Unfortunately I don't expect the next Power Mac revision to be more than a slightly incremental upgrade (in the same way as the PowerBooks): slightly higher clock speed (maybe up to 2.8 Ghz), more RAM on the low end models, better graphics (better be!), more HD etc. Nothing too exciting (although I'd love to be surprised )....
I do expect something more than just slightly incremental upgrade. It's been two years since the original G5s were out, when the new batch probably is released. The last upgrade was fairly minor. 500 MHz boost for the best model, just a slight increase of 200 MHz for the other models. Very few of the other aspects of the PowerMac were changed. Still, the same basic graphics cards, plus the 6800 Ultra and now GT cards. 256 MB RAM is inexcusable for an expensive pro machine in 2005, and it was inexcusable enough in 2004.
I'm expecting a change in the processors (The G5 needs to be improved ASAP), PCIe architecture, generation shift in the video cards section (no effin' 5200 Ultra, no more 64 MB VRAM) and 512 MB RAM in the "slower" models, possibly 1 GB in the high-end. And I'm hoping for better expandability of the hard-drives, but Apple might not be able to fit them depending on the cooling needs of the eventual new processors.
Plus I expect something is done with the single G5 model, which has sold poorly because of its bang/buck ratio. Getting it down to $1299 instead of $1499 is a good move, maybe making the model more useful and not a big, slow hull with unnecessarily limited expansion. Not that I personally care too much about the single G5, but obviously something needs to change.
I agree. I wanted to buy a dual G5 when they were released in 2003, but I wasn't entirely satisfied with the offer, so I decided to wait until the next revision, which I wasn't satisfied by either, so I'm hoping the 2005 revision will kick ass. If not, I'll wait another year.
That's the same reason I never got one, but I don't think they will ever be close again now that Nvidia has announced the nForce4 Pro motherboard for Dual Opteron processors. Apples only chance to shine brightly now IMO is to adopt SLI in some form or another because that is where Pro machines are now. Other than that their so called "Pro" machine will be pretty far down the latter comparatively.
But nobody thinks they will so they'll keep coming in at a not so respectable placing compared to Pro Xeon, and Opteron workstations equipped with pro graphics cards, and SLI configurations. More so compared to the Opteron nForce Pro. Nvidia says the new nForce pro board is supposedly going to accept Dual Core Opteron processors once they are in announced as well. It's basically like buying a blistering machine, and one in the making while your at it.
Unit sales of professional products (Power Mac and PowerBook), generally have higher gross margins than consumer products (iMacs, iBooks, iPods, and content from the iTunes Music Store). A shift in sales mix away from higher margin professional products towards lower margin consumer products could adversely affect future gross margin (GM) and operating margin percentages.
*\tBuying trends may favor lower GM products:
Apple said that traditional professional customers may choose to buy consumer products, specifically the iMac G5 and iBook, instead of professional products and that they may choose to buy the iMac G5 due to its relative price performance. Additionally, it predicted that significant future growth in iPod sales could also reduce gross margin and operating margin percentages.
Apple said that traditional professional customers may choose to buy consumer products, specifically the iMac G5 and iBook, instead of professional products and that they may choose to buy the iMac G5 due to its relative price performance]
Although Apple is kidding itself in it reasoning. They noted the problem themselves. But it's not traditional professionals. It's more like "some" traditional Pre-Mac using mac customers.
That's the key right there. Two of 4 of the last posters decided not to purchase the PowerMac because the lower comparative/competitive performance vs. the PC is not at a respectable performance level (argue all you want your only fooling your self). It is too high a price to pay for a sub level performing machine. The competition proves, time in, and time out that they rule the Pro market because Apple won't get off it's derrière, and compete. It's impossible to sell a sub performing Mac machine to those looking to buy the highend machine. The Mac high end is not anything other than that. Its only the "Mac" high end. High end everywhere else (x86) is far superior.
The Mac high end is not anything other than that. Its only the "Mac" high end. High end everywhere else (x86) is far superior.
Onlooker is right,
*by the numbers*,
But when taking the whole machine experience as a whole, the OS, the quality of manufacturing, the software, etc, the Mac can still come out on top for *SOME* users who focus on certain tasks.
By the numbers, when evaluating the hardware, it would be a tough decision. But simply using a Macintosh and relying on it for your business is a much better experience than an x86 machine.
That's the key right there. Two of 4 of the last posters decided not to purchase the PowerMac because the lower comparative/competitive performance vs. the PC is not at a respectable performance level (argue all you want your only fooling your self).
I hope you're not attributing that to me. At least in Norway, the high-end PM has represented a reasonable deal compared to similar x86 offerings I could buy, so lower comparative performance has not been the offer. For the stuff I care about, like Photoshop and Cinema 4D rendering, the 2.5 GHz G5 has been pretty much top-notch (or at least enough). Games, OTOH, hasn't been at the same level, but nothing Apple can do about the towers themselves will fix this, plus it isn't a high priority. The problems for me has been differentiation between individual models. I don't want to shell out for the 2.5 GHz, as it is a bit too much cash, but I feel I want a bit more oomph for my money than the other models provide. And then there's the issue with standard RAM and hard-drive slots that I've repeated so many times.
That's the same reason I never got one, but I don't think they will ever be close again now that Nvidia has announced the nForce4 Pro motherboard for Dual Opteron processors. Apples only chance to shine brightly now IMO is to adopt SLI in some form or another because that is where Pro machines are now. Other than that their so called "Pro" machine will be pretty far down the latter comparatively.
I'm failing to see what's so special in the nforce4 chipset that Apple/IBM cannot easily match and exceed. Let's seperate the wheat from the shaft here. Info from http://www.nvidia.com/page/nforce_pro.html
Multi-GPU capability with NVIDIA SLI technology: Supports two full x16 PCI Express slots for workstation graphics cards such as NVIDIA Quadro.
Great stuff! For %10 of the computer buying population. Apple may or may not go with SLI support but it won't be a dealbreaker for many beyond teh Doom 3 crowd.
Quote:
An innovative feature-rich single-chip architecture integrates native Gigabit Ethernet with NVIDIA ActiveArmor? secure networking, SATA 3Gb/s with Native Command Queuing and RAID.
Standard fare. I expect the next Powermacs to have maybe dual gigabit and SATA II with NCQ as well.
