PPC 970 System Specs
I'm a long-time browser of these forums and have decided to participate instead of soley observing so take it easy - this is my first post 
I've read quite a lot about the (almost inevitable) usage of the PPC 970 in the next major generation of Apple pro machines.
Since its pretty much given that Apple will use this überchip, what are we expecting to see on the new motherboard?
Specifically:
1) frontside & backplane buses
2) main memory technology
3) cache memory
4) interfaces (future Firewire / USB standards)
5) legacy interface support
6) cost (?)
Speculate away <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
I've read quite a lot about the (almost inevitable) usage of the PPC 970 in the next major generation of Apple pro machines.
Since its pretty much given that Apple will use this überchip, what are we expecting to see on the new motherboard?
Specifically:
1) frontside & backplane buses
2) main memory technology
3) cache memory
4) interfaces (future Firewire / USB standards)
5) legacy interface support
6) cost (?)
Speculate away <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Comments
Processor: Dual 1.8 PowerPC 970
L2 Cache: 512 Ko per processor
System Bus: 900 MHz
Memory (4 GB Max): 2 x 512 MB PC3200 400 MHz (nVidia DualDDR Memory Architecture - up to 6.4GB per second of memory bandwidth)
Hard Disk Drive: 200 GB Ultra ATA 100
Optical Drive: SuperDrive
Graphic Support: nVidia GeForce NV30
Expensions: 4 PCI 64 bits 66 MHz / AGP 8X / 4 Internal Drive bays / 2 Optical Drive bays
Ports: One FireWire 2 / Two FireWire / Two USB 2.0 / Minijack / ADC / etc.
Networking: 10/100/1000 BASE-T / Modem / Airport 2
System: Mac OS X v10.3
We will most likely see two 800 Mb/s IEEE 1394b ports, and one fiber (1600 Mb/s) port.
[quote]Originally posted by jeromba:
<strong>Hard Disk Drive: 200 GB Ultra ATA 100
Optical Drive: SuperDrive</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hard Disk Drive: I would expect SerialATA.
Optical Drive: A new version compatible with both +R/W and -R/W such as the <a href="http://www.djsmiley.com/review_sony/"; target="_blank">Sony DRU-500A</a>.
LW.
[ 11-17-2002: Message edited by: lwells ]</p>
1) frontside & backplane buses
Rumor has it that the cpu bus will be Apple PI, I dont think anyone really knows what that is, but it might be based on hyper transport. Certainly the traditional busses are losing favour, hyper transport lowers board complexity and cost while increasing bandwidth.
If apple goes with HT then they will be able to use off the shelf inter connect chipsets to provide AGP 8x, PCI, and PCI-X. I think they will probably develop their own chip, with the large integration of components already seen in the powermacs.
2) main memory technology
Probably DDR 333 ( 400 is not a JEDEC standard ). If we are lucky then dual channel, but the cost is probably prohibitive. Never rule out Rambus, a RIMM 4200 is still the fastest ( only just ), and they do have a roadmap for the future. It would also bring memory sales well into Apple's fold, which Im sure they'd love.
While Apple has always been a leader for memory form factor, they are equally behind on new memory technology.
3) cache memory
On chip only. The cheap way to do it. Off chip cache is desperately needed for current machines with slow memory sub systems.
4) interfaces (future Firewire / USB standards)
Hard to say, everyone wants firewire 2, and Im sure that the technology is just waiting to be deployed. It probably down to a 'strategic' moment. I think Apple dont want USB 2, I think they'll leave it to 3rd party manufacturers, and you wnot get it on the consumer machines.
5) legacy interface support
The same as its always been, USB and Firewire. You can talk about them being legacy in 20 years.
6) cost (?)
Horrendous
I hope that they bring out a new modular case. Hypertransport could really allow a system like the cube to have full expandability. With AGP 8x we can finally have multiple AGP slots, so you could have a base machine with the CPU + memory, 1 AGP slot, optical and HD. Then drop an expansion box on it, and get 4 more slots ( one AGP/PCI, 3 PCI ), and an extra drive bay. You would want to be able to put 2 extra expansion modules on it all up. With a seperate Power supply module, that could be replaced with a UPS module.
This has only really become feasible in a consumer proof way with highspeed serial buses like HT, or maybe fibre channel. Have a look at a riscPc as an example of a machine that did this in the 90's. It wasnt as nice to add modules to however.
