PDA

View Full Version : Fastest G4 Ever




TyleRomeo
Sep 23, 2006, 11:48 PM
Ok I've looked around the net and the fastest dual G4 I see is a 1.8 GHZ upgrade to the 7447 chip that has 512KB of L2. I've seen a single 2.0GHZ g4 updrade but will we ever see a dual 2 GHZ g4? More importantly is freescale or whoever owns the chips now are going to make faster G4s for those still not willing to let go of their g4s (myself included going strong after 4 years) I would like to hold on to my dual 1.25GHZ longer but a 2HZ+ dual G4 seems promising for Final Cut Pro and Photoshop. If anyone has any info on this please respond.

Tyler



Warbrain
Sep 23, 2006, 11:51 PM
Ok I've looked around the net and the fastest dual G4 I see is a 1.8 GHZ upgrade to the 7447 chip that has 512KB of L2. I've seen a single 2.0GHZ g4 updrade but will we ever see a dual 2 GHZ g4? More importantly is freescale or whoever owns the chips now are going to make faster G4s for those still not willing to let go of their g4s (myself included going strong after 4 years) I would like to hold on to my dual 1.25GHZ longer but a 2HZ+ dual G4 seems promising for Final Cut Pro and Photoshop. If anyone has any info on this please respond.

Tyler

I doubt it. I don't know if the G4 chips are even in production anymore and if they're being made for use in consumer computers.

FF_productions
Sep 23, 2006, 11:54 PM
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/encore_mdx_duet.html

Fearless Leader
Sep 23, 2006, 11:56 PM
Ok I've looked around the net and the fastest dual G4 I see is a 1.8 GHZ upgrade to the 7447 chip that has 512KB of L2. I've seen a single 2.0GHZ g4 updrade but will we ever see a dual 2 GHZ g4? More importantly is freescale or whoever owns the chips now are going to make faster G4s for those still not willing to let go of their g4s (myself included going strong after 4 years) I would like to hold on to my dual 1.25GHZ longer but a 2HZ+ dual G4 seems promising for Final Cut Pro and Photoshop. If anyone has any info on this please respond.

Tyler

i dont think so. I believe they couldn't get the g4 that fast as a dual (heat/power issues) and then they took the g4 technology and birthed the g5.
anyways, a dual 1.8 is only .4ghz behind and should pack some power.

TyleRomeo
Sep 23, 2006, 11:59 PM
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/encore_mdx_duet.html

Yeah im looking forward to seeing some benchmarks, $600 for 550MHZ (from my dual 1.25) updrade is very very pricey and only good for those fools not willing to part with their g4s. (dammit) I thought these chips are .13 and give off less heat. So two of these bad boys should push 2.0GHZ without melting the insides of the MDD.

Fearless Leader
Sep 24, 2006, 12:05 AM
what is it about the g4 you love, and why isn't it good enough to make you want to upgrade?

sorry to hijack your thread but is their a way to upgrade g5 a dual 1.8 g5 to say dual 2, 2.5, or even 2.7. dang that would be sweet.

RichP
Sep 24, 2006, 09:57 AM
Yeah im looking forward to seeing some benchmarks, $600 for 550MHZ (from my dual 1.25) updrade is very very pricey and only good for those fools not willing to part with their g4s. (dammit) I thought these chips are .13 and give off less heat. So two of these bad boys should push 2.0GHZ without melting the insides of the MDD.

For a little more, you could probably pick up a dual 1.8G5 on ebay.I understand the G4 love, but there has to be a limit.

Spanky Deluxe
Sep 24, 2006, 10:33 AM
For a little more, you could probably pick up a dual 1.8G5 on ebay.I understand the G4 love, but there has to be a limit.

I have to say I'd go for a G5 if I were considering spending that much on upgrading a G4. I'm a big fan of the G4 myself and think they're simply beautiful machines but spending $600 on a machine worth at best the same doesn't seem right to me. You could get a dual 2.0Ghz G5 if you sold the G4 and didn't get the upgrade. I know the G4 is faster than a G5 clock for clock but personally I'd prefer to have the newer machine.
I know this might not be as much of an option if you're coming from the freedom of a PowerMac but you're already at the 17" iMac level in terms of cost and not far off the 20" iMac if you sell the G4 and put the $600 towards it. It might be worth considering although I could easily understand it if you have a particular desire to stay with the Powermac sized enclosure.

TyleRomeo
Sep 24, 2006, 12:32 PM
I have to say I'd go for a G5 if I were considering spending that much on upgrading a G4. I'm a big fan of the G4 myself and think they're simply beautiful machines but spending $600 on a machine worth at best the same doesn't seem right to me. You could get a dual 2.0Ghz G5 if you sold the G4 and didn't get the upgrade. I know the G4 is faster than a G5 clock for clock but personally I'd prefer to have the newer machine.
I know this might not be as much of an option if you're coming from the freedom of a PowerMac but you're already at the 17" iMac level in terms of cost and not far off the 20" iMac if you sell the G4 and put the $600 towards it. It might be worth considering although I could easily understand it if you have a particular desire to stay with the Powermac sized enclosure.

I understand why getting an old G5 off ebay would be a great deal. But when I bought my dual g4, I planned to skip over the entire line of g5s and with intel coming out with dual core, quad core and so on, its probably the time time ever to wait for a new machine. I also do not want to just sell off my tower since it has 2GB of RAM, nearly 2TB of PATA Hard drives inside, a ATI 9700 Pro card, airport, and a few PCI cards also. So I've invested a lot into this tower. If I can wait out another year, I can be in an 8 processor or even 16 processor Mac Pro. That would be huge and then the dual 1.8 G4 can be used as a media server of some sort. I would just like to wait and see the fastest g4 and Im hoping that something better than a dual 1.8 comes along.

Tyler

Makosuke
Sep 24, 2006, 12:46 PM
I doubt it. I don't know if the G4 chips are even in production anymore and if they're being made for use in consumer computers.Oh, they're in production all right, in a wide variety of flavors:

http://www.freescale.com/

...but you're right that they're not going into the same sort of devices or the subject of the same sort of development anymore. They're largely intended for embedded use these days, so things like multiprocessing and large clockspeeds aren't where the development is heading.

I have my doubts that you'll see a 2GHz dual in the foreseeable future, but like everybody is saying, at some point getting a cheap G5 is a WHOLE lot cheaper and easier than upgrading a G4 tower.

Spanky Deluxe
Sep 24, 2006, 12:52 PM
I understand why getting an old G5 off ebay would be a great deal. But when I bought my dual g4, I planned to skip over the entire line of g5s and with intel coming out with dual core, quad core and so on, its probably the time time ever to wait for a new machine. I also do not want to just sell off my tower since it has 2GB of RAM, nearly 2TB of PATA Hard drives inside, a ATI 9700 Pro card, airport, and a few PCI cards also. So I've invested a lot into this tower. If I can wait out another year, I can be in an 8 processor or even 16 processor Mac Pro. That would be huge and then the dual 1.8 G4 can be used as a media server of some sort. I would just like to wait and see the fastest g4 and Im hoping that something better than a dual 1.8 comes along.

Tyler

Ahh, I see your problem then. That many hard drives wouldn't fit in a G5 for one and with those upgrades an iMac just wouldn't do. Do you feel like you really need a faster processor right now? Dual 1.25Ghz isn't too bad and could maybe last you for a bit longer. I just see these $600 upgrades as being incredibly bad value for money.

