Well, Thinksecret is reporting that there will be no new PM's this month.
If this turns out to be true, then I see two possibilities:
(1) Apple introduces new Power Macs next month or so at frequencies around 2.5 GHz top, and the promised by S. Jobs 3 GHz Power Mac does not see the light of the day before November;
(2) Apple waits until WWDC to introduce at once the 3 GHz Power Mac, as Croquer (I know, MOSR clone ) predicted.
......the power consumption and heat issues limits their true usefulness. If you want to compare the PowerBooks to something look at the latest Centrino machines.
Though, of course, the difference in Operating Systems is still the biggest barrier of all, whatever the proc specs.
It looks like there will be more information later today. From the ISSCC2004 program, IBM will be talking about the POWER5 at 1:30 and the 970fx at 4:45 PST. Hopefully they will release a copy of the presentations soon after that.
It looks like there will be more information later today.
Indeed. Of particular interest, although slightly off topic:
Quote:
IBM reveals chip process trinity
PowerPC 970FX chip can be used in PCs, laptops and networking equipment
Customers will be able to use the chip in everything from PCs to notebooks to networking equipment, said Norman Rohrer, senior technical staff member at IBM.
Another point. What might be the ace in the pack is not only the 970 fx but the IBM compilers recently launched!
Could we be seeing 30-40% improvements as Apple recompile 'X' for 10.4? Adobe recompiling Photoshop? Newtek recompiling Lightwave?
It's this that maybe intrigues me the most... I'd love to see IBM finally rundown those Intel compilers that fix the benchmarks in Intel's favour. Apple can say, 'Okay, we used the best Intel compilers...so we used the best IBM compilers for our chip...and guess what...'
Apple had a news item on their site about it a while back...but it's gone surprisingly quiet on that front...
Lemon Bon Bon
OMG awesome post LBB. Thats a very interesting point. Those compilers were built for the 97x procs... not for every proc like most compilers. I don't see how much more optimized assembly code could get, but some how I'd definitely believe IBM's compiler would toast gcc or any other compiler out there. If these apps get much faster... we might be saying good bye to x86 procs... (wishful thinking I know).
My point is that M$ is already moving over to ppc for consoles (hell must have froze over). Everyone is going to flame me for saying this but, Windows on ppc? Heh... I'm not saying thats the way it should be (we all know that OS X is the best in so many ways) but what a weird world it would be.
So if those apps are optimized for the g5 and the g5 becomes the standard in all new macs... (at a cheaper price)... apple might be able to finally ditch the "mhz myth" and simply show #'s finally... exactly what investors have been waiting, and lower prices.
Everyone is going to flame me for saying this but, Windows on ppc?
Anyone who flames you for that does so in ignorance of the fact that that very thing was one of the explicit goals of the original alliance.
If PPC has a clear advantage over Intel's offerings then Windows on PPC would mean lots and lots of PPCs sold, which means massive economies of scale, which means more money for development and less cost per part.
If the PPC keeps its power dissipation advantage as well, that means that PC hardware has a chance to improve, too, since their designers will no longer have to accomodate 100W behemoth CPUs.
And, since IBM has set things up so that they can do custom PPC designs quickly and inexpensively, Apple still wins even though they become a minority customer. That wouldn't be the case with the monolithic G4 or Intel/AMD offerings.
Broad PC hardware support for PowerPC also means much better support for Linux/PPC, and Windows on PPC means that WINE for OS X could work without the aid of an emulator, at least for those applications that have been recompiled for PPC.
And, since IBM has set things up so that they can do custom PPC designs quickly and inexpensively, Apple still wins even though they become a minority customer. That wouldn't be the case with the monolithic G4 or Intel/AMD offerings.
You're absolutely right, I actually overlooked the big picture at first. If IBM starts pumping these chips out for more then just apple then maybe... just maybe... apple could lower the cost of their machines (or add even more for the same price to really dominate) and finally make their market share grow. The only way apple will ever grow is to lower prices and keep performance up.
Everyone starts migrating over to PPC, it could mean good times for developers such as myself. $$$$$$$$$
You're absolutely right, I actually overlooked the big picture at first. If IBM starts pumping these chips out for more then just apple then maybe... just maybe... apple could lower the cost of their machines (or add even more for the same price to really dominate) and finally make their market share grow. The only way apple will ever grow is to lower prices and keep performance up.
Everyone starts migrating over to PPC, it could mean good times for developers such as myself. $$$$$$$$$
That depends if IBM's fab can keep up with demand, if not then the chips could actually go up in price and put pressure on Apple to increase the price of their computers.
