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.
Hypertransport Updated
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Re: Unafraid
Just a techie point - S/PDIF (Sony/Philips Digital Interface) is not the same thing as Toslink. S/PDIF is an audio transport protocol, whereas Toslink is a physical connector used with optical fiber. Toslink connectors can be used for connecting anything - S/PDIF just happens to be one of those things. Toslink is also used on e.g. 8-channel audio I/O in ADAT systems. S/PDIF is also quite often sent over copper wire and connected via RCA connectors.
Anyway, back to HT:
Wow, if only hard drives could keep up with that! Imagine sending an entire 20GB worth of hard drive data over a wire in 1 second! That would be my entire MP3 collection...
Originally posted by Rincewind42
S/PDIF is an audio connect - toslink. They won't be getting very much bandwidth off of that!
Just a techie point - S/PDIF (Sony/Philips Digital Interface) is not the same thing as Toslink. S/PDIF is an audio transport protocol, whereas Toslink is a physical connector used with optical fiber. Toslink connectors can be used for connecting anything - S/PDIF just happens to be one of those things. Toslink is also used on e.g. 8-channel audio I/O in ADAT systems. S/PDIF is also quite often sent over copper wire and connected via RCA connectors.
Anyway, back to HT:
Wow, if only hard drives could keep up with that! Imagine sending an entire 20GB worth of hard drive data over a wire in 1 second! That would be my entire MP3 collection...
Just a quick note...
I am NOT AT ALL predicting Apple will be supporting HyperTransport 2.0 in their upcoming G5 machines. (Whether they be released tomorrow or in months from now...)
BUT ... remember that Apple is a member of the HyperTransport Consortium. And although Apple makes it a habit to not comment on unannounced products, you can bet your butt that Steve Jobs and AMD have a very clear arrangement where Jobs and Apple knew about HT 2.0 long before the announcement today.
I have no doubt that Apple has been working on HT 2.0 machines in their labs for as long as AMD had a working spec for it. Today's announcement is no surprise to Apple, and does not mean there's "lots of work to do" which could prevent Apple from using it for a long time.
Apple will use it as soon as possible...sooner rather than later. Because to use HT 2.0 before any other company will be one more check Apple can add to their list of firsts. Jobs loves doing things like that. So don't be surprised to see HT 2.0 appearing in the G5 right alongside the 3.0+ GHz G5s when they are available. (Again...not saying WHEN it will happen, just that you can be sure it will.)
I am NOT AT ALL predicting Apple will be supporting HyperTransport 2.0 in their upcoming G5 machines. (Whether they be released tomorrow or in months from now...)
BUT ... remember that Apple is a member of the HyperTransport Consortium. And although Apple makes it a habit to not comment on unannounced products, you can bet your butt that Steve Jobs and AMD have a very clear arrangement where Jobs and Apple knew about HT 2.0 long before the announcement today.
I have no doubt that Apple has been working on HT 2.0 machines in their labs for as long as AMD had a working spec for it. Today's announcement is no surprise to Apple, and does not mean there's "lots of work to do" which could prevent Apple from using it for a long time.
Apple will use it as soon as possible...sooner rather than later. Because to use HT 2.0 before any other company will be one more check Apple can add to their list of firsts. Jobs loves doing things like that. So don't be surprised to see HT 2.0 appearing in the G5 right alongside the 3.0+ GHz G5s when they are available. (Again...not saying WHEN it will happen, just that you can be sure it will.)
Good questions. ATI indicated years ago that they would support HyperTransport, but we haven't seen anything from them. Nvidia apparently has a chip that supports hypertransport that works in conjunction with a northbridge. Not sure how it well it works or if it can work with out Nvidia's north bridge.
It does make one wonder what Apple will implement in the future. On a laptop this owuld be ideal because you would get rid of an agp port.
You are right it will be awhile before we see this. I do hope that it gets adopted as a video chip interface but I don't believe that that is written in stone.
Thanks
Dave
It does make one wonder what Apple will implement in the future. On a laptop this owuld be ideal because you would get rid of an agp port.
You are right it will be awhile before we see this. I do hope that it gets adopted as a video chip interface but I don't believe that that is written in stone.
Thanks
Dave
Dual core G5
So if this technology is good for processors, more so multi processors, could this be a stepping stone for a dual core G5 in a laptop?
So if this technology is good for processors, more so multi processors, could this be a stepping stone for a dual core G5 in a laptop?
heh no quite yet. Considering the problems of even putting a single G5 into a laptop at this point, two would be out of question--toasty lap i would say
Considering many of the low power Opterons can run @ full speed using only 30 watts, with the 970FX and its successors, i don't see this being at all difficult later on. The later on part will be quite a bit later unfortunately, but again, 2 cpus in any laptop hasn't been done yet (correct me if i'm wrong).
Considering many of the low power Opterons can run @ full speed using only 30 watts, with the 970FX and its successors, i don't see this being at all difficult later on. The later on part will be quite a bit later unfortunately, but again, 2 cpus in any laptop hasn't been done yet (correct me if i'm wrong).
