Joined
·
889 Posts
Can't get enough 970 info ....?
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
In time for the June bugs? But the first iteration from Apple will probably be a real gouger on price so as to not knock the wind out of the mainstay G4 sales in the other lines. Also, there's supposedly a G3 chip with an Altivec unit for low end use (the Ars Technica author used the slapping on of the Altivec unit as the primary evidence for Apple's likelihood of adopting the 970).
Performance looks like it could almost double G4 output at similar clock rates (assuming recompilation of apps and a fast FSB architecture). If so, then there will probably be an initial shift back to single processors to reduce the cost, with DPs later or maybe an initial DP the "extreme" top end. Doubt we'll see a 970 in a laptop for a while though, at least at these power consumption rates.
I'd guess Apple will make a big thing out of 64 bit processing but for the first year at least, most of the cpu will be parsing 32 bit code most of the time. Apple has been pretty good at transitioning processors though and OS X should be a great ride on the 970.
Performance looks like it could almost double G4 output at similar clock rates (assuming recompilation of apps and a fast FSB architecture). If so, then there will probably be an initial shift back to single processors to reduce the cost, with DPs later or maybe an initial DP the "extreme" top end. Doubt we'll see a 970 in a laptop for a while though, at least at these power consumption rates.
I'd guess Apple will make a big thing out of 64 bit processing but for the first year at least, most of the cpu will be parsing 32 bit code most of the time. Apple has been pretty good at transitioning processors though and OS X should be a great ride on the 970.
Joined
·
889 Posts
Agreed re: the lag before we see any real boost from 64-bit processing.
As to the issue of single vs. double processors, the long standing rumour (as you know) revolves around 1.4 (single) and 1.6 and 1.8 (doubles) as the initial line up.
Check out looprumours latest info which seems to confirm that we will see dual processor machines (at the above speeds) and soon. Of course it's, "just a rumour"
![]()
.
As to the issue of single vs. double processors, the long standing rumour (as you know) revolves around 1.4 (single) and 1.6 and 1.8 (doubles) as the initial line up.
Check out looprumours latest info which seems to confirm that we will see dual processor machines (at the above speeds) and soon. Of course it's, "just a rumour"
Joined
·
224 Posts
I'll be one of the first in line when the 970-based 15" PowerBooks are released. Power consumption seems to be a problem with these 970s. Apple can't have their Powerbooks lagging behind for TOO long with G4s, while the Power Macs have their beasty 970s.
The transition is going to be VERY interesting.
The transition is going to be VERY interesting.
Joined
·
3,622 Posts
According to some sources, IBM 970 chipped Macs are already in production.
FoxComm, Apple's Taiwanese manufacturer, has reportedly recieved from IBM under an Apple Computer Purchase Order:
20,000 IBM 970 @ 1.4Ghz
40,000 IBM 970 @1.6Ghz
Destined for arrival this morning (Wednesday April 14 03) are 40,000 IBM 970 @ 1.8Ghz
IBM's OEM division has listed part numbers for 2.0Ghz 970's and indicates delivery as "pending", which according to past practice means that they will be in IBM's chip inventory within 30 days or less.
Apple supposedly has a PO for 40,000 of those pending.
According to some Asian news sources, FoxComm (a trade name of Apple OEM manufacturer Hon Hai) typically produces Apple products in batches of 20,000. This has led to speculation that the 40k orders are for dual-processor setups.
Pure, unadalterated rumour, but I'm sure some would find it interesting.
As well as the looprumours site (link in mycat~'s post) other Mac and general computing sites are starting to post similar stories.
FoxComm, Apple's Taiwanese manufacturer, has reportedly recieved from IBM under an Apple Computer Purchase Order:
20,000 IBM 970 @ 1.4Ghz
40,000 IBM 970 @1.6Ghz
Destined for arrival this morning (Wednesday April 14 03) are 40,000 IBM 970 @ 1.8Ghz
IBM's OEM division has listed part numbers for 2.0Ghz 970's and indicates delivery as "pending", which according to past practice means that they will be in IBM's chip inventory within 30 days or less.
Apple supposedly has a PO for 40,000 of those pending.
According to some Asian news sources, FoxComm (a trade name of Apple OEM manufacturer Hon Hai) typically produces Apple products in batches of 20,000. This has led to speculation that the 40k orders are for dual-processor setups.
Pure, unadalterated rumour, but I'm sure some would find it interesting.
As well as the looprumours site (link in mycat~'s post) other Mac and general computing sites are starting to post similar stories.
Joined
·
3,838 Posts
Jwoodget said:
Also, there's supposedly a G3 chip with an Altivec unit for low end use
There is!
Not the next G3, but the next one will have Altivec SIMD on board. It is currently codenamed Mojave following IBMs desert naming scheme for the PPC750 line (the current one is Sahara and the next one is Gobi).
--PB
Also, there's supposedly a G3 chip with an Altivec unit for low end use
There is!
Not the next G3, but the next one will have Altivec SIMD on board. It is currently codenamed Mojave following IBMs desert naming scheme for the PPC750 line (the current one is Sahara and the next one is Gobi).
--PB
Joined
·
889 Posts
I suspect you'll be waiting a while. There's apparently no plans to move the 970 to a .9 micron fab til at least the new year so I'd guess that 970-based laptops will be about a year behind any towers at the earliest.
One things for sure, if Apple delays implementation into iMacs and eMacs (as I suspect they will) it'll be the first real incentive to buy a tower in about the last 2-3 years.
Joined
·
3,622 Posts
Although the details are naturally unavailable now, I'm pretty confident that the 970/64-bit OSX won't require a minimum 1 GB of RAM, which is what Microsoft lists as the minimum requirement to run 64-bit versions of SQL Server and Windows Server 2003 on 64-bit Intel and AMD processors.
News story
News story
Joined
·
889 Posts
Yet another link to more fresh, tender 970 morsels. Unfortunately it's a secondary reference (MacWorld UK) to an "declassified" excepts from the infamous 2002 Microprocessor Review discussion of the 970.
Not sure how fresh this is actually but I hadn't heard some of it before ergo the post.
Not sure how fresh this is actually but I hadn't heard some of it before ergo the post.
Joined
·
117 Posts
IM currently saving for a 970. I imagine they will be out in late fall..I'm hoping to be pleasantley surprised and see them very soon 
Joined
·
889 Posts
Well I'll go on record and predict that they will be _in the hands of conusmers_ sometime in August. Any other guesses?
If you really beieve the rumours then they might be shipping in small quantities by WWDC D-day but given Apple's track record ...
If you really beieve the rumours then they might be shipping in small quantities by WWDC D-day but given Apple's track record ...
Joined
·
889 Posts
Damn I just realized they can't ship 'em til Panther is out (expected in September). Oh well I won't try to fudge my guess now...
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
The potential 970 "conusmers" will have to wait then. Another on-call marathon?
![]()
Joined
·
3,302 Posts
What makes you say that? There's nothing preventing the PowerPC 970 based Macs from running MacOS X.2.x. The PowerPC 970's after all are just new 64-bit PowerPC chips, they can run PowerPC code just like any other PowerPC chip, whether it's 64-bit or 32-bit code doesn't matter.
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
