Yes but it was obviously made from a Powerpoint presentation that was created much earlier than that. Did you notice that the "Apollo program" was referred to as a "new technology"? Sorry, but it looks to me like someone updated a presentation from last year's Smart Networks Developer Forum (SNDF) for presentation at this year's Forum. (2002 Recap).
Also, you'll note that the HiPerMOS perfromance roadmap has .13 parts targeted for the end of 2001. Yet here we are at the end of 2002, and I'm not seeing any 0.13 products out from Moto. Unless I'm missing something?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Good point, Tomb, this is an old document. Mot did not suceed to implement SOI 0,13 like he expected , he was oblige to downgrade to SOI 0,18 and he did not increase the size of the L2cache (512 K was great on SOI 0,13 but to big on SOI 0,18).
Also, you'll note that the HiPerMOS perfromance roadmap has .13 parts targeted for the end of 2001. Yet here we are at the end of 2002, and I'm not seeing any 0.13 products out from Moto. Unless I'm missing something?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes I agree with much of what you say but remember we ARE dealing with MOT here (MOT=delays)... Here is how I see it.
MOT would never make changes to the G4 unless the changes were at the request and/or agreed by Apple. Just like IBM wouldn't go out and expend the massive dollars to build a new CPU unless it already had customers SIGNED UP to buy em (as in contracted or formal agreement to use/buy them with an 'out clause' for the buyer so if IBM messes up and doesn't deliver in a window of X the deal is off)
I'm not sure if this is *exactly* how things work but it seems to be a reasonable way to do things.
So if we look at where we are now and assume the above holds true.
- IBM wouldn't build a GPUL without someone stepping up to the plate to buy them. Sure IBM will use em too but since the gpul isn't gonna be a replacment for the Power4 IBM I'm sure would like to (need?) another company buying the chips. From what we know Apple is the odds on favorite to fill that spot. IBM has it's own time table for when this CPU will be ready... It isn't tied to anything on the MOT side of the PPC fence.
- MOT wouldn't make changes (they cost money) to the G4 a (pretty much) Apple specific CPU unless Apple agreed to it. When I say agree I mean some form of contract with MOT to buy enough of the 'new feature' G4 CPUs to make it worth MOTS time (and money) MOT had to spend to make the changes in the first place.
Neither of these are a real issue...
But it looks like we have two ways to look at the future.
MOT G4++ being 1st out of the gate (not that I like it but this seems most likly)
- MOT G4++ machines in January
- IBM GPUL machines in Aug/Sep/Oct
- MOT G4++ moves down to the iMac/eMac (in their own time table)
What I don't like about this is the short life span of 'todays' machines. 4 months a tad quick to re-gen the desktop units.
G4 Duals just came out in Sept (4 month life)
G4++ In January (9ish month life)
G5 (err GPUL) In Aug/Sep/Oct
IBM GPUL and MOT G4++ showing up at the same time (this could happen and I'd like it but that is why I don't think it'll happen)
- IBM GPUL machines in March time frame.
- MOT G4++ iMac/eMac in March time frame.
This fixes some of the issues of about todays boxes having such a short life. Now it's would be close to 8 or so months (still short but not outta the question).
I really do like that 2nd plan since it's much cleaner but so many people think IBM based boxes are still 'late summer / fall' it could be I'm just wishfull thinking again.
..edit..
finally... MOT better have those plans still 'in the works' or Apple is in deep trouble. Sure Apple's desktop space will be fine given what we know/assume about the GPUL but the laptop space still needs an upgrade path. From things I've seen (not public yet) the size of the GPUL seems to be too big for use in laptops. I don't know about heat or low power functions of the GPUL (I wish) but my thinking is if the chip is larger than todays G4 (plus being built with a smaller process then todays G4) that cpu is gonna run hot and isn't gonna be battery friendly. Total speculation but it makes sense.
One bad rub with the 2nd plan...
If G4++ and GPUL aren't ready till Mar/Apr then what will Apple do for MWSF? Yea I know they have tried to push hardware away from the MW events but they have to have something... Jag is 'old news' and Panther is 'too soon' some other iApp or updates to existing ones should work (iPhoto iMovie are both rumored) as for hardware they can't really speed up the eMac/iMac too much... Well okay maybe 1Ghz (single processor) since all of the Pro machines are now DP and maybe a new Powerbook or iBook with bluetooth... Well yea any combo that stuff would take care of MWSF (people might be bummed but what else is new).
