See this article:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=7973
Looks like the Power5 will be a beast of a chip!
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=7973
Looks like the Power5 will be a beast of a chip!
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.
Power5 with hyperthreading
- Thread starter gaomay
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Don't get your hopes up about a Power5-derived chip making its way into a Mac anytime in the near future.
Thats true, but I've seen it reported several times that IBM would be working on such a chip, similar to the power4 derivitive 970. As you say, it will be a while, but such a chip is probably going to be in the works.
In any event, any major chip development on a powerpc can only help apple in the long run. Maybe some things scheduled for the power5 will be able to be incorporated into the 970 in a future revision, or the fab process would be further refined to make for better yields, small processes, lower heat, etc. Just because its not diertly going to affect apple any time soon doesn't mean its not relevent.
What I think
While I think the 970 is the most probable next step for apple, they could have been doing some R&D on the power 5 with IBM all this time, and the power 5 could be the next big thing for apple. I know this is a long shot, but apple has to pull a magic rabbit out of their hat to push through the next couple of years. They need to make a huge leap to separate themselves away from the x86 market, and push full force into the pro market again.
*closes eyes and keeps praying*
While I think the 970 is the most probable next step for apple, they could have been doing some R&D on the power 5 with IBM all this time, and the power 5 could be the next big thing for apple. I know this is a long shot, but apple has to pull a magic rabbit out of their hat to push through the next couple of years. They need to make a huge leap to separate themselves away from the x86 market, and push full force into the pro market again.
*closes eyes and keeps praying*
Is the 970 going to support hyperthreading? If not, why not? Would it serve no purpose because of the multi-core ness?
... Is the 970 going to have multiple cores? Erm...
... Is the 970 going to have multiple cores? Erm...
Re: What I think
the power5 is a server chip, the sucessor to the power4. you wouldn't want it in a desktop at all. server chips prioritize things like reliability, not performance. this is evidenced by the fact that the 970 will outperform the power4 in some areas precisely because it doesn't need to worry about a lot of stuff.
There is absolutely 0 chance the power5 will have anything to with apple, ever (unless apple gets into the high end server business, whcih is doubtful).
It is likely (assuming the sucess of the 970) that a power5 derivitice chip will follow, but it doesn't make much sense for that to be anytime soon. The 970 doesn't even exist yet, nor does the power5. So its predecessor and the chip it would be based on are both nonexistent at this point, making it pretty unlikely such a chip would appear, don't you think.
The 970 will be the chip you want, assuming it will scale to high speeds well (and there is nothing to suggest it wouldn't)
the power5 is a server chip, the sucessor to the power4. you wouldn't want it in a desktop at all. server chips prioritize things like reliability, not performance. this is evidenced by the fact that the 970 will outperform the power4 in some areas precisely because it doesn't need to worry about a lot of stuff.
There is absolutely 0 chance the power5 will have anything to with apple, ever (unless apple gets into the high end server business, whcih is doubtful).
It is likely (assuming the sucess of the 970) that a power5 derivitice chip will follow, but it doesn't make much sense for that to be anytime soon. The 970 doesn't even exist yet, nor does the power5. So its predecessor and the chip it would be based on are both nonexistent at this point, making it pretty unlikely such a chip would appear, don't you think.
The 970 will be the chip you want, assuming it will scale to high speeds well (and there is nothing to suggest it wouldn't)
Only the 3.06GHz P4 and later have Hyperthreading technology. Code must be specifically written to take advantage of it, and so far the only software I know that takes advantage of it is Windows XP. There could be others but I am not aware of any.
Acually I read up on this and the 3.06 GHZ chip has hyperthreading ENABLED. The 2.6 ( I belive) chips and above have it but 3.06 and up can use it.
Intel was being sued by some company that had a trademark on it or something... they settled hence.
Intel 3.06 w/Hyperthreading.
Good call, I didn't realize that. If you have a link I wouldn't mind reading about the law suit.
the power5 won't be in the apple lineup as of yet but the power4 is supposedly going to be heading into macs, there was an article on neowin.net about.
The hyperthreaded p4s kicks ass, it focused all of its CPU on 2 apps at once, its kind of a cool feature. Hopefull it comes to the mac CPUs
The hyperthreaded p4s kicks ass, it focused all of its CPU on 2 apps at once, its kind of a cool feature. Hopefull it comes to the mac CPUs
The Power4/5 and derivatives are nice, but I'm going to take the really long view. I'm eagerly awaiting the day when we can laugh at Intel users with their 15GHz Pentiums, not because they are running at 15GHz, but because they still use system clocks. That's right, I want a nice new asynchronous Mac. A FleetZero based PowerBook, for instance, would be an excellent start. 
(No, I am not waiting until we get asynchronous Macs before I upgrade, but I do think that's where we will be eventually.)
