G5 Trinity @ WWDC

17810121325

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 492
    henriokhenriok Posts: 537member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Res

    Does anyone have any solid information on the PPC975? I've been searching the web and all I've found are rumors. Is it on one of the published roadmaps?



    AFAIK there is no official word from IBM of any POWER5 derivative, so everything we "know" about 975 could be fabricated. On the other hand did Steve say at WWDC'03 that "the next generation G5" would run at 3 GHz "a year from now" and i really don't think that 970FX constitutes a next generation.
  • Reply 182 of 492
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member
    I find Kasper's comments quite interesting. And it is obvious, more or less, that Croquer is copying rumors here and there. As most representative case, I would mention the last updates in the Powerbook line. AppleInsider posted in the News Comments the exact model numbers, just to see them the next day in Croquer presented as a genuine source information .



    But Kasper's comments are bad news too:



    Quote:



    They have no 90nm in adequate quantities over 2GHz, and still do not.









    After that, I don't believe we will see anytime soon this so heavily discussed and anticipated 3 GHz G5. I am curious to see how Apple will cover this historical goof (didn't yet happen, but now I am confident it will).
  • Reply 183 of 492
    zapchudzapchud Posts: 844member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Res

    Does anyone have any solid information on the PPC975? I've been searching the web and all I've found are rumors. Is it on one of the published roadmaps?



    The closest we have to ***CONFEEERMED!!!!11 is this http://www-901.ibm.com/servers/eserv...lreport_1.html



    Awright, it's in chinese, but if you babelfish it, it'll become ... eh, sort of readable. But it's the number 975 hosted on IBM's site, at least. :-)
  • Reply 184 of 492
    costiquecostique Posts: 1,084member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by onlooker

    Where are these sources close to Apple? I am assuming that this means Apple will not hit 3GHz as promised at WWDC.



    And please let's not argue over the later revised time frame.




    See this quote:

    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kasper

    They [Apple] have no 90nm in adequate quantities over 2GHz, and still do not.



    Let's presume Kasper is right (though, of course, everybody can be misled by deliberately false information or even fooled into believing it by providing 'sources' with the same misinformation). While all is not lost yet, this, IMHO, clearly indicates huge problems with CPU yields anyway. The 3GHz summer deadline is about to arrive no later than the 30th of September anyway, however you count, regardless of your religion, etc. I should say, 4 months are not such a great deal of time, considering the whole process from CPU manufacturing to computer assembly. I don't want to raise FUD, but Mr. Jobs personally is quickly approaching a difficult (or tense, at the very least) moment of his life. If everything turns out as it should, these problems will very soon get forgotten. Otherwise, he will have a hard time explaining why Apple didn't hold his promise. And, worse yet, he won't be able to blame IBM because IBM did not announce 3GHz CPUs this year, not to mention this summer.



    Poor old Stevie...
  • Reply 185 of 492
    henriokhenriok Posts: 537member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Zapchud

    The closest we have to ***CONFEEERMED!!!!11 is this http://www-901.ibm.com/servers/eserv...lreport_1.html



    ooooh.. nice! But I guess that this is just the contribution of the internal news department and they don't have any more information than we do.
  • Reply 186 of 492
    ensign pulverensign pulver Posts: 1,193member
    Yeah, except for the fact that it's now officially non-vaporware!



    Zapchud is right, seeing "PPC 975" on an IBM hosted site is huge all by itself.
  • Reply 187 of 492
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,419member
    Quote:

    The AGP bus is a bottleneck when it comes to upstream comms. Increasing that from 1x to 16x speed will have a significant effect on the role of GPUs in the future and although you won't see it in first gen cards you can be certain you will in later gens.



    Thanks Telomar I did a google search for AGP and Upstream and got linked to an article that explains what Ensign Pulver was talking about. My apologies for my ignorance. With all things being considered having much faster upstream is a feature worth having. In fact I was preoccupied with graphics cards and forgot that cards like ATI All in Wonder have video features and then you have the bandwidth constraints of HD video. I'm humbled yet excited...hopefully Powermacs can strike first. Plus reading on how PCI Express is excellent with Isochronous transactions I can only guess what benefits will become available to high end audio and video cards. Those using them are bound to be happy.



