IBM PPC970 64bit CPU at CeBIT

[Hammer]

Another thing, I am pretty sure that the x86 64bit CPUs are almost entirely different architecture

Define "entirely different architecture" for K8 vs K7 families.

and doesn't hold the same blistering Ghz speeds as their 32bit brethren.

Refer to http://amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=43216

[Hammer]

Both the 64 bit X86 alternatives have so far failed to reach the market

That would be false in regards to AMD's Opteron. Refer to AMD's "beachhead" programs (some sort of “early bird” program).

Define “hitting the market" (i.e. you seems to apply different “hitting the market" definitions on different products).

IBM's PPC970 64bit CPU is not the only one to attend the CeBIT show.

Refer to http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8274
Summary
- Several mass-producing X86 motherboard manufactures will be showing their X86-64 motherboards products i.e. these include Tyan, MSI, Gigabyte and Asus.
- MS's Windows 64bit (beta build) edition will be also on show.
- AMD Athlon 64 laptops.

(unless you count 900MHz Itanium 2 chips for $2700 as reaching the market).

 Note that IA-64 was based HP's PA-RISC. Secondly, what was the price for Power 4 CPUs again?

Careful with your claims or assertions.

[Hammer]

You didn't read the comment I edited in, did you?

Editing like that is like shooting a moving target… Have you considered “preview” option?

I feel I properly answered BOTH of those questions BEFORE you asked them.

Ok, I’ll do it again with your second version of your post.

What's interesting to note about the 970 is that it's a cut-down high-clock version of the POWER4 series of CPUs, which has already proven itself in battle over a number of years. Both the 64 bit X86 alternatives have so far failed to reach the market (unless you count 900MHz Itanium 2 chips for $2700 as reaching the market).

That would be false in regards to AMD's Opteron. Refer to AMD's "beachhead" programs (some sort of “early bird” program). Note that Athlon XP can be made to run like (i.e. compatibility mode only) Athlon 64 (i.e. via AMD’s SimNow).  

Define “hitting the market" (i.e. you seems to apply different “hitting the market" definitions on different products).

IBM's PPC970 64bit CPU is not the only one to attend the CeBIT show.

Refer to http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8274
Summary
- Several mass-producing X86 motherboard manufactures will be showing their X86-64 motherboards products i.e. these include Tyan, MSI, Gigabyte and Asus.
- MS's Windows X86-64bit version (beta build) edition will be also on show (not a IA-64 edition).
- AMD Athlon 64 powered Laptops.

Note that “IA-64” wasn't defined as "X86-64" (refer to www.x86-64.com).

However, prediction is never accurate, even more so when it comes to predicting the future.

With the X86 market, one can predict the success of this market due to the past 16bit-to-32bit X86 transitions i.e. 8086/80286 (DOS/Windows 3.11) to 80386/80486/Pentium (Windows9x**/Windows NT 4.0/Windows NT 5.x). As this past transition has shown, Microsoft (the X86 king maker) will play a large part for the success of X86-32bit-to-64bit transitions.

Secondly, the large number of third party X86 motherboard manufactures (includes their corresponding customers) that supports AMD’s X86-64 platform cannot be underestimate since they may well dictate the next ruler of the massive X86 Empire. One doesn’t expect 90 percent of desktop users (including the supporting industry) to dump their software investments or move to a graded performance (for legacy software).

Both Transmeta*** and AMD support X86-64 initiatives. ***Insurance as a second source for X86-64 platform.

RAMBUS mess has shown the limits of X86 motherboard manufactures (i.e. their steadfast support for SDRAM and DDR SDRAM technologies) to follow Intel.

If the 970 can indeed hit the market in reasonable clock ranges at a reasonable price it will most probably be something of a success.

Define “success”. It’s not the first time that the PPC has the same clock speed as with X86 CPUs (refer to 1995 era). I’m just too old for such optimistic appraisals.  

But how much really depends on how Intel/AMD go from here. Do they continue to produce faster and faster 32 bit chips, or start migrating people over to 64 bit?

