[RedStar]

Apple VP: PowerBook G5 still ways off
Tuesday, April 20, 2004 @ 7:30am



Greg Joswiak, Apple vice president of product marketing, told the BBCNews in an article yesterday regarding Apple's updated laptops that a PowerBook G5 won't be released in the forseeable future. "In the very long run, the G5 is part of our long term processor roadmap, but it will be some time before that processor will be in a notebook," Mr. Joswiak said, without elaborating further. Apple has consistantly said that the cooling and power requirements of the G5 pose significant engineering obstacles for packing the chip into a portable.

Well I guess I will be keeping my ti800 for the foreseeable future.

[Mark Tungston]

since i got Panther, i have been much more satsfied with even my old Tibook 500!

[runejoha]

Originally posted by RedStar:
Well I guess I will be keeping my ti800 for the foreseeable future.

We will see it Januray 2005 then. The latest upgrade is a big joke; just to say they have upgraded it.

Jobs statement about seeing the new G5 in the end of 2004 was indeed true. Talk about confusing the market by telling the truth. This reminds me to Ecos "Baudoliono". The man is lying so much that he confuse people when he tells the truth.

Anyway, I am indeed happy with my new PB so I am not going to complain about the specs of today. If I wanted a game machine I would have invested my money in a Dell desktop with 2-3 GHz which is much faster than a PowerMac in every way.

[schuey100]

This part is also intriguing:

"He declined to be pinned down to a date for G5 portables, but pointed out that it had taken at least two years for the G4 chip to make it from the desktop to the notebook."

2 years????

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by schuey100:
This part is also intriguing:

"He declined to be pinned down to a date for G5 portables, but pointed out that it had taken at least two years for the G4 chip to make it from the desktop to the notebook."

And he would be wrong. It took 1 year and 4 months. (Sept. 1999 to Jan. 2001.)

[schuey100]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
And he would be wrong. It took 1 year and 4 months. (Sept. 1999 to Jan. 2001.)

LOL

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
And he would be wrong. It took 1 year and 4 months. (Sept. 1999 to Jan. 2001.)

He is probably talking about the internal time span, and whole project design time spans. It is conceivable that the machine was 2 years in the planning from when they first had access to play with desktop G4 chips.

[The Placid Casual]

P.S. He would say this wouldn't he... he is trying to sell a new range of machine!

Does a salesman trying to sell goods he has now, hawk superior goods that may come in the future at some point, at the same time?

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
He is probably talking about the internal time span, and whole project design time spans. It is conceivable that the machine was 2 years in the planning from when they first had access to play with desktop G4 chips.

Perhaps, but then the G5 1.8 was announced way back in October 2002, and probably was in Apple's hands in enough numbers to do real work with later that year. 2 years later would be around the end of 2004.

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
P.S. He would say this wouldn't he... he is trying to sell a new range of machine!

Does a salesman trying to sell goods he has now, hawk superior goods that may come in the future at some point, at the same time?

I agree completely.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
And he would be wrong. It took 1 year and 4 months. (Sept. 1999 to Jan. 2001.)

And the G4 was stuck at 500Mhz for over a year.

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
2 years later would be around the end of 2004.

Good point. I personally (using the screen on my old classic as a crystal ball!), can see a new g5 machine coming out on this time span... End of 2004/Beginning of 2005. MW in January seems about right to me.

[RedStar]

Do you think this was just a tactic to get more people to buy g4's? Maybe they are trying to stop people from waiting on the g5's?

Personally, I feel like this is kind of mean. Apple will not announce new products ahead of time, but will gladly tell us that something ISN'T coming out.

[madmacgames]

Originally posted by RedStar:
Personally, I feel like this is kind of mean.

And I feel your signature is meaner.

[runejoha]

Originally posted by RedStar:
Do you think this was just a tactic to get more people to buy g4's? Maybe they are trying to stop people from waiting on the g5's?

Personally, I feel like this is kind of mean. Apple will not announce new products ahead of time, but will gladly tell us that something ISN'T coming out.

