if you're running OS X, I'd say go for the dual. I can't say much about PowerLogix, but I can say I love Sonnet. I've upgraded a good number of Macs with Sonnet cards and they all worked flawlessly, even 5 years later they're still working.
I was exhausted last night, so I will repeat my question with a little more elaboration:
What advantages does the Dual 800 have over the single 1Ghz? I am currently running a Sawtooth, if that makes any difference. I understand the dual is better for the OS, but for most applications I have heard that the second processor (other than for things such as iTunes ripping) does not make such a huge difference, as the apps are not MP aware.
I also have had good luck with a Sonnet in the past (for my 7500) but they currently, if I am not mistaken, do not offer a dual-800. That is from Powerlogix.
Dual, dual, dual. It's like having a second computer to assign processes to--I've loved using them when I've had the chance. I would pretty much always take a dual over a single, unless the single was more than 50% faster.
That's just me--if there are specific tasks you think a very high clock rate will help, go ahead that way. For me, in daily use, I wish I could have dual in my powerbook if that wouldn't result in 1 hour battery life and burning my lap.
If you go to xlr8yourmac.com, there is a link to where OWC has G4/700 AGP for $345. Doesn't seem like that bad of a deal. If only they worked in my old beige G3.
Just thought I'd give anyone who's looking a heads up.
Thanks for the link. I have checked it out, but a 700 mhz over my current 500 does not seem like a big enough bump to be worth the effort (to extend the life of my machine). I am looking for a more sizable speed increase.
I am getting closer to snapping up a card. I am still puzzled as to whether to go dual 800 or single GHz. What are the specific advantages of each? I remain torn. Which will prolong the life of the machine better?
Mandricard: Make sure to post some feedback here once you decide.
IMHO, I would go for the Ghz SP, not the 800Mhz DP. My rationale follows your analysis above. Many apps are not yet MP aware. Thus they'll run faster on a higher clock SP system. DP is great if your software supports it. If your software doesn't support it, the second processor is of no use. Bottom line, I'd be conservative and play it safe with a Ghz SP upgrade.
My iMac is getting really old in the tooth. But being on an ever more restricted budget I have held off on getting a new PowerMac. I've looked into various upgrade paths, but none seem worth the money considering the dismal mobo and video specs of my Rev.A, which would stay the same. Of course, unlike you, I don't need more speed. So I can fantasize and wait all I want.
Not true about the second one sitting there with duals. If you use X it will use both, even if the specific app isn't multi coded. X uses both for typical OS things and it works wonders if you multi-task.
It may not make a single non-multi coded app run faster, but overall you'll have a better experience on OS X with a dual.
<strong>If you use X it will use both, even if the specific app isn't multi coded. X uses both for typical OS things and it works wonders if you multi-task.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>Not true about the second one sitting there with duals. If you use X it will use both, even if the specific app isn't multi coded. X uses both for typical OS things and it works wonders if you multi-task.
It may not make a single non-multi coded app run faster, but overall you'll have a better experience on OS X with a dual.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I had a dual 450 PowerMac a month or so. Maybe it was a early one but CD ripping speed varied from the sublime to the ridiculous. Power switch proved bad and Outpost took it back. Anyway... I bite for things dual, my bad. Dual exhaust, dual CPU, DBNS, it goes on. Will the Powerlogix dualies at some point not need the firmware patch/software d/l?
[quote]Originally posted by fantastic happy dinner man:
<strong>
I had a dual 450 PowerMac a month or so. Maybe it was a early one but CD ripping speed varied from the sublime to the ridiculous. Power switch proved bad and Outpost took it back. Anyway... I bite for things dual, my bad. Dual exhaust, dual CPU, DBNS, it goes on. Will the Powerlogix dualies at some point not need the firmware patch/software d/l?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Gonna go out on a limb here but if you wanna rip CDs a dual isn't gonna help nearly as much say a faster CD reader and given ripping a CD is a single task a dual wouldn't help much anyway. Now if you were ripping a CD while doing other stuff with your computer well then THIS is where a dual shines. RIP happens on CPU1 and 'other stuff you are doing' happens on CPU2 (or whatever the lesser used CPU happens to be).