TyleRomeo
Sep 24, 2006, 01:49 PM
Ahh, I see your problem then. That many hard drives wouldn't fit in a G5 for one and with those upgrades an iMac just wouldn't do. Do you feel like you really need a faster processor right now? Dual 1.25Ghz isn't too bad and could maybe last you for a bit longer. I just see these $600 upgrades as being incredibly bad value for money.

yeah not to mention that the G5 uses serial ATA and the g4 has PATA. The G4 has lasted me this long but Im worried about the next full upgrade of the final cut pro suite and if my 1.25 will be fast enough to run it smoothly. I made sure my video card is full core video ready and has 128MB of video ram. Im going to hold out until at least NAB next year when FCP 6 comes out and if im too slow, then i might jump on the sonnet upgrade if it has gone down in price by then. I won't get a Mac Pro until it has at least 8 cores, that will future proof it for at least 4-5 years again.

disconap
Sep 28, 2006, 12:16 AM
yeah not to mention that the G5 uses serial ATA and the g4 has PATA. The G4 has lasted me this long but Im worried about the next full upgrade of the final cut pro suite and if my 1.25 will be fast enough to run it smoothly. I made sure my video card is full core video ready and has 128MB of video ram. Im going to hold out until at least NAB next year when FCP 6 comes out and if im too slow, then i might jump on the sonnet upgrade if it has gone down in price by then. I won't get a Mac Pro until it has at least 8 cores, that will future proof it for at least 4-5 years again.

My opinion mirrors yours, with the exception of the Final Cut necessity.

knome
Sep 28, 2006, 04:34 AM
i would have kept my g4 if it had agp 8x. The agp 4x was killing me in games. But i had that thing pimped out with extra cooling, overclocking, 9800 pro and extra hard drives. It even managed to kick the crap out of the first gen g5's. I'm not sure what to do with it now, i think i'll leave it at home so when i go home to do laundry i can do some graphics work, or turn it into an ftp server...

generik
Sep 28, 2006, 04:44 AM
Ok I've looked around the net and the fastest dual G4 I see is a 1.8 GHZ upgrade to the 7447 chip that has 512KB of L2. I've seen a single 2.0GHZ g4 updrade but will we ever see a dual 2 GHZ g4? More importantly is freescale or whoever owns the chips now are going to make faster G4s for those still not willing to let go of their g4s (myself included going strong after 4 years) I would like to hold on to my dual 1.25GHZ longer but a 2HZ+ dual G4 seems promising for Final Cut Pro and Photoshop. If anyone has any info on this please respond.

Tyler

Even my casio wristwatch has more processing power than a 2HZ+ dual G4, so I don't get what you mean by it being promising for those pro apps ;)

ReanimationLP
Sep 28, 2006, 05:00 AM
Sonnet = Overpriced s***.

I had one of their 1GHz G4 upgrades. Thing caught on fire inside of my Gigabit Ethernet G4 tower and killed it. They refuse to do anything about it even though it is under warranty. Stay as far away from them as you can. Try Powerlogix, or Giga Designs. Sonnets customer support is lousy.

disconap
Sep 28, 2006, 05:09 PM
I've decided to completely stop at my dual 1.3. The thing is that a faster G4 processor would be cool, but realistically there is only so much you can improve on a box with a 100mHz bus (mine is a Sawtooth). And really, a dual 2.3 (which is what the current aim is in those still working with the G4 chipsets) would end up costing as much as a used G5 dual 2.3 by the time it comes out, so screw it.

Killyp
Sep 28, 2006, 05:16 PM
Stick with your dual G4 for the time being. It's still very fast, and if you might be able to get a MacPro later, then wait until you have that to upgrade Final Cut.

TyleRomeo
Sep 28, 2006, 05:23 PM
I've decided to completely stop at my dual 1.3. The thing is that a faster G4 processor would be cool, but realistically there is only so much you can improve on a box with a 100mHz bus (mine is a Sawtooth). And really, a dual 2.3 (which is what the current aim is in those still working with the G4 chipsets) would end up costing as much as a used G5 dual 2.3 by the time it comes out, so screw it.

yes but the MDD have a 167MHZ bus, yes that's not exactly lightning but its a step up from the 100/133MHZ buses in most other G4s. I also think with the 7447 1.8GHZ G4 chips, they should run a little cooler than the 1.25G4s i have now. So hopefully no fire. I would look for a non Sonnet brand of CPU upgrade but they are the only ones to support the 167MHZ bus of the MDD.

Keebler
Sep 28, 2006, 05:26 PM
you know Tyler..I've been thinking of upgrading my G4 too (sounds like the same model - mdd 1.25 dual), but unless i'm wrong in what i think/know about computers, it's the bus speed that really helps pipe data through. therefore, upgrading the processor really isn't going to do much imho b/c the bus on our G4s is so low. if we could bump that up, it might be worth it.

this has me thinking i'll keep my g4 for itunes/photos and the occasional transfer job and buy a G5 (dual 2.7 or quad) or get a new macpro to really see a difference in speed. i have dual 2.0 g5 and it's great so if i can get another one, i'll be laughing.

just a thought for you.

cheers,
keebler

TyleRomeo
Sep 28, 2006, 06:35 PM
you know Tyler..I've been thinking of upgrading my G4 too (sounds like the same model - mdd 1.25 dual), but unless i'm wrong in what i think/know about computers, it's the bus speed that really helps pipe data through. therefore, upgrading the processor really isn't going to do much imho b/c the bus on our G4s is so low. if we could bump that up, it might be worth it.

this has me thinking i'll keep my g4 for itunes/photos and the occasional transfer job and buy a G5 (dual 2.7 or quad) or get a new macpro to really see a difference in speed. i have dual 2.0 g5 and it's great so if i can get another one, i'll be laughing.

just a thought for you.

cheers,
keebler

yes you are right the FSB at 167MHZ is a big burden. but apple launched 167MHZ bus only on the 1GHZ or higher macs. So you can definately see a much bigger increase in speed on a 167MHZ FSB and a 1.8GHZ g4 than a 100MHZ FSB and a 1.8GHZ g4. So if we update our macs were adding on 1.1GHZ of extra power that will make the MDD last for a long long time for itunes and iphoto. What I would like to know is if anyone knows how much cooler 1.8GHZ 7447s G4s run compared to the apollo chips in the MDD with 2MB L3s?

disconap
Sep 28, 2006, 07:08 PM
I don't know about cooler for fact, but the L3 cache is really what makes putting a processor over 1ghz into a 100mHz bus machine worth it, as it prevent a ton of bottleknecking. That's why I went with the dual 1.3gHz, as it's the fastest dual I could find that still had the L3 cache...

It runs hot as hell, though. The later processors run cooler from what I've heard.

TyleRomeo
Sep 28, 2006, 07:19 PM
I don't know about cooler for fact, but the L3 cache is really what makes putting a processor over 1ghz into a 100mHz bus machine worth it, as it prevent a ton of bottleknecking. That's why I went with the dual 1.3gHz, as it's the fastest dual I could find that still had the L3 cache...

It runs hot as hell, though. The later processors run cooler from what I've heard.

I will be sad to lose my L3 if i upgrade to a dual 1.8 but isn't getting double the L2 help. MDD have 256KB of L2 and the later chips have 512KB of L2. L2 runs at full CPU speed while L3 runs at 1/6th the speed. This is the same argument apple had when their powerbooks went from having 1MB of L3 to losing it all together and then getting 512KB of L2. I guess I'll have to wait for the new benchmarks to really say what you gain. I hope they compare the dual 1.25 and not just a single 1.0GHZ to a dual 1.8 G4 which i can understand being quite faster.

dpaanlka
Sep 28, 2006, 07:26 PM
I don't know where you people got your information from, but the "G4" aka the 7xxx series of PowerPC chips is still actively developed, manufactured, and sold by Freescale.

Personal computers are not the only applications that use PowerPC chips.

http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/homepage.jsp?nodeId=0162468rH3bTdG

TyleRomeo
Sep 28, 2006, 08:03 PM
I don't know where you people got your information from, but the "G4" aka the 7xxx series of PowerPC chips is still actively developed, manufactured, and sold by Freescale.

