I suppose that if there are two cores running at 2Ghz, the chip itself could be rated as a 4 Ghz chip, even though it may only achieve 90% parity of a single chip at the same speed.
Even now, if the 970fx chip is rated at 2.5 but may only achieve 80% of that in the real world. Yet it still appears acceptable to be termed a 2.5 chip.
(This 80% number is a vague reference to an Ars benchmark that is showing that the 970 is throttled down to 80% capacity even at the "highest" performance setting for as yet unexplained reason, possibly heat related.)
It seems to me like introducing dual dual core 2.5Ghz+ G5s is a little much at this point. Seems like the prices would have to go up right? You're not going to get a 4 processor system for 2500... i mean seriously. Perhaps apple is going to create a workstation type computer out of these new chips, but I doubt the regular PowerMac will get 4 processors just yet. Seems like overkill honestly. I am sticking with the next upgrade just being a speed boost + PCIe etc.
I think it would be good if apple created a dual dual core workstation PowerMac X series or something starting at 3500 or so.
I mean I just don't know, but it def seems like overkill to me.
I don't think they'll use 4 chips. I think it's just 2x dual core processors like everyone else.
Why would they not? It's what AMD is planning on doing. And more. They (AMD) also intends on a 4 core processor shortly there after.
They also have the advantage from the get go because their current sockets will be able to use the dual core processors. I'm not sure Apple can claim that, and if they can how long will it be before you'll be able to upgrade to one? (never) If Apple just gives you one dual core processor running at 2.5 GHz what is the point? It's the same machine they have now (maybe a slight bit slower) That's not really an upgreade. All AMD machines will be running at the same speed (or better) using two cores. Your talking about Apple watching the boat to the future go by and just waving at it.
Quote:
Seems like the prices would have to go up right?
I have seen no reason why the usual processor cost is going to be increased at all.
They do indeed produce more heat than the 970fx currently at higher frequencies. PowerTune is about all Apple is doing as far as controlling the heat (other than the obvious radiator bolted to the current PowerMacs). I don't see this happening in a PowerBook any time soon.
This is what I believe too. I doubt that we will ever see a PPC970 processor in the Powerbook. Only hope for the Powerbook is the 7448/8641D from Freescale, and perhaps the PPE from CELL.
This is what I believe too. I doubt that we will ever see a PPC970 processor in the Powerbook. Only hope for the Powerbook is the 7448/8641D from Freescale, and perhaps the PPE from CELL.
What about the 970GX? After all, it should consume considerably less power (I won't say 50%, because it's rare that two CPU cores are ever used at equal ratios on a consistent basis), and it sounds like there's better power management in place.
What about the 970GX? After all, it should consume considerably less power (I won't say 50%, because it's rare that two CPU cores are ever used at equal ratios on a consistent basis), and it sounds like there's better power management in place.
Although we don't have yet exact power figures, if the 970GX is the single-core of 970MP, then from the recent finding on IBM's site I would say it is rather a remote possibility. Of course, in a Powerbook there is no need right now for more than 2 GHz. But even if it is possible at this moment, what about a roadmap? Apple cannot invest in such a processor only for one or two Powerbook updates. Apple needs a real 64-bit mobile CPU.
The AMD dual core benchmarks show a Quad configuration.
There are 4 cores all together, but there are 2 chips. Each chip has 2 cores which is why it is a quad. But this is the same thing Apple should be doing. i have no doubts, but If for some reason they didn't - Like I said.... There goes the boat, and the PowerMac would be laughed at big time. If your top machine takes that big of a step down your screwed. Because AMD's Dual Socket MB's, and their Quad socket MB's will all be doubling in power. All the Duals will now be Quads, and all Quads will All be Octo's, because of dual core. They already have the fastest machine there is, And then they double it. Apple would be pretty foolish to abandon their entire Highend user base that has patiently waited for them to catch up. (that have been waiting since the early G4's) There is no coming back from that blow.
It seems to me like introducing dual dual core 2.5Ghz+ G5s is a little much at this point. Seems like the prices would have to go up right? You're not going to get a 4 processor system for 2500... i mean seriously. Perhaps apple is going to create a workstation type computer out of these new chips, but I doubt the regular PowerMac will get 4 processors just yet. Seems like overkill honestly. I am sticking with the next upgrade just being a speed boost + PCIe etc.
I think it would be good if apple created a dual dual core workstation PowerMac X series or something starting at 3500 or so.
I mean I just don't know, but it def seems like overkill to me.
