Arstechnica: PowerPC 970 [Archive]

MrMacMan

Oct 16, 2002, 07:52 PM

[/rant start]
:eek:
Oh no, soon we will have lower number of users than Linux at this rate!
:eek:
NOOOOOOOO!!!
:loudspeaker at Apple HQ 1 Infinite Loop:
Does anyone know how to mass produce Ghz Processors here? Anyone?
IBM? Motrola? Intel? AMD? GIMME A BONE HERE!
Repeat to all Apple employes we are now hiring people to handmake processors if you would wish to please go to main office.
[/rant end]
:rolleyes:

Mr. Anderson

Oct 16, 2002, 08:12 PM

But there's even worse news in the article at the bottom.

The estimated SPEC INT and SPEC FP numbers (937 and 1051) would allow the 970 to clearly dominate the desktop scene were it released tomorrow, but by the time we see this chip in a shipping system the performance landscape will look significantly different in both the 32-bit (P4 at 4GHz+ with SMT) and 64-bit (AMD's Hammer) desktop markets. I won't try to predict exactly how it will stack up to the x86 and x86-64 offerings in late 2003/early 2004, but when it finally ships the 970 certainly won't spanking anything from Intel or AMD in the SPEC benchmarks. It should, however, enable Apple to avoid the kind of overpriced embarrassment (from a hardware perspective, at least) that is their current "pro" desktop line. And in fact a dual- or quad-970 system could potentially compare quite nicely in terms of price/performance to a single-processor Prescott or Hammer machine.

Is Apple going to shoot itself in the foot again?!?! This is not acceptable, if they have the thing available, use it. Damn, and damn again....

D

rice_web

Oct 16, 2002, 08:35 PM

I'm betting it will be announced at MWNY, shipping two months later. With this news, PowerMac sales will be cannibalized. So, we could likely see updated PowerMacs in January (or roughly January) to possibly 1.5GHz, but only a limited number would ever be made, and production on the PowerMac G4 would cease early in 2003 as Apple clears out inventory to prevent a build-up of G4s after the release of the G5.

Optimistic, yes; but Apple has a few difficult decisions to make right now as far as finding the perfect time to stop producing the PowerMac. Maybe they could improve the cooling of the PowerMac (more so) and simply ask Motorola to rename their 1.25 chips 1.5GHz (basically overclocked, but not really) and Apple would have 1.5GHz G4s in January-March, setting up the G5 for July-September.

ddtlm

Oct 16, 2002, 09:05 PM

dukestreet:

Of course Apple does not yet have PPC-970 chips ready for shipping. They may have prototypes, but you can bet that they don't have any of the real thing.

Anyway, not sure where Ars Tech got 2004 from, since everyone else was saying 2003 and some even said middle of 2003. I'm still betting on late 2003.

Catfish_Man

Oct 16, 2002, 09:05 PM

Originally posted by dukestreet
But there's even worse news in the article at the bottom.

The estimated SPEC INT and SPEC FP numbers (937 and 1051) would allow the 970 to clearly dominate the desktop scene were it released tomorrow, but by the time we see this chip in a shipping system the performance landscape will look significantly different in both the 32-bit (P4 at 4GHz+ with SMT) and 64-bit (AMD's Hammer) desktop markets. I won't try to predict exactly how it will stack up to the x86 and x86-64 offerings in late 2003/early 2004, but when it finally ships the 970 certainly won't spanking anything from Intel or AMD in the SPEC benchmarks. It should, however, enable Apple to avoid the kind of overpriced embarrassment (from a hardware perspective, at least) that is their current "pro" desktop line. And in fact a dual- or quad-970 system could potentially compare quite nicely in terms of price/performance to a single-processor Prescott or Hammer machine.

Is Apple going to shoot itself in the foot again?!?! This is not acceptable, if they have the thing available, use it. Damn, and damn again....

D ...but they don't have the thing available. They can't use it until it comes out, same as any other product. That means late summer 2003 at the VERY EARLIEST. Also, the SPEC numbers for the 970 are 3-5 times the G4's, and while the G4 IS slower than the competition, it isn't 4 times slower. If the 970 behaves like the G4 on SPEC, then real world performance may be significantly better. Also, they don't state what compiler they're planning to get those numbers with, if it's GCC we're in luck. If it's some ubercompiler, then the numbers probably mean more (since that's what Intel's using).

Mr. Anderson

Oct 16, 2002, 09:15 PM

Did you read the article? I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about what he's going on about delaying the release so that they don't have a couple months of reduced sales - which puts the arrival in 2004. I know its not available now, I'm just hoping they make them available as soon as they can and don't hold them back.

