Not maximum, but typical power usage, likely running at 2.3 Dhrystone MIPS/MHz.
Yes probably. But look at the 7448 column. For the N-spec, it is <10 W @ > 1 GHz. What GHz do you think that will hold true for? 1.1 GHz? 1.2 GHz? 1.4 GHz? 1.8 GHz? Likewise for the L-spec, it is <15 W @ > 1.5 GHz. What GHz do you think that will hold true? 1.6 GHz? 1.7 GHz? 1.8 GHz? 2 GHz?
First, these chips started to sample at the beginning of the year and are going to be in mass production in 2 months, at some point Freescale should know the power consumption. If you don't believe Freescale's numbers at all, why not save yourself some time, and just say so, without having to argue about voltages and so on. Just say, 'I believe no word of what Freescale is saying, I believe it when I see it (i.e. the new Powerbooks), full stop.'
Second, I am well aware that these are typical consumption numbers, but I was comparing them to the typical consumption numbers of the 7447A.
Third, <15 W @ > 1.5 Ghz can only mean 1.6 & 1.7 Ghz, the only two official speeds (or if you want 1.51, 1.52, ... , 1.69 Ghz as well) bigger than 1.5 Ghz. Now, you probably think they will not be able to achieve 1.4 and 1.5 Ghz with the N-rated chips and therefore they will have to use the L-rated chips which have a higher power consumption. But why on earth not write <15 W @ >1.35 Ghz then?
I don't think the small differences are worth the $1000 or so premium for the PBook right now. Then again I'm one who doubts that the premium for the Mercedes is worth it either.
Up until two years ago, the iBook was G3 and the PowerBook G4, but then Apple ran into this problem where they couldn't differentiate as clearly as I'm sure they'd like. My guess is that once the Intel transition is in place, the iBook will be single core and the PBook dual.
i would have to agree that i personally am not willing to cop that $1000 premium right now. but apple has factored in their margins, the bait is there, just a matter of seeing who bites.
i might bite after paris expo *punches wallet* shut up you stupid wallet...!! take this!!!
I certainly don't criticize someone for saying that "for me, the iBk is just as good". But the statement "the iBk is just as good" just doesn't wash.
Really?
But the only fair comparison is the 12" iBook and 12" Powerbook. There's very little difference that matters comparing between those two if you're actually after a portable and not a desktop replacement.
Comparing any other Powerbook with the iBook and I'd agree with you but then any other Powerbook costs $1000+ more and you are indeed comparing a Bug with a Mercedes.
Incidentally, I think Volkswagen's are better cars today than Mercedes (S class excluded) so the analogy doesn't really hold these days, as most car analogies tend not to.
They market to the automobile market im which they are very sucessful. The printer market is a big one as well. Machinery control does not require the same performance that leading edge personal computers do. But they don't care because they are getting out of that market.
It isn't so much that they can't do something, as it is that they don't have the interest in doing it. They know very well that they can never gain marketshare in the personal computer space because of the domination of x86. So they work elsewhere. they have a very large line of PPC chips, and they are quite sucessful in the areas that they are in - even more so than Intel.
One of their biggest markets, if not THE biggest, is network routers and phone exchange comms. That's why they push altivec for it's abilities to crush the opposition in use in TCP/IP stacks whilst still running fanless low power slow chips. It's also something we're going to lose going to Intel - IP efficiency.
Fans are the main problem with comms boxes that are on 24/7/365. The fan sticking and CPU melting because of it is one of the main causes for engineer callouts. I can't remember if it was Nokia or SE but one of them made huge profits a few years back by selling small fanless exchanges to phone companies because the phone companies engineer overheads dropped off the planet.
It's also why FSB speed hasn't been a concern for Moto in the past as routers and exchanges tended not to be shoving vast amounts of memory about and most of the comms routines they run are highly vectorized small chunks of code that sit well in an L1/L2 cache.
But that's changing even in embedded land where the processors are expected to do a lot more and that's why the 8xxx series has an embedded memory controller. Pity it's arriving (if at all) so late though for Apple as I reckon it'd crush the Yonah still.
I still think looking at the current Intel roadmap is underwhelming. If Jobs is to be believed about the power/performance ratio thing, which I highly doubt, it's not with Yonah. Conroe? Merom? Something else?
Intel's gonna buy out Freescale and IBMs chip division to form "IBFreetel" and start producing processors that run cooler as they get faster and Apple will bring back the tray load optical drive only with the processor in the bottom to make a handy drinks holder.
