PPC970 and WWDC Rumors: Part 2

[trebblekicked]

Re: Re: Re: Re: By the way, what would be the time tables?

Originally posted by eric_n_dfw
I believe Cheetah was the code name for 10.0

-'doh. stand corrected. well there goes that. oh what the hell. 64 bit OS's for everyone then!

 

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by porovaara
Where have you head this?

That's from SPEC numbers. The 1.8 theoretical SPEC is about 4x the 1GHz G4. Note that this isn't on a per-clock basis; that brings it closer to the 2x faster figure the original post went with.

On the other hand CPU performance boost != system performance boost. you still have to read stuff from the HD and write it back out, etc. I am looking for a 1.8GHz 970 to pretty much match Intel's 3GHz P4 in overall performance, although of course I'd accept a surprise ... 🙂

 

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by t^3
Does anybody know what prevented the PowerBook from getting a G4 until a year after the G4 was released? I'm just wondering if were making too many assumptions about a 970 PowerBook being released soon after the chip itself is released...

Supply of G4s is what kept it out of the notebook form factor for so long. Apple traditionally tries to make sure demand is being met in their pro desktop lines before trickling down new processors to the notebook and consumer desktop lines.

Granted, such a policy is always subject to change, and of course IBM in general has a better record with meeting demand than Motorola, so you never know when the 970 will show up in notebooks.

 

[strider42]

Originally posted by jholzner
I think he's asking why the 1.4 and 1.8 models are not also duals...why just the top end model?

Ooops, I think you're right. Still comes down to the same thing in the end: money. More profit margin on a single processor machine on the low end than a dual, and its enough to make someone want to upgrade to to the upper end instead of just buying the low end. Product differentiation at its finest. Kind of like how when I bought my car, to get the automatic trans, you needed to go up a model (not a perfect analogy, but you get the idea, especially since I prefer a manual trans anyway)

 

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by ktlx
I don't know if it is true or not, but some have claimed that the PowerPC 970's FSB runs at half the processor speed. So a 1.2Ghz would have a 600Mhz bus, a 1.4Ghz would have a 700Mhz bus and a 1.8Ghz would have a 900Mhz bus.

I have absolutely no idea if this is correct or not and the IBM PDFs that I have seen don't allow you to conclude one way or another.

As has been discussed before, the "half the processor speed" comment appears to only apply to the 1.8GHz unit. It would be downright foolish to produce a chip in which each speed bump operates at a radically different FSB rate from the last, as changing the FSB requires modifying the chipset and possibly overall motherboard design instead of just plopping in the newer faster chip (more or less 🙂 )

I expect the 900MHz bus will stay constant for the time being at least (also, note that the bus has an effective bandwidth of an 800MHz bus after overhead ... still a lot faster than anything else out there for the Mac and at the moment faster than Inte's 533MHz bus too).

 

[edenwaith]

How to speak French

Originally posted by psxndc
What I'd like to know is how you pronounce MacBidouille in the first place.

I'm a dumb American that only speaks one language. Is it "Mac-Bi-dooey"? "Mac-Bi-dooley"? "Mac-Bi-day"?

-p

Well, since it's French, you just pronounce the first half of the word and drop the rest. So one could pronounce it either "Mac" or "MacBi" or "MacBid".

I'm just kidding around. I just feel threatened by any language which tries to be more messed up than my own native language (Americanized English).

Anyway, if the RUMOR of a 2.3 GHz is true, then that would be sweet. I think that would put the Mac back into the race. What is the top speed AMD? The last I saw it was a 2.2GHz, but it could compete pretty well with a 3GHz P4.

 

[seamuskrat]

Misconceptions

First- any news on the processor front is good news. I think even the Mac loyal will concur that we need a new birght spot in the future. That said, on to my next statement.
Correct me if i am mistaken on this as well...

1. The 970 will NOT be dual core. Never was meant to be. its based on a server design called the POWER4 which IS multicore, but the derived chip called the 970 will NOT be multicore- AND will include an 'alti-vec' style vector unit.

2. A 64 bit OS will be no faster in most tasks than a 32 bit OS. The bits have to do with how memory is addressed and such. So, Photoshop will not have to be re-written to be '64 bit clean'. etc. That said, some apps WILL benefit from having more RAM available to them. 64 bit systems and OS will allow for a higher RAM total than is currently available.
2a) Certain tasks can be designed and coded in a way to take advantage of the 64 bit processor. Aspects of OS X and other apps could have compenents that will benefit in performance on this. However, IMO, not a dramatic performance improvement.
2b) Because the 970 runs 32 bit PERFECTLY fine, 64 bit OS and/or software IS NOT A PREREQUISITE for release.
2c)There is no reason why certain aspects of a package cannot be installed for 64 bit vs 32 bit machines. A compiler update can allow for binaries to be compiled in 64 bit vs 32 bit. In a package the installer could check and install the appropriate version. So, vendors would not have to 'make separate' versions of software. They could compile binaries in each variety and have it be transparent. Again, specific advantages to using 64 bit clean code will NOT apply to a 32 bit system, such as memory addressing.