That depends if IBM's fab can keep up with demand, if not then the chips could actually go up in price and put pressure on Apple to increase the price of their computers.
The fabrication plant isn't running near the full capacity it can do. Also with the 90nm chips more of them can be produced at a quicker rate. If IBM was pumping chips out of that plant at full capacity they'd have more then enough to build a new plant or upgrade the existing plant.
The chips won't go up in price from what they started out at. Apple was the ONLY consumer for the first few months. That has already changed.
If PPC has a clear advantage over Intel's offerings then Windows on PPC would mean lots and lots of PPCs sold, which means massive economies of scale, which means more money for development and less cost per part.
Sorry for being the party pooper, but where would you see a clear advantage (to the avg. customer) of the PPC chip in comparison to the x86?
64 Bit? Certainly not. AMD is right on track and intel will follow suit.
Heat dissipation? nice, but not a killer criterion. Besides, this can change in a years time if intel is able to optimize their processes to either make the P4 more energy efficient or the Pentium M faster.
More elegant architecture? Who cares except for very special cases like maybe XBox 2?
Apart from that, a modern Mac is more or less a PC with a different CPU. Back in the day when intel tried to persuade people the pentium made the web more powerful, we all laughed our asses off - but then we should not today believe that a better CPU is all it takes to convince MS to port Windows over.
Who would gain from a ported Windows?
- Mac users who would gain more choice by being able to boot their machine into windows.
- IBM by selling more chips
Who would not gain?
- MS would extend their reach onto another platform, but on the other hand, they had to support two different Windows versions.
- Independant software developers since they had to maintain two versions of their products too.
Windows on PPC was tried once and it faltered. MS is not going to go down this road again unless some company is able to slash computer prices to the point where they simply outsell x86-based products. I fail to see where the $100 PPC-PC is going to come from...
as for the original reason for this post. take a look at thinksecret.. looks like no revisions for PPCs in Feb. they are usually right on about everything. so...
Well, either Apple/IBM have some technical problems with yields/reliability/heat/whatever or Apple is simply stockpiling PPC970fx for a really big announcement like 'dual 3GHz PowerMacs shipping tomorrow'.
The latter is not to be taken literally, I mean a great product which Jobs is very confident about.
as for the original reason for this post. take a look at thinksecret.. looks like no revisions for PPCs in Feb. they are usually right on about everything. so...
In the last year I've accepted that no rumor site is always right. Apple is probably one of the hardest companies to get info on upcoming products from. Everyone just makes guesses 9 times out of 10. I'm not saying they are coming out in Feb... but don't take a rumor sites word for it... ever
64 Bit? Certainly not. AMD is right on track and intel will follow suit.
Heat dissipation? nice, but not a killer criterion. Besides, this can change in a years time if intel is able to optimize their processes to either make the P4 more energy efficient or the Pentium M faster.
Just because IBM announces new chips doesn't mean we'll see them in Apple computers right away!
Let's see, when did IBM announce the 970? January 2003, wasn't it? (I have a photo from Feb. 2003)
And when did the PowerMacs arrive at Apple Stores for people like us to buy them? August 2003?
As for the "3GHz in Summer '03", my recollection is that SJ said "we expect to be at 3GHz this time next year"... That doesn't mean machines in end-user's hands. Give that 3GHz-in-2004 idea up.
You're right, but most PC-fanatics don't bother with anything else but Intel and AMD. So when they hear about new Power Macs with 2.5GHz at 50W they'll just think: "AMD announced their 30W CPU a month ago". My first link writes nothing about 30W at 1.4GHz, and that is how http://www.hw.no/art.php?artikkelid=5662 presents the news (a norwegian webpage, very AMD-friendly and Mac-skeptic). So this is how some thousand norwegian PC-users get their news...
"The AMD Opteron processor models 846 HE and 840 EE are priced at $1,514 in 1,000-unit quantities. The AMD Opteron processor models 246 HE and 240 EE are priced at $851 in 1,000-unit quantities. The AMD Opteron processor models 146 HE and 140 EE are priced at $733 in 1,000-unit quantities. AMD is immediately taking orders for the processors, which are expected to ship worldwide within 30 days."
Comments
No surprise as iPod is king right now.
I see the posibility of March 2 being a reasonable date.
Not before though.
Hey, it keeps my prediction good of no new hardware (CPU's) this month.
Originally posted by msantti
Well, Thinksecret is reporting that there will be no new PM's this month.
