I think with Panther, a 970 and a 9700, Mac gaming will have come of age. Macs were doing great colour games when the PC was still doing orange and blue Battle Chess.
So.
Games are important to the Mac. Apple have a sizeable slice of their webside devoted to games and the appropriate Mac set up depending on whether you're a soft or 'hard core' gamer. They'll become more so when we get decent hardware to run them on. It is a big market. It's worth billions...and Apple, a company that can barely string out a profitable quarter...could well do with a slice of that or any music player market (which was also 'unimportant' to Apple before Apple made it so.) All parts of the computer market are 'small' if taken individually. Apple have made a fist of video, music...but now it's time to get back to their core graphic market with a sidewinder missile: the 970. This will torpedo any wintel incursion in Mac Quark/print territory.
I think the 970 will bench much against the PC brethren than the current G4s do re: games. How's that?
Apple's hardly going to trumpet Unreal 2003 performance unless it has a: Unreal 2003 and b: has the latest 9700 and c: a decent cpu with decent bandwidth. The 970 will allow Apple to trumpet gaming and 3d performance. Something Wintel is strong on. Not for much longer. I can see the 970 cutting their lead time.
Personally, I'd settle for Painter 8 performance without brush lag in A4 300dpi mode...or bitch slapping 300 dpi Photoshop files...or 3D renders in about 1 fifth of the time...
Ok, so we know that the 970 is eventually going to get faster than 1.8 ghz, but the 2.5 blades were supposedly prototype 0.09 parts that supposedly will be introduced later than the inital 0.13 ones (early next year?).
The IBM site quoted 0.13 as the size, with a speed range of 1.8 to 2.5 GHz. From looking at the original page it would have had to be a serious typo for something else to be intended.
Then that _one_ specific page is removed from the site. All the other references/documents are left alone - there's just nowhere that says '2.5 GHz' anymore.
There wasn't a date presented either for the 2.5's. Just that 'the blades' would be available 2H03, and they would range from 1.8 to 2.5....
If it was a typo, why wasn't it just fixed?
If it was prerelease 0.09 parts, why wasn't it just worded that way "... and 0.09 um parts shipping in 1H04 at 2.5GHz" or whatever?
I think I might be content at 1.8... but I'm not convinced there was no truth behind the Blade announcements. (Seeing the text straight from IBM is convincing somehow
AH, yes, entertainment has done more to boost technologies than most any other form of promotion. VHS-Video? Porn. 1-900? Porn. The internet? HELLO! It took quite some time from the internet going "commercial" before any of the top ten money earning sites was anything other than porn. It is a killer app, and there's no disputing it.
Gaming may not be a killer, but it counts, the market for games is huge, the consquences of presence (or lack of it) are also profound.
Maybe I misread you, but that seems the converse of what you were arguing before. Technology drives porn. Porn drives technology means that the Fu-FMe would be the gift to give Mom on Mother's Day instead of the George Foreman grill.
If Gaming weren't high on the radar, it wouldn't be all over CNN or NBC's news channels whenever ATI and nVidia release a new product. We're talking main stream media here (as much as financial news can be considered main stream) Would anyone pay attention to Sony's PS2 fortunes or M$'s Xbox forays if gaming wasn't important...[snip]
I'm just saying that you can't underestimate games. It tends to be a familiar refrain around here, this idea that "games" should be dismissed because they're inconsequetial. They aren't, not in the least.
I don't argue that gaming isn't a big thing. I don't argue that cars are a big thing, either, but I don't think it makes sense for Apple to get into that market...
What I'm arguing is that Apple can't make a Powermac that hardcore gamers will flock to without seriously compromising the integrity and viability of the Mac platform, and they shouldn't try. ATi, nVidia, Creative, etc can compete for the meager PC gamer market while Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft can compete for the much larger console market. The barriers of entry to both markets are too high for Apple to even consider.
