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.
Something is Coming...
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
SPEED !
It's been said a couple of times already but "... exspect new that will surpass all your exspectations concerning speed". "A new era in computing (of computers)". Well, it may be overhyped but definitely this can only mean PPC 970s. Apple badly, badly, badly needs faster top-of-the-line machines. Now they think they've got them. Hypertransport and all.
I'm really curious to see how well Hypertransport does in real world tests. Also, don't forget that theses beasts will have their "Altivec" implementation as well. Combine that with a wickedly fast bus + decent processor speeds. Gnarrr, harrr...
As for why Berlin?: 'Coz it is, as the invitation states, "in the heart of Europe" Are you getting the drift ?
It's been said a couple of times already but "... exspect new that will surpass all your exspectations concerning speed". "A new era in computing (of computers)". Well, it may be overhyped but definitely this can only mean PPC 970s. Apple badly, badly, badly needs faster top-of-the-line machines. Now they think they've got them. Hypertransport and all.
I'm really curious to see how well Hypertransport does in real world tests. Also, don't forget that theses beasts will have their "Altivec" implementation as well. Combine that with a wickedly fast bus + decent processor speeds. Gnarrr, harrr...
As for why Berlin?: 'Coz it is, as the invitation states, "in the heart of Europe" Are you getting the drift ?
Re: Re: oxymoron - "64-bit consumer"
How about re-reading what I said? Your reference is not relevant.
Having a faster FSB is good, it's just that it has nothing to do with 64-bitness! A 970 running in complete 32-bit mode should be very fast, due to the FSB and impressive internal design.
Will it get faster in 64-bit mode? No. 64-bit will be useful once you cross that 4GiB barrier, and especially if you run individual programs that need more than 4GiB of RAM.
I'm simply pointing out that it is pure HYPE to tout a machine's 64-bitness if it only has 256MiB or 512MiB of RAM -- almost nothing useful will come of having a 64-bit machine with small amounts of memory. Nothing useful that couldn't just as well be done by a 32-bit machine, that is.
Note also that large memory support doesn't even need 64-bits. Intel processors support up to 64 GiB of RAM per system, allowing you to run many 4 GiB programs simultaneously. It's very common for servers to support more than 4GiB, even Intel desktops and workstations support 4 GiB to 12 GiB (e.g. look at http://www.hp.com/workstations/ia32/index.html)
How about re-reading what I said? Your reference is not relevant.
Having a faster FSB is good, it's just that it has nothing to do with 64-bitness! A 970 running in complete 32-bit mode should be very fast, due to the FSB and impressive internal design.
Will it get faster in 64-bit mode? No. 64-bit will be useful once you cross that 4GiB barrier, and especially if you run individual programs that need more than 4GiB of RAM.
I'm simply pointing out that it is pure HYPE to tout a machine's 64-bitness if it only has 256MiB or 512MiB of RAM -- almost nothing useful will come of having a 64-bit machine with small amounts of memory. Nothing useful that couldn't just as well be done by a 32-bit machine, that is.
Note also that large memory support doesn't even need 64-bits. Intel processors support up to 64 GiB of RAM per system, allowing you to run many 4 GiB programs simultaneously. It's very common for servers to support more than 4GiB, even Intel desktops and workstations support 4 GiB to 12 GiB (e.g. look at http://www.hp.com/workstations/ia32/index.html)
ok.... with all the stores getting these freaking boxes, I DOUBT not even one emplyee will peak... Wheres the holdup?!?
Fight the "64-bit myth"
And you're in the camp that thinks that 64-bit is some magic elixir that can improve everything.
Look at http://www.anandtech.com/guides/viewfaq.html?i=112
That article bebunks your other claims as well....
Did you know that x86/G4/970 all support exactly the same floating point formats? Same size and precision? No 64-bit benefit here.
Did you know that the P4 and G4 already have internal datapaths up to 256 bits in width? They have 64-bit wide external memory busses. They can load 64-bit (fp) and 128-bit registers (sse/altivec) in a single cycle. No 64-bit benefit here.
Did you know that C compilers (VC++ and gcc) have support for 64-bit integers already? They generate extra instructions to accomplish this, but the program has the same precision 64-bit integers whether the code runs on a 32 or 64 bit CPU.
