[quote] Yes, true computer enthusiasts -- just like car lovers -- will always be interested faster, drool-worthy machines. Meanwhile they'll probably drive their Accord or Saturn to work, and not think there's any connection between the two. <hr></blockquote>
I thought that was an interesting since I could really use the computational horsepower to run MAYA at work, while I'm quite happy with my g4 450 at home. Likewise, my jeep cherokee does just fine day-to-day, but when I really want to drive I take the twin turbo 87 mustang gt out of the garage.
Once again, a car analogy:
"wins on sunday bring sales on monday"
There is something to be said about the legitimacy of "flagships", in both the auto and computer world. I think Apple could use a flagship that truly is a "powermac".
<strong>Keep in mind that DDR is likely to show up, and when it does it will have a very significant effect on performance -- it will be worth a "couple hundred MHz" all by itself.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, as long as the G4's FSB get's DDR'ed too, that is.
<strong>How much of a difference does DDR make? Can someone elaborate like compare current 133 to DDR 266?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think I read somewhere that, in typical everyday use, DDR gives about a 5% performance increase over SDR (yes, that's right, 5 not 50). Nice, but nothing revolutionary.
I think I read somewhere that, in typical everyday use, DDR gives about a 5% performance increase over SDR (yes, that's right, 5 not 50). Nice, but nothing revolutionary.
Bye,
RazzFazz</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but in typical everyday use a 867MHz G4 isn't really much faster than a 400MHz G3. That 5% number also depends heavily on how the OS is engineered, at least for day to day tasks. Neither Windows nor Linux are bandwidth limited, and it remains to be seen how limited Xs internals are. What is certain is that for many applications (including the ones Mac users tend to care about, ie content creation) the speedup will be far more significant.
I too would personally be satisfied with a quad 1 GHz with the increase of better multithreaded apps for OSX. Yet, single-threaded scientific and other apps would still suffer greatly.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmm, aren't scientific ones a class of apps that can usually most easily be made SIMD-, SMP- and clustering-ready?
I think I read somewhere that, in typical everyday use, DDR gives about a 5% performance increase over SDR (yes, that's right, 5 not 50). Nice, but nothing revolutionary.
Bye,
RazzFazz</strong><hr></blockquote>
It can give as much as 25% or more of a speed boost in memory-intensive applications, such as 3D rendering or big ass file editing in Photoshop and multimedia content creation. At Word it's not that big a difference.
<strong>...Segway HT would change the way we build cities...</strong><hr></blockquote>
completely OT but hey: it will, at least I believe it will. Traffic jam is becoming more and more normal, it takes much longer to get to work with your car than with a bike in some cities, the air gets worse etc.
completely OT but hey: it will, at least I believe it will. Traffic jam is becoming more and more normal, it takes much longer to get to work with your car than with a bike in some cities, the air gets worse etc.
This is where I see the Segway succeed.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Do you really think Apple will give us less then they CAN on Monday?
<hr></blockquote>
The already are not giving us everything that they can.
Right NOW, there are faster G4s available. They have been for months. But Apple hasn't used them.
And I'm not even going to mention bus speeds, RAM type, AGP speed, or anything else that Apple has CHOSEN to use the cheapest available so they can maximize their profit margins.
Apple seems like they have given up on increasing market share, and instead are milking their installed base for all they can each time they upgrade. This is pathetic.
Yes, but in typical everyday use a 867MHz G4 isn't really much faster than a 400MHz G3. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Ummmm, yes it is. I have used it and it is considerably faster. Remember, you are talking twice the clockspeed + Altivec....that is a big hurdle for the G3 to get over.
of course an 800 mhz g4 is faster than a 400 mhz g3 for everyday use?
have u not used OSX??? i use it everyday i think that qualifies as everyday use and because osx is teh future it be everday use for everyone eventually so what u said is invalid
G4 iMacs are coming maybe not today maybe not tommorow but they are coming it is inevitable because the superdrive is coming the iMac thats why iDVD exist and why jobs said the imac was to get superdrives sometime this year.
