970 Motherboards to enter production soon (MacBidouille)

[quote]Originally posted by Barto:

One thing makes me skeptical though: Would Apple really move the Xserve to the 970 immediently? Wouldn't it run too hot? Or maybe it's moki's surprise <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[surprised]" /> <hr></blockquote>

The current 1.85V 1 GHz G4s dissipate 35.5W typical. The 1.8 GHz PPC 970 should dissipate 42W typical. So where do you think that puts the 1.33 GHz G4s?

[ 03-17-2003: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by Barto:
<strong>***From here on in MacBidouille will be refered to as FreedomRumors***

- George W Bush
</strong><hr></blockquote>

ok, that is funny ...

[quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:
<strong>Great news!
I'd love to hear a leak about what's on this mobo.

Serial ATA?
DDR 400 support(Dual Channel)?
What's the processor to Memory Bus interconnect?
Audio??
Any PCI changes?
Modem?</strong><hr></blockquote>

[quote] 2. The two motherboards we reported as being in the bidding stage, prior to production, are for single processor and a dual-processor variants, are said to be "larger, longer, and narrower" than present designs. No word on other details, yet.

<hr></blockquote>

<a href="http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000047.php" target="_blank">MacWhispers 03/10/2003</a>

So singles and duals, anyway. "Larger, longer, and narrower" suggests rack-mount style for PM, too - front panel slide-out mobo access, maybe?

[quote]Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch:
<strong>And that means state of the art hardware, and not some bullshit like the DDR flop!!</strong><hr></blockquote>

That wasn't Apple's fault.

[quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:
<strong>Ok I'm not asking for much just

4 Serial ATA ports
PCI Express 3slots plus 1 AGP8x
3 3.5 HD Bays
4 FW ports. 2x FW400 2x FW800
Outboard Box Firwire DA Converter, USB and Audio Input all over FW.
USB 2.0
Dual Channel DDR- 4 Slots
Easy Access Cases ala El Capitan

I'm easy to please
<img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think that's unreasonable. Apple needs to redesign their controller chip from scratch to support the new 970 comanion chip, so why not include new standards and technology? Up until the new MDD G4's they have just building on the technology of the original Sawtooth chipset. This is their chance to radically overhaul the featureset of their towers and introduce all the modern wizz bang features.

So bring on S-ATA! Bring on USB 2.0! Bring on PCI-Express and/or PCI-X!

Finally, we'll have the 21st century equivalent of the IIfx. A computer ahead of it's time in almost every way.

[quote] What exactly is Serial-ATA? <hr></blockquote>

Serial ATA replace Parallel ATA.

Benefits

Faster- Current incarnation 150MBps. Will scale to 4x that at least.

Thinner Cables- Since you're not sending data down 40 think wires the cable is the size of a Firewire cable with a much smaller connecter.

Hop Swap- I don't know if Manuf will attempt to utilize this but SATA is supposed to Hot Swap

Compatibility- SATA should remain total signal compatibility. Only the connecters should really need to change.

<a href="http://www.serialata.org" target="_blank">www.serialata.org</a>

[quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:
<strong>

Compatibility- SATA should remain total signal compatibility. Only the connecters should really need to change. </strong><hr></blockquote>

But could current ATA drives be used with a simple adapter? Obviously there might be a performance hit, but the cost savings for the end user could be helpful.

[quote]Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch:
<strong>

Maybe not 100%, but Apple should have pushed Moto more than they did..!

What exactly is Serial-ATA?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well according to rumor Steve said on more then one occassions a few shouted expletives to describe Moto and thier chips during meetings. Not sure how much more you can push when they are the only ones making your main bread and butter chip. Hopefully, that era is over.

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>

Well according to rumor Steve said on more then one occassions a few shouted expletives to describe Moto and thier chips during meetings. Not sure how much more you can push when they are the only ones making your main bread and butter chip. Hopefully, that era is over.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Confront them with the real deal: No chips, and they're going Intel/AMD.

We're talking money here, and I cant see why Moto is letting that down..