[quote]Originally posted by fantastic happy dinner man:
<strong>
I had a dual 450 PowerMac a month or so. Maybe it was a early one but CD ripping speed varied from the sublime to the ridiculous. Power switch proved bad and Outpost took it back. Anyway... I bite for things dual, my bad. Dual exhaust, dual CPU, DBNS, it goes on. Will the Powerlogix dualies at some point not need the firmware patch/software d/l?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I believe that CD ripping speed has less to do with the processor speed than the rated 'extraction speed' of the cd/dvd drive...
I believe it is now noted on most drive boxes, at which rate/speed they will extract digital audio and video...
I say this because I used to have a dual 800 Superdrive Powermac that extracted at around 5-8 speed... While at the same time, a friends 700 mhz iMac will extracted at above 18+ speed...
My new dual 867 has extracted at 18 speed +.
It is more to do with drives than CPUs...
Although in relation to which upgrade to get, I would go with a dual every day of the week if you are running OSX...
Although in relation to which upgrade to get, I would go with a dual every day of the week if you are running OSX...<hr></blockquote>
Thanks, Marcus. Is the reason you would go with a dual because it allows you to multitask better? From what I understand rarely will an application access both processors, it really has to do with allowing two or three processes to run simultaneously, correct?
Yes. Go with the dual. The speed difference between 800 MHz and 1 Ghz is not enough to outweigh the benefits of duals in OS X. Go look at process viewer sometime... see all those processes? OS X will split them across both processors on a dual, freeing up quite a bit more processing power for other things. OS X takes full advantage of both processors, and that's invaluable if you're ever running more than one thing... which is all the time. And some programs do use dual processors anyway, so it's worth it for that as well.
If you run two apps at once, each app will benefit from having its own processor... which means that you can have one running something processor intensive in the background and it won't interfere with whatever you've got going on the other processor.
Compare doing that on dual 800s compared to a single 1 Ghz and it becomes rapidly apparent that the duals are far better for doing multiple tasks, no matter how menial or important. And since OS X is so good at multithreading and multiprocessing now, I can't even see any reason to get a single processor card if you have the option to get a dual. It really is like having two computers in one because of the way OS X handles multiprocessing.
Comments
thanks!
Mandricard
What advantages does the Dual 800 have over the single 1Ghz? I am currently running a Sawtooth, if that makes any difference. I understand the dual is better for the OS, but for most applications I have heard that the second processor (other than for things such as iTunes ripping) does not make such a huge difference, as the apps are not MP aware.
I also have had good luck with a Sonnet in the past (for my 7500) but they currently, if I am not mistaken, do not offer a dual-800. That is from Powerlogix.
Any and all feedback is appreciated.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
[ 10-18-2002: Message edited by: Mandricard ]</p>
That's just me--if there are specific tasks you think a very high clock rate will help, go ahead that way. For me, in daily use, I wish I could have dual in my powerbook if that wouldn't result in 1 hour battery life and burning my lap.
Just thought I'd give anyone who's looking a heads up.
Thanks though!
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
Rev 3 isn't compatible with dual cpu modules.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
Any and all help appreciated.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
IMHO, I would go for the Ghz SP, not the 800Mhz DP. My rationale follows your analysis above. Many apps are not yet MP aware. Thus they'll run faster on a higher clock SP system. DP is great if your software supports it. If your software doesn't support it, the second processor is of no use. Bottom line, I'd be conservative and play it safe with a Ghz SP upgrade.
My iMac is getting really old in the tooth. But being on an ever more restricted budget I have held off on getting a new PowerMac. I've looked into various upgrade paths, but none seem worth the money considering the dismal mobo and video specs of my Rev.A, which would stay the same. Of course, unlike you, I don't need more speed. So I can fantasize and wait all I want.
