toggle

AAPL Stock: 113.99 ( + 1.98 )

Printed from http://www.macnn.com

IBM developing dual-core version of PowerPC G5

updated 12:55 am EDT, Tue July 27, 2004

Dual-core PowerPC G5

IBM's Microprocessor division is developing a , which will be used in workstations and servers sometime next year, according to eWEEK: Code-named "Antares," it will contain two processing units per chip, with each carrying its own execution core, Level 1 cache and storage subsystems including a Level 2 cache...It will use 16 stages for most fixed-point integer operations; 18 for most load-and-store operations; and 21 stages for most floating-point operations. VMX operations, which will take 19 stages, will be handled in the 970MP's AltiVec-compatible vector processing unit...With the longer pipelining, the 970MP will implement "instruction cracking," which can distribute code requests to each core, splitting certain recognized instructions into several internal and simpler operations."




by MacNN Staff

POST TOOLS:

TAGS :

toggle

Comments

  1. chas_m

    Joined:

    0

    Oh, yeah!

    Admittedly, we're at least 18 months and a GHz or so away from seeing this baby in our beloved Macs ... but start your drooling engines NOW, that dual-core 4GHz G5 (coming out the same day as Longhorn!) is gonna be SWEET!!

  1. haunebu

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Damn

    Looks like I'd better cancel my order for that 2.5Ghz G5...

  1. Eriamjh

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Pfffft

    We've heard about great processors before. So far, the last five years have been duds.

  1. Cless

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    The G5 is a dud?

    News to me. Last I saw it got us competitive with PCs in terms of speed—in some cases faster. It's the fastest Mac ever, certainly. Get over the "not hitting 3GHz" thing already.

  1. paulc

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Coupla things...

    I think this chip will start at 90nm, 3G. Will they put only one chip or two inside the box?

    Yeah, I'm drooling...

  1. beeble

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    dual core

    I processor with dual cores isn't going to be as fast as two single core processors at the same clock speed. I think Apple will keep it's multi-processing capability by shipping two of these babies in Mac's like they do with current G5's. That way they won't have to go through explaining to the general public what dual cores are and how this single processor 3GHz machine is faster than a dual processor 2.5GHz machine.

    That's a very hard line to sell simply because your starting to get very technical in, traditionally, one of the least technical areas of the professional computer market.

    Dual 3-3.5GHz dual core G5's. hmmmmmmmmmmmm!

  1. macjockey

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Cooling

    and you think the G5 heat sink is big now

  1. JeffHarris

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Dual-Core x2?

    I doubt Apple would put 2 Dual-Core processors in each G5.

    The article stated that the footprint of a single dual core was larger than the size of 2 single processors AND the dual-core ran hotter and used more power than 2 single processors. But it said that the dual-core design should be more efficient as far as processing goes.

    Who know? It's all speculation at this point. I STILL want a G5 PowerBook!

  1. testudo

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    Who cares

    I read some Linux article how all the Linux folks are going to some new chipset that IBM is making for game console manufacturers, and Apple missed the boat because they pinned their stuff on the G5 instead of bringing it to all platforms (like good ol' Linux) and basically that Apple was doomed to obscurity and the whole Wintel monopoly was going to collapse as Linux takes control.

    At least that's what I read. I'm sure it wasn't hyperbole or anything. Not from a Linux journal...

  1. jimothy

    Joined: Dec 1969

    0

    re: dual core

    "[One] processor with dual cores isn't going to be as fast as two single core processors at the same clock speed"

    I get the opposite impression. From the article:

    "IBM documents suggested that hardware and software optimizations would make this processor more efficient in many computing situations than two separate processors at the same clock speed."

    Additionally, the two cores don't need to rely on the front-side bus for inter-core communication/synchronization.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

DoxieGo Portable Scanner

Sometimes, people need to scan things, but having a computer at hand to do so isn't exactly feasible. Maybe it's the home of a relat ...

Dell AD211 Bluetooth speaker

For all of the high-priced, over-engineered Bluetooth speakers in the electronics market, there is still room for mass-market solution ...

VisionTek 128GB USB Pocket SSD

USB flash drives dealt the death blow to both the floppy and Zip drives. While still faster than either of the old removable media, sp ...

toggle

Most Commented