[sCreeD]

Actually, the "mp" did indeed imply multi-processor from the very start of the Antares rumors.

Screed

[propropro]

News of December from Thinksecret ( http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0412powerpc.html ) :

Confidential documents pertaining to the development of IBM's future single-core PowerPC 970GX and dual-core 970MP processors, code-named Antares, obtained by Think Secret, reveal that Apple has already received a number of prototypes of the processor. Apple is also expected to wrap up Process Verification Testing of the 970MP around the end of January, meaning systems featuring the processor could be ready as early as the Spring including, possibly, the long-awaited PowerBook G5. However, sources continue to report that IBM is working to develop other low-power 970-series processors topping out around 2GHz that could find their way into future PowerBooks instead. Antares will debut at 3GHz.

Maybe this has been already discussed, but I just wanted to know what do you think of this:
1. Could a 970 MP really be put in a Powerbook??!!
2. Am I the only one that think the Low-Power 970 isn't coming anytime soon? I just think this because of the lack of any news about it, but hopefully I'm wrong...

Morpheus, let's play some mind games

[oldmacfan]

Originally Posted by propropro Morpheus, let's play some mind games

He is already playing mind games on you...

[FallenFromTheTree]

Uh Guys, look what I found over at OWC :-)

ATI X800 Mac edition

256 MB single slot card! Happy Happy Joy joy

[Henriok]

I'm sitting here watching Graphics and Media State of the Union from WWDC'04 and 34 mins into this session the topic is Core image. The presenter talks about Core Image as a "stream based processing model" and "mappable to GPUs, SMT CPUs and any other parallell architectures".

OK.. this got me going on several points:
- Stream based processing model. Last I heard, this is how you describe the Cell and its APUs witch are called a "stream processor".
- GPUs, CPUs and any other parallell architecture? Huh, what other parallell architecture might one have for rendering graphics if not the CPU or GPU? Core Image is certainly optimized for AltiVec, but isn't that part of the CPU? Again.. The APUs in Cell is not considered a part of the CPU but are co-processors, and is certainly some "other parallell architecture"
- SMT CPU? Last I heard no CPU in any Mac to date have symmetric multi threading. Pentium4 have, POWER5 also, but AFAIK neither will ever run Tiger.

Oh well.. this might be me just finding what I'm looking for..

[Enki]

Altivec is a vector processor that does excellent work with streams. Whether the 970 evolves Power5-ish capabilities or an explicit Power5 derivative with Altivec continues the family, SMT is on the way to the desktop and it's just a matter of exactly when.

[Programmer]

Sometimes it amazes me how long it takes people to notice things.

I've heard the big W is essentially tri P, Morpheus -- I think you know what that means.
What I don't know is why it is posted in this forum, my understanding is that Apple has nothing to do with this thing. Should I assume that since you mentioned it here that Apple is now involved? I can see why they might want it, but I thought that not everything in it is their desired flavor. I think the original P+x*S would be more up their alley.
eh?

[rickag]

Originally Posted by ablative I've heard the big W is essentially tri P, Morpheus -- I think you know what that means. What I don't know is why it is posted in this forum, my understanding is that Apple has nothing to do with this thing. Should I assume that since you mentioned it here that Apple is now involved? I can see why they might want it, but I thought that not everything in it is their desired flavor. I think the original P+x*S would be more up their alley. eh?

[NMR Guy]

Originally Posted by ablative I've heard the big W is essentially tri P, Morpheus -- I think you know what that means. What I don't know is why it is posted in this forum, my understanding is that Apple has nothing to do with this thing. Should I assume that since you mentioned it here that Apple is now involved? I can see why they might want it, but I thought that not everything in it is their desired flavor. I think the original P+x*S would be more up their alley. eh?

I just took this as a reason why Morpheus was busy, not necessarily an implication that Apple was involved. If you realize what this is, you also know that signicant lateness is not an option.

[CoreMac]

Were you guys always so vague at that other place?

So Waternoose is Tri P?

[Kurt]

Tri-P?? Isn't Xbox 2 supposed to have 3 processors?
Waterhouse could easily be Steve Ballmer.

How is that for wild speculation.

[Programmer]

P is for Power?

I know what S is, but I'm not telling.

[Morpheus]

Originally Posted by ablative What I don't know is why it is posted in this forum, my understanding is that Apple has nothing to do with this thing.

Correct, Apple has nothing to do with it. I take the thread as PPC (or even Power), not only Apple related :-)

Morpheus

Originally Posted by Programmer P is for Power? I know what S is, but I'm not telling.

I'll take "SPU" for 100, Alex

[Bucolic Old Sir Henry]

Ok. We have a three core Power processor, and a Power core with x stream processing units attached (which is what Cell is). So Apple is doing something with cell.

But then I know feck all about computer processors, although I do do the Telegraph crossword.

Pip pip!

[Dave J]

Originally Posted by Morpheus OBTW, this one from MOSR: "The first 65-nm 970's will be arriving in Cupertino soon, but 90-nanometer will be the only viable technology for the majority of 2005 so the problems are considerable. We should know more in the days ahead...." Who provides banned substances to Ryan? Morpheus

Let's hope that this quote, also from MOSR, is also 'tainted':

"What the grapevine now envisions is a mixed bag -- an entry-level system based on single and dual 2GHz PPC 970 processors, a mid-range machine based on the 2.5GHz 970FX, and a high-end machine with either two 2.8GHz 970GX's or a sole dual-core 2.8GHz 970MP."

