Rev B powermacs - PPC 970 vs. 970fx

[shadowband]

Since day one of the rev B powermac announcement back in June, there has been debate over which CPU is used in the 1.8/2.0 GHz powermacs. The specs have been intentionally vague in this area. The 2.5 GHz powermac obviously uses the PPC970fx (90nm process) but speculation has it that the rev B 1.8/2.0 Ghz powermacs could have either the PPC970 (130nm process) or the newer PPC970fx. BTW - The Xserve uses the PPC970fx.

If you've received a rev B powermac, please post your CPU info here along with your purchase date. The procedure to determine your CPU version is as follows (thanks Sun Baked):

1) bring up a terminal window (Applications/Utilities/Terminal)
2) enter the following:

ioreg -l | grep cpu-version

A CPU version of <003c0300> equates to PowerPc 970fx rev 3
A CPU version of <00390202> equates to PowerPc 970 rev 2.2

Note: two entries will be output since rev b powermacs are all DP.

I'll go first -

Order Date: June 28
Ship Date: July 13
Model: 2.0GHz
CPU version: PPC970 (the old stock)

 

[NusuniAdmin]

all the rev b models have the 970fx. It would be VERY dumb of apple to have a proc with the powertune technology (as well as many other cool features/benefits) in the high end comp and have older technology in the other 2.

Occording to mactracker and a few other sources they all use 970fx as well.

 

[keysersoze]

all the rev b models have the 970fx. It would be VERY dumb of apple to have a proc with the powertune technology (as well as many other cool features/benefits) in the high end comp and have older technology in the other 2.

Occording to mactracker and a few other sources they all use 970fx as well.

Negative. The Dual 1.8 Rev.B we just got here at work 2 weeks ago has 90202, which according to the first post means 970.

Sucks.

 

[Sun Baked]

Don't worry people rarely let the facts get in the way of their blind trust of keynote speeches and Apple marketing documents.

The news that Apple was using 130nm processors in the Rev B 1.8/2.0GHz machines was released the first day the Rev B machines were sitting in store displays.

The only question was when Apple started making the switch to the 90nm processors, which seems to have been an August event.

 

[NusuniAdmin]

actually i just now called apple and asked them if it uses the ppc 970fx processor. The man on the phone said "every current powermac does in fact use the IBM powerpc 970FX chip"

so there is some sort of lieing going on somewhere.

 

[NusuniAdmin]

actually occording to apple.com tech sheets they use the 90 nm process. And as we all know the 970fx is 90 nm, and 970 aint.

http://www.apple.com/g5processor/

just look at the powermac g5 tech sheet and the processor tech sheet.

- which is from the processor sheet

- which is from the powermac overview

and since apple does not specify anywhere which powermac uses the 90 nm chip and which dont then that means every powermac does in fact use the 970fx.

 

[maxvamp]

Lets think for a moment...

Everyone knows that the 90nm Procs were hard to get out the door.

It would have made sense for Apple to stuff the lower machines with the proven 1.8/2.0 970 PPCs so they could ship them. After all, for those machines, very little was brought to the table as far as features.

I can see Apple switching entirely to the 970fx as the supply of the newer processors increase. Now, they may all be the 970fx.

GM used to do ( probably still does ) the same thing. I had an all original 1969 Camaro with a motor that was made in / for 1968.

Max.

 

[Sun Baked]

>maxvamp

Don't worry about it...

Have faith the person this news came from is more reliable than the people trying to get the information off Apple's marketing brochures to "prove" their point.

The guy wrote one of the guides to Overclocking G4s, one of the PPC version checkers, and is constantly providing up-to-date info on the PPC and Power processors.

Which is more than I can say about the people who fail to trust the fact of what the Processor Value Register is trying to report.

This guy is more reliable and qualified than the googlers...

http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/G4ZONE/G4_733_overclock/G4_733_overclock.html

---

Edit - Satisfied the 2.0 uses it, not sure about the 1.8 machine...

http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve...5231&m=9080959175&r=437005745631#437005745631

 

[NusuniAdmin]

>maxvamp

Don't worry about it...

