IBM’s PowerPC 750VX microprocessor has been finalized, sources told AppleInsider last week, though a few errata still need to be addressed. The chip is widely rumored for adoption by Apple Computer’s iBook consumer portable line sometime next year.
IBM PowerPC 750VX finalized, says AppleInsider
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
*drool*
~
Im confused thought. Theres going to be G3 versions. I thought G3 was just an older generation chip and left to bite the dust of the G4. But now it seems as if its still being updated?
Still, an Apple laptop would be sooooo cool
this will be hot in the laptop :-(.
—
homepage.mac.com/softkid
Im confused thought. Theres going to be G3 versions. I thought G3 was just an older generation chip and left to bite the dust of the G4. But now it seems as if its still being updated?
There has never been an IBM manufactured “G4” chip before. The G4 merely refers to the addition of an AltiVec unit to the standard “G3” core. So, this processor will be a “G4” class processor, with significant technological improvements over the current Motorola offerings.
I’m guessing these chips will probably end up in the Powerbooks first, despite what the article states. Why? They can clock them higher than the Motorola offerings, and it’ll take some time for IBM to ramp up fabs. It would seem a bit odd for Apple to jettison the new iBook G4 line in less than a year — you’d think the line would probably be good for 18 months or so.
But when you compare a 12″ Powerbook and the iBooks, there really aren’t that many reasons to buy a Powerbook now.
Perhaps I’m biased, being a new (and very satisfied) iBook G4 owner.
I would have guessed it would go into PowerBooks before iBooks, but, nevermind.
“The G4 merely refers to the addition of an AltiVec unit to the standard “G3″ core.”
Not true at all. The G4 does not scale as well as far as meghertz go while the G3 has never had a dual processor because it was not designed for that application. There are differences in the two, with altivec being the big one, however, not so once these chips hit the block.
“But when you compare a 12″ Powerbook and the iBooks, there really aren’t that many reasons to buy a Powerbook now.”
There is a difference in bus speed and amount of ram that you can put into it. If you don’t need either, then you don’t need the Powerbook. But then again, why would you need the power, but in the 12″, I would say 15″ if you need the power anyways, get a bigger better screen.
I would say, G5 powerbooks, and these chips into the iBooks. That would be best, to keep things moving forward, and not slowly forward. Apple needs to keep pushing this power thing to have the PC people see that their wintels are not more powerful just because their clock speeds are faster. That is the biggest rumor that consumers can’t get over for some reason.
Brando> Apple needs to keep pushing this power thing to have
Brando> the PC people see that their wintels are not more
Brando> powerful just because their clock speeds are faster.
CPU efficiency can’t be evaluated with one scale only, since it highly depends on the intended use. But consumers need a simple scale to compare CPUs (because of lazyness I’d say), and manufacturers/resellers wouldn’t provide anything else than raw clock speed until now : AMD is trying to build up on 64 bits touting, even if this technology has been available for a long time, and that it’s no better than the clock speed scale.
“But when you compare a 12″ Powerbook and the iBooks, there really aren’t that many reasons to buy a Powerbook now. ”
I think most people would feel the oppisitte way, why get a iBook when you can get all it does and more and much nicer in a powerbook for not much more.
“I think most people would feel the oppisitte way, why get a iBook when you can get all it does and more and much nicer in a powerbook for not much more.”
Well maybe 40% more in price is considered “not much more” in lah-lah-land, however in reality those hundreds of bucks DO make a difference.
The G3, G4, and G5 names are simply what Apple calls the chips for marketing purposes. Even though this chip won’t be quite the same as the Motorola “G4”, it will probably branded as such by Apple since it do most of the thing that the G4 did except for things like dual processors, and the that part won’t matter since it will likely find it’s way into low end consumer computer like the iBook and the eMac, and presumably, by the time this comes out the PowerBook and iMac lines will be updated to the G5.
The specs on the new G4 is much better. Looking forward to seeing these in the new eMac, iMacs, iBook and PowerBooks.
Motorola is a poor business partner and they deserve to sink.
the IBM g3 has always scaled better in clock speed than the moto g4, so adding altivec to it will make this chip last a long time….look how long the P6 series has lasted!!!
all I can say is GREAT, consumer level machines, and laptops don’t need the multi CPU abilities off a moto G4 and since the multi proce systems are not G5s, why not just add on altivec to the IBM g3 and let the ramping begin!!!
Is there a new revision of the G5 coming out soon?
The reason I ask is because some have mentioned that they expect the G5 to make it to the Power book, but last I checked it pulled too much power, and lets off too much heat.
Apple seems to want to put a G5 in (why wouldn’t they) but the engineering stands in the way right now, and it looks like they will probably wait till the next rev… although the G4 wasn’t going to be in power books when it came out either… Lower clock maybe? A big fan wouldn’t be their style…
Article:
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/top_news_item.cfm?NewsID=6916
http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/macos/story/0,10801,…
Slashdot coverage:
http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/03/09/18/1822219.shtml?tid=137&tid=…
Latest OSNEWS dicussion:
http://osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=5024
Anonymous (IP: —.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net)
Not true at all. The G4 does not scale as well as far as meghertz go while the G3 has never had a dual processor because it was not designed for that application. There are differences in the two, with altivec being the big one, however, not so once these chips hit the block.
