“Apple Computer is looking toward a 64-bit future for the Mac — courtesy of PowerPC partner IBM. According to sources, IBM Microelectronics, a division of IBM, is working with Apple on a 64-bit PowerPC processor for use in the latter’s high-end desktops and servers. Sources said Apple is testing the CPU, dubbed the GigaProcessor Ultralite (GPUL) on Mac OS X-based hardware at its Cupertino, Calif., headquarters, and making sure that the processor complies with a new bus architecture on tap for future Macs. In addition, IBM plans to offer the processor as the centerpiece of future Linux-based systems, the sources said.” Read the interesting article at eWeek. Also from eWeek recently, they reported that Apple is backporting to the x86 as a fallback plan.
Apple, IBM Team on 64-Bit CPU
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
80 Comments
2002-09-20 8:06 am
2002-09-20 9:57 am
2002-09-20 10:13 am
2002-09-20 10:35 am
2002-09-20 10:53 am
2002-09-20 10:53 am
2002-09-20 11:16 am
meroveus: “By the time these IBM cpus come out, Intel will have the 5GHz Prescott, and AMD the 3GHz Hammer. So Macs will be behind yet again with their ‘speedy’ 1.4 – 2GHz cores.”
“By time Prescott comes out with a 5GHz processor, Athlons should at least be close to 4GHz. (But I’m sure their model rating would be 5000+ or so).”
In your dreams!
According to a source, AMD is struggling to increase the speed of Hammer beyond 1.3GHz.
There was a very good reason behind the samples which were locked to 800MHz 
2002-09-20 11:56 am
2002-09-20 12:41 pm
2002-09-20 1:37 pm
2002-09-20 3:20 pm
2002-09-20 4:06 pm
2002-09-20 4:13 pm
2002-09-20 4:41 pm
2002-09-20 5:17 pm
2002-09-20 8:40 pm
This is just an uncomfirm rumour, and shouldn’t be regarded as the truth before any official proof comes to the table. The same case with x86 Macs.
IBM – who supply Apple with PowerPC processors – announce a new PowerPC chip with Vector/SIMD instructions (read Altivec) which Apple makes use of.
Steve Jobs himself said that IBM and Motorola had interesting roadmaps.
IBM specifically say it is a “Desktop” processor, There are not many Desktop PPC players.
Does it take ANY imaginaton to think Apple might be investigating these processors?
Becoming a niche player is what’s killing companies with wonderful hardware such as SGI…
That niche kept SGI alive well and innovating all that new hardware for many years, it was only when they tried to move into NT boxes they got into financial trouble, they’ve since retreated to their niche and are making money again.
They might just mean one GPUL with two cores. Any opinons? Clarification? Speculation?
Probably a dual core device with the memory controller ripped of and the cache arrangement changed (i.e. more L2 but slower).
“By time Prescott comes out with a 5GHz processor, Athlons should at least be close to 4GHz. (But I’m sure their model rating would be 5000+ or so).”
In your dreams!
Agree – sort of. 5GHz is probably a year or 2 off, IBM will be up to 3-4GHz and still kicking Intels arse. POWER 4 @ 1.3GHz runs rings around the P4 at 2.5GHz – and thats just a single core!
According to a source, AMD is struggling to increase the speed of Hammer beyond 1.3GHz.
There was a very good reason behind the samples which were locked to 800MHz
I’ve heard the same myself: they’ve had to add another layer and thats delayed it a few months at least, possibly into Q2 next year.
2002-09-20 8:43 pm
2002-09-21 12:37 am
2002-09-21 4:14 am
2002-09-21 5:42 am
meroveus: According to a source, AMD is struggling to increase the speed of Hammer beyond 1.3GHz.
There was a very good reason behind the samples which were locked to 800MHz
Accroading to many sources, AMD had problems with getting Thoroughbred to hit 2GHz and go beyond, and with T-bred-b, they manage to do that exactly.
Most of these sources are rumours. While yes, my number is more of a personal theory, I think it is best we just leave things to evolve on their own, and see what happens later.
