New POWER7 machines

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by thunng8, Aug 17, 2010.

  1. thunng8 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #1
    Not Mac news, but some PowerPC fans might be interested :cool:

    IBM have announced low-end and high end POWER7 servers (they originally only released mid range and blade servers).

    The High End server run at up to 4.25Ghz in turbo mode and 4.00Ghz in normal mode and can have up to 256 cores. It is a performance monster with >2X better performance /core than the high end Intel chips.

    http://www.itjungle.com/fhs/fhs081710-story02.html

    Also, low end 1 socket and 2 socket servers released (starting price of about $6k).

    http://www.itjungle.com/fhs/fhs081710-story01.html

    It is interesting to compare chips used in "lower" end machines:

    The recently announced MacPro with 2 x 6 core 2.93Ghz "Westmere" chips gets:

    http://www.apple.com/au/macpro/performance.html

    297/197 in specint_rate/specfp_rate

    Compared to the 730 Express server

    http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/power/hardware/730/perfdata.html

    2 x 6 core 3.7Ghz POWER7 472/432
    2 x 8 core 3.55Ghz POWER7 575/482

    Take that intel! :D
     
  2. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #2
    This is all so exciting!! Too bad their market is so small for implementation, you cNt exactly run everyday OSs on it!!

    I hear these have 1/2 the transistor count too! Go IBM!
     
  3. thunng8 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #3
    They do own the UNIX server market

    Which is a shame.
     
  4. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #4
    true, not exactly mainstream though - I think.

    I was under the impression that the instruction sets were widely backwards compatible, I wonder if leopard would run on it :p but I guess there are marginal differrences between PowerPC and Power architectures. Red hat will run on it, which is a fairly usable OS :D

    What industry are you in?
     
  5. wjlafrance macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2009
    Location:
    Madison, WI
  6. Giuly macrumors 68040

    Giuly

    #6
    It would rather be interesting to run Snow Leopard on it - or port Leopard.
     
  7. thunng8 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #7
    POWER7 is completely backward compatible with PowerPC ISA used by the G5. In fact, it uses the PowerPC ISA. In theory, all the would be needed to make Leopard run is equip the POWER7 machine with the appropriate firmware.

    I'm in IT industry (Financial company) - nothing too exciting, but I do deal with some large Unix installations once in a while
     
  8. advres Guest

    advres

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2003
    Location:
    Boston
    #8
    So anyway I can slap em in my dual 2.0G5?
     
  9. raysfan81 macrumors 6502a

    raysfan81

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Location:
    North Carolina
  10. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #10
    very exciting! imagine that.. G7 Mac. :D i am not certain if it would run though, given 32-bit vs 64-bit, and the memory limitations :p

    nice man :) im in Uni at the moment, getting into networking and security. thanks very much for this thread, i work for IBM at the moment - always goods to show my interest at work for brownie points :D
     
  11. thunng8 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #11
    No, it would be a completely different machine which is many times faster than the G5.
     
  12. kbfr08 macrumors 6502

    kbfr08

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    #12
  13. thunng8 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #13
    That's an MCM module. The High end chips are packaged in an MCM module containing 4 POWER7 chips. That's a total of 32 cores. Maximum Power consumed by the module is around 800W. Considering its performance, that is not a lot and in fact would beat most Nehalem Xeon chips in performance/watt (except possible for the Ultra low voltage models).

    More information here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/27/ibm_power7_hpc_server/page2.html

    Low and mid range chips are not package this way - the POWER7 chip actually contains less transistors than the Intel Nehalem-EX chip.
     
  14. yamabushi macrumors 65816

    yamabushi

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    #14
    I think some people over at IBM should just go ahead and show leopard running on a POWER7 server. Sure they would have to deal with the firmware bit but there are few ways to solve that problem. Then run a benchmark to see if you have created the most powerful non-clustered OSX computer. Send the benchmark to Steve Jobs and offer to provide POWER7 for use in a build to order big iron Mac server. Could even just rebadge the IBM enclosure. As a BTO if they don't sell many it's no big deal. It might be useful just to scare intel a little bit.
     
  15. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #15
    stop making me drool, my keyboard doesn't like that :rolleyes:
     
  16. thunng8 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #16
    A 16 core 3.55Ghz POWER 740 Express Tower with 256GB RAM is what I'm drooling about :D
     
  17. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #17
    64 threads right? gah *drool*. :D
     
  18. thunng8 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #18
    Correct. It is 4 threads per core :D
     
  19. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #19
    i am not very fond of hyperthreading - i wonder how performance changes when single/multi threaded applications are compared.
     
  20. thunng8 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #20
    Hard to say. Obviously the performance differential between the POWER7 and Westmere would be less for single threaded applications.
     
  21. aliensporebomb macrumors 68000

    aliensporebomb

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2005
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN, USA, Urth
    #21
    Lol!

    And your power bill (and office temperature) would never be the same again.

    But you'd geekbench 50,000 easy!
     
  22. thunng8 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #22
    A 256 core 4Ghz POWER7 box should be able to beat 200,000 easily :eek:
     
  23. iThinkergoiMac macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Location:
    Terra
    #23
    And how, exactly, do you figure that someone will get Snow Leopard running on non-Intel hardware?
     
  24. Jason Beck macrumors 68000

    Jason Beck

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Location:
    Cedar City, Utah
    #24
    +1,000,000
     
  25. thejadedmonkey macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #25
    I want Apple to go back to PPC.... it just doesn't feel... Apple... without a PPC chip in there
     

Share This Page