HyperTransport Technology
HyperTransport is a state-of-the-art I/O bus interface?up to 8.0GB/s?between the NVIDIA nForce Professional media and communications processor (MCP) and the CPU. NVIDIA?s fifth-generation HyperTransport design integrates tightly with the AMD Opteron? Direct Connect Architecture to deliver leading-edge 32-bit and 64-bit performance.
Powermacs have had Hypertransport links for almost two years now.
Nvidia keeps hyping fluff and making it sound like they have something new. Yawn, somebody wake me up when a real advancement comes.
Powermacs have been dual proc for almost a decade now. Apple was first with a mainstream board with PCI-X and Hypertransport. They were first with standardized wireless.
I expect Apple to once again leapfrog the lowest common denominator PC architecture once again by mid year. As always the whining always grows stronger just before a refresh. Par for the course.
Quote:
It's basically like buying a blistering machine, and one in the making while your at it.
Yeah ummmm...blistering. The king has no clothes.
Quote:
Apple could also shine above by adopting Cell technology before the other major computer manufacturers.
You haven't even seen the Cell technology working. I think it's going to be overhyped. We'll see soon enough.
Quote:
That's the key right there. Two of 4 of the last posters decided not to purchase the PowerMac because the lower comparative/competitive performance vs. the PC is not at a respectable performance level
Yes and neither of these posters are generating appreciable income with their computers. Totally different value proposition if you're making your keep with your computer.
Quote:
The Mac high end is not anything other than that. Its only the "Mac" high end. High end everywhere else (x86) is far superior.
If I remove SLI capability as "bullet point" I'm pretty sure you couldn't come up with 5 reason why X86 is superior. I keep hearing people say that yet I keep seeing Computer Scientists choose the G5 platform.
Hmmmmmm let's seeee who would I trust to give me the most accurate info. I think I'll go with the CS people
Yes and neither of these posters are generating appreciable income with their computers. Totally different value proposition if you're making your keep with your computer.
You've got many valid points in your post but that is nonsense. Devoid of any kind of logic. So, if you have been able to generate income with your, say, G4 or whatselse but resisted to upgrade to a Power Mac G5, those money earned from work done on the G4 must be fantasy money or what??
You know, people were capable of making money - some of it even big - with their computers 2, 3, 5, even 10 or 15 years ago. More CPU horsepower is not always the same as more money.
Besides, how do you know that "neither of these posters" are not generating appreciable income with their computers?
I certainly don't mean to belittle anyone. Everyone has their own value points that they want made. I just sometimes think that those of us who do not depend on our computers to generate income tend to obsess over the "flash" of computing and not the grunt. There's nothing sexy about talking PCI-X or ASIC chips and busses but those are really the heart and soul of computers.
Stuff like PCI Express and SLI configurations and the like are a bit too new to castigate Apple over. Undoubtedly they are working on it. In contrast; those who do make their livings with computers can justfy extra expenditures that would turn off many of us.
Quote:
Besides, how do you know that "neither of these posters" are not generating appreciable income with their computers?
I don't. But they'll tell me if I'm wrong.
I guess my "take home message" is this. We all have our torches to bear. Onlooker needs excellent video card performance so SLI and PCI Express are high on his list. I like Digital Video so PCI-X and SATA are high on mine. We all have to realize where we are biased and be careful not to unduly slam products unless they truly warrant it. I know that's subjective and that's why we all convene here and discuss topics. It's all in good fun.
[B]I just sometimes think that those of us who do not depend on our computers to generate income tend to obsess over the "flash" of computing and not the grunt.
I agree. If you make an income from the computer and a faster model will increase that income (the value being higher than the price or lease of the machine) then you need it, even if it does not have your "dream-specs". Simple real-world business. What I wanted to take to task what that you made it sound like anyone making a real income with the computer would need it. That's not true, it's dependant on the task.
I'll take my own example. I compose and sometimes produce music for a living using the computer. I don't need the Power Mac G5 right now for my current main project. My G4 is fine for that as I have a lot of external equipment.
However, come this spring I intend to buy a Power Mac G5 for several reasons:
? I'd like to use more internal software synthesizers and effects in addition to all my external devices for my next project - though it would be possible to create it with the current setup.
? I'd like to save a few minutes (maybe 10-15 minutes) every day (average) when processing audio
? I'd like more smoothness when working with large scores (this will not save much time a day, as the G4 is perfectly capable of handling the scores, but it will make the experience more comfortable)
? I'd generally like a faster machine for other all-round purposes.
So you see, allthough my computer is essential for my studio setup (and my income) I am actually capable of doing my work with a G4 without losing money . So I can afford to wait until the next revision.
Quote:
I don't. But they'll tell me if I'm wrong.
You're wrong
Quote:
I guess my "take home message" is this. We all have our torches to bear. Onlooker needs excellent video card performance so SLI and PCI Express are high on his list. I like Digital Video so PCI-X and SATA are high on mine. We all have to realize where we are biased and be careful not to unduly slam products unless they truly warrant it. I know that's subjective and that's why we all convene here and discuss topics. It's all in good fun.
We actually agree on most points - I was being pedantic, but I think it was warranted
I guess my "take home message" is this. We all have our torches to bear. Onlooker needs excellent video card performance so SLI and PCI Express are high on his list. I like Digital Video so PCI-X and SATA are high on mine.[/B]
What do you think is most important for the professional Photoshop user who works primarily on 24-100MB images?
I'm thinking that the current hardware has mostly surpassed what the typical professional Photoshop user requires.
What do you think is most important for the professional Photoshop user who works primarily on 24-100MB images?
I'm thinking that the current hardware has mostly surpassed what the typical professional Photoshop user requires.
Sincerely,
Jaddie
that's simply not true. using high-rez images for press and retouching those images to have 20 or more layers still bogs down photoshop on a dual 2.5 g5. photoshop still has a ways to go before it's outperformed by the computers. even for comps i have working files in photoshop that are 300-400 meg. that's for low-rez files. the more power the computers get, the more we'll expect from photoshop. i'm specifically waiting for layered filters so i can apply filters non-destructively the way i do adjustment layers now.
for sub 100 meg photoshop files, my old standby Qucksilver Dual 1 gig flies, and unless i'm using the old beater filters that have the oldschool code, I rarely wait for anything. So any of the new G5 duals are going to be heavenly for your 2D jobs in that size range.
