<strong>To maximize data bandwidth and reduce memory latency, Motorola Inc. said it will likely integrate a DRAM controller directly onto a future high-end PowerPC processor ... By doing so, the processor could bypass an external bus and have a direct link to the DRAM. ... "It makes a lot more sense to add high-speed memory controllers on processors," ... "Anytime you have a bus, you have to arbitrate for the bus. Rather than let it go hungry, you could feed the processor as fast as it can be fed."
Anyone who knows about this stuff think this is possible, in this case depicted here? Or in the next PowerMac revision?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Absolutely -- the case is irrelevent for this aspect of the design. Whether this could show up in the next PowerMac is a function of whether Motorola has developed a new G4 variant with an on-chip memory controller...
Here is a bunch of what we think we know:
Motorola has talked up on-chip memory controllers for some time now.
They have a working on-chip memory controller with DDR266/333 support on the 8540. Shipping or damn close.
They have said that the G4 will retain its MPX bus, MPX will not change substantially except for a possible speed bump to 166 MHz at some point in the future.
Various sources claim that Apple's next machine will have gone a long way toward addressing the bandwidth problem.
A new version of the G4 is coming, based on the 0.13 process, which provides an opportunity for design changes.
The 7455's transistor count is relatively low for a modern processor... leaving plenty of room on-chip for something like a memory controller (and a larger L2 cache on-chip).
The Register has been talking about a confusing array of new G4s, one (or more) of which include an on-chip memory controller.
This prototype case includes a significantly improved cooling system, which may hint at a processor that run hotter... possibly due to higher clock rates and/or greater on-chip complexity.
Apart from memory bandwidth, is there any real need for the FSB pipe to be as large as we want it to be? Or is it mere, "he's got a bigger..." psychology?
<strong>Maybe the graphics card...</strong><hr></blockquote>
But say, you have an on-chip DDR memory controller, then would a 133MHz or maybe 166MHz MPX bus be enough for everything else. I don't know if the high-end graphics cards could saturate the pipe.
<strong>But say, you have an on-chip DDR memory controller, then would a 133MHz or maybe 166MHz MPX bus be enough for everything else. I don't know if the high-end graphics cards could saturate the pipe.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It could (saturate it)... but the MPX's 850 MB/sec would probably handle the situation in the short term (i.e. next year) just fine. I/O system bandwidth would have to cross the MPX as well, as would any interaction between processors. This wouldn't be the end-all-be-all, but it would be a substantial improvement in processor performance over the current situation.
It would go into <a href="http://duluthpack.com"; target="_blank">Duluth Packs </a> well <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
the interesting part is that the motherboard is a cheaper 4 layer variety while the CPU daughter card is made on a more expensive 8 layer board.
.............
The reason for this is the fact that the G5 CPU has a built-in memory controller that interacts with high-speed DDR-SDRAM.
............
To run at these fast speeds you must utilize 2 dimensional PCB space efficiently.
.............
On the CPU daughter card you will find 3 slots for DDR-SDRAM DIMMS.
................
They are distanced from the actual CPU core to allow for the heatsink placement, but in this configuration (since on the card the CPU is hard soldered to the PCB) you can design DIMM slots that can operate at 133, 166, and quite possibly 200MHz at DDR speeds.
..............
In fact, I believe the impedence should be low enough to allow for 4 DIMM slots.
<hr></blockquote>
So It sounds like he was at least partly right. As far as the CPU being on a seperate daughter card. It appears to be that way in the recent pix. Though it sounds like he is saying the ram slots were on the daughter card also (and only 3 of them), at least on his boards. It appears in the new pixs that the ram is on the main board and there are four slots. Interesting.
<strong>It could (saturate it)... but the MPX's 850 MB/sec would probably handle the situation in the short term (i.e. next year) just fine.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So I guess a G4 with a on-chip memory controller and 266 mhz FSB (DDR) could well overtake similiar clocked athlons in terms of performance? Or if we fantasize a bit about a 166 MPX bux and 2 G4s at 1.2 ghz each that could pose a "threat" to Athlon MP systems, right?