Yeah, and that's a nice drive. It came out after Apple's last PB update. We'll see what happens with this one.
The more recent 846B I linked to has support for both + and - DL media but it came out after the last PowerBook update as you said. However, the older 845B which had support for + DL media actually came out many months before the last PowerBook update yet they still didn't use it. I believe they are using it in the latest iMacs though. Go figure. I really wouldn't be surprised if Apple used this now "outdated" drive for the upcoming PowerBooks even though they have the newer 846B at their disposal. I hate it when they intentionally cripple a model in order to make the next one look better. I'm hoping they don't do it this time as these last PPC PowerBooks will need very good specs in order to sell well given the upcoming Intel transition.
"Two new models that have shown up on radar are referenced as the PowerBook5,8 and the PowerBook5,9. Both Apple's current 15-inch and 17-inch PowerBook G4 systems identify themselves as the PowerBook5,7, with the 12-inch model being listed as a member of the iBook family (PowerBook6,8)."
Why would the current 15" and 17" models both share the same 5,7 identifier while the upcoming models have two different ones? Is this significant?
I hate it when they intentionally cripple a model in order to make the next one look better.
Isn't that a standard procedure how people try to keep their boss happy, not showing all they have done, so in case something goes wrong you always have some back-up stuff to show your boss?
First, these chips started to sample at the beginning of the year and are going to be in mass production in 2 months, at some point Freescale should know the power consumption.
Yeah. And when they do know, they'll let us know. What's currently on the product aren't specifications. Really, when was the last time you see a product specification that says "<10 W @ > 1 GHz" and "<15 W @ > 1.5 GHz"?
As far as what I've said, I stand by it. It's hardly even an outragous statement. A 1.7 GHz 7448 may have the same power consumption as a 1.7 GHz 7447A, most especially for the first run of processors coming off the fab.
Look at it this way, it isn't necessary for Apple to ship L-spec processors, no?
Quote:
If you don't believe Freescale's numbers at all, why not save yourself some time, and just say so, without having to argue about voltages and so on. Just say, 'I believe no word of what Freescale is saying, I believe it when I see it (i.e. the new Powerbooks), full stop.'
I quote myself: I don't see any product specifications for the 7448 on the website. All I see are:
N-Spec "<10W @ >1.0 GHz"
L-Spec "<15W @ >1.5 GHz"
For all we know, those are the numbers Freescale is expecting to see next year. I'll wait for the hardware spec documentation to come out for the 7448 to see what the real numbers are.
Quote:
Third, <15 W @ > 1.5 Ghz can only mean 1.6 & 1.7 Ghz, the only two official speeds (or if you want 1.51, 1.52, ... , 1.69 Ghz as well) bigger than 1.5 Ghz.
If it is so, why didn't they say so? Ie, a 1.7 GHz L-spec 7448 has a typical power consumption of 15 Watts. That they say "<15 W @ >1.5 GHz" is telling me they really don't know with any specificity yet.
Incidentally, I think Volkswagen's are better cars today than Mercedes (S class excluded) so the analogy doesn't really hold these days, as most car analogies tend not to.
Just avoid those auto trannies. VW can't make one worth $#!%
Freescale are claiming that now that the 7448 can use out-of-order altivec instructions, some altivec code runs 20% faster on the 7448 than the 7447A. The 7447A Altivec core was already faster than the G5 core by a little bit so that's one in the knackers for IBM.
Improved memory subsystem - 23% improvement in altivec memcpy. Nice
twice the L2 cache - very nice. ECC - nice. slight latency increase - ok.
Dynamic Frequency Scaling much improved allows any frequency setting in just one clock cycle with no overhead - tell that to Apple with the dismal G5 power scaling in 'Automatic' mode. Previously used TEST pins on the 7447A have been used for allowing this to be controlled by hardware in the 7448 as well as by software.
Of note also is that the presentation which Freescale gave in June, mentions the Tundra Tsi108 bridge chip which now supports DDR2-400Mhz memory which they claim reduces memory power consumption by 50%. Tundra are what became of Moto's bridge chip business and the origins of the Tsi108 can be traced back to chips like Moto's MPC10x back in the CHRP days.
If Apple sticks that all together in a Powerbook then it's a nice curtain call. Even if it's just 1.7Ghz, I'd bet on it running quite a bit quicker than the 7447As at 1.67.
The Genesi/Pegasos hardware guys developing the ODW PPC workstation however were stating in May that their new boards would be coming in at 1.8Ghz, so I'd find it hard to believe that Apple would stick to 1.7Ghz.