I agree. When a spec/standard is released, that means that all parties are happy with where it's at. Once products are made and a flaw is found, that may not be correctable. So trying to jump the gun and get products out as soon as its released is asking for problems. What would happen if a last minute change was made one week prior and a company produced one million chipsets. That is potentially a big waste. Some companies will gamble and release products that follow the interim release, but they usually say there is no guarantee that it will be compliant. Some 100Mb gear and later gigabit gear was like that. I implemented both of those in an enterprise environment before they were officially released. 10-gigibit gear is another example, Cisco was selling gear before the standards body released it. They did say it would be compatible with the official spec when available though.
When there is a pressing need, companies will typically release products that meet the proposed spec.
All members of the consortium had access to it, not just AMD or Apple. The whole point of a standards/spec body is to get everyone's input. If one company did all of the work, no one would want to use it. Some members may have more influence then the others though. Want to know who knew about HT 2.0 before it was announced; go here:
http://www.hypertransport.org/org_members.html
Re: Dual core G5
A dual core CPU is quite a different beast from two connected CPUs. They tend to use a rather custom connection fabric that runs at CPU speed and basically allows them to share a single often large cache. So HyperTransport, while nice, is not really a consideration here.
A dual core CPU is quite a different beast from two connected CPUs. They tend to use a rather custom connection fabric that runs at CPU speed and basically allows them to share a single often large cache. So HyperTransport, while nice, is not really a consideration here.
Re: Re: Re: Unafraid
Heh - you had the advantage(?) of having seen any of Swordfish and possibly of more sleep to go on too at the time . I just kinda ignored the rest of the post because it seemed incoherent to me...
Heh - you had the advantage(?) of having seen any of Swordfish and possibly of more sleep to go on too at the time
. I just kinda ignored the rest of the post because it seemed incoherent to me...980
This won't show up in a G5 machine, it'll be in the 980 G6 version, this summer/shipping in September.
This won't show up in a G5 machine, it'll be in the 980 G6 version, this summer/shipping in September.
Apple doesn't really use hyper transport, in the fullest of the sence, since both processors still communicate to each other and the System RAM through a north bridge.
The AMD 64 chips (and other lessr know ones) have this function on-chip, thus giving it true 'Hypertransport.' See the AMD site for a technical white paper on the tech.
The AMD 64 chips (and other lessr know ones) have this function on-chip, thus giving it true 'Hypertransport.' See the AMD site for a technical white paper on the tech.
response - a lil more coherent, hehe
Frohickey
WM
huckleup
HT and PCI bus' can be used to carry the same kinds of data throughout the mobo, right? I mean why not? Sure I know they don't necessarily compete.
HyperTransport is HyperTransport whether you choose to connect cpus to memory or not, right? nVidia has a video card based on its technology doubt its the same kind of usuage that AMD uses (GPU to memory without a controller of some sort.)
Good to see IBM is a member as well.
Do I really come off as being scatter brained, often?? trouble with being a Gemini is being missunderstood.
Frohickey
Man I'm always getting seconds.
WM
Actually I was serious, LOL. But still was wrong.
huckleup
Are you sure S/PDIF isn't on optical fibre? I had a Sony Mini-Deck that supported S/PDIF in the form of Optical Cable for my Mini-Disc recorder/player, and I did see that beautifully bright red light shine through when the cable was bent.
HT and PCI bus' can be used to carry the same kinds of data throughout the mobo, right? I mean why not? Sure I know they don't necessarily compete.
HyperTransport is HyperTransport whether you choose to connect cpus to memory or not, right? nVidia has a video card based on its technology doubt its the same kind of usuage that AMD uses (GPU to memory without a controller of some sort.)
Good to see IBM is a member as well.
Do I really come off as being scatter brained, often?? trouble with being a Gemini is being missunderstood.
Re: response - a lil more coherent, hehe
I never said that S/PDIF isn't available over optical fibre using Toslink connectors. It most definitely is, but it is also available over copper wire using RCA connectors. I was clarifying the difference between a physical connector and a protocol. Just like the fact that Ethernet can be transported over various physical layers, like coax and BNC connectors (old world), twisted pairs and RJ-45 connectors (10xBaseT) or even Air (802.11x). S/PDIF is just a protocol and is independent of whatever physical layer is used. Toslink is just a physical connector, just like BNC, RJ-45 and RCA are physical connectors. Toslink connectors are also used for things other than S/PDIF, the example I gave was ADAT optical I/O (there may be other places that Toslink is used, but I don't know).
I never said that S/PDIF isn't available over optical fibre using Toslink connectors. It most definitely is, but it is also available over copper wire using RCA connectors. I was clarifying the difference between a physical connector and a protocol. Just like the fact that Ethernet can be transported over various physical layers, like coax and BNC connectors (old world), twisted pairs and RJ-45 connectors (10xBaseT) or even Air (802.11x). S/PDIF is just a protocol and is independent of whatever physical layer is used. Toslink is just a physical connector, just like BNC, RJ-45 and RCA are physical connectors. Toslink connectors are also used for things other than S/PDIF, the example I gave was ADAT optical I/O (there may be other places that Toslink is used, but I don't know).
Clarified
Thanks for the clarification Huckleup. I didn't realize what you meant until now. Wish that I could be clear when explaining things.
Thanks for the clarification Huckleup. I didn't realize what you meant until now. Wish that I could be clear when explaining things.