If this turns out to be true, then I see two possibilities:
(1) Apple introduces new Power Macs next month or so at frequencies around 2.5 GHz top, and the promised by S. Jobs 3 GHz Power Mac does not see the light of the day before November;
(2) Apple waits until WWDC to introduce at once the 3 GHz Power Mac, as Croquer (I know, MOSR clone
Originally posted by Programmer
......the power consumption and heat issues limits their true usefulness. If you want to compare the PowerBooks to something look at the latest Centrino machines.
Though, of course, the difference in Operating Systems is still the biggest barrier of all, whatever the proc specs.
ISSCC info
Originally posted by Kurt
It looks like there will be more information later today.
Indeed. Of particular interest, although slightly off topic:
IBM reveals chip process trinity
PowerPC 970FX chip can be used in PCs, laptops and networking equipment
Customers will be able to use the chip in everything from PCs to notebooks to networking equipment, said Norman Rohrer, senior technical staff member at IBM.
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Another point. What might be the ace in the pack is not only the 970 fx but the IBM compilers recently launched!
Could we be seeing 30-40% improvements as Apple recompile 'X' for 10.4? Adobe recompiling Photoshop? Newtek recompiling Lightwave?
It's this that maybe intrigues me the most... I'd love to see IBM finally rundown those Intel compilers that fix the benchmarks in Intel's favour. Apple can say, 'Okay, we used the best Intel compilers...so we used the best IBM compilers for our chip...and guess what...'
Apple had a news item on their site about it a while back...but it's gone surprisingly quiet on that front...
Lemon Bon Bon
OMG awesome post LBB. Thats a very interesting point. Those compilers were built for the 97x procs... not for every proc like most compilers. I don't see how much more optimized assembly code could get, but some how I'd definitely believe IBM's compiler would toast gcc or any other compiler out there. If these apps get much faster... we might be saying good bye to x86 procs... (wishful thinking I know).
My point is that M$ is already moving over to ppc for consoles (hell must have froze over). Everyone is going to flame me for saying this but, Windows on ppc? Heh... I'm not saying thats the way it should be (we all know that OS X is the best in so many ways) but what a weird world it would be.
So if those apps are optimized for the g5 and the g5 becomes the standard in all new macs... (at a cheaper price)... apple might be able to finally ditch the "mhz myth" and simply show #'s finally... exactly what investors have been waiting, and lower prices.
Originally posted by emig647
Everyone is going to flame me for saying this but, Windows on ppc?
Anyone who flames you for that does so in ignorance of the fact that that very thing was one of the explicit goals of the original alliance.
If PPC has a clear advantage over Intel's offerings then Windows on PPC would mean lots and lots of PPCs sold, which means massive economies of scale, which means more money for development and less cost per part.
If the PPC keeps its power dissipation advantage as well, that means that PC hardware has a chance to improve, too, since their designers will no longer have to accomodate 100W behemoth CPUs.
And, since IBM has set things up so that they can do custom PPC designs quickly and inexpensively, Apple still wins even though they become a minority customer. That wouldn't be the case with the monolithic G4 or Intel/AMD offerings.
Broad PC hardware support for PowerPC also means much better support for Linux/PPC, and Windows on PPC means that WINE for OS X could work without the aid of an emulator, at least for those applications that have been recompiled for PPC.
It's a win all around, really, if it happens.
Originally posted by Amorph
And, since IBM has set things up so that they can do custom PPC designs quickly and inexpensively, Apple still wins even though they become a minority customer. That wouldn't be the case with the monolithic G4 or Intel/AMD offerings.
You're absolutely right, I actually overlooked the big picture at first. If IBM starts pumping these chips out for more then just apple then maybe... just maybe... apple could lower the cost of their machines (or add even more for the same price to really dominate) and finally make their market share grow. The only way apple will ever grow is to lower prices and keep performance up.
Everyone starts migrating over to PPC, it could mean good times for developers such as myself. $$$$$$$$$
Originally posted by emig647
You're absolutely right, I actually overlooked the big picture at first. If IBM starts pumping these chips out for more then just apple then maybe... just maybe... apple could lower the cost of their machines (or add even more for the same price to really dominate) and finally make their market share grow. The only way apple will ever grow is to lower prices and keep performance up.
Everyone starts migrating over to PPC, it could mean good times for developers such as myself. $$$$$$$$$
That depends if IBM's fab can keep up with demand, if not then the chips could actually go up in price and put pressure on Apple to increase the price of their computers.
Originally posted by @homenow
That depends if IBM's fab can keep up with demand, if not then the chips could actually go up in price and put pressure on Apple to increase the price of their computers.
The fabrication plant isn't running near the full capacity it can do. Also with the 90nm chips more of them can be produced at a quicker rate. If IBM was pumping chips out of that plant at full capacity they'd have more then enough to build a new plant or upgrade the existing plant.