If they have a rumored iDevice (Cam / Phone / ???) that would/should fix that too.
. . . MOT would never make changes to the G4 unless the changes were at the request and/or agreed by Apple. Just like IBM wouldn't go out and expend the massive dollars to build a new CPU unless it already had customers SIGNED UP to buy em . . .
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I believe this too. IBM certainly has a use for the GPUL, but it is questionable whether their own, in-house usage would have been enough to justify the development costs. I think IBM made the GPUL for Apple, to Apple's requirements, but intends to use it too. Regarding Motorola, if we see G4 updates, it will be something Apple contracted for long ago. Who knows, it might be the last update from Motorola.
As for the new PowerMacs, the possibilities are almost too numerous to begin speculating. Here is just one more to add to the pot.
When the GPUL first appears, it will be the 130 nanometer process and be in the top two models of PowerMacs. The bottom two will be the new G4s from Motorola. The case will be the same as it is now, with plenty of cooling. Later, the GPUL will be the 90 nanometer process and be in all PowerMac models. At that time there may also be a new case, and the new G4s will move down to the iMac and eMac. The reason I say top two models is that there may be a real workstation class Mac at the very top.
Wow, you can't get clearer than that. It is the PPC 970, a single core and available the second half of 2003. Oh yes, 1.8 GHz. We even learned that IBM will make the Playstation 3 chip, though it didn't state that directly.
I change my guess about PowerMacs. The first 970 chips will already be 90 nanometers, and the whole PowerMac line will use it. No earlier introduction on the 130 nanometer process.
<strong>Wow, you can't get clearer than that. It is the PPC 970, a single core and available the second half of 2003. Oh yes, 1.8 GHz. We even learned that IBM will make the Playstation 3 chip, though it didn't state that directly.
I change my guess about PowerMacs. The first 970 chips will already be 90 nanometers, and the whole PowerMac line will use it. No earlier introduction on the 130 nanometer process.</strong><hr></blockquote>
snoopy.... "Wow, you can't get clearer than that." ?!?! This is in reference to what? INPUT! DAVE NEEDS INPUT!!!!
Sorry for the bad movie quote... but I am serious was this a 'public' disclosure or something you just heard?
Interestingly enough it initially says going into production late next year, which would mean a 2004 release, then says available 2nd half 2003. I'm inclined to think the first is an error but still Steve Jobs with an Uzi could be interesting
For all the people that are too lazy to press a link.
[quote]IBM server chip seen slimmed down for Apple Macs
Reuters, 10.13.02, 3:49 PM ET
(TRANSMISSION EMBARGO UNTIL 12:01 am EDT/0401 GMT)
ARMONK, N.Y. (Reuters) - International Business Machines Corp. Monday announced a microchip for personal computers that will crunch data in chunks twice as big as the current standard and is expected by industry watchers to be used by Apple Computer Inc.
Apple was not available to comment, and IBM declined to comment on which PC makers would use the chip, but its plans would mark a change for the industry, which has emphasized the importance of the speed of a chip rather than its ability to handle heavy workloads.
IBM said its new PowerPC chip would go into production late next year and process 64 bits of data at a time at 1.8 Gigahertz, or 1.8 billion cycles per second.
The microchip is the brain of a computer, although personal computer chips now come only in 32-bit flavors, which are tuned to do light workloads fast but cannot handle heavy duty server chores.
Chekib Akrout, vice president of IBM microprocessor development, said big databases and the Internet challenged PCs: "This is the time to introduce a 64-bit machine capable of being used on a desktop," he said in a telephone interview.
An industry source said Cupertino, California-based Apple would use the chip in its Macintosh computers.
That could catapult Apple, long dogged by the belief its chips are slower than those produced by Intel Corp., to the technological head of the class and put to rest speculation it was considering moving soon to the Intel platform.
The fastest of the current generation of PowerPC chips in Macintosh computers runs at 1.25 Gigahertz, while the top Intel Pentium is 2.8 Gigahertz. Apple says its machines are already more efficient than Intel-based ones.
Advanced Micro Devices Inc., the main competitor to Intel, is also developing a 64-bit chip code-named Hammer that is expected early next year, although it is planned primarily for servers rather than personal computers.
SERVER LITE
IBM said the new PowerPC 970 microchip is a "lite" version of its Power4 chip, which it launched last fall in its sophisticated computer server, code-named "Regatta."
The PowerPC can run 32-bit applications as well as 64-bit ones and is tuned for graphics, like some Intel chips, IBM said. However, it is not designed to run programs written for Intel chips.
