Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Steve Bosell · Feb 10, 2006, 02:36 AM

How cool would it be if the new ProMac (or whatever they are going to be called) had a dual core PPC chip and a dual core intel chip! It would beat the heck out of rosetta. I wonder how feasible it is technically.

tooki · Feb 10, 2006, 11:26 AM

It could be done, but it would be REALLY hard to do. I'd actually think that writing the OS for that would be harder than designing the hardware.

One way of doing that would be to have one of the processors be the CPU of the system, and the other one to be a subordinate co-processor (much the way that graphics chips are subordinate to the CPU, despite the fact that these days, the graphics chip is often more powerful than the CPU!!).

tooki

GORDYmac · Feb 10, 2006, 12:00 PM

Interesting concept. It seems like a plausible stop gap for Pro users. Many of these users won't take the leap until the Holy Trinity (Adobe, Quark, Microsoft) have Universal Binaries of all of their apps.

I can't even imagine how the hardware would be designed, but it's an interesting concept.

BurpetheadX · Feb 10, 2006, 03:08 PM

I remember when Apple did this with the PC-Compatible Performas and Quadras back in the day.

They had a Intel Chip as an expansion card so they could run WIndows at the same time as the Mac OS.

Scotttheking · Feb 10, 2006, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by BurpetheadX

I remember when Apple did this with the PC-Compatible Performas and Quadras back in the day.

They had a Intel Chip as an expansion card so they could run WIndows at the same time as the Mac OS.

Not quite the same; those systems ran an independent OS on separate hardware, and shared subsystems.

©öñFü$íóÑ · Feb 10, 2006, 04:36 PM

..... maybe a 3rd party hardware developer *cough*sonnet*cough* can produce such a G5 expansion/upgrade card for the Intel Macs.... *cough*laff*cough*

jcadam · Feb 10, 2006, 04:53 PM

Something like this HAS been implemented on the Amiga:
link

Amazing how much they were able to extend that old-ass hardware, eh?

GORDYmac · Feb 10, 2006, 07:31 PM

Come to think of it, if Apple had pursued this option, it might hinder the transition to Universal Binaries--not to mention the Intel transition overall. They seem to be fed up with IBM/FreeScale, so, why keep supporting them?

mduell · Feb 10, 2006, 09:33 PM

One problem that may occur with $other_architecture on an expansion card is the speed of the expansion slots. Even 8 PCIe lanes only gives you ~20-40% of the processors usual FSB bandwidth; some members of these boards assert the speed of the FSB is very important.

jcadam · Feb 11, 2006, 04:05 AM

Originally Posted by mduell

One problem that may occur with $other_architecture on an expansion card is the speed of the expansion slots. Even 8 PCIe lanes only gives you ~20-40% of the processors usual FSB bandwidth; some members of these boards assert the speed of the FSB is very important.

putting some RAM on the expansion card (a couple 'o SODIMMs, maybe) for the foreign CPU would help alleviate this.

But if Apple were really serious about this, they would use a fast, custom daughterboard for the companion PPC CPU.

©öñFü$íóÑ · 04:46 PM

Originally Posted by GORDYmac

Come to think of it, if Apple had pursued this option, it might hinder the transition to Universal Binaries--not to mention the Intel transition overall. They seem to be fed up with IBM/FreeScale, so, why keep supporting them?

Well, you'd think you'd be far better off with a REAL PPC chip running what PowerPC apps are still left un-ported to Intel... I mean, does anyone know exactly how long is Apple gonna keep Rosetta in the Mac OS?

Also, the whole idea behind a PPC daughtercard/upgrade is to extend the usability of your original investment (i.e. the computer, the apps....). If you have a piece of software that does EXACTLY what you want and don't need all the extra bells and whistles, is it really worth another $1000 or so for a whole new system that only runs that same software at half speed and support for it may or may not even be there with the next major OS release?

Don't get me wrong, i understand that there are people who just HAVE TO HAVE the latest and greatest for whatever reason... but there are also people who've made a serious investment in their G4's or G5's.... in my case, i've made a serious investment in my G1!!!

And it takes time to recover from any new computer purchase... (even -more- time for others.....*cough*me*cough*)

But for people who have never owned a computer before or who seriously haven't purchased a computer since -before 1993, the choice should be clear..... (nods and jerks head towards the Intel-based iMac)

And, more likely, a PPC daughter-card would be reasonably priced, 300$-500$. Not only would it give you access to your PPC apps at full speed, but who knows, maybe by the miracles of molecular physics, they can eventually find a way to make a faster G5 upgrade that doesn't generate too much heat nor require water-cooling.