Personal computers are not the only applications that use PowerPC chips.

http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/homepage.jsp?nodeId=0162468rH3bTdG

yes, but to 99% of mac users, no one cares if freescale is using PPC chips in anything other than a mac. I don't feel proud that the G4 or G5 lives on in high tech microwave. If it doesn't involve a new g4 chip that i can put inside my tower than its useless to my mac. So if there is some info of freescale still making chips that will work in a g4 or g5 then please attach a link.

dpaanlka
Sep 28, 2006, 08:12 PM
So if there is some info of freescale still making chips that will work in a g4 or g5 then please attach a link.

I did post a link, try clicking on it. That lists every family of Power chips Freescale is making.

TyleRomeo
Sep 28, 2006, 09:20 PM
I did post a link, try clicking on it. That lists every family of Power chips Freescale is making.

I did click on it and I found no information about any new chip that would be compatible with the G4s. They show the 7447, 7447A, 7457 but nothing faster or newer. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong section.

dpaanlka
Sep 28, 2006, 10:14 PM
Weird... well I wouldn't discredit the G4 as being dead just yet. Even for Macs, there is still a big G4 after market. I can't find it now but Sonnet suggested a while back that 2ghz is not the ceiling for the G4 line.

I had a 2ghz G4 AGP with a Radeon 9800 and it was really really fast. I was quite satisfied doing Photoshop, Quark, and Final Cut Pro work on that machine.

disconap
Sep 28, 2006, 10:25 PM
I will be sad to lose my L3 if i upgrade to a dual 1.8 but isn't getting double the L2 help. MDD have 256KB of L2 and the later chips have 512KB of L2. L2 runs at full CPU speed while L3 runs at 1/6th the speed. This is the same argument apple had when their powerbooks went from having 1MB of L3 to losing it all together and then getting 512KB of L2. I guess I'll have to wait for the new benchmarks to really say what you gain. I hope they compare the dual 1.25 and not just a single 1.0GHZ to a dual 1.8 G4 which i can understand being quite faster.

Macsales.com has live bench tests so you can compare processors. They're obviously not 100%, but on my system the one I bought outperformed the single 2.0gHz substantially, and held its own with the dual 1.8 (it may have even beaten it in some tests, but I doubt it). The price difference between the 1.3 and the 1.8 duals also had an effect on my choice as well, since I'd rather not spend $500 or $600 upgrading a G4 when I can get a G5 for $1000...

I think it's all just what works for you. I got the bump I needed, so I'm happy. Though again, it is rather warm in here these days. ;)

TyleRomeo
Sep 28, 2006, 10:37 PM
Weird... well I wouldn't discredit the G4 as being dead just yet. Even for Macs, there is still a big G4 after market. I can't find it now but Sonnet suggested a while back that 2ghz is not the ceiling for the G4 line.

I had a 2ghz G4 AGP with a Radeon 9800 and it was really really fast. I was quite satisfied doing Photoshop, Quark, and Final Cut Pro work on that machine.

Yeah I vaguely remmeber that statement also but I can't find any link to it. If anyone does please feel free to post it.

If you were happy with a single 2.0 on a 100MHZ bus than a dual 1.8 on a 167MHZ bus can't be that bad. But if there is any hope that 2.0 is not the limit than I might hold of for at least true dual 2.0GHZ g4s with hopefully the 7457 chips with 2MB of L3 per chip. Time for some google research. Thanks dpaanlka for the glimmer of hope.

dpaanlka
Sep 28, 2006, 10:53 PM
I recall getting into a long telephone conversation with a Sonnet person about the L3-less G4s, and I pretty much walked away feeling confident in the performance of the G4 with more L2 but less L3. He said that the newer L3-less G4s were optimized to make better use of L2 (and had more of it) and therefore negated the benefits of having an L3.

The 2ghz G4 on the 100mhz murdered my 1.5ghz PowerBook G4 with a 167mhz bus in all my tests.

My 1.5ghz PowerBook G4 also murdered my 1ghz PowerBook G4, which had the L3 cache.

Wasn't even close.

disconap
Sep 28, 2006, 11:01 PM
Here's a post about the new 7448s that Daystar are working with:

http://www.daystar-forum.com/forum3/68.html

They're still buggy and there is apparent difficulty with OS support, but current specs imply a minimum 2.2-2.3gHz as attainable...

disconap
Sep 28, 2006, 11:03 PM
I recall getting into a long telephone conversation with a Sonnet person about the L3-less G4s, and I pretty much walked away feeling confident in the performance of the G4 with more L2 but less L3. He said that the newer L3-less G4s were optimized to make better use of L2 (and had more of it) and therefore negated the benefits of having an L3.

The 2ghz G4 on the 100mhz murdered my 1.5ghz PowerBook G4 with a 167mhz bus in all my tests.

My 1.5ghz PowerBook G4 also murdered my 1ghz PowerBook G4, which had the L3 cache.

Wasn't even close.

I never live tested a 2.0, but for what I need it for I get a lot more out of a lower dual. I'd be curious to play with a 2.0 upgrade, but it's not worth the money for me at the moment...

For what it's worth, the brief time I had a 1.6 w/o L3, it ran a bit faster than my 1.1 w/ L3, but it was also a 1.6. I never benchmarked, and honestly the speed difference was only noticable in Adobe apps...

dpaanlka
Sep 28, 2006, 11:05 PM
They're still buggy and there is apparent difficulty with OS support, but current specs imply a minimum 2.2-2.3gHz as attainable...

Wow that sounds like fun! Link didn't work for me though :(

TyleRomeo
Sep 28, 2006, 11:13 PM
Wow that sounds like fun! Link didn't work for me though :(

yes it sounds fantastic, but the link is not working for me either. 2.2-2.3 GHZ g4s would compete quite well against dual 2.0 g5s and that would mean quite a bad ass G4 system. Is there any links or info on what daystar freescale are planning on releasing these chips, even if its not for another year, I'll hold off since 7448s have 1MB of L2. Which would make me completely forget about g4s ever having an L3.

AlexMaximus
Sep 29, 2006, 08:05 PM
Hi Tyler,

finally an CPU upgrade for the G4 MDD! How cool is that! I have waited so long. But you know what, -I still don't feel like upgrading. I have the G4 Dual 1,42 Gig with the L3 cache and the 9800/256MB ATI card. My rig runs so fast and smoothly I am still happy as I can be. Unless someone is interested in my Dual 1,42 Gig CPU with the heatpipe, I don't see a reason to upgrade on the CPU side.
My next upgrade will be the SATA HD controller with two 150 gig / 10K Raptors. I think with that I will blow away any G5 on the planet now matter what. Since my verax fan is in, I won't need a new mac for a very long, long, long time. My G4 was defenitly built with magic, I don't know why its so fast.
I am a G4 lover!:) :)

Keebler
Sep 29, 2006, 08:18 PM
Hi Tyler,

finally an CPU upgrade for the G4 MDD! How cool is that! I have waited so long. But you know what, -I still don't feel like upgrading. I have the G4 Dual 1,42 Gig with the L3 cache and the 9800/256MB ATI card. My rig runs so fast and smoothly I am still happy as I can be. Unless someone is interested in my Dual 1,42 Gig CPU with the heatpipe, I don't see a reason to upgrade on the CPU side.
My next upgrade will be the SATA HD controller with two 150 gig / 10K Raptors. I think with that I will blow away any G5 on the planet now matter what. Since my verax fan is in, I won't need a new mac for a very long, long, long time. My G4 was defenitly built with magic, I don't know why its so fast.
I am a G4 lover!:) :)

ok..i keep hearing about this verax fan for G4s...does it work? is the wind tunnel sound gone? is it super quiet as advertised?

law guy
Sep 29, 2006, 09:56 PM
Hi Tyler,

finally an CPU upgrade for the G4 MDD! How cool is that! I have waited so long. But you know what, -I still don't feel like upgrading. I have the G4 Dual 1,42 Gig with the L3 cache and the 9800/256MB ATI card. My rig runs so fast and smoothly I am still happy as I can be. Unless someone is interested in my Dual 1,42 Gig CPU with the heatpipe, I don't see a reason to upgrade on the CPU side.
My next upgrade will be the SATA HD controller with two 150 gig / 10K Raptors. I think with that I will blow away any G5 on the planet now matter what. Since my verax fan is in, I won't need a new mac for a very long, long, long time. My G4 was defenitly built with magic, I don't know why its so fast.
I am a G4 lover!:) :)

I concur - my dual 1.42 is still such a fast machine. I have 2 gb of RAM now, and I added a USB 2 four port card, but I haven't upgraded the video card, so that is one upgrade I still might make. It's such a tank build wise, has those wonderful short pipeline fast G4s and was assembled in the USA. It seems to me to have several years of productive life left. I like the Raptor upgrade path - I've toyed with adding one (that or an SCSI 3 card with 15,000 rpm drives - my goodness, can you imagine?).