Escher
It may not make a single non-multi coded app run faster, but overall you'll have a better experience on OS X with a dual.
<strong>If you use X it will use both, even if the specific app isn't multi coded. X uses both for typical OS things and it works wonders if you multi-task.</strong><hr></blockquote>
'nuff said
<strong>Not true about the second one sitting there with duals. If you use X it will use both, even if the specific app isn't multi coded. X uses both for typical OS things and it works wonders if you multi-task.
It may not make a single non-multi coded app run faster, but overall you'll have a better experience on OS X with a dual.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I had a dual 450 PowerMac a month or so. Maybe it was a early one but CD ripping speed varied from the sublime to the ridiculous. Power switch proved bad and Outpost took it back. Anyway... I bite for things dual, my bad. Dual exhaust, dual CPU, DBNS, it goes on. Will the Powerlogix dualies at some point not need the firmware patch/software d/l?
<strong>
I had a dual 450 PowerMac a month or so. Maybe it was a early one but CD ripping speed varied from the sublime to the ridiculous. Power switch proved bad and Outpost took it back. Anyway... I bite for things dual, my bad. Dual exhaust, dual CPU, DBNS, it goes on. Will the Powerlogix dualies at some point not need the firmware patch/software d/l?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Gonna go out on a limb here but if you wanna rip CDs a dual isn't gonna help nearly as much say a faster CD reader and given ripping a CD is a single task a dual wouldn't help much anyway. Now if you were ripping a CD while doing other stuff with your computer well then THIS is where a dual shines. RIP happens on CPU1 and 'other stuff you are doing' happens on CPU2 (or whatever the lesser used CPU happens to be).
Dave
<strong>
I had a dual 450 PowerMac a month or so. Maybe it was a early one but CD ripping speed varied from the sublime to the ridiculous. Power switch proved bad and Outpost took it back. Anyway... I bite for things dual, my bad. Dual exhaust, dual CPU, DBNS, it goes on. Will the Powerlogix dualies at some point not need the firmware patch/software d/l?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I believe that CD ripping speed has less to do with the processor speed than the rated 'extraction speed' of the cd/dvd drive...
I believe it is now noted on most drive boxes, at which rate/speed they will extract digital audio and video...
I say this because I used to have a dual 800 Superdrive Powermac that extracted at around 5-8 speed... While at the same time, a friends 700 mhz iMac will extracted at above 18+ speed...
My new dual 867 has extracted at 18 speed +.
It is more to do with drives than CPUs...
Although in relation to which upgrade to get, I would go with a dual every day of the week if you are running OSX...
Peace,
Marc
Although in relation to which upgrade to get, I would go with a dual every day of the week if you are running OSX...<hr></blockquote>
Thanks, Marcus. Is the reason you would go with a dual because it allows you to multitask better? From what I understand rarely will an application access both processors, it really has to do with allowing two or three processes to run simultaneously, correct?
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
Thanks to all for replying. Any other info would be appreciated.
Hope springs eternal,
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
If you run two apps at once, each app will benefit from having its own processor... which means that you can have one running something processor intensive in the background and it won't interfere with whatever you've got going on the other processor.
Compare doing that on dual 800s compared to a single 1 Ghz and it becomes rapidly apparent that the duals are far better for doing multiple tasks, no matter how menial or important. And since OS X is so good at multithreading and multiprocessing now, I can't even see any reason to get a single processor card if you have the option to get a dual. It really is like having two computers in one because of the way OS X handles multiprocessing.
Er, you can have this soapbox back now.
Don't know the price but I am sure the dual 800 will cost more than the single Ghz
<strong>Also think about cost.
Don't know the price but I am sure the dual 800 will cost more than the single Ghz</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but by only about a hundred dollars. Not a bad deal, when you think about it.
Thank you all. I will let you know how it goes. I am not sure the duals are shipping yet.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider