Wouldn't it be sensible for MOT to consider contracting the 7457 to Fishkill and save some face and get things back on track for hardware updates?
If they've got the $$$, although I suppose IBM is a bit more interested in getting contracts now than when they were just selling surplus capacity in their own plants. It wouldn't surprise me to hear that they're still the most expensive contract fab in the industry.
Mot, of course, has a definite interest in getting their process tech working on 130nm, because from there it's (supposed to be) relatively straightforward to move it to 90nm.
It's more likely that they'll use their own fab, and contract out to IBM if their chip production falls too far behind orders. That's what they did with the 7400, way back when.
"I keep reading about the power gains from the die shrink. But looking at moto's pdfs, the 7455 @1.0Ghz uses a max of 22W while the 7457 @ 1.0Ghz uses the exact same 22W max. That would be a power savings of exactly nothing. And in fact the typical usage of the 7457 @1.0 Ghz is 15.8W while the 7455 at the same speed is rated 15.0W typical. Am I reading these wrong? If I'm not and these numbers are true, a dual 1.6 ain't gonna happen. I mean in a cube.
Basically, that's incorrect info. I'll post something later to update."
No update yet, but it sounds like he does have som, or has access to some data that is different than the pdf the Moto publically released, possibly real world, and is confidant on the power usage of the 7457's.
Well, one has to be careful what one is reading. 1.42 GHz 7455 CPUs are "special", possibly low-k dielectric, 1.85 Volt G4 CPUs. Running them at 1.85V compared to 1.3V 7455 represents a massive 90% increase in power requirements alone. So any 7457 running at 1.3V and at 1.4 to 1.6 GHz should have much lower power consumption, even with the 7457's additional 25 million transistors.
The additional 25 million transistors in the 7457 (predominantly L2 cache) would increase the power consumption a good percentage, but the reduced capacitance from a smaller process offset it. So a 1.3V 7457 at 1 GHz would have about the same power consumption as a 1.3V 1 GHz 7455.
I do question whether it'll be possible to run a dual 1.6 GHz 7457 CPU daughterboard in a Cube. I think a fan would be necessary.
So it does appear that they have them in house and are working on upgrade cards for the 7457 processors.
yes, and i think it will be a good upgrade for my home G4 533 next year. The upgrade will be not very expansive, and due to the greater L2 cache, it will improve the performance quite nicely. Add this with an upgrade of the old geforce 2 mx card, and you will have a quite good tower.
yes, and i think it will be a good upgrade for my home G4 533 next year. The upgrade will be not very expansive, and due to the greater L2 cache, it will improve the performance quite nicely. Add this with an upgrade of the old geforce 2 mx card, and you will have a quite good tower.
Don't forget the rumored speed increase you will get from Panther.
Most everyone is expecting the 7457 to appear in revised Powerbooks. Does anyone think Apple will update the G4 towers with them? I'd love to get a dual 1.5GHz 7457 tower that is MacOS9 & MacOSX bootable with two 5.25" bays and capacity for four 3.5" HD's.
I'd love to get a dual 1.5GHz 7457 tower that is MacOS9 & MacOSX bootable with two 5.25" bays and capacity for four 3.5" HD's.
I believe you can forget that dream right now. Apple seems to be unwilling to do the effort to keep OS 9 booting alive (and effort needs to be done whenever they upgrade the processors, to make sure it works OK in both OS 9 and OS X. OS 9 even requires a custom enabler per machine, that needs to be written).
The G4 towers doesn't have the highest margins right now, and Apple are certainly wanting people to buy the high-margin macs - the G5s. I'm pretty sure they plan to phase out the G4 towers as fast as they can, and no upgrades...
I still maintain that there is no real technical reason Apple can't put the current 970 in Powerbooks right now @ 1.0 and 1.2Ghz. The heat and power consumption characteristics would be somewhat less than optimal, but not unfeasible. Power and heat will gradually decrease in magnitude as the efficiency of the production line ramps up and more of the processes switch to 90 nm. So 970 Powerbooks by next spring, guaranteed
Aside from the lack of a motherboard to put the 970 on. Mobo's aren't trivial- they take time and money to create. By the time Apple has one for laptops, the 970 will be getting a smaller process. A 1GHz G5 would only be faster than a 1 GHz G4 because of its bus and its better FPU's. A die shrunk 1.8 GHz G5 would beat a G4 in every way because it has more MHz.
