, and everyone will scramble to buy one. Just like you did when the G4 Yikes! replaced the G3.
They will then release 10.3, but it will not be a free upgrade as others have suggested. It will be sold as "optimized for 970", and pitched as an upgrade that will significantly increase the speed of the 970s out there, and everyone will scramble to buy it. Just like you did with Jaguar.
New machines will ship with the faster 970s and 10.3 installed, whilst your shiny new 970 plummets in value before your very eyes. Suddenly you're left with Yikes! MK II, and you've also forked out for a software "upgrade" that everybody else is getting for free.
SHAFTED!!!
That's the way anybody running a business would do it...
If you are too "smart" in business deal the customer will not come back nor recomend you to other people.
The weakest link in Apples business model is not shortness of cash. Market share and CPU performance in the tower models are the two main weaknesses I think. Neither of them will be improved by shafting the customers
A very substantial upgrade in performance and features at the same price is a far better way of regain some of what was lost during the dark ages of G4.
With IBM aiming the 970 for Linux blade servers I would guess that the Apple blade server will get a 970 as well but in a low key event while the Apple focus will be the towers so that to keep a friendly atmosphere between Apple and the big big blue!
That's the way to run a business if you have a monopoly.
I don't see anybody else selling machines that run Mac OS 9/X out of the box.
Yeah, thats a way to run business if you want to piss off every mac customer in the world, and then eventually lose all the marketshare you have. Calling Apple a monopoly is a little strange I think. It's not as there's no alternatives to macs. If Apple starts to f**k customers this way, they may lose all their loyal fans, and all their sales. Not gonna happen.
quote:...the company [IBM] has now navigated beyond its Sahara generation of PowerPC G3 to a remap dubbed Colorado. Next stop: Gobi, which is expected to reach full production during the first calendar quarter of 2003.
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.
1.6 GHz. For a G3 descendant/derivative. What can we suppose from this? Perhaps that the iBooks will go 1.6GHz Mojave when the 970 is well beyond that (1.8 at the low end??)? But what of the G4? Mojave would seem cover this year and few quarters into the next.
And what's this MojaveMP?
The mind boggles, the eyes blur and the Screed goes to bed.
Screed
Last edited by sCreeD on 05-06-2003 at 12:21 AM
With this ammunition in hand, I will say that GOBI is not the IBM 850, but the Mojave will ultimately be the IBM 850 in all its' multicore superscaler, Rapid I/O, n-way Core connect GLORY. Halleluja IBM comes through where Motorola failed in its' timelines.
Even if this scenario is true, it's completely wrong to consider it being 'shafted' as you say. It's nothing of the sort. You get what you pay for and nothing more.
Even if this scenario is true, it's completely wrong to consider it being 'shafted' as you say. It's nothing of the sort. You get what you pay for and nothing more.
Yeah, thats a way to run business if you want to piss off every mac customer in the world, and then eventually lose all the marketshare you have. Calling Apple a monopoly is a little strange I think. It's not as there's no alternatives to macs. If Apple starts to f**k customers this way, they may lose all their loyal fans, and all their sales. Not gonna happen.
Sorry, are you honestly trying to tell me that Apple don't f**k their customers at the moment?
Sorry, are you honestly trying to tell me that Apple don't f**k their customers at the moment?
Not intentionally they arent. They are a business and have to sell whatever product they can, and at the current state I think they are doing as good as they can. It's not their fault that moronola is so far behind in the performance race. I think Apple is delivering at the time being well balanced and fine laptops, somewhat overpriced iMac, and the new eMac is well suited for it's purpose I think and right priced. And lets not forget the new displays that are extremely well designed, have great performance, and is actually very reasonably priced compared to other products. They have also released a batch of new iPrograms the last few years for "free". That leaves the powermac left as somewhat underpowered and overpriced compared to offerings on the PC side. But again, this is not how Apple wants things to be, and we'll see some changes when the new processors from IBM is introduced I think. So you see I cant agree with you with you when you say that Apple f**cks their customers. And hey, you dont have to buy if you dont want to.