Have faith the person this news came from is more reliable than the people trying to get the information off Apple's marketing brochures to "prove" their point.

The guy wrote one of the guides to Overclocking G4s, one of the PPC version checkers, and is constantly providing up-to-date info on the PPC and Power processors.

Which is more than I can say about the people who fail to trust the fact of what the Processor Value Register is trying to report.

This guy is more reliable and qualified than the googlers...

http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/G4ZONE/G4_733_overclock/G4_733_overclock.html

what does this have to do with the ppc 970fx? lol. And i dont see anyone on here who googled the info, when i posted the screenshots i logged straight into apple.com/powermac (no google involved) and downloaded the files.

 

[Sun Baked]

what does this have to do with the ppc 970fx? lol. And i dont see anyone on here who googled the info, when i posted the screenshots i logged straight into apple.com/powermac (no google involved) and downloaded the files.

Did you go to an Apple Store and actually check a Rev. B machine on display built before August 2004?

Edit -- the source of the 130nm information has. And he has also proven more reliable a source of info than you.

 

[Sun Baked]

>keysersoze

Thank's for checking, I don't know if anyone has pinned down the build date yet when the 90nm CPUs finally hit.

If we get enough responses from new/recent DP2.0PM owners it should be possible to pin down a somewhat reliable build date.

 

[keysersoze]

>keysersoze

Thank's for checking, I don't know if anyone has pinned down the build date yet when the 90nm CPUs finally hit.

If we get enough responses from new/recent DP2.0PM owners it should be possible to pin down a somewhat reliable build date.

My pleasure. I sit on top of this Dual 1.8 40 hours a week, so if you have any other questions on it, just fire away!

 

[NusuniAdmin]

Did you go to an Apple Store and actually check a Rev. B machine on display built before August 2004?

Edit -- the source of the 130nm information has. And he has also proven more reliable a source of info than you.

well how can apple tech documents be unreliable? Wutever.

and going to an apple store is absolutely worthless in this convo. But yes in july i tried out the dual 2.0 and 2.5 ghz machiens on new 23" displays at local apple retail.

 

[maxvamp]

SunBaked / keysersoze

Thanx for the heads up. I guess blind logic isn't all bad.

BTW: I read xlr8yourmac. Great site.

Max.

 

[NusuniAdmin]

this makes me wonder when the dual core g5 will be released....

 

[maxvamp]

this makes me wonder when the dual core g5 will be released....

When it is ( nearly ) ready.

Max.

 

[shadowband]

well how can apple tech documents be unreliable? Wutever.

The docs that you referred to are basically marketing docs. The docs are reliable in that the powermac line does support the PPC970fx, but they're misleading in that the chip is not supported across the entire line. As with all marketing docs, don't take them at face value.

The powermac specification doc can not take the same liberties that are generally accepted in marketing docs. If you check out the spec here:
http://www.apple.com/powermac/specs.html
you'll note that the CPU is simply referred to as the PowerPC G5. This is probably intentionally vague, but it's a true statement that gives apple the option of using either the PPC970 or the PPC970FX.

BTW: I'll believe the Processor Version Register on the PPC chip over a marketing doc any day of the week

 

[NusuniAdmin]

The docs that you referred to are basically marketing docs. The docs are reliable in that the powermac line does support the PPC970fx, but they're misleading in that the chip is not supported across the entire line. As with all marketing docs, don't take them at face value.

The powermac specification doc can not take the same liberties that are generally accepted in marketing docs. If you check out the spec here:
http://www.apple.com/powermac/specs.html
you'll note that the CPU is simply referred to as the PowerPC G5. This is probably intentionally vague, but it's a true statement that gives apple the option of using either the PPC970 or the PPC970FX.

BTW: I'll believe the Processor Version Register on the PPC chip over a marketing doc any day of the week

ah ok, so when i called up apple sales support and asked them and they said it was across the line they must have been full of crap...wutever. I dont trust apple employees anymore anyways...not after that mess with my dual 1 ghz g4.