TyleRomeo
Sep 29, 2006, 10:01 PM
Hi Tyler,

finally an CPU upgrade for the G4 MDD! How cool is that! I have waited so long. But you know what, -I still don't feel like upgrading. I have the G4 Dual 1,42 Gig with the L3 cache and the 9800/256MB ATI card. My rig runs so fast and smoothly I am still happy as I can be. Unless someone is interested in my Dual 1,42 Gig CPU with the heatpipe, I don't see a reason to upgrade on the CPU side.
My next upgrade will be the SATA HD controller with two 150 gig / 10K Raptors. I think with that I will blow away any G5 on the planet now matter what. Since my verax fan is in, I won't need a new mac for a very long, long, long time. My G4 was defenitly built with magic, I don't know why its so fast.
I am a G4 lover!:) :)

Long live the MDD!! Sounds like you got a nice system also. I bet your RAM is maxed also. Hey you wouldn't or anyone else have a link that compares the 1.25g4 with 2MB L3 to the 1.42g4 with 2MB L3. I know macworld did one about 4 years back but I don't have the article anymore.

Getting back to the upgrade I think Sonnet, OWC and maybe barefeats will have some benchmarks comparing the dual 1.8g4, 7447A to the 7455 in the dual 1.42 and dual 1.25 with 2MB of L3. I expect the dual 1.8 to beat the dual 1.42 eventhough it doesn't have an L3 but the 512KB of L2 should be enough to balance things.

weaverra
Sep 30, 2006, 12:29 AM
So what's the big deal about the G4? I am just curious.

ReanimationLP
Sep 30, 2006, 12:56 AM
I've personally decided that unless I get a hell of a deal on a used G4 upgrade, it isnt worth it to upgrade my Digital Audio G4.

TyleRomeo
Sep 30, 2006, 11:35 AM
So what's the big deal about the G4? I am just curious.

A lot. Mac towers are great becuase you can upgrade almost every part of it. I'm not sure what mac you have or how long you have been using macs. But my Power Mac G4 from over 4 years ago is still my main machine and I'm using it for Final Cut Pro, Adobe CS2 and other pro programs. I've upgraded the RAM from 512MB to 2GB, the hard drives from 120GB to 1,910GB, video card from 64MB ATI 9000 Pro to 128MB ATI 9700 Pro. I've added an airport card, 3 USB 2 ports, and 8 Firewire 400 ports. It's so much fun making your old mac still keep up and get the job done with today's much faster macs.

The CPU and Superdrive upgrades are what I have left to do. My mac is one that I will never let go off, like many people who hang on to classic macs from the 80s, I plan to keep mine running and still be usable. So that's why it's important to upgrade the CPU to the fastest possible option I have. I'm just waiting to see the reviews of the sonnet 1.8 G4 upgrade to the MDD then I'll either buy that or hope that something faster comes out my early next year. A computer doesn't have to be put down after a few years, it can serve a purpose to decades if you want. Well maybe 20 years. If I can still use my powermac g4 in 2022, I will be impressed by it. Then you can do the math and see how much your computer costs you per year. If you buy a $2,000 machine and dump it after 2 years, you're paying $1,000 a year for it. Plus with some users macs become more than just a machine, you get very attached to your machine.

weaverra
Sep 30, 2006, 12:42 PM
A lot. Mac towers are great becuase you can upgrade almost every part of it. I'm not sure what mac you have or how long you have been using macs. But my Power Mac G4 from over 4 years ago is still my main machine and I'm using it for Final Cut Pro, Adobe CS2 and other pro programs. I've upgraded the RAM from 512MB to 2GB, the hard drives from 120GB to 1,910GB, video card from 64MB ATI 9000 Pro to 128MB ATI 9700 Pro. I've added an airport card, 3 USB 2 ports, and 8 Firewire 400 ports. It's so much fun making your old mac still keep up and get the job done with today's much faster macs.

The CPU and Superdrive upgrades are what I have left to do. My mac is one that I will never let go off, like many people who hang on to classic macs from the 80s, I plan to keep mine running and still be usable. So that's why it's important to upgrade the CPU to the fastest possible option I have. I'm just waiting to see the reviews of the sonnet 1.8 G4 upgrade to the MDD then I'll either buy that or hope that something faster comes out my early next year. A computer doesn't have to be put down after a few years, it can serve a purpose to decades if you want. Well maybe 20 years. If I can still use my powermac g4 in 2022, I will be impressed by it. Then you can do the math and see how much your computer costs you per year. If you buy a $2,000 machine and dump it after 2 years, you're paying $1,000 a year for it. Plus with some users macs become more than just a machine, you get very attached to your machine.

I bought my first mac in March 2006 and it was the dual G5 2.0. Not the dual core. Bought it New and onsale for $1610 at CompUSA. I have 2 Gigs of ram in it along with 320 Gigs of HD space. I have used the intels and they are fast esp the core 2 duos! I will have to say that it's amazing how the G4's perform with Tiger.

TyleRomeo
Sep 30, 2006, 12:51 PM
I bought my first mac in March 2006 and it was the dual G5 2.0. Not the dual core. Bought it New and onsale for $1610 at CompUSA. I have 2 Gigs of ram in it along with 320 Gigs of HD space. I have used the intels and they are fast esp the core 2 duos! I will have to say that it's amazing how the G4's perform with Tiger.

Well the G4s will always run very well with OSX since OSX was built to run on a G4 chip. And with Powerbooks still using 1.67GHZ g4 chips thru 2005, the G4 chip can do plenty. The G3 will still run with 10.5. Maybe by 10.6 the G3 chip will be no longer enough. But the G4 should continue running smoothly thru 10.6. 10.7 will probably bring on a requirement for core video graphics card and that will start to phase out some older g4s. But I can see mine with 128MB of video memory on the ATI 9700 Pro card run thru all the OSX updates until system 11 ships eventually.

FF_productions
Sep 30, 2006, 01:13 PM
This is a very motivating thread for me. I have been thinking about dumping my MDD and moving on to a faster dual G5, but I have thought twice. I realize I can still upgrade the graphics card to replace the crappy radeon 9000 pro and I can still upgrade to 2 gigs of ram. I got about 700 gigs of space in this G4 right now and it's been very steady for me.

Long live the MDD G4!

dpaanlka
Sep 30, 2006, 01:17 PM
I still think the G4 towers are very nice looking too. My 350mhz AGP still looked better than any PC I've ever seen... very refined, professional, and yet thoroughly modern. It still drew "wows" from people right up until I sold it last month.