As far as the competing systems from other vendors, there are some fabulous speed demons available for sure, for great prices (at times). My partner just purchased a Dual Xeon 3.6 with everything from Dell for $2200 (!!!) it was a one day only promo on a few boxes they had. However, i believe these boxes, and similar from other vendors are over 4K on average, which makes the Dual G5 a nice bargain in comparison. Not to be to hyped up on Apple biased arguments, it is a more than valid point that an OSX box on a day in day out, run alot of apps all at once to keep the billable hours rolling in, will be MUCH less expensive to own, and make much more money over a year than a similar, even much faster Windows box. My partner is a video editor, and a PC consultant on the side. He builds some amazing boxes and knows what works. It seems to me however, as he constantly is presenting me with graphs of how much faster his system is than my old dual quicksilver, I get ALOT more work done every day on average than he. I spend no time fixing, troubleshooting and adjusting. I have 15 apps running, with a gig and a half of fonts available in FontAgent, and I jam...all day, every day. This is just not the case with the PC. For example, when Illustrator and PHotoshop and Premiere are all open at the same time, the Illustrator tool bars disapear (???) and the system has huge slow downs. Also, is it just me or is OSX exponentially better at hard multitasking WinXP??? I cant snap around between open apps when heavy lifting is going on in the background at all on the PC's in the shop, it seems, everything is a grind. (I am no PC expert however). I'm not even going to get into the whole virus spyware thing. To me the ultimate test of speed is how much work you can bill out every day, and IMHO, the Mac workstation is unrivaled in a multi-application just makes money tool. Isnt that what it's all about?
(if you are doing big 3D renders however... it seems the PC workstation is tough to beat)
(if you are doing big 3D renders however... it seems the PC workstation is tough to beat)
Good point. I'd like this to be equalized. I don't want to be forced to work on a PC.
The mac nvidia 6800 ultra doesn't work correctly with Maya. If I paid $7k for Maya unlimited (mac) it should work without flaws. Especially since apple is writing the drivers for the cards. So now mac users are forced to wait on ATI's X800xt.
It really doesn't matter if it's SLI or not. Just make it pci-express so we can take advantage of future cards that run at PCIE speeds. SLI is cool until companies like ATI come out with cards that are almost as fast and are $100 USD cheaper.
I think most of us who are in need of a new top-of-the-line computer can afford to wait (we've passed the schedule upgrade point) for a more beneficial/current architecture. Even mac users look forward to the new industry standards as it comes to Hdrives, ram, video cards, fsb and mother boards. We're old/smart enough to know it's not a mhz game anymore. The ghz warz made us more knowlegdeable about architecture technologies. So, that's what we want. We'll wait, discuss and dream.....
Every time I post that I get a great read out of you guy's. Thanks.
As for the photoshop question I would check the adobe site. They typically say what hardware their apps work best with. The last time I heard anything was when they said that PC's were a better choice for Photoshop work, but that was like a year ago.
There was so much else in there that it's hard to respond to it all. But, most of all the CS is in it's own class. Most CS benchmarks only apply to that field. So they are pretty much null, or void to use as benchmarks in popular 2D, and 3D rendering, or anything 90% of Mac uses do (or would like to do) with their Mac's.
But a few things to note.
Quote:
Yeah ummmm...blistering. The king has no clothes.
You forgot to explain what your showing.
Quote:
from original article
Halo is a great cross platform test since it uses advanced shading technologies.
What a bunch of crap. The highest shading technologies are in real 3D rendering apps.
Very deceptive Mac testing, This is what I expect from an Apples next keynote. But it is telling tale to those who know to read it correctly nonetheless.
Notice the card tested many times as Quad in the description is an Nvidia Quadro FX 3400, which is a pro 3D card made specifically for use in 3D applications, and the Nvidia Quadro drivers are quite different than basic gaming drivers as I have recently learned. But they are testing it with Games. Doesn't work like that.
They did however make a few tests that show how high a level of performance is possible by using a card with basic drivers that are used in every day machines, and games. GeFU stands for Geforce 6800 Ultra. That is a basic card that is gaming capable. The dual Processor Xeon Machine across the top shows just how much faster performance can be achieved using a correct card with SLI in the test. It also shows the Dual Xeon as spanking the Dual Mac both with a single GPU by about a 20% increase in performance. But note that Nvidia's SLI performance under the Dual Xeon machine was just short of twice as fast as the PowerMac Dual G5.
Now - they did not show the Athlon once with the Geforce 6800 Ultra GPU because you can see how fast this single processor machine compares to the Dual Xeon using the Quadro GPU. They come up as equal.
So it stands to reason that a "single processor" Athlon with SLI using Geforce 6800 Ultra's would also be twice as fast as a Dual Processor G5 using the same graphics card. !
Athlon = Single Processor. 1 CPU
Opteron = Dual Procressor. 2 CPU
Note: They never bothered showing an AMD Opteron (dual Processor) Machine #1 = Because they smoke Dual Xeons, and #2 = The G5 would just look that much worse.
Yep Looks like an Apple keynote to me.
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
HyperTransport Technology
HyperTransport is a state-of-the-art I/O bus interface?up to 8.0GB/s?between the NVIDIA nForce Professional media and communications processor (MCP) and the CPU. NVIDIA?s fifth-generation HyperTransport design integrates tightly with the AMD Opteron? Direct Connect Architecture to deliver leading-edge 32-bit and 64-bit performance.
Powermacs have had Hypertransport links for almost two years now.
Nvidia keeps hyping fluff and making it sound like they have something new. Yawn, somebody wake me up when a real advancement comes.
Powermacs have been dual proc for almost a decade now. Apple was first with a mainstream board with PCI-X and Hypertransport. They were first with standardized wireless.
What's wrong with NVIDIA?s fifth-generation HyperTransport design.
Yes, So what are you trying to say? AMD invented Hypertransport. Nvidia is working closely with AMD, and now Nvidia is in their 5th incarnation of hypertransport technology. That does not sound like they are saying hypertaransport is new. It sounds like they are using the latest version of it that's all.
PCI-X Yes every mother board manufacturer had it at the same time too.
Not like it really matters.
Quote:
I expect the next Powermacs to have maybe dual gigabit and SATA II with NCQ as well
That remains to be seen, but as of now I see nothing, and their last years model was still out paced by the competition.