3. Lets assume that we are not all Apple fanatacists. From a corporate stategy, Apple wants to re-coop development costs on its current designs. So, taking this track, Apple will want to maximize life out of the current 17 and 12 powerbooks. That would indicate that laptops 970 would be less likely early in the product line. But since we are talking business, we know that Apple needs some help. The 970 SEEMS to be the help that is needed. I fear that laptop sales would plummet if desktop 970's were released and laptop updates were not forthcoming. So, it makes sound business sense to have 970s ina desktop and laptop modality as soon as technically possible.
3a) Consumer machines. We know that Moto has a few more breaths of life in the G4 series. Its possible that the newest G4 series could prolong the consumer line while the 'pros' get the 970 for the first year of production. What I do not know is the cost factor. What does the current G4 and upcoming models cost and what will the 970 cost per chip. This would go a long way to 'roadmap' a consumer vs pro future. However, if the consumer line would get 1.25 to 1.8 G4 with L2 and L3 cache with DDR (maximied or as is) at the current (or lower) prices and the pro line gets 970s then Apple would have a period of 9 to 12 months to breathe, and retool the consumer line for 970s. In that 12 months, I think we can feel confident IBM will take the 1.8 and allow it to scale to 2.8. So, lets assume we have this. Consumer lines with 1.25 to 1.42 G4 with L2/L3. Pro line with 1.4 to 1.8 970 for year 1. Year 2 consumer gets 1.8 to 2.x 970 and pro gets 2.5+ 970 )with dual options). Sounds reasonable from a tech standpoint and buisiness model. If the SPEC scores standup it makes the proline compeative, and the consumer lines very nice (afterall- they would be the same or slightly btter than todays PRO line).

As I said, I may have misinterpreted some of the technical facts, but I am nearly sure I have managed to explain it all correctly. I hope we can all say that come summer things will be very different for the platfrom.

 

[shadowfax]

Re: Misconceptions

Originally posted by seamuskrat
1. The 970 will NOT be dual core. Never was meant to be. its based on a server design called the POWER4 which IS multicore, but the derived chip called the 970 will NOT be multicore- AND will include an 'alti-vec' style vector unit.

I don't think the chip has anything on it to preclude dual processing. the system controller or something like that should decide about DP. the 970 may not be DP on new PMacs when they arrive, but that doesn't mean that there is no way to DP 970s.

 

[edenwaith]

Re: Re: By the way, what would be the time tables?

Originally posted by dongmin

6-8 weeks puts delivery in early August. Perfect for going back to school. Perfect for me to take out more school loans and get one of these suckers.

One thing which I don't quite get is why Apple will announce a product 1.5 to 2 months before it is scheduled to ship...it seems like that would hurt their sales, or at least their revenue, especially on a quarter system. Such as when Apple has showcased new items, yet they aren't going to be released for several months. I can understand how the MacWorld expos might have pushed Apple into wowing the audiences again and again, even if the products weren't QUITE ready.

 

[wrylachlan]

Re: Re: Misconceptions

Originally posted by Shadowfax
I don't think the chip has anything on it to preclude dual processing. the system controller or something like that should decide about DP. the 970 may not be DP on new PMacs when they arrive, but that doesn't mean that there is no way to DP 970s.

Dual Core and Dual Processor are not the same thing. Dual Core means you have two processors in the same piece of silicon.

Dual Processor means two separate pieces of silicon working together.

The 970 will definitely be DP capable, but it is not Dual core.

 

[pgwalsh]

Re: Re: By the way, what would be the time tables?

Originally posted by dongmin
WWDC is on June 23-27.


Dual 2.3 ghz 970
900 mhz FSB
ATI 9700
2 gigs of RAM
Superdrive
FW800
Bluetooth
$3000
(the going rate for the 'Ultimate' config via the student ADC discount)

Okay, this looks pretty good, but I'm shooting for the ATI 9800...and standard two hd raid.

 

[steve53e]

I'm waiting

Rumor or not.... I don't care if it takes a year or more, but I'm not giving Apple another dime for a computer until they release a box that clocks out at 2.5 ghz or better. Until then, 800 mhz will have to do and I'll gladly spend my money elsewhere.

 

[Frobozz]

Originally posted by iloveMac
WOW!!! a dual 2.3ghz. I am slobbering right now.

yeah, I think that day-- should these live up to the rumors, be one of the best days in apple's history. seriously. That means somewhere between the middle of July to the middle of August we will have dual 2.3 Ghz 970's. That's a HUGE performance boost. It ain't like getting dual 2.3 Ghz G4's... this is much closer to 4 or 6 times faster.