This is a speculation thread, so I'll point in you the direction of The Inquirer (http://www.theinquirer.net/)...they are claiming sources that have the inside running on the the CPU in the new Powerbook...it is apparently the MPC8641, the e600 core with in-built memory controller and PCI express.
It's more expensive than you would think, especially for the 1420Mhz version.
Oh, and melgross, there was a 7447B version of the 7447A...these CPUs are in the current Powerbooks. Do a search of my previous posts and you'll find the source. Here's proof if you need it that it exists - http://www.freescale.com/files/share...n/PCN11161.htm
This is a speculation thread, so I'll point in you the direction of The Inquirer (http://www.theinquirer.net/)...they are claiming sources that have the inside running on the the CPU in the new Powerbook...it is apparently the MPC8641, the e600 core with in-built memory controller and PCI express.
It's more expensive than you would think, especially for the 1420Mhz version.
Oh, and melgross, there was a 7447B version of the 7447A...these CPUs are in the current Powerbooks. Do a search of my previous posts and you'll find the source. Here's proof if you need it that it exists - http://www.freescale.com/files/share...n/PCN11161.htm
That's very interesting, but a search shows no such part. I wonder why?
For all we know, those are the numbers Freescale is expecting to see next year. I'll wait for the hardware spec documentation to come out for the 7448 to see what the real numbers are.[/i]
OK, see you in October when Freescale updates the specs.
This is a speculation thread, so I'll point in you the direction of The Inquirer (http://www.theinquirer.net/)...they are claiming sources that have the inside running on the the CPU in the new Powerbook...it is apparently the MPC8641, the e600 core with in-built memory controller and PCI express.
Except that they talk about a 200 Mhz FSB which only the 7448 has. They simply don't know what they are talking about. And except for that mistake they have no new information whatsoever.
OK, if Apple don't use this new-fangled 8641D whatever before they swith to Intel, who the hell is Freescale going to sell it to? Are there any major compuer makers using PPC chips anymore, I can't think of any????
Comments
Originally posted by sunilraman
let's all take a break from this and scope out august 23 intel announcements?
Not much to scope yet.
Why don't we meet back here the evening of the 23rd? I hear they have some good draft on hand.
Originally posted by THT
Not maximum, but typical power usage, likely running at 2.3 Dhrystone MIPS/MHz.
Yes probably. But look at the 7448 column. For the N-spec, it is <10 W @ > 1 GHz. What GHz do you think that will hold true for? 1.1 GHz? 1.2 GHz? 1.4 GHz? 1.8 GHz? Likewise for the L-spec, it is <15 W @ > 1.5 GHz. What GHz do you think that will hold true? 1.6 GHz? 1.7 GHz? 1.8 GHz? 2 GHz?
First, these chips started to sample at the beginning of the year and are going to be in mass production in 2 months, at some point Freescale should know the power consumption. If you don't believe Freescale's numbers at all, why not save yourself some time, and just say so, without having to argue about voltages and so on. Just say, 'I believe no word of what Freescale is saying, I believe it when I see it (i.e. the new Powerbooks), full stop.'
Second, I am well aware that these are typical consumption numbers, but I was comparing them to the typical consumption numbers of the 7447A.
Third, <15 W @ > 1.5 Ghz can only mean 1.6 & 1.7 Ghz, the only two official speeds (or if you want 1.51, 1.52, ... , 1.69 Ghz as well) bigger than 1.5 Ghz. Now, you probably think they will not be able to achieve 1.4 and 1.5 Ghz with the N-rated chips and therefore they will have to use the L-rated chips which have a higher power consumption. But why on earth not write <15 W @ >1.35 Ghz then?
Originally posted by BRussell
I don't think the small differences are worth the $1000 or so premium for the PBook right now. Then again I'm one who doubts that the premium for the Mercedes is worth it either.
Up until two years ago, the iBook was G3 and the PowerBook G4, but then Apple ran into this problem where they couldn't differentiate as clearly as I'm sure they'd like. My guess is that once the Intel transition is in place, the iBook will be single core and the PBook dual.
i would have to agree that i personally am not willing to cop that $1000 premium right now. but apple has factored in their margins, the bait is there, just a matter of seeing who bites.
i might bite after paris expo
Originally posted by melgross
I certainly don't criticize someone for saying that "for me, the iBk is just as good". But the statement "the iBk is just as good" just doesn't wash.
Really?