Aside from the lack of a motherboard to put the 970 on. Mobo's aren't trivial- they take time and money to create. By the time Apple has one for laptops, the 970 will be getting a smaller process. A 1GHz G5 would only be faster than a 1 GHz G4 because of its bus and its better FPU's. A die shrunk 1.8 GHz G5 would beat a G4 in every way because it has more MHz.
To suggest that Apple DOES NOT have a MB for the 970 PB is rather shortsighted. Its a given that it exists, the fact that it may dissipate too much heat and its not ready for mass production, I would accept.
They may indeed simply wait for the process update to give this project the green light, but in the meantime, apple engineers will most certainly be testing 970's in a PB.
I also see some posts from Powerlogix themselves confirming that they have samples of the 7457 @ 1.6G - now that would be a speed bump for the PB that i would actually be happy with. The iMacs too need this scale of update.
To suggest that Apple DOES NOT have a MB for the 970 PB is rather shortsighted. Its a given that it exists, the fact that it may dissipate too much heat and its not ready for mass production, I would accept.
If one looks at the PowerMac G5 architecture, it's really quite simple. Apple would eliminate the Hypertransport PCI/PCI-X bridge chip and accompanying slots, rejigger the system ASIC for AGP 4x, use the existing 128 bit PC2700 system but use 2 SO-DIMM slots, use the PCI bus on the K2 I/O chip for a cardbus bus and slot, use the ATA/100 bus on the K2 I/O drip for optical and disk drives, and everything else stays the same.
Just by eliminating the AGP slot, 3 PCI slots, 2 970 daughtercard sockets with a 970 soldered in, and trading 2 SO-DIMM slots for 8 DIMM slots probably reduces the board 80%, if not more.
Quote:
They may indeed simply wait for the process update to give this project the green light, but in the meantime, apple engineers will most certainly be testing 970's in a PB.
This is becoming a meme. The power consumption and heat dissipation issues for a 90 nm 970 and a 130 nm 970 are the same. The only difference will be clock rate. That is, a 1.1V 1.3 GHz 970 will have the power consumption as a 0.9/1.1V 1.6 GHz 970. The process shrink will only shrink the capacitance of the transistors some 20 to 30% (thereby reducing power consumption).
What the 90 nm 970 may bring is the all important dynamic voltage and frequency cycling. If a 130 nm 970 revision has these things, then a 1.3 GHz 970 can definitely go into a notebook.
Eventually, Apple will have to put in the necessary cooling and battery size to support a 30 to 35 Watt processor for notebooks. They don't have much choice. It looks like they are designing to about 20 Watts right now, maybe even 30 if there are 1.6V 7455s in Powerbooks, and for a future with a 1.3V 7457, they will definitely have to design for 30 Watts. When it is that high already, they mind as well use the 970.
Quote:
I also see some posts from Powerlogix themselves confirming that they have samples of the 7457 @ 1.6G - now that would be a speed bump for the PB that i would actually be happy with. The iMacs too need this scale of update.
Do you, and others, really think that 1.4 to 1.6 GHz 7457 CPUs will be an affordable option for the iMacs? These would be the top of the 7457 CPUs, and if Apple can't get them for less than $200, it isn't going to be worth it.
Well, if they are willing to design to 40 Watts for the processors, they can make dual 1 GHz and dual 1.3 GHz a reality.
Quote:
The G4 towers doesn't have the highest margins right now, and Apple are certainly wanting people to buy the high-margin macs - the G5s. I'm pretty sure they plan to phase out the G4 towers as fast as they can, and no upgrades...
Do you, and others, really think that 1.4 to 1.6 GHz 7457 CPUs will be an affordable option for the iMacs? These would be the top of the 7457 CPUs, and if Apple can't get them for less than $200, it isn't going to be worth it.
You could be right particularly hearing 7457 yields, ouch!. The point im making is from a market perspective on price/performance for these machines (compared to pc's).
Ill leave the cost of volume purchasing of cpus for someone more qualified.
The PB's and the iMacs need this sort of upgrade - what will be the response if apple updates them to G4 1.2G? Apple's sales figures for these units are falling and anything piss poor will only contribute not arrest this situation.