And this is why I say unless Apple decides to adopt SLI, and do more with the internals of the PowerMac they are going to be the second rate buy for a pro machine again this year.
One last thing to note again is that nVidia has said that the dual core Opteron Processors should also work in this motherboard when they are released.
Apple must love people like me. Pardon me for a moment, as I realize this is a bit besides the point..
I'm surprised to find so many people (on AI) compare, and consider non-Macs. Don't get me wrong, I see all of your points of interest... Just for some reason I expected to find more Mac fans.
Personally, I've had computers around my whole life, and they've always been useful, and enjoyable. Though I've used them in business, Macs are largely just the computer of choice that I will use because I enjoy them. Shortly after my parents bought their first Mac (SE), I bought my first Plus, and have never seriously considered buying a non-Mac ever since. I've appreciated the Macs I could get my hands on, and have had the pleasure of the top of the line twice (The IIFX, and the beige 266 G3 PM). I will likely buy the next, top of the line, PM because it will be the best computer that I will use available, for the longest period.. but also certainly because at this point in my life I can afford to. Exciting times for me!
Again, I realize my considerations are much different then some of yours. Not trying to discredit anyone else's.
BTW, I loved that Mac Plus, and also my little Duo/dock. Good times.
Every time I post that I get a great read out of you guy's. Thanks.
As for the photoshop question I would check the adobe site. They typically say what hardware their apps work best with. The last time I heard anything was when they said that PC's were a better choice for Photoshop work, but that was like a year ago.
There was so much else in there that it's hard to respond to it all. But, most of all the CS is in it's own class. Most CS benchmarks only apply to that field. So they are pretty much null, or void to use as benchmarks in popular 2D, and 3D rendering, or anything 90% of Mac uses do (or would like to do) with their Mac's.
But a few things to note.
Quote:
Yeah ummmm...blistering. The king has no clothes.
You forgot to explain what your showing.
Quote:
from original article
Halo is a great cross platform test since it uses advanced shading technologies.
What a bunch of crap. The highest shading technologies are in real 3D rendering apps.
Very deceptive Mac testing, This is what I expect from an Apples next keynote. But it is telling tale to those who know to read it correctly nonetheless.
Notice the card tested many times as Quad in the description is an Nvidia Quadro FX 3400, which is a pro 3D card made specifically for use in 3D applications, and the Nvidia Quadro drivers are quite different than basic gaming drivers as I have recently learned. But they are testing it with Games. Doesn't work like that.
They did however make a few tests that show how high a level of performance is possible by using a card with basic drivers that are used in every day machines, and games. GeFU stands for Geforce 6800 Ultra. That is a basic card that is gaming capable. The dual Processor Xeon Machine across the top shows just how much faster performance can be achieved using a correct card with SLI in the test. It also shows the Dual Xeon as spanking the Dual Mac both with a single GPU by about a 20% increase in performance. But note that Nvidia's SLI performance under the Dual Xeon machine was just short of twice as fast as the PowerMac Dual G5.
Now - they did not show the Athlon once with the Geforce 6800 Ultra GPU because you can see how fast this single processor machine compares to the Dual Xeon using the Quadro GPU. They come up as equal.
So it stands to reason that a "single processor" Athlon with SLI using Geforce 6800 Ultra's would also be twice as fast as a Dual Processor G5 using the same graphics card. !
Athlon = Single Processor. 1 CPU
Opteron = Dual Procressor. 2 CPU
Note: They never bothered showing an AMD Opteron (dual Processor) Machine #1 = Because they smoke Dual Xeons, and #2 = The G5 would just look that much worse.
Yep Looks like an Apple keynote to me.
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
HyperTransport Technology
HyperTransport is a state-of-the-art I/O bus interface?up to 8.0GB/s?between the NVIDIA nForce Professional media and communications processor (MCP) and the CPU. NVIDIA?s fifth-generation HyperTransport design integrates tightly with the AMD Opteron? Direct Connect Architecture to deliver leading-edge 32-bit and 64-bit performance.
Powermacs have had Hypertransport links for almost two years now.
Nvidia keeps hyping fluff and making it sound like they have something new. Yawn, somebody wake me up when a real advancement comes.
Powermacs have been dual proc for almost a decade now. Apple was first with a mainstream board with PCI-X and Hypertransport. They were first with standardized wireless.
What's wrong with NVIDIA?s fifth-generation HyperTransport design.
Yes, So what are you trying to say? AMD invented Hypertransport. Nvidia is working closely with AMD, and now Nvidia is in their 5th incarnation of hypertransport technology. That does not sound like they are saying hypertaransport is new. It sounds like they are using the latest version of it that's all.
PCI-X Yes every mother board manufacturer had it at the same time too.
Not like it really matters.
Quote:
I expect the next Powermacs to have maybe dual gigabit and SATA II with NCQ as well
That remains to be seen, but as of now I see nothing, and their last years model was still out paced by the competition.
And this is why I say unless Apple decides to adopt SLI, and do more with the internals of the PowerMac they are going to be the second rate buy for a pro machine again this year.
One last thing to note again is that nVidia has said that the dual core Opteron Processors should also work in this motherboard when they are released.
I've been trying so hard to wait for the Rev. C PM's, but as someone noted before, the price/performance of the Wintel world can't be denied, I just configured this system at Dell for about $2100...
Comments
Originally posted by Power Apple
Unfortunately I don't expect the next Power Mac revision to be more than a slightly incremental upgrade (in the same way as the PowerBooks): slightly higher clock speed (maybe up to 2.8 Ghz), more RAM on the low end models, better graphics (better be!), more HD etc. Nothing too exciting (although I'd love to be surprised
I do expect something more than just slightly incremental upgrade. It's been two years since the original G5s were out, when the new batch probably is released. The last upgrade was fairly minor. 500 MHz boost for the best model, just a slight increase of 200 MHz for the other models. Very few of the other aspects of the PowerMac were changed. Still, the same basic graphics cards, plus the 6800 Ultra and now GT cards. 256 MB RAM is inexcusable for an expensive pro machine in 2005, and it was inexcusable enough in 2004.
I'm expecting a change in the processors (The G5 needs to be improved ASAP), PCIe architecture, generation shift in the video cards section (no effin' 5200 Ultra, no more 64 MB VRAM) and 512 MB RAM in the "slower" models, possibly 1 GB in the high-end. And I'm hoping for better expandability of the hard-drives, but Apple might not be able to fit them depending on the cooling needs of the eventual new processors.
