I don't get the hint. What on earth does Xgrid have to do with Powerbook G5 and the supposed 4 CPU thingamabob you spoke about at the beginning of this thread?
I don't get the hint. What on earth does Xgrid have to do with Powerbook G5 and the supposed 4 CPU thingamabob you spoke about at the beginning of this thread?
Exactly what I was thinking. What are you saying? Please explain.
Cell will be fast on its own, exponentially faster on a network with other cell processor based computers (be they workstations, servers, game consoles or laptops thus the hint).
I'm guessing that Nr9's proposed 4 by 440 Powerbook G5 wouldn't use xgrid itself but some more specialized, stripped down version, thus the "hint, hint" comment.
Nr9 - any time frames mentioned by your source, other than 2004?
Not to throw more fuel on the fire but IBM is set to announce a new 440 SOC processor on 1/21/2004. Initial indications are that the processor is desinged as a support CPU for servers. Interestingly it is to incorporate a cross bar switch. No mention of any other capabilities have been made but I would imagine that is what the net seminar is for on the 21st.
While I'm still not convinced that Apple will take this direction I'm not at all convinced either that the 970 will ever make it into a laptop this year. So I have to believe that Apple has alternatives to the 970, most likely a conventional CPU but a multiprocessor 440 based machine is still not out of the running. Apple likes to innovate, but I'm not convinced that they will want to diverge that far from the norm, that is a multiprocessor 440 based machine.
What would really be neat is to see a Linux vendor deliver such a machine. Linux is where much of the softwar einnovation comes from these days, it would be nice to see a little hardware innovation coming from there also.
Whatever the case it does look like 2004 is shaping up to be THE hardware year for Apple.
While I'm still not convinced that Apple will take this direction I'm not at all convinced either that the 970 will ever make it into a laptop this year.
I agree. We have to wait though just to see what's exactly this alleged PowerTune technology.
I don't get the hint. What on earth does Xgrid have to do with Powerbook G5 and the supposed 4 CPU thingamabob you spoke about at the beginning of this thread?
apple has optimized all its core pro applications to run on 64bit. even the new version of Logic Audio is due out soon, optimized for G5, 64bit.apple has a strong market and loyalty in the pro audio area. lotsa peopel here use powerbooks. it would be foolish not to offer 64bit processing here. also the very fact that the iBooks are now G4 mean that there is going to be a significant change of PowerBook chips. maybe not the 970, but who knows whats brewing in the apple labs? i for myself desperately need to replace my aging pismo and am waiting for the next major PowerBook upgrade. cant get a desktop as i am travelling a lot.
Whoa, people cool down. This guy (Nr9) is having you on.
The Cell concept calls for linking thousands to millions of SOCs via broadband connections (optical fiber down to cable modem speeds) to distribute unused processing power wherever it is needed in a network.
The Cell CPU will have a different instruction set than current CPUs as well, so current Applications will not run on it.
XGrid is somewhat similar in that it is designed for massive amounts of CPUs forming the computing grid (wide area).
Nothing in those two concepts can be easily adapted to a 4-core multi chip module. And a laptop is the most unlikely machine to introduce network based next gen technology, both because of energy consumption and the simple fact that notebooks spend a lot of time off a network.
1. how would Apple market such a system with 4 400Mhz chips ?...is that 1.6Ghz G5 ?
There are presently PowerPC 440 cores up to 700 MHz, and there will be up to 1 GHz soon. Since we are talking about two dual core chips here (to a total of 4 cores) I guess that Apple would market them as lets say 2x 1.4 GHz if they'd choose a 700 MHz core.
Even if it was more like 4x 700 MHz in reality, that'd be something that might confuse the market. The concept is heard enough for us to comprehend so..
Quote:
Originally posted by Hawkeye_a
2. from the software standpoint...wouldnt everything need to be recompiled ? and wouldnt that be one hell of a hastle.
There will be a hell of a hassle for someone. If they do it, it'd either be a hassle for IBM since they are making the chips. If they are clever they can mask the dual core chips so that they in reality acts like one for all intents and purposes.
The cue of instructions and data going into the 4 core CPU would have to handled by some pretty magnificent operating unit.
