New Dual 1.8 & 2 GHz are 90nm or 130nm?

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
Are the new Dual 1.8GHz & 2GHz 90nm or 130nm?



I've heard conflicting reports both ways.



Additionally, will there be a performance difference between 90nm and 130nm chips at a similar clock speed?



Thank you.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    they are 130



    the 2.5 is 90 and that is why it wont be available till august
  • Reply 2 of 16
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Perhaps Applenut has some special info, but it's possible that even the 2,5 ghz are 130 nm one. The PPC 970 is supposed to reach 2,5 ghz. However this chip will produce many heat, recquiring a special cooling system.



    If the 2,5 ghz was fabbed on 90 nm, I don't think it will produce more heat, than the 2 ghz at 130 nm. Therefore I conclude that it's a 130 nm model.



    It looks like that IBM have serious problems with the 90 nm fabbing process.
  • Reply 3 of 16
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    The new product line does include some new technology in the processor. First introduced in the Xserve, the 2.5GHz G5 now uses the new 90-nanometer processor technology.



    -Maccentral
  • Reply 4 of 16
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    On both the White Paper and the Technology Overview on this page, it says things like:



    Quote:

    With industry-leading build, assembly, and test technology, IBM uses a 90-nanometer process with more than 58 million transistors and ten layers of copper interconnects.



    However, it's really not clear if that's referring to all or just the new 2.5. It seems to implicitly refer to all models, but it doesn't say so explicitly. I said in another thread that my guess is with applenut that the 1.8 and 2.0 are the same 130 nm, which is why they're available now, whereas the 2.5 is 90 nm, which is why it's available later. It would also explain the large jump from 2.0 in the middle range to 2.5 at the top.



    However, that might not be right, and it may be that they are all 90 nm, and they've just had more success with the lower-Mhz chips. And isn't the new 2 Ghz xserve 90 nm?



    [edit]OK, I guess they're saying it's only the 2.5
  • Reply 5 of 16
    mslifkinmslifkin Posts: 66member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    Perhaps Applenut has some special info, but it's possible that even the 2,5 ghz are 130 nm one. The PPC 970 is supposed to reach 2,5 ghz. However this chip will produce many heat, recquiring a special cooling system.



    If the 2,5 ghz was fabbed on 90 nm, I don't think it will produce more heat, than the 2 ghz at 130 nm. Therefore I conclude that it's a 130 nm model.



    It looks like that IBM have serious problems with the 90 nm fabbing process.




    According to white papers that apple released, the new G5 is using the 90nm process:



    Quote:

    Anatomy of a Processor A microprocessor makes logic decisions based on whether its transistors are holding a charge?that is, whether they are ?on? or ?off.? Each transistor on the PowerPC G5 is just .00000009 meter (90 nanometers) wide, built on a layer of silicon on insulator (SOI). SOI refers to the placement of a thin layer of insulator between transistors and bulk silicon. When transistors are built on this SOI layer, their capacitance, or the tendency to store a residual electrical charge, is reduced?which results in faster operation.



    Regards,

    Marc
  • Reply 6 of 16
    Still no consensus.



    I guess we'll have to wait a few days for the dust to settle.
  • Reply 7 of 16
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    after reading the PDF files it seems that the new powermac G5 use 90 nm chips.



    The dual 1,8 is based upon the old mobo of the single 1,6

    According to MacBidouille the BTO 9800 XT option, take the place of one PCI X slot.
  • Reply 8 of 16
    costiquecostique Posts: 1,084member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BRussell

    And isn't the new 2 Ghz xserve 90 nm?



    Yes, new Xserves use 90nm PPC970fx. Taking their shipping problems into account, I guess there are still unresolved issues with the 90nm process. If so, 'available now' means that 1.8 and 2.0 GHz models utilize 130nm chips.
  • Reply 9 of 16
    pbpb Posts: 4,233member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by costique

    Taking their shipping problems into account, I guess there are still unresolved issues with the 90nm process. If so, 'available now' means that 1.8 and 2.0 GHz models utilize 130nm chips.



