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

IBM Announces the PowerPC 970MP

I know that it is possible that Apple will use these new IBM procs in new PowerMacs, PowerBooks or even Mac minis, but wouldn't it be kind of weird if they released a new PPC PowerBook or a new PPC PowerMac faster than 3Ghz (a quad G5??) , which are supposed to be two of the main reasons for the transition to Intel (I recall the third reason was the Intel vs. IBM roadmap). Or did Jobs mean only the "delay" in introducing those products was the reason?
I'd have to watch the keynote (AGAIN:rolleyes: ) to make sure but I also recall Jobs saying IBM couldn't deliver those products, not deliver those products on time.

Just speculating without conclusions...
 
We're all forgetting something vitally important.

Apple's major reason's wasnt just powerconsumption, but also performance per watt. Intel's roadmap may actually fare better than IBM's PPC 970 lineup in the next 5 years. I just realized that this was important not just how much watts the cpu uses.

Also, I'd like to see if Apple gets these 970MP dual core cpu's, even it its to boost hardware sales. Jobs, however made another promise or close to one that by this time next year we'll be shipping macs with intel cpu's. wonder if a new lineup will be implemented. And of its design?

No worry on Intel branding as CEO of Intel during the WWDC already said that they believe Apple knows what their doing with marketing, and branding and will leave that up to them.
 
tex210 said:
... but what do I know, I just want everything to work.
Click to expand...

Quote of the day. Thank you.

I feel the same way. I will want another mac before they go intel. It's just a matter of which one.

Lynxpro said:
I really wish Apple would release a Mac alternative to the Windows Media PC platform. Since the machine would essentially be a living room alternative to a PVR and other devices, Apple could get away with releasing it now with an Intel based processor just to begin the transition and iron out the kinks. Yes, the Mac Mini can be made into a pseudo-media PC, but the G4 is not powerful enough to encode/decode HD content and HD is where Apple would want to shine and beat the Windows Media PC platform. Give the machine a slot for Cable Card 1.0 for today, and offer an external Firewire solution for Cable Card 2.0 (whenever it is finalized) and again, Apple would beat out the Windows Media PC platform.
Click to expand...

I've been considering this, too. In fact, I'm wondering how a little Mac mini (DVD player and music jukebox) would look next to the 37" LCD TV I'm going to order next week. ;)

(Pending approval from my CFO...err...wife.)

Squire
 
Bregalad said:
Too little too late? The PPC970 is just as fast as anything Intel is currently shipping and the clock speed has increased more quickly than Intel has managed lately. I'd rather be looking at a dual core 2.5GHz than a single core 3.0GHz processor, wouldn't you?

Which products Apple moves to Intel first is clearly an area for debate, but it's the laptops where Apple has most significantly fallen behind. Centrino based machines offer much better performance than the G4 without using too much power. With laptops now accounting for 50% of sales, Apple was forced to look elsewhere when Freescale and IBM both failed to keep up with Intel. The Mac mini is a bit gutless, but 1.0 products are usually not the best value. The iMac G5 would be great if it didn't overheat. There's really no pressing need for anything there except lower warranty repair costs. In the towers Apple has a very strong performer albeit a pricey one. Asking people to pay more for an iMac in an aluminum box (the last single 1.8 tower) than one with a 17" LCD was clear evidence that Steve still puts too much value on expandability and shows just how much Apple pays to have such fancy cases.

I think Apple will transition completely to Intel for reasons other than processor performance. It's clear that "security" proposals from Intel and Microsoft will be accepted by corporations eager to keep outsiders and whistle blowers from leaking internal documents. Whether it's best for customers or not, Microsoft and Intel will get their DRM into your computers and they will ultimately determine what you can and can't do with them. If Apple's machines don't have the same digital rights management built in, they will be denied access to "secured" networks, thus completely shutting them out of the enterprise. The 1984 commercial is coming true. The only difference is that Big Brother isn't being played by IBM and the hammer thrower is now sitting in the second row just as entranced as the rest of them.
Click to expand...

spot on

I didn't think there was anyone as cynical or 'conspiracy theorist' as me, next thing you'll be saying Steve would sell Apple to Intel so he could become boss of Disney!!
 
