I agree with onlooker. Apple needed 3GHz 6 months ago. If you look at benchmarks using various apps like photoshop, games, SPEC etc.. using the fastest available processors, this is the picture you usually get from <$5000 systems.
Opteron > Xeon > Athlon64 > P4 > G5 > AthlonXP
Onlooker, I'd wait until WWDC (or whenever these new G5s come out) before judging against Apple and getting a BOXX system (or building your own).
I'm not doing anything until I see what they have, but I reconfigured my next possible system earlier with a Quadro FX 4000 in it, and it's not that much more than it was, but I took alienware over BOXX, and Dual AMD Opteron? 250 2.4 GHz 64-Bit over Xeons.. Still affordable.
And what's up with the downgrade to the video card on the top model?
Asuming that the TS specs are right, I agree with you that the 9600XT on the top model is a joke, but it's NOT a downgrade. The current 2X2 ships with a 9600 Pro with 64MB. The XT is a better card with 128MB.
I think we ahve a fundamental misunderstanding of what dual core provides us. Dual core provides us with SMP, it is the same SMP that one gets with dual chips except for some minor issues. How those minor issues impact the results you get with dual core chips will be dependant on a couple of things. However since we don't know the implementation details yet it realy is not worth getting wrapped up in a discussion about it.
That being said though, if Apple where to deliver a dual core iMac I'd jump on it. Priced right it would offer extremely good performance, well beyond what one could get for the price with single core SMP units.
Thanks
Dave
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker
What I mean is when we see these dual core systems (if ever) Apple better not release a SP dual core system, and say o.k., now MP is out the window this is just as good as an MP system so no more MP system's. Basically they need to use the dual core processors, but keep 2 of them in at least the highest configuration of the PowerMacs. XOEN's aren't going away any time soon.
also changed his information on the webpage. it was updated today, but instead of leaving in the old info and putting an addition at the bottom, he wiped out most of the old info(including the tuesday announcment and changed it to 'this week')
General,
We simply updated the story to reflect new information, and marked it accordingly. In fact, the assertions in the first edition of the story are still referenced in the updated version:
"While it was previously thought that the updated Power Macs would top out at 2.6GHz..." and "Apple's initial plans called for an announcement of the G5 refresh on Tuesday, June 8..."
We're committed to providing the most detailed, reliable information as it becomes available to us, and have no intention of hiding past inaccuracies.
Anyone see the latest rumor on ThinkSecret? I'm sorry, but after looking at all aspects of those "predicted" new displays, they are just plain bad....
Apple has been known for their "different" yet innovative products. When you look at an iMac, or even the current LCDs, you say, wow! Thats cool! And besides their looks, they have innovative features, like the iMacs LCD, and the LCDs ADC Connector, allowing you to only have to connect ONE cable, for video input, USB hub, and Power.
The display shown of TS, looks just like the rest, boxy design, DVI, power cable needed, etc. What makes that so different?
Now I'm really starting to get the feeling that Apple is just releasing FALSE information, since if Apple were to release what is depicted on TS, honestly, they have no idea what they're in for...
To be fair to TS, I'm pretty sure yesterday's story did include a sentence that said the date couldn't be positively confirmed and might change, perhaps to later in the week.
Anyone see the latest rumor on ThinkSecret? I'm sorry, but after looking at all aspects of those "predicted" new displays, they are just plain bad....
As much as I personally dislike the design, I have to admit that it addresses many of the complaints about the current line. It's adjustable for height; it has a slimmer bezel; and it dumps ADC. I happen to love ADC but people started screaming about it the instant it was introduced.
Also, there has been discussion that ADC could not provide the power needed for the rumored 30-inch display. Apple may not have had a choice. I can't imagine this was done to draw in PC users. Apple isn't even on their radar for displays, are they? Unless Apple plans to price them very aggressively (which would be nice).
ok, atfer looking at the designs a few more times, it's not THAT bad... Although it just doesn't look Apple...It looks boxy, and kinda cheap...It's just not what I expected!
I think we ahve a fundamental misunderstanding of what dual core provides us. Dual core provides us with SMP, it is the same SMP that one gets with dual chips except for some minor issues. How those minor issues impact the results you get with dual core chips will be dependant on a couple of things. However since we don't know the implementation details yet it realy is not worth getting wrapped up in a discussion about it.