As long as we Mac users have nothing but clumsy and slow Windows ports to offer, no hardcore gamer will give the platform a second thought. And who cares? Microsoft takes a $250 million beating every quarter from Xbox losses. And on the PC end, I seriously doubt any of the 'l33t g4m3rz' I know paid for Windows XP, or even most of their games. It's their hobby, leave 'em be.
Now, as for making Mac OS X a better place for games to be developed and ported, I completely agree with you. But I'm no programmer, so I'll leave other people to complain about that .
The Cinema benches don't look right either. The dual 1.8 970 should have a render time of 10-13 seconds, not 18 (based on the single 1.4 970 score of 29). Something's wrong here.
The IBM site quoted 0.13 as the size, with a speed range of 1.8 to 2.5 GHz. From looking at the original page it would have had to be a serious typo for something else to be intended.....
I think I might be content at 1.8... but I'm not convinced there was no truth behind the Blade announcements. (Seeing the text straight from IBM is convincing somehow
It is important to keep in mind, that we cannot directly intepret any information regarding the IBM Blade servers to also directly apply to a potential new breed of PowerMacs.
The expected volume high end yield of the 970 is 1.8ghz. Now a certain percentage of chips will achieve yields higher then that, and based upon other rumors, the percentage of higher yields is greater then expected. However, Apple has been burned too many times by Motorola's inability to meet demand. I think they will play this cautious and will not announce anything they are not confident they can meet the demand of.
Also keep in mind, even if IBM is getting some yield above 2.0 ghz, I would anticipate they will first meet the demand for that higher power in their blade servers, before selling any to Apple. Therefore, Apple will get what is available in volume, but IBM may reserve the lower volume, higher speed chips (if any) for their own use, until such time that supply is sufficient to meet the volume demand of Apple.
The .13 process will likely scale well beyond 2.0 ghz eventually. The question is, will it be in sufficient volume and at acceptable heat and power consumption levels. If anything beyond 1.8 ghz is announced intially by Apple, I will be very pleasantly surprised. But I think it is foolish to expect it. And as much as I am anxious to see 970s in PowerBooks, I think it would be even more foolish to expect them before 2004.
I have great expectations and hopes, but choose to temper them with a little bit of realism. Neither rumors, nor economics nor realistic production scenarios support a complete refresh of all Apple lines for this summer or even fall. However they do provide a for a strong possibility, even probability, for the PowerMacs and X-serves, possibly as soon as July with announcements or at least preliminary introductions at WWDC. More then that is likely fantasy. Of course there is nothing wrong with a little fantasy, as long as you don't live your life around it.
Oh and back on topic of the benchmarks, while interesting and hopeful, they must be taken with a grain of salt. There are obviously irregularities and even if well intentioned, I would have to question their accuracy simply due to probable human error, and the fact that we have no detailed information by which to evaluate the various machines. Still, from what I have seen and read elsewhere, while not "accurate", they may very well be "in the ballpark". I think the 970 will come to the Macintosh and and general performance parity will be restored. In some areas their performance will surpass the competition. Likewise, I expect the competition will also have their areas of superiority.
Still the future of Macintosh is bright. Much brighter then it has been for a very long time.
does the introduction of 1.7Ghz Power4+ mean higher clocked 970s ???
1.7GHz Power4s? A hot box gets even hotter. I don't know if it'd have any correlation to the 970 clock frequency, though. If it did, that'd mean we could see top 970s at or a little above 2 GHz, would be nice.
1.7GHz Power4s? A hot box gets even hotter. I don't know if it'd have any correlation to the 970 clock frequency, though. If it did, that'd mean we could see top 970s at or a little above 2 GHz, would be nice.
IBM can skim the fastest 970 all they want and leave the lowend to Apple, I will not mind. A 1.6 GHz 970 has twise the integer speed of a G4/1.42 and more than 4 times the FP
So if IBM keep the 1.8 and above for their blade server for while, I am still happy
If they keep everyting above 1 GHz I will get cranky even if 900 MHz 970 are faster than the current G4/1.42 GHz....