So, if Apple announced the availability of a 1.4GHz 970 tomorrow, but it didn't have 10.3 pre installed, and you wouldn't be able to take full advantage of the 970, you wouldn't buy it? Even with everyone raving about how it wiped the floor with the G4, you still wouldn't buy it?
And if they then announced the availability of 10.3, which offered you a major leap in productivity, you wouldn't be tempted to buy 10.3?
And when the next generation of 970 were released shortly afterward, and your "ultimate" machine became the "fast" machine, you wouldn't be pissed off?
Okay!
The launch of the 970 is going to be an exciting time for us all, the dawn of a new age for Mac users (I hope). Once again, we're going to be able to blow away PCs, with a CPU that should scale quickly. Apple would be stupid not to milk us for every penny. If they can get us to pay for something twice, then they would be foolish not to do so.
Of course it doesn't feel like you're getting shafted at the time, because you have this shiny new state of the art piece of hardware, or this miraculous new piece of software that increases the speed of your machine as if by magic.
Happened with the early releases of OS X, and we scrambled to buy 10.2 when it appeared on the shelves. 10.2 was the first release of OS X that was usable, but we all still ran the beta and got excited when 10.1 was released.
I hope they don't pull that sh*t again, where the entry level machine is a stripped down version, or entirely different architecture to the rest of the family.
A lot of people I know fell foul of Yikes! or those 466MHz & 533MHz vs. 667MHz & 733MHz machines.
I'd hate for people to buy the first revision 970, only for them to find out it was a stop gap machine.
Comments
What if IBM is itching to get these out ASAP (not necesarily in Apple's boxes, but their own)? Might Apple have tied themselves to a schedule that they *gasp* don't control???
Is it possible that Apple just might have to introduce these boxes sooner rather than later or be overshadowed by an IBM pre-planned announcement?
Just thinking out loud here.....
Originally posted by Programmer
The 970 might be low power compared to a Pentium4 or Athlon, but its still way too hot for the kind of portable and small machine uses that I suspect Apple would use it for.
True, but the 970 (low powered chip) uses less wattage than todays G4's as well. So it will be a good match for the powerbook and iMac, which use G4's in them today.
The PowerBooks may get the low end 970s, but the iBook will get the other.
Which is basicly what I am saying. The IBM 850 (upgraded G3) would be great for future iBooks, and possibly a DLD (digital life-sytle device). 970 will filter into everything else.
Originally posted by boots
I don't think it has to drop at all. I believe the 1.4GHz and 1.8GHz 970 CPU's will both use a fixed 450MHz external bus frequency, they are just using different integer multipliers (3x and 4x) to generate the core clock. That's my theory which fits with the mentioned clock rates (1.4, 1.8, 2.3 GHz)
You are think in terms of MaxBus. The 970 bus speed is based on a 4:1 scale of the processor (this was mentioend by IBM, if I recall correctly). So a 1.8GHz processor would have a 450MHz bus (900MHz double pumped). A 2.0GHz processor would have a 500MHz bus (1GHz double pumped), and a 1.2GHz processor would have a 300MHz bus (600MHz double pumped).
As far as I understand, there is no bus multiplier for the 970's bus.
Originally posted by boots
I don't think it has to drop at all. I believe the 1.4GHz and 1.8GHz 970 CPU's will both use a fixed 450MHz external bus frequency, they are just using different integer multipliers (3x and 4x) to generate the core clock. That's my theory which fits with the mentioned clock rates (1.4, 1.8, 2.3 GHz)
The information from the MDF2002 presentation (not the slide show, but directly from the presenter) is that the FSB runs at half the processor clock. If this information is wrong then you're probably right, but at this point I have to believe the information from IBM and not from you.
Originally posted by kupan787
Ok, it is not GOBI, but the 850:
You posted a quote about the 850 as folllows.
PowerPC 850: Based on an extended G3 core (750/740) that will probably increase the pipeline to 10 stages or so, it will have 512KB L2 cache, 32bit core, made on 130nm process, at least 36bit memory addressing,and include Altivec. The bus will be a RapidIO (probably 2 16bit ports) and have a built-in memory controller for DDR-SDRAM. This will limit it's usage with SMP but considering the target market, this is not much of an issue. Power consumption will be a major design point. Expected: 4Q 03.
