or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Need opinion on the new 933MHz G4
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Need opinion on the new 933MHz G4

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
Well, I'm a bit confused. I'm in the process of choosing a new computer to replace my good old Mac IIci.

I was very interested in the dual 1GHz with the GF4 Ti card and a 1GB of ram, but it's going to cost me a bit too much.

I'm now considering the 933MHz, with 1GB ram and the GForce4 Titanium video card.

What do you think of this setup ?

How fast MacOS X should perform on it ?

Of course, the GF4 Ti will be usefull for the games, but is it usefull too for the graphical interface (OS X) and other graphical applications (FreeHand, Mathematica graphics, etc) ? I mean, how will it boost the general uses of the computer compared to the same setup with the standard GF4MX ?

(I apologise for my bad English writings, as it's not my native langage).

Mac mini 2.53 GHz, 4 GB, NVidia's 9400M.
13" MacBook Pro 2.66 GHz, 8 GB, NVidia's 320M.
OS X Snow Leopard 10.6.8

Reply

Mac mini 2.53 GHz, 4 GB, NVidia's 9400M.
13" MacBook Pro 2.66 GHz, 8 GB, NVidia's 320M.
OS X Snow Leopard 10.6.8

Reply
post #2 of 16
Well let me tell you a little story about the new Macs.

I went to the Northridge Apple Store last weekend. (I sold my 867 about two months ago) I wanted to try all of the machines to see how all the Power Macs performed. I was at the Dual 800...it was okay. I went to the 867, not impressive (keep in mind that even though the 867 is/was a great machine, what I was looking for was a machine that I walked up to and it impressed me off the bat). I then went to the 800, it was okay. I then walked over to another machine, started toying around and I was just floored. I said to myself that this MUST be the dual GHz, I went into System Profiler and it was the 933. I am telling you that these Apollo chips are no joke. If anyone is deciding between the lower and middle Power Mac, by all means go with the 933.

Now the dual GHz...... <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
I'm making plastics right now!
Reply
I'm making plastics right now!
Reply
post #3 of 16
It can't be the Apollo chips, because people are reporting Altivec Fractal test scores right in line, clock speed for clock speed, with previous G4 Powermacs. So a 933 shouldn't feel faster than a dual 800 on that basis. It must be the video card in these new machines, or something.
post #4 of 16
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by sizzle chest:
<strong>It can't be the Apollo chips, because people are reporting Altivec Fractal test scores right in line, clock speed for clock speed, with previous G4 Powermacs. So a 933 shouldn't feel faster than a dual 800 on that basis. It must be the video card in these new machines, or something.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well then, if there's a GForce4 Titanium in the machine, does this mean it would affect (positively) the rendering time in the fractal test ?

If I use Mathematica to do some mathematical graphics, do the video card help ?

Or if I'm drawing something in FreeHand (or Illustrator, or wathever), do the GF4 Ti card accelerate the machine in some way ?

And what about the windows resizing and drawing in the Finder ? Do the GF4 Ti help the Finder ?

I totally hate slow redraw and jerkiness in the interface. I could hit the machine for that ! &gt;8-(

Can anyone tell the differences in feelings between the 933MHz and the dual 1GHz ?
I mean real time, real world differences in screen redraw, windows and menus behavior, QT and DVD playback, smootheness, etc.

Anyone is using Mathematica or FreeHand for MacOS X, on a 933MHz ?

I know it's too soon to ask, but... anyway...

Mac mini 2.53 GHz, 4 GB, NVidia's 9400M.
13" MacBook Pro 2.66 GHz, 8 GB, NVidia's 320M.
OS X Snow Leopard 10.6.8

Reply

Mac mini 2.53 GHz, 4 GB, NVidia's 9400M.
13" MacBook Pro 2.66 GHz, 8 GB, NVidia's 320M.
OS X Snow Leopard 10.6.8

Reply
post #5 of 16
No matter what i dual processor machine is faster then i single, if I would chose between the dual 800 and 933 i would chose the dual one, X IS faster on the dual, and so are all apps.

I havent tested the new ones but its obivos that a 933 Mhz machine is slower then a dual 800.
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
post #6 of 16
[quote]Originally posted by Kali:
<strong>

Well then, if there's a GForce4 Titanium in the machine, does this mean it would affect (positively) the rendering time in the fractal test ?

If I use Mathematica to do some mathematical graphics, do the video card help ?

Or if I'm drawing something in FreeHand (or Illustrator, or wathever), do the GF4 Ti card accelerate the machine in some way ?

And what about the windows resizing and drawing in the Finder ? Do the GF4 Ti help the Finder ?

I totally hate slow redraw and jerkiness in the interface. I could hit the machine for that ! &gt;8-(

Can anyone tell the differences in feelings between the 933MHz and the dual 1GHz ?
I mean real time, real world differences in screen redraw, windows and menus behavior, QT and DVD playback, smootheness, etc.

Anyone is using Mathematica or FreeHand for MacOS X, on a 933MHz ?
</strong><hr></blockquote>


No, I'm not implying that the video card will speed up number crunching stuff like Mathematica or the Altivec Fractal test, but the new video cards seem to make the GUI in OSX seem a lot snappier, which would explain Bodhi's experience.