There could be many reasons! Maybe they have a agreement with Motorola to buy the G4s for a spesific period etc. etc. I think they have calculated that the interest for the Apple products are higher with the G5 wait; at the same time the 64 market is still not here as the commercial product. None serious laptop competitors have released a 64 architecture etc. I think Apple have their products ready long time before the release date, everything is buisiness. They are probably less honest than Microsoft (which is so big that they earn more to be honest about releasedates than Apple, never forget that!)

While Dell, Hp Compaq and Toshiba don't care to much about their image (exception to be business related) and design, Apple have these features as main image. Apple is also dependent to make something to look good, perform better and live up to the mac-users requirements. (Read here and you find out that this is not that easy :-)

The fact that they are a minority they have to play all their cards the right way (3%!) to sell more and even more and to get attention. The iPod market will not last for a long time. When MS release their answer which functions with all MP3 players iTunes and iPod will be just another minority. Apple believes that people continue to use a product their are used to (like MS products for most users), but maybe their forget that MS products where very cost effective the first years with a solid agreement with IBM.

Time will show!

[Eriamjh]

Apple can't get better G5s in the desktops, how they gonna do a PB G5?

[SSharon]

I just don't believe this VP's excuses about putting a G5 in a laptop. Fine, maybe its not ready yet and won't be announced as soon as I want but if they can get 2 G5's inside of an xserve (don't know exact dimensions) they can definately get 1 slower G5 in a laptop. They just want to sell the G4's for longer but if Apple doesn't give the pro users a G5 laptop by late August why not just buy a fast PC and save some money and time waiting. Mac-users are loyal but a 1.5ghz G4 just does not compare to PC laptops today.

[RooneyX]

I want a G5 as badly as anyone else. But if Apple moved to quickly to the G5 then then problem facing them would be how would it scale? Would it scale quickly enough within the power requirements a Powerbook needs?

For example, if they released a G5 1.6Ghz PB and then found they couldn't move to 1.8 or 2Ghz within a year then there would be no updates for a long time. That would kill business.

With the G4 they can be confident that it will keep increasing in speed every 3-6 months and power consumption will still be low. Mhz per Mhz the G5 doesn't really offer much over the G4 anyway. It's only at far higher speeds and with 64bit software that the G5 shines.

[runejoha]

Originally posted by SSharon:
I just don't believe this VP's excuses about putting a G5 in a laptop. Fine, maybe its not ready yet and won't be announced as soon as I want but if they can get 2 G5's inside of an xserve (don't know exact dimensions) they can definately get 1 slower G5 in a laptop. They just want to sell the G4's for longer but if Apple doesn't give the pro users a G5 laptop by late August why not just buy a fast PC and save some money and time waiting. Mac-users are loyal but a 1.5ghz G4 just does not compare to PC laptops today.

Well, this is the monpolic dilemma for apple HW and SW. They can competite because OS X only are for Apple computers, and most of their users buy it because of that, not the HW. The PBs are as well just as good for many things, even though the herz is a little low (but remember the RISC and CISC archtecture is indeed different and this speed measure is not even telling the half truth) - and the graphics cards in the PBs is the state of the art.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
I want a G5 as badly as anyone else. But if Apple moved to quickly to the G5 then then problem facing them would be how would it scale? Would it scale quickly enough within the power requirements a Powerbook needs?

For example, if they released a G5 1.6Ghz PB and then found they couldn't move to 1.8 or 2Ghz within a year then there would be no updates for a long time. That would kill business.

With the G4 they can be confident that it will keep increasing in speed every 3-6 months and power consumption will still be low. Mhz per Mhz the G5 doesn't really offer much over the G4 anyway. It's only at far higher speeds and with 64bit software that the G5 shines.

That doesn't make much sense either.

If they released a G5 1.5, they'd have to move up to a G5 1.8 or thereabouts.

If they released a G4 1.5 (which they did), they'd have to move up to a G4 1.8 or a G5 1.8 or thereabouts.

Thus, unless Motorola can come out with a G4 1.8 by fall, either way Apple is SOL for a PB update at the end of 2004 if IBM can't make a laptop-friendly G5 1.8 by then.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
That doesn't make much sense either.

If they released a G5 1.5, they'd have to move up to a G5 1.8 or thereabouts.