Faster machines at lower prices are a little optimistic I think.
An increase in price would suck, but I'd pay $100 across the line for a machine with this chip - IF it lives up to the hype.
Demand will be huge, and it'll be priced accordingly.
[ 11-18-2002: Message edited by: Hobbes ]</p>
Nobody complains that an Athlon cant use all the bandwidth in a dual channel nForce motherboard.
It is already well established that the 970 will have much higher bandwidth off chip ( 6.4 gb or so ), so yes, it should be able to make use of DDR, and dual channel DDR as well.
As for the price, Apple seem to be stuck thinking inside the box, the quarter box that is. I feel that corporate culture at Apple wants the pro machines to be 2k+. The only reason they have dropped under that mark is that the hardware is not advancing in significant ways. They can only drop the price over time. If the hardware could suddenly catch up, just watch those prices sky rocket. The systems may not be dual anymore ( but I think they'll have to be to really be faster than the current machines ). On the flip side, it will give the iMac room to get faster, without damaging its price. You'll see a smooth continuum, from 999 for the entry level iMac, to 1999 for the top of the line. Right there the new powermacs will step in, 1999 on up.
The logic of the pricing policy is undeniable, it really is attractive. Unfortunately it doesnt have any room for power users who cant afford more expensive systems.
Personally, the key factor preventing me from getting a mac is dual monitor support. With the new spanning hack for the iBook ( does it work on the iMac ? ) I can consider getting one.
As for USB2 - Apple will of course use it when they start usinf FW2, they'd be stupid not to.
<strong>How about DDR-II?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think it all depends on the timeframe in which the new 970 Macs will be introduced. I don't know if it's a finalized standard already, but it'll probably be by mid 2003. The question is, will Apple be bold enough to use such a brand new memory standard after so little time after its intro? The move would be a great one--AFAIK DDRII-400 is much better than DDR-400, performance- and price-wise--but maybe Apple won't simply be able to do it...
...which means that, by current Apple speeds, we'll be stuck with DDR-333 for the next three or so years! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
ZoSo
Computers are getting faster and cheaper all the time especilly the the PCs, Apple has to compete.
There is no intrinsic link between cost and performance of a CPU. If the die size and yields are similar to a AMD or Intel CPU so is the cost. The G4/500 with its yield problem was far more expensive to make than G3/500 despite offering no performance improvments that was usefull at the time.
You can get a Dell box with 2.5 GHz P4 with both DVD and CDRW players and a fast nVIDA card for 1200 dollar. If Apples budget tower with a 970 came out today this is what it had to compete with. A year form now it has to compete with budget CPUs above 3 GHz!
In Jan 1999 when the B&W towers came out the budget G3/300 was faster or as fast as the top of the line beige G3/366 a the same price as the low end G3/233.When the fourth generation of powermac towers comes out they better to at least as good as that and hopfully much better than that.
Timing is also critical. If they could release 1.6-1.8 GHz 970 today they could possibly go back to a single CPU line up asuming that the 970/1.8 is at least as fast as a dual 1.25 G4. If the introduction is about a year away then the G4s (hopefully) will be in the 1.4-1.8 range and then single 970 CPUs (half the cost) will not be the option.
<strong>If powermacs suddenly start life at 1999, they'll sell well for exactly 2-3 months, and then demand will taper off as most of the high-end customers get theirs. They must have a broader appeal than that. At the very LEAST the current prices MUST STAY, for real progress, both price (downwards) and performance (upwards) must move in positive directions. If iBooks and Powerbooks can drop 200USD across the board, the the powermacs (the machines with the highest margins) can do so aswell, 970 or not.</strong><hr></blockquote>
My sentiments exactly.
I think an $1,199 price point for a low end dual 970 would be the magic number. And six months later, or when IBM achieves a die shrink, $999 would be a more appropriate price point; particularly as these new smaller die chips migrate to the portable lines.
Apple has a good opportunity here to make some headway in terms of market share. I doubt their hardware offerings will remain competitive for long after the introduction of the 970. (Maybe a year or so after). They must take full advantage of this window of time to introduce the macOS to as many potential costumers to as possible. This will build momentum and a word of mouth reputation for their products among those that would never even consider looking at Macs (like 100% of my friends), mainly because of the outrageous pricing scheme on these machines.
mika.
