However, the 2.5 GHz 970fx(0.09 µm) typical watts is 50 and the old(0.13 µm) 1.8 GHz 970 typical watts is 51, so does that mean the liquid cooling is mainly for noise reduction/rapid heat flucuations or will the 970fx actually scale to 3.0 GHz.
My suspicion is that the liquid cooling has little to do with the overall heat budget. Rather, it has to do with the heat density in 90nm chips. Remember the resin problems they had with the chip capsule for the FX? I suspect that the chip was getting so hot at certain locations that it would smoke a hole in itself while other parts remain cool.
Check out the cooligy site (www.cooligy.com) for some discussion of the 90nm and less issues.
Mr. MacPhisto, those seem to be all plausible events and outcomes. Any clue as to SMU_Neo2 in the 10.3.4 update? To me that just seems to scream, "and now, for something completely different."
Have no ideas. Everything I've said I've pieced together from contacts at IBM. I don't have any at Apple or FreeScale.
SMU_Neo2 deos puzzle me too. I think we're going to be getting some interesting stuff at WWDC in addition to the Tiger preview.
One thing I find interesting is the 3-inch gap between the stand and the new Cinema displays reported by Thinksecret. They're usually pretty good. I could just see something fitting in that 3-inch high gap. It's probably just my imagination running away with me. I had thought about people wishing for a pizza-box Mac. Imagine if FreeScale is about ready to deliver a higher-speed, low power G4 that could fit in something like that. I'd certainly buy that at the right price, though I don't think they'll pull off dual core this summer. If they do, then Moto would be back in a big way.
One thing I find interesting is the 3-inch gap between the stand and the new Cinema displays reported by Thinksecret. They're usually pretty good. I could just see something fitting in that 3-inch high gap. It's probably just my imagination running away with me. I had thought about people wishing for a pizza-box Mac.
That could be interesting. The other possibility if these are indeed real, is that they are going after more of the PC display market by going DVI. Why the heck not, after all?
That could be interesting. The other possibility if these are indeed real, is that they are going after more of the PC display market by going DVI. Why the heck not, after all?
I saw someone else mention in another thread somewhere that ATI has gone on record saying videocards would be more abundant and cheaper for Macs if Apple abandoned ADC. While ADC was a nice concept for ease of use, if getting rid of it will mean Macs can now more easily get high-end cards, I'm all for it. The big question for me is this: will there be a way to use PC cards on the Macs again by flashing them? Apple really needs to get on the ball, especially if they want to push Macs for animation, CAD, etc. Honestly, if Autodesk is bringing AutoCAD to th Mac, as rumored, then high-end cards coupled with the PPC's incredible ability for floating point operations should give the Mac a huge advantage. While the G5 is slightly inferior to the AMDs and Intels of the world in integer crunching, the PowerPC rocks on floating point thanks to a great SIMD unit.
I don't think the powerbooks will be updated with the G4's anymore. The next powerbook revision I think will happen is the January Macworld and sport a G5.
I don't think the powerbooks will be updated with the G4's anymore. The next powerbook revision I think will happen is the January Macworld and sport a G5.
I don't think so. Right now, only a lower speed G5 could get in there. Let's say we get a 1.6 GHZ G5. A 1.5GHZ G4 draws less juice and is about the some speed in the real world. A low power G4 with a faster FSB and improved architecture would be superior to a G5 in a laptop. Add to this the fact that FreeScale has said they are developing (and maybe soon fabbing?!?) the e600, a G4 that is system-on-chip, greatly reducing the needs from the logic board and saving power. Add to this the possibility of dual-core SoC G4s and you've got a chip that is far better suited to PowerBooks and iBooks. A chip that will draw less power and reduce development costs. I see the G5s being in only in PowerMacs and higher-end consumer Macs. Next year we should see dual-core, multi-threaded G5 (or G6?) chips from IBM that will give the PowerMacs and high end consumer machine plenty of kick, but the G4s will keep the PowerBooks in the high-end range of laptops, especially for power to energy consumption. Couple that with the development of the e700 that will go beyond 3GHZ and feature triple-cores and more. Also note that Crolles is the only fab that is already preparing to go below 45nm. Fishkill is only prepared for 45nm at this point and will have to go through a refit to get below it.
