IBM 90 nm SOC-processor for Apple?
IBM is about to deliver its first volume production 90 nm SOC-design, and the customer is Apple, says Elerctronic News. Is 970FX or the system controller in G5 systems SOC designs? I think not.. so what are they talking about?
Comments
Originally posted by Henriok
IBM is about to deliver its first volume production 90 nm SOC-design, and the customer is Apple, says Elerctronic News. Is 970FX or the system controller in G5 systems SOC designs? I think not.. so what are they talking about?
I call typo.
I think they mean to say SOI at 90 nm. Nowhere else in the 'article' do they mention actual chipdesign. They only talk about production and they do mention SOI. That's my take.
Originally posted by kroehl
I call typo.
I think they mean to say SOI at 90 nm. Nowhere else in the 'article' do they mention actual chipdesign. They only talk about production and they do mention SOI. That's my take.
I think you hit it on the head. Typo.
I'm taking it at face value. That is it appears as if Apple is about to recieve a customed designed processor just for them. Of course the delivery of the 90nm 970 is due around this time also, so they could be talking about that. It owuld be really groovy if the report is accurate and a SOC is destined for Apple. Such a chip could have a tremendous impact on either their low cost lines or their laptops.
We will soon see either way. I do know one thing though, Apple needs to get on the ball with respect to the iMac or its replacement so something is probally targetted at that market. The Laptops are almost in the same shape peformance wise.
Dave
Originally posted by kroehl
I call typo.
I think they mean to say SOI at 90 nm. Nowhere else in the 'article' do they mention actual chipdesign. They only talk about production and they do mention SOI. That's my take.
Originally posted by wizard69
I'm taking it at face value. That is it appears as if Apple is about to recieve a customed designed processor just for them.
If it is so, then why we did not hear anything about this processor? Why IBM did not make an announcement, like they did with the 970?
Anyway, let's just see how the sentence reads if we "correct" for the typo:
IBM is about to deliver its very first volume production of an SOC on 90nm, said Reeves. This will be a design for Apple.
becomes
IBM is about to deliver its very first volume production of an SOI on 90nm, said Reeves. This will be a design for Apple.
Doesn't really work. Earlier in the article, he structures it like "our SOI 0.13-micron process." You'd have to put "chip" in there to start to sound right:
IBM is about to deliver its very first volume production of an SOI chip on 90nm, said Reeves. This will be a design for Apple.
The easiest explanation is a typo, I admit. Is it true that this the first 90nm product ever from IBM?
Screed
Edit: Okay, back to the other side of the fence. Five minutes of Googling would indicate that this would be IBM's first SOI 90nm product.
- Apple fabrique des SOC ? - Lionel - 14:29:44
http://www.reed-electronics.com a publi? une intervention de Tom Reeves, VP et manager G?n?ral de la division ASIC d'IBM.
Une phrase est int?ressante:
IBM is about to deliver its very first volume production of an SOC on 90nm, said Reeves. This will be a design for Apple
IBM est sur le point de fournir ? Apple sa toute premire production de SOC en 90 nm, ce sera un design pour Apple.
Nous avons interrog? un sp?cialiste qui nous a expliqu? ce qu'est un SOC. SOC = System On Chip, ou pour le commun des mortels un processeur avec ses p?riph?riques sur une seule puce. Notre sp?cialiste pense cependant que le terme utilis? trs ? la mode l'aurait ?t? ? la place d'ASIC.
Dans ce cas, sous ce terme, on pourrait entendre qu'IBM a sorti pour Apple les premiers contr?leurs de carte mre en 90 nm. Et l? l'information prend un sens, car on voit mal Apple fabriquer ses propres processeurs.
Selon les informations que l'on trouve sur le site http://www.970eval.com/BlockDiagram_970.html, on apprend que le contr?leur (NorthBridge) d'un PPC 970 consomme 29 Watts (? 1 GHz). Or, il est grav? en 130 nm
C'est plus qu'un processeur PPC 970 Fx ? 2 GHz.