Quit nitpicking. For starters, there are chips made by both Motorola and IBM which were sold under the “G3” name. You don’t even mention which one you are comparing. The differences you are citing are between the Motorola and IBM cores and have little to do with the marketing labels.
For all intents and purposes, the “G4” is a “G3” with an AltiVec unit.
skwirlmaster (IP: —.humboldt.edu)
The reason I ask is because some have mentioned that they expect the G5 to make it to the Power book, but last I checked it pulled too much power, and lets off too much heat.
For some reason people continue to think the heat dissipation of the G5 is a crippling issue when it comes to portables. It’s not. Please see page 14 of http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1…
At 1.2GHz the G5 only dissipates 19W of power, while comparatively the 867MHz G4 in the 12″ Aluminum Powerbook dissipates 18.5. Only when ramped up to 1.8GHz, the heat dissipation becomes 42W, which is why a G5 desktop requires such a cooling system.
At 1.2GHz the G5 only dissipates 19W of power, while comparatively the 867MHz G4 in the 12″ Aluminum Powerbook dissipates 18.5. Only when ramped up to 1.8GHz, the heat dissipation becomes 42W, which is why a G5 desktop requires such a cooling system.
It doesn’t actually require that large of a cooling system, it just looks better that way.
The Athlon dissipates from 60-80 watts and they do not require the crazy cooling system that the G5 has, but it still works.
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20021001/xp_2800-02.html
http://www.intel80386.com/cpuheat.html
The G5 has a large system for 2 reasons.
1. It is quieter (or so they say, I’ve not had personal experience working with one in my enviroment) High speed fans create much more noise then low speed ones.
2. It looks cool.
That said I see no problem getting the G5 into a LAPTOP, just getting it into a 1.1″ or less thick alluminum case (or whatever they decide to use). If Apple wanted to, they could release a 7-9 lb Dell looking laptop quickly that had a G5 in it.
You’ve got to realize that the fast P4 laptops actually use desktop processors. (that’s not true anymore, looks like most use centrino now) But back when dell was selling them they had 2 seperate fans on the processor to keep it cool!
Apple is phasing out its reliance on Motorola’s design and fab. When they stopped developing the G4, IBM still continued improving the G3 to to the point of it being better per cycle than the G4 except for things that required altivec. So now you can consider this new one as an better G4, especially considering there is no Moto involved.
A G5 would be a bit of a push. It uses 42W, while most of the P4-M series uses about 30W. That’s nearly 50% more power dissipation. And the P4-M is one hot-running CPU to begin with.
PS> Most high-end x86 laptops actually used the P4-M (for mobile) chip. There are some “desk-note” systems that use a desktop P4, but they’re not terribly common. They’re still hugely power hungry though — my Dell has 2 (tiny and loud) 8000RPM fans in it.
“Sources recently sited a relationship-terminating, 3-strike at bat with Apple Computer”
no way is this really true. Motorola really does deserve the boot but what about a second source? will they just single source? TI, Taiwan Semiconductor, AMD might be second source guesses.
actually i wonder. does the new cell chip, which will be made by toshiba and sony, not sport ibm tech and a powerpc core? maybe toshiba is the second source.
no way is this really true. Motorola really does deserve the boot but what about a second source?
Dell doesn’t have a second source.
will they just single source? TI, Taiwan Semiconductor, AMD might be second source guesses.
None of those companies own a PowerPC core design. They could only be used to manufacture a core owned by another company (such as TI does with Sun’s UltraSPARC)
actually i wonder. does the new cell chip, which will be made by toshiba and sony, not sport ibm tech and a powerpc core? maybe toshiba is the second source.
There’s no reason for them not to depend on IBM. IBM sees the PPC970 as a great chip in two ways: First, it’s a great way to utilize their new Fishkill plant, which they really need in order to cover its $2.5 billion costs. Secondly, it lets them exact more profit out of the enormous investment they’ve made into the POWER architecture. The Power4 (and Power5) represents over a decade of continuous investment into processor design. In order to cover this investment, they must continually look for new ways to leverage their IP. Meanwhile, Apple’s sales of non-portables was lackluster, and Apple was desperately in need of a better PowerPC processor in order to close the widening performance gap between the PC platform. The IBM/Apple arrangement is very much mutually beneficial to both respective parties, as each was desperate to solve their particular problems. Were the relationship to fail, it would be incredibly damaging to both parties.
The “G” in Apples chips refers to the word generation, as in not the same as before it. Simply calling calling the G4 a G3 with altivec is not a correct statement. When both Motorola and IBM were designing the next generation chips after the G3, two approaches were taken. Motorola choose to add the altivec capabilities while IBM was into increasing cache sizes. If the G4 was an IBM design, then yes, the G4 would have been a G3 with altivec. But like you said before IBM has never made a G4 and for good reason, they never designed one, they simply added more cache to a G3.
IBM did manufacture G4’s for motorolla back in the 500mhz days they are rare but folks have seen them.