(Besides, those 800MHz prototype is soooooo 2001 🙂
Chris: In my experience, the real benefit isn’t that Apple’s hardware is good looking(which it is), but that it takes abuse really well. […]
I heard many cases of iBook hard disk crashing after a 2 feet fall….. I demand proof behind your claims, not some petty claims you never bothered to back up. My brother has a Compaq Evo, haven’t been to any repair site before. (And yes, he drops it a lot, and he also takes a lot of dumpy journeys, from where he lives to the beach).
Non-religious Mac User: […]and making a 15GB music collection more simple to search & browse than an address book.
Well, congrats, you are the first person I know that isn’t a P2P client node, yet have more than 3GB of music files. (But besides, have you compared with WMP8? I found searching very easy).
As for the rest of the iApps stuff, did you just compare with what that Microsoft makes available on Windows, or did you try third party stuff? I suggest you go into a Sony store and compare the apps.
appleforever: Genaldar and rajan will explain it to you.
Genaldar, did you heard that? Our ultra-secret experiment of our plan to get rid of Apple has worked! We brainwashed appleforever! Now, to the masses, my friend.
Nicholas Blachford: IBM – who supply Apple with PowerPC processors – announce a new PowerPC chip with Vector/SIMD instructions (read Altivec) which Apple makes use of. […]
I’m talking about the article and what this supposedly processor would be like, and whether Apple would use it. Jobs also said, after all, that Motorola’s roadmap is veyr interesting.
Granted, there is more sense in the rumour that IBM would be making PPC desktop with Linux.
Nicholas Blachford: Agree – sort of. 5GHz is probably a year or 2 off, IBM will be up to 3-4GHz and still kicking Intels arse.
What economic reasons for IBM to pump up the processor speed that much? Little. Talking from history (G3), without mass sales like those Intel and AMD get, IBM have little reason to go head-on with Intel and AMD, especially when the returns are little.
Nicholas Blachford: POWER 4 @ 1.3GHz runs rings around the P4 at 2.5GHz – and thats just a single core!
Except POWER4 uses a lot more cache than Pentium 4 ever had – cache that would have to go for something for the “desktop”.
ActiveMan: Why? Apple sells hardware not software. As soon as they release a x86 Mac OS X, a hacked patch appear than leave every x86 machine execute Mac OS X in every PC.
I doubt this would be the problem. I’m sure the hack would be hard enough that only power users would be able to use it, while most PC power users aren’t that interested in OS X. Plus, you forgot “drivers”, who is going to write them for all those PCs the hacked version would run on?
ActiveMan: It’s not crazy to say than they could loose 50% of their hardware sales in only a year.
But it is crazy nontheless. People who do buy Macs now – Apple’s target market, won’t buy a cheap PC clone, spend hours on cryptic hacks to run OS X.
And most of Apple’s users (design houses, companies etc.) can’t afford to break Apple’s EULA and get the wrath of BSA.
Andrew: Let me know if I am wrong. I enjoy reading your posts.
I have no idea whether I’m wrong or right. 🙂
2002-09-21 1:48 pm
2002-09-21 8:04 pm
2002-09-21 8:24 pm
2002-09-21 9:25 pm
2002-09-22 3:26 pm
2002-09-22 4:18 pm
2002-09-22 10:15 pm
2002-09-23 12:53 am
2002-09-23 2:20 pm
2002-09-23 4:57 pm
2002-09-23 11:57 pm
wooohoo!!!
I agree!
Now we’re talking!! 🙂
please read http://groups.google.com/groups?
q=Power4+group:alt.internet.talk.haven&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=PM0003A 93596C67FB8%
40minion.nashville.comcast.net&rnum=1
It’s very very interesting
I work for IBM and we will conquer the evil empire with open source, innovation, and buying Sun next year:)
I hope this is true. I am a software developer where my company has standardized on MS Visual C++ and Borland C++ Builder. Therefore, IF I want to do work at home, I am locked into using my pc. I have been considering replacing my pc and getting a mac, but I just cannot spending $1k+ on a mac when I have a working pc at home. Something like this is the justification that I need.
if only it were true…until then…GO LINUX!!!
