# Future PowerPC beyond 3.2 ghz?



## MacFreak (May 14, 2005)

IBM and Apple own PowerPC. They approved to let Micro$hit to use PowerPC processor for XBoX only. It's very interesting since it will have 3.2 ghz this Dec 2005. Therefore PowerMac will go beyond than 3.2 ghz? Its very interesting since Apple have no comment about this. Umm...  Already leaked?


----------



## TimR (May 14, 2005)

I'm no expert but other threads at macrumours etc were saying that they are 3.2 but also that they were "stripped down" versions designed to do one thing very fast and were not really suitable for a computer enviroment which has many varied tasks.

Its all a bit deep for an average computer user like myself (I'm learning!) but suffice to say whatever money gets spent developing at IBM will eventually trickle down to Apple.

later
Tim


----------



## Convert (May 14, 2005)

Yeah, after all, the XBox is a gaming machine. It has an OS, but it's different to Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux, it's not like that, it's made just for gaming.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 14, 2005)

Convert said:
			
		

> Yeah, after all, the XBox is a gaming machine. It has an OS, but it's different to Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux, it's not like that, it's made just for gaming.


I wouldn't sound so sure about that.  Where there's a CPU, there always seems a way to get Linux onto there.  XBox, PS2, Gamecube all have implementations of Linux running on them. I'm sure there will be hacks to get the new XBox to do things it wasn't intended to do.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 14, 2005)

TimR is correct, the CPU in the XBox is a stripped down PPC.  How much has been stripped away is unknown, but at the very least playing with speeds above 3GHz and mass producing them can only help the rest of the PPC line get better.
I've always believed that all these PPC derivatives coming out of IBM has slowed production of PPC we know as the G5.  R&D and tweaking of the manufacturing process for these new PPCs, like he one in XBox and Cell, which appear to have been developed simultaneously, probably took away key people working on future G5/G6 CPUs.  
The resources needed to keep the flow of chips to Sony and Microsoft to keep up with demand has to have put a strain on IBM's manufacturing.


----------



## Captain Code (May 14, 2005)

I haven't read anything saying that it's a stripped down version, besides people's comments on it with no proof.  It just says it's a custom PPC chip.  

I read that Microsoft was showing game demos on a PM G5 though so this does seem like it's pretty close to the same chip.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 14, 2005)

ZDNet quotes a Microsoft spokesman saying that the XBox 360 demos running on the G5 emulate some of the technology behind XBox.  So some stuff is certainly there, some stuff is not.  I'm sure they must be pretty close.  Specs are impressive.
I noticed the max FSB bandwidth is the same as the dual 2.7Ghz PM and from one chip has to be a phenomenal performer.


----------



## texanpenguin (May 15, 2005)

The boon for Mac users will be that IBM will have a very steady income flow from this (the XBox will sell great and everyone knows it), and that should enable them to overcome the hurdles they have about going faster at present.

Edit: I don't know if the derogatory misspelling of Microsoft was required.


----------



## Chazam (May 15, 2005)

MacFreak said:
			
		

> IBM and Apple own PowerPC. They approved to let Micro$hit to use PowerPC processor for XBoX only.


Isn't Nintendo's next console supposed to be PPC also?



> The Chinese website Unika.com have what they claim are the Spec's for Nintendo's next-gen Revolution! Here's a quick translation by Google.
> 
> # CPU: IBM G5 Custom x 4 2.5GHz cores, level 1 cache 128KB, a level 2 cache 512KB share
> 
> # GPU: RN520 x 2core 16MB eDRAM, PC R520 AMR technology supports 720p and 1080i.



Source

Looks like IBM is going to be busy......


----------



## Mikuro (May 15, 2005)

IBM is delivering the PS3's CPU, too (although it's not strictly a PPC, IIRC). Also, the GameCube uses a variant of the G3. IBM's busy, indeed.

It's kind of ironic that the state of Mac gaming is so sad when so many consoles use the same processor family. Even the SNES used Apple-like processors (a variant of the processor used in the Apple II, with some added graphics routines).

There was actually a rumor going around that IBM was giving MS and Sony the exact same processors. But that turned out to be just a rumor. Would've been funny, though.


----------



## HomunQlus (May 15, 2005)

If the specs on CNET are right, it is most probably one of the most powerful gaming consoles ever done. But I wonder when they put 3.2 GHz G5's into those consoles, then why aren't there any PowerMacs with these speeds? I find it a kind of strange.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 15, 2005)

Well, several sites report saying it's not exactly the same G5 we're using, so then you might have to wonder if it's pin compatible with the Apple motherboard.  
If not then there's probably firmware and chipset support to take into consideration.  Cooling the chip doesn't seem to be a problem as the heatsink I've seen from leaked pics looks small.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (May 15, 2005)

HomunQlus said:
			
		

> If the specs on CNET are right, it is most probably one of the most powerful gaming consoles ever done.