If they released a G4 1.5 (which they did), they'd have to move up to a G4 1.8 or a G5 1.8 or thereabouts.

A 300Mhz increase on a Rev A G5 Powerbook might end up taking more than a year. Nobody can tell right now. Maybe not even IBM or Apple.

But the G4 will scale quicker and the power requirements will stay the same.

If the G5 Powerbook only went up a couple hundred Mhz a year it would really kill sales if Windows laptops keep getting faster and Power Macs too. By the time they could get a 1.5Ghz G5 in a Powerbook the G4 could be at 2Ghz.

I think the move to G5 will only happen when IBM can guarantee they will have faster and faster energy efficient 970s every 3-6 months. I haven't read any news or gossip about IBM being able to do this yet.

[Eug Wanker]

But the G4 will scale quicker and the power requirements will stay the same.

I think that's the very first time I've ever heard anyone say a G4 would scale quicker than a G5.

[Casper Crane]

Originally posted by SSharon:
I just don't believe this VP's excuses about putting a G5 in a laptop. Fine, maybe its not ready yet and won't be announced as soon as I want but if they can get 2 G5's inside of an xserve (don't know exact dimensions) they can definately get 1 slower G5 in a laptop. They just want to sell the G4's for longer but if Apple doesn't give the pro users a G5 laptop by late August why not just buy a fast PC and save some money and time waiting. Mac-users are loyal but a 1.5ghz G4 just does not compare to PC laptops today.

i disagree. i haven't tried the 1.5 Ghz Powerbook yet, but my 1 Ghz Powerbook with 1 GB RAM feels at least as fast as any PC notebook I've tried. It sure is a hell of a lot faster than the 1G/1G Pentium notebook i also have. i'm sure you can get a mean windows gaming laptop now for the price of a top end 17-inch, and it will be somewhat faster, but at a great cost of personal satisfaction. the Mac is better. period.

it handles DV nicely, graphic design is quick. since i got this machine (rev. A 17-inch) i haven't pined for an upgrade at all (and this is very unusual for me). so i would bet that a 1.5 Ghz machine with 2 GB RAM would be kickass for a couple years.

if you need to do heavy DV stuff, get a desktop computer. this is a mobile workhorse. the G4 is good enough for now.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
I think that's the very first time I've ever heard anyone say a G4 would scale quicker than a G5.

Only in mobile form! Previously you/we've spoken about the desktop G5 scaling. Different rules apply here.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Only in mobile form! Previously you/we've spoken about the desktop G5 scaling. Different rules apply here.

Yeah, I know... just joking around.

However, while Motorola has been doing well to produce low power embedded chips, I'm not entirely confident of their ability to scale the G4 chip up quickly in clock speed. Certainly, this has not the case historically.

A low power 1.8 GHz chip is going to be hard for both IBM and Motorola, but I wouldn't be surprised if IBM beats them to it, esp. since it's clear that Apple would have wanted a G5 PowerBook asap, and both Apple and IBM would have been planning for it. Indeed, the PowerTune built into the 970FX is probably one of the features aimed specifically for this market. Luckily for Motorola, they were able to incorporate something somewhat similar in their latest 7447A series chips.

Actually, if Motorola does produce a G4 1.8 GHz with true DDR support and power specs appropriate for a laptop, I'll buy a PowerBook with that if Apple uses that in the next refresh. But somehow I'm guessing the next one will have a G5 1.8, even if it's not until Jan. 2005.

[RooneyX]

There will probably be one more G4 update this year. Then the G5. I suspect the G5 will be clocked at the same speed but touted as being much faster even if independent benchmarks only give a small improvement. Personally I'd like Apple to offer upgradable graphics in the future. We should be given a service to upgrade hard drives, optical drives and graphics cards without problems with the warranty.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
We should be given a service to upgrade hard drives, optical drives and graphics cards without problems with the warranty.

GPUs are often soldered to the motherboard. I don't know if all of Apple's laptops have immovable GPUs, but I would expect so. It saves both space and cost.

I'm not sure upgrading hard drives voids the warranty if it's done by an Apple-certified centre, but it's $$$$.