“I work for IBM and we will conquer the evil empire with open source, innovation, and buying Sun next year:)”
It just seem ironic that IBM would conquer the evil empire, since it used to be the standard by which evil empire were created.
If the RH part pans out, could that mean RH Linux PPC boxes at the high end that could run OSX perhaps with the help of MOL, now that would be interesting!!!
Wow. This could blow the Itanic out of the water (er, send them deep).
While I love(!) hearing this news, I wouldn’t really start rejoicing just yet. I know that Apple keeps this kind of thing hush-hush until they are proof-positive about it, but even with this great news, it is about at a MINimum another year away. What will Apple do in the meantime? Freeze the hardware speeds for a year (which is like three years in computer-progress-time) ?
/me wonders/
-spider
“What will Apple do in the meantime? Freeze the hardware speeds for a year (which is like three years in computer-progress-time) ? ”
Unleash the G5’s? I have no idea if this will ever happen but it would fill the gap nicely
All news like this does is help to push Apple under. Everyone is always saying, “OOh, those new macs are nice, whenever they (do something, add something, upgrade something), then I’ll buy one.
Meanwhile Apple shares are down and M$ shares are up, XFree is still ugly and most people use 98Se anyway.
If you really want to help Apple, BUY THIER PRODUCTS OR DEVELOP PRODUCTS FOR THEM.
Enough of my rant.
This will be great, but with a year MINIMUM, then I don’t see this being in laptops till 2004, or 2005. It would be nice to be an Apple user and be able to brag about the OS AND the hardware, but only time will tell.
64 bit could give apple a few nice high-end, high margin segments that could reduce the importance of desktop sales.
The result, if apple is feeling warm, fuzzy and unusually benevolent, could be cheaper apple desktops. If ibm starts pushing their power pc-based linux machines down market then apple will need to do this anyway.
IBM clearly has big plans in the processor market and intends to beat up on intel but the entire motorola card is simply nebulus. So the G5 is different then the IBM chips? are they compatible? Must be.
If you really want to help Apple, BUY THIER PRODUCTS OR DEVELOP PRODUCTS FOR THEM.
Great idea. I’ve actually done just that. In the last year, I’ve purchased a 733QS, a 20GB iPod and Jaguar(please don’t start). Also, as a developer of MIDI apps (okay only one really, but it’s coming along nicely), I maintain a website dedicated to MIDI development for OS X. (xmidi.com)
I couldn’t agree more, Apple is in a pretty funny spot right now, I like to look at it as a temporary funk, one way or another, the speeds will HAVE to increase, either via this new GPUL, Power4, or x86. Only time will tell… =
-spider
Do you ever talk to doug wyatt?
Funny you should ask about Doug Wyatt. My site has some downloadable MIDI apps for OS X and my logs reveal that a SH|TLoad of ppl hit my site from google looking for OMS (Open music system – Doug authored this code for Opcode). Well, since MIDI is now integrated into the OS and Doug is the lead engineer for this project for Apple, I thought I’d write a quick-n-dirty page on my site spelling out the path OMS took to get into OS X. Doug was kind enough to email me to correct some dates that I had mis-researched for my OMS history page. I know that Doug is active in the lists.apple.com audio group. Other than that, I can’t say that I’ve directly chatted with the fellow, but have made a brief contact.
Sorry for being OT Euguenia. =)
-spider
Doug is one a the nicest and smartest programmers around.
Also a very good musician.
I know him cyberly thru my long usage of opcode products.
Apple hiring him for the midi integration for OS X was a good move!
so the real question is when the pc advertiser dominated computing magazines start running stories like
new 64 bit apple a disappointment. Not too late to switch to x86.
courtsey will probably be the first “journalist” to add to the FUD factory.
Well this is great news. 64 bit 1.4-2 ghz 2-4 cores that’s a nice line up of chips, NQA. Given that they run cool and are the size of the celeron (low power) it sounds much more like this is needed for the powerbook (though of course this helps the powermac too). In the powermacs going dual and adding cache creates a nice speed boost. But you can’t do that for the powerbook. Its the high end laptops that are the weakest offerings right now.
