Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 24th Oct 2005 15:43 UTC, submitted by Hakime Seddik
Hardware, Embedded Systems P.A. Semi, a 150-employee chip startup, wants to make name for itself through attention to detail. The Silicon Valley chip startup, run by chip legend Dan Dobberpuhl-Dobberpuhl, its CEO, presided over the development of the Alpha processor while at Digital Equipment Corp. lifted its veil of secrecy Monday. The company will begin offering a new family of low-power, multicore, PowerPC architecture processors in 2006.
Thread beginning with comment 50663
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Too late.
by Tuishimi on Mon 24th Oct 2005 19:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Too late."
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

Eh? I echo the other two respondents. Apple isn't lying about their motives. IBM still isn't and doesn't plan to give them what they want and need in a chip.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Too late.
by somebody on Mon 24th Oct 2005 19:36 in reply to "RE[3]: Too late."
somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

Apple isn't lying about their motives. IBM still isn't and doesn't plan to give them what they want and need in a chip.

And that would be?
Lets summarize their claims
- no 3GHz? Cell is 4.2
- short on supply? Do you remember one day when you couldn't buy Apple the day you decided? I sure don't. Supply trouble would mean that demand exists but there is no product
- better power consumption? Intel and 64-bit? BS. Not even worth to mention?

Did I forget something?

And yes, they are not lying, they are keeping quiet about their motives.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Too late.
by Tuishimi on Mon 24th Oct 2005 20:00 in reply to "RE[4]: Too late."
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

"Cell is a breakthrough architectural design -- featuring eight synergistic processors and top clock speeds of greater than 4 GHz (as measured during initial hardware testing)"

Yeah, this is still new technology and we don't know what it will do regarding heat output at those levels and how it will be crammed into a notebook?

What is gained/lost? Instruction set changes? Altivec? I haven't seen anything concrete addressing this? But I just may not have seen what you have seen. Whereas Mac OS X has been running on x86 architecture from day one.

:/

As far as demand/supply. Yes. My mini was a month late. That could be Apple's fault - but you asked and I answered.

Intel HAS been demonstrating better technologies (well, better rehashing of OLD technologies) in it's M and likely the M descendants.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Too late.
by rayiner on Mon 24th Oct 2005 21:08 in reply to "RE[4]: Too late."
rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

Comparing the Cell and the PPC970 makes no sense. The Cell can run at 4.2GHz because it has extremely short, optimized circuits, as well as an 18 stage integer pipeline. Part of the reason it can have such short circuits is because it in-order schedule-execute loop is dead simple, it has limited instruction-level-parallelism, and uses static branch prediction. Meanwhile, the PPC970 does a lot of work in its 16 stages to support massively out-of-order, parallel execution. The two chips are completely different.

Reply Parent Score: 2