I also agree about your 970 heat comments, although the CPU isnt the only thing that generates heat on the MB. Im resigned to the fact that we will get (hopefully no more than) one more G4 update on the PB till the 0.09um chips arrive. \
To suggest that Apple DOES NOT have a MB for the 970 PB is rather shortsighted. Its a given that it exists, the fact that it may dissipate too much heat and its not ready for mass production, I would accept.
They may indeed simply wait for the process update to give this project the green light, but in the meantime, apple engineers will most certainly be testing 970's in a PB.
I also see some posts from Powerlogix themselves confirming that they have samples of the 7457 @ 1.6G - now that would be a speed bump for the PB that i would actually be happy with. The iMacs too need this scale of update.
It is not a given that it exists. It is a given that it is in development. Being in development, there may be some actual motherboards lying around at Cupertino, even some in experimental Al cases, but it is still in development. There is a world of difference between something in development and something that is ready for the real world. My guess is that Apple is making the mobo that will last them for the next three years for the whole powerbook line (12 inch to 17 inch). Heck, it might even double for an iMac mobo (I seem to recall that the iMac needs a round mobo though). Apple is going to release another incredible mobo, just like the G5 and this takes time. I doubt that they have the motherboard all done and are just waiting for a G5 to put in it- they would release a 1.0 or 1.2 GHz G5 in it without hesitation.
A 1.6 GHz G4 would be great. Too bad it still has a poor bus.
It is not a given that it exists. It is a given that it is in development. Being in development, there may be some actual motherboards lying around at Cupertino, even some in experimental Al cases, but it is still in development. There is a world of difference between something in development and something that is ready for the real world. My guess is that Apple is making the mobo that will last them for the next three years for the whole powerbook line (12 inch to 17 inch). Heck, it might even double for an iMac mobo (I seem to recall that the iMac needs a round mobo though). Apple is going to release another incredible mobo, just like the G5 and this takes time. I doubt that they have the motherboard all done and are just waiting for a G5 to put in it- they would release a 1.0 or 1.2 GHz G5 in it without hesitation.
A 1.6 GHz G4 would be great. Too bad it still has a poor bus.
I have read somewhere, that the G5 recquired 2 years of developpement.
However, Apple has solve many problems during this time : for example they have developped a custom asic for the G5. We can say that most of the work for a Powerbook mobo has be done : but many problems to solve are still present : miniaturisation, heat issues, video section, screen ...
I think that 2004 will be the year of the powerbook G5. the new I mac will come later, because in a marketing point of vue, a powerbook is more high end oriented than the imac line.
I think that 2004 will be the year of the powerbook G5. the new I mac will come later, because in a marketing point of vue, a powerbook is more high end oriented than the imac line.
I agree. I don't see G5 powerbooks until March. I see G5 iMacs about one year from right now. It would be nice if Apple could leverage the PB mobo into an iMac mobo (saves them cost, saves us cost). Probably can't happen.
For the time being, I think that there will be one more rev of the G4 in powerbooks, whenever Moto gets around to shipping the 7457. I'm glad that I am not in the market.
I agree. I don't see G5 powerbooks until March. I see G5 iMacs about one year from right now. It would be nice if Apple could leverage the PB mobo into an iMac mobo (saves them cost, saves us cost). Probably can't happen.
They can't do it literally, because one board has to be rectangular and the other circular, but once they've designed one board the other one would only have to be laid out: From an engineering point of view, an iMac is basically a laptop that happens to always be plugged into a wall, so once you know which CPUs and which support chips go in one model, you know which ones go in the other. The only question would be where they'd go.
Given that, I imagine that development of the iMac and PowerBook boards is going in parallel, perhaps even with the same team of engineers, so that they don't engineer one board and then turn around and find out that laying the parts they chose out on the other board is a bear.
Comments
According to our inhouse testing, here is what we have found:
When comparing power dissipation between 1.4g 7455 and 1.4g 7457 during a CD RIP
in iTunes, the 7455 shows an additional 31.5 watt demand. Extraordinary.
For system idle in OS X, it measures 11.4 watts more.
Quake (comparing 1.2 gig 7455 to 1.2 gig 7457): 28 watts more for the 7455.
