Come on out, Power6+, you win
Well, you'll compete. Perhaps
Comment Where on earth is IBM's Power6+ kicker to the dual-core Power6 processors that were first announced in July 2007? Moore's Law says it should be here right about now.
When it comes to the Power6+ processor, IBM has been as quiet as a child playing hide and seek that wants to win the game so badly that she ends up falling asleep in the closet and can't hear that everyone has given up. It's a great way to win, but it also has the effect of scaring the living daylights out of the adults.
The Power6+ chip is, of course, the presumed kicker to the dual-core Power6 chip that IBM launched in the summer of 2007 in high-end boxes and rolled out across the unified Power Systems line this time last year. I have been watching Big Blue for a long time now, and the company has stopped bragging about technology way ahead of time - as it did with the Power4 processors at the turn of the millennium some 18 months ahead of the launch of those dual-core processors - and spends most of its time bragging about market share stats in the Unix space. When people know a new machine is coming, they stop buying.
Moreover, the Power6 chips, which were originally scheduled for 2006 with kickers in 2007, didn't make it to the field until July 2007 and were not across the product line until April 2008. The only thing worse than an impending product announcement in terms of its effect on sales is a delayed product that extends the impendingness of a product announcement for six months or a year. So, IBM has decided to simply not talk about the future, just in case something goes wrong - unless you want to discuss services or some business far removed from servers, like smart water meters.
Whatever Power6+ is or isn't remains unclear, as does its launch schedule. I am beginning to think the Power6+ is some figment of my imagination, or a hallucination, particularly with the eight-core, hybrid architecture Power7 chip due early next year. But it does exist. Here's a 2005 roadmap that shows it:
IBM went off the road a little bit on that roadmap from 2005, and in late 2006, this is the Power Systems roadmap the company was showing customers. As far as I know, this is still accurate:
Big Blue needs to do something to allow the Power Systems line to better compete against Intel's quad-core "Nehalem EP" Xeon 5500 processors, which are used in two-socket X64 servers. Now would be a good time for Power6+ to come out, with Intel's Nehalem cards on the table, Advanced Micro Devices now expecting to put its six-core "Istanbul" Opteron chips in the field in June (instead of later this year), Intel having delayed the quad-core "Tukwila" Itaniums until June or July with system shipments probably later than that, and Sun Microsystems looking weaker every day for reasons that only make sense to Wall Streeters who paid too much for Sun stock a few years back. (Sun is a good company with some great technology, and one that simply has too many employees.)
IBM likes to do summer and spring, sometimes fall, Power server announcements, but the poor global economy and the merger of the System p and System i product lines have pretty much killed anything resembling tradition in midrange server launches. I'll need more data if I want to establish a new pattern.
Just because IBM is being cagey about Power6+ doesn't mean things are not out there on the Web that point to it. First and foremost, since about 2005, the last page of an awful lot of IBM documents - the place where IBM covers all of its zillions of trademarks - has had Power6+ as a trademark. So IBM has been clearly been planning on launching something by that name. And soon, we'll be seeing Power7 trademarked, too.
Next page: Repeating chip history
Power 5/6 are different processors targeted at servers (running AIX, z/os and other boring stuff).
Gaming processors and apple processor are cousins. Originally from the same family; but have forked off and have totally different strengths (and cost less).
It's like comparing Core2 with Nehalem/Opteron - same family but no connection. Once is used in corporate datacenters and the other in homes or desktops.
If you are from the IT industry you'ld know that IBM has slowly divorced itself from the consumer/home world and caters - in hardware/software/services - only to big corporates. (Yeah there might be some odd execptions; but 99.99% of the revenue comes from big corporates).
Apple, nintendo are direct opposites. They hardly cater to the "datacenters". They targe home environment. The processors they use are chearper, less power hungry but also less powerful copmared to power hungry, cache loaded, cash-demanding power6.
Paris, coz she left the corporate world to help the average citizen.
AMD is dead...nehalem will kill it off
IBM specializes in scale up architecture and the whole business justifies the expense of having specialized chips. Itanium on the other hand is nothing more than a pa-risc dud
By Stuart Duel Posted Friday 24th April 2009 04:39 GMT
Apple dropped the PPC Processor, not the Power Processor although both are based on the same architecture.
Also, Nintendo along with Sony and Microsoft have adopted "variants of the Cell Processor" for their gaming consoles, which is based on the Power/PPC architecture but is not the Power Processor.
actually Stuart Duel , the truth IS, Nintendo use in affect a generic G3 at it core.
Microsoft Use a generic G4 WITH an Extended Altivec SIMD core, thats got the generic G4 Altivec 128 bit SIMD registers AND a seperate matching set of Altivec SIMD+ registers for exclusive use..
and we all Know the Sony PS3 uses a cut down G4 plus the so called Co-processers know as "Cell" That are INFACT modifyed cut down Altivec SIMD units as their core, you can evendirectly port your existig Altivec SIMD codebases with care and reasonable ease as the old school G4 coders found out...
OC the x86 SIMD guts didnt get Altivec or "Cell" by any other name, so could take best advantage of it in their x86 SIMD ports.... funy how intel CPUs improved SIMD are only now finally becoming more like the old 128but Altivec after all this time....
powerPC OC is dirived fromthe G5 that could do its SIMD anywere as good as the G4 clock for clock, infact you have to tweak your G5/PowerPC SIMD to get anywere near the G4's implimentation.
the basic premise today then for this story and the perhaps impending Power6+ IS will they have included the MS inspired Altivec+ additions and vastly improved on them,
making a new [Altivec] SIMD++ 512Bit available perhaps...
alongside the expected and demanded multicore, bus, interconnects, memory, and other generic boosting for todays markets OC, rememebr IBM have a worlds smallest die tech, and make massive head line news with it all the time, so why dont they use it on mass.
multi "cell" Altivec++ SIMD is Good, so let us buy it and use it TODAY....