Originally posted by suzerain
Not to be argumentative, but this simply isn't true. I totally dig the concept of Macs blowing the doors off Windows machines, but it's simply not going to happen. There's too much inertia on the side of Intel/AMD right now.
I think it's more reasonable to assume these chips (meaning, the IBM GPUL) will benchmark close to current Intels. Look at these SPECfp2000 numbers.
I can't get to that link for some reason. It's OK to be argumentative too... it's a rumor discussion list
And... if you look back at my original statement (which you quoted), I was refering to the contention of the previous poster.. that the PowerPC64 will be slower than the G4. I said that I guaranteed that whatever IBM has up it's sleeve won't be slower than the G4. You twisted what I said.
The Itanium is beating the Power4, though not by tons.
It wasn't the last time I looked, but I haven't checked out the SPEC on Itanium2 yet.
And the important thing to remember is that the new IBM chip IS NOT A POWER4. It is a new chip which takes design cues from the Power4. It is being referred to as GPUL (GigaProcessor UltraLite), which is a reference to it being the "light" version of the Power4.
Basically, that means they scaled it back from the heat-producing electrical black hole it is now into a more reasonable chip that doesn't require you to also build your own nuclear reactor to run it. Then they added on an AltiVec-alike, and appear to be extending the pipeline in order to boost Mhz performance, probably to make it easier to market to the average consumer.
(I don't understand why people on this list constantly use the current Power4 numbers...1-1.3Ghz, when IBM has, itself, said that they expect the chip to DEBUT at 2 Ghz. To me, this means that this processor has a longer pipeline, and will not match the Power4 in terms of operating efficiency.)
I don't know either. I didn't use 1 GHz in reference to the upcomming PowerPC64, I only used that number to point out that a processor (the Power4 in my example) can be very very powerful with out being clocked very very fast.
It may have a longer pipeline, though IBM was never a big fan of long pipelines in the past. evne the latest PPC750s don't have very long pipes... I think they are like 7 stages in the 750fx but don't quote me on that. As far as I know, pipeline is not the only element affecting clock speed. It's a way to boost it, but the overall design is going to affect how fast the chip clocks too.
Undoubtedly, this chip will be fast, but not as fast as the Power4.
I don't think it will be as fast as the Power4 either. I don't think I ever said that. It won't be competing against the Power4 though, just like it won't be competing against the Itanium or the PA-RISC (which I call the wrong name earlier :-(
This is a small server/workstation processor. Merced (and the Power4) are still being marketed as big iron, or at least mini-big iron.. if that makes sense.
I do, however, think it will be fast. Really fast. I think it will be a smoking processor because:
1) It takes design cues from the Power4, but it will build on the Power4 design. It isn't unreasonable to expect that next gen processors benefit from lessons learned on the last project. Sure it will be a 'lite' processor, but it will benefit from all that IBM has learned from the Power4 (and the power3, and the 750s, and the 604... and so on).
2) If it can really do multiple fetch/stores and issue as many ops per cycle as people say, it will be much more efficient than the x86 processors it will compete with. I recall seeing that the P4 really doesn't average much more than one operation per cycle in the real world. If you put a PowerPC that could _potentially_ execute 3 or 4 times as many operations per cycle as a P4 that was clocked twice as fast as the PowerPC... guess which processor will perform better?
3. it will retain Altivec which has always seemed to perform better than SSE2. Many of the SSE2 instructions take MANY more cycles to complete than the same or similar operation in Altivec.
Yes, the Itanium stumbled out of the gate. Yes, moving to the Itanium is going to be a bitch for the PC world, because of addressing incompatibilities. Yes, the PowerPC move to 64 bit should be easy.
It's not addressing incompatabilities that will hold up acceptance of EPIC. EPIC is totally different from CISC (x86 in this case). Itaniums are VLIW processors. They are HUGE, hot, and they require exquisitely complex compilers to write fast code. Itanium is probably the most complex processor ever created and many people think that the compiler writers will need to work harder than the chip engineers to make Itanium work well.
But no, the GPUL is not going to "toast" the Itanium in raw performance...the Itanium is pretty bad-assed.
(As a side note, the Itanium ALSO runs at slower clock speeds...1-1.5 Ghz. Intel's going to have to completely shift its marketing strategy if they plan to mainstream Itaniums after they milk the P4.)
Itanium doesn't run at 1.5 GHz. I'm pretty sure Itanium 2 is only available at ~900 and 1000MHz so far.
But who cares if it toasts the Itanium. I didn't say GPUL will toast itanium.. I have no Idea about that. I said that the power4 toasts Itanium **which as you tried to point out, may not be true anymore**
If GPUL ends up in macs next year, it won't compete with itanium. I don't expect to see Itanium in the average computer until well after Deerfield arrives. I think the software will hold up acceptance of Itanium at least as much as the hardware will. Intell will push x86 at consumers for AT LEAST two more years, probably longer.
PowerPC64 will go up against P4 and Athlon. It will likely also go head to head with clawhammer. This is where the comparisons need to be made. From what we
think we all know, I think it will take them all. clawhammer is the real unknown. It has only sampled at 800MHz so far so who knows how it will perform when it comes out of the gate (about mid way through 2003).
If the PowerPC can do as much work as people claim it can (per cycle), I think it is going to put a lot of PCs to shame.
This is all, of course, only my opinion. Afterall, what do I know, I'm just an average ffakr with the same sketchy info and innuendo that everyone else has.
