w00t! Dual-core Power Macs

T

Tomahawk

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
355
The online Apple Store has been updated, but http://apple.com/powermac still shows the previous models. :/

The top-of-the-line is as follows:

Two dual-core 2.5GHz PowerPC G5 processors :cool:
1.25GHz frontside bus per processor
1MB L2 cache per core
512MB of 533MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-4200)
250GB Serial ATA hard drive
16x SuperDrive (double-layer)
Three open PCI-Express expansion slots
NVIDIA GeForce 6600 with 256MB GDDR SDRAM

$3299
 
PowerBook update, Power Mac update...nice all around.

Still, I wish they'd just tack $80-$90 on the price and make 1 GB of RAM standard.
 
wow,
4 full size pci-e slots for support of up to 4 video cards..could you imagine having 8 30" cinema dislays..splooge..dammit...

upped the L2 cache to 1MB for each of the 4 cores, each processor has its own system bus.

support for 4 terabytes of ram (for when, you know, we have 500GB sticks avaliable) and ecc is now an option

2 gigabit ethernet ports with jumbo frame support-finally got rid of that pesky dial up modem

Geforce 7600 GT and Quadro FX 4500 cards avaliable (with optional 3D Goggles)

no more antenna dongles for bluetooth and wifi

the only thing this bad boy is missing is SATA2
 
They need to add an option for a second optical drive in the tower. I mean, being able to do a direct disc to disc copy without involving an external drive is so basic it seems silly they even support the option... one example of Apple letting fashion dictate form.
 
Oh god...

Wheres... my... credit... card.

NO DAMNIT I'M POOR
I DON'T NEED FOOD

Oh god...
 
Oh help me...I just ordered my first mac. A 17" PB with the 7200rpm drive and 2gb of ram. Come to papa.

There goes my Thinkpad running debian. I can't wait to play with virtual PC on this thing. How many OSs can I get going on it? Hmm, a debian server install with a 800x600 window and a XP install at 800x600 side by side? :D
 
That's an insane amount of power...yikes, I wonder how it performs...anybody got one?
 
Apple finally comes out with their 4 processor beast. Wow.

1700 bucks for a graphics card? HA

Well, I thought apple was going to save the day for my agp G5, but look at them now.
 
I'm willing to bet money that the final revision of the Power Mac G5, be it this revision or a speed bumped one down the line, will outclass the first Intel Power Macs.
 
Yeah, priced one out at $24,000. Not too bad...now where's my lotto ticket. I need my 16GB of RAM DAMMIT!
 
ramdisk.. .or something similar.

im sure A/V editing with that thing would be insane...
 
man i wish i can afford one... the bling factor is one thing, but with it my music game will elevate to another new level (still no garageband for windows...)
 
Apple finally comes out with their 4 processor beast. Wow.
Click to expand...

erm. two processors, 4 cores.

i'm waiting to see some benchmarks (not apple jpgs) comparing the dual core 2ghz to a dual 2ghz g5, we didn't magical unbelievable speed increases in the intel camp with dual core (or HT for that matter) so i won't be holding my breath with ppc either. how's 15-30% sound over single core? anywho, waiting for some sort of speed indicator i am.

-esr
 
esr2 said:
erm. two processors, 4 cores.

i'm waiting to see some benchmarks (not apple jpgs) comparing the dual core 2ghz to a dual 2ghz g5, we didn't magical unbelievable speed increases in the intel camp with dual core (or HT for that matter) so i won't be holding my breath with ppc either. how's 15-30% sound over single core? anywho, waiting for some sort of speed indicator i am.

-esr
Click to expand...
yeah but the mult-tasking ability of this thing would be something to behold
 
yeah but the mult-tasking ability of this thing would be something to behold
Click to expand...

any computer can multitask. i'm just cutting through the PR fat. inte went HT and promised multitasking beyond belief... erm not quite. same goes for my dual g5, yes it's faster then a single 1.8, but noticably faster? sure if i'm encoding video. when i'm burning a cd? listening to mp3s? and doing stuff? no. not really, let's not underestimate the importance of ram and lots of it. So no, I'm not expecting to see any massive increases in performance for every day users, sure up to 30% in specific areas like video encoding, etc. but enough that the average user will notice? doubtful. Not enough for me to sell my dp to upgrade, nothing like the move from 1.5ghz g4 to dual 2ghz g5.

-esr
 
thats the powermac i wish i had....*looks at dual 1.8GHz G5 with distain* but one thing i did notice, can the cores communicate "on-die"(AMD) or do they need to go through the frontside bus(Intel)?
 
