Why did PowerPC die?

Why did PowerPC die?

Attached: PowerPCPad.jpg (1023x682, 89K)

Couldn't compete. x86 offered more performance per dollar and more performance per watt. Chalk it up to economies of scale or Intel/AMD competition or whatever you want, but x86 was (and is, except in very specialized cases) just better.

It didn't die, it's just not used as the main processor in any PCs anymore

it wasn't used as the main processer in PCs ever

Let's not start that semantics battle, you get the point

sometimes i just feel like being a bit of a dick

IBM couldn't keep up so they stopped trying. Intel is dying, now that things are shifting from x86 to ARM.

Man I wanted one of those so bad when my job was selling RS/6000s to casinos to run my company's player tracking system.

As a consumer CPU? Power consumption and cost to manufacture.

IBM failed to deliver a G5 for PowerBooks and after Apple dropped it, it was dead on the consumer marked.

Like most other desktop RISCs by the early 2000s, it didn't really offer anything particularly special or otherwise compelling to anybody in the low end or mid range of the market, and pretty much the only thing keeping it alive as a consumer desktop processor at that point was Apple. Things weren't much better in the high end either, there were way more compatible and all around better options, and all in all PPC was just plain redundant in the desktop and server markets.

Attached: ppcx86.png (1067x578, 27K)

Apple got fed up with it since it wasn't as profitable than just buying chips from Intel that they didn't have to put any money into it themselves.

Yes and no. Apple had to work on PowerPC alone, since IBM was focused on POWER and POWER even until the Core line did just as well as x86. That's why IBM used it in their own desktop workstations too.

It's dead.

IBM didn't even use PowerPC. Apple and a few others did, it was created via the AIM alliance and IBM just fabbed the chips while Apple had to fund them. IBM themselves worked on and used POWER. Think about it like Sony and Microsoft hiring IBM to create CPUs for their consoles, Apple did the same for their computers.

It was Apple's choice to use G5.

>IBM didn't even use PowerPC
Yes they did. It may have been short lived, but they used PowerPC in the Power Series Thinkpads.

>It's dead
There are more PowerPC processors than POWER processors in a modern POWER machine

Its still used, but trying to find a system that uses it is low. It was used a lot by Apple, Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, Cisco, and so on years ago.

> (You)
>It was Apple's choice to use G5.
Yeah, since 2003 but when IBM failed to deliver a proper mobile version to replace the G4 in 2005 they switched to Intel.

>IBM didn't even use PowerPC.....
They did for some of the RS/6000 workstations

IBM was a pretty regular user of PPC in their lower-end servers and workstations especially during the RS/6000 era, and on the other side of the coin you and Jow Forums in general are once again forgetting the significant contributions of Motorola to PPC development and fabrication. I guess you can't expect much from a consumer technology board that only remembers the biggest and prettiest logos on their fashion accessories.

Yeah, and how many people are still buying POWER machines? He's right. It's dead.

Enough to continue making them. I'll be getting a Blackbird in a few months

Like everyone else who's been saying that about every new Raptor product pretty much since the day Jow Forums remembered POWER existed and had an IBM logo on it, you probably won't. But good luck, maybe some day we'll actually get to meet someone who does something more than just talk about them like they're relevant.

You had a point with older systems but with how much more reasonable these price tags are I think a lot more are going to be owning up to their statements

I hope so. I'm pretty bored of the constant bitching and moaning over desktop architectures from casuals who read a wikipedia article about RISC in the 90s once but otherwise have never touched anything other than a PC or Mac in their life.

No it's POWER not PowerPC.

No I mean PowerPC.

PowerPC is gone, it's only POWER now

PowerPC merged into POWER with POWER3. It's just POWER now.

>especially during the RS/6000 era
The 90's RS/6000 machines used the original POWER ISA, pre-PowerPC one even.

It's not the main processor architecture but there are still PowerPC cores on board, similar to how modern x86_64 processors have an ARM core

lower-end being the keyword here

POWER =/= PowerPC
Raptor uses POWER9, it's not dead.

Early ones sure, but they did use PowerPC in a few ThinkPads and entry level RS/6000 machines. Even a very low end Intellistation used PowerPC, possibly thanks to Apple giving up on G5 and they had a bunch of G5 silicon in stock.

Let me fix that: IBM didn't even use PowerPC in their high end lineup.
Shows how much crap they gave about it.

Yes they did. Or do you think workstations were their high end lineup?

Workstations were their own lineup. You had low end and high end workstations.

Applel didn't want to think different.

>forgetting the significant contributions of Motorola to PPC development and fabrication.
Motorola was a fab, they started PPC fabrication since their 68000 ISA was not efficient to develop for anymore.

Look at eServer, RS/6000, IntelliStations, most use POWER.

i would love to use one but i don't even need a high end chip, so it would be a waste of money. something similar to an i5 would be great.

>Why did PowerPC die?
Apple wasn't using enough of them to make it worth IBM's while to develop a 3GHz version.
Jobs told them where to stick their silicon and called Otellini.

>Motorola was a fab, they started PPC fabrication since their 68000 ISA was not efficient to develop for anymore.
Yes, but they realised that they could make more selling their 88000 line to auto makers for engine control.