[RedStar]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
GPUs are often soldered to the motherboard. I don't know if all of Apple's laptops have immovable GPUs, but I would expect so. It saves both space and cost.

I'm not sure upgrading hard drives voids the warranty if it's done by an Apple-certified centre, but it's $$$$.

The new alienware gaming laptops have replaceable video cards. This is something apple could do to lure more gamers/game makers over to the platform I think. If they could extend that to other parts (hard drive) as well that would be even better, but a swappable gpu would be amazing.

As far as GHz to GHz...I could care less if I have a 1.5 or a 1.6, but I do want a huge (half the clock speed) front side bus, and a large ram capacity. THAT is why the g5 is such an important chip to get into the PB.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
GPUs are often soldered to the motherboard.

Ever since the 9600 Mobility ATI has been providing upgradable chipsets to manufacturers. I really wish Apple would take advantage of this. Mac users were paying 600 bucks through the nose when Geforce 3 cards were being sold by Apple for Power Macs.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by RedStar:
The new alienware gaming laptops have replaceable video cards. This is something apple could do to lure more gamers/game makers over to the platform I think. If they could extend that to other parts (hard drive) as well that would be even better, but a swappable gpu would be amazing.

As far as GHz to GHz...I could care less if I have a 1.5 or a 1.6, but I do want a huge (half the clock speed) front side bus, and a large ram capacity. THAT is why the g5 is such an important chip to get into the PB.

Those Alienware gaming laptops are humungous. Personally, I'd much rather have a cheaper and lighter laptop than an upgradable GPU, and so would 99% of PowerBook buyers.

Furthermore, a G4 1.6 (or G5 1.8 for that matter) laptop is not going to lure any gamers over, even if the GPU were upgradable.Also, games come out later and are much less plentiful on the Mac side, and games are not as well-optimized on the Mac side, since many are simply ports.

A swappable GPU would be a complete waste of money for Apple.

[madmacgames]

Originally posted by SSharon:
I just don't believe this VP's excuses about putting a G5 in a laptop. Fine, maybe its not ready yet and won't be announced as soon as I want but if they can get 2 G5's inside of an xserve (don't know exact dimensions) they can definately get 1 slower G5 in a laptop.

an XServe is roughly 1 Rack unit (1.75 inches).. the Xserve actually comes in at 1.73 inches if you want to get specific. The thickest powerbook is the 12" of coarse, coming in at only 1.18 inches, a difference of a little over 1/2 an inch... so yeah they probably could put it in a powerbook right now but only if it were the 15 or 17 and they made it 1.75 inches thick, but who wants a notebook that thick? 1/2 inch may not seem like that much just thinking about it, but I have a 12" powerbook in front of me, and a piece of 1 unit rack gear off to the side of my desk, and if my notebook was that thick, I could hardly call it a notebook at all! I'd feel like it was 1990 again (or whatever year notebooks were that thick).

[arekkusu]

And, just for a counterpoint, what was the lead time between the first desktop G3 and the first PowerBook G3? Less than a month? If I remember correctly, both shipped in November 1997.

[slider]

How many times do we need to be told this? How many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie pop?

[Link]

Upgradable video module chips don't necessarily mean bigger machine. They could simply implement it in a 'drop out' module perhaps :shrug: there's always a way

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by arekkusu:
And, just for a counterpoint, what was the lead time between the first desktop G3 and the first PowerBook G3? Less than a month? If I remember correctly, both shipped in November 1997.

Some of the early Powerbook G3s caught fire.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by Eriamjh:
Apple can't get better G5s in the desktops, how they gonna do a PB G5?

Exactly.

There won't be a Dual 3.0 gHz G5 PowerMac until after the New Year.

Look at the heat that the G4 produces now in the PB's. G5 is that much harder to deal with.

[Link]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
Exactly.

There won't be a Dual 3.0 gHz G5 PowerMac until after the New Year.

Look at the heat that the G4 produces now in the PB's. G5 is that much harder to deal with.

Stop worrying. I'm so sure we'll see the g5 powerbook before the end of september, so sure well.. yeah I'm not going to bother worrying about it.

