IBM is rolling out new PowerPC processors aimed at the embedded space that are designed to improve performance while consuming less power than their counterparts. The new chips illustrate IBM's commitment to building processors that do not rely solely on speed bumps for performance improvements, but also are energy-efficient, said Ron Martino, director of Power architecture solutions for IBM's Technology Collaboration Solutions unit.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2006-04-21
Member since:2005-09-30
Member since:2006-01-26
Doubtful - I'm sure it was already on their roadmap.
If anything, I suspect companies like Microsoft and Sony have been applying pressure to get lower-power processors for game consoles.
I get the impression Apple was just using it as another excuse to switch. I believe Apple no longer wanted to be "bound" to the PPC architecture regardless of it's technical merit.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2006-04-21
Member since:
2006-04-19
With regret, I must say that Apple's move to Intel was the right choice. I love the concept of PowerPC's and being different, but what's faster than Core 2 Duo? Nothing. And to think -- those Mac Pros have got to be outrageous. So fast, they will get you arrested! Buy one of those and you will be in for some hard time.
Member since:2005-07-29
Member since:
2005-12-28
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2005-08-31
I'd better say POWER is for server and PowerPC is for embedded/desktop.
These new CL chips with reduced power consumption will certainly find their way to high-performance embedded targets. If I'm not mistaken, many PowerPC chips are available for both commercial and industrial temp. range, unlike, for example, chips from Intel and this is very important thing for embedded...
Member since:2005-07-06
Depends on how IBM achieved these 'energy savings', was it through raw 'lets grab the achitecture and make it really efficient' or is it nothing more than glorified tweaking of the mhz scaling which they current use.
Look at the Core processor and what they've done, and the massive improvements to the underlying architecture to improve efficiency - 1cycle to complete a SSE instruction, for example; and compare it to what IBM has there lack of achieved.
Member since:2006-08-09
Member since:
2006-08-23
Member since:
2006-05-14
