970GX going official
I don't know if anyone noticed, but this IBM page talks about the 970GX processors.
I think this means that the next Power Mac will have this POWER4-based 970GX G5 processor. Now, who will tell us what exactly is this?
Quote:
The only processors currently supporting AltiVec are the G4 and G5. The G4 (including model numbers 7400 and 7410) and G4+ (7450 and 7455) processors are made by Motorola. (There are more models than just the ones listed here, but these are the most widely discussed.) The G5 chips include the IBM 970, 970FX, and 970GX; these are essentially POWER4? cores with an AltiVec unit bolted on. So far, only PowerPC® processors have had AltiVec support, not the POWER? line. If you want to buy "a computer with AltiVec," Apple's Mac line is your most likely option. For evaluation boards and custom designs, however, you can go with any of the many vendors who do development kits based on either the G4 or G5.
The only processors currently supporting AltiVec are the G4 and G5. The G4 (including model numbers 7400 and 7410) and G4+ (7450 and 7455) processors are made by Motorola. (There are more models than just the ones listed here, but these are the most widely discussed.) The G5 chips include the IBM 970, 970FX, and 970GX; these are essentially POWER4? cores with an AltiVec unit bolted on. So far, only PowerPC® processors have had AltiVec support, not the POWER? line. If you want to buy "a computer with AltiVec," Apple's Mac line is your most likely option. For evaluation boards and custom designs, however, you can go with any of the many vendors who do development kits based on either the G4 or G5.
I think this means that the next Power Mac will have this POWER4-based 970GX G5 processor. Now, who will tell us what exactly is this?
Comments
Originally posted by PB
this IBM page ... 970GX !
... Now, who will tell us what exactly is this?
Great link PB!
Listed in order, as they are, ("970, 970FX, and 970GX") it is hard to consider this info a typo. This just confirms there IS a 970GX as rumored. This would also lend credibility to the 970MP alluded to in same rumors.
What exactly it is (the 970GX) remains to be seen. I would hope that it would also share some features with Power5, along with process improvements that will take us to the 3 GHz promised land. I'll throw in a reduction in the "hot spots" that have been plaguing scaling and power consumption into my wish list.
Originally posted by New
So, when will we see a G5 update?
On WWDC I would say, like last year.
Originally posted by Rhumgod
970gx was the low-power version supposedly for PowerBooks. WWDC = PowerBook G5???
WWDC would more likely mean announced powerbooks, to be shipping in a month or two.
"The biggest news is that Antares will also be available in a single-core version, code-named AntaresSP, which is expected to be named the PowerPC 970GX. At present, Apple's dual-2.5GHz Power Mac G5 uses the PowerPC 970FX processor. Like Antares, the 970GX will initially come in at speeds around 3GHz and is said to feature 1MB of L2 cache, double what the 970FX processor sports. Like the 970FX, however, the processor will not have any L3 cache."
Originally posted by Bigc
It's no an IBM article, just published on their site...
Yes, I do realize that this is written by someone Peter Seebach, a freelance writer, and it is not an official IBM document. However, being published in IBM's site, means that the company allowed the author to talk about the 970GX processor in this article. For me, this implies that the 970GX is not just a rumor but real. It was also said before that 970GX is the single-core version of the 970MP, I think, the dual-core G5. So, apparently this rumor was not without substance.
The only processors currently supporting AltiVec are the G4 and G5. The G4 (including model numbers 7400 and 7410) and G4+ (7450 and 7455) processors are made by Motorola. (There are more models than just the ones listed here, but these are the most widely discussed.) The G5 chips include the IBM 970 and 970FX; these are essentially POWER4? cores with an AltiVec unit bolted on. So far, only PowerPC® processors have had AltiVec support, not the POWER? line. If you want to buy "a computer with AltiVec," Apple's Mac line is your most likely option. For evaluation boards and custom designs, however, you can go with any of the many vendors who do development kits based on either the G4 or G5.
I don't know if this makes a diffence or not.
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerwork.../pa-unrollav1/
Originally posted by xsmi
The reference to the 970GX has been removed.
That's it.
*** CONFIRMED ***
Originally posted by PB
That's it.
*** CONFIRMED ***
Works for me, Relic breaks open piggy bank and starts counting pennys.
Originally posted by PB
That's it.
*** CONFIRMED ***
Maybe, maybe not. It could have been an overlooked mistake. Where would a freelance writer get that kind of information?
Originally posted by onlooker
Maybe, maybe not. It could have been an overlooked mistake. Where would a freelance writer get that kind of information?
From the IBM web page:
Our apologies!
The original version of this article contained an erroneous reference to the 970GX; this was an oversight. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused.
--Editors
Parsing out the above quote, the reference to the 970GX was the oversight, not the fact of it's existence. The apology itself refers to the 970GX. by name.
The author of the article must have had access to IBM personnel as well as documentation. I'm sure he didn't get the idea of a 970GX from Think Secret.
I'd say this faux pau does lend credibility if not confirmation to the 970GX, the only question left in my mind is WHEN?
Originally posted by xsmi
I think you guys may be reading too much into it.
I agree. "The author of the article must have" been stoned.
erroneous
Now we need to get a timeframe going
Originally posted by onlooker
erroneous illusion
incorrect
wrong
misbelief
Based on what?
Alphelion is correct, a writer wouldn't throw a name up from a "rumor site" and have it published on that companies website, this definitely confirms a 970gx with references to it.
It was IBM's fault not blocking that part out, they saw their mistake and covered it before apple was all over them for it.