So it does appear that they have them in house and are working on upgrade cards for the 7457 processors.
Originally posted by Mr. Bob
Wouldn't it be sensible for MOT to consider contracting the 7457 to Fishkill and save some face and get things back on track for hardware updates?
If they've got the $$$, although I suppose IBM is a bit more interested in getting contracts now than when they were just selling surplus capacity in their own plants. It wouldn't surprise me to hear that they're still the most expensive contract fab in the industry.
Mot, of course, has a definite interest in getting their process tech working on 130nm, because from there it's (supposed to be) relatively straightforward to move it to 90nm.
It's more likely that they'll use their own fab, and contract out to IBM if their chip production falls too far behind orders. That's what they did with the 7400, way back when.
Originally posted by @homenow
Other interesting quotes:
"I keep reading about the power gains from the die shrink. But looking at moto's pdfs, the 7455 @1.0Ghz uses a max of 22W while the 7457 @ 1.0Ghz uses the exact same 22W max. That would be a power savings of exactly nothing. And in fact the typical usage of the 7457 @1.0 Ghz is 15.8W while the 7455 at the same speed is rated 15.0W typical. Am I reading these wrong? If I'm not and these numbers are true, a dual 1.6 ain't gonna happen. I mean in a cube.
Basically, that's incorrect info. I'll post something later to update."
No update yet, but it sounds like he does have som, or has access to some data that is different than the pdf the Moto publically released, possibly real world, and is confidant on the power usage of the 7457's.
Well, one has to be careful what one is reading. 1.42 GHz 7455 CPUs are "special", possibly low-k dielectric, 1.85 Volt G4 CPUs. Running them at 1.85V compared to 1.3V 7455 represents a massive 90% increase in power requirements alone. So any 7457 running at 1.3V and at 1.4 to 1.6 GHz should have much lower power consumption, even with the 7457's additional 25 million transistors.
The additional 25 million transistors in the 7457 (predominantly L2 cache) would increase the power consumption a good percentage, but the reduced capacitance from a smaller process offset it. So a 1.3V 7457 at 1 GHz would have about the same power consumption as a 1.3V 1 GHz 7455.
I do question whether it'll be possible to run a dual 1.6 GHz 7457 CPU daughterboard in a Cube. I think a fan would be necessary.
Originally posted by JCG
From PowerLogix on the 7455 and 7457's
So it does appear that they have them in house and are working on upgrade cards for the 7457 processors.
yes, and i think it will be a good upgrade for my home G4 533 next year. The upgrade will be not very expansive, and due to the greater L2 cache, it will improve the performance quite nicely. Add this with an upgrade of the old geforce 2 mx card, and you will have a quite good tower.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
yes, and i think it will be a good upgrade for my home G4 533 next year. The upgrade will be not very expansive, and due to the greater L2 cache, it will improve the performance quite nicely. Add this with an upgrade of the old geforce 2 mx card, and you will have a quite good tower.
Don't forget the rumored speed increase you will get from Panther.
Originally posted by neutrino23
Don't forget the rumored speed increase you will get from Panther.
Yep
Originally posted by BJNY
I'd love to get a dual 1.5GHz 7457 tower that is MacOS9 & MacOSX bootable with two 5.25" bays and capacity for four 3.5" HD's.
I believe you can forget that dream right now. Apple seems to be unwilling to do the effort to keep OS 9 booting alive (and effort needs to be done whenever they upgrade the processors, to make sure it works OK in both OS 9 and OS X. OS 9 even requires a custom enabler per machine, that needs to be written).
The G4 towers doesn't have the highest margins right now, and Apple are certainly wanting people to buy the high-margin macs - the G5s. I'm pretty sure they plan to phase out the G4 towers as fast as they can, and no upgrades...
Originally posted by hotboxd
I still maintain that there is no real technical reason Apple can't put the current 970 in Powerbooks right now @ 1.0 and 1.2Ghz. The heat and power consumption characteristics would be somewhat less than optimal, but not unfeasible. Power and heat will gradually decrease in magnitude as the efficiency of the production line ramps up and more of the processes switch to 90 nm. So 970 Powerbooks by next spring, guaranteed
Aside from the lack of a motherboard to put the 970 on. Mobo's aren't trivial- they take time and money to create. By the time Apple has one for laptops, the 970 will be getting a smaller process. A 1GHz G5 would only be faster than a 1 GHz G4 because of its bus and its better FPU's. A die shrunk 1.8 GHz G5 would beat a G4 in every way because it has more MHz.