But the only fair comparison is the 12" iBook and 12" Powerbook. There's very little difference that matters comparing between those two if you're actually after a portable and not a desktop replacement.
Comparing any other Powerbook with the iBook and I'd agree with you but then any other Powerbook costs $1000+ more and you are indeed comparing a Bug with a Mercedes.
Incidentally, I think Volkswagen's are better cars today than Mercedes (S class excluded) so the analogy doesn't really hold these days, as most car analogies tend not to.
Originally posted by melgross
They market to the automobile market im which they are very sucessful. The printer market is a big one as well. Machinery control does not require the same performance that leading edge personal computers do. But they don't care because they are getting out of that market.
It isn't so much that they can't do something, as it is that they don't have the interest in doing it. They know very well that they can never gain marketshare in the personal computer space because of the domination of x86. So they work elsewhere. they have a very large line of PPC chips, and they are quite sucessful in the areas that they are in - even more so than Intel.
One of their biggest markets, if not THE biggest, is network routers and phone exchange comms. That's why they push altivec for it's abilities to crush the opposition in use in TCP/IP stacks whilst still running fanless low power slow chips. It's also something we're going to lose going to Intel - IP efficiency.
Fans are the main problem with comms boxes that are on 24/7/365. The fan sticking and CPU melting because of it is one of the main causes for engineer callouts. I can't remember if it was Nokia or SE but one of them made huge profits a few years back by selling small fanless exchanges to phone companies because the phone companies engineer overheads dropped off the planet.
It's also why FSB speed hasn't been a concern for Moto in the past as routers and exchanges tended not to be shoving vast amounts of memory about and most of the comms routines they run are highly vectorized small chunks of code that sit well in an L1/L2 cache.
But that's changing even in embedded land where the processors are expected to do a lot more and that's why the 8xxx series has an embedded memory controller. Pity it's arriving (if at all) so late though for Apple as I reckon it'd crush the Yonah still.
I still think looking at the current Intel roadmap is underwhelming. If Jobs is to be believed about the power/performance ratio thing, which I highly doubt, it's not with Yonah. Conroe? Merom? Something else?
Originally posted by melgross
Yeah, and that's a nice drive. It came out after Apple's last PB update. We'll see what happens with this one.
The more recent 846B I linked to has support for both + and - DL media but it came out after the last PowerBook update as you said. However, the older 845B which had support for + DL media actually came out many months before the last PowerBook update yet they still didn't use it. I believe they are using it in the latest iMacs though. Go figure. I really wouldn't be surprised if Apple used this now "outdated" drive for the upcoming PowerBooks even though they have the newer 846B at their disposal. I hate it when they intentionally cripple a model in order to make the next one look better. I'm hoping they don't do it this time as these last PPC PowerBooks will need very good specs in order to sell well given the upcoming Intel transition.
Why would the current 15" and 17" models both share the same 5,7 identifier while the upcoming models have two different ones? Is this significant?
Originally posted by 1984
Why would the current 15" and 17" models both share the same 5,7 identifier while the upcoming models have two different ones? Is this significant?
Apparently no one read what I wrote earlier in the topic, because I asked the same thing.
Originally posted by 1984
I hate it when they intentionally cripple a model in order to make the next one look better.
Isn't that a standard procedure how people try to keep their boss happy, not showing all they have done, so in case something goes wrong you always have some back-up stuff to show your boss?
Originally posted by noirdesir
First, these chips started to sample at the beginning of the year and are going to be in mass production in 2 months, at some point Freescale should know the power consumption.
Yeah. And when they do know, they'll let us know. What's currently on the product aren't specifications. Really, when was the last time you see a product specification that says "<10 W @ > 1 GHz" and "<15 W @ > 1.5 GHz"?
As far as what I've said, I stand by it. It's hardly even an outragous statement. A 1.7 GHz 7448 may have the same power consumption as a 1.7 GHz 7447A, most especially for the first run of processors coming off the fab.
Look at it this way, it isn't necessary for Apple to ship L-spec processors, no?
If you don't believe Freescale's numbers at all, why not save yourself some time, and just say so, without having to argue about voltages and so on. Just say, 'I believe no word of what Freescale is saying, I believe it when I see it (i.e. the new Powerbooks), full stop.'
I quote myself: I don't see any product specifications for the 7448 on the website. All I see are:
N-Spec "<10W @ >1.0 GHz"
L-Spec "<15W @ >1.5 GHz"
For all we know, those are the numbers Freescale is expecting to see next year. I'll wait for the hardware spec documentation to come out for the 7448 to see what the real numbers are.