Stop being so paranoid.

[Switched2Mac]

This heating issue is not unique to Apple/G5.

Intel and AMD have the same issues.

Check out the P4 laptops at CompUSA. They are thick, heavy and have 3 large (compared to Apple) noisy fans.

The Centrino's run much cooler. But they took awhile to get them designed, tested and into production.

Heat is a natural by-product that the engineers must struggle with each time a processor gets a major upgrade (G4-G5, P3-P4, etc.).

Given how hot the G4 runs in the PowerBooks now, I have no doubt that G5 heating issues (already an issue with the PowerMacs and their roomy, multi-fan cases) will be a huge problem in a laptop form factor.

IBM may well be looking into a "light" version of the G5 that runs cooler but sacrifices some performance compared to a "regular" G5. Similar to Celeron or Centrino style chips on the Intel side.

I can easily see Apple not introducing a G5 PowerBook until WWDC 2005 at the earliest. The Apple VP was just setting the appropriate level of expectation for such a product. Smart move on Apple's part. I am glad they made that announcement because you can now plan your next purchase based on that information. The problem with Apple is they don't tell you anything until the day its announced, not even a hint.

So if you were holding out for a G5 PB, you now know it won't be anytime soon. So you can go out, purchase one of the upgraded PB's announced this week and be perfectly happy with your purchase. I wish they had done the same thing on the PowerMac side of the house. Set the expectation level for consumers rather than leaving everyone guessing.

Your thoughts?

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by Link:
Stop worrying. I'm so sure we'll see the g5 powerbook before the end of september, so sure well.. yeah I'm not going to bother worrying about it.

Stop being so paranoid.

Not paranoid.

Just realistic.

I will be picking up one of the new PowerBooks this week after work. Apple made the announcement and now I know that there is no point in waiting a few months.

Heat. Always the worst problem that laptop engineers face in the design and manufacturing process.

And as CPU's get faster, they get hotter. This problem will only become more pronounced as time goes on, for both IBM and Intel.

Until we come up with a revolutionary CPU design where heat is not an issue.

Now the question is 12" or 15". Hmmm.......

[Link]

"heat problems with the desktops" hrmm?

So you think the processor is running hotter AFTER a die shrink? Oh brother.

Apparently the heat issues were with the processor running too COLD, not too hot, that's just what I heard though/

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by Link:
"heat problems with the desktops" hrmm?

So you think the processor is running hotter AFTER a die shrink? Oh brother.

Apparently the heat issues were with the processor running too COLD, not too hot, that's just what I heard though/

I meant in comparison to the G4 in the PowerBooks.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by Link:
"heat problems with the desktops" hrmm?

So you think the processor is running hotter AFTER a die shrink? Oh brother.

Apparently the heat issues were with the processor running too COLD, not too hot, that's just what I heard though/

I cannot be sure of this with the G5.

Does anyone have any factual evidence either way?

[Drakino]

but if they can get 2 G5's inside of an xserve (don't know exact dimensions) they can definately get 1 slower G5 in a laptop.

First off, the XServe to Powerbook compairson is not a good one to make. Sure, the XServe is thin, but it is a rackmount server that has a few advantages:

1. More internal room, period. Sure, it's thin, but it's wide and deep.

2. Fans. They can put high speed always on fans since the system isn't running off a battery, nor normally sitting on someones lap.

The latest upgrade is a big joke; just to say they have upgraded it.

Why was it a big joke? Yould you have rather they let the 1.25 be the top of the line for another 9 months while the G5 Powerbook finishes up the development run?

500->667->800->1000->1250->1500
400->550->667->867->1000->1333

That looks about right to me. Sure, it wasn't to a G5, but the speed increases were what they should have been.

If Apple could release a G5 Powerbook right now that ran as people expected, then they would. I bought my Powerbook fully aware that a G5 would come one day. When it does, I'm not going to be mad in any way, because I have had plenty of time to own an Apple laptop and use it, instead of sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for an unlikely release.

So you think the processor is running hotter AFTER a die shrink? Oh brother.

