AMD chips and the mac

[ryanmil1]

I've been reading a million threads about people thinking that apple may port OS X to x86....not a chance in hell. However, seeing as motorola is lagging, I do have another option. It seems to me (and someone may have already mentioned this) that at it's core, the athelon is a risk processor...that emulates x86. I'm pretty sure this is true because I spent hours reading tech documents on it a few months ago. Since the chip is a risk chip, It ssems to me that it would not take a ton of work to create a athelon chip that would run OSX (with some root os changes as well). And since this chip would be running pure instead of having to emulate x86, I'd think it would be even more powerful mhz for mhz. I could be completely off base though

[mac15]

hmm sound entreaging, an athlon would be nicer, but we won't see if for ages, by then I'll be able to by a new computer so bring it on AMD

[nuckinfutz]

AMD's future is with Hammer

But a slight setback has happened. Hammer has been slightly delayed.

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-957757.html

Also MacEdition has a Naked Mole Rat report that's quite interesting. http://www.macedition.com/nmr/nmr_20020914.php

In recent days, certain Reports to an Apple developer list purported to report Remarks from IBM Engineering Manager that Apple had rejected a Scheme to replace Motorola’s ill-starred PowerPC G4 with a Desktop Version of IBM’s 64-bit Power4 chip that has been enriched with Altivec Vector-Processing Technology.

With all due respect, I must tell you that this Notion is a Tissue of Lies of the most Unspeakable Brazenness: Despite what untutored Nay-sayers may claim, Apple and IBM are indeed working closely on this excellent Chip.

The heretofore-unspoken name of IBM’s G4 Replacement is GPUL (short for GigaProcessor UltraLite). It is Multi-core, 64-bit Microprocessor that supports Vector/SIMD Multimedia eXtension (VMX), the generic Title for the Technologies comprising Altivec (a k a Velocity Engine).

This Most Worthy CPU also being fine-tuned to work with the Apple Processor Interconnect bus (ApplePI), Apple’s Replacement for the venerable MaxBus. Mac OS X is already booting happily on Prototype Units. And contrary to the scandalous Poppycock mouthed by some Detractors, Emissaries from IBM have visited Apple Headquarters in recent weeks to apprise them of the progress of engineering GPUL for the illustrious Mac Architecture.

As to the Timeline for Delivery of this Powerful new Weapon: Alas, GPUL does not appear to be in the Cards for January’s Generation of Apple Systems. IBM had Mac OS X running on GPUL by November 2001, was delivering Prototypes to Apple by March of this Year, and was testing prototype Mac Hardware Systems and core Apple Application Software by April. Nevertheless, GPUL not scheduled to be delivered – even to Apple and other Worthy OEM Partners – until later in 2003, meaning that January’s announced end of the line for Mac OS 9 booting will not coincide with the Brave New World of 64-bit Macs.


Now THIS is more exciting to me than Athlon chips.

[Chaszmyr]

I have every confidence that Apple will catch up with or surpass the PC market sometime in the future... But if they go with IBM it will be a long time (probably a year or more) before they do.

A little over a week ago was when the first serious rumors of AMD chips in macs came up... and now AMD delayed hammers to about the time new powermacs would be due.... Is it possible AMD is pushing back the PC version of their hammer to make a special mac version of it for simultaneous release?

[MisterMe]

Originally posted by Chaszmyr
.... Is it possible AMD is pushing back the PC version of their hammer to make a special mac version of it for simultaneous release?
No.

[alex_ant]

What is a risk chip?

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by nuckinfutz
Now THIS is more exciting to me than Athlon chips.
And unlike the AMD rumors, it actually seems plausible. :)

[iGav]

Originally posted by alex_ant
What is a risk chip?

You know what.... I was asking myself the same thing....... does it take liberties or something??? Does it get really intoxicated and then try to process something?:rolleyes:

It's not just a one off either, in another thread, someone mentions a Risk and a Cisk processor......... :p :p :p

And to get back in line with the tread topic....... I don't want AMD processors in my Mac thank-you...... :rolleyes:

[sparkleytone]

i have absolutely no inkling of belief in this naked mole rat. he knows nothing and is trying to shake things up. no person with any real knowledge coming from the depths of apple will be so superfluous with his words. the man embellishes everything with a pseudo-SAT word in order to feel more intelligent than he actually is.

do not believe this report. i hope IBM and Apple are working together...but do not believe this report.

[scem0]

Originally posted by MisterMe

No.

You might want to expand on that thought so people dont think you are cynical. I would also like to know why you think 'no' so strongly.

[bousozoku]

Originally posted by iGAV


You know what.... I was asking myself the same thing....... does it take liberties or something??? Does it get really intoxicated and then try to process something?:rolleyes:

It's not just a one off either, in another thread, someone mentions a Risk and a Cisk processor......... :p :p :p

And to get back in line with the tread topic....... I don't want AMD processors in my Mac thank-you...... :rolleyes:

Okay okay...it's RISC and CISC. Reduced Instruction Set Computing and Complex Instruction Set Computing.

In the old days, the differences were bigger. RISC generally had fewer than 120 instructions and CISC had many more. DEC VAX's processor had 300+. In contrast, the MOS Technologies 6502 had 57.