I don't think so. Right now, only a lower speed G5 could get in there. Let's say we get a 1.6 GHZ G5. A 1.5GHZ G4 draws less juice and is about the some speed in the real world. A low power G4 with a faster FSB and improved architecture would be superior to a G5 in a laptop. Add to this the fact that FreeScale has said they are developing (and maybe soon fabbing?!?) the e600, a G4 that is system-on-chip, greatly reducing the needs from the logic board and saving power. Add to this the possibility of dual-core SoC G4s and you've got a chip that is far better suited to PowerBooks and iBooks. A chip that will draw less power and reduce development costs. I see the G5s being in only in PowerMacs and higher-end consumer Macs. Next year we should see dual-core, multi-threaded G5 (or G6?) chips from IBM that will give the PowerMacs and high end consumer machine plenty of kick, but the G4s will keep the PowerBooks in the high-end range of laptops, especially for power to energy consumption. Couple that with the development of the e700 that will go beyond 3GHZ and feature triple-cores and more. Also note that Crolles is the only fab that is already preparing to go below 45nm. Fishkill is only prepared for 45nm at this point and will have to go through a refit to get below it.
Yep, all good things. RapidIO is the only thing I can see as a stumbling block as Apple, if I recall correctly, was not buying into it. They wanted to go down the Hypertransport road. Not sure how things stand today....
So the reality is finally setting in: the G5 is NOT a mobile CPU, and neither does it look to be one in the forseeable future because of the way it derives it's speed. With huge FSB and relatively high clock rates, the G5 is well suited to DP configs in a desktop, but it doesn't look to be a chip that will respond well to lower FSB speeds and clock rates -- two essential features of laptop powersaving.
Which is all to say nothing of the true power consumption and heat dissapation of the G5 -- which by now is obvious to all as something much much higher than IBM's original microprocessor forum numbers. Or, as reasoned above, it may not be worth running a G5 at sub 1.5ghz speeds at all.
IBM hasn't done much in the last 4 years (as far as Apple is concerned) except for releasing a ton of vapourware -- 2 ghz G3's or alphabet soup 750's with supposed "altivec-like" speed enhancements.
Enter moto/freescale, with far more interest in low power computer CPUs than IBM has shown. They're looking like a lock for the next powerbook, and if IBM ain't careful, the next iMac too.
a laptop specific chip needs to be built by either IBM or Freescale and dubbed the G5-mobile or something along those lines even if it isnt the chip thats in the powermacs.
Well, actually, Freescale/Motorola does make all of the chips in the current PowerBook and iBook lines. I would guess that that trend will continue for some time. IBM is more big guns, Freescale is more low-power chips. I don't see IBM making mobile chips - they did sell off most of their 440 line for a reason. \
IBM hasn't done much in the last 4 years (as far as Apple is concerned) except for releasing a ton of vapourware -- 2 ghz G3's or alphabet soup 750's with supposed "altivec-like" speed enhancements.
Aside from the G5, you mean? That is a pretty significant achievement in anybody's book. The vapourware isn't really vapour either, it was rumours for the most part and its hardly fair to hold them to rumours. By most accounts IBM wasn't even trying to build chips for Apple until fairly recently, and then it was the 970/970FX.
I think what has caught everyone by surprise is that 90nm is not only really hard, but its payoff is nowhere near what previous transitions have brought in terms of benefits. 90nm parts are smaller, and therefore cheaper... if you can get the yields up to 130nm levels. From a power consumption and clock rate perspective, however, it isn't significantly better than 130nm and it increases the heat density problem to epic proportions.
The ramifications of this for Freescale will be interesting. If their partnership at Crolles works out well, and they can actually deliver a 90nm G4-class part (say with on-chip memory controller), what will its heat / clock characteristics be like? According to IBM the fab & design teams will need to work much more closely together at 90nm and below, which may not bode well for Freescale using an external fab. I'd place my bet with IBM being able to make better progress than the as-yet unproven Freescale/Crolles combo.
seems to me that this 90nm and below thing really bodes well for dual core chips. I can't believe people are bitchin about apple not going to 3GHz, who cares I want dual core dual processors and some damn HD space, period...
Aside from the G5, you mean? That is a pretty significant achievement in anybody's book. The vapourware isn't really vapour either, it was rumours for the most part and its hardly fair to hold them to rumours. By most accounts IBM wasn't even trying to build chips for Apple until fairly recently, and then it was the 970/970FX.
do you think IBM or Freescale and Apple have been working on a new chip for the laptops? I mean, if its going to take a while to develop, I hope they dont count on the G4 to last a few more years in the powerbooks in its current state.
Well, actually, Freescale/Motorola does make all of the chips in the current PowerBook and iBook lines. I would guess that that trend will continue for some time.
