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.
IBM Intros Power5 Server
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
wrldwzrd89 said:
The decision to go with 130 nm was undoubtedly made long before the problems with 90 nm surfaced.
A similar discussion came up when the 970 came out, about how it was smaller and faster than the Power4, because the high-end server chips are manufactured in fairly conservative fashion, in order to be absolutely bulletproof.
Unfortunately, I suspect that we will hear little or nothing official about the purported PPC975 until Apple releases it in a product. Should keep the rumor mills running nicely over the next 6 months or so.
JFreak
macrumors 68040
wrldwzrd89 said:
if i remember correctly, the power4 was 180nm so it's only logical to produce the next version with 130nm technology. i would have been very surprised if they would have chosen 90nm for power5.
to repeat myself: ibm needs to have rock-solid technology behind the power-series. it's a benefit for ibm to be able to get money (by selling the next step for apple) from the research they must do anyway (because they need to be always at least one step ahead in r&d than in powerX chip production) - and that's the #1 reason ibm can sell G5 chips for apple at competitive prices.
so...
if ibm didn't have the powerX series, apple would not have a chance at getting G5 chips from ibm at current prices.
wrldwzrd89
macrumors G5
I'm certainly looking forward to whatever the rumor mill has in store regarding new PowerPC processors. Any reason why you specify 6 months? My guess is that 6 months is the usual time between upgrades for Apple (and that would be the logical time to introduce the PPC 975) - am I correct?neilw said:
Veldek said:
i may be mistaken (and probably am), but if memory serves, the problems that IBM has been having with the 970fx is because of the migration to 90nano and ssoi at the same time.
my guess is that by using the process that they've already got figured out, they can move units as soon as possible and then probably update with a 90nano ssoi version when all the kinks get worked out.
thatwendigo
macrumors 6502a
adamfilip said:
The current Pentium 4 "Prescott" cores aren't going above 3.4ghz until they solve that 100w power draw. When their Centrino Dothans hit in about a week, unless the shipping target misses, then they'll have a chip that draws about 35w at peak performance for 2.0ghz, scales down to 600mhz and around 8-12w at idle, and performs roughly on par with a 3.55ghz P4.
When that happens... How long do you think the P4 will have on the desktop? Someone will get the bright idea to create a standard ATX board for the Centrino, and then the desktop modders will be running something just as performance-capable but at a third of the heat, while not needing to spend as much as, say, as P4EE 3.4 ($1,049) or an Athlon FX-53 ($804).
Then there's savings on cooling, form factor, and so on...
The competition is not with the Pentium 4, which is hitting all kinds of walls because of inneficient core design and wasteful use of resources. It's with AMD's very PowerPC-like Athlon cores, and with the much more efficient Penitum-M line.
As for there being no choice... You're wrong.
IBM is rumored to be working on a chip for the XBox at the moment, one that is pretty well in line with some of their other designs, which will end up as a three-core single chip processor. Sharing 1MB of L2 cache and on-die memory control, this monster will act like six processors at once (due to SMT providing virtual "cores" on each real one) as far as an aware OS is concerned. In other words, whatever number of threads your software can assign to a processor, it now has six of them to do its spooling through.
Freescale is working on a dual-core, double-precision AltiVec processor as well (starting as en e600, then transferring to the e700 line). While not a triple-core SMT machine, it still acts as two processors on one chip at just slightly higher heat than the current 74xx generation. For applications that make use of floating point math, the AltiVec implementation should prove a godsend, because it will allow that complicated dual-precision math to be done twice as fast.
Clockspeed is not the be-all, end-all, as you would think mac users would realize by now. The G5 and Athlon XP and 64 are all lower clocked, as is the Opteron. Going to claim that they can't keep up, though?
I thought not.
Mac-Xpert said:
i think this shows that theres a chance that when the next g5's come, they'll be 130nano power5 derivatives.
that seems like that would make the most sense for both apple and IBM short term, and that way it buys IBM time to smooth out 90nano.
wrldwzrd89
macrumors G5
Well, that scenario would be interesting. The Pentium-M, modified for desktops, competing with the Athlon line by AMD and the POWER/PowerPC line by IBM/Apple/Motorola/Freescale? I would never had suspected that would occur. If it does occur, though, it could jump-start Intel's processor development again (which is stalling right now) - perhaps egging on IBM to follow suit? Who knows how it would work out - but it sure makes the ballgame more interesting.thatwendigo said:
IBM - Return of the Empire
Folks, Big Blue is coming back and Apple has tied their wagon to their shooting star. Big Blue is set to give Intel, Microsoft, Sun, Dell & HP the Big Blue middle finger. 😉 If you look at what they have rolled into the unit, they control everything that goes into the unit. They pay nothing to Intel, MS or others, except for comodity parts. Big Blue is Open Source because it means taking back the entreprise and desktop from Microsoft. It has taken them 20 years but they are coming back. Apple stands to profit because their enemies and Big Blue's are one in the same. Also, they compliment each other. If you buy a new G5/G6 Macintosh, you are buying and IBM machine inside.