The already are not giving us everything that they can.
Right NOW, there are faster G4s available. They have been for months. But Apple hasn't used them.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Some being around that work at higher frequencies unfortunately do not mean there are enough of them to make a (shipping) product line out of them.
[quote]<strong>
And I'm not even going to mention bus speeds, RAM type, AGP speed, or anything else that Apple has CHOSEN to use the cheapest available so they can maximize their profit margins.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Uh, it's not like faster bus speeds or DDR slots are just lying around, and you just have to slap them onto your mainboard and deliver the whole thing.
Incorporating them into a MoBo unfortunately does involve significant amounts of R&D, especially when you're talking about custom-built motherboards such as Apple's.
Man, here in Germany, they ride their bikes in the snow. As a former Detroiter, I wouldn't even check my mailbox without driving.
They even walk outside when it's cold!
Anyway, I'm trying to psyche myself down. All of these slogans are getting to me. I want an iBook, so I'll try to get more excited for Tokyo. If Sonnet can make a dual G4 for my G4 tower on Monday, then I'll get excited.
I think that all this hype is linked to the Iwalk stuff, I think that this device is real it has even been pulled from spymac by legal request.<hr></blockquote>
Not so quick. Images are often pulled "Due to legal request" only because they have the Apple logo on them, which is protected by trademark.
Ummmm, yes it is. I have used it and it is considerably faster. Remember, you are talking twice the clockspeed + Altivec....that is a big hurdle for the G3 to get over.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I recently moved from a Beige G3/266 to a dual 800 and there really wasn't much of a difference in everyday use. Obviously this is with OS 9, not X which seemed like at least a 10x difference. (Actually about 3x).
I recently moved from a Beige G3/266 to a dual 800 and there really wasn't much of a difference in everyday use. Obviously this is with OS 9, not X which seemed like at least a 10x difference. (Actually about 3x).</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have a hard time believing that because I went from a PPC 6500/225 to a G4 450. The speed difference for me was not as great as for you and I noticed a HUGE difference. No comparison.
<strong>If the specification are right and that the PowerMac line tops at 1Ghz it will be a terrible news especially after all the hype.
I'm a truly mac fan, but if the Powermac would not carry drastic improvement such as DDR, faster bus and Clock speed beyond 1.2Ghz, I think that my very next puchase will be an Athlon.
Don't get me wrong I love Apple as much as everyone here, but Apple needs to come up with better machines right now.
The actual specifications are a shame especially with those tag prices.
Far beyong the rumors site they said.. I hope so for their own sake</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have a hard time believing that because I went from a PPC 6500/225 to a G4 450. The speed difference for me was not as great as for you and I noticed a HUGE difference. No comparison.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But you have to remember that you were going from a 603e with no backside cache (256K system cache) and a 50MHz bus with probably the stock Rage2 graphics (??) and probably the stock slow hard disk to a G4 with 1 MB of backside cache, a fast system bus, a decent drive and a very fast graphics system. On my systems the only thing that really changed was the processor and bus... both systems had Radeons, ATA/66 hard drives and 768MB RAM. Plus, using 9, the G3 was already so fast that there was literally no delay when performing general tasks (web surfing, word processing, finder ops, etc). The G4 didn't seem any faster until I started compiling apps and running games and 3D apps (and X).
I also did performance measurements on each system (43 different tests in both X and 9). Overall 9 was 2.92 times as fast, and X was 4.47 times as fast, but most of that speedup (in both OSs) came from increased frame rates in games.
Comments
I thought that was an interesting since I could really use the computational horsepower to run MAYA at work, while I'm quite happy with my g4 450 at home. Likewise, my jeep cherokee does just fine day-to-day, but when I really want to drive I take the twin turbo 87 mustang gt out of the garage.