Comments
Originally posted by rickag
However, the 2.5 GHz 970fx(0.09 µm) typical watts is 50 and the old(0.13 µm) 1.8 GHz 970 typical watts is 51, so does that mean the liquid cooling is mainly for noise reduction/rapid heat flucuations or will the 970fx actually scale to 3.0 GHz.
My suspicion is that the liquid cooling has little to do with the overall heat budget. Rather, it has to do with the heat density in 90nm chips. Remember the resin problems they had with the chip capsule for the FX? I suspect that the chip was getting so hot at certain locations that it would smoke a hole in itself while other parts remain cool.
Check out the cooligy site (www.cooligy.com) for some discussion of the 90nm and less issues.
Originally posted by Rhumgod
Mr. MacPhisto, those seem to be all plausible events and outcomes. Any clue as to SMU_Neo2 in the 10.3.4 update? To me that just seems to scream, "and now, for something completely different."
Have no ideas. Everything I've said I've pieced together from contacts at IBM. I don't have any at Apple or FreeScale.
SMU_Neo2 deos puzzle me too. I think we're going to be getting some interesting stuff at WWDC in addition to the Tiger preview.
One thing I find interesting is the 3-inch gap between the stand and the new Cinema displays reported by Thinksecret. They're usually pretty good. I could just see something fitting in that 3-inch high gap. It's probably just my imagination running away with me. I had thought about people wishing for a pizza-box Mac. Imagine if FreeScale is about ready to deliver a higher-speed, low power G4 that could fit in something like that. I'd certainly buy that at the right price, though I don't think they'll pull off dual core this summer. If they do, then Moto would be back in a big way.
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
One thing I find interesting is the 3-inch gap between the stand and the new Cinema displays reported by Thinksecret. They're usually pretty good. I could just see something fitting in that 3-inch high gap. It's probably just my imagination running away with me. I had thought about people wishing for a pizza-box Mac.
That could be interesting. The other possibility if these are indeed real, is that they are going after more of the PC display market by going DVI. Why the heck not, after all?
Originally posted by Rhumgod
That could be interesting. The other possibility if these are indeed real, is that they are going after more of the PC display market by going DVI. Why the heck not, after all?
I saw someone else mention in another thread somewhere that ATI has gone on record saying videocards would be more abundant and cheaper for Macs if Apple abandoned ADC. While ADC was a nice concept for ease of use, if getting rid of it will mean Macs can now more easily get high-end cards, I'm all for it. The big question for me is this: will there be a way to use PC cards on the Macs again by flashing them? Apple really needs to get on the ball, especially if they want to push Macs for animation, CAD, etc. Honestly, if Autodesk is bringing AutoCAD to th Mac, as rumored, then high-end cards coupled with the PPC's incredible ability for floating point operations should give the Mac a huge advantage. While the G5 is slightly inferior to the AMDs and Intels of the world in integer crunching, the PowerPC rocks on floating point thanks to a great SIMD unit.
Originally posted by quagmire
I don't think the powerbooks will be updated with the G4's anymore. The next powerbook revision I think will happen is the January Macworld and sport a G5.
I don't think so. Right now, only a lower speed G5 could get in there. Let's say we get a 1.6 GHZ G5. A 1.5GHZ G4 draws less juice and is about the some speed in the real world. A low power G4 with a faster FSB and improved architecture would be superior to a G5 in a laptop. Add to this the fact that FreeScale has said they are developing (and maybe soon fabbing?!?) the e600, a G4 that is system-on-chip, greatly reducing the needs from the logic board and saving power. Add to this the possibility of dual-core SoC G4s and you've got a chip that is far better suited to PowerBooks and iBooks. A chip that will draw less power and reduce development costs. I see the G5s being in only in PowerMacs and higher-end consumer Macs. Next year we should see dual-core, multi-threaded G5 (or G6?) chips from IBM that will give the PowerMacs and high end consumer machine plenty of kick, but the G4s will keep the PowerBooks in the high-end range of laptops, especially for power to energy consumption. Couple that with the development of the e700 that will go beyond 3GHZ and feature triple-cores and more. Also note that Crolles is the only fab that is already preparing to go below 45nm. Fishkill is only prepared for 45nm at this point and will have to go through a refit to get below it.