DigitalEdge said:
Im still going to wait for the Intel Macs this summer
Click to expand...
I seriously wouldn't buy the first gen Intel macs, since they will probably have problems.

Plus, it's going to be 2 years for intel powermacs, then a year for all the kinks to be worked out.

Also, Apple has said that they will support PPC for about 5 years.

In short, I want a 4 core powermac...
 
Gob said:
I seriously wouldn't buy the first gen Intel macs, since they will probably have problems.

Plus, it's going to be 2 years for intel powermacs, then a year for all the kinks to be worked out.

Also, Apple has said that they will support PPC for about 5 years.

In short, I want a 4 core powermac...
Click to expand...


Steve jobs said they have been testing os10 with Intel chips for 5 years allready (Secretly)he also said june of 06 they will be availble
 
Damn I really want one of the 4 cores with a few gigs of ram. I can't wait untill I get to play with one of those things as I want to do some video encoding tests on it.
 
esr2 said:
any computer can multitask. i'm just cutting through the PR fat. inte went HT and promised multitasking beyond belief... erm not quite. same goes for my dual g5, yes it's faster then a single 1.8, but noticably faster? sure if i'm encoding video. when i'm burning a cd? listening to mp3s? and doing stuff? no. not really, let's not underestimate the importance of ram and lots of it. So no, I'm not expecting to see any massive increases in performance for every day users, sure up to 30% in specific areas like video encoding, etc. but enough that the average user will notice? doubtful. Not enough for me to sell my dp to upgrade, nothing like the move from 1.5ghz g4 to dual 2ghz g5.

-esr
Click to expand...
The PowerMacs are not intended for doing average stuff like browse the web or listen to MP3s (or DMRed AAC, rather). They're intended for professional work, and you can bet your ass that the quad PowerMac beats the pants off a dual one when it comes to quite a few things (3D rendering performance scales almost linearly with cores and clock frequency). If you don't strain the computer enough to notice going from two cores to four, you have no business buying a PowerMac in the first place.

And dual-processor Macs are a hell of a lot better at multitasking than single-processor ones. It's not PR fluff.
 
esr2 said:
any computer can multitask. i'm just cutting through the PR fat. inte went HT and promised multitasking beyond belief... erm not quite. same goes for my dual g5, yes it's faster then a single 1.8, but noticably faster? sure if i'm encoding video. when i'm burning a cd? listening to mp3s? and doing stuff? no. not really, let's not underestimate the importance of ram and lots of it. So no, I'm not expecting to see any massive increases in performance for every day users, sure up to 30% in specific areas like video encoding, etc. but enough that the average user will notice? doubtful. Not enough for me to sell my dp to upgrade, nothing like the move from 1.5ghz g4 to dual 2ghz g5.

-esr
Click to expand...
Obviously this isn't for you.

I do video editing, and encoding. As well as sound work.

It would be great to be able to encode a video, while downloading a file, while working on a sound file, while browsing the internet.

Obviously if all you are doing is basic computing, a dual proc is not for you.

Also, of course I'm not doing video work ALL THE TIME, but when I AM, then it's good.
 
DigitalEdge said:
Steve jobs said they have been testing os10 with Intel chips for 5 years allready (Secretly)he also said june of 06 they will be availble
Click to expand...

You haven't been paying much attention to the Intel switch.

The switch is starting in summer '06, and it's starting on the low-end. It's wrapping up sometime in 2007 with the Power Macs. And the fact that OS X has been in testing on Intel for five years has absolutely nothing to do with the defects in Revision 1 *hardware* you can expect from the first Intel Macs.
 
These computers were not designed with home users in mind.

Why don't people ever get that?
 
Dietrich said:
These computers were not designed with home users in mind.

Why don't people ever get that?
Click to expand...

Because they are the only macs with similar specs and a similar appearance to what every other vendor markets towards home users. Mac Mini's are good internet terminals, maybe a little word processing, worthless for anything more. eMacs are bulky and also fairly underpowered. iMacs look kinda dumb (personal opinion) but have decent power, and decent price, other than that damn integrated screen you have to buy, and a 20" widescreen LCD is the biggest. Powermacs are way too expensive, and probably most are overpowered for average home tasks. There needs to be a Powermac in the iMac price slot, with a single G5 (2.0 ghz would work), HD, Superdrive, etc, that looks like a tower, and doesn't include a screen.
 
The PowerMacs are not intended for doing average stuff like browse the web or listen to MP3s (or DMRed AAC, rather). They're intended for professional work, and you can bet your ass that the quad PowerMac beats the pants off a dual one when it comes to quite a few things (3D rendering performance scales almost linearly with cores and clock frequency). If you don't strain the computer enough to notice going from two cores to four, you have no business buying a PowerMac in the first place.