I am just wondering how much such a solution would "make up" in terms of noticeable performance when working with big photoshop files or 3D rendering and games since for Apple it's basically about bragging rights in front of the customer and then Steve's fingers surely itch to do a Shake bake-off.
Anyway a MPX 166 bus and a G4 with on-chip memory controller would probably be great, but I wonder what chances do "we" have to really get both and not a hack solution that doesn't really give a significant boost to performance.
Programmer thanks for the info! This whole controller-on-chip theory sounds great, but as we know all too well Motorola is great at designing chips, but when it comes to making them.... I'm worried about their huge losses now.
What's that supposed to mean?</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's a non-admission.
Apple would expectedly send C&D letters to anyone violating copyright, NDA, etc. Here, my guess is that they are arguing that they are also being misrepresented by a product that is purporting to be an Apple product.
Basically, Apple is saying that the item in the photo, while not necessarily an Apple product, is sufficiently similar to an Apple product to be damaging to the brand.
So, they aren't saying that it's going to be a shipping product, rather that it's a prototype or hacked Apple product and don't want people to be misled. I wonder if I tore my iBook apart, painted it silver and tried to pass the photos off as an iBook Limited Edition if a similar letter would arrive.
we've seen the next powermacs.....spent eons debating likely innards to these beauties(I like this new design alot) and still we are clueless....okay well not necessarily clueless...OMG! its 3 AM...what hte hell am I still doing up!
stupid warcraft 3 addictivness....you'll rue the day....you hear me!
Comments
<strong>To maximize data bandwidth and reduce memory latency, Motorola Inc. said it will likely integrate a DRAM controller directly onto a future high-end PowerPC processor ... By doing so, the processor could bypass an external bus and have a direct link to the DRAM. ... "It makes a lot more sense to add high-speed memory controllers on processors," ... "Anytime you have a bus, you have to arbitrate for the bus. Rather than let it go hungry, you could feed the processor as fast as it can be fed."
Anyone who knows about this stuff think this is possible, in this case depicted here? Or in the next PowerMac revision?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Absolutely -- the case is irrelevent for this aspect of the design. Whether this could show up in the next PowerMac is a function of whether Motorola has developed a new G4 variant with an on-chip memory controller...
Here is a bunch of what we think we know:
- Motorola has talked up on-chip memory controllers for some time now.
- They have a working on-chip memory controller with DDR266/333 support on the 8540. Shipping or damn close.
- They have said that the G4 will retain its MPX bus, MPX will not change substantially except for a possible speed bump to 166 MHz at some point in the future.
- Various sources claim that Apple's next machine will have gone a long way toward addressing the bandwidth problem.
- A new version of the G4 is coming, based on the 0.13 process, which provides an opportunity for design changes.
- The 7455's transistor count is relatively low for a modern processor... leaving plenty of room on-chip for something like a memory controller (and a larger L2 cache on-chip).
- The Register has been talking about a confusing array of new G4s, one (or more) of which include an on-chip memory controller.
- This prototype case includes a significantly improved cooling system, which may hint at a processor that run hotter... possibly due to higher clock rates and/or greater on-chip complexity.
Possible? Yes. Likely? You decide...<strong>
Bah! I've never paid that much for curtains...!
Any ammount of light striking the new chrome keyboard will cause you to go blind for some reason....
Those curtians are from NASA.
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: Animaniac ]</p>
<strong>Maybe the graphics card...</strong><hr></blockquote>
But say, you have an on-chip DDR memory controller, then would a 133MHz or maybe 166MHz MPX bus be enough for everything else. I don't know if the high-end graphics cards could saturate the pipe.
<strong>But say, you have an on-chip DDR memory controller, then would a 133MHz or maybe 166MHz MPX bus be enough for everything else. I don't know if the high-end graphics cards could saturate the pipe.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It could (saturate it)... but the MPX's 850 MB/sec would probably handle the situation in the short term (i.e. next year) just fine. I/O system bandwidth would have to cross the MPX as well, as would any interaction between processors. This wouldn't be the end-all-be-all, but it would be a substantial improvement in processor performance over the current situation.