Well, if the machines come in at outrageously expensive prices for the extra processing power, then sure, 4 way Mac's won't happen - but please, don't for a second think that Maya, Final Cut Pro HD and Logic Pro users somehow CAN'T use all that power - they need it, all of it, and more.
My suspicion is, getting dual core onto a single chip will be enough of a price reduction and over-all speed up, that we'll almost certainly see 4-way PowerMacs very soon - at the very least, single chip/core PowerMacs will go the way of the Do-do.
Oh, and btw, OMFG! Anybody who does media production will need to have their tounge velcro'd down to stop it banging into their knees when they use these upcoming beasts.
Synced with BSD 5.x with fine grain locking on the SMP.
CHUD recognized 4 physical processors now.
Tiger with built in Xgrid technology.
Shake,Final Cut Pro etc with Qmaster grid technology.
It's fairly obvious that MWSF 2006 would be the LATEST date for Quad Powermacs. One of the benefits of DC chips is that you only need two sockets on the mobo.
I think not only should it be possible for Apple to hit Quads at $3k or less but probable.
THT, are you saying that the process used in making this new chip is a stopgap project that was put together in a pinch?
No, not saying this at all. I'm saying IBM did the minimum necessary for a dual-core chip. For the most part, that's always the best strategy to bring a product to market.
I was thinking that dual-core with shared, unified L2 would be the simplest, but I was mistaken. This really is.
Quote:
In your opinion, will this be a compettive chip with AMD/Intel?
If you believe the 970fx is competitive with the Athlon 64 and Pentia, then the dual-core version will be just as competitive. AMD and Intel did that the exact same thing IBM did for dual core and what Freescale is doing for dual-core, the minimum necessary: two cores on one die with a switch or arbiter to the core logic. In the case of Freescale, they are using an MPX bus to act as the arbiter.
What would lead a cutting edge, powerful company like IBM to leave out an onboard memory controller if it could impact performance in such a huge way? Is it much more expensive to produce? Any guestimates on how much of a performance boost it would give if included?
So if the 970MP is a hot chip at higher frequencies, what's it like when clocked down? It strikes me that a 970MP (or another, perhaps more suitable, dual core design) would be a big win in PowerBooks. Clocked at 1.5GHz it might deliver the perceived performance of a 2.5GHz single core, a big leap forward. And the heat might be manageable...
I don't think it says if it does have an ODMC or doesn't have one. We'll have to wait, and see. Yesterday is was mentioned that it probably would not because the 970 processors are based on the Power4 which apparently didn't have an on die memory controller, but the Power5 does, IBM can probably still keep the processors performance very high without it because they truely are the experts of Dual core technology of the 3. They have been making dual core processors for a few years longer that the rest.
But again we'll have to wait, and see. I personally think they should have added the ODMC.
I don't think it says if it does have an ODMC or doesn't have one. We'll have to wait, and see. Yesterday is was mentioned that it probably would not because the 970 processors are based on the Power4 which apparently didn't have an on die memory controller, but the Power5 does, IBM can probably still keep the processors performance very high without it because they truely are the experts of Dual core technology of the 3. They have been making dual core processors for a few years longer that the rest.
But again we'll have to wait, and see. I personally think they should have added the ODMC.
Perhaps they are waiting the 65 nm fab process to introduce the additional circuitery for an on die memory controller.
BTW, the fact that a sligthty tweaked mobo design will be able to take advantage of the dual technology is a plus for Apple. This transition will be more simple for them, and will allow us to have the new generation as soon as IBM will fab the MP in large quantities.
This said, at one point of an another of the evolution of the PPC line, on die memory controller will appear.
What would lead a cutting edge, powerful company like IBM to leave out an onboard memory controller if it could impact performance in such a huge way? Is it much more expensive to produce? Any guestimates on how much of a performance boost it would give if included?
I think it is a pretty easy choice for putting an on-chip memory controller on it or not. For the "vast" majority of products, the best way to get them through development to shipping is to only do the minimum necessary.
For Apple, having a 970mp that uses the same elastic bus means that Apple can ship a machine with dual-core chips with minimal changes to the system ASICs, with minimal testing and development for a new machine, and with minimal testing and development for software support.
If an on-chip memory controller is on the chip, it automatically means a brand new set of system ASICs, more testing and development for the hardware and more testing and development for software support.
The on-chip memory controller probably buys about 5 to 10% increase in performance, primarily due to lower latencies. So, the cost-benefit seems a pretty simple choice for Apple. Apple keeps its investment in G5 ASIC and board design for another generation which makes G5 ASIC parts cheaper and less bug-ridden at the cost of 10% reduction in performance. It's all about margins.