The PowerPC has the same energy-saving attributes as the Power4 but uses only one central processing unit, not two.
The chip will be available in the second half of 2003 and be built in IBM's East Fishkill, New York, chip plant, a new facility that is currently doing test-runs and aims to ramp up into production on other chips later this year.
One analyst said the chip's attributes mean it would work well in the professional publishing sector, for high-end graphics and other media-intense tasks.
"This processor would be a great processor for a Macintosh," said Tom Halfhill, an analyst with San Jose, California-based In-Stat/MDR.
IBM, the world's largest computer company, has seen revenue from its microelectronics division dwindle in recent quarters as the semiconductor sector has been hit by a sharp downturn in demand. It has restructured the unit, selling off some assets.
IBM announced earlier this week more details on its new microelectronics design unit, where it will design chips and other electronics for customers, including Sony Corp.
<strong>Interestingly enough it initially says going into production late next year, which would mean a 2004 release, then says available 2nd half 2003. I'm inclined to think the first is an error but still Steve Jobs with an Uzi could be interesting.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I hope you are right. Late may mean last half. In any case, I believe Apple will have hardware waiting for those chips as they come from IBM.
Has there ever been a microprocessor with so much interest and anticipation?
Allright, I'm curious. What is this mysterious Uzi quote that is constantly being referred to?
A bit more on topic, [quote] Has there ever been a microprocessor with so much interest and anticipation? <hr></blockquote> Yes. Remember MWNY 2001? How about MWSF 2002? The G5 has been anticipated a *lot* longer than this new-fangled GP-UL. But, the GP-UL does have a lot more substantial information behind it than the G5 ever did. Of course, you could always say that the GP-UL is the G5 . . . but that's a different monster all together.
<strong>Allright, I'm curious. What is this mysterious Uzi quote that is constantly being referred to?
A bit more on topic, Yes. Remember MWNY 2001? How about MWSF 2002? The G5 has been anticipated a *lot* longer than this new-fangled GP-UL. But, the GP-UL does have a lot more substantial information behind it than the G5 ever did. Of course, you could always say that the GP-UL is the G5 . . . but that's a different monster all together.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sure -- the difference is that the people who were claiming the G5 was coming out had absolutely no clue what they were talking about.
That was "confirmed" in the write up about the processor announcement at the Microprocessor Forum:
"Breaking Through Compute Intensive Barriers - IBM's New 64-bit PowerPC Microprocessor
Peter Sandon, Senior Processor Architect, Power PC Organization,
IBM Microelectronics IBM is disclosing the technical details of a new 64-bit PowerPC microprocessor designed for desktops and entry-level servers. Based on the award winning Power4 design, this processor is an 8-way superscalar design that fully supports Symmetric MultiProcessing. The processor is further enhanced by a vector processing unit implementing over 160 specialized vector instructions and implements a system interface capable of up to 6.4GB/s."
The bit of interest is "The processor is further enhanced by a vector processing unit implementing over 160 specialized vector instructions"
<strong>I wonder if those Alti-Vec savvy apps require a recompling for use with this "new" vector unit.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If they do the developers will have time to recompile them anyway. Apple will incorporate any changes needed into their compiler before the chip is even released.
Remember MWNY 2001? How about MWSF 2002? The G5 has been anticipated a *lot* longer than this new-fangled GP-UL.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I should have been clear on my question. I meant, has there ever been a chip at the Microprocessor Forum that generated this much interest and anticipation?
Regarding the Uzi, it was a joking comment from Moki I believe. Very roughly from memory, if Apple didn't have a new microprocessor before 2004, SJ would stalk the halls with an Uzi. If I got it wrong, sorry.
The Uzi comment. Was in response to someone whining that the GP-UL wouldn't arrive until 2004.
[quote]Originally posted by moki:
<strong>
2004? If Apple isn't using a radically spiffed up processor by the end of the 2003 calendar year, Mr. Jobs is going to finally lose his zen-like control and bring an Uzi into work, going out in a blaze of glory and heated metal.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Edit: It's worth mentioning moki's insight has been spot on as of late
Comments
<strong>
Yes but it was obviously made from a Powerpoint presentation that was created much earlier than that. Did you notice that the "Apollo program" was referred to as a "new technology"? Sorry, but it looks to me like someone updated a presentation from last year's Smart Networks Developer Forum (SNDF) for presentation at this year's Forum. (2002 Recap).