On peut donc sans trop se lancer dans des sp?culations os?es, penser qu'IBM va livrer ? Apple des NorthBrige grav?s ? 90nm qui chauffent mois et peuvent aller probablement plus vite. En appliquant ? cette puce la rgle de 3 du PPC 970, on obtiendrait environ 8w de consommation pour cette puce ? 1 GHz.
C'est infiniment mieux, surtout si elle doit tre embarqu?e dans un portable. Mais l? c'est une sp?culation.
En apart?, on nous a appris qu'Apple vendait son NorthBridge ? d'autres clients, dont IBM. En revanche l'autre (petite) partie du contr?leur, le SouthBridge est sp?cifique ? Apple car le vendre ?quivaudrait ? accepter que des clones existent.
Originally posted by sCreeD
[snip]
The easiest explanation is a typo, I admit.
Excellent analysis. Thank you.
SOC is often used to refer to anything other than a memory device. The Semiconductor industry (the test side, anyways), is often divided as "Memory" and "SOC"; the later covering everything that the first does not.
It may be technically inacurate, but it is the reality.
That's my take on it.
Originally posted by PB
Here is Macbidouille opinion (sorry, no time to translate):
So, briefly: it says that, according to some specialist they asked, the term SOC is used much today in the place of ASIC. They believe that the article is about the NorthBridge of the G5 being now at 90 nm, and they estimate that the process shrink would reduce the power consumption of the NorthBridge from 29 W to 8(!) W (at 1 GHz). Powerbooks anyone?
Originally posted by THT
I think it is quite clear the article is talking about ASICs too. And that ASIC is most likely the system ASIC for G5 systems.
That's what I thought as well THT, but what about SOC System On Chip? I remember a big stink about IBM starting research in that a few years back, and the reality of such a processor could possibly lead us to a new device from Apple.
BTW, I was in the Minneapple a few days back THT. You still live there?
Originally posted by Henriok
IBM is about to deliver its first volume production 90 nm SOC-design, and the customer is Apple, says Elerctronic News. Is 970FX or the system controller in G5 systems SOC designs? I think not.. so what are they talking about?
SOC could refer to a 'System On a Chip' design which would refer to an all in one chip for some sort of compact device, usually low-power. That would explain the custom design since Apple would have spec'ed it out for IBM to produce. If it's PPC based, it could be for a tablet, palm-like device, phone (doubting), or perhaps the ever-rumored set-top box.
-=- (veering offtopic)
Having said that, I think it'd be nice if it were high-performance (not necessarily low-power) and led to a radical and insanely great new iMac. Hmm, perhaps the new iMac could be screens with this chip in them (making them full-blown computers, albeit auxiliary speed) but attachable to a full-blown computer station (optional) with full speed graphics, CPU(s), h/d, etc..
-=- (really offtopic)
What I really see Apple needing *right*now* is the SoHo computer though, not a sexy one. This would be a business class iMac AIO --- no detachable anything, just pure ergonomics and business. Let the iMac (e.g., two-piece) evolve into an insanely great home computer, and introduce a new business class AIO desktop line. What makes a great (sexy) home computer does not necessarily make an insanely great (low theft, high reliability, high security) business computer. It also needs to look the part. Apple has just started their retail store small business Wednesdays, so they recognize the (a?) need, but it would be nice if they had a computer specifically suited to that market --- with all the latest fixings!
Cheers!
Originally posted by onlooker
That's what I thought as well THT, but what about SOC System On Chip? I remember a big stink about IBM starting research in that a few years back, and the reality of such a processor could possibly lead us to a new device from Apple.
BTW, I was in the Minneapple a few days back THT. You still live there?
