Whatever was said about motorola in the past no longer applies.
STMicro and Philips are two very serious partners, and crolles is supposed to be a first rate facility. The technology has never been a problem at Moto, the corporation was.
I think that's changed.
Just think of it this way. Despite the belly aching, the G4 is right there in terms of mobile technology.
Centrino? 1.3-1.7 Ghz with more cache and bigger FSB throughput.
G4 1.33-1.5Ghz with a slower bus but better SIMD technology and some really good L3 tech in their pocket, if they choose to use it.
I'll bet you that the real world difference between the two is negligible for the target audience, "mobile creatives"
Wanna put Premiere/avid on Centrino up against FCP/avid on the PB ?
I think Apple might surprise a lot of people.
As much as some of you can't admitt it, Apple absolutely needs two independent sources of CPU. IBM might be in this game for good this time, but they're still in it for IBM, as is moto. You need options when things go askew, a second viable source creates options.
As much as some of you can't admitt it, Apple absolutely needs two independent sources of CPU. IBM might be in this game for good this time, but they're still in it for IBM, as is moto. You need options when things go askew, a second viable source creates options.
Well said Matsu. Many people here are mad at Motorola (not without reason of course) and often forget that.
Whatever was said about motorola in the past no longer applies.
STMicro and Philips are two very serious partners, and crolles is supposed to be a first rate facility. The technology has never been a problem at Moto, the corporation was.
I think that's changed.
One could at least hope so. Even if Freescale seems to me a sane move for Motorolas IC-division they have yet to deliver anything exciting and 7447A isn't really that exciting imho. Freescale is dedicated to doing embedded stuff, IBM are going for the high end computing segment. They are even selling off some of their embedded assetts.
Whatever was said about motorola in the past no longer applies.
STMicro and Philips are two very serious partners, and crolles is supposed to be a first rate facility. The technology has never been a problem at Moto, the corporation was.
I think that's changed.
Just think of it this way. Despite the belly aching, the G4 is right there in terms of mobile technology.
Centrino? 1.3-1.7 Ghz with more cache and bigger FSB throughput.
G4 1.33-1.5Ghz with a slower bus but better SIMD technology and some really good L3 tech in their pocket, if they choose to use it.
I'll bet you that the real world difference between the two is negligible for the target audience, "mobile creatives"
Wanna put Premiere/avid on Centrino up against FCP/avid on the PB ?
I think Apple might surprise a lot of people.
As much as some of you can't admitt it, Apple absolutely needs two independent sources of CPU. IBM might be in this game for good this time, but they're still in it for IBM, as is moto. You need options when things go askew, a second viable source creates options.
One of the things that distinguished Apple's laptops is that they could deliver a desktop processor in a laptop computer running at full desktop speeds. The G3 and G4 allowed them to do this. As I understand it the G5 might be pushing the limits, so Apple will need a "next Gen" laptop processor. Weather this is a new G4 or a revamped G5 time will tell, it sounds like they are both competing for this buisness and that is good.
This said, I think that Apple needs to get the G5 into the iMac as soon as possible, even at 1.5 Ghz the G4 just isnt cutting it from a marketing perspective for a computer that costs as much as the iMac does. Apple needs to do something to invigerate their consumer desktop line as soon as possible.
One of the things that distinguished Apple's laptops is that they could deliver a desktop processor in a laptop computer running at full desktop speeds. The G3 and G4 allowed them to do this. As I understand it the G5 might be pushing the limits, so Apple will need a "next Gen" laptop processor. Weather this is a new G4 or a revamped G5 time will tell, it sounds like they are both competing for this buisness and that is good.
This said, I think that Apple needs to get the G5 into the iMac as soon as possible, even at 1.5 Ghz the G4 just isnt cutting it from a marketing perspective for a computer that costs as much as the iMac does. Apple needs to do something to invigerate their consumer desktop line as soon as possible.
You got that backwards. That "desktop processor" was really a notebook processor in a desktop.
I think that if Freescale is indeed getting their act together (and their manufacturing partners are all they are cracked up to be) then we could finally see the G4 flower like it deserves to. The core is still sound, its two biggest limitations being the FSB and its clock rate. Now that its finally on a 130 nm process it has hit 1.5 GHz -- if they move it to 90 nm (hopefully avoiding IBM's pain!) then 1.8 .. 2.0 GHz should be possible. That leaves the FSB, which could be sidestepped by bringing the memory controller on chip (with a RapidIO external bus) as was rumored for years. This part would give the portables and consumer machines something to crow about.
Now wouldn't it be sweet if Moto... er, Freescale gave in and put HyperTransport on a G4+memory controller for Apple? That would let Apple use their existing southbridge from the G5.