D

MacCoaster

Oct 16, 2002, 09:20 PM

Originally posted by ddtlm
Anyway, not sure where Ars Tech got 2004 from, since everyone else was saying 2003 and some even said middle of 2003. I'm still betting on late 2003.
Did you even bother to read my explanation above? They say they will start producing the chips--NOT shipping--mid to late 2003. As stated before, it takes a while to reach a volume suitable for Apple to release it.

nickgold

Oct 16, 2002, 09:37 PM

WHO THE HAY GIVES A POO?!?!

So what if they come out late 2003 or at the January MWSF '04. Does it really matter? The answer is, no. Apple is not competing with the Windows world, in many ways. Especially not in "hardware specs." So what if these things are released around the time of a 4+ GHz P4. WHO THE HECK REALLY WANTS THAT CRAP?!

If you're into Apple, freaking yay. But don't act like a bunch of little weenies and get all super-paranoid and stressed over what may or may not happen in the future. Please. Apple will still be there, and if you're still a Mac user by then, you'll probably be pretty happy with the offerings. Enjoy what you have now, and get over it already. It's so funny you can go onto a forum and see hundreds of people bickering and going bonkers over the latest dorky Mac rumor, and almost nobody talking about what they even DO with their machines. Wudda world, wudda world...

Why is it that I have an old rev A G4 450 Sawtooth that rocks out to this day, even with its Rage 128 AGP (not Pro) graphics card. And all sorts of peeps are freaked because THE UBERMAC's freakin' SPEC scores are weak. I know that I couldn't give a rat's arse, and that's true for 97.5% of the Mac user base. I love my machine as much today -- no, in fact more -- than the day it arrived. The PPC970's are going to be BEASTS, and the thought of them makes me quiver.

:P

e-coli

Oct 16, 2002, 09:40 PM

How long have we been waiting for this blasted G5, or whatever the hell it is.

I feel like by the time we get it I won't even care. I might even laugh. It's just such a joke now.

talk about a nightmare. sheesh.

Telomar

Oct 16, 2002, 10:18 PM

Originally posted by MacCoaster

Did you even bother to read my explanation above? They say they will start producing the chips--NOT shipping--mid to late 2003. As stated before, it takes a while to reach a volume suitable for Apple to release it. I'd say it's a fair bet you'll see the final product in August/September and I am fairly certain Apple will announce it at MW Boston.

Despite the fact I have heard a very reputable person put it in that time frame just looking at past history IBM said Sahara would be sampling Q1 2002. By 05/2002 it was in iBooks.

Cappy

Oct 16, 2002, 10:57 PM

It's nothing more than a guessing game *if* Apple is even going to use this cpu but if I wanted to throw my two cents in, I'd agree with the early 2004 number. The number of these needed will be much, much greater than those sahara's for the ibooks even without the expected hype. Lets not forget that this is a first gen chip that should be expected to have problems along the way. I'd say look for Apple to counter the expected hype with a G5 in 2003 from Moto.

It seems to me that IBM is typically one to not overhype their products which gives me confidence in the comments made that they'll be able to crank the clockspeed up pretty quickly after the initial chips are released.

Also I find it funny that Apple rarely announces any significant new or upgraded Mac hardware at the Macworld shows any longer yet people still cling to the fact that they can predict announcements by those dates.

Now I'm just waiting for the first Apple pda rumor that uses one of these 970's. ;)

Telomar

Oct 17, 2002, 02:51 AM

Apple is moving pro hardware updates and speed bumps in general away from the shows and focusing on consumer markets. This is due to the type of marketing and press that follows a Macworld show. Typically pro users stay up to date on what is going on and speed bumps aren't importnat enough to hype. The major shows do provide some immense free marketing for new items however.

If it will be ready with a month or so of the show they will announce there. A G5 says to consumers we're evolving and there are some great things coming up for you. Whenever you release a completely new generation you want to hype it to death and there is no better place to do that than a Macworld.

Given Apple sells just as many iBooks as PowerMacs I'd be surprised if sheer numbers were an issue. So unless they meet with a technical hitch, which I have a suspicion is more likely to be Apple caused and easier to solve, I would be very surprised if it gets pushed back to 2004. I know from people who have definitely had inside information that the current aims are the August/Spetember time frame and I'm very inclined to trust that.

j763

Oct 17, 2002, 03:02 AM

Originally posted by Telomar
I am fairly certain Apple will announce it at MW Boston.

MW04 will be the first boston show. 03 will still be in NY.