Anyway this is good news all around. I only wish they weren’t talking about over a year away.
RH for PPC already exists in the form of Yellow Dog Linux. http://www.yellowdoglinux.com/
I think Yellow Dog is more of a distribution in it’s own right now, not just a Red Hat port. It’s kind of like Mandrake, it started out as a Red Hat derivitive, but now it’s a distribution in it’s own right.
I wonder how many people worked on the development of the CPU’s name and acronym? “GigaProcessor Ultralite (GPUL)” whats the next generation SuperUltraProcessorExtremeRacer2 (SUPER2)
Question though, would apple call it GPUL or would they call this the G5 or G6, (isn’t G4 just a hack of the acctual moto cpu name?
I can already see the fancy linux port logos removing the U from the acronym giving them GPL and putting it in the LinUx.
I wonder how many people worked on the development of the CPU’s name and acronym? “GigaProcessor Ultralite (GPUL)”
Probably the same people in charge of naming for SCSI (aka, the Super Ultra Mega Fast Happy Funtime 3 bus).
if i only had a timetraveling delorian…
Sounds awesome for both the MAC and Linux world.
Linux looks even better in the future because of choice – Itanium, Pentium4 and future processors, Clawhammer, Sledgehammer, GPUL and who knows maybe UltraSparc.
No IBM has clearly stated that they have no intrest in the desktop market anymore.
I can’t wait that long 1yr??? f**k it I’ll have to buy another
iBook which I love or a eMac and use that to tied me over till these babies come out.
Macos rumors are reporting seeing code in the Darwin CVS repository for a Journalled HFS filesystem under OSX.
Journalling is one of the major plus points of the BeOS as yet unimplemented in OSX
Its Hammer time.
Zenja, you just caused the image of steve jobs in MC Hammer pants (balloon pants?) to be burnt in my mind. and he is still wearing a turle neck with them.
Does anyone remember seeing at MacWorld NY 01 the ppc box to run YD Linux that was the size of an external scsi HD, AND can it run MOL?
It’ll be good to see macs with a faster cpu, but by the time this becomes reality won’t they still be much slower then intel or amd’s latest offerings? Especially if clawhammer turns out to be even 3/4 as good as the hype.
I have never owned a mac, but I just went to the Mac store to get a look at things. After trying out the new iMac and drooling over the huge-ass cinematic monitors, I realize that it doesn’t matter that macs are behind PCs in the speed department. Macs have much that PCs can only wish for. They are elegant, slick, smooth machines. WinXP cannot come close to the Macintosh’s level of beauty. For people who care about such things, who cares that they aren’t screaming fast? They’re fast enough. They certainly aren’t slow. My computer is an AMD K6-2 450Mhz machine that I’ve been running for over three years, and it isn’t too slow for me. And all of Apple’s offerings will outperform my machine by a long shot.
For some people, a Pioneer amplifier bought at Best Buy will be good enough for a home stereo. Others won’t go anywhere near Best Buy, and will opt to shop at the local audiophile store. It’s the same with PCs and Macs. Macs are high end. People who don’t care about that will get fast ‘n cheap instead. What they’ll get will be “good enough”, but not beautiful. That’s what I have now. I definitely want a Mac though. I’m going to break down and buy one, one of these days.
This has all been said before, I know, but I just can’t get over how damn nice those Macs are!
You mean the BriQ?
http://www.totalimpact.com/briQ.html
http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com/products/briQ/
Macs are high end. People who don’t care about that will get fast ‘n cheap instead.
Although I like Macs, I’m not quite sure how you can simultaneously say they’re “high end” and slower at the same time. If you mean “high end” in terms of design, maybe the interface, sure. But the fact is that when you shop at an audiophile shop, you get more capable equipment than a Pioneer from Best Buy, not just equipment that looks better. When you buy a Mac, you’re getting less capable equipment. Sure, it might be a little easier to use, and it might look better (arguable), but “high end” is about much more than looks. And your analogy is fundamentally flawed because of that fact: for it to be correct, the person shopping at the audiophile store would have to get more impressive looking but less impressive performing speakers. Not convincing.