I don't see how the Power Mac motherboards could get larger or longer. They're already huge compared to ATX mobos. The boards are quite bare as they are too. Look at any of the current P4 or Athlon boards and you'll see how much busier they are. Apple's being carefree with the size of their mobos as it is.

Does the taller motherboard mean more PCI slots?

[quote]Originally posted by Fat Freddy:
<strong>These are the new Workstation mainboards (xStation) ;)

The PPC 970 will hit the Power Mac in the summer of 2004 :( </strong><hr></blockquote>

Ranting, trollin' og facts?

[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>I'm a bit suspicious. Powermacs have traditionally been made at Apple's Elk Grove plant in the US. Not sure why they would switch to Taiwan. And if they did, what would the Elk Grove plant be used for with all the other lines already outsourced in taiwan?</strong><hr></blockquote>

it will be sold and the profits will go to jobs ;)

-or-

it will sit there secretly pumping out iPhones ;) :p

[quote]Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch:
<strong>

Ranting, trollin' og facts?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Facts, i know somebody, how is nearly to Apple ... (not USA). These Apple guys told him, that a Apple workstation will arrive in summer 2003.

Previewsly, he found hints (PPC970) on Apples own HP, i don't know where but i think somewhere on the ADC pages?!

I hope i am wrong, i'm waiting for Power Macs G5 since 2002 (Thanx TheReg).

[quote]Originally posted by Anonymous Karma:
<strong>

That's because it's not for a desktop machine.

Say hello to the 20" PowerBook.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> Funny.

But maybe truish (not the 20" part but the PowerBook part). Why would we need a longer motherboard for a tower? We may have missed the Tower motherboard RFP altogether and in fact be looking at the Xserve or PowerBook MB RFP. (or we may be looking at an untrue rumor as well.)

Oops...

[ 03-17-2003: Message edited by: Jared ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by Fat Freddy:
<strong>

The Apple Workstation!

The summer 2004 Power Mac are my thoughts only

[ 03-17-2003: Message edited by: Fat Freddy ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
If you are correct about a new Workstation being the only machine with a 970 this year, then the folks at Apple have clearly lost all touch with the real world. I can imagine them saying "we now have a competitively performing machine to Wintel and it's not twice the price, but four times the price - the new Macintosh Workstation."

I have to believe you are wrong about the timing of a 970 in the PowerMac.

If 970 performance dropped into the current PM prices tomorrow it be barely acceptable, in three to six months it'd already tread in the too high category, if they make their desktop macs any more expensive, regardless of the performance, then they've clearly lost it.

Originally posted by Fat Freddy
Don't foget, we talk about Apple!

How long did it take to put a G4 in the Powerbooks?
How long did it take to put DDR-RAM in Macs?
And they don't even support it yet.

Again, it's not Apple's fault the G4's don't support DDR speeds. moto, moto, moto... And Apple put the G4 in the Powerbooks when the G4's were ready for it (cold enough).

If 970 performance dropped into the current PM prices tomorrow it be barely acceptable, in three to six months it'd already tread in the too high category, if they make their desktop macs any more expensive, regardless of the performance, then they've clearly lost it.

If Fred Anderson's comments regarding the 'power'Mac issue are to read into, I think it would be possible that the next tower update will come with both 970s and a more aggressive price cut. Apple seem to be aware of the mhz and performance problem and the undeniable impact it has had on their tower sales.

Hopefully it will be addressed sooner rather than later...

Playing catch up and hoiking up prices will not wash.

Lemon Bon Bon

PS. I don't like the new icons as much. Some of them seem a bit squished/funny. But overall, quite a nice gleam to appleinsider's new look. Kudos to those who put in the hard work. Generally, much brighter, cleaner and better organised.

"If 970 performance dropped into the current PM prices tomorrow it be barely acceptable "- well i for one would accept it gladly, it's going to be more than just a new chip after all isn't it.

Long and narrow, huh? Sounds like a blade to me.

Originally posted by Telomar
Considering PCI Express isn't planned to appear until mid 2004 I would be a touch surprised to see it anytime soon.