I really hope we see it before Q2, 2004 :)

j763

Oct 17, 2002, 03:06 AM

IMO, we'll see a new moto chip before the 970 comes out. The 970 will be in the pro-line in '04 (mwsf announcement probably), but apple will need something for their consumer line... what do you guys think? can moto pull something out of the hat during 2004 or is it just going to be more g4 speed bumps?

Telomar

Oct 17, 2002, 05:38 AM

Originally posted by j763

MW04 will be the first boston show. 03 will still be in NY.

I really hope we see it before Q2, 2004 :) Oops. Glad someone corrected me on that one :)

Rocketman

Oct 17, 2002, 08:30 AM

Originally posted by MacCoaster
Why before? Do you realize the PowerPC 970 is planned to start being produced (as in final RTM) in Q3/Q4 2003. They need to produce a lot of chips and many of those fail to meet tests so not all of them produce at a 100% rate. At any rate, Apple won't get enough of those until late Q4 or so to start assembling the new Macs.

This has always interested me. It seems that even though Apple only has about a 3% market share there is always a perceived or real shortage of chips for their computers. This indicates they are employing JIT methods on the limited supply of chips that do exist and often get bitten by it.

But it also means the fabs they use are a very small fraction of the volume of the pee cee marketplace. Probably even smaller in relative terms.

It is my understanding the PowerPC itself had higher yield per wafer and higher % yield, so that is not the issue.

It may be that because they are behind in the Mhz race they are trying to use chips closer to the technical limit of the process than Intel has to and thus there is a lower yield because of that.

The fact there is a 700mhz chip in Apples premiere product this year supports that theory.

Rocketman

jayscheuerle

Oct 17, 2002, 08:33 AM

Originally posted by nickgold
WHO THE HAY GIVES A POO?!?!

So what if they come out late 2003 or at the January MWSF '04. Does it really matter? The answer is, no. Apple is not competing with the Windows world, in many ways. Especially not in "hardware specs." So what if these things are released around the time of a 4+ GHz P4. WHO THE HECK REALLY WANTS THAT CRAP?!

If you're into Apple, freaking yay. But don't act like a bunch of little weenies and get all super-paranoid and stressed over what may or may not happen in the future. Please. Apple will still be there, and if you're still a Mac user by then, you'll probably be pretty happy with the offerings. Enjoy what you have now, and get over it already. It's so funny you can go onto a forum and see hundreds of people bickering and going bonkers over the latest dorky Mac rumor, and almost nobody talking about what they even DO with their machines. Wudda world, wudda world...

Why is it that I have an old rev A G4 450 Sawtooth that rocks out to this day, even with its Rage 128 AGP (not Pro) graphics card. And all sorts of peeps are freaked because THE UBERMAC's freakin' SPEC scores are weak. I know that I couldn't give a rat's arse, and that's true for 97.5% of the Mac user base. I love my machine as much today -- no, in fact more -- than the day it arrived. The PPC970's are going to be BEASTS, and the thought of them makes me quiver.

:P

Amen!

I've got the same machine at work and with the proper RAM the only thing it runs slowly is Aqua (and all the speed issues that are inherently part of OSX). Everything flies in 9 of course, but I haven't been there for a while. All this wankin' is about numbers, not about getting work done. It's about being perceived by the Wintel Geek Contingent as having wimpy hardware. Unfortunately for Apple, computers are being seen less as wizz-bang electronic Godsends and more like appliances. They will be expected to have the same shelf-life as your microwave oven because unless they break down, they get the job done.

Rocketman

Oct 17, 2002, 08:41 AM

Originally posted by j763
IMO, we'll see a new moto chip before the 970 comes out. The 970 will be in the pro-line in '04 (mwsf announcement probably), but apple will need something for their consumer line... what do you guys think? can moto pull something out of the hat during 2004 or is it just going to be more g4 speed bumps?

Since the 970 is a cripled Power 4 (for cost manufacturability and temperature purposes), I wonder if the actual Power 4 might be found in a future X-serve? It has the cooling balls and has the throughput need, and has no price sensitivity due to the low lisencing costs. Makes sense to me!

Rocketman

PretendPCuser

Oct 17, 2002, 09:33 AM

Word, nick. Do the work, complain less = better karma. Working on a PM G3 with >600 Mb free disk space, here at an advertising agency as an "art director". Whatever, i get my work done by deadline.

Faster machines often mean people expect proportionately more or better work at no increase in cost to them.

Seems a lot of people are crying for these things more and more. I'm wondering how much of it is like the proposed male-midlife crisis over-compensating for something syndrome.

gazelips

Oct 17, 2002, 11:33 AM

Isn't Motorola going to do a PPC7470? It seems like I remember reading about it, and that it would help with memory issues, etc. I realize the 85xx stuff has no place in Macs, but what about a 7470 on at least a .13micron process. Aren't the 7455s still on .18? Maybe a 7470 would go a long way toward easing the wait for the 970...