My computer is an AMD K6-2 450Mhz machine that I’ve been running for over three years, and it isn’t too slow for me.
Try running OS X on a slot-loading iMac. Your (cheap) computer lasted three years.
(and, for what it’s worth, I’m writing this from a damn sexy HP laptop. Macs have great design, but it’s not like all PCs look like beige boxes from Fry’s)
Both RJW and bkakes (derivated from “bitchkakes”?) have good points. At this time, Macs are not high end compared to the latest PC offerings. No matter how much Apple lies by telling people that even the dual 867 Mhz is faster than a Pentium 2.54 Ghz for some tasks, the truth is that currently high end PCs are way faster than any Macs, which are also overpriced, but I don’t criticize that much because I think it would be really hard to lower their prices to match PCs when Apple has only 5% of the market or less. Dell can afford to lower their prices to ridiculous lows, because they basically own the market along with HP-Compaq, Gateway, etc.
But bkakes has a point in that the style of Macs makes a difference for some people, including me. The style of the PowerMac box is amazing, but that’s not what’s most important, because I don’t work looking at the box, I do it looking at the OS GUI, and THAT makes the difference to me. Mac OS X has simply the best GUI I’ve ever seen in an OS, and if I had to use a GUI like this forever, I wouldn’t mind, I would want some enhancements done to it, but mostly is just a wonderful and practical interface.
About the speed, it’s not that Macs are SO far away from PCs, since PowerPC chips do more per cycle than x86 ones, so a dual 867 Mhz G4 should easily get to the speed of a 2 Ghz P4. And programs that use Altivec instructions (most popular design programs use them) really fly on G4s. Even better, having dual CPUs lets you do lots of taks at the same time, including some that totally clog single CPUs, like video rendering in After Effects or NLE software. With dual CPUs, you can render a video and do many more things at the same time, such as working on Photoshop, Illustrator, listen to MP3s, browse the internet, etc. Since Mac OS X is prepared to take full advantage of dual CPUs, every task behaves as if it was the only one running (as long as you have a good amount of RAM).
Anyway, it’s a matter of looks and a matter of power. I’d certainly wouldn’t use a Mac if they were slow even if the GUI looks good, but the GUI and processing is fast enough in their current models.
Sebastian
The reason I can say that Macs are both higher end and slower than PCs is the same reason I can say that an old Dynaco 35 watt tube amp is higher end than a 150 watt Pioneer. Sure, the Pioneer will probably blow away the Dynaco in terms of _loudness_, but it won’t sound as _good_, and hence the Dynaco will overall perform better. Similarly, I would say that the Mac actually performs better than the PC, not because it’s faster, but because the interface is better, the hardware is more nicely integrated, and the OS (comparing with Windows) is better, and I’m not saying that to bash Microsoft. With the Mac, I get the feel of a computer that is much more “finely crafted” than any other computer I’ve ever used. This is why I say they are high end.
Comparing stereo equipment to computers is just one of several ways that Mac fans try to apologize for their favorite computers. To a Mac fan, comparing a Mac to a Wintel PC is like comparing a nice clean 60 watt stereo system with a noisy hissing 100 watt system. Or it is like comparing a BMW with a Yugo. etc. etc.
At various times in the past, Macs have had both the best hardware and the best software. I’m a Mac user, and I think this is the natural order of things. Macs had the performance edge as recently as 3 years ago, but they lost it sometime in the last year or two and they don’t seem to be moving much toward getting it back. Mac OS X is the best desktop operating system I’ve ever used. But that’s only half the story. Apple needs to climb back to the top of the heap of hardware performance. Whether it is Motorola’s chips or IBM chips (or AMD or Intel for that matter), they need to triple their performance over the next couple of years, they need to move into the 64-bit address world, and they need to move toward 4-way and 8-way processor machines at the high end. Apple should be leading the field they created 25 years ago, not playing catch-up with features or with performance.
