Multiple processors

pb

Macbidouille posted this very interesting detail. Someone, discovered in a file named "AppleSystemInfo.strings" (in Panther) the following:





// String used to describe a dual processor configuration.

//

// IMPORTANT: Make sure the right hand side value contains the substring "%@".

// "%@" will get replaced by the processor speed and type string

// (e.g. "800 MHz PowerPC G3").

//--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"2xCPUFormat" = "Dual %@";



// String used to describe a triple processor configuration.

//

// IMPORTANT: Make sure the right hand side value contains the substring "%@".

// "%@" will get replaced by the processor speed and type string

// (e.g. "800 MHz PowerPC G3").

//--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"3xCPUFormat" = "3 x %@";



// String used to describe a quadruple processor configuration.

//

// IMPORTANT: Make sure the right hand side value contains the substring "%@".

// "%@" will get replaced by the processor speed and type string

// (e.g. "800 MHz PowerPC G3").

//--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"4xCPUFormat" = "4 x %@";



// String used to describe a N processor configuration where N > 2.

//

// IMPORTANT: Make sure the right hand side value contains the substrings "%1$d"

// and "%2$@". "%1$d" will get replaced by the number of processors (e.g. "4"),

// and "%2$@" will get replaced by the processor speed and type string

// (e.g. "800 MHz PowerPC G3").

//--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"NxCPUFormat" = "%1$d x %2$@";





Can anyone confirm?

pb

OK, one more thing.





// String used to format RAM description, when there is more than 1 TB of

RAM.

"RAMInTB" = "%.*f TB";

// String used to format RAM description, when there is more than 1 PB of

RAM.

"RAMInPB" = "%.*f PB";

// String used to format RAM description, when there is more than 1 EB of

RAM.

"RAMInEB" = "%.*f EB";





Now, where you could physically install this tera- or peta- or exa- bytes of RAM, is another question.

ghost_user_name

Confirmed.



Located at:



/System/Library/CoreServices/Resources/English.lproj/AppleSystemInfo.strings

kickaha

Nice to see them planning ahead!



I don't think we're going to be seeing exabyte systems anytime soon...

whisper

Quote:

Originally posted by Kickaha

Nice to see them planning ahead!



I don't think we're going to be seeing exabyte systems anytime soon...

No exabyte systems in the near future?!? WEAK!!

pb

Quote:

Originally posted by Brad

Confirmed.

So, would be safe to assume that in the time frame of 1-2 years from now, we will see something much bigger than usual from...Apple?

eugene

I'm holding out for Yottabyte RAM chips anyway.

airsluf

Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.



Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.

code master

I think it was on apple's site where they said that 64 bits can address exobytes worth of memory.

2.3 Exobytes according to my calculations

jwthomp

Hmm, very interesting. I'm guessing we'll see this sort of mega processor box in the Xserves. Wonder if they will be able to keep it in a 1U box tho..



No more Starfires, its time for MacFire! If you've never heard of Starfire servers, you should look them up. These are EXTREMELY expensive systems that Sun could not make fast enough. The back order was crazy. Lots of Swiss banks and the like were clamoring for them. Kinda fun to build code on them.



Cheers!



Jeff

kecksy

If OS X really does support triple processor configurations, then Apple needs to come out with a triple processor machine. Mac these days are too much like PCs. They need to be stranger and more exotic. A triple processor G5 would be a step in the right direction.

pb

Quote:

Originally posted by Code Master



2.3 Exobytes according to my calculations

My calculator says 18.45EB ( 2^64/10^18 ) .

whisper

Quote:

Originally posted by PB

My calculator says 18.45EB ( 2^64/10^18 ) .

Due to the weird way we calculate things (1024 vs 1000), it's an even 16EB.

pb

Quote:

Originally posted by Whisper

Due to the weird way we calculate things (1024 vs 1000), it's an even 16EB.

I missed that. You are correct, it is exactly 16EB ( 2^64/1024^6 ) .

telomar

Quote:

Originally posted by PB

I missed that. You are correct, it is exactly 16EB ( 2^64/1024^6 ) .

Actually it's exactly 16EiB or ~18.45 EB.

pb

Look at Macbidouille again today. They post now rumors with more concrete info. They say that Apple is going to make systems with up to 64 processors .The project is named internally as Dark Star. Each CPU will have 4 memory slots and the 64 CPU configuration will be maxed at 1TB memory. It will be also possible to use many ATI cards in parallel (note by me: is that possible or total nonsense?) for outstanding graphics performance. They also say that prototypes with 8, 16, 32 and 64 CPUs already exist and that these models will ship by the end of the year with prices ranging from 10000 to 50000$.

code master

Ooops, I was addressing bit wise, not byte wise.

airsluf

Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.



Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.

madmax559

Quote:

Originally posted by Kickaha

Nice to see them planning ahead!



I don't think we're going to be seeing exabyte systems anytime soon...

that does it... IM NOT Buying a mac

until they make one out of UnObtanium



Why the next thing you they'll be saying you dont need

more than 640 Petabytes of ram

telomar

Quote:

Originally posted by PB

It will be also possible to use many ATI cards in parallel (note by me: is that possible or total nonsense?) for outstanding graphics performance.

ATI just made an agreement with SGI to offer something similar.



Don't expect to see Apple release a 64 processor system for $50 000 though. Don't even expect an 8 processor system for $10 000.

whisper

Quote:

Originally posted by Telomar

Actually it's exactly 16EiB or ~18.45 EB.

What's an EiB?