I'm a university professor--and my experience leads me to the conclusion that the statements that one is a college student and that one can speak English sadly have nothing to do with each other!Originally posted by billiam0878
Scratch that, keywords are "scaled down." Gosh you would think a college student could speak english It's been a long day
Let's see. Besides the 17 minutes of battery life, add in a very scorched desk and/or lap. Maybe your scaled-down Power4 would be a Power3. It's still more powerful that a G4.Originally posted by billiam0878
I'd love to have a Power4 in my next PowerBook... fingers crossed
By the way, I like the name OKComputer
I feel sure that Sony looked at the processor market very carefully when they decided against a MIPS processor for the PS/3. Likely, there is no way MIPS is going to keep up with Intel, and Sony knew it. Sony could have chosen Intel to supply the processor. I don't think Intel would turn Sony down, but would be happy to get their business. No, I believe Sony went with the PPC from IBM because it can give them the best performance. It is a consumer chip, and yes, it is eating into the very highest end of processor performance. IBM knows well how good Intel is. I'm sure they are busy on a Power4 replacement as well as Sony's processor. I believe IBM will sell something like it to Apple too.Originally posted by alex_ant
... I could see a move to a better PowerPC chip, such as a new Power4-derivative, but it will take more than that to keep up with Intel.
Well, that was a stupid question; I should've known! From what I've heard IBM is using a new strategy to do their business. Instead of focusing on selling as many computers as possible to consumers and businesses, they are instead focusing on making superior computer parts and selling as many of them to other computer makers. That's a good strategy, IMO.Originally posted by snoopy
From what I hear, IBM will be providing a PPC processor for the PlayStation 3. Sony had many choices for their new chip, which replaces the MIPS processor. It seems logical they would pick one that gives them enough performance to blow XBox out of the water. In game consoles, nobody cares about clock rate, just performance. So, this tells me that the PPC processor line will eventually have better performance than Pentiums. PPC has the brighter future.
IBM's new plant is not for the Power4 only. IBM stated that they are going after "cream of the crop" firms in high-end electronics. They are in business to make custom chips for such customers. IBM is just what Apple needs. The Pentium roasting technology IBM develops for making the Sony PPC processor can also be applied to Apple's processor. And, IBM is using an SIMD Engine in new processors. Their road map shows it. Regarding AltiVec, which is likely the best SIMD Engine available, Apple must have rights to use it. Apple went with a sole source supplier when they chose the Motorola G4, and no one does that without a good contract. Apple would not lock themselves into AltiVec if they could never get it elsewhere. There may be a price, however.
Just for blue sky thinking, it is interesting that those writing games in the future will be working with a lot with PPC code, both PS3 and GameCube. Also, since AltiVec is so useful, could Sony have been interested in it for the PS3? There may already be a deal with Motorola on this, and AltiVec may become a PPC standard, maybe even purchased by STI. This would be a good thing. Just think if it were commonly used in PS3 game code. Developers would soon learn how to use AltiVec well for performance advantage. Such knowledge would benefit development of OS X applications.
Shrek, I wasn't addressing your post, but addressing the main topic, which is IBM on the move ... It just appeared after your posting. Regarding your question, IBM is a competitor like every other PC maker is Apple's competitor. That never stopped Apple from using IBM processors before. And Apple is less of a competitor to IBM than Dell, HP and Sony. Yet IBM is making a PPC for Sony, so the rumor goes anyway. True, IBM and Apple both make computers. IBM's PPC computers and Macs don't sell in the same markets now, from what I see.Originally posted by Shrek
Isn't IBM one of Apple's biggest competitors?
Originally posted by snoopy
I feel sure that Sony looked at the processor market very carefully when they decided against a MIPS processor for the PS/3. Likely, there is no way MIPS is going to keep up with Intel, and Sony knew it. Sony could have chosen Intel to supply the processor. I don't think Intel would turn Sony down, but would be happy to get their business.
No, I believe Sony went with the PPC from IBM because it can give them the best performance.
It is a consumer chip, and yes, it is eating into the very highest end of processor performance.
No, I simply assumed that they would want a CPU that can out-perform the Intel processor in the XBox. Obviously you know something about this market, and I do not. Also, it shows that rules from one field don't necessarily apply to another.Originally posted by alex_ant
Do you have any evidence of this? SPEC scores etc.?