Squire said:
I've been considering this, too. In fact, I'm wondering how a little Mac mini (DVD player and music jukebox) would look next to the 37" LCD TV I'm going to order next week. ;)
Click to expand...

you can have a proper multi-media mac mini, It just needs bundles of hard cash, massive upgrades, a few warranty-voiding hacks to make it a bit faster than horribly slow and loads of other boxy devices attached to it with hundreds of wires
 
Hey any Mac is a media computer center. It all depends on how you set it up.

@Squire, there is a picture thread of the Mac Mini in the Community Forums with a seriously sweet Mini & widescreen TV setup. Have a look. ;)
 
lopresmb said:
low-power 970FX chips??? Does this at least allow for the possibility of a G5 powerbook before the intel switch??? Seems odd to me.:confused:
Click to expand...
If you think about it, these "low-power" chips don't seem all that impressive by comparison. A single 1.6 GHz G5? Meh. In everyday use, for most people, that's not going to be much faster than what we currently have (1.67 GHz G4). A G5 is generally only a tiny bit faster than a G4, clock for clock. The bus speed would almost certainly be increased from the G4 PowerBook's pathetic 167 MHz, but by how much? You saw how they clocked it down for the iMac G5, and what other sacrifices got made to produce this low-power version? Possible smaller cache as well. I guess they'd be welcome in a PowerBook, but I don't think they're The Savior Chip either. Another factor in the Intel decision had to be chip availability, and just because IBM announces these chips doesn't mean they can deliver them on-time and in steady quantities. I think Steve probably thought he could never really trust them again after what happened with the G5.
 
Squire said:
Quote of the day. Thank you.

I feel the same way. I will want another mac before they go intel. It's just a matter of which one.



I've been considering this, too. In fact, I'm wondering how a little Mac mini (DVD player and music jukebox) would look next to the 37" LCD TV I'm going to order next week. ;)

(Pending approval from my CFO...err...wife.)

Squire
Click to expand...

You need a black-bag budget, no need for the CFO to know about it. ;)
 
bosrs1 said:
I must say, I find the lack of speed improvement on these new PPC chips to be pathetic. Max is 2.5 Ghz? That's it? I don't care if it's Dual Core, that's still pathetically slow even for a PPC.

Apple made the right choice about moving to Intel. IBM obviously has hit the end of their usefulness.
Click to expand...

Hmm, but AMD's top of the range $1000 dual-core processor runs at 2.4GHz. Don't say that Intel's runs at 3.2GHz because it performs like something you'd flush away.

Yonah will be delayed and then come out at lower speeds than people expect.

A lot of Centrino notebooks are sold running between 1.4GHz and 1.8GHz. The processor speed isn't the problem any longer, it is the graphics, the memory, the hard drive, the display, the infrastructure. That is where Apple is behind.

Just because IBM are making 3.2GHz PowerPC processors for the XBox360 doesn't mean that a 2.5GHz G5 is slow! Sheesh, engage your brains, possibly take a look outside the Mac world once in a while. Apple switched to Intel because of *long term* roadmaps. The fact that Intel's long term roadmap means **** to anyone that has a clue about the PC world seems to have been missed by Apple, but it is their issue. At least Intel can make a lot of processors that are 'good enough'...
 
Hattig said:
At least Intel can make a lot of processors that are 'good enough'...
Click to expand...
And we will eat them up like gluttonous children attack a bag of Halloween candy. As long as they run OS X, provide steady performance upgrades over time, give us access to the fastest GPUs (hopefully no longer "special Mac editions"), and good battery life...I will buy one. If a handful of little hamsters on tiny wheels give us that, then bring on the hamsters.
 
grr EVERY TIME i am ready to order a new computer (I was just about to order a Powerbook 1.67ghz) - I read announcements like this :(

Do you think I'm safe to order a current model Powerbook without a new one being released in the next couple of months? How long should I wait?

Kim
 
kmaisch said:
grr EVERY TIME i am ready to order a new computer (I was just about to order a Powerbook 1.67ghz) - I read announcements like this :(

Do you think I'm safe to order a current model Powerbook without a new one being released in the next couple of months? How long should I wait?