LaoTzu
Sep 30, 2006, 01:37 PM
It's up to you what you buy, but there is no G4 rated to run over 1420MHz. The 1.67 GHz is actually overclocked. Apple & Mot/ freescale determined it is not possible to run them any faster without data corruption, heat damage, or worse...
I consider the claims of a 1.8/ 2.0 GHz G4 absolute fiction, sensationalism, and BS. Since they are overclocked, and no one believes they can run at those speeds ( OK, cooled in liquid nitrogen maybe ) This is selling you a POS CPU which has died, is neglected, still on 90nm process if anyone wants one... system bus @ 167MHz and CPU @ 10x is as fast as it can get.... there is no value in overclocking one & selling it for more than a G4 tower...

Please, do NOT hack your Mac CPU. No, there will never be more G4's - thermostats, cars, don't need 800 MHz, and they cost a buck each in volume.... do NOT bother, overclock your G4 chip yourself, or better yet, avoid data corruption, errata, and over drawing power resulting in damage, or unable to boot....

Crazy!

Good luck.
LT

Keebler
Sep 30, 2006, 01:43 PM
Ok..this thread is making me also think twice about selling my dual g4 for a dual g5 or macpro.

so, i have 2 GB ram, i have 4 hds..plenty of space...plus externals. i have the 1.25 dual mdd.

if i get a new vid card as the one that came with it (9000 i believe?) such as this one:
ATI Technologies RADEON 9800 PRO MAC EDITION 4x/2x AGP ...
will that make a difference? i use the iapps; dvd studio pro and final cut ALOT (it's 1 of 2 working video transfer machines). would a new vid card help scrolling through my huge itunes library (23000+) and would it help rendering mpeg2s or is that entirely my processor?

i'm also thinking of getting the verax unit..does it really cool down the g4 and make it silent? b/c the wind tunnel noise is the only thing i hate about it.

also, does anyone have both the verax and the card listed? i ask b/c i saw something on the verax site that said certain cards couldn't be installed due to the size of the verax fans...

Cheers,
Keebler

dpaanlka
Sep 30, 2006, 01:43 PM
I consider the claims of a 1.8/ 2.0 GHz G4 absolute fiction, sensationalism, and BS.

Ummmm.... Sonnet offers a 3 year warranty on their products. Newer Tech does too. Obviuosly they think the things can run just fine at 1.8 and 2.0ghz speeds.

I had a Sonnet 1.8ghz for a year and it was just fine and dandy.

So calm yourself down.

FF_productions
Sep 30, 2006, 02:54 PM
if i get a new vid card as the one that came with it (9000 i believe?) such as this one:
ATI Technologies RADEON 9800 PRO MAC EDITION 4x/2x AGP ...
will that make a difference? i use the iapps; dvd studio pro and final cut ALOT (it's 1 of 2 working video transfer machines). would a new vid card help scrolling through my huge itunes library (23000+) and would it help rendering mpeg2s or is that entirely my processor?


Encoding Mpeg 2 is a processor-intensive thing to do. The only app I know that really eats away on the graphics card is Motion. I'm not sure if a new graphics card would make scroling easier, that's a question I'm waiting for to get answered. I'm in the exact same situation, I would like to get the same 9800 graphics card to keep the life flowing in this machine.

TyleRomeo
Sep 30, 2006, 07:53 PM
It's up to you what you buy, but there is no G4 rated to run over 1420MHz. The 1.67 GHz is actually overclocked. Apple & Mot/ freescale determined it is not possible to run them any faster without data corruption, heat damage, or worse...
I consider the claims of a 1.8/ 2.0 GHz G4 absolute fiction, sensationalism, and BS. Since they are overclocked, and no one believes they can run at those speeds ( OK, cooled in liquid nitrogen maybe ) This is selling you a POS CPU which has died, is neglected, still on 90nm process if anyone wants one... system bus @ 167MHz and CPU @ 10x is as fast as it can get.... there is no value in overclocking one & selling it for more than a G4 tower...

Please, do NOT hack your Mac CPU. No, there will never be more G4's - thermostats, cars, don't need 800 MHz, and they cost a buck each in volume.... do NOT bother, overclock your G4 chip yourself, or better yet, avoid data corruption, errata, and over drawing power resulting in damage, or unable to boot....

Crazy!

Good luck.
LT

Yeah sonnet wouldn't give out a 3 year warranty if it was unstable above 1.42GHZ.

http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC7448&nodeId=0162468rH3bTdG8653

If they 7447A only goes to 1.42GHZ before it's overclocked, then the 7448 is always an option.

The MPC7448 processor represents the most significant product update in the MPC74xx line of processors to date. The MPC7448 is the first high-performance processor manufactured on 90 nanometer silicon-on-insulator (SOI) process technology and continues Freescale?s strong legacy of providing Power Architecture products with extensive processing performance at very low power. The MPC7448 is designed to perform between 600 MHz and in excess of 1.5 GHz, contains a full megabyte of L2 cache and offers enhanced power management capabilities. MPC7448 processors are ideal for leading-edge pervasive computing, embedded network control and signal processing applications.

AltiVec Engine Acceleration

The MPC7448 includes the same powerful 128-bit AltiVec vector execution unit as found in previous MPC74xx devices, but with the enhanced support for out-of-order instructions. AltiVec technology may dramatically enhance the performance of applications such as voice over IP, speech recognition, multi-channel modems, virtual private network servers, high-resolution 3D graphics, motion video (MPEG2, MPEG4), high fidelity audio (3D audio, AC-3), and so on.

AltiVec computational instructions are executed in the four independent, pipelined AltiVec execution units. A maximum of two AltiVec instructions can be issued in order to any combination of AltiVec execution units per clock cycle. In the MPC7448, a maximum of two AltiVec instructions can be issued out-of-order to any combination of AltiVec execution units per clock cycle from the bottom two AltiVec instruction queue entries. For example, an instruction in queue 1 destined for AltiVec integer unit 1 does not have to wait for an instruction in queue 0 that is stalled behind an instruction waiting for operand availability.

Power Management

Continuing to pursue lower and lower power consumption is a keen focus with the Freescale family of Power Archtitecture processors, and the MPC7448 is no exception. Power management features include:

Expanded Dynamic Frequency Switching (DFS) enabling software to change power consumption
Nap and Sleep modes
Voltage scaling down to at least 1.0 volt
Added benefits of 90-nm technology:
Multi-Vt and Triple Gate Oxide integrated transistors for low standby power
Low-K Dielectric for high performance with reduced power and noise
Temperature sensing diodes included to monitor die temperature

The e600 core is virtually identical to the G4 core, but with enhancements to L2 cache and AltiVec implementation, and it is manufactured in 90nm technology. Software written for the MPC7447 and MPC7447A will run seamlessly on the MPC7448. MPC7448 can be a pin-for-pin compatible drop-in replacement for MPC7447A.


It's just too bad that the 7448 is very expensive but it runs cooler than the 7447A does. So if they G4 ever goes to dual 2.0 i bet it will with these chips.

AlexMaximus
Sep 30, 2006, 08:03 PM
Hi Keebler,

I have made some extensive research and tests in the past regarding the best noise/cooling solution for my G4 rig. In my opinion the most noise comes from the two small Powersupply fans. That means if you just go with the Verax Powersupply fan kit you have the best cost effective solution.(129$) But you still want to replace the case fan too. The best case fan by far is the Panaflow 120mm with hydrobearing (about 20$). However you will need a dremel tool to make the Panaflow fit.
I did not choose the CPU verax because of my heatpipe. The 1,25MDD does not have a heatpipe so you can go with the CPU verax as well but it will cost you more.