My 6100 is 11 years old and after fixing it (cleaning the power supply's fan), I think i've just added another 5-7 years to it!

tooki · Feb 11, 2006, 05:15 PM

The Amiga made it easy: PPC and 68K are both natively big-endian.

Intel processors are little-endian, which means that the bits in each byte are the other way around. This massively complicates things, especially on the software side, which is why I said that the software is likely the bigger hurdle than hardware.

tooki

24klogos · Feb 16, 2006, 01:21 PM

BMW has released a statement in which, due to the "high" consumption of fuel from their engines, they have chosen to switch to KIA as their powerplant supplier. These engines are more eficient and will save gas for the future BMW users.

BMW drivers have enough money to pay for the gas if it translates into performance, but if BMW is seeking to slowly switch us into compact, four cylinder shoeboxes because, well profit vs overhead costs.

Why would you want to downgrade your PowerPC G5, even an iMac, into a "more eficient" yes, but not so solid 32bit mobile processor? as for the MacBook, man, you could have pushed the G4 chip even more, or made better batteries... why woud you want to downgrade? why would you want to buy a BMW with a KIA engine, on a KIA world....

Macs are 50% their OS, and the other 50% their superior hardware, now we have to conform with 50% more people buying our respected brand, so they can write more viruses for OSX (cause u want to have the personal information of the BMW diver, not the KIA),,, bah, i'm pissed, PowerPC forever.

milhous · Feb 16, 2006, 01:29 PM

huh?

Tomchu · Feb 16, 2006, 01:34 PM

Macs have no more "superior hardware" than Dell, HP, Sony, or IBM. Ever actually looked inside a Mac?

BurpetheadX · Feb 16, 2006, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by Tomchu

Macs have no more "superior hardware" than Dell, HP, Sony, or IBM. Ever actually looked inside a Mac?

yea - the G5's have beautiful, elaborate hardware.

rhashem · Feb 16, 2006, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by BurpetheadX

yea - the G5's have beautiful, elaborate hardware.

The G5's have a beautiful, elaborate case. The have OEM RAM, an OEM graphics card, an OEM hard drive, etc. If you took a Dell PC and put it in a G5 case, you'd have a machine that had parts as good as the Mac.

I own a G5 PowerMac and I also own a hand-built PC with premium parts. Aside from the case, there are no premium parts in the PowerMac.

rhashem · Feb 16, 2006, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by 24klogos

BMW has released a statement in which, due to the "high" consumption of fuel from their engines, they have chosen to switch to KIA as their powerplant supplier. These engines are more eficient and will save gas for the future BMW users.

To make the analogy more accurate:

The Core Duo is a Toyota engine - powerful for its class, but still designed to be efficient.
The G4 is a motorcycle engine - not really intented for a full-size vehicle, happier in smaller, "embedded" confines.
The G5 is a big Mercedes V12 with half the cylinders removed - the downsizing makes it a shadow of what it was before.

To complete the analogy, "The Switch" is like Apple using the engine from a Corolla in their compact car, so Toyota will give them the engine from this Lexus: http://www.gizmag.com/go/3601/ for their high-end sedan

Seriously, PowerPC has been far too much drama, and Apple has done well to get rid of it. I mean who wants laptops with a chip mainly designed for routers? Who wants a desktop with a chip that its manufacturer purposely keeps from being "too good", to prevent it from competing with its bigger brother? Who wants chips from a pair of companies that have zero interest in the desktop market?

mduell · Feb 16, 2006, 09:22 PM

Originally Posted by 24klogos

BMW has released a statement in which, due to the "high" consumption of fuel from their engines, they have chosen to switch to KIA as their powerplant supplier. These engines are more eficient and will save gas for the future BMW users.

BMW drivers have enough money to pay for the gas if it translates into performance, but if BMW is seeking to slowly switch us into compact, four cylinder shoeboxes because, well profit vs overhead costs.

Why would you want to downgrade your PowerPC G5, even an iMac, into a "more eficient" yes, but not so solid 32bit mobile processor? as for the MacBook, man, you could have pushed the G4 chip even more, or made better batteries... why woud you want to downgrade? why would you want to buy a BMW with a KIA engine, on a KIA world....

Core Duo is "not so solid"? Where did you get that idea?