PPC 970 info and speculation
 

A couple of articles to start out with:

PDF reprint of a Microprocessor Report article from late last year.

Ars Technica's Hannibal Stokes with Part II of his comprehensive (given what IBM will let out) analysis of the 970, and why he (like many of us) are sure it was designed with Apple in mind.

Finally the (in)famous benchmarks rumored at MacBidouille.

boy, that macbidouille article makes no sense at all. it's like jibberish in some foreign language, to me ;]

so, Craig, i understand you've been following this closely? care to speculate about any of it with some sweeping generalizations of the kind we like to hear?

The Stokes' comment about the application of the Altivec core seems to be the giveaway about Apple applicability.
I just can't figure out what the speed of the frontside bus would be and if it fixes Apple to nVidia and their nForce motherboard (rapid IO etc.)

Well, it'll be the thing that finally gets me off my butt to replace the G3's. ;)

But seriously folks, I believe this is the calibre of system that Mac OS X was originally spec'd for back in 1998, as it was becoming apparent that Rhapsody wasn't going to make it, and I think it comparable to the move from the 68040 to the PPC601. I'd also expect Panther to be optimized for this system.

The real question of course boils down to price. A base (1.4 gHz?) single proc system had best not exceed the $1499 for the current low end tower, and a high end (dual 1.8 gHz?) the current $2699 'Fastest' model.

At those prices it could become 'The Year of the Tower' pretty quickly. :cool:

The bus speed appears to be 1/4 of the processor clock, double-pumped to 1/2 speed. So a 1.8 gHz proc would run an effective 900 mHz FSB. Just like HyperTransport (of which the nVidia board is an example). Apple is also a founding member of the HyperTransport Consortium.

With the new nForce chipset I can't imagine a price lower than $3000 if they're dual processor. From the article and unsubstantiated rumours I get the impression that the processors will start at or around 1.8 Ghz and top out at 2.2 Ghz. I hope you're right about a base single processor model.

I think your assessment of OSX usability is spot on. I just wonder if Panther will be compatible with older G3 systems or will there an arbitrary cut off.

Very detailed 'rumoring' going on over at arstechnica today.
Honestly, most of it is way above my head, but some here may get a lot out of it.

Yup, that's the Hannibal Stokes article we're talking about.

Reading the forums over there makes it look like some of the Wintel people are feeling a little threatened. Who'da thunk it? :D

Now how did I miss that link in the very first post...

/slaps forehead

Ah, our very own 970 rumors/discussion thread! :)

Glad to see this happening. Since I just bought a 1 Ghz FP iMac, I'll probably feel like a chum for not waiting for 970 and Panther, but what the heck! It might take them a year after release to iron the wrinkles out.

Well, the 7100/66 AV I bought the day they shipped was running fine until late last year, so they can get it right the first time every so often. :)

Well, after thinking this through a little more and digesting the more recent {whatever you want to call it} from the rumor mills, I now think:

The 970 will make an appearence in Apple computers :D , and the early debut is likely to happen in a new XServe design, and maybe in a new workstation class machine above (and pricier than) the current PowerMac line, aimed directly at the professional media creation markets;

The other systems probably won't transition processors until early next year (January perhaps). Some will go 970 and others will go to a souped-up 750.

There will be distributed computing technologies in Panther that will let the older and slower systems offload computationally intensive tasks, and remotely run applications on, the new high-end systems.


Disclaimer: there is no factual evidence for any of this, and it may be that Craig had one too many beers last night instead. :p

Craig, I see your point about an initial release not necessarily being beta-ish. I bought a G3 desktop when they first came out in the Fall of 97 and it served me flawlessly for four years. The first G4s were also quite reliable, as I recall.

What seems new, here, is the combination of both significant processor and OS upgrades. But you're right: Apple usually does their homework.

I want a dual-processor PowerBook running them things.

Cool articles (what I could understand) Craig.
oooOOoooOOo 4 processors!!

Apple to Announce the Power Mac G5 at WWDC
Please, oh please let it be true.

Wonder what kinda price-tag the dual 1.8s will carry.. Anyone speculate on whether my GForce4 Ti will work in a new G5?

sweet zombie crizzapy! good eye, crabby.

anyone seen any flop metrics for these new processors?

I saw that AppleInsider story too, and I'm hopeful, but did you happen to notice that the last update on their front page (http://www.appleinsider.com/) was 2 months ago?

Daniel

I speculate they were waiting for "solid" information. ;)

Well, that seems to go along with what MacBidouille claims.

You gotta wonder if these people are all just quoting each other or if there are different sources involved.

