PowerMac - Anyone else waiting? - Page 7

Sweet! Then you're eagerly waiting for NAB 2005 as I am. I'm most excited to see the first Final Cut Pro version that I will buy. I've used FCP very sparingly since version 2

Oh noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
not the infamous Haxial garbage. As Rickag say..that bozo was debunked a long time ago. Amorph is right, the guy ranted about compilers but Apple chose GCC because at least you had the same compiler to test. I doubt GCC was even close to be optimized for PPC as it was for X86 hence the improvement we saw with the IBM XLC/XLF compilers. If high scores are what you value the most then you use a tweaked compiler. If a fair test is what you want you use a compiler that is available on both platforms.

You know we've heard this myth for years about how fast PCs are. That'll last about as long as it takes to build a PC and say "well it doesn't fell 'that' much faster than a fast Mac"

I felt duped myself..I noticed that my PCs did well when I was letting them crunch one task at a time but as soon as I wanted to start tossing in new tasks they degraded pretty fast.

You want to benchmark a computer right..develop a "real world" task where you utilize the computer in a scenario that is likely to happen. Something like compressing video while surfing and burning a CD. The one thing about Macs that people love is that they degrade gracefully under load. Unix baby!

I love the iPods success because I don't have to care about whether someone "gets it". If a PC is so great then go buy one. But you have to wonder why the most exciting thing happening in PCs nowadays is modding them with plexiglass windows adding colors and lights. Everything "but" computer performance. IMO.

You know some of these posts can be attributed to not fully reading what others say.

You missed this part about GCC where I corrected myself from what the author said from the original GCC test in the post.

"SPEC FAQ, SPECfp2000 contains 10 Fortran programs, and 4 C programs. In other words, SPECfp is mostly Fortran, and NAGWare is the Fortran compiler, so therefore it is most likely NAGWare that is the bad compiler for Intel, not GCC.)"

Although the GGC portion was what I remembered from articles in the 2 year old tests, none of that really pertains to the heart of the matter which is most of the tests were unscrupulously altered in Apples favor, and they were knowledgeable and responsible for that, and making false statements as to why they did it.


But then Apple went, and said they did it because the Mac came out too fast comparatively, and they did it to make the PC look faster. Again. It's just not truthful. Actually according to you the opposite its the truth. The PC is would be faster than they stated with it. Why would they do that? If it's not true don't say it.

Another web site asked how a G5 might compare to a modern automobile.

I chose Volvo, because of the G5's overall stability, safety, reliability and performance. <">

Hopefully we'll see some real head turning benchmarks with the first dual core TigerMac.

Then it's pedal to the metal

Quote from Fallen: "My personal favorite would be a new audio interface card taking full advantage of 64 bit technology enabling Apple to leave ProTools
and their friggin $7000 HD requirements in the dust."

Perhaps a bit OT but Fallen can't help but ask himself how many Cell's it would take to smoke ProTools' $3000 each Accel cards.

Er.... 1/2?

Actually I can't wait to see the next PowerMac update. I think Apple has had so much time to work, and actually think about it that they probably designed something that's really extraordinary. It's all going to revolve around the motherboard.
That aside. I think that the iPods success has affected the other groups. It only makes them strive to create something more excellent, and maybe Apple will use some of their new success to go back to their roots, and put something back to their computing buisness model which is what got them there to begin with.

The whole reason I'm getting a new tower is so I can finally attempt
a transition to digital audio recording without sacrificing too much quality.

It's only my opinion, but charging $7995 for an HD1 PCI card
is like Apple still charging us $3995 for a DVD burner and
then telling you that it can't be used unless you buy the proprietary
$4000 license and software to use it.
All this before you even consider the cost of professional quality, interfaces, sound libraries and PRO audio plug-ins.

It's no wonder that Digidesigns' parent company AVID bought out
M-Audio. But ProTools won't work with M-Audio hardware. Go figure.

With a growing user base of Garageband and Logic 7,
I hope that Apple will soon give Digidesign a run for their
money with truly professional capabilities in Logic software
and supporting hardware.

I could be wrong, but I think I'll have more quality and flexibility with Logic 7 Pro and 3rd party hardware, than downgrading to ProTools LE.

If Apple takes on pro audio as seriously as they have for video,
then it only seems to be a matter of time.

Hi all....new here......but am like some of you looking and waiting for the next upgrage to the g5. Seems to have taken longer that normal and when i bought my G4 dual i was under the impression it would be a while until the G5 came out and it was only about 2 months and my mac was outdated. I have been with mac since the inseption and watched this happen more than once and i totally understand how it does but this time i am waiting for at least a dual g5 3 ghz or better and tiger. Any one with any current thoughts on this???

Hi all....new here......but am like some of you looking and waiting for the next upgrage to the g5. Seems to have taken longer that normal and when i bought my G4 dual i was under the impression it would be a while until the G5 came out and it was only about 2 months and my mac was outdated. I have been with mac since the inseption and watched this happen more than once and i totally understand how it does but this time i am waiting for at least a dual g5 3 ghz or better and tiger. Any one with any current thoughts on this???http://forums.appleinsider.com/newre...hreadid=49730#

Yah,

I think the difference between dual 3.0 and 2.8 will be nothing. If that is the next machine that comes out I wouldn't see anything wrong with getting that machine over a dual 3.0. Waiting for tiger is fine, if you want it to ship with the machine. But the current machines will run tiger just as efficiently as the new ones will. I don't think there will be any major changes between new ones and current ones... minor things like PCI-E. etc.

I agree. I fell into the PT trap a while back and while they do have quality and the name rep, prices are offputting. Meanwhile Logic gets better and better (a definite Key Buy from Keyboard) with PI's almost the equal of standalone's and bundled virtual synths. A 'powertower' with a decent interface - Emu's? - should almost equal the sound at a fraction of the cost.

PCI-E doesn't seem minor to me. Thats a new MB design. Why design a new MB just for PCI-E. If they are going to add PCI-E there will be more. What, I don't know, but there will be more.

The likelyhood of the next revision offering PCI-E is one of the major reasons I decided to wait regardless of what happens with dual core.

It's not that PCI-E is so critical to audio recording by any means, but that
it would involve a major motherboard alteration replacing AGP.

At least that's the way I understand it for now.

Just a side note to onlooker, have you seen teh dual gpu 6600gt? It smokes dual SLI 6800ultras... it actually has 2 gpus on the board. They are saying this is the future... only problem is it requires a special mobo. SLI is less than a year old and it is already outdated.

Gigabyte makes the motherboard and graphics card.

Reason I brought this up is because if apple immediately invested into SLI someone would already be complaining that there is a new technology out and apple doesn't have it. I'd much rather see dual gpu 6600gt cards than SLI.

Also,

They will probably add DDR2 ram... I"m guessing PC4200

Other than that I really don't know what else they would add except for dual memory controllers, but I don't see that happening any time soon.

Maybe hypertransport2? Guess is as good as mine.

Point being, (especially for audio) the current machines would suit fallen just fine. There is nothing wrong with waiting if he can. I have been checking up because (after selling my dual 2) I was going to get a powerbook, but if the powermacs are going to be significantly upgraded, i'll just get a new powermac instead.

Dual GPUs on a card just makes more sense. The next thing that needs to happen is a true dual core GPU with a memory controller ondie or offdie that allows both cores to access the same pool of memory efficiently.

We're going to look back in a few years and laugh about the days of wanting to stuff two GPU cards into our computers just as I laught about the days when you had to toss two 3DFX cards in a computer "and" a 2D card!

In dealing with hardware I always try to remember that it is me that is the slowest component in the chain. I can affect a change in efficiency by my own actions than that of a GPU card running faster.

Excellent points

Yes I saw it, but I didn't see it smoke 6800 Ultras in SLI, and it doesn't. I saw their test where it does beat 6600GT's in an SLI configuration in some tests, but not all. Usually a single 6800GT will beat it in a non SLI configuration.


The difference between their card, and the usual GT is theirs has Dual 6600GT GPU's with "*256MB DDR3 on a 256-bit Bit Bus" clocked @ "**600MHz" with a Core Clock @ 500 MHz

(*same as the 6800 Ultra / **overclocked)

The regular GT has 128MB DDR3 on a 128MB Bus Clocked @ 500MHz with a Core Clock @ 500MHz.

Tom's hardware has already looked at this card, and I wasn't as impressed with it as you are. Dual GPU on one card isn't that stellar IMO. I am far more impressed with SLI.

But Usually a single 6800 Ultra whooped this card. Toms hardware didn't bother using it in SLI because it wasn't really comparable. 6800 Ultra is faster in most cases as a single card. So is the 6800 GT.

All and all it's performs OK, for an over clock, but it's nothing to freak about.

Some Comparisons from Tom's hardware.

Unreal Tournament
DOOM 3
FarCry
3DMark 2005

Keep in mind the tests they ran do NOT take advantage of SLI or dual gpu, so those benches are bunk no matter how you slice it. Its like comparing a stock 6600gt to a stock 6800ultra (overclocking considered). This is like having a dual processor system in windows, no true multithreading / multitasking between processors. The 2nd processor just sits there waiting to be used... just like in this case, the 2nd gpu just sits there in Unreal Tourn and other games not being used. Maximum PC is the ones that tested the card in this months issue (if you care to pick it up and look). They DID use applications to compare SLI and the dual core cards. And YES the dual core 6600gt was faster than the 6800ultra SLI. You can't believe every bench you see, and while I have great respect for tomshardware, this test does not prove anything about the dual core / SLI.

And this proves my point... Apple not moving to PCI-Express ASAP does not bare a big difference, yes there is a 533mhz vs (what is pci-e, 1066mhz?) (agp8x vs pci-e 16x).

Long story short apple not moving to pci-express 16x doesn't have any BIG performance issues until applications take advantage of the bi-directional communication of which makes pci-e so much better. A year from now, i'll bite. I'm sure major apps will take advantage of it. As it is now nothing really does take advantage of it.

Wow, if you choose a Volvo for stability and reliability then I have to be sorry for you. I have two volvos and I can't wait to get rid of them. They have good pick up and safety. But when it comes to maintenance and reliability they look more like PC's that keep giving you headaches.

The only thing that stopped our old Volvo 240 wagon
was the tree it hit when my wife accidentally forgot to set the emergency brake and it rolled down the mountain.

Not to get too much on the car discussion. I agree that the really old Volvo's are great and very reliable. Anything built after 1995 are horrible. I experienced three completely different models 95, 98 and 2000 and was unhappy with them all. I know two people who purchased new ones in the last year and are not crazy about them either.

i would put this way: G5 is: Volvo for safety, BMW or Audi for performance and Toyota or Honda for reliability.

\\\\What makes you think that?

If it's not using SLI or Dual GPU why is the single 6600GT slower than the SLI 6600GT?

Hard OCP tested this card too. At the beginning of the test they rebooted, and loaded the SLI once the second GPU was detected as instructed (I think Toms hardware did too), and their test definitely had both GPU's running. Their results were the same if not worse for the card.

Doom3
FarCry
Half Life 2

Throughout these tests a single 6800GT matched, but usually outperformed this all in one SLI card. A single 6800 Ultra consistently bested it.

I KNOW this because the graphics libraries do NOT take advantage of 2nd cards.

Just because the SLI was SLIGHTLY faster doesn't mean it was because of the SLI, it could have been many different things, from GPU clock speed, to memory core clock. I would bet money that unreal 2004 and farcry do NOT take advantage of SLI and dual core gpus.

Unreal obviously doesn't, it's old, and FarCry only utilizes it in some things, but not all. Full optimization isn't present, but look at the ones that do. Half life 2, Doom 3, Need for speed. This card still isn't smoking a single 6800 Ultra, or a 6800GT. They didn't even need to try it against either in SLI. Think about it. Look at the stats of that card, and the practicality of what your saying. It's not going to outperform those cards. Not the way you seem to think it should.

Again,

Get a copy of maximum PC and look at the article... they ahve benches that make sense. I am basically a messenger boy for what I read in a respected magazine that is up on new hardware.

Dual core is better than SLI, its like compare dual cpu cards to dual core cpus... the dual cpu's are going to be faster (please don't make me get into this one, I know you know that).

I don't need a copy of Max_PC. I trust Hard_OCP, and Toms Hardware more. They have both earned it, and are not willing to give up the kind of respect they have both earned over the years while others have been bought by advertisers. Patrick Norton used to use these guys benches on his show back when I watched.

Anyway.. Lets get back to the thread. I'm tired of this.

Testing every card at a different resolution/adjustment doesn't make their comparison very reliable.

And btw SLI = PCI-E 8x for each card.

Any idea on when the new PM's will actually be out? I need one, but won;t buy a dual 2.0 when a new feature set will make the upcoming release more appealing. Time frames anyone?

I think end april -> end of may.

dual 2.3, dual 2.5, dual 2.8

That is one hell of a wait. Not to mention the fact that we'll have to wait several more weeks before we can actually get our hands on them.

WWDC is in June and if they announce them there they will most likely ship in the July and August time frame.

And yes that is one hell of a long wait.

Hurry up with the PowerMac updates! I want a Dual 3.0Ghz machine NOW!!! Pro Tools LE v6.7 is eating my 533 Mhz G4 alive... i'm not gonna drop $3000 on a 2.5Ghz model that's been out for 7 months or more...

That will be very sad. Almost a 2 years wait to still fall short of Steve Jobs promise of 3ghz. I really hope you are wrong.

If that's end up being the case, I hope the prices will fall at least $500 across the board to compensate such failure. 250gig HD, 1gig RAM, Dual layer 16x superdrive and video card to drive the 30" display must be standard in this situation to give Apple some leverage with the professional community.

If not, i only can say that Apple has forgotten their most loyal segment in order to please the Ipod generation.

I'm thinking WWDC too.

My feeling is that if Steve is planning to announce the PowerMac at WWDC is going to be a MAJOR upgrade. Steve loves the wow factor. Seriously, for him to go up to the stage and introduce a silly upgrade to 2.8, is not going to happen. It's embarrassing for him.
I think the PowerMac is going to possibly get a quiet revamp like the PowerBook line did recently. Small speed increase(2.8), lower prices and more HD, RAM and faster superdrives among other things. It makes sense and that would give more time to Apple to introduce something much better in the future(Paris?).
That would leave the Powerbook G5 coming to WWDC and give Steve what he wants. Wow factor!

I just don't see the powerbook g5 being updated at WWDC, Way too short of a time span for the current powerbooks... unless they ship in september.

As far as the speed goes on the powermac processors, all chip manufacturers ran into problems, AMD, Intel, IBM... that is not apple's fault. No one can see into the future... this is why cpu upgrade plans are called "road maps"... they are the plan. Plans don't always pan out.

Even if 3ghz is the upgrade speed I still don't see Jobs announcing the powermacs at wwdc. It would still be a minor upgrade even if they did add Hypertransport2, PC4200 DDR2, PCI-Express, new case. If all of this came in the new powermac it still wouldn't be significant enough for the developers. You MUST remember this IS a Developer show, not a consumer show. Announcing at other shows would be much better publicity. The products at WWDC must intrigue developers... the g5 was introduced there because it introduced 64bit programming to the mac.

Just my opinion. I think we're at least a year away from a MAJOR upgrade... which will be dual core.

I agree it would be a Major upgrade at WWDC if they decide to announce it there (which is why I hope it is WWDC), but processor speed may not necessarily be the WOW'ing factor. All the other tweaks would be sufficient especially if the 3GHz processor never even appears.
Also, if they wait that long it could also be a dual core CPU that they use which would be a huge WOW, but I'm not making any predictions, just thinking aloud.

If you scope out Macrumors buying guide page it shows the Powermac updates all the way back to January 2002. It also shows the span of time between updates.
MacRumors Buyers Guide

The current lack of update far exceeds the previous update history. While I'm sure someone here that has a photographic memory can point out longer refresh cycles, one can at least appreciate that the Power Mac in the last three years hasn't taken this long for an update.