The chips won't go up in price from what they started out at. Apple was the ONLY consumer for the first few months. That has already changed.
Originally posted by Amorph
If PPC has a clear advantage over Intel's offerings then Windows on PPC would mean lots and lots of PPCs sold, which means massive economies of scale, which means more money for development and less cost per part.
Sorry for being the party pooper, but where would you see a clear advantage (to the avg. customer) of the PPC chip in comparison to the x86?
64 Bit? Certainly not. AMD is right on track and intel will follow suit.
Heat dissipation? nice, but not a killer criterion. Besides, this can change in a years time if intel is able to optimize their processes to either make the P4 more energy efficient or the Pentium M faster.
More elegant architecture? Who cares except for very special cases like maybe XBox 2?
Apart from that, a modern Mac is more or less a PC with a different CPU. Back in the day when intel tried to persuade people the pentium made the web more powerful, we all laughed our asses off - but then we should not today believe that a better CPU is all it takes to convince MS to port Windows over.
Who would gain from a ported Windows?
- Mac users who would gain more choice by being able to boot their machine into windows.
- IBM by selling more chips
Who would not gain?
- MS would extend their reach onto another platform, but on the other hand, they had to support two different Windows versions.
- Independant software developers since they had to maintain two versions of their products too.
Windows on PPC was tried once and it faltered. MS is not going to go down this road again unless some company is able to slash computer prices to the point where they simply outsell x86-based products. I fail to see where the $100 PPC-PC is going to come from...
The latter is not to be taken literally, I mean a great product which Jobs is very confident about.
Originally posted by kid k
as for the original reason for this post. take a look at thinksecret.. looks like no revisions for PPCs in Feb. they are usually right on about everything. so...
In the last year I've accepted that no rumor site is always right. Apple is probably one of the hardest companies to get info on upcoming products from. Everyone just makes guesses 9 times out of 10. I'm not saying they are coming out in Feb... but don't take a rumor sites word for it... ever
64 Bit? Certainly not. AMD is right on track and intel will follow suit.
Heat dissipation? nice, but not a killer criterion. Besides, this can change in a years time if intel is able to optimize their processes to either make the P4 more energy efficient or the Pentium M faster.
Yup... AMDs new Opteron HE and EE: http://www.amdmb.com/#News-7617
30 W Opteron EE...
And AMD has cut prices on almost every CPU-series. A 53% price-cut on Opteron 848.
It will be interesting to hear what IBM has to say tomorrow (18th) about the PowerTune tech.
Let's see, when did IBM announce the 970? January 2003, wasn't it? (I have a photo from Feb. 2003)
And when did the PowerMacs arrive at Apple Stores for people like us to buy them? August 2003?
As for the "3GHz in Summer '03", my recollection is that SJ said "we expect to be at 3GHz this time next year"... That doesn't mean machines in end-user's hands. Give that 3GHz-in-2004 idea up.
Originally posted by sls
Yup... AMDs new Opteron HE and EE: http://www.amdmb.com/#News-7617
30 W Opteron EE...
And AMD has cut prices on almost every CPU-series. A 53% price-cut on Opteron 848.
It will be interesting to hear what IBM has to say tomorrow (18th) about the PowerTune tech.
Even a better link for specs on these CPU's, with what I read, IBM is already ahead of them.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...PEE02#lowpower
Originally posted by oldmacfan
Even a better link for specs on these CPU's, with what I read, IBM is already ahead of them.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...PEE02#lowpower
You're right, but most PC-fanatics don't bother with anything else but Intel and AMD. So when they hear about new Power Macs with 2.5GHz at 50W they'll just think: "AMD announced their 30W CPU a month ago". My first link writes nothing about 30W at 1.4GHz, and that is how http://www.hw.no/art.php?artikkelid=5662 presents the news (a norwegian webpage, very AMD-friendly and Mac-skeptic). So this is how some thousand norwegian PC-users get their news...
(sorry... very off-topic..)
One thing caught my eye though.
from the AMD Launches New Opteron HE and Opteron EE CPUs - Ryan Shrout article
"The AMD Opteron processor models 846 HE and 840 EE are priced at $1,514 in 1,000-unit quantities. The AMD Opteron processor models 246 HE and 240 EE are priced at $851 in 1,000-unit quantities. The AMD Opteron processor models 146 HE and 140 EE are priced at $733 in 1,000-unit quantities. AMD is immediately taking orders for the processors, which are expected to ship worldwide within 30 days."
These aren't inexpensive cpu's