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

970 ?????

Sabenth

Sabenth

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 24, 2003
888
3
UK
Ok guys ive read a lot about a so called 970 now is this a chip scuse me for been a dumb ass just that this has got my attention. been informed about current things is why i come on here not to mention I still havent decided on what i want as far as macs go but now i am seening a lot of posts about new this new that i know that some products have been updated and well i dont know to much about what products have and havent been updated all i know is that people keep talking about the 970 whats so special about it and whats its so called clock speed...


PC USER WHO WISHES HE KNEW WHAT TO BUY.............
 
Well I don't know much about the 970, just that it's a 64-bit processor, as opposed to the 32-bit processors that we have today (not quite sure what that means exactly, but there ya go). The clock speed should be around 1.8 to 2.0 GHz or so.

--Fred
 
basically it is a "g5" in apple terms. Being a 64 bit processor is the most obvious, but probably not something that will be immediately useful. Programs would have to be made to take advantage of that. More immediate things of value will be the immediate clockspeed boost, the FSB speed will be a major improvement as it is a major bottleneck in the current generations of powermacs. Power dissipation will also be taken down quite a bit, hence cooler processors, also meaning a higher potential for future clock speed increases. Also the overall architecture of the thing is well improved. Definitely something to be very excited about.
 
if we see the darn thing before we see the pentium 6!!

apple and IBM really need to get cracking on this solution. If we dont have it soon - its going to be worth almost nothing.

just imagine though (cause we will get it eventually) how fast this this will launch safari considering that sjobs DP1.25 launches it in one bounce. :D (someone confirm, the 1.42 was not available at MWSF03)
 
-----Power dissipation will also be taken down quite a bit, hence cooler processors

Are you sure about this? I've read that this might not be the case.
 
Originally posted by benixau
just imagine though (cause we will get it eventually) how fast this this will launch safari considering that sjobs DP1.25 launches it in one bounce. :D (someone confirm, the 1.42 was not available at MWSF03)
Click to expand...

Heck, even with just a 1 GHz iMac with 768 MB of RAM, Safari sometimes launches in just one bounce (two at most, like if I'm launching other programs or listening to music at the same time).
 
OK, here's what it is:

Clock speed: 1.8GHz
Bus speed: 450MHz DDR (800MHz effective)
Instructions per clock: about 2.8 (G4 does 2.31)
Altivec: 7400/7410 style (current G4 is 7455)
Out of order execution: Extensive (G4 has very little)
Power usage: 42 watts @ 1.8GHz, 19 watts @ 1.2GHz (G4 uses about 30 watts @ 1GHz, iirc)
L2 cache: 512k (G4 has 256k)
L1 cache: 96k (G4 has 64k)
L3 cache: none (G4 has 1-2MB)
Integer Units: 4 (G4 has 4)
Floating Point Units: 2 (G4 has 1, this is very important)
Memory address space: 64 bit (G4 is 32 bit)
Die size: 118 sq mm (or mm^2, I can't remember)
Manufacturing process: 8 layer .13 micron SOI

Overall, it should be about equal to the 3.06GHz Pentium 4 while using half as much power, and faster for Altivec and memory limited tasks. It should be a lot faster than a G4 of the same clock speed (which doesn't exist), except at well coded Altivec tasks with data sets between 512k and 2MB.

It will be released in the third quarter of 2003, and may be used in Macs at some point after that. No word on whether it will be dual or single processor, but single is most likely (due to the complexity of designing a "northbridge" chip for it, and due to the cost).

It should be transitioned to a .09 micron manufacturing process relatively soon after release (the fab it's being made at is switching to .09 micron). This will allow for higher clock speeds, lower power usage, more cache, possibly a second processor core, or possibly an on chip memory controller like the Athlon64/Opteron. It would be possible to do a dual core 970 with 512k L2 cache per processor core at .09 micron without increasing the size of the chip.

Any questions?
 
Questions? Just one...

Get a dual 1.42 now... or wait for the 970.
Im running a Beige G3 and ive been waiting for a long long time for a new computer, but is it worth 6 to 9 months for it?
 
Originally posted by benixau
if we see the darn thing before we see the pentium 6!!

apple and IBM really need to get cracking on this solution. If we dont have it soon - its going to be worth almost nothing.

just imagine though (cause we will get it eventually) how fast this this will launch safari considering that sjobs DP1.25 launches it in one bounce. :D (someone confirm, the 1.42 was not available at MWSF03)
Click to expand...