Once again, a car analogy:
"wins on sunday bring sales on monday"
There is something to be said about the legitimacy of "flagships", in both the auto and computer world. I think Apple could use a flagship that truly is a "powermac".
<strong>Keep in mind that DDR is likely to show up, and when it does it will have a very significant effect on performance -- it will be worth a "couple hundred MHz" all by itself.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, as long as the G4's FSB get's DDR'ed too, that is.
Bye,
RazzFazz
<strong>How much of a difference does DDR make? Can someone elaborate like compare current 133 to DDR 266?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think I read somewhere that, in typical everyday use, DDR gives about a 5% performance increase over SDR (yes, that's right, 5 not 50). Nice, but nothing revolutionary.
Bye,
RazzFazz
<strong>
I think I read somewhere that, in typical everyday use, DDR gives about a 5% performance increase over SDR (yes, that's right, 5 not 50). Nice, but nothing revolutionary.
Bye,
RazzFazz</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but in typical everyday use a 867MHz G4 isn't really much faster than a 400MHz G3. That 5% number also depends heavily on how the OS is engineered, at least for day to day tasks. Neither Windows nor Linux are bandwidth limited, and it remains to be seen how limited Xs internals are. What is certain is that for many applications (including the ones Mac users tend to care about, ie content creation) the speedup will be far more significant.
<strong>
I too would personally be satisfied with a quad 1 GHz with the increase of better multithreaded apps for OSX. Yet, single-threaded scientific and other apps would still suffer greatly.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmm, aren't scientific ones a class of apps that can usually most easily be made SIMD-, SMP- and clustering-ready?
Bye,
RazzFazz
<strong>
I think I read somewhere that, in typical everyday use, DDR gives about a 5% performance increase over SDR (yes, that's right, 5 not 50). Nice, but nothing revolutionary.
Bye,
RazzFazz</strong><hr></blockquote>
It can give as much as 25% or more of a speed boost in memory-intensive applications, such as 3D rendering or big ass file editing in Photoshop and multimedia content creation. At Word it's not that big a difference.
<strong>
Hmm, aren't scientific ones a class of apps that can usually most easily be made SIMD-, SMP- and clustering-ready?
Bye,
RazzFazz</strong><hr></blockquote>
I guess it depends on the people coding them and what environments they are developed in...
<strong>...Segway HT would change the way we build cities...</strong><hr></blockquote>
completely OT but hey: it will, at least I believe it will. Traffic jam is becoming more and more normal, it takes much longer to get to work with your car than with a bike in some cities, the air gets worse etc.
This is where I see the Segway succeed.
bye.
<strong>
completely OT but hey: it will, at least I believe it will. Traffic jam is becoming more and more normal, it takes much longer to get to work with your car than with a bike in some cities, the air gets worse etc.
This is where I see the Segway succeed.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Until it rains.
<strong>
Until it rains.
hehe
Nah, this is where they start building the city around it.
bye.
Do you really think Apple will give us less then they CAN on Monday?
<hr></blockquote>
The already are not giving us everything that they can.
Right NOW, there are faster G4s available. They have been for months. But Apple hasn't used them.
And I'm not even going to mention bus speeds, RAM type, AGP speed, or anything else that Apple has CHOSEN to use the cheapest available so they can maximize their profit margins.
Apple seems like they have given up on increasing market share, and instead are milking their installed base for all they can each time they upgrade. This is pathetic.
<strong>
Yes, but in typical everyday use a 867MHz G4 isn't really much faster than a 400MHz G3. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Ummmm, yes it is. I have used it and it is considerably faster. Remember, you are talking twice the clockspeed + Altivec....that is a big hurdle for the G3 to get over.
of course an 800 mhz g4 is faster than a 400 mhz g3 for everyday use?
have u not used OSX??? i use it everyday i think that qualifies as everyday use and because osx is teh future it be everday use for everyone eventually so what u said is invalid
G4 iMacs are coming maybe not today maybe not tommorow but they are coming it is inevitable because the superdrive is coming the iMac thats why iDVD exist and why jobs said the imac was to get superdrives sometime this year.
