Talk:PowerPC 7xx

Since there is no discussion entered here, I have removed the NPOV dispute msg. Surely a dispute has to exist before the msg can be added? Graham 01:38, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

This article talks exclusively of the G3 as a Macintosh desktop processor. However, the G3 architecture is used widely in for example embedded applications (that market is Motorola's current principal focus). I don't think the processor should be called G3 in the Motorola processor box, since that was Apple's marketing name for the processor family. Would PPC 7xx be appropriate? David Remahl 01:42, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * As the article had nothing substantial about the PPC 7xx and the fact neither Motorola or IBM use the G3 designation I've made this page more accurately reflect the marketing nature of the name and removed it from the list of Motorola processors. I would suggest a seperate article for the PPC 7xx is created with it's proper name and technical details with some cross-linking perhaps. DamienG 18:26, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)

Overhaul
I took the freedom to make a major overhaul of the article. I felt is was sorely lacking in information and was incorrect in some places. I fashioned it after the PowerPC G4 article. I hope you enjoy it. -- Henriok 23:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

750GX top speed is 1.1 GHz not 1.0 GHz
While it was announced with a top speed of 1.0Ghz, and you can still find this top speed mentioned in some IBM documents, there was a 1.1 GHz 750gx released later. The main page about the 750GX on IBM's site mentions a top speed of 1.1 GHz. Further proof is that PowerLogix is shipping an upgrade card with a 1.1 GHz 750Gx.

So I fixed the error, I felt like some explaining was needed.
 * It does indeed say 1.1 GHz on the page you linked, but nowhere in the marketing materials and documentation, afaik. But 1.1 GHz it says so the change is good. -- Henriok 12:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Broadway
1. If Broadway is a variant of the G5, what's it doing on this page?

2. Is Broadway really likely to be a variant of the G5? The "citation" is an unusually poor Ars article claiming it must be "because it was offered as a laptop version of the G5". There's no apparent evidence it was offered in that form, other than uncited rumours, and the current consensus, if there is one, is that this CPU runs at 729MHz, which would be a hard sell as a replacement to the G4s in recent PowerPC based laptops, even allowing for there being multiple versions.

I don't think the evidence cited is trustworthy, it's rumour based and contradicts pretty much everyone else. 208.152.231.254 16:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the article should be unmerged from the PowerPC G3 article and restored to its previous form. AFAIK, there's no conclusive evidence that the Broadway CPU either belongs to the G3 or G5 family. --Cryovat 17:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think I'm the right person to move it, but I did tweak the wording to include the general "729MHz Gecko" spec that most rumours had centered around, and de-emphasised the Ars Technica claim (while still including.) Both are useful, but I think it's premature to really believe anything specific, and (personally, my opinion is) the Hannibal claim just doesn't ring true for me right now. 208.152.231.254 17:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The 729MHz figure seems to have originated as a troll by supporters of the xbox360 against the Wii as a way to present it as not being as powerful as even the original xbox. It also is out of line with the statements that have been made that Broadway would be 2-3 times more powerful than the Gekko. If the Broadway processor is simply a PPC750GL chip clocked to 729MHz would not be 2x as fast as the 485MHz Gekko.

I think the Broadway reference in this page should be limited to a link in the Gekko section to the Broadway article. There is no concrete information about the chip yet and rumors about what it is are all over the board. There are articles here that list Broadway as carrying the VMX extentions (altivec), and that would seemingly by definition exclude it from being a G3 class chip wouldn't it? 64.6.0.220 02:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

The 729MHz figure originates from early leaks of the spec (see the references cited) coupled with developers comments about receiving "overclocked Gamecubes". I've seen plenty of references for the 729MHz figure, but none earlier than those cited in the main Broadway article. Nintendo has not claimed that Broadway is 2-3x faster than Gekko, they've said the Wii is 2-3x faster than the Gamecube. Given massive upgrades in the graphics department and a large amount of extra memory, it wouldn't require a 2-3x improvement in CPU speed to meet that. That's ignoring the possibility that it's just a dual core, overclocked, Gekko, which would reach that speed requirement all by itself.

IBM did, at one point, drop heavy hints about a G3 with VMX, you can read about it in the main article (Mojave); the problem with it was that it was intended for use as a "G4 equivalent" (it'd have been badged a G4 by Apple even though it had essentially a G3 architecture) by Apple, who wasn't interested. The 74xx chips are more than the 74x/75x chips with a few bolt-ons, and there's no concrete evidence Broadway has VMX anyway.

Nintendo are mostly interested in power consumption and cost. They've been very explicit about this stating again and again they don't intend to compete with Sony and Microsoft on CPU power. Given this is a CPU for a console with SD graphics and an unsubsidized price tag of around half the subsidized prices of its competitors, it's hard not to take them at their word about it, and very difficult to see why there'd be so much doubt about this being a "better Gekko" rather than some G5/Cell/Xenon type powerhouse. 208.152.231.254 15:53, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

We know the early developer comments about recieving overclocked gamecubes is true, Nintendo sent them devkits which were Triforce arcade boards with overclocked gekko processors. However, there hasn't been any reliable source on the 729MHz number, and I've seen 1.1GHz and 970MHz tossed around nearly as much. While I appreciate that the Broadway isnt' intended to be a powerhouse, in the bulk amounts nintendo is ordering transistor count matters more than the design they order. A low clocked G5 would still be a very efficient chip would it not?


 * Hannibal's latest article doesn't bring any more hard facts regarding Broadway. 750CL seems to be a speed bumped Gekko, but that's just circumstantial evidence regardning Broadway. Nothing more than what we alredy _know_. But since Hannibal retracted his previous non-G3 guess, our only source at this moment is that it is indeed a G3 based processor, just like Gekko, most certainly based on 750CL (if it's not actually a 750CL). We haven't any other sources, and even if this one is unconfirmed by IBM or Nintendo, it is still a source. Is i OK to put Broadway back into the article at this point? -- Henriok 22:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Rename
I'd like to propose a rename of this page. "G3" was the codename for this family processors and Apple used it in its marketing, neither case should have any bearing on what this page is called. The proper name for this article shoule be something like "PowerPC 750", "PowerPC 75x" or "PowerPC 750 family". I'd like commets on the suggested names, and other variations are welcome. I also will make the same proposition regarding the PowerPC G4 article, with the same argumentation. Please comment there too. -- Henriok 11:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I completely agree with this. Right now PowerPC 750 redirects to PowerPC G3 which is incorrect - the G3 was a marketing label used for only some of the parts of the different lines discussed here. It would make sense to redirect entries like PowerPC G3, PowerPC 745, PowerPC 750GX, etc to PowerPC 750 since it's simple and was the first chip in the family. You have my vote. Trollaxor 21:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

G3 an upgrade to PC 603e?
My understanding is that PPC 740/750 was basically a 603e with reworked and enlarged cache structure. It does explain how G3 upgrades for the PowerBook 1400 and 2400 functioned. Pinout is the same as well, I believe. --Flightsoffancy (talk) 23:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)