Say Hello to the PPC NextGen (G5?)

[whiskeybravo]

Re: Silent Fans?

Originally posted by StuPid QPid


What I can't understand is that we have the technology to make computer chips with 90nm pipelines, but are unable to come up with a silent fan

I know the make some noise owing to air turbulence, but maybe the blades need redesigning? I'm not a mechanical engineer, but is there some physical reason why it's not possible to make a fan quieter?

Yes, it does seem odd, but things are rarely as simple as they seem. Several conflicting requirements come into play for fans. Size, airflow and efficiency. Silence is easy if you eliminate the first constraint. Make a really big fan with a lot of blade pitch and turn it r e a l slow. You move lots of air with little sound. Now make the same fan 3" in diameter and 1/2" thick and you can't move any air at that low speed. Small fans have generally low efficiency, but efficiency can only help you so much in any event, even 100% efficient means each revolution can only move 3 1/2 cubic inches of air (assuming the entire area of the fan is useful, which it isn't). So you still need to rely on speed to increase volume. High tip speeds = turbulence = noise, period. And yes, I am an ME.

 

[sneed]

Originally posted by bobindashadows
Well it does, but i mean there's a pretty good size heat sink in the G4 tower and it still has a number of fans. I personally don't know the heat produced by the power4, but I don't think even a huge heat sink is going to eliminate the need for fans. Like i said, Apple isn't going to produce a loud computer anyway so why argue about it?

I didn't say that a heat sink would eliminate the need for a fan, only that it would reduce it. And the reason why I brought it up in the first place was that the rumored new box has quite a large heat sink in it.

As far as whether Apple has produced a loud computer or not, I believe they have produced several; the quicksilver, the pre 800 Ti's, and the xserve (though it's a server, what d'you want?) Frankly, if Apple made it's product offerings by how quiet the box was we'd still be able to buy the cube, which would be fine by me.

 

[kenohki]

Originally posted by i_wolf
Just my two cents worth. Opteron will be launching shortly. I reckon that we will see G5 much much sooner than later. Please don't flame me for saying this but i would not be surprised if we see one of these babies announced at the end of this month with production and shipping to begin in October. Apple probably have one of those agreements with IBM as they did with MOTO where they get to demonstrate the newest processor first.

I would have to agree. Maybe not October but I don't think it's as abysmal as the guys who are screaming x86 would have us believe. This chip is going to be based on POWER4 which is an existing architecture. It's not like it's being 100% engineered from the ground up. It could purely be one of those POWER4 cores sans the MCM dual-core layout. But let's not get into pure speculation here.

Bottom line is, I bet we'll be seeing this processor fairly soon and maybe even transitioning to POWER5 or POWER6 (or some subset) when they are launched. 5 and 6 are supposed to be significantly less power-hungry and expensive than the POWER4 and as such, would make more sense to use in a purely desktop environment. Apple convincing IBM to to let it use POWER chips though (which traditionally have been an IBM exclusive) may be a little tricky.

 

[Brent]

nforce2

Assuming that Apple does go with the IBM chip in 2003 - the nforce2 will have been updated by nvidia by the time this G5 (G4.2?) comes out. Apple needs something that can trump the current nforce2 specs, not just equal it. It's not like nvidia is just going to sit still.

I'm putting my money on Apple working in collusion with ATI, especially now that they have proven their mettle with the Radeon 9700 graphics card.

I just want Apple to stay reasonably close in the tech arms race and make up the difference with all of the intangibles - form function, superior os, etc. I think they've proven time and time again that they just don't have it in them to stay up with PC specs.

 

[peterh]

Re: sweet

Originally posted by dongmin
Well a few weeks ago, there was a rumor posted on MOSR claiming that the G5s to be introduced next year are to be Power4 based. This new development certainly adds more fuel to that fire.

an older thread on this topic

We know IBM's desktop hardware presence is small (if any at all) so this new desktop-targeted PPC chip can't be for themselves. And if it's PPC-based, it's probably not for the x86 crowd. Who does that leave? Linux? Nah, it's gotta be Macs.

-new Mac cases with a radically redesigned cooling system...
-IBM opening a new state-of-the-art manufacturing plant...
-And now this...

the pieces are falling into place...

IBM has a great use for this chip, the RS6000s are in desperate need of a new low end processor to replace the 604e. currently the cheapest POWER4 machine is ~$12,500. As to when we will se this chip in CPUs, who knows, maybe sooner rather than later

 

[sneed]

Re: Re: sweet

Originally posted by peterh
IBM has a great use for this chip, the RS6000s are in desperate need of a new low end processor to replace the 604e. currently the cheapest POWER4 machine is ~$12,500. As to when we will se this chip in CPUs, who knows, maybe sooner rather than later

The reference that started the thread was pretty clear that this chip was for desktops and low end servers. As such, we can probably assume (at leaset for the sake of this discussion) that the price will be lower.

