Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

milhous · Dec 12, 2002, 10:35 PM

From IBM PowerPC News December 2002
http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/products/...uctfocus2.html
_
Earlier this year, at the Microprocessor Forum, IBM showcased the first details of the PowerPC� 970, the first in a series of 64-bit processors built for performance and bandwidth-intensive applications.

With the introduction of the PowerPC 970, IBM has taken PowerPC performance to new heights. At up to 1.8 GHz, the PowerPC 970 is the fastest PowerPC yet introduced. But the 970 employs much more than frequency to answer the demands of high-performance computing customers. The 970's multiple execution units including an AltiVec compatible vector processor are fed by an up to 900-MHz processor interface bus, which can deliver data at a rate of up to 6.4 GBps.......
_

...The PowerPC 970 is designed in IBM 0.13-micron CMOS silicon-on-insulator (SOI) technology and will be manufactured in IBM's new state-of-the-art 300-mm facility in East Fishkill, NY. Sampling is scheduled to begin in the second quarter of 2003 with production expected in the second half of 2003.

superlarry · Dec 12, 2002, 10:43 PM

sweet

Eug · Dec 12, 2002, 11:47 PM

All this is of course old news, but it's good to see it so prominently displayed on their website.

"Sampling is scheduled to begin in the second quarter of 2003 with production expected in the second half of 2003."

milhous · Dec 13, 2002, 12:49 AM

Originally posted by Eug:
All this is of course old news, but it's good to see it so prominently displayed on their website.

"Sampling is scheduled to begin in the second quarter of 2003 with production expected in the second half of 2003."

I might be wrong on this, but I do believe this is the first instance that IBM is stating explicitly that it is compatible with Altivec(Velocity Engine). From Peter Sandon's 970 white paper, it only stated how many vector instructions the 970 had and we the public then compared that to the number of altivec instructions the G4 had, thus we assumed that it would be compatible.

I wonder if Apple will continue to use the term "Velocity Engine" in the 970 or rename it to "Velocity Engine II". Oh the speculation!

Eug · 01:39 AM

You may be right, but just about everything I've read has said that Altivec-compatibility was no question, esp. considering the design and the fact that IBM was one of the designers of it in the first place. Mind you, I'm not an engineer.

I'm counting on a name update, since the new chip is supposed to be significantly faster with Altivec instructions.

In any case, look for a new article at Ars soon, hopefully next week.

EDIT:

See here:

During the presentation of the PowerPC 970 processor, Peter Sandon revealed that the Vector SIMD units were indeed Altivec-compatible. The vector SIMD ISA was co-developed by IBM and Motorola, but the "Altivec" name was trademarked by Motorola, so IBM could not use Motorola's trademarked name to describe a functionally compatible implementation of the same vector SIMD unit.

I do note that the term "Altivec" is used in IBM's press release though, despite the trademark. Hmmm...

Superchicken · Dec 13, 2002, 03:54 AM

sweet well now it's confirmed... all of the advantages of the G4.. none of the disadvantages... I likey

ecrelin · Dec 13, 2002, 01:02 PM

Big questions are; Will OS X be tuned to scale up and run on some of IBM's bigger server boxes so they can sell them with it bundled like Linux? (I was under the impression that BSD scales better than Linux does now) Will they be cheap enough for Apple to keep the price down on the "premium" boxes? While I'm ecstatic that OS X will be getting some sorely needed horsepower the real issue here is, will this give them more traction in the corporate desktop environment. All that AMD blather missed that point too. If Apple can't run on the installed base of Intel or AMD chips they still need to battle for a nitch in the obsolescence/ purchasing cycle. If you can't plop a 1.8 or 2 Ghz box on a desktop at competitive prices with Dell and the boys you will need real raves about TOC and ROI from the IT staff to sell them. Still an uphill battle. Can Apple make some good moves without shooting themselves in the foot or head as the case may be, example, while relatively happy with their agressive marketing on switching they still don't make a two button mouse which already works natively in OS X and nearly every Windows user uses� HUH?, or should I say DUH?!?!?!

Commodus · Dec 13, 2002, 01:58 PM

Here's my question:

Did Apple and/or IBM deliberately put out this information to "remind" dedicated Apple users that a return to genuinely high performance was just around the corner?

Don't forget, there are very few companies (if any) who actually use Altivec apps outside of those companies using G4-based Apple systems. If IBM were only interested in catering to existing customers of the Power series or to new customers who hadn't touched an Apple system at all, they could have just left the feature set with the label of "vector multimedia extensions" and left it at that - if you're new to the PowerPC or VMX in the first place, there's no point to knowing that the instructions are specifically Altivec-compatible. You'd try to code your apps to benefit from the design of the CPU you're given.

Before everyone immediately starts budgeting for a "PowerMac 970" or "Xmac" (however likely such a design is), I should also note that this is a fairly technical document and isn't in the most conspicuous of locations on IBM's site. What's important is that the article exists at all, and that IBM has gone to the effort to verify that the PPC 970 can handle Altivec.

Metzen · Dec 13, 2002, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by Commodus:
What's important is that the article exists at all, and that IBM has gone to the effort to verify that the PPC 970 can handle Altivec.

Almost makes you think that IBM is targetting Motorola's market's eh?

raferx · Dec 13, 2002, 02:17 PM

All this does is keep apps from companies like Adobe, et al running the same; nice and fast. With the specs on that chip, and a new mobo, Altivec is just the icing on the cake.
My DP 1gig will keep me until the "Xstation" arrives...

iChristopher · Dec 13, 2002, 04:23 PM

Irony, don't you love it? The next generation of Mac in late 2003-2004 will have an IBM chip at their core?

This is Big Brother folks! The Information Purification Directive and all that jazz for those of you that are true believers.

1984 ... 2004?

Trust no one, Mr. Mac User.

Eug · Dec 13, 2002, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by iChristopher:
Irony, don't you love it? The next generation of Mac in late 2003-2004 will have an IBM chip at their core?

This is Big Brother folks! The Information Purification Directive and all that jazz for those of you that are true believers.

1984 ... 2004?

Trust no one, Mr. Mac User.

And most likely running Microsoft Office as well.

Superchicken · Dec 14, 2002, 08:51 AM

IBM ain't what she used to be folks... my iMac already has an IBM chip in him... I don't mind having another

Although forget M$ office, it'd be funny to run Sun's Star office on this thing hehe... that is if they bother to make an OS X version like their open source counterpart.