BTW, I’m using MacOS X on a circa 1999 Powerbook (400 Mhz Lombard), and it runs just fine. Macs are well built and do keep their value well, that’s not the problem. Performance is the problem that Apple needs to solve right now.
Sebastien: bkakes stands for Billy Kakes.
G4s _don’t_ do more per cycle than a P4 or Athlon.
RJW:your hi-fi analogy is crap.
No Pioneer amp could ever be considered ‘high-end’.
Obviously, you are no audiophile.
I can see why you like the idea of macs. Having a K6 for three years, you are used to slow ‘puters.
anonymous205 seems to have it right.
Macs used to be high-end, but no more.
They are nice machines, but to continue charging a premium, Apple needs to add some grunt to their flagship models.
By the time these IBM cpus come out, Intel will have the 5GHz Prescott, and AMD the 3GHz Hammer. So Macs will be behind yet again with their ‘speedy’ 1.4 – 2GHz cores.
I don’t really disagree with you, except that I’m not a Mac apologist*. I don’t even own one, yet. I’m basing my opinions on the time I’ve spent with them at stores and at work. I think your analogy (…nice clean 60 watt stereo system with a noisy hissing 100 watt system…) is a pretty good one :-). But you’re right. They are definitely behind speedwise. My point was, maybe that’s not a huge issue, because although they are behind the speed game, they aren’t slow, and they will get faster. And my other point was, speed isn’t everything.
*Maybe I’m turning into one
>RJW:your hi-fi analogy is crap.
>No Pioneer amp could ever be considered ‘high-end’.
>Obviously, you are no audiophile.
Hmm…I don’t seem to recall saying Pioneers were high-end. I said quite the opposite, in fact. But you’re right, I’m not an audiophile, I can’t spout on for hours about harmonic distortion and transparency, but I know when I hear something good.
>I can see why you like the idea of macs. Having a K6 for three years, you are used to slow ‘puters.
As I said before, to me it isn’t really slow. It’s getting time to think about something faster, but it’s not bad. Dunno, I guess it depends on what you want to do with your system.
Although I like Macs, I’m not quite sure how you can simultaneously say they’re “high end” and slower at the same time. If you mean “high end” in terms of design, maybe the interface, sure. But the fact is that when you shop at an audiophile shop, you get more capable equipment than a Pioneer from Best Buy, not just equipment that looks better. When you buy a Mac, you’re getting less capable equipment. Sure, it might be a little easier to use, and it might look better (arguable), but “high end” is about much more than looks. And your analogy is fundamentally flawed because of that fact: for it to be correct, the person shopping at the audiophile store would have to get more impressive looking but less impressive performing speakers. Not convincing.
Actually the best buy vs. audiophile analogy is quite good. First a disclaimer: I’m out of date in terms of speakers, I bought my sterio about 7 years ago so the situation may have changed the argument by analogy will still hold even if the details do not.
Good magnets are very expensive. A real 15″ woofer should cost well over around $2k per speaker. OTOH you can see a 15″ woofer from someone like Klipsch (http://www.klipsch.com/) for $200 per speaker. How do they do it? Well they have a 15″ piece of paper being driven by a 3″ magnet. Its a 3″ wolfer being passed off as a 15″ wolfer; what you are getting is an expensive 3″ not a cheap 15″ system. To hide the speakers artificially boost the volume of the deep bass and the high treble fooling the listener’s ear.
If you go to a place like Mirage (http://www.miragespeakers.com) you won’t find any 15″ wolfers but where you see their dual 8″ wolfer it is backed by a dual 8″ magnets. The sound is wonderful and for the same money you get a far better speaker.
Even though the ignorant listener will like the Klipsch better all you have to do is listen for details to see the effect of the quality.
Macs problems are just as common as pc’s these days .. problems are mainly caused by hardware failure… EG IBM drives that came in Macs. When it comes to driver problems OSX has a LOT more than XP thats for sure.