Separate the 64-bit truth (more memory) from the hype. The 970 is a fast CPU that happens to be 64-bit. It is not a fast CPU because it is 64-bit.
And you're in the camp that thinks that 64-bit is some magic elixir that can improve everything.
Look at http://www.anandtech.com/guides/viewfaq.html?i=112
That article bebunks your other claims as well....
Did you know that x86/G4/970 all support exactly the same floating point formats? Same size and precision? No 64-bit benefit here.
Did you know that the P4 and G4 already have internal datapaths up to 256 bits in width? They have 64-bit wide external memory busses. They can load 64-bit (fp) and 128-bit registers (sse/altivec) in a single cycle. No 64-bit benefit here.
Did you know that C compilers (VC++ and gcc) have support for 64-bit integers already? They generate extra instructions to accomplish this, but the program has the same precision 64-bit integers whether the code runs on a 32 or 64 bit CPU.
Separate the 64-bit truth (more memory) from the hype. The 970 is a fast CPU that happens to be 64-bit. It is not a fast CPU because it is 64-bit.
"64-bit consumer"
I like 64-bits - I use 64-bit systems every day. Most of them have at least 16 GiB of RAM.
What I'm arguing is that if Apple shouts "64-bits" and sells you boxes with 256MiB of RAM, that's like putting a tachometer that goes to 12,000 RPM on your Trabant.
Nice tach, but what good is it?
http://www.m.benndorf.easynet.be/PRIVATE/CARS/TRABANT/Home.html
I like 64-bits - I use 64-bit systems every day. Most of them have at least 16 GiB of RAM.
What I'm arguing is that if Apple shouts "64-bits" and sells you boxes with 256MiB of RAM, that's like putting a tachometer that goes to 12,000 RPM on your Trabant.
Nice tach, but what good is it?
http://www.m.benndorf.easynet.be/PRIVATE/CARS/TRABANT/Home.html
Well, all PowerMacs on the UK site now have delivery times of 6-8 days... Sounds encouraging!
TiBooks are still shown with 'next day' delivery...
TiBooks are still shown with 'next day' delivery...
In my opinion if (and its a big if) they do introduce the 970 it surely will be introduced in both the PowerMacs and all variations of the Powerbooks, i.e. the entire premium end of Apples hardware range will be switched.
People are always willing to purchase lesser clocked chips in return for a lower price, which is why speed bumps do not cause massive slumps in sales of lesser powered machines. However, a move from one chip design to another will (rightly) be regarded as considerably more significant than a standard speed bump and users will want to move on to the new platform asap.
If the 970 was solely introduced into the Powermac range, Powerbook sales would dry up pretty quickly as the public waited for the inevitable upgrade. Equally if the 15" Powerbook was the only powerbook to receive the 970 sales of the 12" and 17" would also grind to a halt. I just cannot see Apple engineering that situation.
So if the rumors are true and the 970 is imminent I for one feel that Apple will take the opportunity to revamp considerably more than just the Powermac/15" Powerbook products.
On the downside, if we are instead looking at straight G4 speed bumps the inevitable widespread frustration and disappointment will be palpable and extremely uncomfortable for Apple, which will likely cause Apple to take a long hard look at popular rumour sites that helped to generate such over expectation.
Interesting times.....
Vanilla
People are always willing to purchase lesser clocked chips in return for a lower price, which is why speed bumps do not cause massive slumps in sales of lesser powered machines. However, a move from one chip design to another will (rightly) be regarded as considerably more significant than a standard speed bump and users will want to move on to the new platform asap.
If the 970 was solely introduced into the Powermac range, Powerbook sales would dry up pretty quickly as the public waited for the inevitable upgrade. Equally if the 15" Powerbook was the only powerbook to receive the 970 sales of the 12" and 17" would also grind to a halt. I just cannot see Apple engineering that situation.
So if the rumors are true and the 970 is imminent I for one feel that Apple will take the opportunity to revamp considerably more than just the Powermac/15" Powerbook products.
On the downside, if we are instead looking at straight G4 speed bumps the inevitable widespread frustration and disappointment will be palpable and extremely uncomfortable for Apple, which will likely cause Apple to take a long hard look at popular rumour sites that helped to generate such over expectation.
Interesting times.....