Or.. The hassle would be Apple's since they are making the operating system and developmet tools. The operating system could make some nifty cue issuing so that the 4 core CPU would get a balanced workload. Perhaps doing some forced threading so all four cores have something to do at all times.
Or.. it would be the developers that have to make their apps even more threaded. That is aldready happening though.
This is way above my head. I'd like Nr9 to explain how the hell this is supposed to be done. I don't think we have that thing sorted out after quite a long thread. Xgrid in its present condition is far far from an aswer to this problem, so I have really no idea of what he was hinting about earlier.
We've hashed this over. It's not going to happen. Cell is not a handful of 440-family cores, or even derivatives. It's something radically different. Any API or software layer to distribute processing over a Cell architecture would have to be so much more fine-grained than Xgrid as to be a completely different implementation. Xgrid assumes small numbers of big CPUs; Cell assumes big numbers of tiny cells (not CPUs in any traditional sense).
To the extent that Cell requires a dedicated programming model (which extent is not known publically) it will be difficult for Apple to change over to that model, just because of 20 years of legacy that assumes a particular sort of Von Neumann architecture, and because the entirety of their system is written in languages that predate any notion of threaded or distributed execution.
Well, as Smircle pointed it out, no chance to see a cell powerbook in the near future.
There is only two choices for the next generation of powerbook :
- the G5
- the G4 design from IBM
Even on 90 nm the G5 still produce a lot of heat (but not more than a mobile athlon), and may have heat issues in the present slim alu case, or battery issues.
I think that IBM has to produce a mobile G5 with a low voltage, and why not SSOI
Otherwise, there is still the future G4 design, but frankly i see more this chip in the ibook than in any others products.
Comments
Originally posted by Nr9
xgrid.. hint hint
I don't get the hint. What on earth does Xgrid have to do with Powerbook G5 and the supposed 4 CPU thingamabob you spoke about at the beginning of this thread?
Originally posted by Henriok
I don't get the hint. What on earth does Xgrid have to do with Powerbook G5 and the supposed 4 CPU thingamabob you spoke about at the beginning of this thread?
Exactly what I was thinking.
Cell will be fast on its own, exponentially faster on a network with other cell processor based computers (be they workstations, servers, game consoles or laptops thus the hint).
Screed
Nr9 - any time frames mentioned by your source, other than 2004?
Not to throw more fuel on the fire but IBM is set to announce a new 440 SOC processor on 1/21/2004. Initial indications are that the processor is desinged as a support CPU for servers. Interestingly it is to incorporate a cross bar switch. No mention of any other capabilities have been made but I would imagine that is what the net seminar is for on the 21st.
While I'm still not convinced that Apple will take this direction I'm not at all convinced either that the 970 will ever make it into a laptop this year. So I have to believe that Apple has alternatives to the 970, most likely a conventional CPU but a multiprocessor 440 based machine is still not out of the running. Apple likes to innovate, but I'm not convinced that they will want to diverge that far from the norm, that is a multiprocessor 440 based machine.
What would really be neat is to see a Linux vendor deliver such a machine. Linux is where much of the softwar einnovation comes from these days, it would be nice to see a little hardware innovation coming from there also.
Whatever the case it does look like 2004 is shaping up to be THE hardware year for Apple.
Dave
Originally posted by wizard69
While I'm still not convinced that Apple will take this direction I'm not at all convinced either that the 970 will ever make it into a laptop this year.
I agree. We have to wait though just to see what's exactly this alleged PowerTune technology.
Originally posted by Henriok
I don't get the hint. What on earth does Xgrid have to do with Powerbook G5 and the supposed 4 CPU thingamabob you spoke about at the beginning of this thread?
because the 440 doesn't support SMP
Originally posted by Nr9
because the 440 doesn't support SMP
I thought it was already established that each core would run a microkernel (32K?) and use message passing. No need for SMP or hyperthreading.
apple has optimized all its core pro applications to run on 64bit. even the new version of Logic Audio is due out soon, optimized for G5, 64bit.apple has a strong market and loyalty in the pro audio area. lotsa peopel here use powerbooks. it would be foolish not to offer 64bit processing here. also the very fact that the iBooks are now G4 mean that there is going to be a significant change of PowerBook chips. maybe not the 970, but who knows whats brewing in the apple labs? i for myself desperately need to replace my aging pismo and am waiting for the next major PowerBook upgrade. cant get a desktop as i am travelling a lot.
The Cell concept calls for linking thousands to millions of SOCs via broadband connections (optical fiber down to cable modem speeds) to distribute unused processing power wherever it is needed in a network.
The Cell CPU will have a different instruction set than current CPUs as well, so current Applications will not run on it.
XGrid is somewhat similar in that it is designed for massive amounts of CPUs forming the computing grid (wide area).
Nothing in those two concepts can be easily adapted to a 4-core multi chip module. And a laptop is the most unlikely machine to introduce network based next gen technology, both because of energy consumption and the simple fact that notebooks spend a lot of time off a network.
1. how would Apple market such a system with 4 400Mhz chips ?...is that 1.6Ghz G5 ?
2. from the software standpoint...wouldnt everything need to be recompiled ? and wouldnt that be one hell of a hastle.
(if answered already, just let me know)
Cheers
Originally posted by Hawkeye_a
1. how would Apple market such a system with 4 400Mhz chips ?...is that 1.6Ghz G5 ?
There are presently PowerPC 440 cores up to 700 MHz, and there will be up to 1 GHz soon. Since we are talking about two dual core chips here (to a total of 4 cores) I guess that Apple would market them as lets say 2x 1.4 GHz if they'd choose a 700 MHz core.
Even if it was more like 4x 700 MHz in reality, that'd be something that might confuse the market. The concept is heard enough for us to comprehend so..
Originally posted by Hawkeye_a
2. from the software standpoint...wouldnt everything need to be recompiled ? and wouldnt that be one hell of a hastle.
There will be a hell of a hassle for someone. If they do it, it'd either be a hassle for IBM since they are making the chips. If they are clever they can mask the dual core chips so that they in reality acts like one for all intents and purposes.
The cue of instructions and data going into the 4 core CPU would have to handled by some pretty magnificent operating unit.
Or.. The hassle would be Apple's since they are making the operating system and developmet tools. The operating system could make some nifty cue issuing so that the 4 core CPU would get a balanced workload. Perhaps doing some forced threading so all four cores have something to do at all times.
Or.. it would be the developers that have to make their apps even more threaded. That is aldready happening though.
This is way above my head. I'd like Nr9 to explain how the hell this is supposed to be done. I don't think we have that thing sorted out after quite a long thread. Xgrid in its present condition is far far from an aswer to this problem, so I have really no idea of what he was hinting about earlier.
We've hashed this over. It's not going to happen. Cell is not a handful of 440-family cores, or even derivatives. It's something radically different. Any API or software layer to distribute processing over a Cell architecture would have to be so much more fine-grained than Xgrid as to be a completely different implementation. Xgrid assumes small numbers of big CPUs; Cell assumes big numbers of tiny cells (not CPUs in any traditional sense).
To the extent that Cell requires a dedicated programming model (which extent is not known publically) it will be difficult for Apple to change over to that model, just because of 20 years of legacy that assumes a particular sort of Von Neumann architecture, and because the entirety of their system is written in languages that predate any notion of threaded or distributed execution.
There is only two choices for the next generation of powerbook :
- the G5
- the G4 design from IBM
Even on 90 nm the G5 still produce a lot of heat (but not more than a mobile athlon), and may have heat issues in the present slim alu case, or battery issues.
I think that IBM has to produce a mobile G5 with a low voltage, and why not SSOI
Otherwise, there is still the future G4 design, but frankly i see more this chip in the ibook than in any others products.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
...and why not SSOI
Care to explain what difference this would make?
Thanks.
Originally posted by PB
Care to explain what difference this would make?
Thanks.
Strained Silicon on insulator. It's an improvement of SOI, the goal is to reduce electricity leakage, thus save watt, and produce less heat.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
...
There is only two choices for the next generation of powerbook :
- the G5
- the G4 design from IBM
...
That's what I see too. Though I would prefer to see a G5PB instead of a PowerBook G4 Extreme.
What do you think? How fast could IBM make their G4 at 90 nm or next year then at 65 nm?