You are forgetting one critical factor i.e. the Microsoft factor. From the average Joe and Jane POV (i.e. 90 percent of desktop market); “Microsoft” as a name is a powerful brand name.

Do they continue to produce faster and faster 32 bit chips, or start migrating people over to 64 bit?

Are you implying the Athlon 64/Opterons to be slower than Athlon XP 3000+?
I don’t think there would be Athlon 3600+ based on the current K7 Athlon XP’s Barton core.

Impossible to say. But I really expect Intel to reach something of an upper limit in clock frequencies soon.

Your statement reminds me of mid-90’s “Intel has reached its limit rhetoric”. Some people never learn (sigh).

Edit: I would just like to comment that I'm not saying POWER4 ain't been as expensive as Itanium 1 and 2. I meant to make the point that the 970 is a more marketable version of a battle-proofed chip, whereas Itanium 2 is still only for HIGH END

Such proclamations don’t hold much water in regards to “is still only for HIGH END”. The potential for 100+ transistors silicon chips for mainstream desktop use is not impossible e.g. refer to nVidia’s GeForce FX as an example.

Like DEC’s Alpha, the Itanium has battle X86’s massive empire’s legions of users, support groups and distribution channels. The 64bit distinctiveness would be yet another distinctiveness to be assimilated within X86 collective.

 Hmm, the "Unverified source" story?

Insurance.  

[Hammer]

X86-64 will probably be marketed right at the desktop from the get-go it's a desktop chip...

Initially, server and high performance workstations.

 it isnt here yet...and nor will there be X86-Win2K/XP for it initially when it arrives that takes advantage of it bieng 64bit... aswell as no X86-64 apps initially.

Note that the official release of AMD Opteron and MS Windows Server 2003 (a.k.a dotNET Sever) will be around April 2003 (PS; the planned release, delays can happen).

Note that MS Windows 2003 Server replaces MS Windows 2000 Server range (Win2k code base).

There would be X86-64 OS and applications i.e. SUSE Linux X86-64, Red Hat X86-64 Linux (a.k.a "Red Hat Linux Advanced Server").

To show that AMD64 application and tool’s existence refer to;
http://www.microsoft.com/ddk/debugging/installAMDbeta.asp

MS Windows 2003 AMD64 edition is currently being beta tested at this time.

If we use the past as any indication, the next MS Windows release would be probably plagued by delays.

[Hammer]

filson wrote:
Does AOS 4 support 64 bit extensions, or would AOS on PPC 64 be a total rewrite ?

I recall, Amiga's latest version of FFS was already 64bit (just not 64bit PPC 970 native)...

[Hammer]

en if we bloated os4 or mos, 2.5ghz would be a heavy overkill on our beloved oS's..

Are you implying we just run the OS without the applications?

.i cant even imagine what we could use such an power for atm...first of all we need an OS...then some games and apps....then we can think of this power .)

Extra speed may open new possibilities for the software vendor’s creative energy i.e. new software release with more elaborate plug-ins.    

[Hammer]

64-FFS only means that it can handle bigger than 4GB (32) bit, moving the OS to accept 64bit wide addresses would break compability and is simply impossible for the existing apps.

Of course i.e. I do know the concepts of WOW (Window on Window) compatibility layer.

The sandbox approach is another method to gain compatibility with legacy applications.  

PS; Pictures of PPC 970 and its corresponding motherboard would be nice.

[Hammer]

PPC 970 can run both in 64-bit mode and 32-bit mode, and in 64-bit mode you can run both new 64-bit applications,

Why not Power 4's applications (i.e. run IBM server software on the cheap (relative) )?

[Hammer]

Well, if you listen to IBM you would wonder if this is the same "x86" Big Blue 20 years ago.