Sorry, I had this confused with PCI-X, which is already in some high end PCs.

and it's not like Apple had a lot of choices. IBM was still working on PowerPC chip versions when Moto fell apart and Apple was no doubt talking to them about adding stuff geared to Apple. Here (http://www.iseriesnetwork.com/artarchive/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewarticle&CO_ContentID=15238) is a discussion on the IBM chips during the time frame in reference.

Originally posted by Fat Freddy
[quote]Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch:
<strong>

Ranting, trollin' og facts?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Facts, i know somebody, how is nearly to Apple ... (not USA). These Apple guys told him, that a Apple workstation will arrive in summer 2003.

Previewsly, he found hints (PPC970) on Apples own HP, i don't know where but i think somewhere on the ADC pages?!

I hope i am wrong, i'm waiting for Power Macs G5 since 2002 (Thanx TheReg).

OK, you said your friend mentioned a workstation this year, but did he say 'no 970 desktop this year'? Also, could he be getting the 970 an the 'workstation' confused? How does he know that the 2 aren't to be released this year?

Sorry, just don't see why a workstation would be more important to Apple then desktops would.

It makes no sense as Mac user for us to complain.

New motherboards are coming and Apple has been able to desing these motherboards with the future in mind. No OS9 booting ...no old crusty MPX bus.

I will reserve judgment until the first sytems ship. I am however optimistic.

It's time to move forward. I expect Apple to infuse the Powermac line fully with 970's and if anything is "Workstation" priced it will be loaded to the gills.

Originally posted by Programmer
That's a good article -- in particular it highlights how long processor development takes. IBM started the POWER4 project in 1996, aiming for completion late-2001. And they did it! That's an astounding feat of engineering, if you ask me. And the chip supports 6 different (albeit very similar) architectures. And it hit the market as the fastest chip available.

Ageed. it's not like Apple can snap their finger and get a new processor when they want it. So, at least to me, bashing Apple for not getting a faster processor when Moto had problems is a moot point. They were probably aware of what IBM was doing and realized they had options and exercised them. Wonder how they got IBM to add Altivec (cash or contract for purchase. Probably never know?)

Originally posted by Bigc
Wonder how they got IBM to add Altivec (cash or contract for purchase. Probably never know?)

cash no. probally contract.
don't know if it's enough to sign a contract for say 800,000 - 1 million units a year to get IBM to add altivec.

Originally posted by Fat Freddy
No he didn't, these are my thoughts only. But maybe i'm wrong. Isanely Great Mac talks about two different MOBOs (pro/ consumer) :D

http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=1838

One question:

The PPC 970 back side bus is 1/2 of processor speed, right?

If a 2.5GHz PPC970 is available, this means a 1.25GHz back side bus (625MHz FSB):eek:

What kind of memory can support it?
When will it available?? DDR2 625?

You don't need to have synchronously clocked memory to match the processor. This is handled by the memory controller, and you can use any kind of memory, even down to PC133:D. I don't think you'll get any DDR625 for your 2,5Ghz POWERMac (unless it shows up very late when that kind of memory is feasable economically), but the kind of memory that has the best price/performance ratio, and is the most suitable for use in a desktop. Since we don't know when the 2,5Ghz monster is released, we don't know much about what kind of memory that'll be used.

Originally posted by sCreeD
Macbidouille has added some rumors:
[Translated by Google]

Didn't we see a diagonal ship layout before? Is this new? No wait, that was a diagonal layout on a daughtercard. Hm.

Fibre Channel or a fiber optic port? Either way very nice.

USB 2.0? Blah. USB -still- is for mice; Firewire is for men. :D

Oh and case manufacturers have until April 15th to offer bids for "future professional machines (not of P62 code)."

They're coming.

