Now, this info would explain the rumor that the 750VX is going to power the iBooks, without mention to the Powerbook line. Of course... there is already a high end chip for the Powerbooks.
Yup, notice they list the speed at 2.0Ghz+? IBM doesnt want to steal Apple's thunder here. I wonder if this came as a shock to Apple or if IBM spent all their updating time getting the power numbers down. Compare this to an intel mobile chip. Anyone have numbers
If I recall correctly, IBM will introduce the 65-nm-970s sometime in February? Does anybody know the excat date?
I guess that Apple will release new G5-hardware (PowerMacs in particular) before or around that date as they did with the original G5 introduction where IBM had a press conference shortly after the keynote.
According the Xbit Labs story, the 1.8GHz Dothan consumes up to 31W, rather more than Banias' 24.5W, despite being fabbed at 90nm rather than 130nm.
So it looks like the 970FX beats the Intel mobile processor for power consumption.
And I think that the 867 G4 powering my 12" is rated at about 18W. These new 970s seem to be easily within power consumption limits for laptops (at around the sweet spot for the next upgrade 1.4-2.0 GHz).
Intel have some serous problems with their 90 nm procsess. It doesn't save power at all, and the processors runs even hotter than its predecessor. Dothan and Prescott shows this clearly.
An no.. IBM willl NOT introduce its 65 nm fab this february. I would guess that second half of 2005 is more accurate.
If I remember reading correctly somewhere that IBM is in parallel development for Apple on the G6. Could this happen in time for the start of the Fall semester?
Intel have some serous problems with their 90 nm procsess. It doesn't save power at all, and the processors runs even hotter than its predecessor. Dothan and Prescott shows this clearly.
An no.. IBM willl NOT introduce its 65 nm fab this february. I would guess that second half of 2005 is more accurate.
Maybe they'll contract IBM to produce their 0.09µm chips, just like, well, it seems like everyone else is?
The junction temp limits of the 970FX are 20 degrees higher than the current 970. This is a good amount. This is the chip temperature, the heatsink/case will be considerably lower.
This means that the chip runs at higher temperatures reliably, creating a relaxation of thermal management in applications like laptops. May make them uncomfortable though...
The only variable in all of this PowerBook G5 discussion is the power consumption and heat output of the system controller. However, since Apple is working hand in hand with IBM on the G5, perpaps Apple has worked with IBM on doing the die shrink on the system controller too. What other issues might there be?
Comments
This either means the 970FX currently tops out at 2.2Ghz or they are going to more flexible multipliers.
Originally posted by Smircle
This either means the 970FX currently tops out at 2.2Ghz or they are going to more flexible multipliers.
Or there are things they don't say yet.
I guess that Apple will release new G5-hardware (PowerMacs in particular) before or around that date as they did with the original G5 introduction where IBM had a press conference shortly after the keynote.
Originally posted by RolandG
If I recall correctly, IBM will introduce the 65-nm-970s sometime in February? Does anybody know the excat date?
February 2005?
According the Xbit Labs story, the 1.8GHz Dothan consumes up to 31W, rather more than Banias' 24.5W, despite being fabbed at 90nm rather than 130nm.
So it looks like the 970FX beats the Intel mobile processor for power consumption.
And I think that the 867 G4 powering my 12" is rated at about 18W. These new 970s seem to be easily within power consumption limits for laptops (at around the sweet spot for the next upgrade 1.4-2.0 GHz).
An no.. IBM willl NOT introduce its 65 nm fab this february. I would guess that second half of 2005 is more accurate.
Edited to add a "?" mark where it belongs.
Originally posted by Henriok
Intel have some serous problems with their 90 nm procsess. It doesn't save power at all, and the processors runs even hotter than its predecessor. Dothan and Prescott shows this clearly.
An no.. IBM willl NOT introduce its 65 nm fab this february. I would guess that second half of 2005 is more accurate.
Maybe they'll contract IBM to produce their 0.09µm chips, just like, well, it seems like everyone else is?
The junction temp limits of the 970FX are 20 degrees higher than the current 970. This is a good amount. This is the chip temperature, the heatsink/case will be considerably lower.
This means that the chip runs at higher temperatures reliably, creating a relaxation of thermal management in applications like laptops. May make them uncomfortable though...
I'm not sure what the G4 operating range was...
lb
Originally posted by Curufinwe
5800 Dhrys may be a typo because 8500 sounds about right at ~ 2.0 Ghz.
5800 Dhrys is correct, it's the other figure that's incorrect. Just dig up the ancient PDF from 2002, the 1.8 has 5220 Dhrys.
Originally posted by Zapchud
5800 Dhrys is correct, it's the other figure that's incorrect. Just dig up the ancient PDF from 2002, the 1.8 has 5220 Dhrys.
Glad someone did their homework. . . either way, a typo
Originally posted by Laughingboy
The junction temp limits of the 970FX are 20 degrees higher than the current 970. This is a good amount.
I'm not sure what the G4 operating range was...
0°C up to 105°C.