Plus I expect something is done with the single G5 model, which has sold poorly because of its bang/buck ratio. Getting it down to $1299 instead of $1499 is a good move, maybe making the model more useful and not a big, slow hull with unnecessarily limited expansion. Not that I personally care too much about the single G5, but obviously something needs to change.
Originally posted by Zapchud
I agree. I wanted to buy a dual G5 when they were released in 2003, but I wasn't entirely satisfied with the offer, so I decided to wait until the next revision, which I wasn't satisfied by either, so I'm hoping the 2005 revision will kick ass. If not, I'll wait another year.
That's the same reason I never got one, but I don't think they will ever be close again now that Nvidia has announced the nForce4 Pro motherboard for Dual Opteron processors. Apples only chance to shine brightly now IMO is to adopt SLI in some form or another because that is where Pro machines are now. Other than that their so called "Pro" machine will be pretty far down the latter comparatively.
But nobody thinks they will so they'll keep coming in at a not so respectable placing compared to Pro Xeon, and Opteron workstations equipped with pro graphics cards, and SLI configurations. More so compared to the Opteron nForce Pro. Nvidia says the new nForce pro board is supposedly going to accept Dual Core Opteron processors once they are in announced as well. It's basically like buying a blistering machine, and one in the making while your at it.
-beag
GMs may decrease as product mix changes:
Unit sales of professional products (Power Mac and PowerBook), generally have higher gross margins than consumer products (iMacs, iBooks, iPods, and content from the iTunes Music Store). A shift in sales mix away from higher margin professional products towards lower margin consumer products could adversely affect future gross margin (GM) and operating margin percentages.
*\tBuying trends may favor lower GM products:
Apple said that traditional professional customers may choose to buy consumer products, specifically the iMac G5 and iBook, instead of professional products and that they may choose to buy the iMac G5 due to its relative price performance. Additionally, it predicted that significant future growth in iPod sales could also reduce gross margin and operating margin percentages.
Originally posted by __MaGnUsSoN__
Apple said that traditional professional customers may choose to buy consumer products, specifically the iMac G5 and iBook, instead of professional products and that they may choose to buy the iMac G5 due to its relative price performance]
Although Apple is kidding itself in it reasoning. They noted the problem themselves. But it's not traditional professionals. It's more like "some" traditional Pre-Mac using mac customers.
That's the key right there. Two of 4 of the last posters decided not to purchase the PowerMac because the lower comparative/competitive performance vs. the PC is not at a respectable performance level (argue all you want your only fooling your self). It is too high a price to pay for a sub level performing machine. The competition proves, time in, and time out that they rule the Pro market because Apple won't get off it's derrière, and compete. It's impossible to sell a sub performing Mac machine to those looking to buy the highend machine. The Mac high end is not anything other than that. Its only the "Mac" high end. High end everywhere else (x86) is far superior.
Originally posted by onlooker
The Mac high end is not anything other than that. Its only the "Mac" high end. High end everywhere else (x86) is far superior.
Onlooker is right,
*by the numbers*,
But when taking the whole machine experience as a whole, the OS, the quality of manufacturing, the software, etc, the Mac can still come out on top for *SOME* users who focus on certain tasks.
By the numbers, when evaluating the hardware, it would be a tough decision. But simply using a Macintosh and relying on it for your business is a much better experience than an x86 machine.
Of course, I'm a Jobsian.
-d
Originally posted by onlooker
That's the key right there. Two of 4 of the last posters decided not to purchase the PowerMac because the lower comparative/competitive performance vs. the PC is not at a respectable performance level (argue all you want your only fooling your self).
I hope you're not attributing that to me. At least in Norway, the high-end PM has represented a reasonable deal compared to similar x86 offerings I could buy, so lower comparative performance has not been the offer. For the stuff I care about, like Photoshop and Cinema 4D rendering, the 2.5 GHz G5 has been pretty much top-notch (or at least enough). Games, OTOH, hasn't been at the same level, but nothing Apple can do about the towers themselves will fix this, plus it isn't a high priority. The problems for me has been differentiation between individual models. I don't want to shell out for the 2.5 GHz, as it is a bit too much cash, but I feel I want a bit more oomph for my money than the other models provide. And then there's the issue with standard RAM and hard-drive slots that I've repeated so many times.
That's the same reason I never got one, but I don't think they will ever be close again now that Nvidia has announced the nForce4 Pro motherboard for Dual Opteron processors. Apples only chance to shine brightly now IMO is to adopt SLI in some form or another because that is where Pro machines are now. Other than that their so called "Pro" machine will be pretty far down the latter comparatively.
I'm failing to see what's so special in the nforce4 chipset that Apple/IBM cannot easily match and exceed. Let's seperate the wheat from the shaft here. Info from http://www.nvidia.com/page/nforce_pro.html
Multi-GPU capability with NVIDIA SLI technology: Supports two full x16 PCI Express slots for workstation graphics cards such as NVIDIA Quadro.
Great stuff! For %10 of the computer buying population. Apple may or may not go with SLI support but it won't be a dealbreaker for many beyond teh Doom 3 crowd.
An innovative feature-rich single-chip architecture integrates native Gigabit Ethernet with NVIDIA ActiveArmor? secure networking, SATA 3Gb/s with Native Command Queuing and RAID.
Standard fare. I expect the next Powermacs to have maybe dual gigabit and SATA II with NCQ as well.
HyperTransport Technology
HyperTransport is a state-of-the-art I/O bus interface?up to 8.0GB/s?between the NVIDIA nForce Professional media and communications processor (MCP) and the CPU. NVIDIA?s fifth-generation HyperTransport design integrates tightly with the AMD Opteron? Direct Connect Architecture to deliver leading-edge 32-bit and 64-bit performance.
Powermacs have had Hypertransport links for almost two years now.
Nvidia keeps hyping fluff and making it sound like they have something new. Yawn, somebody wake me up when a real advancement comes.
Powermacs have been dual proc for almost a decade now. Apple was first with a mainstream board with PCI-X and Hypertransport. They were first with standardized wireless.
I expect Apple to once again leapfrog the lowest common denominator PC architecture once again by mid year. As always the whining always grows stronger just before a refresh. Par for the course.
It's basically like buying a blistering machine, and one in the making while your at it.
