G5 -- The Good News or Bad?
Reply 81 of 115
August 22, 2002 7:08PM
Maybe IBM will fill the gap for Apple with an enhanced G3 Sahara running at speeds of well over 1 GHz. Perhaps it could have some Vector Processing enhancements as well.
Reply 82 of 115
tomb of the unknown
August 23, 2002 12:17AM
[quote]Originally posted by admactanium:
<strong>the information i had is that the ibm's chip was sampling in march or april.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The way this parses out, IBM would has had samples since last April. Don't know if that's what you meant though.
[quote]<strong>i dunno how long it takes to get from sampling to being in a product. but that info was from a very good source. the same source that told me that ibm was working on the next gen chip rather than moto.</strong><hr></blockquote>Usually means production volumes somewhere around 6 mos from samples unless something goes wrong.
So, it's possible we could have production quantities of Macs using this chip (which assumes it is a Mac chip) by MWSF if the samples live up to expectations and they don't have to do major revisions to the design.
Of course if you (or your little bird) meant
March or April, then we won't see them 'til next summer, if then.
Reply 83 of 115
tomb of the unknown
August 23, 2002 12:24AM
[quote]Originally posted by filmmaker2002:
<strong>Has Apple realized that by the time the G5 is released at the rumored clock speeds, Intel's processors will probably be upwards of around 4 or possibly even 5 Ghz.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And manufacturers are talking about having to add a line of mobos designed just to support the P4 at 3GHz and higher. Why? Power requirements. It might be faster, but I'm wondering how much more clock they can pump before it becomes a space heater.
Reply 84 of 115
August 23, 2002 5:20AM
snoopy, I think you asked what was meant by sampling. When a chip samples, that means that it has been designed already and the process for manufacturing has already been decided (processing and cleaning techniques of the wafers, etc). Now, test chips have been made several times over at this point, but they move the fabrication to a production-style fab and run a few cycles at "full blown" speed and quantity. So even though you have made a great 2GHz chip with your R&D equipment, sampling puts the production in a day to day fab and churns them out at production pace. At this point, last minute tinkering of the process (chemical ratios, time intervals between production steps, etc) is done to optimize and the final products are retested.
These samples are the benchmarks for stating projections on how well the chip will be produced and the (close to) actual yield. This is the final step before scheduling production runs in the fabs and the point where Motorola typically fails, since their actual fabs are in such sorry shape compared to their R&D labs. IBM, on the otherhand, kicks butt
[ 08-23-2002: Message edited by: b8rtm8nn ]</p>
Reply 85 of 115
August 23, 2002 7:39AM
[quote]Originally posted by b8rtm8nn:
<strong> When a chip samples, that means that it has been designed already and the process for manufacturing has already been decided . . . test chips have been made several times over at this point, but they move the fabrication to a production-style fab and run a few cycles at "full blown" speed and quantity . . . sampling puts the production in a day to day fab and churns them out at production pace. This is the final step before scheduling production runs in the fabs
<strong> IBM is manufacturing chips using the 130-nanometer process at the plant. The company plans to increase manufacturing quickly and reach full capacity early next year. It also plans a quick move to 90-nanometer production, which will reduce the size of the chips, allowing them to reach higher speeds and increase its manufacturing capacity yet again.
; target="_blank">the article</a>
Seems that my reading of the information released about the new IBM fab at Fishkill shows that they are well along the process you outline above. Assuming that the chips they are producing NOW are the fabled "G5" for the next Mac, it would be apparent to me that full scale production runs are quite close. We will know in October.
[ 08-23-2002: Message edited by: Aphelion ]
[ 08-23-2002: Message edited by: Aphelion ]</p>
Reply 86 of 115
August 23, 2002 8:48AM
[quote]All of you imply a connection where none exists between IBM's new Power-derived chip and Apple's "G5" aka next-generation successor to the G4.<hr></blockquote>
This is a rumor forum, isn't it?
[quote]All IBM did was mention in a few lines a new processor to be discussed in October. Nothing ELSE was ever said including what it really will be (server-specific, desktop, portable anything) nor WHEN it will actually ship.<hr></blockquote>
The announcement specifically said for desktops. Really, it did.
[quote]All of you claiming to "know" someone at IBM who knows details about a project they are not related to or working on is silly.<hr></blockquote>
I'm not and most people here aren't.
[quote]Only one man in the world trully knows the future of Apple and he's a bit pissed at all these web sites running rampant speculation about products that will never exist and therefore depressing CURRENT hardware sales.<hr></blockquote>
Only one man knowning the future sure puts a strain on his time, since he personally has to do all the research and development in his basement.
Apple's decline in sales has nothing to do with these forums and everything to do with performance and price.
[quote]If you need a new Mac, GET ONE NOW and SHUT UP about what it "lacks" or whatever mythical spec or standard it DIDNT ship with. In 6-8 months it will be replaced with something else, thats how Apple has worked for YEARS now.<hr></blockquote>
This is a rumor forum, isn't it?????
[quote]Nothing mysterious about product upgrades, new products will eventually come. Just don't buy before an expo and you will be fine.<hr></blockquote>
Reply 87 of 115
August 23, 2002 10:07AM
[quote]Originally posted by Analogue bubblebath:
Fear not, the POWER4 (and the POWER3) use a 64-bit PowerPC ISA, which is backwards compatible with the 32-bit PowerPC ISA of the PowerPC line of chips (G4, G3, 604e, etc.).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks! I recall that the 601 (G1) had additional instructions that were part of the Power arichtecture. Moving to the 603/604 some of these instructions were dropped, which made the PowerPC ISA a subset of the Power ISA. Likewise, moving back to the Power ISA shouldn't be an issue. However, I don't recall reading anything about 32bit compatibility in the Power4 chip. Thanks for the update.