Kim
Click to expand...

I am buying my 12" PB for my B-Day, Sept 21. So I am planning on ordering it mid September.
 
idea_hamster said:
That all depends on what you're using now.
Click to expand...

Have a 900mhz AMD Athlon desktop for graphic design/image editing :(
Use a Dual 2.5ghz G5 at work - definately want a Mac at home.
 
Ahhh, I see...

Clearly, you've been spoiled by that bruiser you get to use at work. Then you have to come home to your plain old my-chip-speed-is-still-measured-in-MHz machine.

I've always had the opposite problem: pokey PC at work, TiBook at home.

Just from these two posts, you seem relatively dissatisfied with your AMD. If you decide to buy, just do so knowing that Apple will come out with something better -- whether you wait or not.

Also, if nothing comes out until September (which seems to be the consensus of this thread? didn't read it all...) you'll have nearly two whole months of delicious, wonderful 1.67 GHz PowerBook under your belt. If you're anything like me, that's enough time to bond with it -- when the new ones come out, you might not care so much!
 
I found this in a press release. I don't see anything new, except perhaps "low cost" and more details about power management.

IBM today announced the newest member of the Power Architecture family of microprocessors -- the PowerPC 970MP. The new processor is a dual-core version of IBM's award winning PowerPC 970FX, targeted for clients who desire a low-cost, high performance, 64-bit, symmetric multiprocessing (SMP)-capable system in a small package with ranges from 1.4 to 2.5 GHz. The microprocessor also provides power-saving features that system architects can use to dynamically control the system power.

The IBM PowerPC 970MP microprocessor builds on the proven 64-bit IBM Power Architecture family and is designed for entry level servers as well as to provide new levels of performance and power management for the embedded marketplace. The increased computing density of the PowerPC 970MP brings a new level of performance to a variety of applications, from HPC clusters to demanding embedded system applications such as high performance storage, single board computer and high performance networking applications.

Each of the two 64-bit PowerPC 970MP cores has its own dedicated 1MB L2 cache, resulting in performance more than double that of the PowerPC 970FX. This design provides clients with a wide range of performance and power operating points that can be selected dynamically to match system processing needs. The frequency and voltage of both cores can be scaled downward to reduce the power during periods of reduced workload. For further power savings, each core can be independently placed in a power-saving state called doze, while the other core continues operation. Finally, one of the cores can be completely de-powered during periods of less stringent performance requirements.
 
Dual core 2.5 GHz x 2 or 4 would be very helpful

I have found that after adopting the EyeTV 500 digital broadcast HD recorder that I need all the power I can get to compress these huge 7GB per hour digital video files in a reasonable amount of time. Thus I now see the need for 4x the power of my new dual 2.5 GHz G5 like YESTERDAY. Anyone else reach the upper limit need like I have? The idea that a dual 2.5 or 2.7 GHz processor G5 is powerful is no longer true for me at all. In fact it seems pretty weak in the face of trying to compress video files from 7 to 1 GB.

I would love two or four of those dual core processors in one G5 PowerMac asap. :p
 
You really think so?

kukito said:
Yonah goes into production late 2005, not 2006.
Click to expand...

Latest inside info that I heard had Yonah being seriously delayed. Bulk production may not happen until 4th Qtr 2006.
 
ninja86 said:
I would love any of those chips in any new Macs. However, I don't think the announcement was aimed towards Mac fans.

The 970MP is definitely going in the XBOX 360.

The 970FX is more-than-likely going in the Nintendo Revolution.

Think about it. It fits.
Click to expand...

Why do people keep repeating this? The cpu in the Xbox 360 is not a 970. It is far less complex PowerPC design built specifically for video game purposes. The only connection the Xbox 360 has to the PPC 970 was that MS bought PowerMac G5s as early development machines. They help developers work with off the shelf hardware running the PowerPC ISA. A single PowerPC 970MP processor would cost as much or more as an Xbox 360 console.
 
nightdweller25 said:
Whoa there fiesty, if your going to respond to people like that maybe you should just leave cause we don't want people like you messing up these forums.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we should just coddle every poster and have warm fuzzy hugs all around, because nothing - not even the truth - is worth hurting any feelings!
 
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