    Back OT I am really hoping that there is a a 975 and in a way I believe that there "has" to be. I figure the die shrink of the 970 was good for a few hundred more megahertz at least but I don't think Apple can hit 3Ghz with these chips. I always assumed they would segue into the POWER5 derivative. It just seams a bit early but I'm hoping that something is working right here.
  • Reply 188 of 492
    jwdawsojwdawso Posts: 389member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Zapchud

    The closest we have to ***CONFEEERMED!!!!11 is this http://www-901.ibm.com/servers/eserv...lreport_1.html



    Awright, it's in chinese, but if you babelfish it, it'll become ... eh, sort of readable. But it's the number 975 hosted on IBM's site, at least. :-)




    ... According to IBM indicated that, the Power5 time arteries will be

    situated between 1.6GHz to 2GHz, next year will release 90nm system

    regulation according to the Power4+ model Power5+, when the arteries

    might arrive 3GHz. IBM estimated 1.6GHz Power5 may achieve 1.3GHz

    Power4 two time of potency. Moreover, IBM as the foundation constructs

    the larger-scale multi-processor system take Power5, PowerPC 975 also

    directly continues to use the Power5 core. But, reverse with initially

    the Power4 strategy, Power5 as soon as will start by the lower step

    server primarily, in the future only then gradually to extend to the

    high step server. Behind this represents strategy transition, worth

    noting ...
  • Reply 189 of 492
    existenceexistence Posts: 991member
    http://www.970eval.com/



    A nice little tidbit here...



    Quote:

    ...

    HyperTransport interface, running at up to 1.2GHz.



    ...



  • Reply 190 of 492
    jasenj1jasenj1 Posts: 923member




    Well, it's sad that Kaspar's sources lead him to believe the 975 rumor is bogus. If that's the case, Apple is in a world of hurt. The 970fx bump was NEEDED at the beginning of the year/early spring. If all Apple can pull off is that speed bump at WWDC, I'll be sadly disappointed. But if Apple has half a clue - and sometimes we wonder - development of the next gen PMac continued despite the 970fx supply issue.



    Kaspar did say Apple has, "no 90nm in adequate quantities over 2GHz". But the 975 rumors are that it is 130nm based. My hope is that the 90nm supply issue is only hurting the iMac now - the PMac bump window is gone.



    Poor Apple they seem to be cursed with CPU supply issues. I hope they have a contract with IBM that provides penalties if IBM can't deliver. IBM's problems are costing Apple $$$. I have $ sitting in the bank earmarked for a new PMac, if Apple had bumped in Spring, I'd be typing this from a dual G5 rather than a G3/350. If all they do is release the Spring bump at WWDC, I may hold back till the next gen, because it can't (shouldn't) be very far away - maybe I will buy that CPU upgrade card to squeeze a little more life out of my old box.



    *sigh*



    - Jasen.
  • Reply 191 of 492
    mattyjmattyj Posts: 898member
    I think you'll find that those who buy Dual Processor Opteron or Xeon machines will not buy them at $1000. This is just silly. They want their hardware to be reliable. No one I've known with Dual proc machines has gone the cheap route, it's too expensive in the long run. If you're going to get a reliable Dual proc system, you're easily spending more than twice that. Remember, you not only want it to be more reliable but you also want the hardware to be well matched against eachother. In the examples shown here they are not. The G5s come like this out of the box, with the exception of the poor GeForce 5200.



    Also, to get a decent spec system here in the UK (which I know is more expensive), I'm talking Athlon 3200 XP, Radeon 9800 SATA, DDR400, and the rest of the system to match you're talking about £1300 from building it yourself and without a screen. I admit the Powermacs are no way near on it for price, but a dual proc machine at the price some of you have suggested is ridiculous.
  • Reply 192 of 492
    henriokhenriok Posts: 537member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ensign Pulver

    Yeah, except for the fact that it's now officially non-vaporware!



    It' still vaporware, but it's official vaporware until we actually see them delivered.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by jasenj1

    Kaspar did say Apple has, "no 90nm in adequate quantities over 2GHz". But the 975 rumors are that it is 130nm based.



    I have always thought the 975 would be a 90 nm device, but I guess it won't need to since its parent, the POWER5, is 130 nm. But 970 was 130 nm, and its parent (POWER4) was originally 180 nm, so there's not much to go on here.
  • Reply 193 of 492
    addisonaddison Posts: 1,185member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by jasenj1







    Poor Apple they seem to be cursed with CPU supply issues. I hope they have a contract with IBM that provides penalties if IBM can't deliver. IBM's problems are costing Apple $$$. I have $ sitting in the bank earmarked for a new PMac, if Apple had bumped in Spring, I'd be typing this from a dual G5 rather than a G3/350. If all they do is release the Spring bump at WWDC, I may hold back till the next gen, because it can't (shouldn't) be very far away - maybe I will buy that CPU upgrade card to squeeze a little more life out of my old box.



    *sigh*



    - Jasen.