Reply 88 of 115
August 23, 2002 11:55AM
[quote]Apple's decline in sales has nothing to do with these forums and everything to do with performance and price. <hr></blockquote>
uh. I think the economy might have something to do with it. All PC makers are selling less. If we were in the middle a depression, people would buy less macs even if they were shipping with G1000s in them.
We are in what many people perceive to be a recession, people buy less when they are unsure of their jobs.
We are also in the post bubble internet age. With all the dot coms dying and saturation of user_levels with internet access ascending less people need computer.
and when intel ships more megahurtz instead of needs for higher megahurtz. (not needed by most people using the internet and word proc.) People have less need to upgrade to to new machines.
This economic slowdown has coincendtlly(sp) happened at the same time apple has hit its own procressor recession so in a way this is the best time for such a slowdown. (if you have to have one in the first place.)
the news and rumors of a power4 based Gwhatever gives me much hope and keeps me warm at night.
Reply 89 of 115
August 23, 2002 12:03PM
From IBM ~ October 10, 2000:
[quote]The facility is planned to begin operation in the second half of 2002, bringing up to 1000 new jobs to the region upon full production in early 2003.<hr></blockquote>
; target="_blank">IBM web page</a>
hmnn... Seems like they are meeting their forecasts. Full production of WHAT?
Reply 90 of 115
August 23, 2002 12:35PM
I know this article has been brought up before, but I thought it might need mentioning again.
The first indication I have seen that IBM was interested in a 64 bit processor with Altivec was in the following 1999 article.
; target="_blank">IBM, Motorola write Book E on the PowerPC</a>
By David Lammers
May 7, 1999 (11:02 a.m. EST) \t
"........The AltiVec PowerPC vector processing unit and instructions would be considered an APU under the Book E definition.
Asked whether IBM will develop a PowerPC that includes an AltiVec coprocessor, Elliott Newcombe, PowerPC product marketing manager at IBM's Research Triangle Park facility, said IBM is considering adding an AltiVec APU to one of IBM's designs.
"AltiVec could be an example of one of these coprocessors that could be plugged in [to a Book E-compliant PowerPC]," Newcombe said. "Nothing precludes IBM from doing that, but I cannot comment on whether a design is in progress. The market will decide whether we do that, and I can just say 'stay tuned.' "..... "
May 7, 1999 over THREE years ago.
"NOTHING PRECLUDES IBM FROM DOING THAT"
Dear Mr. Elliott Newcombe, we're staying tuned.
[ 08-23-2002: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>
Reply 91 of 115
August 23, 2002 12:47PM
Bang on Snoopy. I think you have hit the nail on the head.
Reply 92 of 115
August 23, 2002 12:48PM
Aphelion, i agree. the $1,000,000 question is:
why a new plant for this type of chip?
soley because ibm is going to be more agressive with linux and their current servers?
too early for the playstation 3 for it to be it?
or apple is going to be a big purchaser and they need the capcity.
or all of the above or someother thing we have no clue of.
Reply 93 of 115
August 23, 2002 1:04PM
[quote]Originally posted by keyboardf12:
<strong>uh. I think the economy might have something to do with it. All PC makers are selling less.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Opps, you are quite right. I should have included the slow economy as well. My point stands though, rumors here are not affecting sales and anyone, with money to spend, who is delaying purchasing an Apple computer, or buying elsewhere, is doing so do to lack of, or perceived lack of, power/price performance.
Even Steve Jobs so much as admitted it, when he said something to the effect that they would be catching up next year. Well, I think next year was last year and no promised land yet.
Reply 94 of 115
August 23, 2002 1:19PM
[quote] rumors here are not affecting sales and anyone <hr></blockquote>
I totally agree.
you mean we aren't as influencial as we think we are?!
Reply 95 of 115
August 23, 2002 2:09PM
[quote]Originally posted by keyboardf12:
<strong>Aphelion, i agree. the $1,000,000 question is:
why a new plant for this type of chip?</strong><hr></blockquote>
The whole plant isn't dedicated to this chip. The foundry will also make other chips for other customers (e.g. Nintendo), and there's apparently also an R&D facility there to work on new processors.
However, it looks like IBM is gearing up to churn out this latest PPC in quantity. :cool:
Reply 96 of 115
August 23, 2002 2:11PM
ahh forgot about. gecko / nintendo.
Reply 97 of 115
August 23, 2002 2:34PM
Anyone remember when Moto gave a presentation on the 7410 G4 (or some sort of announcemet)? If I remember correctly, Moto spilled the beans in the fall, and the 7410 was shipping in Titaniums by February.
I think MWSF is a good bet for IBM's new "G5".
Also, for something this huge, Apple would not want IBM to announce it until as late as possible. An Oct. announcement for a chip that will not ship in Macs until a year later seems doubtful.
Reply 98 of 115
August 23, 2002 2:49PM
Also, for something this huge, Apple would not want IBM to announce it until as late as possible. An Oct. announcement for a chip that will not ship in Macs until a year later seems doubtful.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If Apple made condition like that to IBM I think the answer would (and rightfully so) be in the line of "Fcuk you, mr Jobs"
Reply 99 of 115
August 23, 2002 3:18PM
yah think? for a couple of million chips a year, i could see ibm shutting up (for a little bit)
and maybe this little bit is until oct. and not jan feb march....
Reply 100 of 115
August 23, 2002 3:49PM
[quote]Originally posted by Anders:
If Apple made condition like that to IBM I think the answer would (and rightfully so) be in the line of "Fcuk you, mr Jobs"</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think so. Businessess like this like to co-operate with each other and this is a win for BOTH companies. You must remember that there is no pressure on IBM to announce this chip until it is ready. If they announce it now it is probably nearly ready.