http://arstechnica.com/wankerdesk/3q02/powerpc.html
Interesting article.
Early 2004 for it to appear in Power Macs?! Jesus.
Interesting article.
Early 2004 for it to appear in Power Macs?! Jesus.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Arstechnica: PowerPC 970
- Thread starter MacCoaster
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
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.
[/rant start]
Oh no, soon we will have lower number of users than Linux at this rate!
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]
Oh no, soon we will have lower number of users than Linux at this rate!
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]
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yeah...
...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).
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
D
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.
!!!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
MW04 will be the first boston show. 03 will still be in NY.
I really hope we see it before Q2, 2004
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?
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
macrumors 68020
Re: !!!
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.
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.
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.
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
Props to nickgold (read it!!!)
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.
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.
What about the 7470?
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...
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...
Re: What about the 7470?
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.
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?
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.