...and this one too:

"Oh, and "one last thing": according to reliable sources at ATi Technologies, Apple has bought a considerable volume of new 8X AGP graphics cards for OEM use including Radeon 9800s and X700s. This suggests PCI Express may have to wait for the next revision, because there has been nary a peep about PCI Express cards for Apple OEM.... "

[FallenFromTheTree]

Originally Posted by Dave J Let's hope that this quote, also from MOSR, is also 'tainted': "What the grapevine now envisions is a mixed bag -- an entry-level system based on single and dual 2GHz PPC 970 processors, a mid-range machine based on the 2.5GHz 970FX, and a high-end machine with either two 2.8GHz 970GX's or a sole dual-core 2.8GHz 970MP." ...and this one too: "Oh, and "one last thing": according to reliable sources at ATi Technologies, Apple has bought a considerable volume of new 8X AGP graphics cards for OEM use including Radeon 9800s and X700s. This suggests PCI Express may have to wait for the next revision, because there has been nary a peep about PCI Express cards for Apple OEM.... "

I understand your viewpoint, but it seems more likely that we would see
a graphics card update before any major processor revision.

PCI-Express is now current technology, while dual core is still in developement.

Either way Apple needs to improve the available pro user upgrade options to remain competitive with other workstation class desktops.

[Dave J]

Originally Posted by FallenFromTheTree I understand your viewpoint, but it seems more likely that we would see a graphics card update before any major processor revision. PCI-Express is now current technology, while dual core is still in developement.

So you're suggesting we're TWO revisions away from dual core (first for PCIe, then for dual core)? Or are you saying they'd be concurrent?

[FallenFromTheTree]

Originally Posted by Dave J So you're suggesting we're TWO revisions away from dual core (first for PCIe, then for dual core)? Or are you saying they'd be concurrent?

Dave, I wish I really knew! :-(

My gut feeling tells me that we are more likely to see a minor PowerBook type revision first.

We simply can't have PowerBooks with more base RAM than a G5!
The 1.67 GHz 15" & 17" PB models also now offer a BTO ATI 9700 128MB graphics card capable of running the 30" display.
So the Pro line has a bit of catching up to do.
We can only hope that these two issues would be corrected very soon.
Any speed bumps or price drops would also help to move the existing
chassis configuration without the need for major re-tooling.

Upgrading to 3 GHz, PCI-Express, SLI and Dual Core are far more complicated issues and those may have to wait till WWDC, MWSF and beyond.
I can only hope that all would be included in any major revisions.

Reality is that most of us are SO tired of waiting
that we'll probably leap at any reasonable improvement.

[Programmer]

Originally Posted by Bucolic Old Sir Henry Ok. We have a three core Power processor, and a Power core with x stream processing units attached (which is what Cell is). So Apple is doing something with cell.

Just because these things may exist doesn't mean Apple is necessarily doing anything with them. IBM builds the POWER5 server chips too, but Apple doesn't use those.

Of course it doesn't rule it out either.

[Dave J]

Originally Posted by FallenFromTheTree Dave, I wish I really knew! :-( Reality is that most of us are SO tired of waiting that we'll probably leap at any reasonable improvement.

I've decided that I'll be strong - stupid? - and wait for dual core.

[checksum]

Morpheus, should we expect to hear from Trinity soon?

W(h)ither "Morpheus"?
--

[Jay]

Originally Posted by Dave J I've decided that I'll be strong - stupid? - and wait for dual core.

Do what I did put the new Mac money into a CD, I can't touch mine until after WWDC, with the huge amount of interest on in, I might go for an upgrade, like a mouse pad.

[FallenFromTheTree]

Originally Posted by Jay Do what I did put the new Mac money into a CD, I can't touch mine until after WWDC, with the huge amount of interest on in, I might go for an upgrade, like a mouse pad.

Yeah, my bank offers a whopping 1.67% to tie up my money for 3 months.

Funny how that works.

[del-uks]

Originally Posted by Jay Do what I did put the new Mac money into a CD, I can't touch mine until after WWDC, with the huge amount of interest on in, I might go for an upgrade, like a mouse pad.

So you seriously don't expect anything before WWDC...

Please... anybody... tell me it's wrong...

[CoreMac]

Originally Posted by Jay Do what I did put the new Mac money into a CD, I can't touch mine until after WWDC, with the huge amount of interest on in, I might go for an upgrade, like a mouse pad.

You should have invested in AAPL.

[Jay]

Originally Posted by CoreMac You should have invested in AAPL.

I have some but I was late to the party at $55.15. Anyway it's to easy to get at, I don't even have to leave my computer screen.

Anyway I don't want to buy it until the summer, and they maybe announced in March (which I suspect) but will probably be shipping in June.

[Bucolic Old Sir Henry]

Originally Posted by Programmer Just because these things may exist doesn't mean Apple is necessarily doing anything with them. IBM builds the POWER5 server chips too, but Apple doesn't use those. Of course it doesn't rule it out either.

It's a bit like a buffet, then. IBM lays out its wares, and up come the clients. The ones with the biggest plates get to pile most on.

I wonder how big Apple's plate might be?

Pip pip!

[Costique]

Originally Posted by Programmer Just because these things may exist doesn't mean Apple is necessarily doing anything with them. IBM builds the POWER5 server chips too, but Apple doesn't use those.

What about stream processing and parallel architectures which Core Image/Video aim at? Cell sounds so good, but can it (I mean the tech itself) really be used in PCs instead of the traditional CPU design? The thing that really bugs me is that nobody ever said Apple is involved. Some say they wish Apple were involved or just find it logical.

I wonder if the following is possible. Cell is indeed highly customizable, which makes it usable anywhere. Apple is not involved in the development because they have no resources, i.e. they have nothing to contribute to the project. Meanwhile, they develop software support for Cell, extend the OS, reimplement frameworks. When IBM is ready for mass production, here comes Apple with a huge order for customized Cell hardware.