Hehe, I haven't lived in Minneapolis since my Univ of Minnesota days, a long way back. I do visit quite a bit with family there. I've been in Houston for the last 10 years, and with the new wifey moving down here in 3 months, I'm probably staying in Houston for a long while. However, I would love it if I could move back to MN. Wouldn't mind visits to the North shore, drives along the Mississippi and fishing in all the lakes at all, though. Just need to find better employment than I have now.
But back to the article. The article doesn't talk about chips really. It's talking about IBM's poor performance in the foundry business, which I believe is to provide silicon platters, and chip masks to various chip makers. Just forget about the middle two paragraphs everyone and read the 1st and last sentences. Reeves is the VP and general manager of IBM's ASIC division. Reeves said they are about to deliver a 90 nm ASIC, "SOC", to Apple. An ASIC, application specific integrated circuit, usually refers to the "northbridge" and "southbridge" chips or any other chips that provide a specific function. They do not refer to microprocessors or memory chips. If Reeves is saying such a thing, and considering his position, I think it means Apple is about to take delivery of an ASIC.
So the typo is, in all likelihood, that EN mixed up SOC and ASIC. It should have said "... production of an ASIC on 90 nm..." and would thusly be grammatically correct.
We will soon see either way. I do know one thing though, Apple needs to get on the ball with respect to the iMac or its replacement so something is probally targetted at that market. The Laptops are almost in the same shape peformance wise.
System on a chip with anything G5 like MAY be what Apple is looking for to reduce costs and reduce prices on their consumer Macs.
Clearly, if Apple are serious about Marketshare then need to be more aggressive and offer something more compelling.
The horror stories of customers marching into Apple stores with cheaper PC newspaper clippings tells its own story.
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by occam
SOC could refer to a 'System On a Chip' design which would refer to an all in one chip for some sort of compact device, usually low-power. That would explain the custom design since Apple would have spec'ed it out for IBM to produce. If it's PPC based, it could be for a tablet, palm-like device, phone (doubting), or perhaps the ever-rumored set-top box.
http://www.macnet2.com/more.php?id=455_0_1_0
Then these two things go together...
Originally posted by THT
But back to the article. The article doesn't talk about chips really. It's talking about IBM's poor performance in the foundry business, which I believe is to provide silicon platters, and chip masks to various chip makers. Just forget about the middle two paragraphs everyone and read the 1st and last sentences. Reeves is the VP and general manager of IBM's ASIC division. Reeves said they are about to deliver a 90 nm ASIC, "SOC", to Apple. An ASIC, application specific integrated circuit, usually refers to the "northbridge" and "southbridge" chips or any other chips that provide a specific function. They do not refer to microprocessors or memory chips. If Reeves is saying such a thing, and considering his position, I think it means Apple is about to take delivery of an ASIC.
So the typo is, in all likelihood, that EN mixed up SOC and ASIC. It should have said "... production of an ASIC on 90 nm..." and would thusly be grammatically correct.
Apple insider is now reporting it as a System on a chip delivery, and that last guy just posted a link to a sudden shift for Apple having a Palm type device. Everybody knows SJ says no handhelds.
This looks like a bad dream about to happen. People are going to start believing these rumors, and then start their rabid infested complaints once they figure out these products don't exist.
I think these rumors are started by the competition to make Apple lose customers.
And is that wasn't enough Alias is going to be bought away from SGI now by an independent investment company. Which will mean I will be buying my first PC soon, and leaving the Mac. That 3% market share is getting smaller by the second. Apple looks so good at times, but then BLAM! it's in a state of ruin.
Originally posted by onlooker
And is that wasn't enough Alias is going to be bought away from SGI now by an independent investment company. Which will mean I will be buying my first PC soon, and leaving the Mac. That 3% market share is getting smaller by the second. Apple looks so good at times, but then BLAM! it's in a state of ruin.
Why would the investment company ignore 40% - and growing - of A|W's market?
There is little question that Alias/Wavefront is in play. However, with whom is not known.