MacCoaster

Oct 17, 2002, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by gazelips
Isn't Motorola going to do a PPC7470? It seems like I remember reading about it, and that it would help with memory issues, etc.
I doubt Motorola is ever going to do the 7470. Hell, is the 7470 even real, or was it fabricated (pun intended) by rumors? My guess is that since the DP1.25 is technically a 7455A, maybe simply a bumped up 7455A?
I realize the 85xx stuff has no place in Macs, but what about a 7470 on at least a .13micron process. Aren't the 7455s still on .18? Maybe a 7470 would go a long way toward easing the wait for the 970...
Finally, someone who realizes the 85xx isn't intended for Macs. Yes, the MPC7455 is still on the .18m process. They (Motorola) had plans for .15m G4 from the start, but we haven't seen it.

I agree about a need for a bumped up G4 for the next 1 1/4 or so years we have until the next generation Macs.

nixd2001

Oct 17, 2002, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by Rocketman

This has always interested me. It seems that even though Apple only has about a 3% market share there is always a perceived or real shortage of chips for their computers. This indicates they are employing JIT methods on the limited supply of chips that do exist and often get bitten by it.

But it also means the fabs they use are a very small fraction of the volume of the pee cee marketplace. Probably even smaller in relative terms.

It is my understanding the PowerPC itself had higher yield per wafer and higher % yield, so that is not the issue.

It may be that because they are behind in the Mhz race they are trying to use chips closer to the technical limit of the process than Intel has to and thus there is a lower yield because of that.

The fact there is a 700mhz chip in Apples premiere product this year supports that theory.

Rocketman

I didn't follow this 700MHz logic. Can you expand please?

rice_web

Oct 17, 2002, 05:33 PM

iBook = 700MHz, no?

beatle888

Oct 18, 2002, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by PretendPCuser
Word, nick. Do the work, complain less = better karma. Working on a PM G3 with >600 Mb free disk space, here at an advertising agency as an "art director". Whatever, i get my work done by deadline.

Faster machines often mean people expect proportionately more or better work at no increase in cost to them.

Seems a lot of people are crying for these things more and more. I'm wondering how much of it is like the proposed male-midlife crisis over-compensating for something syndrome.

are you responsible for final production? If so
how big are your photoshop files? 600mb of
disk space even if you had your ram to the
max is NOT enough. I would pull my hair out
if i had to work on your system doing trade
show graphics or photoshop composition for
full color ads. I don't even know if I would
except a job in a studio if they wanted to
set me down infront of a G3 with 600mb of
hard drive space.

Unless your doing comps only then it would
be ok. but not final mechanicals. No Way.

nissim

Oct 19, 2002, 07:52 AM

GPTurismo

Oct 19, 2002, 09:06 AM

I forsee...

PPC 970 being first released in X-Serves in September - November, PowerMacs using the chip in January, then powerbooks, then imacs, then ibooks.

Welcome to 64 bit.

Also it is going to use AltiVec, and only one company uses altivec for an OS O:-)

And if you are BITCHING about how long it is going to take, or how slow it is in megahertz compared to p4s....

go buy a wintel box and go solitaire.

The fact is, the PPC 970 uses a new bus archetecture, not only is it going to run at 900 - 1000 megahertz, but higher speed ram and it's not going to have any legacy issues. So you can't just compare the 32 bit p4's running on old x86 arch and with older bus systems etc. ALl the x86 arch has been doing for the past 10 years is adding on and on top of old crap.

With specs like that, if apple released the machines by mid year we could expect them to cost 8 grand easy. Even SGI couldn't sell boxes for that much.

Hopefully they will have the boxes down in cost by January. O:-)

GPT

PS. You're all a bunch of whiney ass bitches :D

Edot

Oct 19, 2002, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by Rocketman

Since the 970 is a cripled Power 4 (for cost manufacturability and temperature purposes), I wonder if the actual Power 4 might be found in a future X-serve? It has the cooling balls and has the throughput need, and has no price sensitivity due to the low lisencing costs. Makes sense to me!

