Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
62,962
29,676
In what perhaps is the first "official" confirmation that IBM's PowerPC 970's will be used by Apple, BusinessWeek claims that IBM has confirmed that they are developing new set of chips for the Mac:


While Motorola has struggled in chips, IBM has soared. Under CEO Sam Palmisano, Big Blue has poured money into chip research and upgraded its factories. IBM says the new Apple chip will be of the 64-bit variety, which means it can process twice as much information per cycle as existing 32-bit chips.


No specific executives are quoted, however.

Update: The article has been edited with the following correction/retraction:

"IBM did not confirm it was building a chip specifically for Apple, but it does say its new PowerPC chip will work on Apple platforms"
 

Approx

macrumors member
Nov 5, 2002
35
0
Norway
YES!!!

And I have sould my dual 1ghz MDD.. did get my money back..
a 970 would look nice side by side with an new power mac ;)
 

Kid Red

macrumors 65816
Dec 14, 2001
1,428
157
Originally posted by Centris 650
Not really. This just confirms, to a point, that the 970 WILL be used by Apple. It doesn't say when.

Some corners are 2 city blocks and some are 8 city blocks, but the ice cream store would still be right around the corner.

As per the article, isn't known now that a 64 bit OS is not twice as fast as a 32 bit OS in general as the article mentions? That leads me to believe the writer had very little real info and the rest he made up.
 

freundt

macrumors member
Apr 8, 2003
87
0
Seattle
Re: PPC 970 for Apple... Confirmed?

While Motorola has struggled in chips, IBM has soared. Under CEO Sam Palmisano, Big Blue has poured money into chip research and upgraded its factories. IBM says the new Apple chip will be of the 64-bit variety, which means it can process twice as much information per cycle as existing 32-bit chips.

Uhh.. whoever said this doesn;t know what they are talking about.. As we all know, as it has been beaten into our heads multiple times, in multiple stories, throughout multiple threads, 64 bit != 2x 32 bit speed.

_f
 

tazznb

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
141
0
New Jersey
Originally posted by Kid Red
Some corners are 2 city blocks and some are 8 city blocks, but the ice cream store would still be right around the corner.

As per the article, isn't known now that a 64 bit OS is not twice as fast as a 32 bit OS in general as the article mentions? That leads me to believe the writer had very little real info and the rest he made up.

Well I hope they have chocolate ice cream.... I like chocolate.:)
 

pgwalsh

macrumors 68000
Jun 21, 2002
1,639
218
New Zealand
Certainly doesn't give any insight to when the 970 will enter the market.

I wonder how much Quark will actually boost sales. I've read so many people switching to InDesign...
 

ZildjianKX

macrumors 68000
May 18, 2003
1,610
0
Hey pgwalsh, I just read the petition in your sig... ya know apple would never do that... they'd go out of business... they're a hardware company #1, and a software manufacturer #2... and without the hardware sales they'd die.
 

DGFan

macrumors 6502a
Mar 28, 2003
531
0
Re: Re: PPC 970 for Apple... Confirmed?

Apple chip will be of the 64-bit variety, which means it can process twice as much information per cycle as existing 32-bit chips.

Originally posted by freundt
Uhh.. whoever said this doesn;t know what they are talking about.. As we all know, as it has been beaten into our heads multiple times, in multiple stories, throughout multiple threads, 64 bit != 2x 32 bit speed.

_f

Actually a 64 bit processor can process twice as much information per cycle as a 32 bit processor. His statement is not synonymous with "twice as fast as a 32 bit computer".

So maybe read it a little closer next time before you rattle off a reactionary response.
 

maradong

macrumors 65816
Mar 7, 2003
1,058
0
Luxembourg
well , so i will wait for the ppc 970 and not go for the new powerbook as soon as it is released, apart it has got the 970, but that is fairly unprobable
 

Mr. Anderson

Moderator emeritus
Nov 1, 2001
22,568
6
VA
I wonder if IBM's acknowledgement of the 970 being made for Macs is going to be an issue with Jobs and Apple. You know they love their secrecy :D

But there is always the issue of what the thing will actually look like ;)

D
 

mathiasr

macrumors regular
Mar 20, 2003
105
0
Strasbourg, France
Re: Re: PPC 970 for Apple... Confirmed?

Originally posted by freundt
Uhh.. whoever said this doesn;t know what they are talking about.. As we all know, as it has been beaten into our heads multiple times, in multiple stories, throughout multiple threads, 64 bit != 2x 32 bit speed.