And dual-processor Macs are a hell of a lot better at multitasking than single-processor ones. It's not PR fluff.
Click to expand...

Oh, well I use mine for average stuff because the other choices I had, mac mini, powerbook, etc, were just too damn slow compared to anything with P4 for the same cost. So no, I’ll go ahead and counter that no, not everyone buys a powermac for pro work. Many who have switched from the intel camp buy it for usual work, photoshop isn’t uncommon anymore on most of my college peer machines. We’re not pros, we just know photoshop, been using them since we had dual P3 500 boxes back in 1999.

Secondly, how do we measure “a hell of a lot better”. Is 20-30% “a hell of a lot better”? to me, NO. that’s why I mentioned moving from the 1.5ghz G4 to the dual 2.0ghz G5. That move WAS a hell of a lot better.


Obviously this isn't for you.

I do video editing, and encoding. As well as sound work.

It would be great to be able to encode a video, while downloading a file, while working on a sound file, while browsing the internet.

Obviously if all you are doing is basic computing, a dual proc is not for you.

Also, of course I'm not doing video work ALL THE TIME, but when I AM, then it's good.
Click to expand...

Ok here we go again. Sure it’s fore me, it’s one of the few bearable options for coming from anything from 2.4ghz faster in the intel camp, because the G4’s antiquated architecture just doesn’t hold a candle to anything beyond a 2.4ghz HT p4, let alone the 3+ ghz machines that can be had for imac mony today.

Um, os you’re telling me you can’t encode a video while downloading a file while working on a sound file while browsing the internet? I managed all that on my pII 350 back in 98 for a highschool project. I’ve managed to do that since 2002 on my ‘studio’ machine running a p4 1.6ghz cpu, adobe premiere, cool edit pro – then adobe audition

Now let’s be clear, I’ve already advocated waiting to see how these perform in the real world. Why? Oh because the only other dual cores out there are seeing a 20-30% max improvement over their single core brothers.

And yes, to both of u, this is an affront on PR bullshit because no one markets better then apple, so no, I will not concede that OMG these are going to be sooo f*cking fast. I will stake my account on the forum that the Dual core 2ghz g5 will not offer amazing gains over the Dual Processor G5, as I’ve already indicated. I DID NOT advocate that the quad core would not be a substantial improvement over the dual g5 setups, not at all. In fact, if you follow my statements, my indication that dual core cpus are showing 30% increases tops in performance over single core per the already available chips on the intel side, then yes, a 30% increase (in pie in the sky scenario) on two chips over single core g5 will offer a decent gain. But that wasn’t my concern, I was posting about moving from my current box, as I stated pretty blatantly.

SO YES, this is the same sort of hype we’ve seen in the intel camps for years. And yes these dual core cpus have offered slightly better performance in the intel camps. And Sorry but YES, AVERAGE COLLEGE STUDENTS WITH ANY SENSE DUE USE THE POWERMAC AS PRIMARY MACHINES, because, as already articulated, THEY”RE THE ONLY THING CLOSE TO WHAT IS OFFERED IN THE PC WORLD AT A FRACTION THE COST. So no, just because the powermac costs more, I will not agree only pros should use it. That’s bs. How many of the students in my labs on campus are pros. Well. None. But why do we use powermacs. Well, maybe because the minis really aren’t anything compared to the powermac in even the most mundane of average tasks that we, who grew up with computers since the age of five, see as every day and not exclusive purchase to the ‘professional’ crowd. Nope, gunna have to refrain from agreeing, sorry. And please, let’s be real, we can already do video, audio, and photo editing while surfing and listening to music on a wide myriad of non Dual cpu machines or even ancient dual cpu machines of yore, not just these newest iterations of ppc.

-esr
 
I just hope they finally got rid of the G5 beep per second without having to turn off NAP in Tiger.

Umm... esr, I'm confused. Where are you finding Powermacs comparable to PC's at a fraction of the cost? Are you talking about refurbs or stolen models out of someone's van? Last I checked, it was easier to find faster PC's at a fraction of the cost of Mid to Low end Powermacs... Doesn't mean I don't love my DP G4 1ghz or DP G5 2.5 ghz, but c'mon... the only reason I learned photoshop, premiere, fcp, etc. was because the art dept. at the university would only buy macs. they incorrectly thought pc's had problems with color and therefore were inferior for graphics work. Even after proving pc's were just as good with color at nearly 1/4 the cost, they still bought macs.