Comments
Even now, if the 970fx chip is rated at 2.5 but may only achieve 80% of that in the real world. Yet it still appears acceptable to be termed a 2.5 chip.
(This 80% number is a vague reference to an Ars benchmark that is showing that the 970 is throttled down to 80% capacity even at the "highest" performance setting for as yet unexplained reason, possibly heat related.)
Originally posted by Algol
It seems to me like introducing dual dual core 2.5Ghz+ G5s is a little much at this point. Seems like the prices would have to go up right? You're not going to get a 4 processor system for 2500... i mean seriously. Perhaps apple is going to create a workstation type computer out of these new chips, but I doubt the regular PowerMac will get 4 processors just yet. Seems like overkill honestly. I am sticking with the next upgrade just being a speed boost + PCIe etc.
I think it would be good if apple created a dual dual core workstation PowerMac X series or something starting at 3500 or so.
I mean I just don't know, but it def seems like overkill to me.
I don't think they'll use 4 chips. I think it's just 2x dual core processors like everyone else.
Why would they not? It's what AMD is planning on doing. And more. They (AMD) also intends on a 4 core processor shortly there after.
They also have the advantage from the get go because their current sockets will be able to use the dual core processors. I'm not sure Apple can claim that, and if they can how long will it be before you'll be able to upgrade to one? (never) If Apple just gives you one dual core processor running at 2.5 GHz what is the point? It's the same machine they have now (maybe a slight bit slower) That's not really an upgreade. All AMD machines will be running at the same speed (or better) using two cores. Your talking about Apple watching the boat to the future go by and just waving at it.
Seems like the prices would have to go up right?
I have seen no reason why the usual processor cost is going to be increased at all.
Originally posted by Rhumgod
They do indeed produce more heat than the 970fx currently at higher frequencies. PowerTune is about all Apple is doing as far as controlling the heat (other than the obvious radiator bolted to the current PowerMacs). I don't see this happening in a PowerBook any time soon.
This is what I believe too. I doubt that we will ever see a PPC970 processor in the Powerbook. Only hope for the Powerbook is the 7448/8641D from Freescale, and perhaps the PPE from CELL.
Of course no cost is mentioned.
If Apple is to re-define cutting edge performance
once again, they may have to pull out all the stops
to get there.
Keeping the top of the line at $2999 or less
may just be part of that innovation. I hope!
Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
...they may have to pull out all the stops
to get there.
Are you organist, maybe
Originally posted by PB
This is what I believe too. I doubt that we will ever see a PPC970 processor in the Powerbook. Only hope for the Powerbook is the 7448/8641D from Freescale, and perhaps the PPE from CELL.
What about the 970GX? After all, it should consume considerably less power (I won't say 50%, because it's rare that two CPU cores are ever used at equal ratios on a consistent basis), and it sounds like there's better power management in place.
Originally posted by Commodus
What about the 970GX? After all, it should consume considerably less power (I won't say 50%, because it's rare that two CPU cores are ever used at equal ratios on a consistent basis), and it sounds like there's better power management in place.
Although we don't have yet exact power figures, if the 970GX is the single-core of 970MP, then from the recent finding on IBM's site I would say it is rather a remote possibility. Of course, in a Powerbook there is no need right now for more than 2 GHz. But even if it is possible at this moment, what about a roadmap? Apple cannot invest in such a processor only for one or two Powerbook updates. Apple needs a real 64-bit mobile CPU.
Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
The AMD dual core benchmarks show a Quad configuration.
There are 4 cores all together, but there are 2 chips. Each chip has 2 cores which is why it is a quad. But this is the same thing Apple should be doing. i have no doubts, but If for some reason they didn't - Like I said.... There goes the boat, and the PowerMac would be laughed at big time. If your top machine takes that big of a step down your screwed. Because AMD's Dual Socket MB's, and their Quad socket MB's will all be doubling in power. All the Duals will now be Quads, and all Quads will All be Octo's, because of dual core. They already have the fastest machine there is, And then they double it. Apple would be pretty foolish to abandon their entire Highend user base that has patiently waited for them to catch up. (that have been waiting since the early G4's) There is no coming back from that blow.
Originally posted by Algol
It seems to me like introducing dual dual core 2.5Ghz+ G5s is a little much at this point. Seems like the prices would have to go up right? You're not going to get a 4 processor system for 2500... i mean seriously. Perhaps apple is going to create a workstation type computer out of these new chips, but I doubt the regular PowerMac will get 4 processors just yet. Seems like overkill honestly. I am sticking with the next upgrade just being a speed boost + PCIe etc.
