PowerPC Plans for the coming year
MacRumors posted this snippet from a NewsFactor <a href="http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/17712.html"; target="_blank">article:</a>
IBM's PowerPC roadmap, which is completely devoid of any reference to the AltiVec acceleration unit, calls for chip architecture to exceed the 2 GHz barrier in the coming year.
While keeping mum on specifics, the company did say that its upcoming chips will be multi-core, meaning that several processor cores can be arranged on a single chip. This technology allows the possibility of four-processor or even eight-processor configurations.
Motorola also has said it plans to exceed the 2 GHz barrier in the coming year and is calling for the same I/O improvements and pipeline upgrades offered by IBM.
However, Motorola does not intend to move its PowerPC line to the .13 micron manufacturing process, which IBM already uses, until it ships the G5 processor.
Is there any future for IBMs multicore PPC in the Mac? It seems like there could be some packaging adavantages (it seems like it would be a lot easier to fit a single 4 core processor in an iMac sized enclosure than 4 or perhaps even 2 processors. Is there a memory architecture that is price effective for Apple's market that could keep 8 cores fed?
Moto claims they are going to bust 2 Ghz in the next year, but they aren't going to a .13 process until they launch the G5. So, o experts, can you get to 2 Ghz without going to .13? If not is it backhanded statement that there will be a G5 in the next 12 months?
It all just makes you say Hmmm... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
IBM's PowerPC roadmap, which is completely devoid of any reference to the AltiVec acceleration unit, calls for chip architecture to exceed the 2 GHz barrier in the coming year.
While keeping mum on specifics, the company did say that its upcoming chips will be multi-core, meaning that several processor cores can be arranged on a single chip. This technology allows the possibility of four-processor or even eight-processor configurations.
Motorola also has said it plans to exceed the 2 GHz barrier in the coming year and is calling for the same I/O improvements and pipeline upgrades offered by IBM.
However, Motorola does not intend to move its PowerPC line to the .13 micron manufacturing process, which IBM already uses, until it ships the G5 processor.
Is there any future for IBMs multicore PPC in the Mac? It seems like there could be some packaging adavantages (it seems like it would be a lot easier to fit a single 4 core processor in an iMac sized enclosure than 4 or perhaps even 2 processors. Is there a memory architecture that is price effective for Apple's market that could keep 8 cores fed?
Moto claims they are going to bust 2 Ghz in the next year, but they aren't going to a .13 process until they launch the G5. So, o experts, can you get to 2 Ghz without going to .13? If not is it backhanded statement that there will be a G5 in the next 12 months?
It all just makes you say Hmmm... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Comments
IMHO, an IBM multi-core low consumption chip, with those new SIMD instructions, would make a *lot* of sense. None of the apps that would run on the racks rely on Altivec, except BLAST, but Apple wrote that part so they could write it again. Shake isn't ported yet...
Hmmm.
Yet I have a strange feeling we'll see something along the lines of dual 1.2GHz G4s, 133SDR, integrated M8, IDE RAID
<strong>yeah, perhaps we'll have some insight on Apple's CPU directions tomorrow... Perhaps not.
IMHO, an IBM multi-core low consumption chip, with those new SIMD instructions, would make a *lot* of sense. None of the apps that would run on the racks rely on Altivec, except BLAST, but Apple wrote that part so they could write it again. Shake isn't ported yet...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
In the Quads thread it seemed like programmer was saying even DDR couldn't keep up with 4 procs. His solution was seperate memory busses for each proc but you can't do that with a multicore single proc(?)
The multicore's packaging advantages could be relevant to the Rack Server though. hadn't thought of that.
<strong>Yet I have a strange feeling we'll see something along the lines of dual 1.2GHz G4s, 133SDR, integrated M8, IDE RAID
My hopes
PM G4 1, 1.2, dual 1.2 GHz
Rackmount G4 dual 1, dual 1 GHz
Also, a while back it was said that Mot had licenced Altivec to IBM. No support, something along the lines of the basic spec and IBM was on it's own to decide how it would execute an SIMD. They would be compatible with altivec enabled code but might work differently than Mot's unit. I dunno, it's just what people were talking about way back when.
For me, nothing less than a G5 stomping on an x86 will satisfy the bloodlust I feel for the last few years of PPC performance lag.
The next half a year.
Does Apple catch up or continue to lag?
The G5 is Apple's shot.
If you can just keep adding another processor to the core, up to eight...then Pantium can keep going mhz but every time another cpu gets added? Ouch. Gotta hurt.
Was the G5 (moto) gonna be single core?
Maybe IBM has a version that will be multi-core? Maybe this would explain Apple 'killing' moto's version of the G5? Especially with rackmounts comming?
And no 'altivec' style 'coding' needed?
I'm sure I'm not the first Apple watcher to feel fascinated and tortured by the whole cpu debacle.
I still think Apollo tweak at 1 - 1.4 gig with DDR mobo...
I guess that's fair catch with AMD's cpu which is...what, 1.7 rated at '2.1'?
I still sez weez behind, though. But if the G5 comes by 2003 at San Fran' then. Okay. Game on.
But I still don't buy until I get the G5 in whatever guise it arrives in.
Lemon BOn BON.
IMO, this sounds reasonable. The specs are pretty good, but dont sound too farfetched. I'm not sure what kind of connections they have to Apple, but so far they seem like they can be trusted
Anyone else have any thoughts about this?
A 100% leap in performance? New case?
Hmmm. Intriguing...
The 'sniffer dogs' are out.
I can't wait until Macworld New York...
Lemon BOn Bon :eek:
<strong>According to todays <a href="http://macosrumors.com"; target="_blank">Mac OS Rumors</a> brodcasting, at the very bottem of the article, flat out tells us just what we want.
IMO, this sounds reasonable. The specs are pretty good, but dont sound too farfetched. I'm not sure what kind of connections they have to Apple, but so far they seem like they can be trusted
Anyone else have any thoughts about this?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh, jeez! You shouldn't have brought up MOSR around here. Its not too popular with the natives.
<strong>I could be mistken, but I remember reading that Motorola does plan to go to a 0.13 micron process with the G4, to increase speed and reduce power. I don't see why they would limit the 0.13 process to a G5. It makes economic sense to use it for several processors.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apparently its Moto saying they won't use .13 on the G4, so ask them. The thing I'm not clear on is they say they are going to reach 2 Ghz in a year but they won't go to .13 till the G5. I thought they were using .18 for the G4 can they make it to 2 Ghz on that process?
<strong>All I know is that when there is a sly $200-300 sale on PowerPCs with no strings attached (i.e. purchase of another product) and the sale ends a week before Macworld NY...you gotta wonder what's coming next to take the place of the current crop. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I just got done looking at Apple's site...I didn't see anything about a $300 rebate on towers <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
<strong>"If you've been drooling over next-generation processors like the G5, and wish Apple would toss the tired old translucent PowerMac design for something more modern that the current Quicksilver incarnation, this summer will have you very pleased indeed. We can't promise multi-processor 2GHz G5s, but we can promise a performance leap of more than 100% in processing speed alone over the existing PowerMac....and major leaps in almost every category on the motherboard."
A 100% leap in performance? New case?
Hmmm. Intriguing...
The 'sniffer dogs' are out.
I can't wait until Macworld New York...
Lemon BOn Bon :eek: </strong><hr></blockquote>
100% increse pretty much has to mean either 2 GHz+ or quads. quads seem much more likely to me. either way, thye MUST've fixed the "bus problem" to be able to make this a reality. YAY!
fast bus and 4x1,4GHz, Mmmmm...
then again, MOSR beeing full of it, is the most likely scenario.