YES! YES! YES!

 

[Frobozz]

Re: I'm waiting

Originally posted by steve53e
Rumor or not.... I don't care if it takes a year or more, but I'm not giving Apple another dime for a computer until they release a box that clocks out at 2.5 ghz or better. Until then, 800 mhz will have to do and I'll gladly spend my money elsewhere.

WOW. You missed the point, didn't you? 🙂

A 2.3 Ghz 970 is roughly equivalent to a G4 at twice that speed. How is 4 Ghz for ya? Just as you can not translate a P4 to a G4 in Mhz, you can't translate a G4 to a 970 easily. (though I tried)

 

[Frobozz]

Re: Re: Re: By the way, what would be the time tables?

Originally posted by edenwaith
One thing which I don't quite get is why Apple will announce a product 1.5 to 2 months before it is scheduled to ship...it seems like that would hurt their sales, or at least their revenue, especially on a quarter system. Such as when Apple has showcased new items, yet they aren't going to be released for several months. I can understand how the MacWorld expos might have pushed Apple into wowing the audiences again and again, even if the products weren't QUITE ready.

They don't care about selling G4 Towers at MWNY, because the focus will be changing. They won't have new hardware. Their existing sales are pretty rough around edges, and are nothing to write home about. They really aren't doing anything but showing the world they are still relevent in the raw-computing arena. If sales slipped to practically zero, it's not a big impact on their overall performance because their current numbers are so low.

 

[jgracia]

Why single 1.4, 1.8 an dual 2.3 and not a single model with 2.3 Mhz processor???

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

How does this french site know whats happening in cupertino, that is the question. and how the heck do they come up with a 2.3 ghz 970? i would think a 1.4,1.8 and dual 1.8 or dual 2.2 but not a 2.3. a single 1.4 or 1.8 will do me just fine. Some food for thought. Apple wont just throw this into a minor redo of the powermac. They will want a brand new looking case to show off this brand new 970. Any ideas?How about black with chrome?

 

[Nipsy]

Originally posted by GPTurismo
I can't wait. I believe a single 970 2.3 by itself would beat a p4 4.0 in raw out power due to it being on a faster bus, better device communication system and most importantly 64 bit.

What 64 bit aware apps have you got?

 

[IJ Reilly]

Re: Re: Re: By the way, what would be the time tables?

Originally posted by edenwaith
One thing which I don't quite get is why Apple will announce a product 1.5 to 2 months before it is scheduled to ship...it seems like that would hurt their sales, or at least their revenue, especially on a quarter system. Such as when Apple has showcased new items, yet they aren't going to be released for several months. I can understand how the MacWorld expos might have pushed Apple into wowing the audiences again and again, even if the products weren't QUITE ready.

True, and Apple has to be finally getting that point after the G4 iMac debacle of last year and the 17" PowerBook of this year. Maybe -- just maybe -- that's why WWDC was put back a month. Sure, I know what wishful thinking gets you, but I've got to be optimistic about this move coming off very soon, or accept that Apple has fallen down and can't get up.

 

[nubero]

970 really fast...? I wonder.

Look at

http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1C2AE087256C5200611780/$file/PPC970_MPF2002.pdf

See the Page with the SPECint2000 Benchmarks?

Now Look at

http://www.ideasinternational.com/benchmark/spec/specint2000.html

Will somebody now please explain to me, why the PPC 970 is supposed to be any faster than the P4? They can be gratefull if they come CLOSE to the P4...

Or am I overlooking something here?

 

[nighthawk]

Re: Re: Re: Re: By the way, what would be the time tables?

Originally posted by IJ Reilly
True, and Apple has to be finally getting that point after the G4 iMac debacle of last year and the 17" PowerBook of this year. Maybe -- just maybe -- that's why WWDC was put back a month. Sure, I know what wishful thinking gets you, but I've got to be optimistic about this move coming off very soon, or accept that Apple has fallen down and can't get up.

But the 970 is a whole different tamale... it would make the most sense to announce the 970 ProPPC Mac at WWDC, where the developers would need to know the most about it... even if the wait was 2 months, it would be official (and that is what Apple needs now more than ever).

 

[seamuskrat]

Re: Re: Misconceptions

Originally posted by Shadowfax
I don't think the chip has anything on it to preclude dual processing. the system controller or something like that should decide about DP. the 970 may not be DP on new PMacs when they arrive, but that doesn't mean that there is no way to DP 970s.

I apologize for not being more clear.
The 970 is NOT dual core, but IS dual Processor capable.

There is a significant difference. In some cases, a dual processor system will outperform a dual core, in other cases vice versa. What it means to us, is that we can be reasonable sure that some configuration will include dual processors.