    This is exactly what I think too. Shipping times indicate that only the 2.5 GHz model has the new 90 nm G5. And that there are still issues with the 90 nm process.
  • Reply 10 of 16
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BRussell

    On both the White Paper and the Technology Overview on this page, it says things like:



    However, it's really not clear if that's referring to all or just the new 2.5. It seems to implicitly refer to all models, but it doesn't say so explicitly. I said in another thread that my guess is with applenut that the 1.8 and 2.0 are the same 130 nm, which is why they're available now, whereas the 2.5 is 90 nm, which is why it's available later. It would also explain the large jump from 2.0 in the middle range to 2.5 at the top.



    However, that might not be right, and it may be that they are all 90 nm, and they've just had more success with the lower-Mhz chips. And isn't the new 2 Ghz xserve 90 nm?



    [edit]OK, I guess they're saying it's only the 2.5




    It's worth mentioning the previous white paper they had up that was updated in January actually made reference to the 90 nm process. I suspect the PPC970FX is pin compatible and Apple was prepared to swap them in at lower clock speeds whenever without mentioning it.
  • Reply 11 of 16
    cbuttercbutter Posts: 8member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by lowbudgetfun

    Are the new Dual 1.8GHz & 2GHz 90nm or 130nm?



    I've heard conflicting reports both ways.



    Additionally, will there be a performance difference between 90nm and 130nm chips at a similar clock speed?



    Thank you.




    From eweek.com :http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1609256,00.asp



    "In addition, the new models run the PowerPC 970FX processor, the version based on IBM Corp.'s 90nm process, that is also used in Apple's Xserve G5 server. The new high-end system requires a water-cooled heat sink. "



    -Tom Goguen, Apple Senior Director of Desktop Marketing



    Notice the plural "models"
  • Reply 12 of 16
    And also this, from the Power Mac technology overview:



    "The PowerPC G5 is fabricated in one of IBM?s world-class semiconductor manufacturing facilities. It uses 90-nanometer circuitry with more than 400 meters (1300 feet) of ultrathin copper wiring...this scalable design contributes to clock speeds of up to 2.5GHz."



    This too seems to imply that all three models are using 90nm processors.
  • Reply 13 of 16
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    uhg, no....just read the maccentral article. its very clear that the 2.5 is the only one using 90nm
  • Reply 14 of 16
    costiquecostique Posts: 1,084member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BrunoBruin

    "The PowerPC G5 is fabricated in one of IBM?s world-class semiconductor manufacturing facilities. It uses 90-nanometer circuitry with more than 400 meters (1300 feet) of ultrathin copper wiring...this scalable design contributes to clock speeds of up to 2.5GHz."



    This too seems to imply that all three models are using 90nm processors.




    I'm afraid you read too much between the lines. Clock speeds up to 2.5GHz doesn't say anything about the 1.8 and 2GHz chips used in the current PowerMacs. It just says that the technology makes the 2.5GHz clock frequency possible.
  • Reply 15 of 16
    existenceexistence Posts: 991member
    ITWorld says this:



    Quote:

    One of the new Power Mac G5 systems is Apple's first Power Mac with IBM Corp.'s new 90-nanometer PowerPC 970FX chip, which runs at 2.5GHz and features a 1.25GHz front-side bus. A total of three dual-processor configurations are available for order through Apple's Web site or the company's retail stores; the other two configurations use older PowerPC processors.



  • Reply 16 of 16
    pbpb Posts: 4,233member
    I will repeat what I said previously and others too suggested here. There is no way to have a dual 2 GHz G5 Power Mac shipping in 1-3 days and assume that this G5 is 90 nm, the moment when a single XServe G5 2 GHz (which, we know well, has a 90 nm G5) ships in 4-6 weeks. No way. All Apple did in this update is to add the dual 2.5 GHz model sporting the new 90 nm G5 and eliminate the 1.6 GHz model. The other two models are the old ones.
Sign In or Register to comment.