 

[bobindashadows]

Originally posted by ImAlwaysRight

You must not have one of the 2002 Quicksilvers. I owned a dual 1ghz and the thing was so noisy I sold it. I hope Apple gets noise under control with the new case design. At least put in some higher quality fans that have a lower noise output. The new iMac G4 fans run virtually silent. Let's hope the new PowerMacs are quieter than the Quicksilvers.

I have one right underneath my desk. It purrs a little, but that's about it. I don't know about dual 1 gig, but this one's barely noticeable. Reminds me of my last computer, a G3 450 Mhz.

 

[bobindashadows]

Originally posted by sneed


I didn't say that a heat sink would eliminate the need for a fan, only that it would reduce it. And the reason why I brought it up in the first place was that the rumored new box has quite a large heat sink in it.

As far as whether Apple has produced a loud computer or not, I believe they have produced several; the quicksilver, the pre 800 Ti's, and the xserve (though it's a server, what d'you want?) Frankly, if Apple made it's product offerings by how quiet the box was we'd still be able to buy the cube, which would be fine by me.

Well I compare the noise to my friend's homebrewed Athlon 1.6(? maybe 1.7 unsure) Ghz comp, which he was forced to put 5 fans in because at times the computer would suddenly shut off and he'd have to wait a half hour before it would start up. The thing is a monster, and you should hear it when it has a CD in it, though that's because my friend got the cheapest CD drive possible. my father has a Ti, and it isn't loud.. i think your standards are a tad high because i barely hear both computers. (as you see in my above post, i'm runnin a quicksilver right now, and its not loud at all.

 

[bobky]

I have a Dual 800, and it's hums a bit, but nothing compared to my house mate's pc (with 5 fans or something) which is in the next room, and drowns out my G4!

 

[sneed]

Actually those aren't my standards. There have been published criticisms of all three from a number of sources. Hard to say whether they would be too loud for me as I have none of the above.

As to your friend's build, I have no comment.

 

[Falleron]

Bang, there is the future of high end macs!!

 

[ddtlm]

Quicksilvers are louder than all Dell desktops I've seen within the past two years; no need to compare to home-brew Athlons. Looking at how each is cooled and silenced, I have to say Apple did a rather poor job. I look forward to the new case.

 

[eirik]

Re: Re: Silent Fans?

Originally posted by davei


A fan can only push so much air. You can make the blades bigger and make it spin slower, make the blades smaller and make it spin faster, etc. It's cost vs. noise. Most people side with cost. Those that have no regard for cost go with water cooling.

Well, the US Navy did it for their nuclear submarines. NASA has been researching quieter jets and props for years. I wouldn't be surprised if the 'fan makers' have not looked up NASA to see what might be used to maker quieter, more efficient fans. You'd be amazed at how technology sometimes fails to propogate.

 

[snoopy]

The G5 Now?

Maybe we are too conservative. Steve Jobs could have struck a deal with IBM two years ago to do the G5 for Apple. In return, Apple might have even agreed to help underwrite the cost of a state-of-the-art plant to build it. Apple's G5 might be the first chip out of that plant. Certainly, IBM suddenly got interested in SIMD, after being very cool to it before. Someone looked up patent information on AltiVec, and he claims that all three parties are on the original patents, Motorola, Apple and IBM. He further claims that later patents have only IBM on them. If true, it suggest that IBM has rights to it, and has continued to develop this vector processor on its own. The vector processor in the G5 may be second generation. We could speculate that all the new PowerMac will be G5 except for one low end model? Well, maybe that's going too far.

 

[Knox]

On the subject of IBM 'licencing' altivec from Motorola for this chip, just noticed this being mentioned

http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-ppc/

Altivec (also called VMX) is a SIMD (Single Instruction Multiple Data) 128-bit vector coprocessor found on Motorola's 74xx ("G4") line of processors.

And, from a rumour back in 1996,

http://bwrc.eecs.berkeley.edu/CIC/otherpr/ppc_vmx.html

According to sources, IBM and Motorola intend to add VMX to the upcoming PowerPC architecture code-named G4 and are considering it for some future G3 processors

Maybe IBM had it all along but never had the need to use it before since their chips were for servers and not desktops.

