> Titan wasn't an existing core with Fast14 added to it. It was a completely
> new core designed by Intrinsity under contract from AMCC.

But why is it then that Titan is often connected to the PPC4xx family of cores?

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6268&forum=11&post_id=76580#76580
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6268&forum=11&post_id=79905#79905

Is it maybe just that Titan was designed to be compatible with the existing PPC4xx cores in supervisor mode, rendering it a new member of the PPC4xx core family technically? And then there's the clue that Titan was announced to deliver 2.0 DMIPS/MHz, just like PPC440 and PPC460 (and presumably PPC450) do.

> When Apple bought Intrinsity I suspect Apple [...] pretty much paid AMCC to drop Titan.

Yes, Applied Micro said that in April 2010 they had got their 5.4 million USD investment refunded by Apple. See last quote there:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7001&forum=3&post_id=77002#77002

> since AMCC owned the design

As they got their investment refunded I would conclude that they don't own the design anymore. Any objections?

> they could still port it to a different process, presumably without the Fast14 tech.
> Titan was a specific implementation of the core, it got cancelled, and AMCC
> started work on a new implementation on IIRC 45nm. So that why Titan was
> the core that was cancelled, but wasn't.

So you think the 40nm PPC465 core based PacketPro/Mamba/APM86xxx is just a quick interim solution on the way to a processor based on a 40nm (not 45) implementation of the Intrinsity developed core? Admittedly, Applied Micro claimed in July 2009 that the Titan core could easily be migrated to smaller process nodes like 40nm. See last quote there:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7001&forum=3&post_id=77005#77005

But then, this was before Apple had refunded Applied Micro's Intrinsity investment, and even before Apple had acquired Intrinsity.

> Before they were bought, there were rumours of Intrinsity
> working on a 2Ghz Cortex-A9.

Samsung's Hummingbird core used for instance in Apple's A4 chip is an Intrinsity (i.e. Fast14) enhanced Cortex-A8 core. And while there're already 2 GHz Cortex-A9 based chips in existence (e.g. by Nufront) I guess that a Fast14 enhanced 2 GHz Cortex-A9 would draw even less power.