I sure am interested in knowing where that quote came from, or where I can find out more. If IBM is making a 32-bit PPC processor with AltiVec and a really good bus, that is the end of Motorola in Macs in my opinion. I think Apple would put it in the eMac and iMac as soon as they could revise the motherboards. It would be a significant boost in performance.
Originally posted by snoopy
I sure am interested in knowing where that quote came from, or where I can find out more.
It was in a post hear about IBMs future/road map. I saw it mentioned in another forum as well (sorry, can't remember where), so I figured two mentions warrant something.
I tried searching IBMs website, and found nothing about a 850, not to say it doens't exist however.
Originally posted by 709
To post a thought pertaining to the original title of the thread (although I'm enjoying all this speculation immensly.....don't stop
What if IBM is itching to get these out ASAP (not necesarily in Apple's boxes, but their own)? Might Apple have tied themselves to a schedule that they *gasp* don't control???
Is it possible that Apple just might have to introduce these boxes sooner rather than later or be overshadowed by an IBM pre-planned announcement?
Just thinking out loud here.....
Wow, maybe it's the time of night, but this strikes me as an incredibly insightful post. Seriously, I haven't heard anyone else mention this posibility, yet it makes a lot of sense. Anyone who has kept abreast of IBM news knows that they like to be highly vocal, and deliver new technologies either on time, or early. (Which basically means they're good at making conservative announcements and then meeting (or beating) them)
It really wouldn't surprise me if IBM is feeling the mounting pressure (from HP/Compaq and others) in the low/mid server market, and wants to get this new iron out there...
AMD had their big day with the whole "our bits go up to 64" thing, claiming first to market, blah blah blah...IBM wants to have their party too...just as soon as Apple's needs for iDrama can be met.
Originally posted by 709
Is it possible that Apple just might have to introduce these boxes sooner rather than later or be overshadowed by an IBM pre-planned announcement?
Who knows the details of IBM-Apple agreements? Neither of the companies are stupid enough to compete with each other while depending on each other. Remember that without PPC970 Apple is pretty doomed to switch to Intel/AMD CPUs. Remember also that Apple is going to be the largest customer of IBM's. They should have somehow divided the market or something. In a wild speculation mode I can presume that Apple contributed to PPC970 development from the very beginning and who knows how. In fact, it's even possible that without Apple there wouldn't be any PPC970. I don't believe that Apple and IBM will offer competing products unless Apple ordered the PPC970 development at IBM 3 years ago in return for all rights reserved by IBM.
Anyway, in this situation they are not going to kill each other with PR.
They will then release 10.3, but it will not be a free upgrade as others have suggested. It will be sold as "optimized for 970", and pitched as an upgrade that will significantly increase the speed of the 970s out there, and everyone will scramble to buy it. Just like you did with Jaguar.
New machines will ship with the faster 970s and 10.3 installed, whilst your shiny new 970 plummets in value before your very eyes. Suddenly you're left with Yikes! MK II, and you've also forked out for a software "upgrade" that everybody else is getting for free.
SHAFTED!!!
That's the way anybody running a business would do it...
If you are too "smart" in business deal the customer will not come back nor recomend you to other people.
The weakest link in Apples business model is not shortness of cash. Market share and CPU performance in the tower models are the two main weaknesses I think. Neither of them will be improved by shafting the customers
A very substantial upgrade in performance and features at the same price is a far better way of regain some of what was lost during the dark ages of G4.
With IBM aiming the 970 for Linux blade servers I would guess that the Apple blade server will get a 970 as well but in a low key event while the Apple focus will be the towers so that to keep a friendly atmosphere between Apple and the big big blue!
I don't see anybody else selling machines that run Mac OS 9/X out of the box.
Originally posted by Messiah
That's the way to run a business if you have a monopoly.
I don't see anybody else selling machines that run Mac OS 9/X out of the box.