I think it would be good if apple created a dual dual core workstation PowerMac X series or something starting at 3500 or so.
I mean I just don't know, but it def seems like overkill to me.
Well, if the machines come in at outrageously expensive prices for the extra processing power, then sure, 4 way Mac's won't happen - but please, don't for a second think that Maya, Final Cut Pro HD and Logic Pro users somehow CAN'T use all that power - they need it, all of it, and more.
My suspicion is, getting dual core onto a single chip will be enough of a price reduction and over-all speed up, that we'll almost certainly see 4-way PowerMacs very soon - at the very least, single chip/core PowerMacs will go the way of the Do-do.
Oh, and btw, OMFG! Anybody who does media production will need to have their tounge velcro'd down to stop it banging into their knees when they use these upcoming beasts.
Synced with BSD 5.x with fine grain locking on the SMP.
CHUD recognized 4 physical processors now.
Tiger with built in Xgrid technology.
Shake,Final Cut Pro etc with Qmaster grid technology.
It's fairly obvious that MWSF 2006 would be the LATEST date for Quad Powermacs. One of the benefits of DC chips is that you only need two sockets on the mobo.
I think not only should it be possible for Apple to hit Quads at $3k or less but probable.
Originally posted by mikenap
THT, are you saying that the process used in making this new chip is a stopgap project that was put together in a pinch?
No, not saying this at all. I'm saying IBM did the minimum necessary for a dual-core chip. For the most part, that's always the best strategy to bring a product to market.
I was thinking that dual-core with shared, unified L2 would be the simplest, but I was mistaken. This really is.
In your opinion, will this be a compettive chip with AMD/Intel?
If you believe the 970fx is competitive with the Athlon 64 and Pentia, then the dual-core version will be just as competitive. AMD and Intel did that the exact same thing IBM did for dual core and what Freescale is doing for dual-core, the minimum necessary: two cores on one die with a switch or arbiter to the core logic. In the case of Freescale, they are using an MPX bus to act as the arbiter.
Pip pip!
But again we'll have to wait, and see. I personally think they should have added the ODMC.
Originally posted by onlooker
I don't think it says if it does have an ODMC or doesn't have one. We'll have to wait, and see. Yesterday is was mentioned that it probably would not because the 970 processors are based on the Power4 which apparently didn't have an on die memory controller, but the Power5 does, IBM can probably still keep the processors performance very high without it because they truely are the experts of Dual core technology of the 3. They have been making dual core processors for a few years longer that the rest.
But again we'll have to wait, and see. I personally think they should have added the ODMC.
Perhaps they are waiting the 65 nm fab process to introduce the additional circuitery for an on die memory controller.
BTW, the fact that a sligthty tweaked mobo design will be able to take advantage of the dual technology is a plus for Apple. This transition will be more simple for them, and will allow us to have the new generation as soon as IBM will fab the MP in large quantities.
This said, at one point of an another of the evolution of the PPC line, on die memory controller will appear.
Originally posted by mikenap
What would lead a cutting edge, powerful company like IBM to leave out an onboard memory controller if it could impact performance in such a huge way? Is it much more expensive to produce? Any guestimates on how much of a performance boost it would give if included?
I think it is a pretty easy choice for putting an on-chip memory controller on it or not. For the "vast" majority of products, the best way to get them through development to shipping is to only do the minimum necessary.
For Apple, having a 970mp that uses the same elastic bus means that Apple can ship a machine with dual-core chips with minimal changes to the system ASICs, with minimal testing and development for a new machine, and with minimal testing and development for software support.
If an on-chip memory controller is on the chip, it automatically means a brand new set of system ASICs, more testing and development for the hardware and more testing and development for software support.
The on-chip memory controller probably buys about 5 to 10% increase in performance, primarily due to lower latencies. So, the cost-benefit seems a pretty simple choice for Apple. Apple keeps its investment in G5 ASIC and board design for another generation which makes G5 ASIC parts cheaper and less bug-ridden at the cost of 10% reduction in performance. It's all about margins.
It boils down to cost. However I see OMC as a possibility with the transition to 65nm and the resultant shrinking of the die.
I'd love to see SMT on each core and OMC on the G6
The 970MP could then be used to replace the existing 2.0 and 2.5's
and the 970 GX might be used for the iMac and an entry level headless
G5 PHAT Cube.
Unless all of us have this wrong and the 970MP is in fact slated
for use in the PowerBooks @2.0 GHz as the new MOBILE PROCESSOR
Then I will be very happy to have a Power5 based QuadraMac in 2005