Screed

I saw it on a picture, still knows someone the "P58" guy? :D
I have it already in my documents folder ;)

Re: Elk Grove Plant

I've visited the EG Plant several times. It's just an assembly, help desk, shipping facility.:p

Originally posted by onlooker

I can't stop thinking about the length of these boards. I agree that it sounds like a Xserve 1U rack size board to me as well. I would certainly use a PowerMac in a 1, or 2U rack space if it had all the features of my standing desktop PowerMac model, but I fear that PCI-(X) space would be limited, and I would end up buying an Apple, or more likely a cheaper 3rd party Raid setup for added drive space. That would be totally unacceptable.

On the other hand if Apple is designing a new PowerMac enclosure for the 970 I hope they do not loose the drop down door. The convenience of the door alone is worth it's weight in gold, and everybody that ever expanded drive space, or memory, or just opened the thing is aware of it.
:)



I'm wondering if the alleged format of these mobos points the way to a post El-Capitan case design. Is it possible that Apple is preparing a kind of blade-inspired desktop? I'd like to think so. Perhaps the SMP-friendly 970 + PCI-X + an innovative case design = even more reasons to be a happy Mac fanboy!

Mmmmm ...... microblades ......

Scratch my reference to PCI-X above: RapidIO would appear to be the best candidate here:

IBM Microelectronics will continue to use Rapid I/O in its PowerPC chips in the future, said Calpesh Gala, a marketing manager for IBM PowerPC.

"There are a variety of technical, marketplace and customer reasons why we feel this interconnect outshines PCI Express," Gala said.

IBM Microelectronics evaluated PCI Express and also HyperTransport, but found Rapid I/O to be superior in speed, offering higher bandwidth, and in functionality, such as quick recovery from errors, Gala said.

http://www.zdnet.com.au/reviews/computers/components/story/0,2000023499,20270191,00.htm (zdnet article)

(Yes, I know that PCI-X is not the same as PCI Express ... the difference makes the above quote even more compelling.)

As I recall, Jobs really liked his NeXT cube, which he temporarily revisited with the Mac Cube. However, it was too small, too difficult to upgrade, too expensive...a dead end. Now, we have an upcoming powerhouse of a CPU, with a strong upgrade path, backed by industry technology leader IBM.

The thought occurs to me that this might be a good opportunity to revisit the cube design. The odd shape of the reported two new motherboards gave me this thought. What if these new mother(?)boards were designed to plug into a backplane, al the old NeXT cube design? The basic case shell would contain the backplane, all the usual port/connectors on the back with power supply and hard/DVD/CDROM drives; USB, FW, headphone jacks on the front. With such a modular design, true power users could add additional boards, perhaps up to four, while the basic box would only come with one board (either single or dual CPU version).

Such a modular construction could handle the entire Mac desktop lineup. Low end consumer boxes would be outfitted with the single CPU board, and perhaps even a backplane that didn't allow for more than one or two boards in a smaller case design, while the PowerMac lineup would come with the larger cube and be configured with from one through four single/dual CPU boards.

Such a design would allow true performance users the opportunity to throw money at the box and load it up with eight CPUs, while mere mortals could satisfy themselves with a simpler configuration. Of course, Apple would have to select several standard configurations to simplify the purchasing decision of regular users.

Now I'd like to hear from the true tech heads on this forum as to whether such a modular design would really be viable. Are such backplanes horrendously expensive? Would the firmware to handle multiple boards plugged into a single plane be prohibitively difficult to create or expensive to implement? Remember, the entry level box has to remain in the low $1500 range.

This just seemed such a logical approach. Apple has the opportunity to begin moving ahead and once again set the hardware standard. Since they have to completely redesign the electronics of the Mac to accommodate the new CPU, why not create an architecture that'll support rapidly upscaling the Mac's performance over the next few years?

:wow:

Tried to find some info on the Elk Grove factory and turned up this piece on iMac Production ( http://www.apple.com/hotnews/features/imacfactory.html).

A tiny bit of history.
Chas

Originally posted by onlooker
And, dual processors for the high end models, not just low end.
So the 2x1.42 Ghz is low-end, and 1 GHz model is high-end? :?:

:p

Originally posted by Fat Freddy
News from MacWhispers:

http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000050.php

March 21, 2003
Confirmed: New PowerMac Motherboards To Use PPC 970

A source inside one of the three OEM manufacturing companies now preparing bids on producing the two next generation PowerMac motherboards offered additional information about the new boards late Thursday.