Folks, Big Blue is coming back and Apple has tied their wagon to their shooting star. Big Blue is set to give Intel, Microsoft, Sun, Dell & HP the Big Blue middle finger. 😉 If you look at what they have rolled into the unit, they control everything that goes into the unit. They pay nothing to Intel, MS or others, except for comodity parts. Big Blue is Open Source because it means taking back the entreprise and desktop from Microsoft. It has taken them 20 years but they are coming back. Apple stands to profit because their enemies and Big Blue's are one in the same. Also, they compliment each other. If you buy a new G5/G6 Macintosh, you are buying and IBM machine inside.
wrldwzrd89 said:
This scenario is FACT, its not a rumor kids. 2006/2007 will see the end of the Pentium 4 line as we know it today.
http://news.com.com/2100-1006-5201338.html
and...
http://news.com.com/2100-1006-5181256.html?tag=nl
wrldwzrd89
macrumors G5
It was inevitable - Intel have finally admitted that the Pentium 4, in its current form, is a dead architecture. It consumes WAY too much power - just look at what happened when Intel tried to shrink the Pentium 4 to a 90nm process - the power consumption dropped 10W (110W -> 100W). Hardly impressive, now is it? 100W is still far too high. The Pentium M, though, is a whole different story. Its power consumption rates are down there with the likes of the PowerPC G3 - in some cases, BETTER than the G3.areyouwishing said:
sinisterdesign
macrumors 6502
JoeMacDaddy said:
i agree, it seemed like we didn't hear much from IBM for YEARS in the 90's. a new Stinkpad here & there, but nothing major. all the buzz was around the Wintel cartel. i'm stoked to see IBM come blazing back w/ what seems to me (processor ignorant) an excellent line of processors coming down the pipe.
i'm glad that Apple got tired of watching Moto flounder around trying to crank out a new processor once in a blue moon & found someone that wants to LEAD the way.
hmmmm....if Windows + Intel = Wintel, what do we call the Apple/IBM partnership? "IB-Apple"? "AppleBuM"? "Big Blue Apple"? i'm stumped...
Power5 and Apple
If my memory serves me correctly, Apple came in late in the development cycle of the Power 4 when they had IBM add in the vector processing and develop the G5. I believe that there was a rumor/news story/comment somewhere around that time that Apple was developing the desktop equivalent of the Power 5 simultaneously with IBM. If that is so, perhaps the June 11 debut of IBM's new servers will be closely followed by the announcement of the Apple Power 5 equivalent at the WWDC a couple weeks later.
If my memory serves me correctly, Apple came in late in the development cycle of the Power 4 when they had IBM add in the vector processing and develop the G5. I believe that there was a rumor/news story/comment somewhere around that time that Apple was developing the desktop equivalent of the Power 5 simultaneously with IBM. If that is so, perhaps the June 11 debut of IBM's new servers will be closely followed by the announcement of the Apple Power 5 equivalent at the WWDC a couple weeks later.
thatwendigo
macrumors 6502a
wrldwzrd89 said:
The Centrino 1.7ghz runs at 30-35w at peak, and 25-27w average consumption, but drops to around 8-12w when it clocks down to 600mhz at idle. When compared to P4 desktop machines, it tends to perform favorably when lined up with 2.8-30ghz P4s. If you extrapolate this to the jump from 1.7 to 2.0ghz, you see why Intel is going to be using the Centrino and its derivatives on the desktop.
It's hardly rocket science:
P4 3.4ghz @ 100w
P-M 2.0ghz @ 30-35w
I wonder which I would choose, were I to be buying a PC...
thatwendigo
macrumors 6502a
pjpoon said:
I've already suggest this in another thread, when the Power5 announcement was being discussed but hadn't happened yet. Essentially, I believe that we'll see PowerPC 980s at WWDC that scale to at least 3.0ghz.
I think that Steve's got something up his sleeve, or rather more than one thing. The VX is waiting in the wings in case Freescale doesn't deliver on the e600 promises, the 970 is about to become a low-end processor that will be further revised to take care of power consumption issues, and the 980 will become the new high-end.
