Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

More than 2 Processor Support in Panther?

The G5 was designed for multiple CPUs. I fully expect 4-way systems to be available in the 2U rack mountable systems ASAP. I just wouldn't expect them to be as quiet as the PowerMac G5s.

This will probably be necessary to compete against the next round of faster Intel chips, continuing the strategy of selling dual G4s against faster P4s, to now sell quad G5s against dual P4s.
 
I thought programming for quad systems was harder than programming for 2, which is harder than programining for 1. I expect the quads will only be in the Xserves. Although it would be nice to see them in the PMs, but I just don't see many companies optimising their software for quads unless they are made standard accross the PM range.
 
Originally posted by hvfsl
I thought programming for quad systems was harder than programming for 2, which is harder than programining for 1. I expect the quads will only be in the Xserves. Although it would be nice to see them in the PMs, but I just don't see many companies optimising their software for quads unless they are made standard accross the PM range.
Click to expand...

It's harder to design CPUs, make chipsets, and program some bits of the operating system, in the way that you suggest, for more CPUs.

But, the 970 handles more CPUs just fine, and the operating system is based off of FreeBSD, which supports many CPUs, and I assume that Apple can either make the chipset, or get someone who knows how to, to make them.

For a server, it's not an issue about the applications needing to support multiple CPUs (via multi-threading), since you tend to need to support multiple users, and thus can simply run multiple instances of the applications.

Err, long story short: there's no technical reason why this wouldn't be possible :)
 
3 processors???

THere's nowhere a sign that PPC970 supports asymmetric multiprocessing. And why should it. Afaik SMP means processors in pairs.
 
Yeah, it's kinda gotta be 2, 4, 8, etc.

But I'm sure they'd design the OS to get it working right, even if the software isn't built for it. Be nice with 90 something % increases for each CPU.

Just don't look for it anytime soon in cheaper machines. XServes, maybe.
 
Re: 3 processors???

Originally posted by ipiloot
THere's nowhere a sign that PPC970 supports asymmetric multiprocessing.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't attach too much importance to this rumor. They probably just added "3 processors" to their list to make it complete, even though it doesn't seem likely to happen with the PPC970. It's a common programmer's technique.
 
Symmetric Multi Processing is where you have multiple [identical] CPUs all doing the same thing.

Asymmetric Multi Processing is where you have multiple CPUs with specific functions.

Both symmetric and asymmetric forms can be done with any number of processors >1.

Jim
 
Originally posted by JimNoble
Symmetric Multi Processing is where you have multiple [identical] CPUs all doing the same thing.

Asymmetric Multi Processing is where you have multiple CPUs with specific functions.

Both symmetric and asymmetric forms can be done with any number of processors >1.

Jim
Click to expand...

Thank You.

But why isn' there any 3-processor machines available then?
 
Re: woot!

Originally posted by Drinahn
Could we expect Quad G5 PowerBooks tomorrow!!
Click to expand...

My auntie's friend has a brother whose postman is a cousin of the grandma of a senior engineer at Apple. This very reliable source told me of an exciting new product at Apple for kids: The iBake will be a totally new multifunctional toy for children, featuring a total of four G5 processors, overclocked to run at 2.5 GHz. Two G5's each are teamed up to power one of two black circular interfaces seen on the product whose purpose has not been determined yet. The best is that Apple manages to run those four G5's without any fan at all! Jonathan Ive commented to a selected group of reporters that "this time, we're not avoiding heat issues, we're creating them on purpose". Whatever that is supposed to mean.

The picture (stolen from Apple's secret labs) seen at

http://www.erzi.de/katalog/images/products/10690_Kochplatte-KLgr.jpg

clearly shows that a number of bluetooth accessories will be available as well since I see no wires attached. Also, there don't seem to be any mouse buttons anymore -- another innovation from Apple.

SCNR ;)
 
SMP`

Originally posted by ipiloot
Thank You.

But why isn' there any 3-processor machines available then?
Click to expand...

/me looks at the 3 cpu box next to him.

There are, I have a 3 cpu SPARCServer right next to me... and with a bit of expense I can make it 8 cpu, or anything in between.
 
Re: woot!

Originally posted by Drinahn
lol, I could resist, I had to become a member to say...

woot! Could we expect Quad G5 PowerBooks tomorrow!!
Click to expand...

i can't wait!! lol:p
seriously, that will come evenbtually. (hundreds of years from now:p)
 
I don't know much on the subject - but could this have to do with clustering? There has been talk about Mac G5 clusters - n-cpus.....that would make sense for this bit of text. Going with 4 CPUs in one box right now seems a bit much - especially given the current internal config of the G5.

Not that I wouldn't want to have a quad G5....;)

D
 
Originally posted by hvfsl
I thought programming for quad systems was harder than programming for 2, which is harder than programining for 1.
Click to expand...

Programming a single workflow application to take advantage multiple processors is harder than programming it for a single processor, yes. However, in general, if you have your code set up to handle two processors it should be next to trivial to get it to support four, eight, sixteen, etc.

On the other hand, multiple single-threaded applications also work smashingly well in an n-processor system ...
 
I don;t think apple would make a 4 processor Pmac. Imagine having to pay $6000.00 entry-level for a 4 processor pmac.
 
Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
I don't know much on the subject - but could this have to do with clustering? There has been talk about Mac G5 clusters - n-cpus.....that would make sense for this bit of text. Going with 4 CPUs in one box right now seems a bit much - especially given the current internal config of the G5.

Not that I wouldn't want to have a quad G5....;)

D
Click to expand...

Anything is possible and clustering, in some form, is supposed to be part of Panther.

Most servers and big machines have had support for large numbers of processors for quite a while. I've worked with an IBM iSeries model 840 which had 24 PowerPC processors.

The efficiency of the operating system needs to improve though, if Apple will sell the processors as add-ons at some point. Hopefully, Darwin has been improved to exploit any processor's power in multiple processor configurations.
 
multiple pocessor panther

maybe this is for some kind of integrated clustering feature like appleseed. I thought I read something about that somewhere...


hmm a little late on that post:eek:
 
I remember reading a long time ago when MacOS X came out that it had support for up to 32 processors. Is this still the case or not?!

Next, with the new ability for certain Apple programs to share resources over a network for processing, it is possible we will see this application before >2 XServes/PMacs.
 
multiple pocessor panther

maybe this is for some kind of integrated clustering feature like appleseed. I thought I read something about that somewhere...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back