That being said though, if Apple where to deliver a dual core iMac I'd jump on it. Priced right it would offer extremely good performance, well beyond what one could get for the price with single core SMP units.
Thanks
Dave
I'm not arguing that a dual core processor at 2GHz isn't identical performance wise to a 2 processor x 2GHz MP system, What I'm saying is there needs to be 2 Dual core processors per highend PowerMac.
Xeons are hyperthreaded which is the same freakin thing. They see, and work as 4 processors. MS, and Linux will have any kernel HT problems resolved before G5s hit 3GHz anyway. But what's the point of having one Dual core processor when the competitors will sell you 2? No way buckwheat. One isn't enough.
I just read TS about the new displays. I think someone is feeding them bad info. It's hard to believe that Apple would abandon the clutter less desktop. Wouldn't they just have to upgrade the ADC to empower FireWire 800 to get the results they are talking about?
If the displays can still power up the computer like the current ADC displays, I have no complaints. I'd hate to have to reach for the Powermacs powerswitch every time I start up the computer.
New monitor benefits:
The design matches the G5 better.
It is more compatible with Powerbooks.
It has a larger and possibly brighter screen.
Narrower frame.
More adjustable.
It can be sold to bigger audience (windows users).
Firewire ports.
Lower price?
All these benefits with only one drawback:
Extra cables because ADC was not used.
What's not to like?
One more thing: ATI once said that there will be more Mac retail graphics cards if Apple abandons ADC. Lets hope ATI is right.
I just had a look at Think Secret's article and I can see the new G5 lineup is shaping up just as I expected. I guess we'll all find out soon enough but let's hope the top end machine isn't ridiculously (eg. ~$3,500) priced.
It would be nice if Apple were to suprise us with PCI-E, ATI X800 XTs and on-board RAID, but that seems unlikely at this juncture. But still...
More importantly, let's hope that IBM has ironed out the kinks in their 90nm process so we can see the G5 refresh more than once a year...
If the displays can still power up the computer like the current ADC displays, I have no complaints. I'd hate to have to reach for the Powermacs powerswitch every time I start up the computer.
New monitor benefits:
The design matches the G5 better.
It is more compatible with Powerbooks.
It has a larger and possibly brighter screen.
Narrower frame.
More adjustable.
It can be sold to bigger audience (windows users).
Firewire ports.
Lower price?
All these benefits with only one drawback:
Extra cables because ADC was not used.
What's not to like?
One more thing: ATI once said that there will be more Mac retail graphics cards if Apple abandons ADC. Lets hope ATI is right.
I'm guessing from the TS illustration that Apple has dealt with the clutter by incorporating all the cabling into one large cable that breaks at the computer end into USB, FW, Power, and DVI. The old AudioVision monitors had a cable that did this with ADB, VGA, Mic, and Speaker Cable, minus the power cord.
[Not directed at you Beigeuser] Another point is that this illustration is from someone who has supposedly seen it or heard a description of it and could be from a prototype. Wait till the displays come out to make any judgement calls.
I'm not arguing that a dual core processor at 2GHz isn't identical performance wise to a 2 processor x 2GHz MP system, What I'm saying is there needs to be 2 Dual core processors per highend PowerMac.
Xeons are hyperthreaded which is the same freakin thing. They see, and work as 4 processors. MS, and Linux will have any kernel HT problems resolved before G5s hit 3GHz anyway. But what's the point of having one Dual core processor when the competitors will sell you 2? No way buckwheat. One isn't enough.
Wrong!
Dual core != SMT/HT. In an SMT/HT system the execution resources are shared between the two threads so if they get busy they will slow eachother down. They may also share L1 cache resources. A dual core chip doubles the amount of execution resources and doesn't share them, except (probably) for the L2 cache... which is an advantage because it speeds up communication between the processors.
Now in the POWER5 they have a dual core SMT chip which is a single chip that can run 4 threads at once. Personally I don't think we'll see dual core in the PowerPC lineup just yet, but we very well may see SMT which would let Apple build a system roughly comparable to the Xeon you're talking about. Much faster in floating point & vector processing, I'd expect.