Dont bother trying to make out macs are like high quality speakers and pc are aweful. They are made of the same components.. the truth is there is way more PC systems for 99.999% hardware avalibility compared to mac. To argue macs are high end because they waste cpu cycles with the UI graphics (yes it wastes it even with QE .. even more so when u play several videos at once over AGP.) is like saying a your cars faster because u paid for a spick red paint job on the same model as mine. Instead with my money i got a much faster car, with more reliabilty (by buying better quality components than apple uses) and still a few extras
Glenn
Oh yeah pc users know what the word “upgrade” means… without being some leet hacker than buys non authorised components and hacks it faster themselves.
jbolden1517: Klipsch speakers are good… you should have picked JVC or Pioneer!
as being a recent convert from a high end pc system that just flies…
I love my ibook. Desktop is nice, but I only use it for gaming now. I can do all my work, easily on my ibook, but on a pc everything gets in the way. Its really almost as speedy as my desktop except in scrolling and resizing =( But I did max out the ram on this laptop.
When you want to just write a paper, ibook is king, and being a student thats important to me.
the reason why intel can hit those high Gz is because they have broken down the process cycle into (I believe) 20 stages. Where as motorolas pipeline is somewhere around 7. Now, many agrue that it is more efficient to have more stages because it will leader to higher speeds, it also deterriates from the overall architecture. So it is a tradeoff. In my opinion, AMD has found the happy medium. It has slightly less stages then intel (but more than motorola) which always it to have a good architecture and high speeds.
That’s just my 2¢
First, before anyone gets too excited, has anyone bothered to look at what IBM charges for a RS/6000 based system (PowerPC based)?
Check out this link: http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/workstations/
The price starts out at nearly $9,000 (not including monitor) for a 250 mhz PowerPC 604E processor, 128 mb of RAM, 9.1 GB of hard drive space (SCSI) and a 10/100 ethernet card.
The 450 mhz Power3-II (64-bit, copper, one processor) starts at $13,000 (monitor not included). That includes 512mb of RAM and up to 4mb of L2 cache.
Now who actually believes this new Power4 chip will be inexpensive enough for even the highend Power Macs? My GUESS (and I make no claim to have any insider information) is that if Apple uses these chips, they will be for a new tier of workstations aimed a video animation/production and priced accordingly. The current G4 Power Mac line will probably be retained to serve as the consumer desktop line and will have incremental updates.
For more information on the Power4 chip, here’s the IBM link:
http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/whitepapers/p…
This is why they are designing a NEW processor that is based on that technology. To address the price/performance issue. The processor you point out are NOT going to be used due to that factor and heat.
Wow. This could blow the Itanic out of the water (er, send them deep).
Wow…. since both Itanium (I refuse to go down to the standards of McNealy lame nade-calling by calling it Itanic) is targeting the same audience as this so call GPUL! NOT!
By time it is released, Itanium 3 would already be out, anyway. If it is true.
Allstar: Meanwhile Apple shares are down and M$ shares are up, XFree is still ugly and most people use 98Se anyway.
XFree86 doesn’t have a look. It uses the look of the window manager/libraries/etc. Besides, Microsoft market share isn’t increasing as fast as Apple’s market share is decreasing. (And also, 98SE would soon would no longer be the version of Windows most used very soon.)
ryan: 64 bit could give apple a few nice high-end, high margin segments that could reduce the importance of desktop sales.
Unfortunately, AMD is seeking to commodonize these high margin segments. The only segments still away to survive AMD’s onslaught wouldn’t be easy for Apple to tackle.
ryan: new 64 bit apple a disappointment. Not too late to switch to x86.
Hardly has any PC magazines (like PC World, PC Magazine, etc.) mentioned about Apple…. if they did, they sure didn’t do it a lot. Most of them DON’T care about Apple.
ryan: courtsey will probably be the first “journalist” to add to the FUD factory.
Coursey article on x86 Macs is based on research papers he linked to. If you consider it FUD, you should also consider eWeek’s article FUD.
Kevin: RH for PPC already exists in the form of Yellow Dog Linux.