AlexMaximus
Sep 30, 2006, 08:23 PM
The fans really rocks! Here is the pic attached

solvs
Sep 30, 2006, 11:13 PM
It's up to you what you buy, but there is no G4 rated to run over 1420MHz.
Er, no. I don't know what Moto/Freescale have posted, but they have chips rated to run at up to 1.8/2GHz. The highest Apple went in their desktops was 1.4 because the G5 came out after that. The PowerBooks/iBooks probably couldn't run the new models at full capacity due to heat, plus we got the Intels, so they only went up to 1.6. But mostly, you are misusing the term overclocked. Overclocking is when you run a chip higher than what it is rated as by the manufacturer. The manufactures of the chip determine how fast it can run, and the makers of the machines mark it as such. By definition, if a chip is rated as a certain speed by those who made it, it isn't overclocked. That's simply what it runs highest at according to spec. They are the ones who rate it, how can that be called overclocked? Some can run higher, but a company can't just go overclocking chips and selling them as a higher rating than they actually are. Plenty of people have the higher end chips and use them without issue, otherwise the makers could not be selling them.

I thought we had dealt with this back in the days of the 1.4 supposedly being overclocked 1.25s (they weren't, they were marked with different numbers by the manufacturer), or the 2.5 G5s being oveclocked 2.0s because they needed liquid cooling to be quiet (again, rated by the manufacture, by definition that is just clocking, it can't be overclocking). :rolleyes:

Bobdude161
Sep 30, 2006, 11:51 PM
Long live the G4. I don't have the patience to save for a G5 so I make "monthly payments" on upgrades. Very illogical financially, but that's how I roll.

But a >2 ghz processor would be nice. Too bad I probably wouldn't be able to join the bandwagon cuz of my older Sawtooth. :o Ah well, I kindly settle for 1.6 :D

And also you think if that G4 processor upgrades are dead, why in the hell are the prices still high? There's gotta be some sort of demand to keep them at that price. If the demand was lower, the prices would be a tad cheaper. Stop buying upgrades for a little bit! I need the prices to drop a little!!

TyleRomeo
Oct 1, 2006, 03:03 AM
Long live the G4. I don't have the patience to save for a G5 so I make "monthly payments" on upgrades. Very illogical financially, but that's how I roll.

But a >2 ghz processor would be nice. Too bad I probably wouldn't be able to join the bandwagon cuz of my older Sawtooth. :o Ah well, I kindly settle for 1.6 :D

And also you think if that G4 processor upgrades are dead, why in the hell are the prices still high? There's gotta be some sort of demand to keep them at that price. If the demand was lower, the prices would be a tad cheaper. Stop buying upgrades for a little bit! I need the prices to drop a little!!

Wait around for the 7448s. I've been doing some research and it's a matter of time before these bad boys come out and get cheap. Of course at that point the Mac Pros will have 8 cores but who cares, some of us still love our old g4s. What is strange is that everyone is having trouble getting these chips to be stable. Day Star stopped selling them for their powerbook 1.83GHZ g4s and that other company power"something" said they were going to start selling them in january of this year and then stopped. Anyone have any information of what's going on with the 7448 G4 chips and when they will see the light of day?

FF_productions
Oct 2, 2006, 10:40 AM
TyleRomeo,

How many hard drives do you have in your PowerMac? 500x4? It kinda just sunk in that you have TONS of space in that PowerMac of yours.

I've really started to enjoy the expandability of this machine and I think I'm going to keep this machine for a very long time. This machine has enough speed for now (I'm going to eat those words during my next video project).

840quadra
Oct 2, 2006, 10:51 AM
Yeah I have decided to keep both my dual G5, and my Dual G4 (out on loan).

The G4 is currently a Digital Audio system logic board that I have mounted in a Quicksilver case. I got them both as new (were apple spares at one point), and they are in great condition. I am currently running a Dual G4 533 processor, but I am intending to upgrade the system to a much faster processor.

I have decided that I am going to stick with a L3 cache chip (the 533 does not have this), so my options appear to be limited.

Thanks for the great posts in this thread. It brings back lots of my love for the G4 systems!


I've really started to enjoy the expandability of this machine and I think I'm going to keep this machine for a very long time. This machine has enough speed for now (I'm going to eat those words during my next video project).

Regardless, if you end up getting a G5 or intel system, you can keep your G4 and have an awesome looking media server, or file server :) .

TyleRomeo
Oct 2, 2006, 11:36 AM
TyleRomeo,

How many hard drives do you have in your PowerMac? 500x4? It kinda just sunk in that you have TONS of space in that PowerMac of yours.

I've really started to enjoy the expandability of this machine and I think I'm going to keep this machine for a very long time. This machine has enough speed for now (I'm going to eat those words during my next video project).

I have two 400GB Seagate 7200.8, one 750GB Seagate 7200.10, a tiny 320GB Western Digital and 40GB on a sonnet 2.5 inch Tempo PCI hard drive. I'm only counting internal storage, I have a few external drives also. Soon I'm going to swap out the 320GB for another 750GB or larger if it's on the market. Then eventually throw the two 400GBs into a Firewire 800 case and RAID them externally. Then if one of those dies, throw in the surviving 400GB and throw the two 750GB into that same FW800 RAID box. Then fill whatever space I have left with the largest PATA drives on the market and get this G4 ready to be a giant media server.

FF_productions
Oct 2, 2006, 12:10 PM
I have two 400GB Seagate 7200.8, one 750GB Seagate 7200.10, a tiny 320GB Western Digital and 40GB on a sonnet 2.5 inch Tempo PCI hard drive. I'm only counting internal storage, I have a few external drives also. Soon I'm going to swap out the 320GB for another 750GB or larger if it's on the market. Then eventually throw the two 400GBs into a Firewire 800 case and RAID them externally. Then if one of those dies, throw in the surviving 400GB and throw the two 750GB into that same FW800 RAID box. Then fill whatever space I have left with the largest PATA drives on the market and get this G4 ready to be a giant media server.

Nice!
I would love to turn this machine into a media server with eyehome, wirelessly sending it over to the TV without having to author DVD's everytime I want to watch my movies from my machine.

TyleRomeo
Oct 2, 2006, 12:51 PM
Nice!
I would love to turn this machine into a media server with eyehome, wirelessly sending it over to the TV without having to author DVD's everytime I want to watch my movies from my machine.

You and I think a like I see. If you have room hold off on your PCI slots. Save at least one, when 802.11n comes out offcially, and iTV supports it, or other boxes you'll be limited by PCI bus of 133MB/s transfers which should be all that you will need for the future of FIOS, (already 30MB/s transfer) and you'll be able to stream just about anything from your multiple RAID MDD. Im just not sure how long Airport Extreme is going to hold up, it says 54MB/s but that only if you're 2 feet away. 802.11N is a sure thing, right now its rated to be something like 540MB/s or something rediculious like that. So I figure that 33MHZ PCI bus might be good for that work.

FF_productions
Oct 2, 2006, 01:01 PM
It will probably be a slow transition into a media center, as I still use this machine to edit videos. I think I still have about 3 PCI slots open, 1 for graphics and one for airport extreme are being used right now.

I'd like to get:
Another Gig of ram to max the machine out at 2 gigs
9600 256 mb's radeon
5 USB 2 Ports (PCI)
and more to come...

TyleRomeo
Oct 2, 2006, 01:06 PM
It will probably be a slow transition into a media center, as I still use this machine to edit videos. I think I still have about 3 PCI slots open, 1 for graphics and one for airport extreme are being used right now.

I'd like to get:
Another Gig of ram to max the machine out at 2 gigs
9600 256 mb's radeon
5 USB 2 Ports (PCI)
and more to come...

Ahh if you already have a PCI airport card then that might last you for a while. I'm only running a stock airport internal card. Oh unless yours is the MDD FW800 model then yes you would have intenal airport extreme. Anyway, for video card, i'd seriously recommend going for a 9700/9800 card, they are much much more powerful than the 9600. The only thing a 9600 gives you is the ability to run a 30 inch apple display. I picked up a 9700Pro becuase it has both ADC and DVI on it, check them out on ebay, ive had mine for a year now and no problems, i have full core video/image/animation capabilities.