Originally posted by Yevgeny
Aside from the lack of a motherboard to put the 970 on. Mobo's aren't trivial- they take time and money to create. By the time Apple has one for laptops, the 970 will be getting a smaller process. A 1GHz G5 would only be faster than a 1 GHz G4 because of its bus and its better FPU's. A die shrunk 1.8 GHz G5 would beat a G4 in every way because it has more MHz.
To suggest that Apple DOES NOT have a MB for the 970 PB is rather shortsighted. Its a given that it exists, the fact that it may dissipate too much heat and its not ready for mass production, I would accept.
They may indeed simply wait for the process update to give this project the green light, but in the meantime, apple engineers will most certainly be testing 970's in a PB.
I also see some posts from Powerlogix themselves confirming that they have samples of the 7457 @ 1.6G - now that would be a speed bump for the PB that i would actually be happy with. The iMacs too need this scale of update.
Originally posted by hasapi
To suggest that Apple DOES NOT have a MB for the 970 PB is rather shortsighted. Its a given that it exists, the fact that it may dissipate too much heat and its not ready for mass production, I would accept.
If one looks at the PowerMac G5 architecture, it's really quite simple.
Just by eliminating the AGP slot, 3 PCI slots, 2 970 daughtercard sockets with a 970 soldered in, and trading 2 SO-DIMM slots for 8 DIMM slots probably reduces the board 80%, if not more.
They may indeed simply wait for the process update to give this project the green light, but in the meantime, apple engineers will most certainly be testing 970's in a PB.
This is becoming a meme. The power consumption and heat dissipation issues for a 90 nm 970 and a 130 nm 970 are the same. The only difference will be clock rate. That is, a 1.1V 1.3 GHz 970 will have the power consumption as a 0.9/1.1V 1.6 GHz 970. The process shrink will only shrink the capacitance of the transistors some 20 to 30% (thereby reducing power consumption).
What the 90 nm 970 may bring is the all important dynamic voltage and frequency cycling. If a 130 nm 970 revision has these things, then a 1.3 GHz 970 can definitely go into a notebook.
Eventually, Apple will have to put in the necessary cooling and battery size to support a 30 to 35 Watt processor for notebooks. They don't have much choice. It looks like they are designing to about 20 Watts right now, maybe even 30 if there are 1.6V 7455s in Powerbooks, and for a future with a 1.3V 7457, they will definitely have to design for 30 Watts. When it is that high already, they mind as well use the 970.
I also see some posts from Powerlogix themselves confirming that they have samples of the 7457 @ 1.6G - now that would be a speed bump for the PB that i would actually be happy with. The iMacs too need this scale of update.
Do you, and others, really think that 1.4 to 1.6 GHz 7457 CPUs will be an affordable option for the iMacs? These would be the top of the 7457 CPUs, and if Apple can't get them for less than $200, it isn't going to be worth it.
Originally posted by Zapchud
I believe you can forget that dream right now.
Well, if they are willing to design to 40 Watts for the processors, they can make dual 1 GHz and dual 1.3 GHz a reality.
The G4 towers doesn't have the highest margins right now, and Apple are certainly wanting people to buy the high-margin macs - the G5s. I'm pretty sure they plan to phase out the G4 towers as fast as they can, and no upgrades...
Go G5 mini!
Originally posted by THT
Do you, and others, really think that 1.4 to 1.6 GHz 7457 CPUs will be an affordable option for the iMacs? These would be the top of the 7457 CPUs, and if Apple can't get them for less than $200, it isn't going to be worth it.
You could be right particularly hearing 7457 yields, ouch!. The point im making is from a market perspective on price/performance for these machines (compared to pc's).
Ill leave the cost of volume purchasing of cpus for someone more qualified.
The PB's and the iMacs need this sort of upgrade - what will be the response if apple updates them to G4 1.2G? Apple's sales figures for these units are falling and anything piss poor will only contribute not arrest this situation.