I well aware of IBM’s products and their ever trying to re-control of Personal Computer market i.e.
1. PS/2's MCA is an attempt to re-control X86 market. Results: Failed. VL-BUS and PCI eventually killed it.
2. OS/2 Warp, one of the first pure 32bit Desktop OS for X86. Results: Still lost to 16/32bit kit-bashed Windows 95 and market power of Microsoft.
3. PowerPC initiative (during PPC 601 era), IBM has finally concluded that it has totally lost control of X86 market and decided to create itself a new PC market i.e. "PowerPC" (based on it’s POWER series lines).
4. IBM's support for Linux bandwagon i.e. aimed against some certain OS ex-partner.

I did purchased (for business purposes) IBM hardware (and OS products) since IBM PS/2 Model
55/56 era (late 80s) until the recent NetVista range.

IBM PS/2 Model 56 era was bundled with OS/2 (still have my pristine IBM PS/2 Model 56 user manual).

The purchasing of the Amiga 500 and the Amiga 3000 is just a personal hobby of mine.

Well, if you listen to IBM

The “you listen to IBM” is irrelevant in this case. I don’t have any feelings towards any optimistic appraisal based on "what we’re going to do speech".

you would wonder if this is the same "x86" Big Blue 20 years ago.

IBM has been involved with non-X86 CPUs way back in 1990s (e.g. RISC System/6000 family of workstations and servers).

And IBM is pushing PPC rather strongly nowdays.

The “PowerPC” (short for “Power Personal Computer”) was targeted for “personal computing” ever since PowerPC 601.

I still remember PPC 601 vs Pentium Class cubed texture map demonstration test. PPC 601 was shown to be faster compared to the similar clocked Pentium Classic.  

"IBM is pushing PPC rather strongly nowdays" would be closer to IBM's attempt to re-energizing PowerPC range.

Personally, I’ll go for “wait an see”, but past deeds plays a large part in terms market acceptance (e.g. desktop PC space).  

IBM has restructured heavily though it is still considered one of the top copmanies in BOTH hardware and software.

So? Any company can “restructure” btw…

still considered one of the top copmanies in BOTH hardware and software.

So? Please note that IBM has to compete with similar level competitors.

 They 've said that noone will speak about Itanium in a few years.

Until Intel has exhausted it’s X86 revenues base,
Intel will pump massive $$$ into it’s IA-64 project.  

Intel is too well cashed up for this type of battle.

And, believe it,

I'm too old for such things. I’m an atheist in such things..

if there is any company with the power to do it IBM would be a strong canditate.

What power? The power like the OS/2 Warp scenario?

Plus, don't forget the new chip they are developing with Toshiba and Sony for PS3.

So? Should one start a list who supports X86 market?  

That means strong sales for their semiconductor division.

Good for the group.

PowerPC is a very good technology - much superior than anything AMD or Intel have in ming.

???ming???

Careful with these types of statements i.e. your statement is open to counter attacks.  

Did you forget X86 market is consist of multiple companies?

It can scale up to servers or down to PDAs. The future is bright.

Oh boy...

[Hammer]

strobe wrote:
Keep in mind PowerPC has been 64bit since day 1.
 

That would be the Power Series not “PowerPC”…

Intel and AMD are still out of their league.
 

Just like during pre-386/pre-Win32 days (before it bashed the existing 32bit desktop platforms out of the water)...

All I hear about Itanium and Hammer are delays, lackluster performance
 

Again, where did you get "lackluster performance" for Itanium and Hammer?

The Mac rumor sites have reported that 2.5Ghz PPC 970 was working using the 130nm process, but the chip consumed as much power as a 3Ghz P4. Of course the PPC 970 does more per cycle...yum! Question is can one supply power to these chips in dual or quad configuration  :-o
 

What was the release date for this product?

[Hammer]

 The PowerPC 640 may have been the first 64bit chip with only PowerPC instructions,

May have been?

A few of the PowerPC CPUs wasn't even pure 64bit   CPUs i.e.
PowerPC 602 Embedded Processor,
PowerPC 603e Microprocessor,
PowerPC EM603e Microprocessor
PowerPC 604e Microprocessor,
PowerPC 740 Microprocessor (300MHz to 550MHz),
PowerPC 740 Microprocessor (up to 266MHz),
PowerPC 750 Microprocessor (300MHz to 550MHz),
PowerPC 750 Microprocessor (up to 266MHz),
PowerPC 750CX and 750CXe Microprocessor,
PowerPC 750FX Microprocessor,

[Hammer]

As for 32bit performance, x86 only caught up to the 68000 series when they released the 486DX4,

So?

