Here's why You don't get 3ghz G5

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
The xbox is actually going to say:

3 IBM PowerPCs running at 3.2ghz



http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/images/xbox3601.jpg

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,259member
    ?????? What's the point of this thread?
  • Reply 2 of 14
    webmailwebmail Posts: 639member
    The point being is, that Mac users have been waiting a long time for 3ghz processor, I know for a fact the reason we don't have them was because IBM was heavly involved in ensuring Microsoft's needs were fo-filled while Apple was put on hold.
  • Reply 3 of 14
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    What utter crap.
  • Reply 4 of 14
    pbpb Posts: 4,233member
    It does not make much sense to me .
  • Reply 5 of 14
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Are these G5s or some special PowerPC core made just for Microsoft?
  • Reply 6 of 14
    mellomello Posts: 555member
    Since IBM is making power pc chips for all three gaming systems, will that bring the prices down for the G5's that are in current macs?
  • Reply 7 of 14
    krispiekrispie Posts: 260member
    Worst thread EVER.

    </comicbookguy>
  • Reply 8 of 14
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,259member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Outsider

    Are these G5s or some special PowerPC core made just for Microsoft?



    That's what I'm thinking.



    My head literally hurts for the immense banality that many Mac users are showing.



    The Megahertz Myth is alive and well. Let us just be honest here. Intel was %100 when they designed the P4. They new that j6p was too lazy to understand any other metric other than Megahertz. Evidently there are many Mac users just as ignorant.



    I don't think the specs have been released but I think it's fair to say that these chips will not be equivalent to the 97x microprocessors that we have today.



    You'd think that after all the blathering on these boards and PDFs on Apple.com about the G5 that people would actually get a freakin' clue in 2005.



    "Box the computer up ma'am...you're too $%^&* stupid to run a computer"
  • Reply 9 of 14
    pbpb Posts: 4,233member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison



    I don't think the specs have been released but I think it's fair to say that these chips will not be equivalent to the 97x microprocessors that we have today.





    I think you got this right. There is nothing suggesting that these processors have anything to do with the G5, apart that they are (64-bit?) PowerPC and have a vector unit that seems like Altivec. I would say it is something more like PPE from CELL.
  • Reply 10 of 14
    thttht Posts: 3,168member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    I don't think the specs have been released but I think it's fair to say that these chips will not be equivalent to the 97x microprocessors that we have today.



    Oh, it's more than fair to say. The Xenon processor looks like triple core PPE processor. The 2 instruction issue, 2-way SMT pretty much tells us that the cores are most distinctly not 970-based cores.



    Just with these bits of info, we can infer that under average or typical code, a 3.2 GHz Xenon core will be about as fast as a 1.6 GHz 970fx, perhaps as fast as 2 GHz. Those dual 2 GHz Power Mac G5 Xbox 2 development kits Microsoft has been using may actually be equivalent to the Xbox 360 in real-world performance.



    Like the Cell, which is optimized for single precision performance to the detriment of double precision, it may prove not very useful as a PC CPU. We'll get more info soon hopefully.
  • Reply 11 of 14
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    Like the Cell, which is optimized for single precision performance to the detriment of double precision, it may prove not very useful as a PC CPU. We'll get more info soon hopefully.



    What? Who uses double precision outside of math and science? Wastrels, that's who!



    Besides, double precision is 5-10x slower on regular CPUs too.
  • Reply 12 of 14
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,259member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gregmightdothat

    What? Who uses double precision outside of math and science? Wastrels, that's who!



    Besides, double precision is 5-10x slower on regular CPUs too.






    Every 3D app out there. It's why you don't see Altivec enabled 3D apps because Altivec doesn't do double precision with alacrity either.
  • Reply 13 of 14
    thttht Posts: 3,168member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gregmightdothat

    Besides, double precision is 5-10x slower on regular CPUs too.



    Last time I checked, single and double precision integer and FPU performance on the 970 were same.



    You have point with SIMD applications, but there isn't a huge demand for double precision SIMD apps.
  • Reply 14 of 14
    benjamin_rbenjamin_r Posts: 265member
    Pointless
Sign In or Register to comment.