What kind of performance boost do you typically get out of hyperthreading? It certainly can't be anywhere near what you'd get from a true dual chip or dual core.
I think this is definitely false info....a 20 inch studio display? Good Lord, that would just be idiotic. Cinema is where Apple is going and a 17 inch model is about as large as I would want to use.
And no, I don't recall anything in the initial report about any release dates other than today ( June 8 ).
I may be wrong, God knows I don't have anything close to TS source info, but this just doesn't seem right.
Comments
Originally posted by Existence
I agree with onlooker. Apple needed 3GHz 6 months ago. If you look at benchmarks using various apps like photoshop, games, SPEC etc.. using the fastest available processors, this is the picture you usually get from <$5000 systems.
Opteron > Xeon > Athlon64 > P4 > G5 > AthlonXP
Onlooker, I'd wait until WWDC (or whenever these new G5s come out) before judging against Apple and getting a BOXX system (or building your own).
I'm not doing anything until I see what they have, but I reconfigured my next possible system earlier with a Quadro FX 4000 in it, and it's not that much more than it was, but I took alienware over BOXX, and Dual AMD Opteron? 250 2.4 GHz 64-Bit over Xeons..
Originally posted by Rhumgod
Just to stop these posts, please, DO NOT include any apostrophes any more.
Ensign Pulver's got issues with their improper use.
Yes, that is correct use of an apostrophe
Originally posted by TWinbrook46636
And what's up with the downgrade to the video card on the top model?
Asuming that the TS specs are right, I agree with you that the 9600XT on the top model is a joke, but it's NOT a downgrade. The current 2X2 ships with a 9600 Pro with 64MB. The XT is a better card with 128MB.
That being said though, if Apple where to deliver a dual core iMac I'd jump on it. Priced right it would offer extremely good performance, well beyond what one could get for the price with single core SMP units.
Thanks
Dave
Originally posted by onlooker
What I mean is when we see these dual core systems (if ever) Apple better not release a SP dual core system, and say o.k., now MP is out the window this is just as good as an MP system so no more MP system's. Basically they need to use the dual core processors, but keep 2 of them in at least the highest configuration of the PowerMacs. XOEN's aren't going away any time soon.
Originally posted by The General
also changed his information on the webpage. it was updated today, but instead of leaving in the old info and putting an addition at the bottom, he wiped out most of the old info(including the tuesday announcment and changed it to 'this week')
General,
We simply updated the story to reflect new information, and marked it accordingly. In fact, the assertions in the first edition of the story are still referenced in the updated version:
"While it was previously thought that the updated Power Macs would top out at 2.6GHz..." and "Apple's initial plans called for an announcement of the G5 refresh on Tuesday, June 8..."
We're committed to providing the most detailed, reliable information as it becomes available to us, and have no intention of hiding past inaccuracies.
-Nick
Apple has been known for their "different" yet innovative products. When you look at an iMac, or even the current LCDs, you say, wow! Thats cool! And besides their looks, they have innovative features, like the iMacs LCD, and the LCDs ADC Connector, allowing you to only have to connect ONE cable, for video input, USB hub, and Power.
The display shown of TS, looks just like the rest, boxy design, DVI, power cable needed, etc. What makes that so different?
Now I'm really starting to get the feeling that Apple is just releasing FALSE information, since if Apple were to release what is depicted on TS, honestly, they have no idea what they're in for...
Originally posted by applejustworks2
Anyone see the latest rumor on ThinkSecret? I'm sorry, but after looking at all aspects of those "predicted" new displays, they are just plain bad....
As much as I personally dislike the design, I have to admit that it addresses many of the complaints about the current line. It's adjustable for height; it has a slimmer bezel; and it dumps ADC. I happen to love ADC but people started screaming about it the instant it was introduced.
Also, there has been discussion that ADC could not provide the power needed for the rumored 30-inch display. Apple may not have had a choice. I can't imagine this was done to draw in PC users. Apple isn't even on their radar for displays, are they? Unless Apple plans to price them very aggressively (which would be nice).