What is fun ti imagine, is that the hypothetical design of the POWER5 derititive (maybe called the 980?!?) could perhaps be dual core. So, in 2 to 3 years we could see dual core/dual processor macs. Confused? heehee

Please for the sake of accuracy refer to the 970 as a DP capable CPU not a dual core CPU.
Thanks!

 

[nighthawk]

Re: Misconceptions

Originally posted by seamuskrat
...Lets assume that we are not all Apple fanatacists. From a corporate stategy, Apple wants to re-coop development costs on its current designs. So, taking this track, Apple will want to maximize life out of the current 17 and 12 powerbooks. That would indicate that laptops 970 would be less likely early in the product line. But since we are talking business, we know that Apple needs some help. The 970 SEEMS to be the help that is needed. I fear that laptop sales would plummet if desktop 970's were released and laptop updates were not forthcoming. So, it makes sound business sense to have 970s ina desktop and laptop modality as soon as technically possible.

The way I see it, the Powerbook 12" is the path to replace the iBook line with the G4. Meanwhile, the 15" ALu and 17" will sport the PowerPC 970.

Although supplies were low for the G4 at the beginning -- the main reason why the PowerbookG4 was so much later than the desktop was Power consumption and heat. A couple of revisions were needed to reduce both of these, and still the Powerbook was difficult to engineer.

Now the current 970 1.0ghz only uses 10watts which is less than the current 1.0ghz G4 processor in the Powerbook now. (I have no idea how the 1.0 is configured with bus/clock-mult., but those are the figures on the IBM website). Possibly we will see the 1.35ghz in the Powerbook this year also, but it depends on cost/availablility, and whether or not there is some sort of speed-stepping technology that would work with the 970 (which would make a lot of sense if IBM wants to create blades with it).

 

[seamuskrat]

Announcement versus Ship Times

Although we hate 'vaporware' products and products that are announced as 'here' and take months to ship, Apple has had a few of these. Here is MY PERSONAL brief analysis on this aspect of the company.

Up until rather recently, Apple has choosen to focus on MacWorld expos, every 6 months to announce new machines. Yes, I know there have been exceptions, but it has become rather customary. That means to maximize the press, focus and bang for your buck you announce when half the world's mac population is watching with baited anticipation of new machines.

With the situation is it stands today, Apple is in a bit of a pickle. Its got a great OS, with a loyal userbase and what we all know has the vast potential yet unrealized to be superior. Yet the current line-up although impressive, is not the blazing speed busting machines we dream of. We all would love to say to our Wintel buddies tha we were RIGHT all along and we do have the better/faster machines.

With Pentiums reaching past 3 gig and the G4 at a mere 1.42 ist getting harder to brush away the gap. With M$ focusing on its own switch campaign and the folks at Adobe pushing Intel chips, it places Apple in a position where it does NOT set the rules or agenda.

Apple can no longer dictate the terms it announces products. It must now react to the market conditions.

By announcing/previewing 970s and 10.3 at WWDC they can get some vitally needed sales recorded on the books before quarter end. The reality of today is that Powermac sales are meager. The cost/performance ratio is not there for 'switchers' and many power users are aware of SOMETHING better in the pipeline. Of course, we have all too often been dissappointed by MOTOs latest efforts.....

So, that menas Apple MUST do something fairly drastic soon. WWDC seems like a great opportunity. Get the developer crowd excited. The delay was in part due to current politics and safety concerns, and mostly due to the chance to announce at WWDC, get early sales for the quarter and to some extent confirm though action that MacWorld July is DOA for Apple this year.

Whether Apple announces AMD fab chips, IBM 970s, Intel chips, or even another gen G4, they have to do it realtively soon or they will be forever placed in the margins of computing. I doubt Apple COULD go under, as throughout its history it has made blunders that would have sent many a company to its grave, but Apple could still be relgated to the footnotes of history, so IMO they need to act NOW.

Logic dictates that the IBM 970 will be the way to go. Its available. Its PPC compatible. Its scalable upwards for the foreseeable future. Its NOT Moto. Contrary to folks like Dvorak at PCMag, I doubt Intel is the way to go. Another transition akin to 9 to X would be harmful overall. And a Mhz to Mhz comparison of OS X vs Win on a X86 platform would still prove problematic.

It seems like Apple has fallen back to punt as they say. I suspect we will hear some great software news at NAB, and see some more spectacular stuff in the next weeks leading up to WWDC. At WWDC we will know for sure.

Keep in mind Apple is a public company out to make money. So many of their choices must be dictated by this directive. I think (hope) that we will see more product announcements at non-MacWorld events over the next 18 months and it will all be fun.

 

[scem0]

dual 2.3! They will sell a lot of those. How can you justify spending
~$2,000 for a single 1.8 when for a couple hundred more you
can get two, much faster processors?