Vanilla
Originally posted by blueBomber
And it was mentioned (jokingly) that maybe Porche made a case for Apple. Hey, I know more than few car-shop guys who mod out pc cases for people. Maybe Steve is trying to show them all up by hiring the best
I'm sorry if someone pointed this out already, as I haven't read through this entire thread yet, but porshe already makes case designs for vpr matrix products, which are sold exclusively at Best Buy stores click here
As for the 970 powermacs...IF it does happen, I just hope I can afford one!!!
Re: Re: Re: oxymoron - "64-bit consumer"
No, that's not quite true. There are a few users with big databases (big disk files) who will get improved performance from a 64-bit processor, but they're not a large segment of the user community.
No, that's not quite true. There are a few users with big databases (big disk files) who will get improved performance from a 64-bit processor, but they're not a large segment of the user community.
Re: Fight the "64-bit myth"
Actually, it doesn't wholly debunk the claims made; The great hope for PPC performance has become AltiVec. The FAQ specifically states it refers to the limitations of SISD; SIMD can gain. Granted, the SIMD circuitry isn't all that different in the 970 vs the G4, but it is relevant.
Originally posted by AidenShaw
And you're in the camp that thinks that 64-bit is some magic elixir that can improve everything.
Look at http://www.anandtech.com/guides/viewfaq.html?i=112
That article bebunks your other claims as well....
Actually, it doesn't wholly debunk the claims made; The great hope for PPC performance has become AltiVec. The FAQ specifically states it refers to the limitations of SISD; SIMD can gain. Granted, the SIMD circuitry isn't all that different in the 970 vs the G4, but it is relevant.
Fight the "64-bit myth"
AltiVec is not 64-bit! It doesn't have 64-bit datatypes, the largest atom is 32-bit.
How is a 32-bit SIMD engine relevant to a 32 vs 64 bit debate?
I'll explain - the only relevance is that on the 64-bit platform you can use more than 2 to 4 GiB of RAM with that SIMD engine.
Do you catch that refrain - "64-bits means more memory"...
AltiVec is not 64-bit! It doesn't have 64-bit datatypes, the largest atom is 32-bit.
How is a 32-bit SIMD engine relevant to a 32 vs 64 bit debate?
I'll explain - the only relevance is that on the 64-bit platform you can use more than 2 to 4 GiB of RAM with that SIMD engine.
Do you catch that refrain - "64-bits means more memory"...
Re: Re: oxymoron - "64-bit consumer"
I *think* it was actually one Steven P. Jobs referring to the mem in the original Macintosh in 84 and its lack of upgrade options compared to the IBM PC.
Of course a consumer doesn't need a 64bit processor but the Mac community needs faster PowerPC chips and that's what's on offer to them. Of course someone will find someway to max out that chip for some novel new use of the PC we've not thought of yet and we'll wonder how we ever managed to cope without.
Given the market's current obsession with big numbers (3 GHz, etc.), it will also help Apple's marketing who won't care if it doesn't mean anything. I also think this is why we won't be waiting on Panther for 970 PowerMacs - 32 bit mode will do just fine as long as they have the bragging rights over the processor.
Sanj
I *think* it was actually one Steven P. Jobs referring to the mem in the original Macintosh in 84 and its lack of upgrade options compared to the IBM PC.
Of course a consumer doesn't need a 64bit processor but the Mac community needs faster PowerPC chips and that's what's on offer to them. Of course someone will find someway to max out that chip for some novel new use of the PC we've not thought of yet and we'll wonder how we ever managed to cope without.
Given the market's current obsession with big numbers (3 GHz, etc.), it will also help Apple's marketing who won't care if it doesn't mean anything. I also think this is why we won't be waiting on Panther for 970 PowerMacs - 32 bit mode will do just fine as long as they have the bragging rights over the processor.
Sanj
Re: Re: Re: Re: oxymoron - "64-bit consumer"
"Databases' are just "big disk files"???? Hmmm....
Please support your claim. Databases are the "killer app" for 64-bit systems today, for sure.
Why? Because with 64-bits you can connect a lot of RAM to cache the database indices and tables - greatly reducing disk traffic.
You don't need 64-bits for large files. NTFS and HFS+ both are already 64-bit filesystems, and support files larger than 2GiB in size. The 32-bit systems do a few extra integer additions to calculate the 64-bit file offsets, but those few instructions are insignificant for the total code path.