_f
The wording "...the new Apple chip will be of the 64-bit variety, which means it can process twice as much information per cycle as existing 32-bit chips." is still true, when a 64-bits CPU adds two 64 bits numbers it handles twice as much bits as would a 32-bits CPU while adding two 32 bits numbers.
The problem is that most of the time in most of the apps you do not work with 64 bits datas but rather 32, 16 or even 8 bits.

What is actually fun is when he writes "gigahertz per second" :D
 

mdavis

macrumors member
May 11, 2003
38
0
Santa Cruz, CA
Re: Re: Re: PPC 970 for Apple... Confirmed?

Originally posted by maradong
well , so i will wait for the ppc 970 and not go for the new powerbook as soon as it is released, apart it has got the 970, but that is fairly unprobable

Judging by history, I really wouldn't expect a G5 PowerBook for at least a year.
 

pgwalsh

macrumors 68000
Jun 21, 2002
1,639
218
New Zealand
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Hey pgwalsh, I just read the petition in your sig... ya know apple would never do that... they'd go out of business... they're a hardware company #1, and a software manufacturer #2... and without the hardware sales they'd die.
You're off topic. There's already threads on this issue so if you'd like to give some good reasons go find them.
 

mdavis

macrumors member
May 11, 2003
38
0
Santa Cruz, CA
Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
I wonder if IBM's acknowledgement of the 970 being made for Macs is going to be an issue with Jobs and Apple. You know they love their secrecy :D

But there is always the issue of what the thing will actually look like ;)

D

Undoubtedly this was discussed between the two already long ago. Also, I might be wrong, but I don't believe IBM has officially announced the 970 as being "make for Apple." I think it's jsut so obvious so that's what people are saying... I donno though..
 

ddtlm

macrumors 65816
Aug 20, 2001
1,184
0
DGFan:

Actually a 64 bit processor can process twice as much information per cycle as a 32 bit processor. His statement is not synonymous with "twice as fast as a 32 bit computer".
But wait! AltiVec allows the 32-bit G4 to eat 128 bits at a time, which the PPC970 does not double. Woo hoo! But wait, both chips are superscalar, so the question is actually how many units can crunch how many bits at once...

mathiasr:

Hmmm, I'd take a computer that could do even a few khz per second... leave it on a few months and it might get pretty fast. :)

mdavis:

Judging by history, I really wouldn't expect a G5 PowerBook for at least a year.
Economics also suggests that Apple would do a 7457 version first, because its a drop-in replacement for the 7455, which means more mileage out of their R&D dollar.
 

Catfish_Man

macrumors 68030
Sep 13, 2001
2,579
2
Portland, OR
Re: Re: Re: PPC 970 for Apple... Confirmed?

Originally posted by mathiasr
What is actually fun is when he writes "gigahertz per second" :D

lol. cycles/second^2. I wish I had a 1GHz/sec computer. It would "accelerate" by 1GHz every second :).
 

Escher

macrumors member
Aug 2, 2001
45
0
Dakar, Senegal
What's intrigueing about this Business Week article is that it was written by Alex Salkever, a regular tech columnist, not Charles Haddad, the pro-Mac columnist. This could mean that the article is more neutral and objective. But it could also mean that the article is less well researched. Could Haddad have fed Salkever the inside scoop to publish during his leave so as not to raise too many eyebrows?

Regardless, coverage of PPC 970 PowerMac in a mainstream publication like Business Week is a good sign. Now we just need the New York Times or another paper of that stature to jump on board. Where are you, David Pogue? ;)

Escher
 

Jerry Spoon

macrumors 6502a
Jan 8, 2002
624
0
Historic St. Charles
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
970 macs around the corner... a bad time to go out and buy a new mac... :)
I've been waiting almost a year to replace my dual 450 tower. Still runs great, but I want more and I'm not buying a thing until these 970's come out (and maybe I'll wait just a bit after that - Got burned with my bondi blue iMac having some bugs). Hopefully I won't have to wait too much longer.
 

mymemory

macrumors 68020
May 9, 2001
2,495
-1
Miami
If Apple doesn't release the 970 in the keynote I may expect no less than a riot in that place. If I was in the US for sure I would start one at the closest Apple Store:mad:

BTW, I hope a 970 chip for my Pismo very soon too:rolleyes:
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.