CeBit: PPC 970's up to 1.8GHz

[MacRumors]

MacGuardians report from CeBit that IBM's PowerPC 970 will debut at up to 1.8GHz as originally expected. (IBM's Microprocessor Forum presentation in October 2002 indicated initial speeds for the PowerPC 970 ranging from 1.4GHz - 1.8GHz.)

The 2.5GHz models described in an IBM press release are reportedly for the subsequent generation of 970's, but will apparently utilize the 0.13 Micron Process, contrary to ZDNet's report.

 

[arn]

As always, full human German translation would be appreciated.

Addendum:

Translations provided by Escher and cuby. Escher's provided here:

Surprisingly, we found out that the PPC presentation announced in advance [of CeBIT] was cancelled. [Could this have been at Apple's request?] When we asked, we learned that the expected processor (2.3 to 2.5 Ghz) was actually the generation after the next [i.e. post initial 970], and that we should thus not expect an introduction [of the 2+ Ghz iron] anytime soon. According to IBM, "current" PPC 970 processors (still produced with a .13 micronc process, which applies to the upcoming 2.3/2.5 Ghz processor as well), clocking up to 1.8 Ghz, could be used by Apple in the future. As always, however, it has been impossible to optain more detailed information.

 

[drastik]

IS there anything about a Mac timetable in there, or even just an idea if Macs will use them? I'm fairly sure this will come to pass, but I'd hate to get screwed on my dreams.

 

[MacManiac1224]

I translated it through google:
-------
Surprisingly we had to state that the conception of the PPC 970 already announced in the apron was unfortunately called off. On demand we experienced that the expected processor (2.3 to 2.5 GHz) represents the view on the processor generation after the next and not on an imminent appearance to be counted is. PPC 970 processors (still in 0,13 Micron manufactured, applies also to for the coming 2.3/2.5 GHz processor) with an achievement of up to 1,8 GHz, which could be blocked according to IBM also by Apple in the future, is current. But one always does not know more details like.
--------

the translation is a little wierd, but that last line about Apple blocking the 1.8Ghz processor, that bothers me, I had a feeling they might do something like that, holding the processor back so they can make thier modest jumps and pump the market for a constant flow of money. I could be wrong,

[Admin Edit: Please see full translation below]


What do you guys think?

 

[arn]

Originally posted by MacManiac1224
What do you guys think?

I think we need a real translation. You're making a lot of assumptions based on an automated translation.

 

[jamilecrire]

The real question is....

Has anyone tried to price comparable 64bit platforms? A dual 1.05GHz Sun Blade 2000 is $19,995. My guess is this is going to hurt Sun (sunw) bigtime.

Oracle is in RC 2 stage (forever) but I would be willing to bet the cost analysis of an XServe with dual 1.8Ghz versus a comparable Sun machine will scare the hell out of them (sun).

Most business I've been in run Solaris (64bit) for database applications. If Apple can enter this market aggressively and quit the guessing games so business can plan, there could be a very bright future for enterprise apple computers afterall. Granted this is just my dream. Apple will have to stick with it for 5+ years before most businesses will even let them in the door. If they can create a sales team (like IBM, Sun, MS, etc have) that demonstrates their systems that are: faster, cheaper, higher quality, and stable, they will turn some heads.

Oh well, guess we'll all have to wait and see. BTW anyone heard anything about the 15" Aluminum Powerbooks? I'm getting tired of waiting (maybe they are waiting on the 17" to actually ship).

 

[cuby]

Translation...

This is a quick translation of the part of the macguardians article re the PPC970:

"Surprisingly we had to realise that the presentation of the PPC970, as announced before, unfortunately was cancelled. Upon request, we found out that the expected processor (2.3 to 2.5 GHz) is just a preview on the next but one processor generation and that one should not expect it anytime soon. Currently, PPC970 CPUs (still manufactured in 0.13 µm, like the upcoming 2.3/2.5 GHz CPU) are available in speeds up to 1.8 GHz that - according to IBM - might be used by Apple in the future. Exact information on this is still not available."

Hope that helps,
Michael

 

[Masker]

Pretty much all I can say is: bring it on! I don't care if it's a 1.8 GHz processor, especially if it's a dual architecture. I want a new processor so that the FUTURE of Macs will be as bright as possible. Yes, of course it would be better if Apple came out with 2.5 GHz PowerMacs, but really, it doesn't matter as long as they lose the G4 and LONG TERM, the 970 can be a viable processor, scaling to higher clock rates with smaller processes. I frankly don't understand the people who say that 1.8 is unacceptable. If it's this processor, I really don't care. Of course, dual would be better, too.

My only concern at this point is cost. But hopefulyl Apple will realize that they need to price slightly lower than current PowerMacs (as they do with most every rev.) to sell these & that they can't charge a huge premium just because it's a swanky new processor.

