IBM Presentation

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 35
    crusadercrusader Posts: 1,129member
    Hmm, I should pick that book up then.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 35
    gensorgensor Posts: 48member
    Very strange. The lack of a specific mention of Apple in the IBM news. I cannot figure that out.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 35
    leonardleonard Posts: 528member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorph

    IBM is giving away design tools?! I almost fainted when I saw that. This is a company that meters their drinking fountains (well, OK, maybe not ).





    Yes, but it's a design tool to design specialized POWER chips (from standard components, probably). You can't do anything with the design yourself, you'd have to go to IBM or a licensed vendor to get the designed POWER chip manufactured. Is it really a design tool or just a put the major pieces together type of tool?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 35
    leonardleonard Posts: 528member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gensor

    Very strange. The lack of a specific mention of Apple in the IBM news. I cannot figure that out.



    Yeah, they mention Princeton, which of course will be using Xserve G5's, but don't mention Apple.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 35
    macgregormacgregor Posts: 1,434member
    This mentions Apple twice.



    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1558747,00.asp



    Another macnn article only mentions Sony?



    http://www.macnn.com
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 35
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Leonard

    Yes, but it's a design tool to design specialized POWER chips (from standard components, probably). You can't do anything with the design yourself, you'd have to go to IBM or a licensed vendor to get the designed POWER chip manufactured. Is it really a design tool or just a put the major pieces together type of tool?



    That wouldn't have stopped IBM from charging $10K per seat ten years ago. They still charge eye-popping prices for friggin' PL/I compilers.



    The idea that they're giving away design tools is astonishing, even if they're "only" SoC design tools.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 35
    costiquecostique Posts: 1,084member
    Hmm. Very optimistic. I especially like the part about Power5 products availability in the 2nd half of 2004.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 35
    Hmm. Very optimistic. I especially like the part about Power5 products availability in the 2nd half of 2004



    We have a winner !



    That's how Steve is going to meet his 3 GHz by "this time next year" goal.



    Straight to 3 GHz G6 on July 1, announced at WWDC, shipping in September anyone?



    (edited for italics)
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 35
    johnpgjohnpg Posts: 37member
    Don't get too excited. The Power 5 is going to first be in IBM's large iSeries (AS/400) servers, then the pSeries (formerly RS/6000). We won't see a chopped down Power 5 (the 970 is a little brother to the Power 4) anytime soon. Certainly not this year. The 970fx is the chip for this year. If it goes to 3ghz then we'll get it. But I don't suspect there's anything in the pipeline regarding the Power 5 architecture.



    Cheers,

    John
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 35
    chris vchris v Posts: 460member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by johnpg

    Don't get too excited. The Power 5 is going to first be in IBM's large iSeries (AS/400) servers, then the pSeries (formerly RS/6000). We won't see a chopped down Power 5 (the 970 is a little brother to the Power 4) anytime soon. Certainly not this year. The 970fx is the chip for this year. If it goes to 3ghz then we'll get it. But I don't suspect there's anything in the pipeline regarding the Power 5 architecture.



    Cheers,

    John




    You may find yourself corrected on that. I seem to recall it being noted that IBM would be developing the single-core vesion of the Power5 alongside, instead of later, like with the Power4. The PPC 970 was an add-on after the Power4 was already in production, which is why the time-gap between the two chips. If they are developing the Power 5 and the 980 single-core chip simultaneously, there's no real reason why we won't see it in the relatively near future. (Not that I'm prediction that it'll ship in Apples this fall, but it's not beyond the pale of possibility)



    CV
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 35
    tinktink Posts: 395member
    I too recall the same thing.....

    Time will tell yet once again......
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 35
    jcgjcg Posts: 777member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by chris v

    You may find yourself corrected on that. I seem to recall it being noted that IBM would be developing the single-core vesion of the Power5 alongside, instead of later, like with the Power4. The PPC 970 was an add-on after the Power4 was already in production, which is why the time-gap between the two chips. If they are developing the Power 5 and the 980 single-core chip simultaneously, there's no real reason why we won't see it in the relatively near future. (Not that I'm prediction that it'll ship in Apples this fall, but it's not beyond the pale of possibility)



    CV




    They may have developed it at the same time, but it may be too much to ask to get the production up and running for both chips at the same time.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 35
    shawkshawk Posts: 116member
    It is my understanding that the mass production version of the Power 5 has/had a higher priority than the actual Power 5. This may relate to the anticipated income of a high volume CPU.



    While the G5 was a spin off of the Power 4, future Power series may be considered spin offs of the mass production CPUs.



    Of course, I could be making this up.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 35
    chris vchris v Posts: 460member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JCG

    They may have developed it at the same time, but it may be too much to ask to get the production up and running for both chips at the same time.



    True. I'm just trying to say that the lag between Power5 and its single-core variant won't neccessarily be as long as the lag between the Power4 and the 970. I, of course, have no clue when, if ever, we'll see Apple desktops with a 980.



    CV
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 35
    @homenow@homenow Posts: 998member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by chris v

    True. I'm just trying to say that the lag between Power5 and its single-core variant won't neccessarily be as long as the lag between the Power4 and the 970. I, of course, have no clue when, if ever, we'll see Apple desktops with a 980.



    CV




    True, but there was over 6 months between the 970 and 970FX, so I think that it would be reasonable to expect that much of a lag between the Power5 and the 9XX (whatever IBM calls it officially). That would put the 970's successor into next year's production cycle. Not too shabby really, but not the optimistic take a lot of people are looking for.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.