FF_productions
Oct 2, 2006, 01:09 PM
Ahh if you already have a PCI airport card then that might last you for a while. I'm only running a stock airport internal card. Oh unless yours is the MDD FW800 model then yes you would have intenal airport extreme. Anyway, for video card, i'd seriously recommend going for a 9700/9800 card, they are much much more powerful than the 9600. The only thing a 9600 gives you is the ability to run a 30 inch apple display. I picked up a 9700Pro becuase it has both ADC and DVI on it, check them out on ebay, ive had mine for a year now and no problems, i have full core video/image/animation capabilities.

Wait, the 9700 pro has ADC on it? I don't need to get an adapter?

TyleRomeo
Oct 2, 2006, 01:29 PM
Wait, the 9700 pro has ADC on it? I don't need to get an adapter?


no, not if you have a legacy ADC apple display, thats why i got it, since i have the original 23 inch HD screen. The adapter cost $100 so it wasn't worth it for me to get the 9800 when the 9700 does everything the 9800 does anyway. I got the 9700 for about $225 and that was last december.

FF_productions
Oct 2, 2006, 01:47 PM
no, not if you have a legacy ADC apple display, thats why i got it, since i have the original 23 inch HD screen. The adapter cost $100 so it wasn't worth it for me to get the 9800 when the 9700 does everything the 9800 does anyway. I got the 9700 for about $225 and that was last december.

Yeah I have the 17 inch studio display, would these work:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Radeon-9800-Pro-128DDR-Video-card_W0QQitemZ170034977641QQihZ007QQcategoryZ25449QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

and

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=001&item=110039684680&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

TyleRomeo
Oct 2, 2006, 01:52 PM
Yeah I have the 17 inch studio display, would these work:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Radeon-9800-Pro-128DDR-Video-card_W0QQitemZ170034977641QQihZ007QQcategoryZ25449QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

and

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=001&item=110039684680&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1

If your has an ADC connector you need $100 adapter to make it work with a DVI connector. Now if you want to connect a DVI monitor to an ADC port that's only $20 or so. When looking for a video card it must be a mac card, and that makes sense since there has never been a PC video card sold with an ADC connector on it. The old ones are mostly VGA and DVI, my 9700 Pro is ADC and DVI.

ricgnzlzcr
Oct 5, 2006, 12:08 AM
I just bought a 400 mhz sawtooth for an amazing price after reading this thread. I was just wondering if the dual 1.3 ghz upgrade makes it run very loud. What is the quietest upgrade? Also, there are so many different types of hard drives. Which one will fit my powermac well? Thanks

xPismo
Oct 5, 2006, 12:28 AM
Good question: So then who has the fastest G4 here?

(anyone with ... mmm... liquid cooling?!)

dpaanlka
Oct 5, 2006, 12:37 AM
Good question: So then who has the fastest G4 here?

(anyone with ... mmm... liquid cooling?!)

I had both Sonnet's 1.8ghz and PowerLogix 2ghz upgrade. The PowerLogix was extremely unstable and very loud due to all the fans I installed to keep it cool.

The Sonnet one was very quiet and very stable, I even ran it with the main case fan disconnected.

ricgnzlzcr
Oct 5, 2006, 01:09 AM
I had both Sonnet's 1.8ghz and PowerLogix 2ghz upgrade. The PowerLogix was extremely unstable and very loud due to all the fans I installed to keep it cool.

The Sonnet one was very quiet and very stable, I even ran it with the main case fan disconnected.

Nice, I'm wondering whether I should get a single core processor upgrade or if the dual core is worth it. I do a lot of multitasking, but the most intensive thing I do is rip dvd's. Also, I like silence.

TyleRomeo
Oct 5, 2006, 01:14 AM
Good question: So then who has the fastest G4 here?

(anyone with ... mmm... liquid cooling?!)


Give me dual 7448s at 2.0GHZ and that would be me. Ahh a man can dream.

dpaanlka
Oct 5, 2006, 07:05 AM
Nice, I'm wondering whether I should get a single core processor upgrade or if the dual core is worth it. I do a lot of multitasking, but the most intensive thing I do is rip dvd's. Also, I like silence.

There is no Dual core G4: they are two full processors side by side.

ricgnzlzcr
Oct 5, 2006, 12:23 PM
There is no Dual core G4: they are two full processors side by side.

Sorry, that's what I meant. I mix them up now.

disconap
Oct 5, 2006, 08:38 PM
Honestly it just depends what you do; if you run a ton of apps at once and use a lot of applications that take advantage of dual processors (mostly pro-apps and some of the OS included stuff like Quicktime), then a dual makes sense. If you generally use three or less applications at once and have never paid more than $100 for a piece of software, then a dual processor is far more than you need.

ricgnzlzcr
Oct 5, 2006, 08:44 PM
I think single is the best bang for my buck then. I do run lots of applications at the same time, but ram should take care of that since I'm happy with my tibook with 1 gig of ram. I think I'll upgrade ram, followed by hard drive, and then processor when money comes around.

houser
Oct 29, 2006, 07:26 AM
Hello,

Related:
Another great thing with G4s is the 4 PCI slots.
I have a Protools HD3 + a Fibrechannel card, so I can not go to G5 without losing a slot and having tp buy a PCI expansion chassis (don't want that).

I guess it is unlikely that Apple will ever bring out MacPros with more slots?
Anyone heard anything about that?

TIA and regards
Janne A.

TyleRomeo
Dec 2, 2006, 12:52 PM
anyone know if there is a site dedicated to the G4 or the G4 Powermac. For those who just can't let go of their G4 powermacs.

Sam0r
Dec 3, 2006, 07:56 AM
I'd love to upgrade my G4, but alas, I'm going over to an intel mac, so its got to go :(

I love the design though, i think its prettier than the G5's in a way, but in another way the G5 is prettier, if you catch my drift.

Macmadant
Dec 3, 2006, 08:09 AM
Ok I've looked around the net and the fastest dual G4 I see is a 1.8 GHZ upgrade to the 7447 chip that has 512KB of L2. I've seen a single 2.0GHZ g4 updrade but will we ever see a dual 2 GHZ g4? More importantly is freescale or whoever owns the chips now are going to make faster G4s for those still not willing to let go of their g4s (myself included going strong after 4 years) I would like to hold on to my dual 1.25GHZ longer but a 2HZ+ dual G4 seems promising for Final Cut Pro and Photoshop. If anyone has any info on this please respond.

Tyler

Freescale are releasing Dual core G4s sometime can't remember when, and is your G4 a MDD version, as the processors are not upgradable for these machines, i have one and would love to upgrade from the Single 1.25Ghz chip in there to a dual 1.6 but it isn't happening because the machine isn't upgradable like previous versions., BTW where did you get a radeon 9700, i could do with a boost from my Radeon 9000

Macmadant
Dec 3, 2006, 08:15 AM
what is it about the g4 you love, and why isn't it good enough to make you want to upgrade?

sorry to hijack your thread but is their a way to upgrade g5 a dual 1.8 g5 to say dual 2, 2.5, or even 2.7. dang that would be sweet.

No i don't thinks it's possible

Maxwell Smart
Dec 3, 2006, 08:49 AM
Well the G4s will always run very well with OSX since OSX was built to run on a G4 chip. And with Powerbooks still using 1.67GHZ g4 chips thru 2005, the G4 chip can do plenty. The G3 will still run with 10.5. Maybe by 10.6 the G3 chip will be no longer enough. But the G4 should continue running smoothly thru 10.6. 10.7 will probably bring on a requirement for core video graphics card and that will start to phase out some older g4s. But I can see mine with 128MB of video memory on the ATI 9700 Pro card run thru all the OSX updates until system 11 ships eventually.

