By: Kira (kirsc.delete@this.aeterna.ru), August 17, 2014 12:53 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on August 17, 2014 12:29 pm wrote:
> Kira (kirsc.delete@this.aeterna.ru) on August 17, 2014 11:33 am wrote:
> > AltiVec was Power6
>
> Altivec was in the PPC970 which was essentially a POWER4 core. The codename for
> PPC970 was GP-UL --- gigaprocessor ultralite, where the GP was the POWER4.
>
> You can get into the legalities of what was added when to "real" POWER cores if you
> like, but that seems like a pointless argument about semantics. AltiVec was in something
> that was, to all intents and purposes (including being 64-bit), a POWER4 core.
>
I was just pointing out that it wasn't in Power5 as originally stated. Or Power4, for that matter. 970 was a special case; Power6 was the first "mainline" Power processor where it was present.
> Kira (kirsc.delete@this.aeterna.ru) on August 17, 2014 11:33 am wrote:
> > AltiVec was Power6
>
> Altivec was in the PPC970 which was essentially a POWER4 core. The codename for
> PPC970 was GP-UL --- gigaprocessor ultralite, where the GP was the POWER4.
>
> You can get into the legalities of what was added when to "real" POWER cores if you
> like, but that seems like a pointless argument about semantics. AltiVec was in something
> that was, to all intents and purposes (including being 64-bit), a POWER4 core.
>
I was just pointing out that it wasn't in Power5 as originally stated. Or Power4, for that matter. 970 was a special case; Power6 was the first "mainline" Power processor where it was present.