It would go into <a href="http://duluthpack.com"; target="_blank">Duluth Packs </a> well <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001420"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001420</a>;
emphasis mine.....
[quote]Originally posted by Dorsal M:
the interesting part is that the motherboard is a cheaper 4 layer variety while the CPU daughter card is made on a more expensive 8 layer board.
.............
The reason for this is the fact that the G5 CPU has a built-in memory controller that interacts with high-speed DDR-SDRAM.
............
To run at these fast speeds you must utilize 2 dimensional PCB space efficiently.
.............
On the CPU daughter card you will find 3 slots for DDR-SDRAM DIMMS.
................
They are distanced from the actual CPU core to allow for the heatsink placement, but in this configuration (since on the card the CPU is hard soldered to the PCB) you can design DIMM slots that can operate at 133, 166, and quite possibly 200MHz at DDR speeds.
..............
In fact, I believe the impedence should be low enough to allow for 4 DIMM slots.
<hr></blockquote>
So It sounds like he was at least partly right. As far as the CPU being on a seperate daughter card. It appears to be that way in the recent pix. Though it sounds like he is saying the ram slots were on the daughter card also (and only 3 of them), at least on his boards. It appears in the new pixs that the ram is on the main board and there are four slots. Interesting.
[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: havanas ]</p>
<strong>It could (saturate it)... but the MPX's 850 MB/sec would probably handle the situation in the short term (i.e. next year) just fine.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So I guess a G4 with a on-chip memory controller and 266 mhz FSB (DDR) could well overtake similiar clocked athlons in terms of performance? Or if we fantasize a bit about a 166 MPX bux and 2 G4s at 1.2 ghz each that could pose a "threat" to Athlon MP systems, right?
I am just wondering how much such a solution would "make up" in terms of noticeable performance when working with big photoshop files or 3D rendering and games since for Apple it's basically about bragging rights in front of the customer and then Steve's fingers surely itch to do a Shake bake-off.
Anyway a MPX 166 bus and a G4 with on-chip memory controller would probably be great, but I wonder what chances do "we" have to really get both and not a hack solution that doesn't really give a significant boost to performance.
[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
[quote]
"...purporting to be a
depiction of a future Apple product part ("Material")...
<hr></blockquote>
What's that supposed to mean?
Time can't pass fast enough so that this thread will die.
But maybe that's just me. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong>Eugene said:
What's that supposed to mean?</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's a non-admission.
Apple would expectedly send C&D letters to anyone violating copyright, NDA, etc. Here, my guess is that they are arguing that they are also being misrepresented by a product that is purporting to be an Apple product.
Basically, Apple is saying that the item in the photo, while not necessarily an Apple product, is sufficiently similar to an Apple product to be damaging to the brand.
So, they aren't saying that it's going to be a shipping product, rather that it's a prototype or hacked Apple product and don't want people to be misled. I wonder if I tore my iBook apart, painted it silver and tried to pass the photos off as an iBook Limited Edition if a similar letter would arrive.
[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: k_munic ]</p>
<strong>
[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: k_munic ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Amazing... the next logo for xlr8yourmac.com!
"Hmm. This apple I'm eating is pretty good...
posted by xxxxxxxx at 3:33 PM"
(name x'ed out)
3.33pm hey hmm... 333 DDR
[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: gsxrboy ]</p>
we've seen the next powermacs.....spent eons debating likely innards to these beauties(I like this new design alot) and still we are clueless....okay well not necessarily clueless...OMG! its 3 AM...what hte hell am I still doing up!
stupid warcraft 3 addictivness....you'll rue the day....you hear me!
RUE!!!!!
[ 07-24-2002: Message edited by: Wrong Robot ]</p>
<strong>
Power Mac: $2999
Curtians: $79
Hmm.
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
It's no good,Spart! Even if I sell all the curtains in the house I still can't afford the PowerMac!