I regularly work with video files of several hundred GiB on my XP system. Don't need 64-bits, and it wouldn't help unless I had hundreds of GiB of RAM to cache those files. (And even then, caching would only help if I made multiple passes through the source - a single pass through encoding would be disk limited.)
Obviously, video will be one of the earlier consumer uses for 64-bits. If you have 8GiB to 16 GiB or so of RAM on your home PC, a video editor could keep the preview quality streams in memory - and you'd have a pretty snappy NLE system. These 64-bit consumer apps will show up over time - but you're not going to benefit from them if your PPC970 Mac has 256 MiB of RAM.
Note again - "if you have 8GiB...". 64-bits is good for more memory. No way that you need it for large files, unless you want to cache the data in those files.
64-bit database servers are not "64-bit consumer" applications - we're talking about systems where spending $50,000 to $100,000 just for the RAM is not uncommon. 64-bit professional workstation applications aren't "64-bit consumer" either.
I think that "first with 64-bit consumer" is a nonsense line that's only invented so that Apple can claim some kind of "first".
The truth of the matter is that Windows 64-bit has been around for quite a while for workstations - you can get a Windows XP 64-bit dual CPU Itanium system with 16 GiB RAM today for $28,000 at the HP website ($23,000 of that is for the RAM, $5000 for the workstation). http://www.hp.com/workstations/itanium/zx6000/
64-bit UNIX desktops came out at least a decade ago. Apple won't be "first" to provide 64-bits to the applications that need it....
"Databases' are just "big disk files"???? Hmmm....
Please support your claim. Databases are the "killer app" for 64-bit systems today, for sure.
Why? Because with 64-bits you can connect a lot of RAM to cache the database indices and tables - greatly reducing disk traffic.
You don't need 64-bits for large files. NTFS and HFS+ both are already 64-bit filesystems, and support files larger than 2GiB in size. The 32-bit systems do a few extra integer additions to calculate the 64-bit file offsets, but those few instructions are insignificant for the total code path.
I regularly work with video files of several hundred GiB on my XP system. Don't need 64-bits, and it wouldn't help unless I had hundreds of GiB of RAM to cache those files. (And even then, caching would only help if I made multiple passes through the source - a single pass through encoding would be disk limited.)
Obviously, video will be one of the earlier consumer uses for 64-bits. If you have 8GiB to 16 GiB or so of RAM on your home PC, a video editor could keep the preview quality streams in memory - and you'd have a pretty snappy NLE system. These 64-bit consumer apps will show up over time - but you're not going to benefit from them if your PPC970 Mac has 256 MiB of RAM.
Note again - "if you have 8GiB...". 64-bits is good for more memory. No way that you need it for large files, unless you want to cache the data in those files.
64-bit database servers are not "64-bit consumer" applications - we're talking about systems where spending $50,000 to $100,000 just for the RAM is not uncommon. 64-bit professional workstation applications aren't "64-bit consumer" either.
I think that "first with 64-bit consumer" is a nonsense line that's only invented so that Apple can claim some kind of "first".
The truth of the matter is that Windows 64-bit has been around for quite a while for workstations - you can get a Windows XP 64-bit dual CPU Itanium system with 16 GiB RAM today for $28,000 at the HP website ($23,000 of that is for the RAM, $5000 for the workstation). http://www.hp.com/workstations/itanium/zx6000/
64-bit UNIX desktops came out at least a decade ago. Apple won't be "first" to provide 64-bits to the applications that need it....
What about Legacy systesm?
There are millions of users out there who will feel like their systems has become worthless
Do you think upgarde cards based on PPC970 will work on the former Mobo?
Ok there will be a huge bottleneck but when I see benchmark of the current cards on Beige G3 against the new Tower it's not like heaven and earth. It's actually pretty close.
There are millions of users out there who will feel like their systems has become worthless
Do you think upgarde cards based on PPC970 will work on the former Mobo?
Ok there will be a huge bottleneck but when I see benchmark of the current cards on Beige G3 against the new Tower it's not like heaven and earth. It's actually pretty close.
As anyone in software development will tell you, it is not unusual for a product to slip a month in order to provide a more robust product. No 970's, just a more solid build of Panther and Server.