The main question is one of the features that will remain when the 980 is revealed. Will it be SMT? Will it be multi-core? What clock will it top out at on the first revision? Is it pin-compatible with the current motherboards? If not, has Apple already taken that into account and had a board waiting?
Most importantly, can I order and have one shipped the day of the conference? 😀
A guess, but:
.13 SOI is a proven process, it's a safe place to start with a new design. Starting a brand new chip on a very new process would cause too mane debugging issues (is it the process, or the design, or the interaction of the two).
Once IBM gets the .09 process stable with high yields, then they will start to debut new chips with it.
Also, ince these are server chips and will likely be in server room environments the demands are different: get performance at any cost. You don't need to worry about heat or noise since the box is not sitting at a desk.
What are the odds that this is all just really optimistic specualtion?
Isn't it still conceivable that at WWDC they simply introduce a revised PM running on a 970 or 970fx and clocked at 2.4 or 2.6?
Don't get me wrong, I'm waiting to buy a rev. B as soon as they debut, and want it to be ridiculously fast, but I get the feeling all this talk is setting me up for a big letdown. I just don't want to expect that a 3Ghz Power5 derivative is coming out in 6 weeks when we'll be getting something far from it. Please don't toy with my hopes!! 😉
Isn't it still conceivable that at WWDC they simply introduce a revised PM running on a 970 or 970fx and clocked at 2.4 or 2.6?
Don't get me wrong, I'm waiting to buy a rev. B as soon as they debut, and want it to be ridiculously fast, but I get the feeling all this talk is setting me up for a big letdown. I just don't want to expect that a 3Ghz Power5 derivative is coming out in 6 weeks when we'll be getting something far from it. Please don't toy with my hopes!! 😉
Soire said:
Im willing to bet nothing extremely great will come out of WWDC.
It will be another mini iPod event.
the future
macrumors 68040
thatwendigo said:
I sincerely hope so, too, and think that it's quite possible. One minor point, though: from all I've read on the Mac web the Power5 derivative will be called PPC 975, not 980.
thatwendigo
macrumors 6502a
Soire said:
Nobody but certain employees of Apple and IBM know.
Certainly it's conceivable, and just as likely as anything else. Without solid information on the process, this is all speculation.
A bit of advice:
Use rumors sites for what they're good at, in ideal circumstances, and only listen to what the general trends are. Never get your hopes pinned on what some people on a messageboard say. It's a lot harder to have your expectations broken that way.
This is all just combining information that's out there with a healthy dose of critical thinking.
Smart decision by IBM
The decision to use the 130nm for this chip versus the 90nm was a smart business decision. Since the 90nm line at Fishskill was already busy pumping out the latest and the greatest, why not bring new life to your old plant/line that is 130nm capable by introducing this new architecture.
I imagine this way they had more time to perfect the Power5 with SMT while the other line was busy with making G5s. As someone has already mentioned once the 90nm plant is upto speed it could be upgraded to produce these new Power5s. Then IBM can retool the older line to produce whatever is the next generation of chips after 90nm.
The decision to use the 130nm for this chip versus the 90nm was a smart business decision. Since the 90nm line at Fishskill was already busy pumping out the latest and the greatest, why not bring new life to your old plant/line that is 130nm capable by introducing this new architecture.
I imagine this way they had more time to perfect the Power5 with SMT while the other line was busy with making G5s. As someone has already mentioned once the 90nm plant is upto speed it could be upgraded to produce these new Power5s. Then IBM can retool the older line to produce whatever is the next generation of chips after 90nm.
mgargan1
macrumors 65816
Well, please don't think of me as a jerk when i say this, but it's not 130nm, it's .13nm. BIG (well, technically small)... the other thing is, what's to keep apple from using the POWER5, and use it for large mainframes, kinda like IBM sells? Also, i remeber reading that the 2.0GHz 970fx has a 550MHz Frontside bus, while the 970 has a 500MHz frontside bus. However, if that were true, the specs on the xserve website would show an 1100MHz Frontside bus. Oh well...
pjpoon said:
I wouldn't say "weeks", maybe a few months.
This could get Apple out of the 3Ghz PPC 970FX issue. IBM is having problems with the 90nm shrink and all that, and 3GHz clocks might not be possible. This is an industry wide problem as well. IBM About 90nm
However a 2GHz-ish 130nm POWER5 derivative could be claimed by Jobs to be "3GHz equivalent". Firstly the core is more efficient, so it could perform 20% better per clock (2.4GHz equivalent). Then SMT adds around 30% performance increase (according to IBM, IIRC), making it 3.1GHz equivalent. So even if things aren't that rosy, a 2.2GHz POWER5 derivative should be a good match for a 3GHz 970FX on multi-threaded applications.