If Jonathan Ive has had this long to work on these new Power Mac's they had better be incredible in order to maintain his reputation. He has done so well and created amazing computers, but I feel entirely underwhelmed by the apparent lack of focus on the Power Mac and a complete lack of "power". I just hope he's spent as much time with the Power Mac as he's been spending on all the latest hardware, e.g. iMac, Mac Mini, iPod Shuffle, etc, but I doubt it. It would have been in our hands by now if that were the case.

I just can't see myself getting excited about a dual 2.0 or a dual 2.5 in the current configuration, certainly not at those prices. I just look down at my 1.25 GHz Powerbook and think, well I guess I'll live with this until a PM is released that is worth all the money of the upgrade and of course, all the BTO options I'd throw on top further jacking up the cost. I'll not have a bare-bones PM like they sell. Since my conversion to Macs I have owned one G3, this G4, and I'll own one Dual G5 Power Mac. As a result, I want it to be a G5 that I'm not disappointed with down the road. Having played around with the current PM's, I'm not convinced that they could be my one G5 upgrade.

Actually the last update cycle took 11 months. The machines were announced (the original g5) the first week of july (at wwdc) and updated last year (rev b g5) the first week of june... almost exactly 11 months. Them adding a dual 1.8 to the line up 4 months into the announcement doesn't make it a refresh.

Coming from someone who's owend a dual g5 (dual 2.0), I think that a machine like that would be MORE than sufficient for at least 3-4 years if you're getting along on a powerbook 1.25. They are excellent machines.

One thing people don't realize is benchmarks don't mark the real world. You should actually use one in a real world environment for a few hours. It will do more than anything you want it to. It has amazing power. Onlooker and others can bitch about numbers, hell I can too... numbers always look good on paper. BUT numbers don't represent real life situations most of the time... example: 2.5ghz ppc 970fx vs 3.0ghz p4... p4 sounds faster yet the 2.5ghz is faster, from floating point calcs to rendering programs (like cinema) to photoshop (real world programs).

Either way, you've waited this long... I'd at least wait until the next rev, you only have a few more months.

But you've scared me. I sold my g5 to get a powerbook... if that 1.25 isn't fast enough for you should I not get a powerbook?

Emig647, I complain about my powerbook because, according to all the others that deem themselves mac gurus, I expect "too much" from a powerbook. To me, they should not put the word "power" in the name if it can't be the definition of the word. The 1.25 GHz PB is good, and while I want to take an axe to it everytime the video goes choppy on me (it can't even display the iTunes visualizer full screen without being so choppy that I want to slam my fist down onto the thing), it does handle surfing the internet well and handles iLife relatively well, though don't get me started about the performance of iMovie on my PB. Others may forgive Apple for the piece of crap videocard they have in the PB, but I most assuredly do not. Also, don't expect to have a hard drive that can perform to reasonable expectations for the word "power" either. Mine is slow and underwhelming. I hold an Apple computer to higher standards than I hold a piece of crap Dell. I expect more. And while everyone complains about the thickness a PB would be if they actually made one to stand up to the "power" name, I'd rather own a thicker PB, than wish to God that I had a better Mac than this underachieving 1.25GHz PB. I love Mac's, but small is worthless to me if it can't perform.

Now, in regard to Power Mac's. I have played for hours on end with a friends dual 2.0 with 4GB ram. It's very smooth and not a bad computer. The problem I have is the price for all of the technologies that will soon be obsolete because they are going to new video aside from AGP (everyone else has) and loads of other things one can read about in these forums that are new technologies that will depress the hell out of someone that buys a dual 2.0. I've already filled up an external 200GB FireWire drive with video, so I want some bigger hard drives to choose from, and the videocard choices are depressing, but none so depressing as the pathetic card they have in this 1.25 GHz PB. Forget what numbers say, I could care less about number crunchers. What I do care about is actual performance, and I swear that my next computer will NEVER have a choppy screen regardless of situation, or it's doing a gravity check out my window.