I did see a few weeks ago that GCC 3.3 was committed to CVS with support for the 970 and the Power4 rolled in. I'm hoping we see some of the IBM development tools make there way into either Apple's stuff or as a separate product offering. Who knows what Moto will do with CodeWarrior?

What do you folks think about the 15" PowerBook? 970 or the new Motorola 7457?

Hmm.. I think it'll be quite some time before we see a 970 in anything but a desktop. So I guess I think 7457.

I agree; I think the G4 and IBM modified G3 will be around for a while, yet.

Think they'll move the G4 into the iBook eventually? That'd make a pretty nifty iBook. While I am excited about the 970, I must admit, I can't really conceptually grasp what a difference I will see. The G4s & Jaguar seem pretty durned fast to me. That aside, like most fans of Apple products I'll be drooling over the 970 when it comes out. Now the hard part is fighting the neigh-overwhelming urge to go into debt to but a new G5 Mac! :)

Hehehe;

I read that the version of Jag (10.2.7) for these guys is code-named 'smeagol/gollum', where smeagol will run on the current hardware, but gollum will only run on the Precious. :D

LOL!

O gosh... more speculation! :cool:

It would be great to get a new G5-based Mac, but I bought my 867DP MDD in Sept 2002 and can't justify selling it to upgrade quite yet. This baby's got a few years left in her yet.

And besides I just bought a new house. I can't afford a new computer... :( Damn :(

this 970 chip sounds cool and all, and i have a silly question to ask. how come on the dells and other intel PCs they have 2ghz or more on their machines.
why are macs still astonished at 1.2 or 1.4ghz? i know its a diff. architecture but are the chips not all the same. why dont we see 2.something yet on macs?

You answered your own question, and then defeated it :). It's a totally different architecture, so the 2 GHz aren't really comparable. Relying on MHz to say 'my computer is faster than yours' is something for slack-jawed salesmen. While the AMD/Intel chipset has more cycles per second, they need it because of all the overly-complicated instructions on each chip, and the lengthy 'size' of the data pipe. This was how Apples managed to keep up in the early years of the G4, because the data pipe was short, and so was the instruction set. So while their MHz ceiling was much lower, they were comparable in 'actual' speed. However, since they hit the ceiling IBM/Motorola's chipsets have been left in the dust. The G5 has been a long time in coming. I hope someone will correct any errors I have written here.

[edit: I did indeed mean 2 GHz! Thanks Craig]

I think you mean '2 gHz' and not '2 mHz.' ;)

Otherwise I recommend the Ars Technica article mentioned in the opening post of this thread as a place to begin to understand the answer to the questions asked. It's somewhat heavy going in areas, but if you bear with it, it does explain a few things.

eWeek report
 

This just about wraps it up. It looks like 'smeagol' is the build of Jaguar that runs on the 970, and it's going to be Panther (and gcc 3.3) that we'll be waiting on.

Rare to see the hardware outpacing the software (for a welcome change).

isnt panther due in july and 970 end of year?
upgrading to panther on our machines will mean what, just a faster booting-up time? better window resizing? in other words this new os is targeted at making full use of the new hardware???

First part: apparently not. ;)

Second part: I don't think we know much about how Panther will perform on current hardware yet.

Third part: I'd say those are the exact words. :)

good one Craig, thanks:p

Smeagol
 

Can't believe that dirty Jobsies wants to put poor Smeagol on the filthy G4sies! Poor Smeagol.. where is the precious? *gollum* *gollum*

MacWhispers
Interesting tidbits:
G5 Powerbooks?
2-2.5 times the speed, even with 10.2.6?

Holy Cow! :D

I wouldn't trust Macwhispers, quite a bad track record. Stick to Thinksecret and the eWeek stuff. Better yet, be patient and await the shiny new toys which are noisier than a Toshiba Satellite on a humid day.

Toshiba Satellite? you mean Plymouth Satellite?

_________
donning my foil helmet

Brrrrm brrrrm!

:D

And here's a mention of Apple discussing the use of HyperTransport in the new Mac architecture.

From CNet, of all places.

It sounds like HyperTransport will be used to connect the U2 Northbridge and the KeyLargo Southbridge controllers, in place of the PCI bus used now.

Don't know about the Max bus, used to connect the processors to main memory. There has been mention from time to time about something called Apple Processor Interconnect (or ApplePI), which may be the successor to Max bus.

Keynote Satellite broadcast
 

MacMinute has the info for the WWDC Keynote (10:00 AM, PT) satellite broadcast. This is also apparently going to be shown in Apple Stores (with theaters). I'll be watching at the Mall of the Universe, if true.

No word about a webcast yet.



Edit - I just received an email from the MOA Apple Store saying they will have the live broadcast. :cool:

I wonder if MSNBC will do a webcast like they did with the Music Store event?