    You are not the only one. I did not want to buy a Rev 1 G5, I have a Rev1 G3 PM and it is fraught with problems. It is obvious thatthe 130nm G5 is too hot and I wonder about he long term reliability of these machines. I would ahave been happy to buy a 2.6ghz 90nm machine six months ago which was the right time frame for a speed bump.



    Quite frankly will know that nearly all their lost market share over the last four years can be attributed to poor processor performance. nearly everything else has been positive news stability, virus protection etc and software support. There are one or two notable exceptions such as Coral and to a lesser extent Adobe.



    We will without doubt get something at the WWDC that we do now know, but what and by how much we just don't. I suspect that we will see 3ghz announced, but shipping later say September with immediate availability of G5 imacs and 2.4 or 2.6 PM's.
  • Reply 194 of 492
    tmantman Posts: 66member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kasper

    Well, you seem to know tman better than I. Has he been accurate about predictions of this magnitude before? How do we know that the source he spoke to at the conference was not informed by the same material that I feel is misinforming all of us?



    I dunno what my opinion is. My opinion is that these rumors have to come to me exclusively from a liar. And frankly, I'm sick of him, and I don't like what he does. And the success he attempts to destroy. I've spoken to many people, and it appears that the source of these rumors are one in the same.



    I really can't stand this guy and what he does, though I have no clue as to what drives him.



    Kasper




    Sorry about the above botched post- restated as follows:



    I don't know if you have ever attended a business function like the one I was at. I attend far too many. Everyone wore a lapel tag with name and company name. And I'm not predicting anything. I simply, right or wrong, believe the guy who told me this for reasons of my own that I have stated in this forum.
  • Reply 195 of 492
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,457member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by costique

    However, I doubt that IBM can conceal the whole development of such a CPU only because Jobs told them so.





    You're wrong -- they can and do conceal processor development projects routinely.







    As for their current yield on 90 nm, earlier this month they (IBM) showed a graph of their target yield trend line vs. actual yields and it clearly showed serious issues through the early part of the year but they have improved to the point where they are almost where they wanted to be at this point (i.e. their improvement has outpaced the project rate of improvement, allowing them to gain quite a bit of ground). Considering that Apple obviously intended to ship on the projected yields at the start of the year and their current yields are now better than that, it would seem that Apple should now be in a position to ship the 970FX.
  • Reply 196 of 492
    costiquecostique Posts: 1,084member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Programmer

    You're wrong -- they can and do conceal processor development projects routinely.



    OK. I stand corrected. One question remains, though: does PPC 975 exist even on paper? As far as I can tell, there's only one public file on one official server in the whole world, which mentions PPC 975 only once. That may as well be a typo. Is it?
  • Reply 197 of 492
    fat freddyfat freddy Posts: 150member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by costique

    OK. I stand corrected. One question remains, though: does PPC 975 exist even on paper?



    Here
  • Reply 198 of 492
    mellomello Posts: 555member
    I just got this nugget from hollywoodindustry.com



    "Spurring development of 64-bit applications is an upcoming programming tool that will facilitate 64-bit software development. IBM will release a new compiler that will convert programming language written by software coders into a language the 64-bit processor can understand. Industry experts say the new compiler will allow 50% faster speeds compared to the open-source compiler, called gcc, that's been used since the G5's inception.



    All these enhancements allow OS X to begin down the path to pure 64-bit processing, taking advantage of the wide bandwidth where possible and practical, while maintaining compatibility with 32-bit applications that are widely installed and available today."



    The link for the full story is Here.



    This plus dual 3ghz G5's is enough speed to trounce anything in its path!



  • Reply 199 of 492
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Fat Freddy

    Here



    I posted this info right here in this forum days ago (5th from end of page 2) and no one noticed till now?



    BlueKnight
  • Reply 200 of 492
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BlueKnight

    I posted this info right here in this forum days ago (5th from end of page 2) and no one noticed till now?



    BlueKnight




    Problem with that link is...



    It seems to just be a 'reprint' of a story that was done in some magazine (look the end of the report 2nd or 3rd page bottom line) you'll notice:



    "this article from iThome 132nd issue of p.56 ~ p.60 < core new generation of server - Gao?? principle big soldier >." (ala babelfish)



    So while that story is ON an IBM website the content of the article wasn't written by anyone at IBM and the real author could have indeed either made a mistake or was guessing about the 975 - after all "PPC 975" wasn't exactly the lead character in that article.



    As much as I'd like it to be 'PROOF!!!!!!11" it still leaves a fair bit of doubt in my mind.





    That being said I do know for a fact that GPUL+ is 'for real' (regardless of the number assigned to it) and has been 'planned for' for quite some time (maybe as long - or nearly as long as the GPUL was).



    Dave
Sign In or Register to comment.