You make it sounds like its been laggin and fallen behind schedule. Its scheduled to be ready in the later part of this year. When apple (if apple) starts using it is up to them. IBM has already demonstrated some blade servers using it. There's no reason to believe it won't arrive for mass production by the end of the year.
 
Originally posted by crazzyeddie
Questions? Just one...

Get a dual 1.42 now... or wait for the 970.
Im running a Beige G3 and ive been waiting for a long long time for a new computer, but is it worth 6 to 9 months for it?
Click to expand...

What are you going to do with it?
 
Originally posted by crazzyeddie
Questions? Just one...

Get a dual 1.42 now... or wait for the 970.
Im running a Beige G3 and ive been waiting for a long long time for a new computer, but is it worth 6 to 9 months for it?
Click to expand...

Wait. Dear Lord wait. If you have survived this long on an old g3, nothing is going to come along in the next six months to make you absolutely pant for a faster system.

Anyone currently buying a powermac is one of two things: A creative professional who needs as much power as possible *today*(and who will likely upgrade to a 970 when they are released anyway, and write it off), and then the small subset of mac users who are clinically insane. (Small? Did I say small?)

Just my 2 cents. Course, maybe I'm just trying to convince *myself* to wait...

Cheers,
prat
 
Catfish_Man:

Bus speed: 450MHz DDR (800MHz effective)
Click to expand...
This is the maximum value and it is likley that it would not be the standard-issue bus speed. IBM is fond is saying "up to 900mhz".

Integer Units: 4 (G4 has 4)
Click to expand...
Actually the PPC-970 has only two (same as a P4, less than an Athlon).

Floating Point Units: 2 (G4 has 1, this is very important)
Click to expand...
The PPC-970 units can also execute fused add-multiplies, making them each individually better than the single unit on a 7455.
 
I know that 64-bit processors can use terabytes upon terabytes of memory (i think something like 4), but what will should we expect at the release of the 970 PowerMac? (And please don't rant: I know there is a chance that Apple won't use the 970, but why wouldn't they?) Oh, and I have been waiting since the release of the 8600/300 for a new PowerMac, and I'll be waiting until the 970 too. Waiting...
 
really, i don't see what the big deal is about the 970, price is very high, making a more expensive mac. it competes, (according to spec scores) to todays desktop processors, when it makes its way to the mac, it's just gonna be ages behind. this isn't going to push apple beyond intel or amd, all it's gonna be is another ppc upgrade. it will act just like any other update to the mac line. really, it goes two ways, those who want speed just to say they have it, and those who who use a computer for what it is, not what's in it. i love osx and would not buy a new computer that did not have it, so speed is just a small part of it, it's also features and alot of other things, but it has to have osx, so if marklar doesn't come out, mac, 970 or whatever, who cares, that's what i'll be buying. however, for production use, windows is the only way to go, not photoshop cause you don't notice the speed difference all that much, but premiere, after effects, shake, combustion, maya, the mac looks like a joke. the windows could crash a hundred times and still outpace the top end mac. but more desktops for home use get sold than business use, for apple at least, i wonder what the stats on that are, anybody know? business sales versus home sales for apple? just my opinion
 
mozez:

really, i don't see what the big deal is about the 970, price is very high, making a more expensive mac.
Click to expand...
I don't think that any price numbers are public, but overall the chip isn't very big and should not be very expensive. Features like only 512k L2 definately imply a reasonably-priced product (noone sells a especially expensive chip with so little cache).

this isn't going to push apple beyond intel or amd
Click to expand...
Why does it have to push it beyond?

windows is the only way to go, not photoshop cause you don't notice the speed difference all that much, but premiere, after effects, shake, combustion, maya, the mac looks like a joke
Click to expand...
You seem to not understand that the PPC-970 will be just as well suited to these tasks as any PC. Well, perhaps not the fastest PC at the time of release, but it will not be a joke at all.
 
Well at least i got some answers to my question ..

Still it seems to me there is a conflict of intrest here between people and what the 970 is going and will do i gather its 64bit well intel has taken there time in this department its around a 3 ghz mark well again intel has just reached this point granted they have a crap load of cash and they get in just about every deacent pc going well depends on how you look at dell ..... packardbell etc..


Its IBM That own it and its apple who is leasing the chip correct ...well if its only going to be released later this year whats everyone worreid about...
 
Personally, I buy powermacs because they last so much longer than any other Mac product, or PC product at that. How many people do you know that are playing todays games on 7 year old PCs?

I use mine for video editing (which is now too slow on this computer), Photoshop, Web design, and games.

They just last so much longer than the iMac/eMac/laptop , it makes the price tag worth the difference in longevity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back