Why did DID cut down TFX for the AmigaOS platform release?

"X86 only caught up to the 68000 series when they released the 486DX4" generalization would be false when given a certain scenario.

Are you saying a 68030@25Mhz can beat 80486DX @33Mhz?

Are you referring to 68060@66Mhz?

Please be more specific.

Lackluster performance refers to IA-64
 

Are you referring to IA-64's 32bit performance?

Hammer really isn't 'here' yet, it's in one of its many delay cycles.  

What about the delays? Most of release dates are just estimations.

At the moment; AMD was still in game (against Intel) with their current Athlon XP’s  Barton core.

[Hammer]

Rephrase: "They 've been a failure though they will be the last to admit it".

For Intel’s POV it would be just a "black eye". It’s not the first time that Intel has embarked on non-X86 processors (not including StrongARM RISC families) venture.

Few can be credited being right at the top in BOTH hardware and software.

Did that combination change their fortunes in regards to the desktop PC market?

Let me guess. Dell ?

Did you forget the following supporters?

Micro-Star-International, Tyan, ASUStek, Gigabtye, nVidia(e.g. nForce2 x86 chipsets; a close AMD partner), ATI (e.g. A3/3x0 x86 chipsets), Aopen, Acer labs (Mitsubishi), Gateway, Walmart, Asrock, Luckystar, Abit, VIA, Chaintech, Evergreen, Supermicro, Transmeta, SIS, Soltek, Newsys, ALi, Microsoft(1),  and 'etc'.  Just about 90 percent of desktop market vendors and mainstream distribution channels.    

Notes;
1. Microsoft has repeatedly stated that it strongly prefers AMD's 64-bit architecture to Intel's IA-64.
2. Red Hat, Mandrake and SUSE has support for AMD64.
For Mandrake's AMD64 Linux refer to
http://www.mandrakesoft.com/products/90/

Intel is good in two things:
1) build and supply many CPUs
2) overhype their products

You are forgetting the other half of the partnership i.e. the Microsoft factor.

@strobe
Refer to "http://www.amdboard.com/hn03130301.html" Athlon 64's K7 rating (Via Canadian Québec distributor MRS MAINTENANCE).
1800Mhz = 3200+ (Planned for June 2003).
1900Mhz = 3400+ (Planned for June 2003).
2000Mhz = 3600+ (Planned for June 2003).
2100Mhz = 3800+ (Planned for September 2003).

One could guess the Athlon XP's Barton Core (3200+) is nearing the end of it's life cycle i.e. 400Mhz DDR is the last stop for EV6 architecture**.

Such a scenario would be similar to 486 days i.e. running 16bit OS (e.g. MS-DOS/MS Win3.11) on 32bit hardware (Not factoring MS Windows 2003 Server AMD64 edition, Red Hat Linux Advance Server AMD64 Edition and ‘etc’ releases).

[Hammer]

Sven highlighted a few important points up there, which I must say ties in pretty well with my initial statement somewhere on the first page of this thread. PPC970 will be a consumer-level CPU based on the POWER4 architecture, and if IBM get it out on the market in time it's got all the chances in the world of becoming a success. Because neither Intel nor AMD have a stronghold here yet.
 

Define success in your view.

Bringing out a CPU product alone doesn’t automatically equal success. Many other factors will aid the level of success for the particular product.  

Did you forget 64bit MIPS based processor?

Because neither Intel nor AMD have a stronghold here yet.
 

It didn't stop Intel from reaching world domination during the late introduction of it’s first X86-32bit processor (e.g. 80386DX).

Intel alone (and X86 market as a whole) did not reach world domination by it’s own abilities i.e. one must the Microsoft factor.