FWIW, I don't think we'll see a dual core design for a while in the G4. There is too much potential gain in the single processor version with SoC designs. Adding a core just costs more, uses more power, and generates more heat.
An upgraded G4 with RapidIO and higher clock speeds would be perfect for the PowerBooks. Apple could even call it the G4+ or something to help create more sales. The G4 is really a fine chip. It just needs to have a faster bus to keep up with the wintel world. I am sure the MacBus is very efficient, and I realize that having a real clock speed of 167mhz is not that bad. The problem is that many modern day tasks require more bandwidth. (especially games) I have no idea how it could be so hard for moto to add a faster bus. They obviously don't really want to. In the end only time will tell what happens with the G4. I think Apple has already announced that they plan on putting the G5 in the PowerBook though. The main problem with the G5 is probably the 1000Mhz bus speeds etc more than the CPU speed. IBM will have to make a mobile version of the CPU before apple can really use it in a PowerBook. I think it would be a good idea for apple to keep two different kinds of CPUs; however, apple can not really afford to wait on moto any longer.
The PowerBook really should have the G5 in the end. The iMac should have a G5 too. The G4 could stick around in the other models for awhile. In the end I have little faith in moto.
This is not the whole story. The important point is that they have transitioned to a smaller structure size. From this on, they should have it much easier to scale the thing to higher frequencies.
If you put it this way, IBM has made no (zero, zilch) success at upping the frequency for what? 11 month or so. Obviously this means missing the bigger picture here as well.
IBM is @ 2.5ghz with the 130nm 970. They announced this back a few months ago.
So as it stands Motorola hasn't even scaled the FSB to 200MHz. arrrrrrgggggghhhhhhh. Motorola #1 in embedded chip sales. So what, Apple needs computer chips not router chips.
EXACTLY... truer words have never been spoken on a Apple rumor site
IBM is @ 2.5ghz with the 130nm 970. They announced this back a few months ago.
Even if that was a typo.. IBM has not officially announced that 970FX at 90 nm have reached beyond 2 GHz. They have hinted at 2.2 GHz since the FSB seem to be able to reach 1.1 GHz.
Even if that was a typo.. IBM has not officially announced that 970FX at 90 nm have reached beyond 2 GHz. They have hinted at 2.2 GHz since the FSB seem to be able to reach 1.1 GHz.
They did officially announce it at the International Solid State Circuits Conference... I'll grab url...
Whether MOTO-Freescale is back or not in the CPU market will take shape in the next year, if they can innovate and prove themselves in that time frame, then ok, but they have a long way to go.
If this does happen, then what. Half of Apple's line is G5 and half G4. If the G5 pans out as it should it the next year, what does apple do with the G4.
I have a hard time seeing a market for these chips.
Embedded market, ok, but does the embedded market need a PC CPU.
If this does happen, then what. Half of Apple's line is G5 and half G4. If the G5 pans out as it should it the next year, what does apple do with the G4.
Dunno about you, but I always tought an iBook with a 1.5 GHz G4 and maybe a Mobile Radeon 9700 for ~1k US$ would be a pretty nice thing to have.
I have a hard time seeing a market for these chips.
Embedded market, ok, but does the embedded market need a PC CPU.
Two points: First, the notebook and AIO PC markets can both be considered embedded - all "embedded" means is that the equation changes from performance/cost to performance/heat/cost, which it does in anything that isn't a tower or rackmount server (notebook, AIO, blade, etc.). Don't underestimate Freescale's strength here.
Second, if you read IBM's literature on the 970 and the 970fx, they're certainly hoping that the embedded market needs a "PC CPU."
Two points: First, the notebook and AIO PC markets can both be considered embedded - all "embedded" means is that the equation changes from performance/cost to performance/heat/cost, which it does in anything that isn't a tower or rackmount server (notebook, AIO, blade, etc.). Don't underestimate Freescale's strength here.
Second, if you read IBM's literature on the 970 and the 970fx, they're certainly hoping that the embedded market needs a "PC CPU."
Sorry for my error, I always think of embedded as anything but Computers. ie: routers, switches, telephony devices that I have no knowledge of, and other designer devices that are not apart of the every day computer world.
If motorola is really back, what would be the time scale on a DDR Bus for the G4 making it into new chips? If they can deliver the mystical 7447-RM within 6-9 months then I can see it being used in the next PowerBook revision, otherwise I say G5.
If motorola is really back, what would be the time scale on a DDR Bus for the G4 making it into new chips? If they can deliver the mystical 7447-RM within 6-9 months then I can see it being used in the next PowerBook revision, otherwise I say G5.
If by mid-summer Freescale can have an SOC dual core 90nm 2.0Ghz+ ramped and ready. Then I can see them getting used. 6-9 months seems too long.
