[Eug]

Original thread is here in the PowerMac forum, but I don't think this will actually see the most use in PowerMacs. If anything maybe PowerBooks and iMacs.

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a forum in which to place this thread. Please move this to Off Topic if you deem it necessary.

Specs:

0.13 micron process
Up to 1.3 GHz
8-10 Watts at 1 GHz.
No DDR??? (I'm not sure.)
Shipping in Q4, sampling next month

See EETimes article and Silicon Strategies article.

A 13 Watt 1.3 GHz AluBook would do just nicely. The lower power usage and quiet fans would be a big bonus. I must say though that I'd prefer to wait until the 7457-RM for DDR support before I upgrade my TiBook though.

[Eug]

It still is conceivable that the PowerBooks could use PPC970, considering that the CPU drops to under 20 W at 1.2 GHz. See here.

I wonder how complex this is going to make OS X.

Two different architectures (32-bit 74xx and 64-bit PPC970) running OS X in the same generation? Hmmmm...

[Graymalkin]

As has been explained before, the PPC970 is binary compatible with current PPC chips, this includes the current 74xx and 75x chips. Optimally you'd want to run 64-bit clean software on the 970 but you don't HAVE to. Both AIX and Solaris run on 64-bit processors yet easily run 32-bit apps written for the OS. OSX is no different, 32-bit code can run right along side 64-bit code.

Porting Cocoa apps is fairly easy because it is rare for your code to assume a particular size for primitives. Most of the memory management is done by the runtime and you're almost always handling references rather than directly manipulating addresses yourself. I'd bet a majority of smaller Cocoa apps are already clean enough to merely recompile with 64-bit addressing. Remember NeXTStep was ported to x86, Alpha, SPARC, and PA-RISC. These are drastically different architectures than the 970 is to the 74xx chips.

[Graymalkin]

Porting Cocoa apps is fairly easy because it is rare for your code to assume a particular size for primitives. Most of the memory management is done by the runtime and you're almost always handling references rather than directly manipulating addresses yourself. I'd bet a majority of smaller Cocoa apps are already clean enough to merely recompile with 64-bit addressing. Remember NeXTStep was ported to x86, Alpha, SPARC, and PA-RISC. These are drastically different architectures than the 970 is to the 74xx chips.

As is OSX will run 32-bit apps right alongside 64-bit apps. Solaris, AIX, Irix, and HP-UX already do this sort of stuff. OSX is no different in this regard.

[Eug]

As is OSX will run 32-bit apps right alongside 64-bit apps. Solaris, AIX, Irix, and HP-UX already do this sort of stuff. OSX is no different in this regard.

Yeah, I would have figured that Apple would have been developing OS X in anticipation of this for just about forever, but one always wonders how smooth the transition will be in the real world. And what is the break in time before developers are in line? 1 year? 2 years? More?

Also, would one expect the Carbon and Classic transition to be less smooth?

My assumption ise that 7457 will simply mean (almost) a drop-in solution for any machine, whereas PPC970 will require a much more significant transition period (perhaps first in the Xserve with OS X Server). PPC970 is radically different, and presents a whole host of potential hardware, OS, and software issues.

Caveat: I am just an end-user and know nothing about hardware design or software development.

[Art Vandelay]

From my understanding, the transition should be very smooth. IBM stated that there would only need to be minor changes to the OS. Current apps should run just fine. The transition would be analogous to the G3-G4 transition. Think of the PPC 970 as a 32-bit PPC plus 64-bit capability. Similarly, the G4 was a G3 plus AltiVec.

[Eug]

Specifications. Motorola press release.




Yep, it's a direct drop-in solution:

Offered in a 483-pin ceramic ball grid array (CBGA) package, the MPC7457 processor is footprint-compatible with Motorola's award-winning MPC7455 processor

Here are some benches. I dunno what these numbers mean though.
N.B. The 7447 is identical to the 7457 except that it doesn't support an L3 cache. Perhaps Apple will use the 7447 in the iBook, iMac, and the 7457 at higher clock speeds with L3 cache in the PowerBook?

Top Scores on EEMBC® Benchmarks
Motorola has benchmarked its 1.3 GHz MPC7447 processor in five different application areas using Embedded Microprocessor Benchmark Consortium's (EEMBC) out-of-the-box certification type: automotive/industrial, consumer, office automation, networking, and telecommunications.

The MPC7447 achieved the highest benchmark scores to date in EEMBC's five application areas:

- Automotive/Industrial: 1128.8
- Consumer: 172.2
- Office Automation: 1531.2
- Networking: 39.5
- Telecommunications: 37.7

"Previously, the highest performing embedded processor, according to EEMBC benchmarks, was our award-winning MPC7455 processor. With today's introduction and the certified MPC7447 EEMBC scores, we have again raised the high performance embedded processing bar," stated Bill Dunnigan, corporate vice president and general manager of Motorola's Computing Platform Division. "Motorola continues to deliver higher performance and a footprint-compatible migration path that preserves our customers' architectural investments without sacrificing power consumption."

Apple already has these of course:

Alpha samples of the MPC7457 and MPC7447 PowerPC processors are available today to selected customers.

[aehaas]

Actually the stats on the low power version of the 7457 show only 7.5 watts at 1 GHz.

This means only 15 watts for a DP version. I predict the 17" PBook has room for this, possibly by MWSF next Jan.

aehaas

[Eug]

Originally posted by aehaas:
Actually the stats on the low power version of the 7457 show only 7.5 watts at 1 GHz.

This means only 15 watts for a DP version. I predict the 17" PBook has room for this, possibly by MWSF next Jan.

aehaas

I don't foresee a dual laptop, but I guess I can't rule it out completely. The 1 GHz 7455 weighs in at around 30 W peak. I wonder what is the wattage of the lower-power version of the 7457 1 GHz at peak. 11 W?

[Gul Banana]

Well, this thing's no good for desktops, but the spectacle of a dual powerbook is an impressive one...

[issa]

The 1 GHz 7455 weighs in at around 30 W peak.

Eug,

It's a small point, but Motorola lists the power consumption of the 7455 at 1GHz as 15W typical and 22W maximum. See Table 7 on page 15 of the hardware specs PDF:
http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDF.../MPC7455EC.pdf

[Eug]

Originally posted by issa:
Eug,

It's a small point, but Motorola lists the power consumption of the 7455 at 1GHz as 15W typical and 22W maximum. See Table 7 on page 15 of the hardware specs PDF:
http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDF.../MPC7455EC.pdf

You are correct. I got the 30 off a 74xx summary page, but the format was all wonky.

...which makes me wonder, why is the TiBook fan on so much?

[issa]

The fact sheet on the MPC7457 shows the low power version to top out at 1 GHz. Still, with the ability to carry 2 MB of L3 cache and typical power consumption of 7.5 W at 1 GHz, the idea of a dual processor PowerBook with typical power consumption of the current 1 GHz (15 W) is intriguing.

[Xeo]

Stick with the original thread.