 

[Escher]

Originally posted by arn
As always, full human German translation would be appreciated.

Well, here's the original German passage relevant to IBM's PPC 970 and Apple:

Erstaunlicherweise mussten wir feststellen, dass die schon im Vorfeld angekündigte Vorstellung des PPC 970 leider abgesagt wurde. Auf Nachfrage erfuhren wir, dass der erwartete Prozessor (2,3 bis 2,5 GHz) den Ausblick auf die übernächste Prozessor-Generation darstellt und nicht mit einem baldigen Erscheinen zu rechnen ist. Aktuell sind PPC 970 Prozessoren (nach wie vor in 0,13 Mikron gefertigt, das gilt auch für den kommenden 2,3/2,5 GHz Prozessor) mit einer Leistung von bis zu 1,8 GHz, die laut IBM auch von Apple in Zukunft verbaut werden könnten. Aber Genaueres weiß man wie immer nicht.

And here's my human translation:

Surprisingly, we found out that the PPC presentation announced in advance [of CeBIT] was cancelled. [Could this have been at Apple's request?] When we asked, we learned that the expected processor (2.3 to 2.5 Ghz) was actually the generation after the next [i.e. post initial 970], and that we should thus not expect an introduction [of the 2+ Ghz iron] anytime soon. According to IBM, "current" PPC 970 processors (still produced with a .13 micronc process, which applies to the upcoming 2.3/2.5 Ghz processor as well), clocking up to 1.8 Ghz, could be used by Apple in the future. As always, however, it has been impossible to optain more detailed information.

As convention demands, text in square brackets represents my own additions.

HTH,
Escher

 

[Escher]

PS: The two MacGuardians state that they have scheduled an interview with a Microsoft representative for tomorrow. They also state at the bottom of the page that they'll post a full first-day report by this evening.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Cool

Well that proves it. The 970 "will" hit 2.3-2.5 on .13um. That bodes well for the .09um parts that will most likely be coming late next year.

I would like to see Apple at least have one Dual 970 based system if not all. That level of speed increase in Macs would generate a frenzy ...even in this weak economy.

 

[leo]

"Block"

which could be blocked according to IBM also by Apple

The google-translation ist wrong here...
It's not "blocked" it's "deployed" or "utilized". The original word "verbaut" is a bit slangy...

edit: Oh, somebody made a complete and accurate translation. I apologize.

 

[Kid Red]

So it sounds like we are getting more and more (possible) credible info about the 970 coming this year. I can't wait.

 

[Mr. Anderson]

That's all well and good - but will a single 1.8 ghz be fast enough or will they have to go to the dual 1.8 to be at or above a Wintel platform?

I really would like to see how well the 1.8 does in speed compared to a 3 GHz Intel....but I'll just have to wait like everyone else.

D

 

[stonysleep]

I'm not bothered about the speed. I dont replace my mac too often but when i do i try to do so when a new processor comes out. My current G4 probably has another year in it, and the more i read about the 970, the more i think this is going to be my next mac's processor.

I thought the ZDnet article was lazy journalism and certainly falling victim to what jobs & co call the Megahertz Myth. I dont think u can really compare speeds of a 64bit RISC processor (PPC970) to a 32bit CISC processor (Pentium 4).

At the moment a 64bit 1.8GHz IBM processor would def hit the spot nicely. I kinda feel more towards IBM than Motorola these days - dont ask me why - maybe cos motorola strikes me as that company that makes mobile phones and all sorts of stuff, whereas IBM i think computer chips.

Since the G4 came out we've seen longer pipelines, more heat -> bigger heatsinks and fans. On the plus side, the gigaflops have gone up from 2 to 21 and the speed from 0.5 GHz to nearly 1.5 GHz.

I'm still thinking that this IBM processor is gonna be good for a few years - i really was worried 3 months ago that i would find myself buying a windows box when i replaced my G4 - so IBM bring it on!!

 

[waterbouy]

Blocked could also translate to allocated...

Arn is right.

The automatice translation does not manage contextual references. Look in a thesaurus under blocked...

 

[nuckinfutz]

Originally posted by Kid Red
So it sounds like we are getting more and more (possible) credible info about the 970 coming this year. I can't wait.

Duke:

A Pentium4 3Ghz will score roughly

SpecFP- 1077
SpecInt- 1099

A PPC 970 is estimated at:
SpecFP- 1050
SpecInt-937

So we're "riiiiiiiight" there. But Intel has Prescott coming which should bump their scores by 10-15%

At any rate if Apple could/would ship a Dual 1.8Ghz Machine for a decent (say $3499) price loaded. It would FLY!!!