Yeah, thats a way to run business if you want to piss off every mac customer in the world, and then eventually lose all the marketshare you have. Calling Apple a monopoly is a little strange I think. It's not as there's no alternatives to macs. If Apple starts to f**k customers this way, they may lose all their loyal fans, and all their sales. Not gonna happen.
I think that the NMR first introduced us to the term GOBI
sCreeD
From the Naked Mole Rat circa Jan '03:
quote:...the company [IBM] has now navigated beyond its Sahara generation of PowerPC G3 to a remap dubbed Colorado. Next stop: Gobi, which is expected to reach full production during the first calendar quarter of 2003.
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.
1.6 GHz. For a G3 descendant/derivative. What can we suppose from this? Perhaps that the iBooks will go 1.6GHz Mojave when the 970 is well beyond that (1.8 at the low end??)? But what of the G4? Mojave would seem cover this year and few quarters into the next.
And what's this MojaveMP?
The mind boggles, the eyes blur and the Screed goes to bed.
Screed
Last edited by sCreeD on 05-06-2003 at 12:21 AM
With this ammunition in hand, I will say that GOBI is not the IBM 850, but the Mojave will ultimately be the IBM 850 in all its' multicore superscaler, Rapid I/O, n-way Core connect GLORY. Halleluja IBM comes through where Motorola failed in its' timelines.
Hope my ammunition isn't all wet.
Originally posted by Messiah
SHAFTED!!!
Even if this scenario is true, it's completely wrong to consider it being 'shafted' as you say. It's nothing of the sort. You get what you pay for and nothing more.
Originally posted by bunge
Even if this scenario is true, it's completely wrong to consider it being 'shafted' as you say. It's nothing of the sort. You get what you pay for and nothing more.
Yea, I'd love to be shafted tomorrow with a 970!
Originally posted by NETROMac
Yeah, thats a way to run business if you want to piss off every mac customer in the world, and then eventually lose all the marketshare you have. Calling Apple a monopoly is a little strange I think. It's not as there's no alternatives to macs. If Apple starts to f**k customers this way, they may lose all their loyal fans, and all their sales. Not gonna happen.
Sorry, are you honestly trying to tell me that Apple don't f**k their customers at the moment?
Originally posted by Messiah
Sorry, are you honestly trying to tell me that Apple don't f**k their customers at the moment?
Not intentionally they arent. They are a business and have to sell whatever product they can, and at the current state I think they are doing as good as they can. It's not their fault that moronola is so far behind in the performance race. I think Apple is delivering at the time being well balanced and fine laptops, somewhat overpriced iMac, and the new eMac is well suited for it's purpose I think and right priced. And lets not forget the new displays that are extremely well designed, have great performance, and is actually very reasonably priced compared to other products. They have also released a batch of new iPrograms the last few years for "free". That leaves the powermac left as somewhat underpowered and overpriced compared to offerings on the PC side. But again, this is not how Apple wants things to be, and we'll see some changes when the new processors from IBM is introduced I think. So you see I cant agree with you with you when you say that Apple f**cks their customers. And hey, you dont have to buy if you dont want to.
(edit: bla bla bla)
And if they then announced the availability of 10.3, which offered you a major leap in productivity, you wouldn't be tempted to buy 10.3?
And when the next generation of 970 were released shortly afterward, and your "ultimate" machine became the "fast" machine, you wouldn't be pissed off?
Okay!
The launch of the 970 is going to be an exciting time for us all, the dawn of a new age for Mac users (I hope). Once again, we're going to be able to blow away PCs, with a CPU that should scale quickly. Apple would be stupid not to milk us for every penny. If they can get us to pay for something twice, then they would be foolish not to do so.
Of course it doesn't feel like you're getting shafted at the time, because you have this shiny new state of the art piece of hardware, or this miraculous new piece of software that increases the speed of your machine as if by magic.
Happened with the early releases of OS X, and we scrambled to buy 10.2 when it appeared on the shelves. 10.2 was the first release of OS X that was usable, but we all still ran the beta and got excited when 10.1 was released.
A lot of people I know fell foul of Yikes! or those 466MHz & 533MHz vs. 667MHz & 733MHz machines.
I'd hate for people to buy the first revision 970, only for them to find out it was a stop gap machine.