Comments
STMicro and Philips are two very serious partners, and crolles is supposed to be a first rate facility. The technology has never been a problem at Moto, the corporation was.
I think that's changed.
Just think of it this way. Despite the belly aching, the G4 is right there in terms of mobile technology.
Centrino? 1.3-1.7 Ghz with more cache and bigger FSB throughput.
G4 1.33-1.5Ghz with a slower bus but better SIMD technology and some really good L3 tech in their pocket, if they choose to use it.
I'll bet you that the real world difference between the two is negligible for the target audience, "mobile creatives"
Wanna put Premiere/avid on Centrino up against FCP/avid on the PB ?
I think Apple might surprise a lot of people.
As much as some of you can't admitt it, Apple absolutely needs two independent sources of CPU. IBM might be in this game for good this time, but they're still in it for IBM, as is moto. You need options when things go askew, a second viable source creates options.
Originally posted by Matsu
As much as some of you can't admitt it, Apple absolutely needs two independent sources of CPU. IBM might be in this game for good this time, but they're still in it for IBM, as is moto. You need options when things go askew, a second viable source creates options.
Well said Matsu. Many people here are mad at Motorola (not without reason of course) and often forget that.
Originally posted by Matsu
Whatever was said about motorola in the past no longer applies.
STMicro and Philips are two very serious partners, and crolles is supposed to be a first rate facility. The technology has never been a problem at Moto, the corporation was.
I think that's changed.
One could at least hope so. Even if Freescale seems to me a sane move for Motorolas IC-division they have yet to deliver anything exciting and 7447A isn't really that exciting imho. Freescale is dedicated to doing embedded stuff, IBM are going for the high end computing segment. They are even selling off some of their embedded assetts.
Originally posted by Matsu
Whatever was said about motorola in the past no longer applies.
STMicro and Philips are two very serious partners, and crolles is supposed to be a first rate facility. The technology has never been a problem at Moto, the corporation was.
I think that's changed.
Just think of it this way. Despite the belly aching, the G4 is right there in terms of mobile technology.
Centrino? 1.3-1.7 Ghz with more cache and bigger FSB throughput.
G4 1.33-1.5Ghz with a slower bus but better SIMD technology and some really good L3 tech in their pocket, if they choose to use it.
I'll bet you that the real world difference between the two is negligible for the target audience, "mobile creatives"
Wanna put Premiere/avid on Centrino up against FCP/avid on the PB ?
I think Apple might surprise a lot of people.
As much as some of you can't admitt it, Apple absolutely needs two independent sources of CPU. IBM might be in this game for good this time, but they're still in it for IBM, as is moto. You need options when things go askew, a second viable source creates options.
One of the things that distinguished Apple's laptops is that they could deliver a desktop processor in a laptop computer running at full desktop speeds. The G3 and G4 allowed them to do this. As I understand it the G5 might be pushing the limits, so Apple will need a "next Gen" laptop processor. Weather this is a new G4 or a revamped G5 time will tell, it sounds like they are both competing for this buisness and that is good.
This said, I think that Apple needs to get the G5 into the iMac as soon as possible, even at 1.5 Ghz the G4 just isnt cutting it from a marketing perspective for a computer that costs as much as the iMac does. Apple needs to do something to invigerate their consumer desktop line as soon as possible.
Originally posted by JCG
One of the things that distinguished Apple's laptops is that they could deliver a desktop processor in a laptop computer running at full desktop speeds. The G3 and G4 allowed them to do this. As I understand it the G5 might be pushing the limits, so Apple will need a "next Gen" laptop processor. Weather this is a new G4 or a revamped G5 time will tell, it sounds like they are both competing for this buisness and that is good.
This said, I think that Apple needs to get the G5 into the iMac as soon as possible, even at 1.5 Ghz the G4 just isnt cutting it from a marketing perspective for a computer that costs as much as the iMac does. Apple needs to do something to invigerate their consumer desktop line as soon as possible.
You got that backwards. That "desktop processor" was really a notebook processor in a desktop.
I think that if Freescale is indeed getting their act together (and their manufacturing partners are all they are cracked up to be) then we could finally see the G4 flower like it deserves to. The core is still sound, its two biggest limitations being the FSB and its clock rate. Now that its finally on a 130 nm process it has hit 1.5 GHz -- if they move it to 90 nm (hopefully avoiding IBM's pain!) then 1.8 .. 2.0 GHz should be possible. That leaves the FSB, which could be sidestepped by bringing the memory controller on chip (with a RapidIO external bus) as was rumored for years. This part would give the portables and consumer machines something to crow about.
Now wouldn't it be sweet if Moto... er, Freescale gave in and put HyperTransport on a G4+memory controller for Apple? That would let Apple use their existing southbridge from the G5.