 

[Nemesis]

Originally posted by nuckinfutz
Duke:

A Pentium4 3Ghz will score roughly

SpecFP- 1077
SpecInt- 1099

A PPC 970 is estimated at:
SpecFP- 1050
SpecInt-937

So we're "riiiiiiiight" there. But Intel has Prescott coming which should bump their scores by 10-15%

SpecFP and SpecInt are designed for single core CPUs. 970 can be multicore, 2 way, 4 way, etc., so all comparisons are in vain.

Stop comparing apples and oranges. Those tests mean absolutely nothing.

But one thing is certain: 970 will rock!!!

 

[arn]

Originally posted by Nemesis
SpecFP and SpecInt are designed for single core CPUs. 970 can be multicore, 2 way, 4 way, etc., so all comparisons are in vain.

Stop comparing apples and oranges. Those tests mean absolutely nothing.

But one thing is certain: 970 will rock!!!

From all official notes I've heard the intial runs of 970s will be single core.

People are specualting that multicore 970s may exist in the future... but it's speculation/rumor at this point.

arn

 

[scem0]

This just confirms what I thought would happen. I can't wait for
these to come up, and the speed bump to 2.5 GHz (if that
happens) will be..... fun. .

 

[Vroem]

And altivec improvements?

Originally posted by nuckinfutz
Duke:

A Pentium4 3Ghz will score roughly

SpecFP- 1077
SpecInt- 1099

A PPC 970 is estimated at:
SpecFP- 1050
SpecInt-937

Correct me if I'm wrong but these results do not include altivec. So will there be any improvements in the 970 (besides the 64-bit registers) that will affect altivec performance. Because from what I read, the altivec registers will stay at 128-bit.

 

[Hattig]

Originally posted by Nemesis
SpecFP and SpecInt are designed for single core CPUs. 970 can be multicore, 2 way, 4 way, etc., so all comparisons are in vain.

Stop comparing apples and oranges. Those tests mean absolutely nothing.

But one thing is certain: 970 will rock!!!

PPC970 is single core.

P4 3.06GHz can have SMT however ... which gives a great advantage when the OS is optimised for it, as shown by the latest beta Linux 2.5 kernels.

So the P4 is the one being underrepresented by SPECInt and SPECFP, all things considered.

At least the 970 will bring the PowerPC back into the same league as the P4 and Athlon though. If they could get it to 2GHz on the initial run instead of 1.8GHz, the extra performance should keep it competitive with the 3.2GHz P4 that will be out at the same time.

Alternatively, the price could be a lot lower, and Apple could just dump two of the processors into each top-end system.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Nemesis

Duly Noted.

As Arn says IBM has never stated anything about the PPC 970 being anything other than Single Core.

Spec marks are not conclusive and they don't take into effect Altivec but nonetheless it's an important distinction regardless. Note I did say "Estimated" so the actual Spec numbers could be higher or lower.

My personal belief is that the 970 remains single core and perhaps is amended with SMT late 2004.

I believe that if there indeed is a 980 based on a "Lite" version of the Power5. It will have dual cores and hopefully support SMT per core. Now THAT would rock but we're probably talking mid 2005 here. Can't wait to run iMovie 5.5 on that !

 

[kenohki]

Re: The real question is....

Originally posted by jamilecrire
Has anyone tried to price comparable 64bit platforms? A dual 1.05GHz Sun Blade 2000 is $19,995. My guess is this is going to hurt Sun (sunw) bigtime.

Oracle is in RC 2 stage (forever) but I would be willing to bet the cost analysis of an XServe with dual 1.8Ghz versus a comparable Sun machine will scare the hell out of them (sun).

It would probably compete well with Sun on the low end as UltraSPARC isn't very impressive with just a few nodes. But Apple couldn't compete on the high end TPC-H and TPC-R benchmarks like the big iron (StarFire and Starcat) can. And even Sun has been getting their butt kicked up there by IBM and HP.

Apple's arena is TPC-C and TPC-W (OLTP) and MS SQL Server has been kicking butt and taking names. SQL Server rules the roost in OLTP and combined with cheap Dell boxes, it rules in price/transaction as well. Unfortunately, we can't convince MS for a port so we'll have to hope that Apple comes up with something good.

But, I guess it's better than where we were yesteryear. At least there's Sybase and Oracle (soon) on the platform.

 

[scem0]

Re: And altivec improvements?

Originally posted by Vroem
Correct me if I'm wrong but these results do not include altivec. So will there be any improvements in the 970 (besides the 64-bit registers) that will affect altivec performance. Because from what I read, the altivec registers will stay at 128-bit.

That is a good observation. Hopefully AltiVec will make a big
difference in applications able to take advantage of it. I would
love to see how quickly photoshop runs on one of these .