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
I don't think so. Right now, only a lower speed G5 could get in there. Let's say we get a 1.6 GHZ G5. A 1.5GHZ G4 draws less juice and is about the some speed in the real world. A low power G4 with a faster FSB and improved architecture would be superior to a G5 in a laptop. Add to this the fact that FreeScale has said they are developing (and maybe soon fabbing?!?) the e600, a G4 that is system-on-chip, greatly reducing the needs from the logic board and saving power. Add to this the possibility of dual-core SoC G4s and you've got a chip that is far better suited to PowerBooks and iBooks. A chip that will draw less power and reduce development costs. I see the G5s being in only in PowerMacs and higher-end consumer Macs. Next year we should see dual-core, multi-threaded G5 (or G6?) chips from IBM that will give the PowerMacs and high end consumer machine plenty of kick, but the G4s will keep the PowerBooks in the high-end range of laptops, especially for power to energy consumption. Couple that with the development of the e700 that will go beyond 3GHZ and feature triple-cores and more. Also note that Crolles is the only fab that is already preparing to go below 45nm. Fishkill is only prepared for 45nm at this point and will have to go through a refit to get below it.
Yep, all good things. RapidIO is the only thing I can see as a stumbling block as Apple, if I recall correctly, was not buying into it. They wanted to go down the Hypertransport road. Not sure how things stand today....
Originally posted by Peter North
Im praying for something like this to come out within the next 6 months or so:
-Powerbook G5-Mobile (maybe using e600 or e700 w/ 400mhz fsb)
-new Gun Metal case, still roughly 1 inch thick
-All widescreen
-128mb video
-gigabit internet and airport extreme
-superdrives
-1.7ghz 13 inch
-1.8ghz 15 inch
-2.0ghz 15 inch
-2.0ghz 17 inch
\t
of course probably wont fly, maybe IBM has been building something centrino like under wraps.
are u the same guy who posted this on macrumors
Originally posted by Peter North
what is/will be the difference between e600 and e700 really?
If I remember well, the main difference would be 64-bit support on the e700 and(?) higher frequencies.
Originally posted by windowsblowsass
are u the same guy who posted this on macrumors
Not to pigeon-hole myself, but wasn't Peter North a porn star?
Originally posted by Rhumgod
Not to pigeon-hole myself, but wasn't Peter North a porn star?
yup
Originally posted by Rhumgod
Not to pigeon-hole myself, but wasn't Peter North a porn star?
all i know is that the exact same post showed up on mr earlyer today
Which is all to say nothing of the true power consumption and heat dissapation of the G5 -- which by now is obvious to all as something much much higher than IBM's original microprocessor forum numbers. Or, as reasoned above, it may not be worth running a G5 at sub 1.5ghz speeds at all.
IBM hasn't done much in the last 4 years (as far as Apple is concerned) except for releasing a ton of vapourware -- 2 ghz G3's or alphabet soup 750's with supposed "altivec-like" speed enhancements.
Enter moto/freescale, with far more interest in low power computer CPUs than IBM has shown. They're looking like a lock for the next powerbook, and if IBM ain't careful, the next iMac too.
Originally posted by Matsu
IBM hasn't done much in the last 4 years (as far as Apple is concerned) except for releasing a ton of vapourware -- 2 ghz G3's or alphabet soup 750's with supposed "altivec-like" speed enhancements.
Aside from the G5, you mean? That is a pretty significant achievement in anybody's book. The vapourware isn't really vapour either, it was rumours for the most part and its hardly fair to hold them to rumours. By most accounts IBM wasn't even trying to build chips for Apple until fairly recently, and then it was the 970/970FX.
I think what has caught everyone by surprise is that 90nm is not only really hard, but its payoff is nowhere near what previous transitions have brought in terms of benefits. 90nm parts are smaller, and therefore cheaper... if you can get the yields up to 130nm levels. From a power consumption and clock rate perspective, however, it isn't significantly better than 130nm and it increases the heat density problem to epic proportions.
The ramifications of this for Freescale will be interesting. If their partnership at Crolles works out well, and they can actually deliver a 90nm G4-class part (say with on-chip memory controller), what will its heat / clock characteristics be like? According to IBM the fab & design teams will need to work much more closely together at 90nm and below, which may not bode well for Freescale using an external fab. I'd place my bet with IBM being able to make better progress than the as-yet unproven Freescale/Crolles combo.
Aside from the G5, you mean? That is a pretty significant achievement in anybody's book. The vapourware isn't really vapour either, it was rumours for the most part and its hardly fair to hold them to rumours. By most accounts IBM wasn't even trying to build chips for Apple until fairly recently, and then it was the 970/970FX.
do you think IBM or Freescale and Apple have been working on a new chip for the laptops? I mean, if its going to take a while to develop, I hope they dont count on the G4 to last a few more years in the powerbooks in its current state.
Originally posted by Rhumgod
Well, actually, Freescale/Motorola does make all of the chips in the current PowerBook and iBook lines. I would guess that that trend will continue for some time.
You forgot the eMac and iMac lines