image
image

|


Go Back   macosx.com > Content & Information > Apple News, Rumors & Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old May 25th, 2007, 07:39 AM
bbloke's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,337
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
bbloke has a spectacular aura aboutbbloke has a spectacular aura about
IBM launches POWER6 chip at 4.7 GHz

IBM has announced the POWER6 chip, running at 4.7 GHz, will be launched next month. Ars technica has an article about the launch, and states that the POWER6 chip has double the performance of the POWER5+ chip.

The details are:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ars technica
  • Top frequency of 4.7GHz
  • >790 million transistors
  • 341mm2 die size
  • 65nm SOI process with ten layers of copper interconnect and a low-k dielectric on the first eight levels
  • Dual-core
  • Two-way simultaneous multithreading (SMT) on each core
  • Two memory controllers
  • Manufactured at IBM's 300mm semiconductor fab at East Fishkill, NY
On some sites, people have questioned whether Apple made the right move, switching to Intel, but I think the issue is much bigger than clock speeds alone.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old May 25th, 2007, 07:58 AM
Mikuro's Avatar
Crotchety UI Nitpicker
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,438
Thanks: 2
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Mikuro is on a distinguished road
Well, if it were all about maximum power, then yes, I think Apple made the wrong move. The current Mac Pros are not faster than what the G5 probably would be now if it had continued to evolve. (Despite popular misconception, the G5 actually evolved quite quickly during its lifespan, at a faster rate than any of Intel's or AMDs chips of the time.) They're certainly not better enough to justify the switch.

But what about laptops? There wasn't even a hint of a low-power G5 until after Apple announced the switch. And the current Intel chips are faster than anyone could reasonably expect of an evolved G4.

Almost two years after the announcement, I have pretty much the same feeling as I had back then: It's all about the laptops. Apple sacrificed some desktop power for a lot of portable power. I can't say I really blame them.
__________________
Mac mini — 1.25GHz G4, 1GB RAM — OS 10.5.2

I'm now a four-browser man. How on earth did this happen?!

Useful programs: PithHelmet, Butler, ffmpegX, VLC, Perian, Tofu, Wcalc
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old May 25th, 2007, 08:20 AM
Captain Code's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,098
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Captain Code will become famous soon enough
Yeah, I still don't see any PPC laptop chips that compare to the Core 2 Duo. It would be interesting if Apple used the POWER6 in the XServes though.
__________________
MacBook Pro 2.16GHz Core2Duo 3GB RAM, G4 1.4GHz OSX Tiger 1.25GB RAM, Dual 2GHz G5 OSX Tiger 2GB RAM (freakin shweet)
Athlon 64 Windoze XP for school work (programming) 1GB RAM
dferns@macosx.com
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old May 25th, 2007, 12:07 PM
Lt Major Burns's Avatar
"Dicky" Charlteston-Burns
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Manchester
Posts: 3,329
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Lt Major Burns will become famous soon enough
POWER6 is a huge-power chip, designed for clusters and servers. not the little man and a workstation. or portable.

and who's to say that IBM would want to invest their money making a PowerPC version of it? remember that the G5/PowerPC 970 was not derived from the POWER5, but from the POWER4.

the reason for the switch was not clock speeds. it was IBM's unwillingness to even show much of an interest in forwarding themselves in the consumer computer market.

the G5 cost IBM a lot of money to constantly research and develop. by comparison, the R+D stopped on their other business about a year ago: the chips destined for the PS3, Xbox360 and the Wii.

IBM basically stopped caring for apple, by the sounds of things. Intel shares a lot of the same interests, and i also don't think that the G5's would be faster than the Mac Pro's now - remember that in nearly two years, the top-level G5 only got speedbumped *twice*, once from 2.5ghz to 2.7ghz, and then from 2.7ghz back *down* to 2.5ghz, albeit dual-core. we would not be seeing much progress. the Core architecture is some of the most impressive seen in the industry for years... and even AMD are pretty much saying "christ, that's good".
__________________
Dual 1.8GHz G5 2GB, 1TB, Radeon 9600XT 128MB, 10.5
20" Apple Cinema Display + Dell 2005FPW 20" dual-head
iBook G3 700MHz
640MB, 40GB, Rage128 16MB, 10.4, dying battery
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old May 25th, 2007, 10:27 PM
Qion's Avatar
Uber Nothing
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In a democrazy.
Posts: 2,404
Thanks: 50
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Qion will become famous soon enough
This chip is impressive, no doubt about it. However, as was said before, it's not consumer-bound. We're talking servers.

We'll see what Intel does down the line. They've been extremely productive so far, haven't they?
__________________
• 2.66GHz Mac Pro Quad Xeon
• 2.2GHz Santa Rosa MacBook Pro
• 2.0GHz iMac Core Duo
• 8GB iPhone
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old May 26th, 2007, 04:01 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
macwhiz is on a distinguished road
Regarding whether Apple made the right move, switching to Intel.

I think Yes & NO. But they've done a great job by adapting Universal Binary standard, they can use powerful offerings from IBM, Intel & AMD, if they ever want, in their workstations & servers without any binary compatibility issues.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old May 27th, 2007, 10:10 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Groton, CT, USA
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
chemistry_geek is on a distinguished road
Given Apple's great talent for porting its code to other processor platforms, I think it would have been a better deal for the consumer for Apple to add Intel, not just switch from IBM PowerPC. This way the consumer could reap the benefits of whichever processor was king-of-the-hill either power-efficient or foot-stomping power, and thus incite competition between IBM and Intel in the same arena.
__________________
Power Mac G5
Dual 2.7 GHz PowerPC G5, 4.5 GB RAM DDR SDRAM, OEM internal SATA 250 GB HD, Hitachi Deskstar internal SATA 500 GB HD, LaCie BigDisk Extreme 500 GB HD, External Pioneer A109 DVD superdrive, External LiteOnLiter CD burner, iSight video camera, 5th generation 60 GB video iPod, 4th generation 40 GB iPod, Apple 23" Cinima Display, KDS Radius 19" LCD Display, Mac OS X 10.4.6.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old May 28th, 2007, 12:37 AM
Satcomer's Avatar
In Geostationary Orbit
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,020
Thanks: 2
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Satcomer is a jewel in the roughSatcomer is a jewel in the roughSatcomer is a jewel in the rough
Well I can feel the heat already from this chip. Intel is mastering the lower heat but faster chip angle. I know my Dual G5 is a heat generating machine. I can't imagine the heat the will come with this new chip. Their past chips heat do not give me confidence in this new chip.
__________________
PowerMac G5 Dual 1.8(Rev A.), , 7 Gig RAM, Pioneer DVR-110, ATI X800XT, OS X 10.4.11 & 10.5.3, 23'' HD LCD
Mac Book Pro Core 2 Duo 2.16Mhz, SuperDrive, ATI X1600, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.5.3
Tibook 400Mhz, DVD drive, 1024 RAM, ATI Rage, OS X 10.4.7
1TB Time Capsule
5g iPod 30Gig White
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:49 PM.


Mac Support® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.1.0
Copyright 2000-2008 DigitalCrowd, Inc.