New PowerMac specs

1356715

Comments

  • Reply 40 of 300
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,393member
    Thinksecret is reporting the same speeds.



    Hopefully these chips can use real DDR memory, not the hack seen in xserve.



    Depressing. Really depressing but expected.
  • Reply 42 of 300
    Reading this forum for a couple month now, first post ever:



    How about getting ready for nothing more than a moderate speed bump, say the 1.25ghz claimed by macminute?



    It seems odd to me that Apple didn't announce the update, one would think they'd do so, if it really was an important one.



    I think they are keeping it quiet until the update is ready (involving IBM's new desktop processor).
  • Reply 42 of 300
    cthulucthulu Posts: 20member
    "Before people start 'ing and running off to PCs: All we know is processor speed, video card and price. That's not much. I'd be surprised if DDR RAM appears, but if there's a move to the 166MHz MPX bus, that's about a 25% increase in CPU bandwidth to go with a 25% increase in CPU clockspeed. It's not astonishing, but it's a solid upgrade."



    Well the 867 cant be on a 166 bus its still 133.The 1 gig could be 166 and the 1.25 must be.

    Which means those who cant aford a 3300 computer are screwed once again.Since most software doesnt use the second processor and most programs that do get only a modest boost this is in reality a sorry 67 mghz bump.Pathetic.This deserves two faces!
  • Reply 44 of 300
    [quote]Originally posted by Amorph:

    <strong>I don't think MacMinute has ever been wrong with last-minute specs either. They're good.



    Before people start 'ing and running off to PCs: All we know is processor speed, video card and price. That's not much. I'd be surprised if DDR RAM appears, but if there's a move to the 166MHz MPX bus, that's about a 25% increase in CPU bandwidth to go with a 25% increase in CPU clockspeed. It's not astonishing, but it's a solid upgrade. Also, the bottom end machine is a duallie now, not a crippled single-processor runt. Who can complain that the cheap machine is now a much better value?



    And who seriously expected a PowerBook update?! There's no way that's happening until November. They got a significant revision not long ago, and the current models are sweet.



    [ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    25% performance increase is not enough. It will make the mac being equal to CURRENT PCs. Now, imagine, you're at Christmas. You want to make a gift to your son you buy a computer :

    - Dual PM 1.25 GHz &gt; 3000$

    - 3.0 GHz P4 &lt; 3000$

    - 2.8 GHz Athlon &lt; 3000$

    You know about the MHz Myth but you have foubn on internet a benchmarks PC is 25% faster and a little bit cheaper... WHAT COMPUTER WILL YOU BUY ?



    Didn't they update the iBook twice this year ? For the QE support with the 700 MHz ?



    Aw
  • Reply 45 of 300
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,268member
    [quote]Originally posted by Toofeu:

    <strong> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

    I'm starting to be very tired of apple and its products, I can't believe that the specs are so low...

    the intel world is reaching the 3 ghtz barrier and we get a 1.25 processor speed for more than 3000 dollars!!

    I'll keep my old system for another 6 months.



    But this shouldn't come as a surprise, Apple knows so well how to let us down...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Keep your chin up man. There are many things worse in life than a computer company not hitting expected speeds in their new line. OSX

    10.2 is gonna scream with snappiness with these boxes.
  • Reply 46 of 300
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,393member
    [quote]Originally posted by Toofeu:

    <strong>

    the intel world is reaching the 3 ghtz barrier and we get a 1.25 processor speed for more than 3000 dollars!!

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    I hope Apple allows you to configure it so that you can get it at a lower price. Nevertheless, it's not going to be an incentive for me to buy one.



    This is pathetic. The way Apple is going, it may be 2004 before they hit 2GHz.
  • Reply 46 of 300
    vikingviking Posts: 127member
    If those specs are true, Apple is going to have 5 months of pretty poor sales until MWSF.

  • Reply 48 of 300
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Well, like I posted in another thread, the all DP upgrade would be OK if it came with DDR (even a hacked up Xserve version) and AGP 8X, and maybe Apple could be nice and supply a multi-channel ATA100 controller on the MoBo. That would save digital A/V pros an expensive outlay on SCSI/Raid and could make the purchase worth it for some.



    As it is (hypothetically of course) a DP 867 for $1600 isn't bad, worth considering over an iMac (if you already own a decent monitor) but the top end wouldn't be worth it.
  • Reply 49 of 300
    I once dreamed of a bright future, that dream is gone.



    i'm getting angry at Apple for not delivering the goods. How do they think to sell anything of that crap.
  • Reply 49 of 300
    Alright, a bit of speculation on my part in regards to the MacMinute specs, but bear with me.



    As for the current bus speed ratios:

    800/133 = 6

    933/133 = 7

    1000/133 = 7.5



    As for the upcoming ratios, let's try a 133 MHz bus speed.