Yeah ummmm...blistering. The king has no clothes.
Apple could also shine above by adopting Cell technology before the other major computer manufacturers.
You haven't even seen the Cell technology working. I think it's going to be overhyped. We'll see soon enough.
That's the key right there. Two of 4 of the last posters decided not to purchase the PowerMac because the lower comparative/competitive performance vs. the PC is not at a respectable performance level
Yes and neither of these posters are generating appreciable income with their computers. Totally different value proposition if you're making your keep with your computer.
The Mac high end is not anything other than that. Its only the "Mac" high end. High end everywhere else (x86) is far superior.
If I remove SLI capability as "bullet point" I'm pretty sure you couldn't come up with 5 reason why X86 is superior. I keep hearing people say that yet I keep seeing Computer Scientists choose the G5 platform.
Hmmmmmm let's seeee who would I trust to give me the most accurate info. I think I'll go with the CS people
Originally posted by hmurchison
Yes and neither of these posters are generating appreciable income with their computers. Totally different value proposition if you're making your keep with your computer.
You've got many valid points in your post but that is nonsense. Devoid of any kind of logic. So, if you have been able to generate income with your, say, G4 or whatselse but resisted to upgrade to a Power Mac G5, those money earned from work done on the G4 must be fantasy money or what??
You know, people were capable of making money - some of it even big - with their computers 2, 3, 5, even 10 or 15 years ago. More CPU horsepower is not always the same as more money.
Besides, how do you know that "neither of these posters" are not generating appreciable income with their computers?
I certainly don't mean to belittle anyone. Everyone has their own value points that they want made. I just sometimes think that those of us who do not depend on our computers to generate income tend to obsess over the "flash" of computing and not the grunt. There's nothing sexy about talking PCI-X or ASIC chips and busses but those are really the heart and soul of computers.
Stuff like PCI Express and SLI configurations and the like are a bit too new to castigate Apple over. Undoubtedly they are working on it. In contrast; those who do make their livings with computers can justfy extra expenditures that would turn off many of us.
Besides, how do you know that "neither of these posters" are not generating appreciable income with their computers?
I don't. But they'll tell me if I'm wrong.
I guess my "take home message" is this. We all have our torches to bear. Onlooker needs excellent video card performance so SLI and PCI Express are high on his list. I like Digital Video so PCI-X and SATA are high on mine. We all have to realize where we are biased and be careful not to unduly slam products unless they truly warrant it. I know that's subjective and that's why we all convene here and discuss topics. It's all in good fun.
Originally posted by hmurchison
[B]I just sometimes think that those of us who do not depend on our computers to generate income tend to obsess over the "flash" of computing and not the grunt.
I agree. If you make an income from the computer and a faster model will increase that income (the value being higher than the price or lease of the machine) then you need it, even if it does not have your "dream-specs". Simple real-world business. What I wanted to take to task what that you made it sound like anyone making a real income with the computer would need it. That's not true, it's dependant on the task.
I'll take my own example. I compose and sometimes produce music for a living using the computer. I don't need the Power Mac G5 right now for my current main project. My G4 is fine for that as I have a lot of external equipment.
However, come this spring I intend to buy a Power Mac G5 for several reasons:
? I'd like to use more internal software synthesizers and effects in addition to all my external devices for my next project - though it would be possible to create it with the current setup.
? I'd like to save a few minutes (maybe 10-15 minutes) every day (average) when processing audio
? I'd like more smoothness when working with large scores (this will not save much time a day, as the G4 is perfectly capable of handling the scores, but it will make the experience more comfortable)
? I'd generally like a faster machine for other all-round purposes.
So you see, allthough my computer is essential for my studio setup (and my income) I am actually capable of doing my work with a G4 without losing money . So I can afford to wait until the next revision.
I don't. But they'll tell me if I'm wrong.
You're wrong
I guess my "take home message" is this. We all have our torches to bear. Onlooker needs excellent video card performance so SLI and PCI Express are high on his list. I like Digital Video so PCI-X and SATA are high on mine. We all have to realize where we are biased and be careful not to unduly slam products unless they truly warrant it. I know that's subjective and that's why we all convene here and discuss topics. It's all in good fun.
We actually agree on most points - I was being pedantic, but I think it was warranted
Originally posted by hmurchison
I guess my "take home message" is this. We all have our torches to bear. Onlooker needs excellent video card performance so SLI and PCI Express are high on his list. I like Digital Video so PCI-X and SATA are high on mine.[/B]
What do you think is most important for the professional Photoshop user who works primarily on 24-100MB images?
I'm thinking that the current hardware has mostly surpassed what the typical professional Photoshop user requires.
Sincerely,
Jaddie
Originally posted by Jaddie
Dear hmurchison & Friends
What do you think is most important for the professional Photoshop user who works primarily on 24-100MB images?
I'm thinking that the current hardware has mostly surpassed what the typical professional Photoshop user requires.
Sincerely,
Jaddie
that's simply not true. using high-rez images for press and retouching those images to have 20 or more layers still bogs down photoshop on a dual 2.5 g5. photoshop still has a ways to go before it's outperformed by the computers. even for comps i have working files in photoshop that are 300-400 meg. that's for low-rez files. the more power the computers get, the more we'll expect from photoshop. i'm specifically waiting for layered filters so i can apply filters non-destructively the way i do adjustment layers now.
As far as the competing systems from other vendors, there are some fabulous speed demons available for sure, for great prices (at times). My partner just purchased a Dual Xeon 3.6 with everything from Dell for $2200 (!!!) it was a one day only promo on a few boxes they had. However, i believe these boxes, and similar from other vendors are over 4K on average, which makes the Dual G5 a nice bargain in comparison. Not to be to hyped up on Apple biased arguments, it is a more than valid point that an OSX box on a day in day out, run alot of apps all at once to keep the billable hours rolling in, will be MUCH less expensive to own, and make much more money over a year than a similar, even much faster Windows box. My partner is a video editor, and a PC consultant on the side. He builds some amazing boxes and knows what works. It seems to me however, as he constantly is presenting me with graphs of how much faster his system is than my old dual quicksilver, I get ALOT more work done every day on average than he. I spend no time fixing, troubleshooting and adjusting. I have 15 apps running, with a gig and a half of fonts available in FontAgent, and I jam...all day, every day. This is just not the case with the PC. For example, when Illustrator and PHotoshop and Premiere are all open at the same time, the Illustrator tool bars disapear (???) and the system has huge slow downs. Also, is it just me or is OSX exponentially better at hard multitasking WinXP??? I cant snap around between open apps when heavy lifting is going on in the background at all on the PC's in the shop, it seems, everything is a grind. (I am no PC expert however). I'm not even going to get into the whole virus spyware thing. To me the ultimate test of speed is how much work you can bill out every day, and IMHO, the Mac workstation is unrivaled in a multi-application just makes money tool. Isnt that what it's all about?
(if you are doing big 3D renders however... it seems the PC workstation is tough to beat)
I agree with you pretty much. Toss in a bunch of RAM and a relatively fast harddrive and PS runs pretty damn good.
Miknap...no doubt man, I can keep my PCs running along smoothly but it does require elbow grease.
You're wrong
I just got owned LOL.
Originally posted by mikenap
(if you are doing big 3D renders however... it seems the PC workstation is tough to beat)
Good point. I'd like this to be equalized. I don't want to be forced to work on a PC.
The mac nvidia 6800 ultra doesn't work correctly with Maya. If I paid $7k for Maya unlimited (mac) it should work without flaws. Especially since apple is writing the drivers for the cards. So now mac users are forced to wait on ATI's X800xt.
It really doesn't matter if it's SLI or not. Just make it pci-express so we can take advantage of future cards that run at PCIE speeds. SLI is cool until companies like ATI come out with cards that are almost as fast and are $100 USD cheaper.
I think most of us who are in need of a new top-of-the-line computer can afford to wait (we've passed the schedule upgrade point) for a more beneficial/current architecture. Even mac users look forward to the new industry standards as it comes to Hdrives, ram, video cards, fsb and mother boards. We're old/smart enough to know it's not a mhz game anymore. The ghz warz made us more knowlegdeable about architecture technologies. So, that's what we want. We'll wait, discuss and dream.....
As for the photoshop question I would check the adobe site. They typically say what hardware their apps work best with. The last time I heard anything was when they said that PC's were a better choice for Photoshop work, but that was like a year ago.
There was so much else in there that it's hard to respond to it all. But, most of all the CS is in it's own class. Most CS benchmarks only apply to that field. So they are pretty much null, or void to use as benchmarks in popular 2D, and 3D rendering, or anything 90% of Mac uses do (or would like to do) with their Mac's.
But a few things to note.
Yeah ummmm...blistering. The king has no clothes.
You forgot to explain what your showing.
from original article
Halo is a great cross platform test since it uses advanced shading technologies.
What a bunch of crap. The highest shading technologies are in real 3D rendering apps.
Very deceptive Mac testing, This is what I expect from an Apples next keynote. But it is telling tale to those who know to read it correctly nonetheless.
Notice the card tested many times as Quad in the description is an Nvidia Quadro FX 3400, which is a pro 3D card made specifically for use in 3D applications, and the Nvidia Quadro drivers are quite different than basic gaming drivers as I have recently learned. But they are testing it with Games. Doesn't work like that.
They did however make a few tests that show how high a level of performance is possible by using a card with basic drivers that are used in every day machines, and games. GeFU stands for Geforce 6800 Ultra. That is a basic card that is gaming capable. The dual Processor Xeon Machine across the top shows just how much faster performance can be achieved using a correct card with SLI in the test. It also shows the Dual Xeon as spanking the Dual Mac both with a single GPU by about a 20% increase in performance. But note that Nvidia's SLI performance under the Dual Xeon machine was just short of twice as fast as the PowerMac Dual G5.
Now - they did not show the Athlon once with the Geforce 6800 Ultra GPU because you can see how fast this single processor machine compares to the Dual Xeon using the Quadro GPU. They come up as equal.
So it stands to reason that a "single processor" Athlon with SLI using Geforce 6800 Ultra's would also be twice as fast as a Dual Processor G5 using the same graphics card. !
Athlon = Single Processor. 1 CPU
Opteron = Dual Procressor. 2 CPU
Note: They never bothered showing an AMD Opteron (dual Processor) Machine #1 = Because they smoke Dual Xeons, and #2 = The G5 would just look that much worse.
Yep Looks like an Apple keynote to me.
Originally posted by hmurchison
HyperTransport Technology
HyperTransport is a state-of-the-art I/O bus interface?up to 8.0GB/s?between the NVIDIA nForce Professional media and communications processor (MCP) and the CPU. NVIDIA?s fifth-generation HyperTransport design integrates tightly with the AMD Opteron? Direct Connect Architecture to deliver leading-edge 32-bit and 64-bit performance.
Powermacs have had Hypertransport links for almost two years now.
Nvidia keeps hyping fluff and making it sound like they have something new. Yawn, somebody wake me up when a real advancement comes.
Powermacs have been dual proc for almost a decade now. Apple was first with a mainstream board with PCI-X and Hypertransport. They were first with standardized wireless.
What's wrong with NVIDIA?s fifth-generation HyperTransport design.
Yes, So what are you trying to say? AMD invented Hypertransport. Nvidia is working closely with AMD, and now Nvidia is in their 5th incarnation of hypertransport technology. That does not sound like they are saying hypertaransport is new. It sounds like they are using the latest version of it that's all.
PCI-X Yes every mother board manufacturer had it at the same time too.
Not like it really matters.
That remains to be seen, but as of now I see nothing, and their last years model was still out paced by the competition.
And this is why I say unless Apple decides to adopt SLI, and do more with the internals of the PowerMac they are going to be the second rate buy for a pro machine again this year.
One last thing to note again is that nVidia has said that the dual core Opteron Processors should also work in this motherboard when they are released.
I'm surprised to find so many people (on AI) compare, and consider non-Macs. Don't get me wrong, I see all of your points of interest... Just for some reason I expected to find more Mac fans.
Personally, I've had computers around my whole life, and they've always been useful, and enjoyable. Though I've used them in business, Macs are largely just the computer of choice that I will use because I enjoy them. Shortly after my parents bought their first Mac (SE), I bought my first Plus, and have never seriously considered buying a non-Mac ever since. I've appreciated the Macs I could get my hands on, and have had the pleasure of the top of the line twice (The IIFX, and the beige 266 G3 PM). I will likely buy the next, top of the line, PM because it will be the best computer that I will use available, for the longest period.. but also certainly because at this point in my life I can afford to. Exciting times for me!