RISC processors are able to process their most valuable instructions in one clock cycle. Since RISC processors have fewer instructions, they must gang together several instructions to do the same work a CISC processor would do. This would seem to be longer, but since they run more quickly, at the same core speeds, more work gets done with RISC. This would also explain why RISC programmes are larger overall.

[BongHits]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by iGAV
ignore everthing i said

[APPLEP58]

JEEZ WHAT'S WITH YOU PEOPLE!!!!!????????

IT'S RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer)
AND CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computer)

[sparkleytone]

so whens the g5 comin p58??

[solvs]

Originally posted by APPLEP58
JEEZ WHAT'S WITH YOU PEOPLE!!!!!????????

IT'S RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer)
AND CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computer)

Hey Apple58, where you been?

Are you going to say anything to those of us who doubted you? I wouldn't blame you if you did, but I guess I'd respect you if you didn't. I just posted something about you coming back to dance around saying "see, I told you so". :D

I can admit when I'm wrong (ignore my signature), I was just hoping you'd stick around to defend yourself. I hate it when people won't stand up for themselves. Especially when they're right (which you were).

Sorry if I was a d*ck, no hard feelings. :)

[Dunepilot]

Was Apple P58 the guy who sent us the pdf of the new G4 towers, and then got attacked for supposedly being unreliable?

[xelterran]

it says g4/g5 server in 1 of the pdf's - it has a pic of the new RAID server - g5 = AMD??

[solvs]

Originally posted by Dunepilot
Was Apple P58 the guy who sent us the pdf of the new G4 towers, and then got attacked for supposedly being unreliable?

When pressed for info, he backed off, so someone made some snide comments. He then threatened to leave and never come back, BEFORE he was proven to be (mostly) right. I was mad at his reaction, which seemed kinda childish at the time, and at the fact that he didn't stick around to defend himself. It's kinda hard to trust someone new, who just kinda says (or posts) something and can't back it up.

I was hoping to pull him out of hiding, but in retrospect I kinda sounded like a jerk (as per the apology). But I still say you need to have a thick skin to post around here. Especially if you present something as fact. Especially if you don't back it up. Plus it could have been much worse. You should have seen Alpha's replies. Brutle.

Sometimes we can forget this is supposed to be a fun site to discuss a HOBBY we enjoy.

Please don't flame me if you use your Mac for work. I did, and will for my next Mac. But let's be honest, coming here, reading and posting about rumors is mostly recreational.

Feel free to flame me for anything else. As long as it's somewhat insightful, and you're not just spelling things that you made up wrong. And ungrammaticallikely. :D

[unreg]

The AMD core excluding X86 compatibility circuits is an updated DEC Alpha chip.
This has been discussed many times over the last 2-3 years.

[vniow]

Originally posted by unreg

The AMD core excluding X86 compatibility circuits is an updated DEC Alpha chip.
This has been discussed many times over the last 2-3 years. What is a DEC Alpha chip exactly? Forgive me, I'd do better in Apple's marketing department, not their chip-design section. :)

[nixd2001]

Originally posted by edvniow
What is a DEC Alpha chip exactly?

A high performance RISC processor designed by Digital Equipment Corporation (ie DEC). DEC got bought by Compaq, but a lot of the Alpha design team went to AMD. The Alpha was one of the first (if not the first?) real 64 bit chips to hit the market. It was an extremely clean design, with a stated design goal of being capable of lasting 25 years (design, not individual chips!) with a 1000 fold performance increase - 10 times from increased clock rates, 10 times from increased superscalar capabilities and 10 times from multiple processors. The instruction set architecture was designed to support this, including lots of consideration for keeping memory accesses consistent and coherent when multiple processors read/wrote the same value.

It was a really neat bit of work and a shame to see it gradually fade away - especially likely now HP as bought Compaq!

[Billicus]

Did the DEC Alpha ever hit the market as part of a major brand computer? Theoretically it sounds awesome.

[nixd2001]

Originally posted by Billicus
Did the DEC Alpha ever hit the market as part of a major brand computer? Theoretically it sounds awesome.

Yes. DEC sold them for many years (it's early '90s Alpha came out). Then Compaq did: Look here (http://www.compaq.com/alphaserver/index.html). HP are probably still selling them until they replace them. They are pretty meaty, although investment in advancing them slowed down a few years ago.

[unreg]

The Alpha chip is still considered one of the best if not the best implimentation of risc chip technology. And its clock speed is @ 500Mhz. Strip the X86 overhead from AMD and it becomes a good candidate for the G4 replacement.

[vniow]

Okay, here's a question for all you chip experts; if the AMD Athlon is an updated DEC Alpha chip with an x86 emulator, the what exactly is the Clawhammer? Is it just a 64-bit version of the Athlon, or something entirely different? :confused:

[e-coli]

Originally posted by APPLEP58

Hey, look who's back! Good to see you 'round these parts again!

Maybe you could shed some light on the true nature of our processor woes??? ;)

(everyone PLEASE be nice to him this time!)

[void]

Is there any 128-bit chips out there?
128...*drool*

[Inhale420]

Originally posted by ryanmil1
I spent hours reading tech documents on it a few months ago. Since the chip is a risk chip....


lol, maybe you should stop posting.. you don't want to take the risc that people would think you're a dumbass.