It very well could. Smaller doesn't always mean cooler. Your cramming the same components (and in many cases more) into a smaller area, you need a more efficient way of getting the heat out of that small area. If the cooling technology doesn't advance, then yes, a die shrink could mean the chip runs hotter.

Think of it this way. ATI released the Radeon 9700 Pro in August of 2002. It's a .15 micron chip, with about 110 million transistors.

NVidia released the FX 5800 a few months later as a .13 micron chip. It was a tad larger, at about 115 million transistors. It put out quite a bit more heat then the ATI chip, and also used more power. This chip mandated an insane 2 slot cooling solution with a fan noiser then hell. And, the big kicker, it didn't do as well.

If the G5 Powerbook only went up a couple hundred Mhz a year it would really kill sales if Windows laptops keep getting faster and Power Macs too.

The Intel world actually came to a halt for a while recently. For a few months, the P4 3.2gHz was the fastest chip. This came out in July 2003. Finally last month you could get a 3.4gHz P4, but with a catch. It's a newer P4 with a huge pipeline, one that slows the chip down. Thus in many cases, the 3.2 is still faster. This from a company that usually churns out a faster processor every 1-2 months.

Moore's law has definitly hit the bottom point right now in the average. August 2002, I bought a 2.26 gHz P4. Here we are 18 months later, and something double that speed isn't even on the horizon. For a while Intel was staging above the law, but now we are under it, so in the end it will probably average out.

[sbc]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
I can easily see Apple not introducing a G5 PowerBook until WWDC 2005 at the earliest.

Your thoughts?

That would be a very intersting release date if it is true. It would put them head to head with the complete release of Intel's Centrino 2 branding suite.

For those that would purchase Apple and PC products could easily pick up the revised PB's now, pick up the complete package of Centrino in 6-7 months, and by second quarter of 2005 get the second generation of the PB G5. I'm liking this plan already, hopefully my wallet and a finance company will too

[Eug Wanker]

It very well could. Smaller doesn't always mean cooler. Your cramming the same components (and in many cases more) into a smaller area, you need a more efficient way of getting the heat out of that small area. If the cooling technology doesn't advance, then yes, a die shrink could mean the chip runs hotter.

G5 970 130 nm 1.8 GHz = 51 W typical
G5 970FX 90 nm 2.0 GHz = 24.5 W typical

Moore's law has definitly hit the bottom point right now in the average. August 2002, I bought a 2.26 gHz P4. Here we are 18 months later, and something double that speed isn't even on the horizon.

Actually, technically Moore's law refers to the doubling of transistors, not speed.

[Tomster]

Even if Apple had the G5's scheduled as the next upgrade, they will NEVER, EVER, tell us, even going as far as to blatantly lie to us. That was the lesson the industry learned from Osborne computers. Honesty = bankruptcy.

For those unfamiliar with the story, here is the story in a nutshell. In 1982, the Osborne Computer Company introduced the Executive, then proceeded to announce the successor, the Vixen, at the time, still in the design phase. Everyone stopped buying the Executive and waited for the Vixen. Sales crashed, the company ran out of money and filed for bankruptcy in 1983. If there is the hint of the G5 coming out soon, sales of the top of the line Powerbook will plummet.

[Link]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
G5 970 130 nm 1.8 GHz = 51 W typical
G5 970FX 90 nm 2.0 GHz = 24.5 W typical
Actually, technically Moore's law refers to the doubling of transistors, not speed.

[Drakino]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
G5 970 130 nm 1.8 GHz = 51 W typical
G5 970FX 90 nm 2.0 GHz = 24.5 W typical

Very good to see. My example above was just more of a general "smaller isn't always better" but in this case it is. The other part I left out was that smaller is more energy efficient due to the shorter traces. So some of the lower heat output comes from that savings.

Now we just need Apple to also get the chipset down in heat output and complexity. All signs do pretty much still point to late this year for a G5 Powerbook.

Actually, technically Moore's law refers to the doubling of transistors, not speed.

I don't know why I keep forgetting this. So far, Intel seems to be on track in that regard, just because they can afford to put a ton of cache on die these days. 6 megs of cache will take up a decent amount of transistors on a chip (Itanium 2).