According to our source, the new motherboards are designed around the IBM PPC 970 processor, with one board being a single processor design, and the other running two processors. This source states that he has seen and inspected pre-production board samples populated with the PPC 970 chips. Additionally, the bid deadline for constructing these boards was reaffirmed as March 28th, only one-week from today.

Two different MOBOS only for Power Macs or for pros & consumer:?:

If true this could signal the beginning of a split PowerMac line that I have been waiting for. A single processor, smaller PowerMac line in the $1200-$1700 range, and a high end dual processor PowerMac line in the $1800-$3000 range.

Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
MmMmm... Do I smell gamer-cube...? :smokey:

If Apple sold a 970 computer for $1200-$1500 with the 9700 (wow, 970, 9700, what an amazing combo! :) ), I'd buy it in a heartbeat. It won't happen though...this inexpensive beast would outperform the more expensive iMacs.

Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
And you now what.. Me and my brother would too.

This would be THE mac for gamers! Which Apple lacks... :grumble:

Well...we can all dream about it. :)

Powermacs will remain as they are. The 970 based computers will be completely different in form and will have a new name. They will be considerbly more expensive then the current PowerMac line. This is a given as ramping up new chips means less output and higher prices at first. Look for a price range of $2999 and up for low end system. This is the way it will be. Those that think it will come on the market at $1500 need a reality check.:no:

"Powermacs will remain as they are. The 970 based computers will be completely different in form and will have a new name. They will be considerbly more expensive then the current PowerMac line. This is a given as ramping up new chips means less output and higher prices at first. Look for a price range of $2999 and up for low end system. This is the way it will be. Those that think it will come on the market at $1500 need a reality check."

The reality is that one 1.8 GHz 970 seem to be on par with a P4/3GHz (something the current dual 1.42 G4 is not). Apples towers has been behind the Winboxes during the whole G4 era and the sales have been slumping ofr a long time. Apple can charge a lot for really fast dual 970 that are faster than the P4s. But if the 970 is 3-6 months away the P4 will be at 3.6 Ghz or so so single 970 and slower duals will just bring parity to the 2.5-3.6 GHz P4.

If Apple will sell the lowend SP G4 for $2999 speedwise on par on then a midrange P4 at 2.8 GHz, how well will they sell:no:

After 4 years of lagging performance Apple need to make an impact with both a 64 bit OS (bragging rights) and really good computers. If they price the 970 towers way above the current one the impact will lessen.:grumble:

Originally posted by DrBoar
"After 4 years of lagging performance Apple need to make an impact with both a 64 bit OS (bragging rights) and really good computers. If they price the 970 towers way above the current one the impact will lessen.:grumble:

Apple should make the whole switch:

Workstatinon:
2.0GHz, 2.5GHz (quad)

xServe:
1.5GHz (single/ dual)

Power Mac:
1.5GHz, 2.0GHz, 2.5GHz (dual)

Powerbook:
1.0GHz, 1.2GHz

iMac:
1.0GHz, 1.2GHz

iBook:
600MHz, 800MHz

eMac:
600MHz, 800MHz

One more thing: Cube2
600MHz, 800MHz

PPC970 & 64bit across the line:D ...if possible:\ :\

Originally posted by Fat Freddy
Apple should make the whole switch:

Workstatinon:
2.0GHz, 2.5GHz (quad)



I do not believe that we will see anything more than duals for quite a while.

Why would Apple do this?

In theory it is a good money maker.

With Motorola constantly lagging on speed, the G4 will not reach a decent peformance for the "bang for your buck."

While only the selected few get the 970s with great performance, great pipeline for enormous growth and a large price tag? That just does not sound right.

If they want to promote these machines to everyone who currently owns a PowerMac then they will price them right and get rid of the sour G4.

Besides, the Xserve was Apple's first move in the Enterprise market (well since Steve has ben back) and it is more affordable then all the things on the market. I see them going at the Workstation arena in the same regard.