It is coming oh yes it is coming
<strong>
The already are not giving us everything that they can.
Right NOW, there are faster G4s available. They have been for months. But Apple hasn't used them.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Some being around that work at higher frequencies unfortunately do not mean there are enough of them to make a (shipping) product line out of them.
[quote]<strong>
And I'm not even going to mention bus speeds, RAM type, AGP speed, or anything else that Apple has CHOSEN to use the cheapest available so they can maximize their profit margins.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Uh, it's not like faster bus speeds or DDR slots are just lying around, and you just have to slap them onto your mainboard and deliver the whole thing.
Incorporating them into a MoBo unfortunately does involve significant amounts of R&D, especially when you're talking about custom-built motherboards such as Apple's.
Bye,
RazzFazz
<strong>
Until it rains.
Man, here in Germany, they ride their bikes in the snow. As a former Detroiter, I wouldn't even check my mailbox without driving.
They even walk outside when it's cold!
Anyway, I'm trying to psyche myself down. All of these slogans are getting to me. I want an iBook, so I'll try to get more excited for Tokyo. If Sonnet can make a dual G4 for my G4 tower on Monday, then I'll get excited.
I think that all this hype is linked to the Iwalk stuff, I think that this device is real it has even been pulled from spymac by legal request.<hr></blockquote>
Not so quick. Images are often pulled "Due to legal request" only because they have the Apple logo on them, which is protected by trademark.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
<strong>
Ummmm, yes it is. I have used it and it is considerably faster. Remember, you are talking twice the clockspeed + Altivec....that is a big hurdle for the G3 to get over.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I recently moved from a Beige G3/266 to a dual 800 and there really wasn't much of a difference in everyday use. Obviously this is with OS 9, not X which seemed like at least a 10x difference. (Actually about 3x).
<strong>
I recently moved from a Beige G3/266 to a dual 800 and there really wasn't much of a difference in everyday use. Obviously this is with OS 9, not X which seemed like at least a 10x difference. (Actually about 3x).</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have a hard time believing that because I went from a PPC 6500/225 to a G4 450. The speed difference for me was not as great as for you and I noticed a HUGE difference. No comparison.
<strong>If the specification are right and that the PowerMac line tops at 1Ghz it will be a terrible news especially after all the hype.
I'm a truly mac fan, but if the Powermac would not carry drastic improvement such as DDR, faster bus and Clock speed beyond 1.2Ghz, I think that my very next puchase will be an Athlon.
Don't get me wrong I love Apple as much as everyone here, but Apple needs to come up with better machines right now.
The actual specifications are a shame especially with those tag prices.
Far beyong the rumors site they said.. I hope so for their own sake</strong><hr></blockquote>
I total agree with you.
<strong>
I have a hard time believing that because I went from a PPC 6500/225 to a G4 450. The speed difference for me was not as great as for you and I noticed a HUGE difference. No comparison.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But you have to remember that you were going from a 603e with no backside cache (256K system cache) and a 50MHz bus with probably the stock Rage2 graphics (??) and probably the stock slow hard disk to a G4 with 1 MB of backside cache, a fast system bus, a decent drive and a very fast graphics system. On my systems the only thing that really changed was the processor and bus... both systems had Radeons, ATA/66 hard drives and 768MB RAM. Plus, using 9, the G3 was already so fast that there was literally no delay when performing general tasks (web surfing, word processing, finder ops, etc). The G4 didn't seem any faster until I started compiling apps and running games and 3D apps (and X).
I also did performance measurements on each system (43 different tests in both X and 9). Overall 9 was 2.92 times as fast, and X was 4.47 times as fast, but most of that speedup (in both OSs) came from increased frame rates in games.