(No, I am not waiting until we get asynchronous Macs before I upgrade, but I do think that's where we will be eventually.)
Once again, everyone say it with me now, the power4 and power5 will never be in a desktop machine. The 970 is a power4 derivitive that is intended for the desktop, but it is NOT the power4. for the same reasons as the power4, the power5 will never be in a desktop. Its just not suited for it.
So...we're already looking beyond the 970?
I'd be happy with the 970, but we don't even have that.
I'd be happy with the 970, but we don't even have that.
This isn't entirely correct. The P4 Xeon processors where the first Intel chips to have the hyperthreading technology. I had 4 very sweet Dell PowerEdge servers that really confused me. The task manager said they had 4 processors when they were dual processor machines. Any program that is designed for multiple processors should be able to take full advantage of it. It's true that XP is the first OS to take advantage of hyperthreading. Windows 2003 Server has support as well. You can turn it off if you don't want to use it though (Windows NT/2k Server users possibly).
-Tim
-Tim
Site with info on P4 w/ hyperthreading
Here's a page by Intel that explains why you would want hyperthreading. Doesn't provide any real technical details, but might help some people here out.
http://www.intel.com/home/desktop/pentium4/hyperthreading.htm?iid=Homepage+htland_ihcp4ht&
Here's a page by Intel that explains why you would want hyperthreading. Doesn't provide any real technical details, but might help some people here out.
http://www.intel.com/home/desktop/pentium4/hyperthreading.htm?iid=Homepage+htland_ihcp4ht&
In reply to a few of the posts here:
The 970 is single core without hyperthreading (or symmetric multithreading to be more accurate, hyperthreading is Intel's name for SMT). When the 970 goes to a .09 micron manufacturing process, dual core may become practical (.13 ->.09 cuts the transistor size in half) A POWER5 derivative seems fairly likely, and would have hyperthreading. The 4x performance boost from ht is widely regarded as bull**** marketing claims, but it should give a fairly good boost (especially if the POWER4 isn't using its execution resources effectively. The Alpha EV8 was going to get a huge boost because it had way more execution units than it could normally use, and ht allowed it to use them more effectively). Neither the POWER4 nor the POWER5 will be used in Macs (the POWER4 costs several thousand dollars per chip, I've heard $7000-$8000). The 970 seems almost certain to be used in Macs (targetted at the desktop, has Altivec, etc...).
The 970 is single core without hyperthreading (or symmetric multithreading to be more accurate, hyperthreading is Intel's name for SMT). When the 970 goes to a .09 micron manufacturing process, dual core may become practical (.13 ->.09 cuts the transistor size in half) A POWER5 derivative seems fairly likely, and would have hyperthreading. The 4x performance boost from ht is widely regarded as bull**** marketing claims, but it should give a fairly good boost (especially if the POWER4 isn't using its execution resources effectively. The Alpha EV8 was going to get a huge boost because it had way more execution units than it could normally use, and ht allowed it to use them more effectively). Neither the POWER4 nor the POWER5 will be used in Macs (the POWER4 costs several thousand dollars per chip, I've heard $7000-$8000). The 970 seems almost certain to be used in Macs (targetted at the desktop, has Altivec, etc...).
I bet this all isn't going to take place this year.....
First we get another lame G4 speedbump with some other minor updates that almost no1 uses.
First we get another lame G4 speedbump with some other minor updates that almost no1 uses.
true... except I belive IBM said they have no plans for a multi-core 970.
IBM isn't claiming 4x performance increase from HT... they claim that their implementation is MUCH better than Intels and that a single core HT Power5 will really act like 2 processors. They claim 80-100% increase with their HT... proof remains to be seen. IBM has also said the core has been reworked so there are also performance improvements totally unrelated to HT.
Intel's HT, OTOH, seems to produce anything from a 20% increase to a 10% decrease in performance.
It's way too early to make this claim. IBM is saying that the Power5 will go into big iron and smaller machines, though the implication is smaller servers. It will make sense, however, to bring the line together eventually instead of engineering two processors for each design generation. I personally wouldn't be surprised if a .13 micron or .09micron Power5 with a single core becomes the Mac chip in late 2004 or early 2005... but who knows.
This is also pretty much impossible to say since the Power4 isn't put in anything but IBM servers. There is no $/1000 unit price, no raw or even retail price. Any figure generated for a Power4 module is the price for an IBM upgrade part for a high end server. I'd wager that if you wanted an IBM 'certified' Xeon, it'd cost a fortune too. I remember pricing additional Pentium 90 cards for old IBM 720 servers and they were around $1000... back when a P90 was a $30 part. Unfortunately, we needed to buy the card with with the CPU soldered onto it.
I think the real test of whether the Power5 makes it to the desktop is whether or not it includes Altivec. Apple would demand such support. IBM didn't think it was too important back in the day, but it has proved to be powerful and it would be useful in server situations.. so we'll see.