Also, you'll note that the HiPerMOS perfromance roadmap has .13 parts targeted for the end of 2001. Yet here we are at the end of 2002, and I'm not seeing any 0.13 products out from Moto. Unless I'm missing something?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Good point, Tomb, this is an old document. Mot did not suceed to implement SOI 0,13 like he expected , he was oblige to downgrade to SOI 0,18 and he did not increase the size of the L2cache (512 K was great on SOI 0,13 but to big on SOI 0,18).
<strong>
Also, you'll note that the HiPerMOS perfromance roadmap has .13 parts targeted for the end of 2001. Yet here we are at the end of 2002, and I'm not seeing any 0.13 products out from Moto. Unless I'm missing something?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes I agree with much of what you say but remember we ARE dealing with MOT here (MOT=delays)... Here is how I see it.
MOT would never make changes to the G4 unless the changes were at the request and/or agreed by Apple. Just like IBM wouldn't go out and expend the massive dollars to build a new CPU unless it already had customers SIGNED UP to buy em (as in contracted or formal agreement to use/buy them with an 'out clause' for the buyer so if IBM messes up and doesn't deliver in a window of X the deal is off)
I'm not sure if this is *exactly* how things work but it seems to be a reasonable way to do things.
So if we look at where we are now and assume the above holds true.
- IBM wouldn't build a GPUL without someone stepping up to the plate to buy them. Sure IBM will use em too but since the gpul isn't gonna be a replacment for the Power4 IBM I'm sure would like to (need?) another company buying the chips. From what we know Apple is the odds on favorite to fill that spot. IBM has it's own time table for when this CPU will be ready... It isn't tied to anything on the MOT side of the PPC fence.
- MOT wouldn't make changes (they cost money) to the G4 a (pretty much) Apple specific CPU unless Apple agreed to it. When I say agree I mean some form of contract with MOT to buy enough of the 'new feature' G4 CPUs to make it worth MOTS time (and money) MOT had to spend to make the changes in the first place.
Neither of these are a real issue...
But it looks like we have two ways to look at the future.
MOT G4++ being 1st out of the gate (not that I like it but this seems most likly)
- MOT G4++ machines in January
- IBM GPUL machines in Aug/Sep/Oct
- MOT G4++ moves down to the iMac/eMac (in their own time table)
What I don't like about this is the short life span of 'todays' machines. 4 months a tad quick to re-gen the desktop units.
G4 Duals just came out in Sept (4 month life)
G4++ In January (9ish month life)
G5 (err GPUL) In Aug/Sep/Oct
IBM GPUL and MOT G4++ showing up at the same time (this could happen and I'd like it but that is why I don't think it'll happen)
- IBM GPUL machines in March time frame.
- MOT G4++ iMac/eMac in March time frame.
This fixes some of the issues of about todays boxes having such a short life. Now it's would be close to 8 or so months (still short but not outta the question).
I really do like that 2nd plan since it's much cleaner but so many people think IBM based boxes are still 'late summer / fall' it could be I'm just wishfull thinking again.
..edit..
finally... MOT better have those plans still 'in the works' or Apple is in deep trouble. Sure Apple's desktop space will be fine given what we know/assume about the GPUL but the laptop space still needs an upgrade path. From things I've seen (not public yet) the size of the GPUL seems to be too big for use in laptops. I don't know about heat or low power functions of the GPUL (I wish) but my thinking is if the chip is larger than todays G4 (plus being built with a smaller process then todays G4) that cpu is gonna run hot and isn't gonna be battery friendly. Total speculation but it makes sense.
One bad rub with the 2nd plan...
If G4++ and GPUL aren't ready till Mar/Apr then what will Apple do for MWSF? Yea I know they have tried to push hardware away from the MW events but they have to have something... Jag is 'old news' and Panther is 'too soon' some other iApp or updates to existing ones should work (iPhoto iMovie are both rumored) as for hardware they can't really speed up the eMac/iMac too much... Well okay maybe 1Ghz (single processor) since all of the Pro machines are now DP and maybe a new Powerbook or iBook with bluetooth... Well yea any combo that stuff would take care of MWSF (people might be bummed but what else is new).
If they have a rumored iDevice (Cam / Phone / ???) that would/should fix that too.
Okay now I really like my second idea...
Dave
[ 10-13-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</p>
<a href="http://www.forbes.com/technology/newswire/2002/10/13/rtr749520.html"; target="_blank">Forbes IBM GPUL link</a>
Article says sources say Apple to use, but not ready until late next year at 1.8 GHZ.
