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

IBM Delivering 90nm Chips?

Originally posted by stingerman
With the 90NM technology, there is no reason why Apple couldn't put an entire Mac on one chip to be embedded in an ultra-thin notebook (the 12" could drop from 5lbs to 2+lbs). Apple could include an entire Mac into a device the size of an iPod, or cell phone. With the right docking technology, you could carry your Mac in your shirt pocket an just plug it in the office or home. How about a Mac built into a Cinema TV, and/or the rumored iBox. It would definitely blow away a Palm or PocketPC.
Click to expand...
This is the most initiated post in this thread to date. Thanks!

There's no end to the possibilities for Apple now that high end CPU cores are getting really small. A SOC based on 970 using 130 nm technology would've been a huge chip, but it won't anymore.

I don't think the "SOC" was a typo since the entire sentance would have to be rewritten for it to make any sense with "SOI".

I don't think that a SOC-processor for Apple would be 970 based, but it can be the fabled 750VX-processor destined for e/iMacs and iBooks. The design facilities at IBM seems to be quite extensive so Apple could, or should, try to make more SOC designs for their computers. I can't se any reason why really.

The component level design of all consumer products are largly the same. All share a couple of components that must be there. Memory controllers, Ethernet, AirPort, Bluetooth, Sound i/o, ATA/SATA, PCI-bridge, USB, FireWire. There's no reason why Apple doesnt move these components on die together with the CPU. Only memory, expansion slots and the physical ports would be left on the motherboard.
 
How much of the logic chipset could they put onto the CPU die. Opteron only has a memory controller right (Northbridge) the I/O is still handled by a southbridge. I have always read that in order to scale CPU speed you need to deepen execution pipelines (more stages). Do you think they would do a radical redesign of the 750 at this stage in it's life? It seems like a lot of work to put into a technology than is past it's prime as a PC CPU.

If this new part is a 970 core, what if RAM technology changes really fast? Do you think they would already have DDR2 memory controllers in the 970FX or would that be kept for later?

Does the intergration of componenets on to a single die offset the cost of developing such a part in such a way as to benefit the consumer? I am thinking primarily of lower prices here.

I think that Apple/IBM would only make this decision if they were really certain thay could count on current memory, and I/O standards to be stable for a while.

Who makes the call re:
PCI Express vs. AGP
DDR vs. DDRII
ATA vs. SATA

Are they going to do enough volume with this chip to recoup the development money for a really elaborate SOC part?

This must have been a typo. It must be low-K Copper interconnect tech. TSMC, a rival foundry to IBM, is claiming that it has the lead in low-K SOI fabrication. They do chips for ATI and Trident using 8 layer copper interconnects (6 used to be a big deal) and use Applied Materials low K stuff. It would be cool to know what the diaelectric constant of this IBM chip is than we would be know how it was made.

TSMC is only doing 130 and 110nm chips though. So if IBM can apply these new technique to the 970 at 90nm that alone will be a big deal (the other crazy SOC stuff won't matter).
 
Originally posted by army_guy
Contracts dude. You know when you hire someone give them the spec and they deliver the product (in this case the someone is an ASIC designer. Apple designs computer systems etc.. not ASICS.
Click to expand...
You don't know what you're talking about. Apple maintains an ASIC design team and in fact the current system controller on the G5s is an ASIC designed by Apple.
 
Just a speed bump.

Originally posted by lewdvig
Who makes the call re:
PCI Express vs. AGP
DDR vs. DDRII
ATA vs. SATA
Click to expand...

I'll make the predictions:
AGP 8x, PCI-X 133, as current G5. (PCI Express in the PPC980 next year.)
DDR at 400MHz, as current. (MAYBE an update to 433 or 450MHz, but I doubt DDR2.)
Serial ATA for hard drives, Parallel ATA for optical, just as current.

Why just keeping the status quo? Because this is just a speed bump. Yes, it's a die-shrink, but the only result of the die shrink is to get higher speeds at lower power. I even doubt that the memory speed will increase, simply because DDR400 is the current highest speed that is an official standard. Everything faster is 'unofficial', and not based on any officially defined standard.
 
Re: Just a speed bump.

Originally posted by ehurtley
I'll make the predictions:
AGP 8x, PCI-X 133, as current G5. (PCI Express in the PPC980 next year.)
DDR at 400MHz, as current. (MAYBE an update to 433 or 450MHz, but I doubt DDR2.)
Serial ATA for hard drives, Parallel ATA for optical, just as current.

Why just keeping the status quo? Because this is just a speed bump. Yes, it's a die-shrink, but the only result of the die shrink is to get higher speeds at lower power. I even doubt that the memory speed will increase, simply because DDR400 is the current highest speed that is an official standard. Everything faster is 'unofficial', and not based on any officially defined standard.
Click to expand...


AND more dies per wafer don't forget.

If yields are good at 2.5 so fast, they will be able to get 3 w/o needing the 980. We should start keeping track of stepping codes on G5s.
 
Re: XServe G5

Originally posted by marco114
Has anyone received their Xserve G5's yet? We ordered 3 and they are saying mid-march.

XSERVE/2GHZ DP/2GB/750/CD/RAID PCI/RA/LL Z08Y03H4X
On or before 03/22/2004
3 Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5 065-4573
2GB DDR400 ECC SDRAM 065-4829
750GB ADM (3X250GB SERIAL ATA)065-4840
CD-ROM 065-4577
HARDWARE RAID PCI CARD 065-4790
PCI VIDEO CARD065-4845
Mac OS X Svr,Unlmtd Lic 065-4581
Country Kit065-4580

Got the 3.5TB XServe raid in a couple of days ago... schweet! But, it's taking forever to format. :(
Click to expand...

