IBM Power 4+ CPU announcement
This looks Promising.
This week IBM will announce the pSeries 650 "Regatta-Mi," an eight-way server that uses its new 1.2GHz and 1.45GHz Power4+ processors.
One of the reasons why IBM can cut prices to the bone with the pSeries 650 is that the Power4+ chip at the heart of the machine is based on a single chip module implementation of the Power4 processor that has been dramatically shrunk using a new 0.13 micron copper/SOI process.
The smaller Power4+ chip uses less voltage, generates less heat, and is about 267 square millimeters in size even though it has a slightly larger shared L2 cache (1.5MB compared to 1.44MB with the Power4). The dual Power cores on the Power4 and Power4+ chips share this L2 cache.
The original Power4 was only available as a multichip module (spanning from two to eight processor cores active, but with four to eight cores physically in the MCMs), and each Power4 chip was 414 square millimeters in size, built using a 0.18 micron copper process. The bigger chip had a much lower yield, ran hot, and had a lower clock speed.
The Power4+ comes in 1.2GHz and 1.45GHz clock speeds and will probably be available soon at higher speeds in the MCM configurations for the 16-way pSeries 670 and 32-way pSeries 690 servers. The Power4 ran at 1GHz, 1.1GHz, and 1.3GHz."
<a href="http://http:://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/28025.html"; target="_blank">IBM Power 4+</a>
This week IBM will announce the pSeries 650 "Regatta-Mi," an eight-way server that uses its new 1.2GHz and 1.45GHz Power4+ processors.
One of the reasons why IBM can cut prices to the bone with the pSeries 650 is that the Power4+ chip at the heart of the machine is based on a single chip module implementation of the Power4 processor that has been dramatically shrunk using a new 0.13 micron copper/SOI process.
The smaller Power4+ chip uses less voltage, generates less heat, and is about 267 square millimeters in size even though it has a slightly larger shared L2 cache (1.5MB compared to 1.44MB with the Power4). The dual Power cores on the Power4 and Power4+ chips share this L2 cache.
The original Power4 was only available as a multichip module (spanning from two to eight processor cores active, but with four to eight cores physically in the MCMs), and each Power4 chip was 414 square millimeters in size, built using a 0.18 micron copper process. The bigger chip had a much lower yield, ran hot, and had a lower clock speed.
The Power4+ comes in 1.2GHz and 1.45GHz clock speeds and will probably be available soon at higher speeds in the MCM configurations for the 16-way pSeries 670 and 32-way pSeries 690 servers. The Power4 ran at 1GHz, 1.1GHz, and 1.3GHz."
<a href="http://http:://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/28025.html"; target="_blank">IBM Power 4+</a>
Comments
<strong>Wouldnt it be nice if Apple could get ahold of some of these for the Xserve?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Does anyone know if this would work? How much effort would it be to have OS X running on these?
<strong>
Does anyone know if this would work? How much effort would it be to have OS X running on these?</strong><hr></blockquote>
If they have a port running on x86 I guess it's not too hard to have one for a PPC platform.
<strong>Actually, I recall some linkage in one of the longer threads that indicated All POWER CPU's can run PPC code without special provisions. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Just nitpicking. I don't think it is _all_ POWER chips. The original ppc601 was both a PPC and a POWER chip. Then they diverged for awhile. The POWER3-series & POWER4 series are back to running as either a POWER or a PPC I think.
<strong>
Just nitpicking. I don't think it is _all_ POWER chips. The original ppc601 was both a PPC and a POWER chip. Then they diverged for awhile. The POWER3-series & POWER4 series are back to running as either a POWER or a PPC I think.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The 601 implemented some extra instructions so a compiler could be made available, but I doubt it implemented the entire POWER instruction set (which would be Amazon+PPC)
My guess that Apple have been running OSX on Power-based systems for a while. Maybe just to have the opportunity to see how OSX runs on 64-bit computers.
-walloo
Would the improved cooling of the the current Pmacs and the high power power supply be able to run a Power4?
The new Power 4+ and the 970 share the same fabrication plant, FWIW.
There is no way that Apple could compete with IBM and Sun in this market segment.
<strong>The Windtunnel can power four dual core Power 4+ CPUs.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
How much power does a Power4+ use?
Didn't know that the PPC970 was already in production. Thanks for the scoop. <--alert for the sarcasm impaired.
<strong>The Register article clearly points out that the Power4+ starts out at 10,000 dollars on the low end and goes up to 125,000. Plus the server sits in a 8U space. I doubt that Apple will ever put one of these things in a xServe. It would be too hot and too costly.
There is no way that Apple could compete with IBM and Sun in this market segment.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If Apple can't beat them, join them! That is, license Mac OS X Server to IBM.
The AMD Hammer runs 32-bit code, or 64-bit code using a 64-bit switch.
The Power3 (and onwards) runs 64-bit code, or 32-bit code using a 32-bit switch.
The kernel has to have provisions to send the switch when running 32-bit apps/libraries/whatever.
The hard part is writing drivers for a new northbridge to accomodate the chip.
I imagine that Apple has had Mac OS X running on Power3 and/or Power4 prototypes for a while, though.
Barto
I guess that would mean they have been manufacturing the cpu's for a while now, since the server's will be available 12/6/02. Just wondering if the cpu's are being made @ the East Fishkill, N.Y. facility? If so, looks like their fabs seem to be coming along just fine.
[ 11-12-2002: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>
<strong>The Register article clearly points out that the Power4+ starts out at 10,000 dollars on the low end and goes up to 125,000. Plus the server sits in a 8U space. I doubt that Apple will ever put one of these things in a xServe. It would be too hot and too costly.
There is no way that Apple could compete with IBM and Sun in this market segment.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I didnt see the chip in the article, just the servers. As I understand it you dont just buy the hardware when you buy an IBM server, you buy a service package as well. Add to that the min config has 4 GB of memory, and over 200 GB HD, 2 processors, etc...and you have a lot of $ in the production of each computer. Also, if IBM can make these in a volume to meet the PowerMac/Xserve market, then the price per chip would come down as they produce and sell in volume to Apple. The question then comes is how does this chip compare to the G4 and 970 in per unit cost in volume.
<strong>The Windtunnel can power four dual core Power 4+ CPUs.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
280W? That's kind of a stretch.