Third, <15 W @ > 1.5 Ghz can only mean 1.6 & 1.7 Ghz, the only two official speeds (or if you want 1.51, 1.52, ... , 1.69 Ghz as well) bigger than 1.5 Ghz.
If it is so, why didn't they say so? Ie, a 1.7 GHz L-spec 7448 has a typical power consumption of 15 Watts. That they say "<15 W @ >1.5 GHz" is telling me they really don't know with any specificity yet.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Incidentally, I think Volkswagen's are better cars today than Mercedes (S class excluded) so the analogy doesn't really hold these days, as most car analogies tend not to.
Just avoid those auto trannies. VW can't make one worth $#!%
http://www.freescale.com/files/ftf_2...59_EVERMAN.pdf
Freescale are claiming that now that the 7448 can use out-of-order altivec instructions, some altivec code runs 20% faster on the 7448 than the 7447A. The 7447A Altivec core was already faster than the G5 core by a little bit so that's one in the knackers for IBM.
Improved memory subsystem - 23% improvement in altivec memcpy. Nice
twice the L2 cache - very nice. ECC - nice. slight latency increase - ok.
Dynamic Frequency Scaling much improved allows any frequency setting in just one clock cycle with no overhead - tell that to Apple with the dismal G5 power scaling in 'Automatic' mode. Previously used TEST pins on the 7447A have been used for allowing this to be controlled by hardware in the 7448 as well as by software.
Of note also is that the presentation which Freescale gave in June, mentions the Tundra Tsi108 bridge chip which now supports DDR2-400Mhz memory which they claim reduces memory power consumption by 50%. Tundra are what became of Moto's bridge chip business and the origins of the Tsi108 can be traced back to chips like Moto's MPC10x back in the CHRP days.
http://www.tundra.com/Products/PowerPC/Tsi108/index.cfm
If Apple sticks that all together in a Powerbook then it's a nice curtain call. Even if it's just 1.7Ghz, I'd bet on it running quite a bit quicker than the 7447As at 1.67.
The Genesi/Pegasos hardware guys developing the ODW PPC workstation however were stating in May that their new boards would be coming in at 1.8Ghz, so I'd find it hard to believe that Apple would stick to 1.7Ghz.
Pentium M beater?
Interesting rumour, that one.
Also, you'll be pleased to know that Freescale has released pricing for the 7447A on their products page: http://www.freescale.com/files/price...ewproducts.xls
It's more expensive than you would think, especially for the 1420Mhz version.
Oh, and melgross, there was a 7447B version of the 7447A...these CPUs are in the current Powerbooks. Do a search of my previous posts and you'll find the source. Here's proof if you need it that it exists - http://www.freescale.com/files/share...n/PCN11161.htm
Originally posted by a j stev
This is a speculation thread, so I'll point in you the direction of The Inquirer (http://www.theinquirer.net/)...they are claiming sources that have the inside running on the the CPU in the new Powerbook...it is apparently the MPC8641, the e600 core with in-built memory controller and PCI express.
Interesting rumour, that one.
Also, you'll be pleased to know that Freescale has released pricing for the 7447A on their products page: http://www.freescale.com/files/price...ewproducts.xls
It's more expensive than you would think, especially for the 1420Mhz version.
Oh, and melgross, there was a 7447B version of the 7447A...these CPUs are in the current Powerbooks. Do a search of my previous posts and you'll find the source. Here's proof if you need it that it exists - http://www.freescale.com/files/share...n/PCN11161.htm
That's very interesting, but a search shows no such part. I wonder why?
Originally posted by THT
For all we know, those are the numbers Freescale is expecting to see next year. I'll wait for the hardware spec documentation to come out for the 7448 to see what the real numbers are.[/i]
OK, see you in October when Freescale updates the specs.
Originally posted by a j stev
This is a speculation thread, so I'll point in you the direction of The Inquirer (http://www.theinquirer.net/)...they are claiming sources that have the inside running on the the CPU in the new Powerbook...it is apparently the MPC8641, the e600 core with in-built memory controller and PCI express.
Except that they talk about a 200 Mhz FSB which only the 7448 has. They simply don't know what they are talking about. And except for that mistake they have no new information whatsoever.
http://www.macobserver.com/stockwatc.../08/15.1.shtml
I know that it doesn't just cover the PB's, but that's what makes it so interesting.
Check out the Mini prediction especially.