Having said that, my G4 450 and DP 450 running tiger and Adobe studio products are still zippy enough to be productive well past their expected lifespan. Can't say that for my p3-500 or p3-850 that barely pass as internet/word processor boxes runnin WinXP in my parent's home.

And I love Powermac Cases, have ever since the blue and whites.

These dual cores g5's are going to be faster, but not by much. Traditionally, each upgrade of the PM's have resulted in a 20% real world increase in speed. $3k+ is a bit to spend on 20%. However, if these new crop of PM's stay useful well past the 5 year mark, it seems like a pretty good investment for a sexy box.
 
they, the powermacs, are the only thing comparible to pcs in terms of speed, the pcs being a fraction of the cost.

-esr
 
I'll go out on a limb and say that Macs tend to hold their value longer then your average PC. I've worked in education for years and older macs just hold out longer based on Apple's software and OS. Its not going to last forever, but the cost of ownership due to maintenance is lower. Powermacs are more inline with Precision Workstations then your average clunky Dimension if compared to Dell. So yes, you can get machines at a 'fraction' of the cost...but really what are you getting? You're just looking at bottom line 'benchmarks', you see a machine that can be built 'comparable' to the Powermac until that one day when that spyware infection comes and fsck's up your day :p
 
I am a Mac Fan, But I am not a fan of them beefing up their dying breed of PPC processor series Macs.

With Intel Macs on the Horizion, they should focus more to that, to get them out faster. Instead of do this. But whatever.
 
o yes, you can get machines at a 'fraction' of the cost...but really what are you getting? You're just looking at bottom line 'benchmarks', you see a machine that can be built 'comparable' to the Powermac until that one day when that spyware infection comes and fsck's up your day
Click to expand...

I do believe you missed the point entirely. I was not attempting to discredit the powermac for being expensive, it's a moot point for me, i've purchased four macs in the last six months (15" 1.5ghz powerbook, 12" 1.2ghz ibook, 1.42ghz mini, dual 2ghz g5 powermac), and a host of other apple toys (20" ACD, isight, wireless keyboard and mouse, ipods, etc). I was responding to the absurd notion that the only people who have any business purchasing powermacs are professionals. I was explaining that the only system apple offers with the speed to compete with what costs significantly less in the windows sector, and in terms of speed im talking how long it takes me to compile a panoramic of 20 6MP images, etc, is the powermac. So no, im not looking just at benchmarks, but I am saying that they can be factored into evaluating if these dual core ppc powermacs are going to some how be 'th3 l337zor' and 'amazingly fast' and all that sort of marketing bs we're already starting to self promote. the answer i believe, given all the evidence out there right now in terms of reviews of other dual core systems, is, as i said, not a massive improvement vs say a move from a g4 1.5 to a dual 2ghz g5. that's the relationship i set up, and if anyone can provide me with a solid example or logical thought process which could extrapolate some sort of fantastic gains from these dual core systems, then i'll shut up. but the fact remains. if apple only sold powermacs to the pro field they'd loose a massive market in academia (where i, surprise, sell apples now). and these dual core machines aren't going to usher in some grand new era of multitasking. g4's can multitask, p4's can multitask, my p2 could multitask. yes the dual cores will be faster, but not some marvel to behold, not like the move from g4 to g5. So no need to regale me with stories of OSX superiority, I’ve been selling apple products for years and currently use them for all but studio work, I’m well aware thank you.

-esr
 
Yer a bit of aaa....bit of a nut aren't you? Ok, I'll call up Apple and tell them to stop making the Quad, the Dualie is fast enough :rolleyes:

Apple cuts the marketing tripe into consmer and professional categories. If you are going to do any sort of serious work, you need a powermac. Agreed. But its designed and marketed for professional use. Get a paper bag, put over your mouth and breath in and out slowly. I was in general, responding to the thread as a whole, not singling you out. The notion was put forth as to why buy a Powermac with this latest upgrade when intellimacs are around the corner? The answer, as I have stated, was that in my professional opinion, the Macs hold their value better and the cost again...in my professional opinion....is worth it. Even if the Macintels come out this summer, there really is not much danger that this thing is going to be dead before it leaves the factory. If I could afford it right now, I'd upgrade my server, but the G4 Still does what I want it to do so its not that big a deal.

As for your tirade on Apple Marketing, wtf do you want them to say? Don't buy it if you already have last year's model because the speed gain is marginal to your eyes? ALL companies blow air when it comes to selling you a new 'whatever they're selling'. My guess would be that 3d renderers would see the most benefit from a quad machine, hence power mac = professional workstation = not priced/designed for internet surfing and light photo retouching and casual use.
:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top