Freehand isn't really a processor-intensive program, at least not for the kinds of uses that I've seen.

I would think that an accellerated video card would make things like screen redraws (window resize, window move, menu open/close/select) seem snappier, without having any effect on processes like Photoshop filters, Mathetmatica calculations, iTunes MP3 rips, etc.
post #7 of 16
The 933MHz G4 is really fast. It seemed like it felt much faster than the 867s ever felt. Definately worth the money.
post #8 of 16
[quote]Originally posted by EmAn:
<strong>The 933MHz G4 is really fast. It seemed like it felt much faster than the 867s ever felt. Definately worth the money.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Thank You. This is what I am trying to say...
I'm making plastics right now!
Reply
I'm making plastics right now!
Reply
post #9 of 16
I have a 993 with the geforce4 mx and its fast. From what i heard about the geforce 4 ti is that its worth it if you wanta play games at 1600x1200 rez. at 60 fps. Other than that your not gonna see that much of a diff since nothing is written for the geforce4, i mean only like 2 games really use the power of the geforce 3.
So if your hardcore gamer or simply have to have the best, pay the 250 extra and get the ti. But i dont think its really worth it , you can alwase put a diff card in later. besides the ti's go for 300-400 anyway, would you ever spend 400 on a graphics card ? Also i dont think you will see a performance increase in the gui and illustrator ect.. but im not totally sure.

btw using osx on the 933 is blazing fast, OSX is finnaly a real os on these machenes. MS just needs to fix window resizing in ie

plus you gotta wait 6-8 weeks for the Ti yuck :eek:

[ 02-07-2002: Message edited by: Ti Fighter ]</p>
post #10 of 16
[quote]Originally posted by Ti Fighter:
<strong>I have a 993 with the geforce4 mx and its fast. From what i heard about the geforce 4 ti is that its worth it if you wanta play games at 1600x1200 rez. at 60 fps. Other than that your not gonna see that much of a diff since nothing is written for the geforce4, i mean only like 2 games really use the power of the geforce 3.
So if your hardcore gamer or simply have to have the best, pay the 250 extra and get the ti. But i dont think its really worth it , you can alwase put a diff card in later. besides the ti's go for 300-400 anyway, would you ever spend 400 on a graphics card ? Also i dont think you will see a performance increase in the gui and illustrator ect.. but im not totally sure.

btw using osx on the 933 is blazing fast, OSX is finnaly a real os on these machenes. MS just needs to fix window resizing in ie </strong><hr></blockquote>

1) 60 fps? try 70-90
2) the new techs should be implemented with the next open gl version
3) i seriously doubt you will see a speed increase in illustrator and such with the ti over the mx
4) who wouldn't pay 400 for a graphics card?
post #11 of 16
The GF4 Ti 4600 is getting over 100 fps at 1600x1200, no joke.

I'm wondering whether its worth the extra money for the dual GHz. I think I might be able to get them for cheaper and I think the dual would have a lot more life to it. Can anyone tell me the education discount prices on each of the models?
~Winner of the Official 2003 AppleInsider NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Pool~
Reply
~Winner of the Official 2003 AppleInsider NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Pool~
Reply
post #12 of 16
Also, can I order the Ti BTO and get the machine with the GF4MX now and get the card stand alone when it arrives?
~Winner of the Official 2003 AppleInsider NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Pool~
Reply
~Winner of the Official 2003 AppleInsider NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Pool~
Reply
post #13 of 16
[quote]The GF4 Ti 4600 is getting over 100 fps at 1600x1200, no joke.<hr></blockquote>

On a Pentium 4 at least. I wonder how the benchmarks on the Mac will stand up.
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
post #14 of 16
[quote]Originally posted by TigerWoods99:
<strong>The GF4 Ti 4600 is getting over 100 fps at 1600x1200, no joke.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

On tech tv the other night they were talking about the geforce 4 ti, that it winds up with 60fps at 1600x1200, but patrick said he didnt belive that it would get even that at that resolution. I will have to see it in my face to belive it does full antialising, 1600x1200, 60 or more fps, all at once. But yea they also said that the proccesor will be the bottleneck.

Maby I'll buy one in 6-8 weeks to see for my self, who knows maby by then will have gone down in price, heh


[ 02-07-2002: Message edited by: Ti Fighter ]</p>
post #15 of 16
[quote]Originally posted by EmAn:
<strong>The 933MHz G4 is really fast. It seemed like it felt much faster than the 867s ever felt. Definately worth the money.</strong><hr></blockquote>


this gets me even more excited, my 933s is coming on monday, I canĀ“t wait.
Thanks to you guys for the heads up.


bye.
post #16 of 16
[quote]Originally posted by Ti Fighter:
<strong>

On tech tv the other night they were talking about the geforce 4 ti, that it winds up with 60fps at 1600x1200, but patrick said he didnt belive that it would get even that at that resolution. I will have to see it in my face to belive it does full antialising, 1600x1200, 60 or more fps, all at once. But yea they also said that the proccesor will be the bottleneck.
[ 02-07-2002: Message edited by: Ti Fighter ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

eww, tech tv
<a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q1/020206/geforce4-12.html" target="_blank">heres</a> the specs, from a slightly more reputable source
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Need opinion on the new 933MHz G4