[ 10-13-2002: Message edited by: CodeWarrior ]</p>
<strong>
. . . MOT would never make changes to the G4 unless the changes were at the request and/or agreed by Apple. Just like IBM wouldn't go out and expend the massive dollars to build a new CPU unless it already had customers SIGNED UP to buy em . . .
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I believe this too. IBM certainly has a use for the GPUL, but it is questionable whether their own, in-house usage would have been enough to justify the development costs. I think IBM made the GPUL for Apple, to Apple's requirements, but intends to use it too. Regarding Motorola, if we see G4 updates, it will be something Apple contracted for long ago. Who knows, it might be the last update from Motorola.
As for the new PowerMacs, the possibilities are almost too numerous to begin speculating. Here is just one more to add to the pot.
When the GPUL first appears, it will be the 130 nanometer process and be in the top two models of PowerMacs. The bottom two will be the new G4s from Motorola. The case will be the same as it is now, with plenty of cooling. Later, the GPUL will be the 90 nanometer process and be in all PowerMac models. At that time there may also be a new case, and the new G4s will move down to the iMac and eMac. The reason I say top two models is that there may be a real workstation class Mac at the very top.
I change my guess about PowerMacs. The first 970 chips will already be 90 nanometers, and the whole PowerMac line will use it. No earlier introduction on the 130 nanometer process.
<strong>Wow, you can't get clearer than that. It is the PPC 970, a single core and available the second half of 2003. Oh yes, 1.8 GHz. We even learned that IBM will make the Playstation 3 chip, though it didn't state that directly.
I change my guess about PowerMacs. The first 970 chips will already be 90 nanometers, and the whole PowerMac line will use it. No earlier introduction on the 130 nanometer process.</strong><hr></blockquote>
snoopy.... "Wow, you can't get clearer than that." ?!?! This is in reference to what? INPUT! DAVE NEEDS INPUT!!!!
Sorry for the bad movie quote... but I am serious was this a 'public' disclosure or something you just heard?
Dave
For all the people that are too lazy to press a link.
[quote]IBM server chip seen slimmed down for Apple Macs
Reuters, 10.13.02, 3:49 PM ET
(TRANSMISSION EMBARGO UNTIL 12:01 am EDT/0401 GMT)
ARMONK, N.Y. (Reuters) - International Business Machines Corp. Monday announced a microchip for personal computers that will crunch data in chunks twice as big as the current standard and is expected by industry watchers to be used by Apple Computer Inc.
Apple was not available to comment, and IBM declined to comment on which PC makers would use the chip, but its plans would mark a change for the industry, which has emphasized the importance of the speed of a chip rather than its ability to handle heavy workloads.
IBM said its new PowerPC chip would go into production late next year and process 64 bits of data at a time at 1.8 Gigahertz, or 1.8 billion cycles per second.
The microchip is the brain of a computer, although personal computer chips now come only in 32-bit flavors, which are tuned to do light workloads fast but cannot handle heavy duty server chores.
Chekib Akrout, vice president of IBM microprocessor development, said big databases and the Internet challenged PCs: "This is the time to introduce a 64-bit machine capable of being used on a desktop," he said in a telephone interview.
An industry source said Cupertino, California-based Apple would use the chip in its Macintosh computers.
That could catapult Apple, long dogged by the belief its chips are slower than those produced by Intel Corp., to the technological head of the class and put to rest speculation it was considering moving soon to the Intel platform.
The fastest of the current generation of PowerPC chips in Macintosh computers runs at 1.25 Gigahertz, while the top Intel Pentium is 2.8 Gigahertz. Apple says its machines are already more efficient than Intel-based ones.
Advanced Micro Devices Inc., the main competitor to Intel, is also developing a 64-bit chip code-named Hammer that is expected early next year, although it is planned primarily for servers rather than personal computers.
SERVER LITE
IBM said the new PowerPC 970 microchip is a "lite" version of its Power4 chip, which it launched last fall in its sophisticated computer server, code-named "Regatta."
The PowerPC can run 32-bit applications as well as 64-bit ones and is tuned for graphics, like some Intel chips, IBM said. However, it is not designed to run programs written for Intel chips.
The PowerPC has the same energy-saving attributes as the Power4 but uses only one central processing unit, not two.
The chip will be available in the second half of 2003 and be built in IBM's East Fishkill, New York, chip plant, a new facility that is currently doing test-runs and aims to ramp up into production on other chips later this year.