    867/133 = 6.5 (this works)

    1000/133 = 7.5 (again, this works)

    1250/133 9.39 (this doesn't work, it'd have to be either a 1197MHz or 1264MHz G4. I doubt they would short change themselves and round 1264MHz down to 1250.)



    What about a 166 MHz bus?

    867/166 = 5.22 (nope)

    1000/166 = 6 (this works)

    1250/166 = 7.5 (works as well)



    What does this mean? If the proc speeds reported by MacMinute are 100% correct, then the following points hold:

    - The 867 machine MUST have a 133 MHz bus, or some multiple thereof (i.e. 266)

    - The 1000 machine can have a bus of either 133 or 166 or a multiple thereof (i.e. 333)

    - The 1250 machine must have a bus of 166 or a multiple thereof (i.e. 333).



    A quick check of available ram types reveals that for SDR RAM, only 66, 100, 133, and 150 MHz models were ever made.



    So, if the 1250 machine must have a 166 MHz bus, then it holds that only 166 MHz DDR RAM (333MHz effective) could sit on such a bus.



    EDIT:

    In short, 333 DDR RAM is almost guaranteed in the 1250 model.




    [ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: SkullMac ]</p>
  • Reply 51 of 300
    [quote]Originally posted by Matsu:

    <strong>Well, like I posted in another thread, the all DP upgrade would be OK if it came with DDR (even a hacked up Xserve version) and AGP 8X, and maybe Apple could be nice and supply a multi-channel ATA100 controller on the MoBo. That would save digital A/V pros an expensive outlay on SCSI/Raid and could make the purchase worth it for some.



    As it is (hypothetically of course) a DP 867 for $1600 isn't bad, worth considering over an iMac (if you already own a decent monitor) but the top end wouldn't be worth it.</strong><hr></blockquote>





    Oooohh no, not with the hacked up XServe please !!!!! WITH TRUE DDR AT LEAST !!!!! AND "G5" !!!!





    Aw



    [ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Appleworm ]</p>
  • Reply 52 of 300
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    [quote]Originally posted by cthulu:

    <strong>Since most software doesnt use the second processor?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    No, but Mac OS X does, and you can run one program on one of the processors while running another on the other.
  • Reply 53 of 300
    toofeutoofeu Posts: 73member
    [quote]Originally posted by Matsu:

    <strong>an AGP 8X, and maybe Apple could be nice and supply a multi-channel ATA100 controller on the MoBo. That would save digital A/V pros an expensive outlay on SCSI/Raid and could make the purchase worth it for some.</strong><hr></blockquote>





    Yeah sure....

    <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

    Don't think that apple can implement all those goodies, we are still hoping that they finally decide to implement something that exists for almost two years now.. the DDR.

    So for the AGP8X well maybe next year if we are lucky.

    By then all pros will be using AMD boxes.
  • Reply 54 of 300
    For more than one year Apple has mac running at 2.0 GHz+ so give them to us !!!!!





    Aw
  • Reply 55 of 300
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,268member
    Unless they've crippled the Entry Level unit too much it's price rocks. I'm not buying now but this gives me a target for early next year. I think the $3300 top unit is pretty spendy..I hope it's beefed up configurationwise.
  • Reply 55 of 300
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I look for the silver lining and people jump down my throat, damn. The site did mention ATI Radeon 9700, which is an 8X AGP part, but I suppose Apple could just run it across a 4X bus.
  • Reply 57 of 300
    zazzaz Posts: 177member
    My guess is they are spot on (though ATI vid cards seem odd)



    In detail, I would bet the 1699 unit stays with PC133 (effectively same as a QS) and the upper 2 go to DDR and a new platform.
  • Reply 58 of 300
    xypexype Posts: 672member
    1] Anyone who expected a .5 ghz jump expected, well, too much



    2] We don't know for sure till tomorrow



    3] Top of the line would be DUAL 1.25 ghz, that's 2.5 ghz total. That's 2.5 ghz total of AltiVec, PowerPC goodness.



    I say let's wait and see them in action before we complain like stupid.
  • Reply 59 of 300
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,268member
    [quote]Originally posted by zaz:

    <strong>My guess is they are spot on (though ATI vid cards seem odd)



    In detail, I would bet the 1699 unit stays with PC133 (effectively same as a QS) and the upper 2 go to DDR and a new platform.</strong><hr></blockquote>





    That's cool because DDR is not going to make a huge difference. Geeks will just miss it for the bragging rights.
  • Reply 60 of 300
    For whoever said that no software uses DP, you're wrong. Plain and simple.



    OS X automatically uses DP.



    I'm concerned about this update for two reasons:



    1. differing bus speeds across line. 133 on a theoretical 867 mhz system, 166 on a 1.25.

    <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />



    2. If they can't get a true DDR implementation in this rev, it's pretty damn sad.



    a Dual 867 for 1599 is pretty good, though, if it's got DDR.
Sign In or Register to comment.