FWIW, I don't think we'll see a dual core design for a while in the G4. There is too much potential gain in the single processor version with SoC designs. Adding a core just costs more, uses more power, and generates more heat.
The PowerBook really should have the G5 in the end. The iMac should have a G5 too. The G4 could stick around in the other models for awhile. In the end I have little faith in moto.
Originally posted by Smircle
This is not the whole story. The important point is that they have transitioned to a smaller structure size. From this on, they should have it much easier to scale the thing to higher frequencies.
If you put it this way, IBM has made no (zero, zilch) success at upping the frequency for what? 11 month or so. Obviously this means missing the bigger picture here as well.
IBM is @ 2.5ghz with the 130nm 970. They announced this back a few months ago.
Originally posted by rickag
So as it stands Motorola hasn't even scaled the FSB to 200MHz. arrrrrrgggggghhhhhhh. Motorola #1 in embedded chip sales. So what, Apple needs computer chips not router chips.
EXACTLY... truer words have never been spoken on a Apple rumor site
Originally posted by emig647
IBM is @ 2.5ghz with the 130nm 970. They announced this back a few months ago.
They did, I am not aware of that, I was aware that they had samples of PPC 970fx 90nm 2.5Ghz chips.
Do you have a link or a something?
Originally posted by oldmacfan
They did, I am not aware of that, I was aware that they had samples of PPC 970fx 90nm 2.5Ghz chips.
Do you have a link or a something?
It was 90nm... I'm sorry for the typo.
Originally posted by emig647
IBM is @ 2.5ghz with the 130nm 970. They announced this back a few months ago.
Even if that was a typo.. IBM has not officially announced that 970FX at 90 nm have reached beyond 2 GHz. They have hinted at 2.2 GHz since the FSB seem to be able to reach 1.1 GHz.
Originally posted by Henriok
Even if that was a typo.. IBM has not officially announced that 970FX at 90 nm have reached beyond 2 GHz. They have hinted at 2.2 GHz since the FSB seem to be able to reach 1.1 GHz.
They did officially announce it at the International Solid State Circuits Conference... I'll grab url...
http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/...werdown_1.html
I had the real announcement but I can't find it because ISSCC.org changed their site to accomodate 2005 conference.
Originally posted by emig647
They did officially announce it at the International Solid State Circuits Conference... I'll grab url...
http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/...werdown_1.html
Well.. i stand corrected!
If this does happen, then what. Half of Apple's line is G5 and half G4. If the G5 pans out as it should it the next year, what does apple do with the G4.
I have a hard time seeing a market for these chips.
Embedded market, ok, but does the embedded market need a PC CPU.
Originally posted by oldmacfan
If this does happen, then what. Half of Apple's line is G5 and half G4. If the G5 pans out as it should it the next year, what does apple do with the G4.
Dunno about you, but I always tought an iBook with a 1.5 GHz G4 and maybe a Mobile Radeon 9700 for ~1k US$ would be a pretty nice thing to have.
Originally posted by xype
Dunno about you, but I always tought an iBook with a 1.5 GHz G4 and maybe a Mobile Radeon 9700 for ~1k US$ would be a pretty nice thing to have.
It sure would be if that is what they released today, but buy the time we see this, it will look shabby.
Originally posted by oldmacfan
I have a hard time seeing a market for these chips.
Embedded market, ok, but does the embedded market need a PC CPU.
Two points: First, the notebook and AIO PC markets can both be considered embedded - all "embedded" means is that the equation changes from performance/cost to performance/heat/cost, which it does in anything that isn't a tower or rackmount server (notebook, AIO, blade, etc.). Don't underestimate Freescale's strength here.
Second, if you read IBM's literature on the 970 and the 970fx, they're certainly hoping that the embedded market needs a "PC CPU."
Originally posted by Amorph
Two points: First, the notebook and AIO PC markets can both be considered embedded - all "embedded" means is that the equation changes from performance/cost to performance/heat/cost, which it does in anything that isn't a tower or rackmount server (notebook, AIO, blade, etc.). Don't underestimate Freescale's strength here.
Second, if you read IBM's literature on the 970 and the 970fx, they're certainly hoping that the embedded market needs a "PC CPU."
Sorry for my error, I always think of embedded as anything but Computers. ie: routers, switches, telephony devices that I have no knowledge of, and other designer devices that are not apart of the every day computer world.
Originally posted by Algol
If motorola is really back, what would be the time scale on a DDR Bus for the G4 making it into new chips? If they can deliver the mystical 7447-RM within 6-9 months then I can see it being used in the next PowerBook revision, otherwise I say G5.
If by mid-summer Freescale can have an SOC dual core 90nm 2.0Ghz+ ramped and ready. Then I can see them getting used. 6-9 months seems too long.