One analyst said the chip's attributes mean it would work well in the professional publishing sector, for high-end graphics and other media-intense tasks.
"This processor would be a great processor for a Macintosh," said Tom Halfhill, an analyst with San Jose, California-based In-Stat/MDR.
IBM, the world's largest computer company, has seen revenue from its microelectronics division dwindle in recent quarters as the semiconductor sector has been hit by a sharp downturn in demand. It has restructured the unit, selling off some assets.
IBM announced earlier this week more details on its new microelectronics design unit, where it will design chips and other electronics for customers, including Sony Corp.
Copyright 2002, Reuters News Service<hr></blockquote>
[ 10-13-2002: Message edited by: Telomar ]</p>
snoopy.... "Wow, you can't get clearer than that." ?!?! This is in reference to what? INPUT! DAVE NEEDS INPUT!!!!
Sorry for the bad movie quote... but I am serious was this a 'public' disclosure or something you just heard?
Dave<hr></blockquote>
I think it's in reference to <a href="http://www.forbes.com/technology/newswire/2002/10/13/rtr749520.html"; target="_blank">this Forbes article</a> mentioned in a previous post.
<strong>Interestingly enough it initially says going into production late next year, which would mean a 2004 release, then says available 2nd half 2003. I'm inclined to think the first is an error but still Steve Jobs with an Uzi could be interesting.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I hope you are right. Late may mean last half. In any case, I believe Apple will have hardware waiting for those chips as they come from IBM.
Has there ever been a microprocessor with so much interest and anticipation?
[ 10-13-2002: Message edited by: snoopy ]</p>
A bit more on topic, [quote] Has there ever been a microprocessor with so much interest and anticipation? <hr></blockquote> Yes. Remember MWNY 2001? How about MWSF 2002? The G5 has been anticipated a *lot* longer than this new-fangled GP-UL. But, the GP-UL does have a lot more substantial information behind it than the G5 ever did. Of course, you could always say that the GP-UL is the G5 . . . but that's a different monster all together.
<strong>Allright, I'm curious. What is this mysterious Uzi quote that is constantly being referred to?
A bit more on topic, Yes. Remember MWNY 2001? How about MWSF 2002? The G5 has been anticipated a *lot* longer than this new-fangled GP-UL. But, the GP-UL does have a lot more substantial information behind it than the G5 ever did. Of course, you could always say that the GP-UL is the G5 . . . but that's a different monster all together.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sure -- the difference is that the people who were claiming the G5 was coming out had absolutely no clue what they were talking about.
The GP-UL, on the other hand, is very real.
<strong>The article didn't say anything about Altivec, but I suppose it's been *confirmed* by other sources.</strong><hr></blockquote>
VMX
"Breaking Through Compute Intensive Barriers - IBM's New 64-bit PowerPC Microprocessor
Peter Sandon, Senior Processor Architect, Power PC Organization,
IBM Microelectronics IBM is disclosing the technical details of a new 64-bit PowerPC microprocessor designed for desktops and entry-level servers. Based on the award winning Power4 design, this processor is an 8-way superscalar design that fully supports Symmetric MultiProcessing. The processor is further enhanced by a vector processing unit implementing over 160 specialized vector instructions and implements a system interface capable of up to 6.4GB/s."
The bit of interest is "The processor is further enhanced by a vector processing unit implementing over 160 specialized vector instructions"
<strong>I wonder if those Alti-Vec savvy apps require a recompling for use with this "new" vector unit.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If they do the developers will have time to recompile them anyway. Apple will incorporate any changes needed into their compiler before the chip is even released.
<strong>
Remember MWNY 2001? How about MWSF 2002? The G5 has been anticipated a *lot* longer than this new-fangled GP-UL.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I should have been clear on my question. I meant, has there ever been a chip at the Microprocessor Forum that generated this much interest and anticipation?
Regarding the Uzi, it was a joking comment from Moki I believe. Very roughly from memory, if Apple didn't have a new microprocessor before 2004, SJ would stalk the halls with an Uzi. If I got it wrong, sorry.
[quote]Originally posted by moki:
<strong>
2004? If Apple isn't using a radically spiffed up processor by the end of the 2003 calendar year, Mr. Jobs is going to finally lose his zen-like control and bring an Uzi into work, going out in a blaze of glory and heated metal.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Edit: It's worth mentioning moki's insight has been spot on as of late
[ 10-14-2002: Message edited by: Telomar ]
[ 10-14-2002: Message edited by: Telomar ]</p>