Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

AmbitiousLemon

Moderator emeritus
Nov 28, 2001
3,415
3
down in Fraggle Rock
i certainly dont think it is naive to think that ibm or apple would (together or separtely) acquire moto's semiconductor department. moto is hurting their stock is dropping, andthey have numerous times discussed openly the posibility of selling or simply abandoning their semiconductor department. if things over at moto get bad enough apple will have to do something, in fact i believe it is somewhat naive to think apple would just sit by idlely while the maker of their (nearly) only chip used in their computers goes under.

as far as discussion on the naming scheme of the processors, some of you need a serious logic injection. you seem to be just making stuff up. you guys are seeing patterns in the naming that doesnt exist and seem to be looking right past the very simple 74xx=g4 85xx=g5 scheme.

but talk of the next generation pro chip coming from ibm is far more interesting. for one, we would finally have a competant partner for apple pro models. also it would be very likley that apple would get rid of the Gx naming scheme finally.
 

Mr. Anderson

Moderator emeritus
Nov 1, 2001
22,568
6
VA
what's wrong in a name

And why 'finally' get rid of the Gx naming convention. Its all just a name, nothing more. If you called it a booger7, it wouldn't matter. All that really seems to be important is that its better, in some way, than a booger6. And for marketing purposes you'd have to call it something, not just 'Apple's New Processor'

Hey there you go ANP1
 

madamimadam

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2002
1,281
0
I was taking a look at the IBM site and noticed something astounding. Apart from the fact that Motorola and IBM both make processor advancment claims and neither recognises the other for work on the PowerPC, the Motorola 1GHz chip has a power consumption of 21.3W where are the competing IBM chip consumes 3.6W @ 800MHz (Note: IBM has a 1GHz PowerPC but I could not see power consumption stats).

I know which one shows more potential out of the two.

Just to confirm, both companies claim their processors to run at the same speed, IBMs just used FAR less power and the simple assumption would be far less heat also. Although, IBM markets the 750FX as a consumer processor.
 

gbojim

macrumors 6502
Jan 30, 2002
353
0
The reason the IBM chip dissipates so much less power is the 750FX chip does not have 2MB of L3 cache nor does it have SIMD like the Motorola chip.
 

madamimadam

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2002
1,281
0
Originally posted by gbojim
The reason the IBM chip dissipates so much less power is the 750FX chip does not have 2MB of L3 cache nor does it have SIMD like the Motorola chip.

Those must require a LOT of power then.... what a drawback
 

ftaok

macrumors 603
Jan 23, 2002
6,485
1,571
East Coast
Regarding Logic

Originally posted by AmbitiousLemon
as far as discussion on the naming scheme of the processors, some of you need a serious logic injection. you seem to be just making stuff up. you guys are seeing patterns in the naming that doesnt exist and seem to be looking right past the very simple 74xx=g4 85xx=g5 scheme.
A.L.

I'm not making anything up. If you look at the roadmap carefully, you'll see that 7xx, and 7xxx chips are for the computing and high-end embedded markets. 8xxx chips are for the communications sector. You'll also see that 82xx chips are G2, 85xx chips are G5, and 86xx chips are G6. 74xx chips are G4. The only chip there that defies my interpretation is the 750 which is a G3.

All that I'm saying is that Moto's naming convention uses the first digit to determine the market and the second digit to determine the generation. Thus, the rumored 7500 chip would be a G5 for computing or high-end embedded applications. The rumored 8540 chip would be a G5 for communications applications.

That's my logic and I'm sticking by it. Personally, I don't think that the 7500 exists at all. I'm believing that IBM will take over G5 (or whatever you want to call it) development for computers only with licensed technology (Alti-vec) from Motorola. This leaves the G5 development with Alti-vec for routers and such to Motorola. Everyone leaves happy. Apple gets a more reliable supplier for their pro-line Macs, IBM gets their hands on Alti-vec (although they may not be too happy, but at least they get to supply Apple's high end Macs), Motorola gets licensing fees from IBM. Ice cream and cake for everyone.
 

mcrain

macrumors 68000
Feb 8, 2002
1,773
12
Illinois
Re: Regarding Logic

Originally posted by ftaok
Ice cream and cake for everyone.

At least for the attorneys who draft the agreements between IBM and Moto! Gotta pay for the kids' educations.
 

madamimadam

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2002
1,281
0
Re: Regarding Logic

Originally posted by ftaok
A.L.

I'm not making anything up. If you look at the roadmap carefully, you'll see that 7xx, and 7xxx chips are for the computing and high-end embedded markets. 8xxx chips are for the communications sector. You'll also see that 82xx chips are G2, 85xx chips are G5, and 86xx chips are G6. 74xx chips are G4. The only chip there that defies my interpretation is the 750 which is a G3.

Rewrite of incorrect statement follows:
"The only chip(s) there that (defy) my interpretation (are) the 750 which is a G3(, the 60x, the 8xx, the 5xx and the 5xxx and the fact that, according to my theory, the G3/4 are ONLY embedded processors never to be used elsewhere).
 

mcrain

macrumors 68000
Feb 8, 2002
1,773
12
Illinois
I was checking out moto's site, and they had a press release about the power pc chip hitting 1 ghz and another power pc chip that had the same pin structure as an older chip and used lower power, and that chip had now hit 800 mhz. Does anyone know if that chip is a g4 designed for laptops? I mean, could there be an 800 mhz tibook in the works, or is that some weird embedded moto chip used for vacuums or something like that?
 

germanknee

macrumors member
Jan 24, 2002
79
0
well, we don't have an agreement with naming, but i think that everyone would rather have ibm than moto. and, hopefully, no one still thinks we'll see a g5 at mwny 02. of course i would like that, but it's not going to happen. i think definitely new g4s at mwny 02, but not what ensign paris posted from macosrumors at the start of the thread.
 

madamimadam

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2002
1,281
0
Originally posted by germanknee
well, we don't have an agreement with naming, but i think that everyone would rather have ibm than moto. and, hopefully, no one still thinks we'll see a g5 at mwny 02. of course i would like that, but it's not going to happen. i think definitely new g4s at mwny 02, but not what ensign paris posted from macosrumors at the start of the thread.

To put it simply, I do not want a G5 for the 64-bit and so forth, I want it for the DDR and Radid I/O ect.

Basically, if mid-year we get a G4 with those features, I will not care that it is a G4, I will be one of the first in line with my credit card details.

I know I can not use 64-bit processing at the moment, I can, however, use DDR and Rapid I/O, but I would settle for DDR, with a much faster bus, obviously.
 

Mr. Anderson

Moderator emeritus
Nov 1, 2001
22,568
6
VA
faster bus and memory

Originally posted by madamimadamtimallen


To put it simply, I do not want a G5 for the 64-bit and so forth, I want it for the DDR and Radid I/O ect.

Yes
 

germanknee

macrumors member
Jan 24, 2002
79
0
madamimadamtimallen:

i don't care about 64 bit either, not until apps i use start implementing it. i don't think that will be for at least another year and a half.
 

madamimadam

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2002
1,281
0
Originally posted by cb911
a G5 at MW Tokyo? i don't think so. we'll be lucky to get a 800MHz G4 in the TiBook, but even that probably won't happen until MY New York.

While I would like to note, I thought the G5 @ Tokyo joke was a good laugh, it is a shame that the above are fact and not just pessimism.... I just can not wait for a hardware upgrade of some value as well as an upgraded PowerBook (not as caring about superfast PowerBook upgrade.... the current PowerBook suits my needs down to a tee.... just could be a little faster for OSX, though).
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.