I have one of these configs on order... My date is 3/11/2004... Maybe VT is getting all the new xServes first, just like they did with the G5's?

That size xServer RAID is going to take forever to format ;)

Good luck!

:cool:

MM
 
Originally posted by Telomar
You don't know what you're talking about. Apple maintains an ASIC design team and in fact the current system controller on the G5s is an ASIC designed by Apple.
Click to expand...

I cant see Apple designing ASICS, how shall we say err its not thier style?
 
There are several possible explanations for the story.

1) They meant SoI - Unlikely, the sentence structure is all wrong

2) SOC means the Apple System Controller, i.e., they are delivering the new northbridges to Apple for the next PowerMac / PowerBook / iMac / iBook

3) SOC also includes a processor. Hence "System on Chip". This would meet the definition. For example, an updated IBM G3 + VMX core, with integrated northbridge and peripherals could be used in a new smaller form factor laptop (like the 8" to 10" Sony VAIOs). Or used in some iTablet device. Or simply in the iBook.

It could also mean a 970FX with integrated memory controller and (e.g.) HyperTransport link. This would reduce the latency to memory (useful!) and cut out one chip in the system. Common chipsets like the nVidia nForce3 250GB, AMD 8000, VIA K8800 or ALi could be used with the processor.

4) Something Completely Different. E.g., a 90nm very low power iPod controller with ARM core, Firewire, USB2, memory, display, audio all on one little chip that will allow even longer battery life, more powerful features, etc.

For all we know it could be an intelligent keyboard controller. But speculation is fun, eh?
 
Re: Re: SOC

Originally posted by TRiPod
remember the xserve g5? that would complete the equation.
Click to expand...

No, if u wud read my post properly. I said doubted the this chip would be a 970. Or even based on a 970, it takes alot more than strapping on a 970 and extras to create an SOC.
Also i doubt IBM would put so much emphasis on just the 970 in their product range. Added to that the fact that IBM has been known to be making an SOC which is not 970 based.

So, no, it wont be the "970 using" Xserve G5.

The SOC IBM has reportedly been looking into was a 750 based chip with RAM and system controller (To put it bluntly). Though i doubt this particular chip is 750 based.

Not an xserve G5.
It would be perfect for an iMac update. But not completely necessary
Or even a notebook update, though i think a 970 would be used in a new powerbook.
 
As a betting man that has just won £40 on Middlesborough Vs Utd match. :D

I would go out of my way and opt for a special edition mac, possibly anniversary mac.

Its a long shot i know. But hey it fits the bill pretty nicely.
 
Originally posted by army_guy
Thats what they say, I still cant see Apple designing ASICS. They probably designed the opteration/flow of the ASIC not the actual low level hardware.
Click to expand...

They did design the ASIC, which is what you said you "couldn't see them doing".

I would guess that IBM manufactures the ASIC alongside the G5 chips, but I don't have any info on that.
 
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
They did design the ASIC, which is what you said you "couldn't see them doing".

I would guess that IBM manufactures the ASIC alongside the G5 chips, but I don't have any info on that.
Click to expand...
You're quite correct Apple designed it and IBM manufactures it.
 
ok im lost...

I am lost, i know ASIC's have sumtin to do with the low level system controller and architecture junkies (stuff i dont need to know about) but can one of ya please give me a rundown on wut it stands for and means?
 
Re: XServe G5

Originally posted by marco114
Has anyone received their Xserve G5's yet? We ordered 3 and they are saying mid-march.

XSERVE/2GHZ DP/2GB/750/CD/RAID PCI/RA/LL Z08Y03H4X
On or before 03/22/2004
3 Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5 065-4573
2GB DDR400 ECC SDRAM 065-4829
750GB ADM (3X250GB SERIAL ATA)065-4840
CD-ROM 065-4577
HARDWARE RAID PCI CARD 065-4790
PCI VIDEO CARD065-4845
Mac OS X Svr,Unlmtd Lic 065-4581
Country Kit065-4580

Got the 3.5TB XServe raid in a couple of days ago... schweet! But, it's taking forever to format. :(
Click to expand...
I ordered my Powermac G5 02/02/04 and it gave me a ship date of 02/13/04 and today the ship date chaned to 03/15/04 :mad:
I got tired of waiting for speed bumped G5s so I ordered the current top of the line G5 so I could have it right away and now I have to wait over a month! This sucks.
 
what a disgrace to all engineers we have a comapny like apple designing asics, as long as its not in my hardware ill be happy. They should stick to marketing, whose knows what trouble thier marketing lies could do in the ASIC market.
 
Originally posted by army_guy
what a disgrace to all engineers we have a comapny like apple designing asics, as long as its not in my hardware ill be happy. They should stick to marketing, whose knows what trouble thier marketing lies could do in the ASIC market.
Click to expand...

DNFTT folks.
 
Re: Re: XServe G5

Originally posted by aceves
I ordered my Powermac G5 02/02/04 and it gave me a ship date of 02/13/04 and today the ship date chaned to 03/15/04 :mad:
I got tired of waiting for speed bumped G5s so I ordered the current top of the line G5 so I could have it right away and now I have to wait over a month! This sucks.
Click to expand...

Yep...and is somewhat suspicious
 
Re: Re: Re: XServe G5

Originally posted by aswitcher
Yep...and is somewhat suspicious
Click to expand...

My dad had something similar to this happen with his beige g3 (the one i own now) when he bought it. He bought it when rev 2's were just about to switch to rev 3. He bought his like 2 weeks before rev 3's and apple actualy gave him his rev 3 before the 2 week "ship date" was up, none of the stores had it up for display yet either. So maybe you might get the rev. 2 g5 before the month is up, who knows.
 
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