IBM to Release 64-Bit, 1.8GHz Processor in 2003

Professor_Quail writes "A Forbes article supposed to be released tomorrow gives some details about the new PowerPC processor that IBM and Apple have been working together on; the chip is slated to be introduced at the end of next year. The introduction of this chip should put to rest any speculation that Apple is moving to an Intel platform."

Comments

1Ghz.

[Trusty Penfold]

So it starts off a full GHz behind Intel? That's just great!

To be released WHEN?

[The Mainframe]

At the end of next year? Apple thinks I'm going to wait an entire year for a processor that's considered slow by today's PC standards? I'm sick and tired of being at the low end of the technology curve. Apple may not be switching to an intel processor, but I very well may be. I love my Mac, but I'm not about to pay $3,000 for a stick in the mud.

Already are 64 bit

[dpatters]

I'm pretty positive the current dual processor Ghz machines out right now are 64 bit already. So start thinking about that request now.

Re:Clawhammer for me.

[BitGeek]

If you really did take price/performance, you'd be running PowerPCs NOW.

ITs this fantasy that clockrate is performance (and the "benchmarks" that only measure clockrate) that allow you to say something so idiotic and not be laughed off the planet-- so many other people want to believe in the superiority of a processor hobbled by backwards compatibility going all the way to the 4004 that you are in good company.

Re:Clawhammer for me.

[Svenne]

Cool.. Care to mention where one would turn to pick up an iBook for $600?