Rocketman

I keep seeing people relate this chip to the Power4 in a negative way. I have not read anywhere (besides these forums) that this chip is a stripped down version of the Power4. Its design is based on that chip, but it seems as though it is an entirely new design in itself. Does anyone have and documentation saying that it is a stripped down Power4 chip, and that its performance is going to reflect that? This chip seems to be a successor to the Power4 not a low price alternative. Please correct me if I am wrong and point me to the documents you are getting this information from. Maybe I am just too optimistic;)

3G4N

Oct 19, 2002, 02:04 PM

One reason people are saying the 970 must be a crippled
Power4 is because of the Power4's very high pricetag.
However, one reason for the high pricetag, is the HUGE
amounts of L3 cache (like 32mb) and 1.5mb L2 cache,
which increases the die size, and therefore the price.
(It's also architecturally very complex in comparison,
and need 500watts of power, compared to about
40watts for the 970). I don't think it's crippled, just
different, and still way more booty-kickin power than
80% of us will ever need.

and this quote Re: the Power4 and PPC, from:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,46356,00.asp

"Power4 cracks its instructions into an intermediate internal
format that is more easily digested by the pipeline. [...]
Both "native" Power instructions, as well as PowerPC instructions,
are decoded into this internal representation early in the pipeline. "

Making the possibility of a Power4 Mac an "option"
that SteveJ likes???

IF Apple made a Power4 (or 5) XServe, it will be
quite a bit further down the road. Apple would need
to have, in place, the hardcore workstation hardware the
movie studios need first, before Apple could go trying to
sell $50K-500K servers. (The movie studios being the only
major market who could afford a Power4 chip's pricetag.)
Even then, studios have been moving toward cheaper
linux renderfarms, so this is still a big If.

And at this power and price, they ought to call them XXXServe!

As OSX matures and proliferates, Apple's
hardware architecture beefen up, and movie studio
strategies play out (FCP, Shake, EMagic, etc), we may
see this become more of a possibility.

3G4N

Oct 19, 2002, 02:10 PM

Originally posted by GPTurismo

With specs like that, if apple released the machines by mid year we could expect them to cost 8 grand easy. Even SGI couldn't sell boxes for that much.

SGI workstations start at around $5000.

PS. You're all a bunch of whiney ass bitches

Tell it like it is!

Telomar

Oct 19, 2002, 07:19 PM

Originally posted by Edot

I have not read anywhere (besides these forums) that this chip is a stripped down version of the Power4. Its design is based on that chip, but it seems as though it is an entirely new design in itself. The PPC970's core is that of the POWER4. They have used 1 core, changed the cache, added a vector unit and introduced a new memory system more appropriate for the desktop market.

People keep saying it's a stripped down version of the POWER4 because that is what it is but it is also an evolution of that to make it appropriate to the desktop market.

Catfish_Man

Oct 19, 2002, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by Telomar
The PPC970's core is that of the POWER4. They have used 1 core, changed the cache, added a vector unit and introduced a new memory system more appropriate for the desktop market.

People keep saying it's a stripped down version of the POWER4 because that is what it is but it is also an evolution of that to make it appropriate to the desktop market. ..., also they switched it to a .13 micron manufacturing process and thinned the gate oxide some (makes it faster but less reliable).

re the person who said POWER4s have 1.5MB L2 cache: I was recently configuring a POWER4 based server (just for fun) on IBM's website. It had 512MB L2 cache.

re the person who said the XServe might get the POWER4: The XServe does NOT have the cooling or powersupply to deal with the POWER4. It is a 1U. It is not, and likely never will be again, as powerful as the PowerMac. This is because the PowerMac isn't as power/heat sensitive as the XServe. Anything that draws 125 watts is not going in a 1U.

Telomar

Oct 19, 2002, 10:18 PM

Originally posted by Catfish_Man
..., also they switched it to a .13 micron manufacturing process and thinned the gate oxide some (makes it faster but less reliable).Actually this has been done to the POWER4 as well it just hasn't been released quite yet. It should appear some time within the next month.

re the person who said POWER4s have 1.5MB L2 cache: I was recently configuring a POWER4 based server (just for fun) on IBM's website. It had 512MB L2 cache.The POWER4 has 3 lots of L2 cache and it in fact has slightly less than 1.5 MB but 1.5 MB is easier to say. If it had 512 MB then that was likely a 32 way server and the L3 cache.

daRAT

Oct 20, 2002, 07:58 AM

This from Geek.com;

"Apple is in long-term decline. Even if Apple adopts the IBM 970, no one at the MPF expressed any confidence in Apple's future. The near consensus was that Apple was in a long term, perhaps terminal, decline, and that the 970 would not be enough to save it. Every year more Macintosh users convert to Windows, and this trend will continue unless Apple comes out with another "insanely great" product. "

Now don't flame me on this, I don't know if I hold a lot of faith in "near consensus", but it appeared to be subject on everyones mind at MPF.

Here is the Geek.com link;
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002Oct/bch20021018016880.htm

BTW, anyone have a better link to what was said at MPF ? I would like to see it first hand :]

Thanks!