Um, isn't that the reason they come up with new consoles? How much sense would it make to take a performance step back?


----------



## Convert (May 15, 2005)

Oscar Castillo said:
			
		

> I wouldn't sound so sure about that.  Where there's a CPU, there always seems a way to get Linux onto there.  XBox, PS2, Gamecube all have implementations of Linux running on them. I'm sure there will be hacks to get the new XBox to do things it wasn't intended to do.




Yes, you can _get_ Linux on there (like I have on my Xbox), but it's not there in the first place. By linux I mean An actual desktop, etc.

You'd have to either hack it and install it, or hack it to release it.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 15, 2005)

Convert said:
			
		

> Yes, you can _get_ Linux on there (like I have on my Xbox), but it's not there in the first place. By linux I mean An actual desktop, etc.
> 
> You'd have to either hack it and install it, or hack it to release it.


In the words of the words of the Donald Rumsfeld, "It'll be a long hard slog", but I think anyone here would understand that if they were to try.


----------



## Satcomer (May 15, 2005)

I feel maybe the 3 GHz hold up from IBM may have been the development of the chip for the XBOX. I just hope IBM will translate the knowledge to the Mac G5 version chip.


----------



## Convert (May 15, 2005)

Oscar Castillo said:
			
		

> In the words of the words of the Donald Rumsfeld, "It'll be a long hard slog", but I think anyone here would understand that if they were to try.



Agreed.

I had someone install Linux for me, it's a Red hat distro, works well. He did a soft mod though (no actual hardware modifications needed!)


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 15, 2005)

Well, well, what do you know. According to the XBox 360 developer video it's also water-cooled.  Some nice closeup shots of the system board too.


----------



## Convert (May 15, 2005)

Where is this video?


----------



## Captain Code (May 15, 2005)

I think this is what he's talking about
http://www.filerush.com/download.php?target=XBOX360Vid.wmv


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 15, 2005)

That's the one.


----------



## Reality (May 15, 2005)

In that video they say it has 3 Symmetric cores. In early reports M$ said the 360 would have 6 PowerPC G5 CPU cores. I'm just wondering if someone can clear up a little question of mine. Are these "Symmetric cores" the same thing as the "G5 CPU cores" mention earlier? I'm just trying to understand if M$ wanted at first to have six, then dropped it to three.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 15, 2005)

Reality said:
			
		

> In that video they say it has 3 Semitic cores. In early reports M$ said the 360 would have 6 PowerPC G5 CPU cores. I'm just wondering if someone can clear up a little question of mine. Are these "Semitic cores" the same thing as the "G5 CPU cores" mention earlier? I'm just trying to understand if M$ wanted at first to have six, then dropped it to three.


It's 3 Symmetric cores.  2 hardware threads per core. 2X3=6.


----------



## Reality (May 15, 2005)

A little confusing but I think I understand it. In other news I was watching the video through one more time and noticed something in 360 prototype line. 






It's like a ugly Powermac or something. It's the crone and handles I think that just make it look like one to me.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 15, 2005)

Looks like it has no shell at all in the pic.  I may get one.  Would be nice if the SDK is available to anyone, but I hear it's no easy task to get ahold of.  Not like picking up Visual Studio at CompUSA, nor is it part of Visual Studio.


----------



## Satcomer (May 15, 2005)

Reality said:
			
		

> A little confusing but I think I understand it. In other news I was watching the video through one more time and noticed something in 360 prototype line.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What video codec were you using to play the movie in QuickTime? My QuickTime 7 Pro will not play the movie (neither will MPlayer or VLC).


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 15, 2005)

The original is a .WMV format, but as you can see he's playing a .MOV.  Probably converted it, or someone else did.


----------



## Reality (May 15, 2005)

It was converted by a site called Gametrailers.com. If your a gamer, they are the place to check out the latest movie media. But yeah, that's where I got it from. 

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=5734&type=mov


----------



## Quicksilver (May 16, 2005)

It would be really nice if Apple and Microsoft really teamed up for once. And it would be nicer to play those xbox 360 games on your Apple G5.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 16, 2005)

I suppose what good can come out of this is that the code base for these games opens up opportunities for developers to support the Mac with much less of a financial risk than supporting two completely different platforms x86/PPC.


----------



## Captain Code (May 16, 2005)

But won't the XBox use Direct X?  I would think they would instead of OpenGL which would make porting games to OS X really hard.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 16, 2005)

The majority of worthwhile games for the PC will use DirectX instead of OpenGL, but it should cut down on development time than starting from an x86 code base.  
Don't know for sure, I've never tried, but considerig the origins of OpenGL, I have a hard time believing that it can be so inferior that it's rarely considered for game development.  I'd have to give both a try.  Anyone have Halo for the Mac?  Is it any less visually lacking than the PC or XBox?