I also agree about your 970 heat comments, although the CPU isnt the only thing that generates heat on the MB. Im resigned to the fact that we will get (hopefully no more than) one more G4 update on the PB till the 0.09um chips arrive.
Originally posted by hasapi
To suggest that Apple DOES NOT have a MB for the 970 PB is rather shortsighted. Its a given that it exists, the fact that it may dissipate too much heat and its not ready for mass production, I would accept.
They may indeed simply wait for the process update to give this project the green light, but in the meantime, apple engineers will most certainly be testing 970's in a PB.
I also see some posts from Powerlogix themselves confirming that they have samples of the 7457 @ 1.6G - now that would be a speed bump for the PB that i would actually be happy with. The iMacs too need this scale of update.
It is not a given that it exists. It is a given that it is in development. Being in development, there may be some actual motherboards lying around at Cupertino, even some in experimental Al cases, but it is still in development. There is a world of difference between something in development and something that is ready for the real world. My guess is that Apple is making the mobo that will last them for the next three years for the whole powerbook line (12 inch to 17 inch). Heck, it might even double for an iMac mobo (I seem to recall that the iMac needs a round mobo though). Apple is going to release another incredible mobo, just like the G5 and this takes time. I doubt that they have the motherboard all done and are just waiting for a G5 to put in it- they would release a 1.0 or 1.2 GHz G5 in it without hesitation.
A 1.6 GHz G4 would be great. Too bad it still has a poor bus.
Originally posted by Yevgeny
It is not a given that it exists. It is a given that it is in development. Being in development, there may be some actual motherboards lying around at Cupertino, even some in experimental Al cases, but it is still in development. There is a world of difference between something in development and something that is ready for the real world. My guess is that Apple is making the mobo that will last them for the next three years for the whole powerbook line (12 inch to 17 inch). Heck, it might even double for an iMac mobo (I seem to recall that the iMac needs a round mobo though). Apple is going to release another incredible mobo, just like the G5 and this takes time. I doubt that they have the motherboard all done and are just waiting for a G5 to put in it- they would release a 1.0 or 1.2 GHz G5 in it without hesitation.
A 1.6 GHz G4 would be great. Too bad it still has a poor bus.
I have read somewhere, that the G5 recquired 2 years of developpement.
However, Apple has solve many problems during this time : for example they have developped a custom asic for the G5. We can say that most of the work for a Powerbook mobo has be done : but many problems to solve are still present : miniaturisation, heat issues, video section, screen ...
I think that 2004 will be the year of the powerbook G5. the new I mac will come later, because in a marketing point of vue, a powerbook is more high end oriented than the imac line.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
I think that 2004 will be the year of the powerbook G5. the new I mac will come later, because in a marketing point of vue, a powerbook is more high end oriented than the imac line.
I agree. I don't see G5 powerbooks until March. I see G5 iMacs about one year from right now. It would be nice if Apple could leverage the PB mobo into an iMac mobo (saves them cost, saves us cost). Probably can't happen.
For the time being, I think that there will be one more rev of the G4 in powerbooks, whenever Moto gets around to shipping the 7457. I'm glad that I am not in the market.
Originally posted by Yevgeny
I agree. I don't see G5 powerbooks until March. I see G5 iMacs about one year from right now. It would be nice if Apple could leverage the PB mobo into an iMac mobo (saves them cost, saves us cost). Probably can't happen.
They can't do it literally, because one board has to be rectangular and the other circular, but once they've designed one board the other one would only have to be laid out: From an engineering point of view, an iMac is basically a laptop that happens to always be plugged into a wall, so once you know which CPUs and which support chips go in one model, you know which ones go in the other. The only question would be where they'd go.
Given that, I imagine that development of the iMac and PowerBook boards is going in parallel, perhaps even with the same team of engineers, so that they don't engineer one board and then turn around and find out that laying the parts they chose out on the other board is a bear.
Originally posted by Yevgeny
A 1.6 GHz G4 would be great. Too bad it still has a poor bus.
Whatever happened to MojaveMP?
Gosh, I think I'm starting to repeat myself.
Originally posted by Anonymous Karma
Whatever happened to MojaveMP?
I don't think we'll be seeing that for quite some time yet, maybe late 2004 or early 2005 if I remember right, so it's not currently in the race.