We received word that two large shipments of Power PC 970 processors went to Foxconn in Taiwan, under a purchase order from Apple computer. Twenty thousand 1.4Ghz PPC 970's and forty thousand 1.6Ghz PPC 970's have already arrived in their hands. IBM's inventory contains fifty thousand 1.8 Ghz PPC 970's, of which forty thousand are destined for Foxconn tomorrow (Wednesday).
IBM has listed as pending 2Ghz parts as well, which means that it will be in inventory within a month if their fab in East Fishkill produces sufficient volumes of them, and from what we hear they should be in stock by mid-June. Apple has stated that they need a minimum of 40 thousand in order to make a production run, and from what we understand this is for dual processors because normally their production runs are twenty thousand units. It is not IBM's policy to comment on other vendor's unreleased products. We have also been briefed that the PPC 970 will come in 2.3 and 2.5Ghz configurations by the end of the year, and as well some preliminary specs on the upcoming 980 processor, which is a Power 5 derivative.
We have also been briefed that the PPC 970 will come in 2.3 and 2.5Ghz configurations by the end of the year, and as well some preliminary specs on the upcoming 980 processor, which is a Power 5 derivative.
They have been briefed on preliminary specs on the 980 but don't bother to tell us. F**** teasers
2Ghz parts as well, which means that it will be in inventory within a month if their fab in East Fishkill produces sufficient volumes of them, and from what we hear they should be in stock by mid-June.
When put thru the Apple Automatic Translation Device:
Those of you that order the Dual 2ghz model on June 23rd will not get your machine till Sept.
Comments
So.
Games are important to the Mac. Apple have a sizeable slice of their webside devoted to games and the appropriate Mac set up depending on whether you're a soft or 'hard core' gamer. They'll become more so when we get decent hardware to run them on. It is a big market. It's worth billions...and Apple, a company that can barely string out a profitable quarter...could well do with a slice of that or any music player market (which was also 'unimportant' to Apple before Apple made it so.) All parts of the computer market are 'small' if taken individually. Apple have made a fist of video, music...but now it's time to get back to their core graphic market with a sidewinder missile: the 970. This will torpedo any wintel incursion in Mac Quark/print territory.
I think the 970 will bench much against the PC brethren than the current G4s do re: games. How's that?
Apple's hardly going to trumpet Unreal 2003 performance unless it has a: Unreal 2003 and b: has the latest 9700 and c: a decent cpu with decent bandwidth. The 970 will allow Apple to trumpet gaming and 3d performance. Something Wintel is strong on. Not for much longer. I can see the 970 cutting their lead time.
Personally, I'd settle for Painter 8 performance without brush lag in A4 300dpi mode...or bitch slapping 300 dpi Photoshop files...or 3D renders in about 1 fifth of the time...
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by NETROMac
Ok, so we know that the 970 is eventually going to get faster than 1.8 ghz, but the 2.5 blades were supposedly prototype 0.09 parts that supposedly will be introduced later than the inital 0.13 ones (early next year?).
The IBM site quoted 0.13 as the size, with a speed range of 1.8 to 2.5 GHz. From looking at the original page it would have had to be a serious typo for something else to be intended.
Then that _one_ specific page is removed from the site. All the other references/documents are left alone - there's just nowhere that says '2.5 GHz' anymore.
There wasn't a date presented either for the 2.5's. Just that 'the blades' would be available 2H03, and they would range from 1.8 to 2.5....
If it was a typo, why wasn't it just fixed?
If it was prerelease 0.09 parts, why wasn't it just worded that way "... and 0.09 um parts shipping in 1H04 at 2.5GHz" or whatever?
I think I might be content at 1.8... but I'm not convinced there was no truth behind the Blade announcements. (Seeing the text straight from IBM is convincing somehow
Originally posted by Matsu
AH, yes, entertainment has done more to boost technologies than most any other form of promotion. VHS-Video? Porn. 1-900? Porn. The internet? HELLO! It took quite some time from the internet going "commercial" before any of the top ten money earning sites was anything other than porn. It is a killer app, and there's no disputing it.
Gaming may not be a killer, but it counts, the market for games is huge, the consquences of presence (or lack of it) are also profound.
Maybe I misread you, but that seems the converse of what you were arguing before. Technology drives porn. Porn drives technology means that the Fu-FMe would be the gift to give Mom on Mother's Day instead of the George Foreman grill.
If Gaming weren't high on the radar, it wouldn't be all over CNN or NBC's news channels whenever ATI and nVidia release a new product. We're talking main stream media here (as much as financial news can be considered main stream) Would anyone pay attention to Sony's PS2 fortunes or M$'s Xbox forays if gaming wasn't important...[snip]
I'm just saying that you can't underestimate games. It tends to be a familiar refrain around here, this idea that "games" should be dismissed because they're inconsequetial. They aren't, not in the least.
I don't argue that gaming isn't a big thing. I don't argue that cars are a big thing, either, but I don't think it makes sense for Apple to get into that market...
What I'm arguing is that Apple can't make a Powermac that hardcore gamers will flock to without seriously compromising the integrity and viability of the Mac platform, and they shouldn't try. ATi, nVidia, Creative, etc can compete for the meager PC gamer market while Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft can compete for the much larger console market. The barriers of entry to both markets are too high for Apple to even consider.
As long as we Mac users have nothing but clumsy and slow Windows ports to offer, no hardcore gamer will give the platform a second thought. And who cares? Microsoft takes a $250 million beating every quarter from Xbox losses. And on the PC end, I seriously doubt any of the 'l33t g4m3rz' I know paid for Windows XP, or even most of their games. It's their hobby, leave 'em be.
Now, as for making Mac OS X a better place for games to be developed and ported, I completely agree with you. But I'm no programmer, so I'll leave other people to complain about that
Originally posted by artcat
The Cinema benches don't look right either. The dual 1.8 970 should have a render time of 10-13 seconds, not 18 (based on the single 1.4 970 score of 29). Something's wrong here.
Indeed.
Originally posted by moki
Indeed.
Well, ask and ye shall receive eh?
Either we are completely off-base with the 970, or Apple/IBM has something up their collective sleeves.
Any knowledge of new 'boxes' floating around...?
render time of 10-13 seconds, not 18
what's the math on that? so compared to macboudille's time it would be what more percentage faster?
Originally posted by Nevyn
The IBM site quoted 0.13 as the size, with a speed range of 1.8 to 2.5 GHz. From looking at the original page it would have had to be a serious typo for something else to be intended.....
I think I might be content at 1.8... but I'm not convinced there was no truth behind the Blade announcements. (Seeing the text straight from IBM is convincing somehow
It is important to keep in mind, that we cannot directly intepret any information regarding the IBM Blade servers to also directly apply to a potential new breed of PowerMacs.
The expected volume high end yield of the 970 is 1.8ghz. Now a certain percentage of chips will achieve yields higher then that, and based upon other rumors, the percentage of higher yields is greater then expected. However, Apple has been burned too many times by Motorola's inability to meet demand. I think they will play this cautious and will not announce anything they are not confident they can meet the demand of.
Also keep in mind, even if IBM is getting some yield above 2.0 ghz, I would anticipate they will first meet the demand for that higher power in their blade servers, before selling any to Apple. Therefore, Apple will get what is available in volume, but IBM may reserve the lower volume, higher speed chips (if any) for their own use, until such time that supply is sufficient to meet the volume demand of Apple.
The .13 process will likely scale well beyond 2.0 ghz eventually. The question is, will it be in sufficient volume and at acceptable heat and power consumption levels. If anything beyond 1.8 ghz is announced intially by Apple, I will be very pleasantly surprised. But I think it is foolish to expect it. And as much as I am anxious to see 970s in PowerBooks, I think it would be even more foolish to expect them before 2004.
I have great expectations and hopes, but choose to temper them with a little bit of realism. Neither rumors, nor economics nor realistic production scenarios support a complete refresh of all Apple lines for this summer or even fall. However they do provide a for a strong possibility, even probability, for the PowerMacs and X-serves, possibly as soon as July with announcements or at least preliminary introductions at WWDC. More then that is likely fantasy. Of course there is nothing wrong with a little fantasy, as long as you don't live your life around it.
Oh and back on topic of the benchmarks, while interesting and hopeful, they must be taken with a grain of salt. There are obviously irregularities and even if well intentioned, I would have to question their accuracy simply due to probable human error, and the fact that we have no detailed information by which to evaluate the various machines. Still, from what I have seen and read elsewhere, while not "accurate", they may very well be "in the ballpark". I think the 970 will come to the Macintosh and and general performance parity will be restored. In some areas their performance will surpass the competition. Likewise, I expect the competition will also have their areas of superiority.
Still the future of Macintosh is bright. Much brighter then it has been for a very long time.
Originally posted by Krassy
does the introduction of 1.7Ghz Power4+ mean higher clocked 970s ???
Originally posted by fred_lj
Yes, it certainly would be nice, wouldn't it?
So if IBM keep the 1.8 and above for their blade server for while, I am still happy
If they keep everyting above 1 GHz I will get cranky even if 900 MHz 970 are faster than the current G4/1.42 GHz....
Output:
You will be sandbagged when Apple releases > 2ghz 970 based Macs at WWDC.
?
a) confirm
b) deny
c) <cough>
Originally posted by moki
Yes, it certainly would be nice, wouldn't it?
moki, I enjoy the nice "enigmatic" style in your recent posts
Originally posted by keyboardf12
When put thru the Moki Automatic Translation Device:
Output:
You will be sandbagged when Apple releases > 2ghz 970 based Macs at WWDC.
?
a) confirm
b) deny
c) <cough>
lol
Originally posted by keyboardf12
c) <cough>
Are you gonna make me turn my head, too?
PowrPC 970 timeline?
We received word that two large shipments of Power PC 970 processors went to Foxconn in Taiwan, under a purchase order from Apple computer. Twenty thousand 1.4Ghz PPC 970's and forty thousand 1.6Ghz PPC 970's have already arrived in their hands. IBM's inventory contains fifty thousand 1.8 Ghz PPC 970's, of which forty thousand are destined for Foxconn tomorrow (Wednesday).
IBM has listed as pending 2Ghz parts as well, which means that it will be in inventory within a month if their fab in East Fishkill produces sufficient volumes of them, and from what we hear they should be in stock by mid-June. Apple has stated that they need a minimum of 40 thousand in order to make a production run, and from what we understand this is for dual processors because normally their production runs are twenty thousand units. It is not IBM's policy to comment on other vendor's unreleased products. We have also been briefed that the PPC 970 will come in 2.3 and 2.5Ghz configurations by the end of the year, and as well some preliminary specs on the upcoming 980 processor, which is a Power 5 derivative.
We have also been briefed that the PPC 970 will come in 2.3 and 2.5Ghz configurations by the end of the year, and as well some preliminary specs on the upcoming 980 processor, which is a Power 5 derivative.
They have been briefed on preliminary specs on the 980 but don't bother to tell us. F**** teasers
Are you gonna make me turn my head, too?
Nope. Hoping the 970 will do that though.
2Ghz parts as well, which means that it will be in inventory within a month if their fab in East Fishkill produces sufficient volumes of them, and from what we hear they should be in stock by mid-June.
When put thru the Apple Automatic Translation Device:
Those of you that order the Dual 2ghz model on June 23rd will not get your machine till Sept.