----------



## Lt Major Burns (May 16, 2005)

direct x has only become the full standard since 9.0. it's still on 9.0.  open gl for years was the standard, untill about 2 years ago


----------



## texanpenguin (May 16, 2005)

But the point is, the Xbox 360 is PPC. Development for the games is being done on G5s. That strongly implies that there's a DirectX for Mac now available from Microsoft.

Imagine THAT.


----------



## Captain Code (May 16, 2005)

There no doubt is but is MS ever going to release it for OS X?  I highly doubt it.  Unless someone leaks it


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 16, 2005)

Lt Major Burns said:
			
		

> direct x has only become the full standard since 9.0. it's still on 9.0.  open gl for years was the standard, untill about 2 years ago



I'd have to say 8.0 is when DirectX came of age.  It's then when I noticed the heavy duty GeForce and Radeon cards appearing with 8.0 support.
OpenGL shouldn't be in such bad shape, I think it's just the it doesn't get any recognition anymore.  The opengl.org website always has plenty of activity.


----------



## Scottfab (May 16, 2005)

MS does play nice with Apple to prevent becoming a monopoly. However, they dominate the computer game market and they know it. They'll most likely never release Direct X for OSX.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (May 16, 2005)

plus open gl under macOS is far superior to the support on pc.  and direct will never be released on mac, because it has always been a core part of windows. it would be like offering a winders version of Quartz


----------



## Lycander (May 17, 2005)

Lt Major Burns said:
			
		

> plus open gl under macOS is far superior to the support on pc.


Must I pimp that BareFeats article again about Doom3 Mac port? OpenGL is not superior on the Mac, some might go as far as to say it is slightly hindered.

OpenGL is great... but it only does graphics. I love OpenGL because I do 3D modeling for fun, and I can't imagine using DirectX in the viewports. But as a programmer, when it comes to something such as a game, DX has a lot of built in functionality specifically for games. So my stance is "pick the right tool for the job."

Forget DX on Mac, I'd be much happier if Apple does form that gaming division, and spends time making a toolkit like DX and make it a FREE kit. I know there are SDKs, middleware, game engines etc. for Mac but it'd be great for a "common" toolbox of functionality that we pick and choose from.

If anyone has given DX programming an honest chance, ask yourself "wouldn't it be great to have something *like* that for OSX?"


----------



## Lt Major Burns (May 17, 2005)

Lycander said:
			
		

> Must I pimp that BareFeats article again about Doom3 Mac port? OpenGL is not superior on the Mac, some might go as far as to say it is slightly hindered.
> 
> OpenGL is great... but it only does graphics. I love OpenGL because I do 3D modeling for fun, and I can't imagine using DirectX in the viewports. But as a programmer, when it comes to something such as a game, DX has a lot of built in functionality specifically for games. So my stance is "pick the right tool for the job."
> 
> ...



respect.


----------



## MacFreak (May 17, 2005)

I noticed that PS3 is using Cell Processor more powerful than XBOX 360.. That is interesting going on with IBM and Apple. I am hoping that Apple will use Power5 for G5. Or quad core of of Cell for G5? Will be G6?


----------



## texanpenguin (May 18, 2005)

They won't release anything as insane as a Cell processor under the name G5.

And they will NOT upgrade to G6 until G5s have been in at least the PowerBooks for a requisite length of time. You can't have two generations between the PowerMac and PowerBook.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 18, 2005)

I don't think Apple would deliberately hold back any progress on the desktop while their engineers try to iron out the difficulties putting a G5 in a PowerBook.  We may never see a G5 in a PowerBook and may take the next generation G6 before the CPU architeture is able to be put in a portable.  I believe the G5 was ever designed for portables and it may be that trying to come up with an elaborate design to try and get one in a portable may be R&D time and money wasted.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (May 18, 2005)

BBC News said:
			
		

> Those hoping for a close-up look at Nintendo's new console were left wanting.
> 
> President Iwata Satoru showed off a prototype of the Revolution, which will be significantly smaller than its rivals.
> 
> ...



IBM. again.  looks like the PPC is in all 3 consoles now.  IIRC a PPC G4 powered the gamecube

IBM are going to filthy rich, if they can keep up with demand.... and we all know how well they did that when the first G5s were rolling out (or not)...


----------



## Krevinek (May 18, 2005)

Lycander said:
			
		

> If anyone has given DX programming an honest chance, ask yourself "wouldn't it be great to have something *like* that for OSX?"



Well, OS X hasn't had it, but OS 9 did: GameSprockets. It was pretty spiffy with the exception that Apple didn't want to keep it around past OS 9.. so it died a horrible death, even though game developers on the Mac were using it.

If Apple were to revive a similar project, you can bet that OpenGL would serve as the 2D/3D renderer in that project, and maybe a 2D-oriented wrapper around it, but the API would remain.


----------