 

[markseaton]

POWER4

If indeed this new IBM 64-bit PowerPC is based or the POWER4 design this this is what the white papers say it's cable of

a .13 micro processor running at 1.1 to 1.4 ghz maybe up to 2ghz in future
Dual FPU on chip
L2 of 512k ECC
L3 of 32MB!! "data array is stored in two 16MB eDRAM"
unknow MAIN ram amount but it will be DDR 400 MHz

The chip can be areanged into 4 linked CPU's into a module that can be linked to 4 others for a total of 16 CPU's

here is the link to the detailed explanation of the POWER4 design

http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/461/tendler.html

 

[eirik]

SIMD and IBM

The embedded processor market, particularly in communications, is absolutely gaga over the 74XX. I'm sure IBM has no doubt changed its mind about SIMD.

As for the upcoming PowerMac announcement, I very much doubt, though prey to the contrary, that it will include a super CPU from IBM. At best, it'll feature a Motorola 74XX with built-in memory controller that supports DDR fully.

I don't see anything from MOSR to indicate that they know anymore than we do, no 'inside' information. Frankly, I think their conservative speculation on the new CPU speeds is total guess work. It is conservative because they seem to feel that their reputation is damaged with past predictions of CPU nirvanna. So, they're predicting modest speed bumps.

Given the timing, August, as opposed to May, I expect the top end CPU to be around 1.5/1.6, possibly even higher and almost certainly hotter, as Apple has no doubt been pressuring them to squeeze the most out of the CPU's regardless of power consumption.

If there is to be a 7470, as opposed to a 7455, I wonder if it (7470) will be fully MERSI compliant so that a quad configuration would be practical, provided, of course, that the memory bottleneck is overcome with the on-chip memory controllers or something else.

There's been much talk about bottlenecks in this thread. I'd like to emphasize a point about this. Bottlenecks exist for different applications. If one is just looking for a more snappy response from one's computer, then the memory/FSB is not critical. However, if one is talking of large memory applications such as Photoshop or Final Cut Pro, then fast and fat DDR would make a tremendous difference.

E

 

[G4scott]

Could this chip, hyper transport, and all of these other new features be why Apple hasn't been working on stuff like what pee-cee's have now? Maybe Apple's planning on the future, rather than the present...

 

[G4scott]

As far as noise goes, I really don't care with a desktop... My monitor and other perephials all make so much noise, the computer doesn't really matter...

 

[RIP]

I say anchor down the computer, spin a large fan like hell and wear ear-plugs if that means a faster computer....

 

[Chryx]

Originally posted by G4scott
As far as noise goes, I really don't care with a desktop... My monitor and other perephials all make so much noise, the computer doesn't really matter...

Um, your MONITOR makes a noise?..

?

It's been a LONG time since I saw a CRT that had a fan in it..

 

[Johnny7896]

New thought....

First, I hope Apple goes the IBM way. Moto isn't competative in the processor market. IBM is working with sony on new processor chips also. IBM has is a serious technology provider. Don't be surprised if Apple makes an agreement with IBM to use their OS to run their servers. Linux sucks eggs. Where Mac OS X is eligant, stable, and not windows. IBM and Apple may be on the same page again. I can see an extremly strong gain (profitable and popular) from this alliance for both companies. For all those people that went to the dark side.....they will want to come back. Apple is going to make some major inovative and unique changes. Windows is running out of tricks with their inablility to change. They can only make things look pretty and do the same tricks diferent ways. Apple is on the ball with Itunes, Idvd, Ical, ect.... Micro$$$$ is lost. They aren't going to inovate these technologies they can only copy them later. Apple has and will continue to make unique changes and give the computer world some fresh air. This is a great time in history to separate the copy cats from the inovators.

 

[Chryx]

Originally posted by RIP
I say anchor down the computer, spin a large fan like hell and wear ear-plugs if that means a faster computer....

I think that speaks for itself

 

[snoopy]

I get the feeling that some have come late to this discussion, and missed IBM's announcement of a very G5 like processor, to be presented in detail on October 15th. I don't think it could be any clearer, without violating a non-disclosure agreement IBM may have with Apple.

 

[alex_ant]

Here are two excerpts from this news.com article regarding this next-gen PPC:

"It's a really hefty processor in terms of performance," said Kevin Krewell, managing editor of industry newsletter Microprocessor Report, which hosts the annual Microprocessor Forum. He added that the chip might debut in a server but declined to offer more details.

...

The chip's heritage--the Power 4 design--suggests that it will be a high-performance processor. Though it's unclear what clock speed the new PowerPC will offer, IBM has been gunning for the 2GHz mark. The company said last year that it intended to hit that speed target by the end of 2002.

A 2GHz G5 or G5-like chip would eat a 2.5GHz P4 for lunch.

Alex