[ 11-18-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</p>
<strong>
Specifically:
1) frontside & backplane buses
2) main memory technology
3) cache memory
4) interfaces (future Firewire / USB standards)
5) legacy interface support
6) cost (?)
</strong><hr></blockquote>
frontside and backside bus:
Main memory technology:
driver dependent
cache memory:
see above
Interfaces:
Seats, buzzer, coin box
Legacy Interface Support:
Tires (8); steps
Cost:
Approximately $250,000 each (not including driver, tags, insurance, or consumables.
<strong>Let's do it !
Processor: Dual 1.8 PowerPC 970
L2 Cache: 512 Ko per processor
System Bus: 900 MHz
Memory (4 GB Max): 2 x 512 MB PC3200 400 MHz (nVidia DualDDR Memory Architecture - up to 6.4GB per second of memory bandwidth)
Hard Disk Drive: 200 GB Ultra ATA 100
Optical Drive: SuperDrive
Graphic Support: nVidia GeForce NV30
Expensions: 4 PCI 64 bits 66 MHz / AGP 8X / 4 Internal Drive bays / 2 Optical Drive bays
Ports: One FireWire 2 / Two FireWire / Two USB 2.0 / Minijack / ADC / etc.
Networking: 10/100/1000 BASE-T / Modem / Airport 2
System: Mac OS X v10.3</strong><hr></blockquote>
More like:
Processor: Single 1.8 PowerPC 970 because the 970 has . .. . and therefore is 400% better than intel's PiV 4Ghz at gaussian blur)
L2 Cache: 512 Ko per processor - probably
System Bus: 400 MHz - if we're lucky
Memory (1.5 GB Max): 2 x 512 MB DDR
Hard Disk Drive: 100 GB Ultra ATA 100
Optical Drive: SuperDrive - still slow
Graphic Support: nVidia GeForce Titanium
Expensions: 4 PCI 64 bits 66 MHz / AGP 4X / 4 Internal Drive bays / 2 Optical Drive bays
Ports: Two FireWire 1 / Two USB 1.1 / Minijack / ADC / etc.
Networking: 10/100/1000 BASE-T / Modem /
System: Mac OS X v10.3
<strong>I think a $1,199 price point for a low end duel 970 would be the magic number. And six months later, or when IBM achieves a die shrink, $999 would be a more appropriate price point;</strong><hr></blockquote>
You don't seriously think to get a 970 PowerMac at 1,199, do you? I mean, come on, those are supposed to be "pro" computers, if a 970 PowerMac goes for 1,199, then a 1ghz 17" iMac would go for 999, too.
I'd be perfectly and uber happy if Apple released them for 1,399 - but I don't expect anything much lower than 1799. And if it is as good performance wise as people say, than that's a price I am content with.
<strong>
You don't seriously think to get a 970 PowerMac at 1,199, do you? I mean, come on, those are supposed to be "pro" computers, if a 970 PowerMac goes for 1,199, then a 1ghz 17" iMac would go for 999, too.
I'd be perfectly and uber happy if Apple released them for 1,399 - but I don't expect anything much lower than 1799. And if it is as good performance wise as people say, than that's a price I am content with.</strong><hr></blockquote>
We?re talking hardware that?s not going to hit the market for another 9-12 months. Given that, I think I was being very generous with those pricing points. As far as the iMac, I think Apple should drop it all together if they can?t make the system more modular. That means being able to retain the LCD module as the base module is replaced or upgraded, or vise versa. But as it stands now, you can?t do either. You can?t upgrade the base module or the LCD module. Should you wish to upgrade the GPU or CPU on the iMac, your only option is to throw the whole damn machine and buy a new one. That simply is idiotic.
mika.
[ 11-18-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</p>
<strong>
We?re talking hardware that?s not going to hit the market for another 9-12 months. Given that, I think I was being very generous with those pricing points. As far as the iMac, I think Apple should drop it all together if they can?t make the system more modular. That means being able to retain the LCD module as the base module is replaced or upgraded, or vise versa. But as it stands now, you can?t do either. You can?t upgrade the base module or the LCD module. Should you wish to upgrade the GPU or CPU on the iMac, your only option is to throw the whole damn machine and buy a new one. That simply is idiotic.
mika.
[ 11-18-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I thought so too, until I saw the insane resale prices of iMac G4's at eBay. No one is going to throw their iMac in the trash.