Originally posted by wizard69
I think we ahve a fundamental misunderstanding of what dual core provides us. Dual core provides us with SMP, it is the same SMP that one gets with dual chips except for some minor issues. How those minor issues impact the results you get with dual core chips will be dependant on a couple of things. However since we don't know the implementation details yet it realy is not worth getting wrapped up in a discussion about it.
That being said though, if Apple where to deliver a dual core iMac I'd jump on it. Priced right it would offer extremely good performance, well beyond what one could get for the price with single core SMP units.
Thanks
Dave
I'm not arguing that a dual core processor at 2GHz isn't identical performance wise to a 2 processor x 2GHz MP system, What I'm saying is there needs to be 2 Dual core processors per highend PowerMac.
Xeons are hyperthreaded which is the same freakin thing. They see, and work as 4 processors. MS, and Linux will have any kernel HT problems resolved before G5s hit 3GHz anyway. But what's the point of having one Dual core processor when the competitors will sell you 2? No way buckwheat. One isn't enough.
If so... Sweet.
New monitor benefits:
The design matches the G5 better.
It is more compatible with Powerbooks.
It has a larger and possibly brighter screen.
Narrower frame.
More adjustable.
It can be sold to bigger audience (windows users).
Firewire ports.
Lower price?
All these benefits with only one drawback:
Extra cables because ADC was not used.
What's not to like?
One more thing: ATI once said that there will be more Mac retail graphics cards if Apple abandons ADC. Lets hope ATI is right.
I just had a look at Think Secret's article and I can see the new G5 lineup is shaping up just as I expected. I guess we'll all find out soon enough but let's hope the top end machine isn't ridiculously (eg. ~$3,500) priced.
It would be nice if Apple were to suprise us with PCI-E, ATI X800 XTs and on-board RAID, but that seems unlikely at this juncture. But still...
More importantly, let's hope that IBM has ironed out the kinks in their 90nm process so we can see the G5 refresh more than once a year...
Cheers,
C.
Originally posted by BeigeUser
If the displays can still power up the computer like the current ADC displays, I have no complaints. I'd hate to have to reach for the Powermacs powerswitch every time I start up the computer.
New monitor benefits:
The design matches the G5 better.
It is more compatible with Powerbooks.
It has a larger and possibly brighter screen.
Narrower frame.
More adjustable.
It can be sold to bigger audience (windows users).
Firewire ports.
Lower price?
All these benefits with only one drawback:
Extra cables because ADC was not used.
What's not to like?
One more thing: ATI once said that there will be more Mac retail graphics cards if Apple abandons ADC. Lets hope ATI is right.
I'm guessing from the TS illustration that Apple has dealt with the clutter by incorporating all the cabling into one large cable that breaks at the computer end into USB, FW, Power, and DVI. The old AudioVision monitors had a cable that did this with ADB, VGA, Mic, and Speaker Cable, minus the power cord.
[Not directed at you Beigeuser] Another point is that this illustration is from someone who has supposedly seen it or heard a description of it and could be from a prototype. Wait till the displays come out to make any judgement calls.
About time...only been a year.
Originally posted by onlooker
I'm not arguing that a dual core processor at 2GHz isn't identical performance wise to a 2 processor x 2GHz MP system, What I'm saying is there needs to be 2 Dual core processors per highend PowerMac.
Xeons are hyperthreaded which is the same freakin thing. They see, and work as 4 processors. MS, and Linux will have any kernel HT problems resolved before G5s hit 3GHz anyway. But what's the point of having one Dual core processor when the competitors will sell you 2? No way buckwheat. One isn't enough.
Wrong!
Dual core != SMT/HT. In an SMT/HT system the execution resources are shared between the two threads so if they get busy they will slow eachother down. They may also share L1 cache resources. A dual core chip doubles the amount of execution resources and doesn't share them, except (probably) for the L2 cache... which is an advantage because it speeds up communication between the processors.
Now in the POWER5 they have a dual core SMT chip which is a single chip that can run 4 threads at once. Personally I don't think we'll see dual core in the PowerPC lineup just yet, but we very well may see SMT which would let Apple build a system roughly comparable to the Xeon you're talking about. Much faster in floating point & vector processing, I'd expect.
And no, I don't recall anything in the initial report about any release dates other than today ( June 8 ).
I may be wrong, God knows I don't have anything close to TS source info, but this just doesn't seem right.