Again, I realize my considerations are much different then some of yours. Not trying to discredit anyone else's.
BTW, I loved that Mac Plus, and also my little Duo/dock. Good times.
Reposting: Due to off topic comments:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Every time I post that I get a great read out of you guy's. Thanks.
As for the photoshop question I would check the adobe site. They typically say what hardware their apps work best with. The last time I heard anything was when they said that PC's were a better choice for Photoshop work, but that was like a year ago.
There was so much else in there that it's hard to respond to it all. But, most of all the CS is in it's own class. Most CS benchmarks only apply to that field. So they are pretty much null, or void to use as benchmarks in popular 2D, and 3D rendering, or anything 90% of Mac uses do (or would like to do) with their Mac's.
But a few things to note.
Yeah ummmm...blistering. The king has no clothes.
You forgot to explain what your showing.
from original article
Halo is a great cross platform test since it uses advanced shading technologies.
What a bunch of crap. The highest shading technologies are in real 3D rendering apps.
Very deceptive Mac testing, This is what I expect from an Apples next keynote. But it is telling tale to those who know to read it correctly nonetheless.
Notice the card tested many times as Quad in the description is an Nvidia Quadro FX 3400, which is a pro 3D card made specifically for use in 3D applications, and the Nvidia Quadro drivers are quite different than basic gaming drivers as I have recently learned. But they are testing it with Games. Doesn't work like that.
They did however make a few tests that show how high a level of performance is possible by using a card with basic drivers that are used in every day machines, and games. GeFU stands for Geforce 6800 Ultra. That is a basic card that is gaming capable. The dual Processor Xeon Machine across the top shows just how much faster performance can be achieved using a correct card with SLI in the test. It also shows the Dual Xeon as spanking the Dual Mac both with a single GPU by about a 20% increase in performance. But note that Nvidia's SLI performance under the Dual Xeon machine was just short of twice as fast as the PowerMac Dual G5.
Now - they did not show the Athlon once with the Geforce 6800 Ultra GPU because you can see how fast this single processor machine compares to the Dual Xeon using the Quadro GPU. They come up as equal.
So it stands to reason that a "single processor" Athlon with SLI using Geforce 6800 Ultra's would also be twice as fast as a Dual Processor G5 using the same graphics card. !
Athlon = Single Processor. 1 CPU
Opteron = Dual Procressor. 2 CPU
Note: They never bothered showing an AMD Opteron (dual Processor) Machine #1 = Because they smoke Dual Xeons, and #2 = The G5 would just look that much worse.
Yep Looks like an Apple keynote to me.
Originally posted by hmurchison
HyperTransport Technology
HyperTransport is a state-of-the-art I/O bus interface?up to 8.0GB/s?between the NVIDIA nForce Professional media and communications processor (MCP) and the CPU. NVIDIA?s fifth-generation HyperTransport design integrates tightly with the AMD Opteron? Direct Connect Architecture to deliver leading-edge 32-bit and 64-bit performance.
Powermacs have had Hypertransport links for almost two years now.
Nvidia keeps hyping fluff and making it sound like they have something new. Yawn, somebody wake me up when a real advancement comes.
Powermacs have been dual proc for almost a decade now. Apple was first with a mainstream board with PCI-X and Hypertransport. They were first with standardized wireless.
What's wrong with NVIDIA?s fifth-generation HyperTransport design.
Yes, So what are you trying to say? AMD invented Hypertransport. Nvidia is working closely with AMD, and now Nvidia is in their 5th incarnation of hypertransport technology. That does not sound like they are saying hypertaransport is new. It sounds like they are using the latest version of it that's all.
PCI-X Yes every mother board manufacturer had it at the same time too.
Not like it really matters.
That remains to be seen, but as of now I see nothing, and their last years model was still out paced by the competition.
And this is why I say unless Apple decides to adopt SLI, and do more with the internals of the PowerMac they are going to be the second rate buy for a pro machine again this year.
One last thing to note again is that nVidia has said that the dual core Opteron Processors should also work in this motherboard when they are released.
Dell Precision Workstation 670\tIntel® Xeon? Processor 3.00GHz, 1MB L2 Cache\t6T30\t[221-4427]\t1
Operating System\tMicrosoft® Windows® XP Professional, SP2 with Media\tXPP2E\t[420-4860]\t11
2nd Processor (Must match speed selection above)\tIntel® Xeon? Processor 3.00GHz, 1MB L2 cache\tPR30\t[311-3862]\t2
Memory\tFREE UPGRADE! 1GB,DDR SDRAM, 4x256 for the price of 512MB\t1GN4DYM\t[463-3042]\t3
Keyboard\tEntry Level, PS/2, No Hot Keys\tE\t[310-1609]\t4
Monitor\tNo Monitor Option\tN\t[320-3316]\t5
Graphic Cards\t128MB PCIe x16 ATI FireGL V3100, Dual VGA or DVI + VGA Capable\tATI128\t[320-3958]\t6
First Hard Drive\t80GB SATA, 7200 RPM Hard Drive with DataBurst Cache? without RAID\t80SAT\t[341-1138]\t8
Hard Drive Configuration\tC1- All SATA drives, Non-RAID, 1 to 2 drive total configuration\tSATA12\t[341-1113]\t9
Floppy Drive Options\t3.5 inch 1.44MB Floppy Drive\tFD\t[341-0497]\t10
Mouse\tDell USB 2-Button Mechanical Mouse with Scroll\tELD\t[310-5203]\t12
File System\tNTFS File System\tNTFS\t[420-3699]\t13
CD-ROM, DVD, and Read-Write Devices\t48X CD-ROM\tCD48\t[313-1304]\t16
Speakers\tNo Speaker option\tN\t[313-2663]\t18
Resource CD\tResources CD contains Diagnostics and Driver for Precision Systems\tRCD\t[310-5419]\t21
Hardware Support Services\t3 Year Basic Plan\tW3YOS\t[980-7000][980-7002]\t29
Onsite System Setup\tNo Onsite System Setup\tNOINSTL\t[900-9987]\t32
Quick Reference Guide\tQuick Reference Guide\tREF\t[310-5420]\t40
Energy Star\tEnergy Star?\tES\t[310-4821]\t50
Mail- In Rebate\tNone\tNONE\t[463-1832]\t81
TOTAL: $2,108.00