Sorry, I don't want to burst your bubble, but OS X 10.5 Leopard will be 100% non-compatible with the G3 processor. It's not just a false limitation either like the firewire requirement of Tiger which can simply be edited in a file. They literally removed G3 processor support from the applications (like iChat) By this logic, it is quite likely that apple will limit 10.6 to just G5s, and then 10.7 would finally make the transition to only intel processors. Of course, this is all just speculation, but the fact still remains that 10.5 will NOT run on G3s, which makes G4 support for 10.6 a little more then iffy.

Source: http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?showtopic=24736

Safari and iChat both crash? That's very, very bad news for G3 owners, because it proves that Apple has deliberately chosen to compile applications without support for G3s. Probably even more applications and maybe even essential frameworks like Quicktime will be compiled this way and then there won't be an XPostFacto for the G3 anymore. When 10.3 removed support for the 604 processors, 604 owners HAD to upgrade. You cannot use a 604 Mac without G3 upgrade with Panther or Tiger, not even with XPostFacto.

The only thing that would help would be an Altivec emulator for the G3. I doubt anyone would spend the time to write that, and even if someone did, it would be slow as hell (at least in "demanding" applications like Quicktime).

That means if you have a G3 Mac that cannot be upgraded to a G4 (e.g. an iBook G3), you're totally out of luck.

dpaanlka
Dec 3, 2006, 10:49 AM
the fact still remains that 10.5 will NOT run on G3s, which makes G4 support for 10.6 a little more then iffy

I hardly see the *fact* anywhere - a hacked beta of an OS that hasn't bee released yet doesn't prove anything. We'll have to wait until it comes out.

Silentwave
Dec 3, 2006, 11:39 AM
Seeing as Leopard will be coming out in Spring 2007, which happens to be about 4 years after the last G3 system was introduced (ibook G3 last revision April 2003) and 3.5 years after the last one was discontinued, I'd say we have a long ways to go before G4 support is dropped, seeing as G4s were still being sold just over 6 months ago.

840quadra
Dec 3, 2006, 12:53 PM
Sorry, I don't want to burst your bubble, but OS X 10.5 Leopard will be 100% non-compatible with the G3 processor.

<snip>

Source: http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?showtopic=24736

So you post a link to a forum that has people working on a pre-release operating system, and claim that to be Gold master ?

All I see on your link is allot of speculation, and conjecture. I will admit that G3 support being dropped is possible, however the G4 is a totally different animal. There is still a huge G4 install base, and many professionals still use G4 Powermacs all the way up to Recently sold G4 Powerbooks and iBooks.


I hardly see the *fact* anywhere - a hacked beta of an OS that hasn't bee released yet doesn't prove anything. We'll have to wait until it comes out.

And then there is always Xpostfacto. and other 3rd party groups making patches for such systems.

TyleRomeo
Dec 3, 2006, 01:32 PM
Freescale are releasing Dual core G4s sometime can't remember when, and is your G4 a MDD version, as the processors are not upgradable for these machines, i have one and would love to upgrade from the Single 1.25Ghz chip in there to a dual 1.6 but it isn't happening because the machine isn't upgradable like previous versions., BTW where did you get a radeon 9700, i could do with a boost from my Radeon 9000

sonnets MDX 1.8 Dual upgrade is out for $599. its made just for the MDD and x-serve with 167mhz bus. SO you can upgrade your MDD to that chip. The 7448 will also work if they ever come out. But dual core G4s ar enot socket compatible like the 7447s and 7448s. I got my 9700 on ebay from england. Becuase i wanted both ADC and DVI not to mention 128MB of video ram and 8 render pipelines. The 9700 and 9800 are pretty much the same spec wise and the 9700 cost my $225 16 months ago when I bought it.

R.Youden
Dec 15, 2006, 08:29 AM
I have just stuck a 9800 Pro 128MB gfx card into my 1.42GHz DP. It makes a nice imprevement. I think it was almost a must with Leopard coming soon with all the core image support. That ripple in dashboard is cool!

I think I need to stick another Gb of RAM in and I will have a nice machine. Either that or put 2GB in my MBP? Hmmmm, wish I hadnt packed that job in now and gone back to uni!

MacBass
Apr 9, 2007, 11:28 AM
Oh, they're in production all right, in a wide variety of flavors:

http://www.freescale.com/

...but you're right that they're not going into the same sort of devices or the subject of the same sort of development anymore. They're largely intended for embedded use these days, so things like multiprocessing and large clockspeeds aren't where the development is heading.

I have my doubts that you'll see a 2GHz dual in the foreseeable future, but like everybody is saying, at some point getting a cheap G5 is a WHOLE lot cheaper and easier than upgrading a G4 tower.

I realized that upgrading my DA G4 would be ridiculously expensive, so I'm going to just settle on an Intel mini. It'll be a helluva lot faster than my 533 MHz G4.

JazzyJ
Dec 2, 2007, 01:06 PM
FASTER G4


I've just been reading this "Big Up" the G4 forum and it's great, so I'll add an idea.

I've got a:

G4 Dual 1.3ghz (2MB L3 Cache), 2GB Ram, Radeon 9800 Pro (Arctic Cooling)

with Internal Firewire drives. Forget IDE and Forget SATA or whatever.

I have two internal firewire ports on two PCI cards (One has USB & Firewire) and

then use an IFC-1P converter on an IDE drive to make it firewire:

http://fwdepot.com/thestore/product_info.php/products_id/1643

and a pic:

http://fwdepot.com/thestore/images/firewiredepot-IFC-1B.jpg

My G4 boots up no Problem from the Firewire drive and Data transfer is lightening fast!

I'm gonna fix the DVD RW up to a firewire port soon too.


Applications especially audio and video stuff are so much better when the OSX drive is Firewire and not IDE.


Only thing I did have to do, was to mount the Drives sidewards as the door of the G4 wouldn't close with the IFC-1P plugged in to the back of the IDE drive when it's kept in the normal postion. I drilled a couple of screw holes and mounted the Drive plate sidewards and the drives fit in no probs with the firewire converters plugged in the back.

So,

If you're looking for better performance from your G4 - Free up the IDE busses - in fact don't even use them.

Oh yeah, one thing to remember, you can't daisy chain the OSX drive. That's why I have two Firewire PCI cards - one for the OSX boot drive and the other to chain up more Firewire devices (more drives!)


My G4 is rocking!!!

TyleRomeo
Dec 2, 2007, 01:43 PM
FASTER G4


I've just been reading this "Big Up" the G4 forum and it's great, so I'll add an idea.

I've got a:

G4 Dual 1.3ghz (2MB L3 Cache), 2GB Ram, Radeon 9800 Pro (Arctic Cooling)

with Internal Firewire drives. Forget IDE and Forget SATA or whatever.

I have two internal firewire ports on two PCI cards (One has USB & Firewire) and

then use an IFC-1P converter on an IDE drive to make it firewire:

http://fwdepot.com/thestore/product_info.php/products_id/1643

and a pic:

http://fwdepot.com/thestore/images/firewiredepot-IFC-1B.jpg

My G4 boots up no Problem from the Firewire drive and Data transfer is lightening fast!

I'm gonna fix the DVD RW up to a firewire port soon too.


Applications especially audio and video stuff are so much better when the OSX drive is Firewire and not IDE.


Only thing I did have to do, was to mount the Drives sidewards as the door of the G4 wouldn't close with the IFC-1P plugged in to the back of the IDE drive when it's kept in the normal postion. I drilled a couple of screw holes and mounted the Drive plate sidewards and the drives fit in no probs with the firewire converters plugged in the back.

So,

If you're looking for better performance from your G4 - Free up the IDE busses - in fact don't even use them.

Oh yeah, one thing to remember, you can't daisy chain the OSX drive. That's why I have two Firewire PCI cards - one for the OSX boot drive and the other to chain up more Firewire devices (more drives!)


My G4 is rocking!!!

One thing though, IDE buses on most of the G4s is much faster than Firewire 400 can provide. Firewire 400 maxes out at 50MBps while MDD G4s have IDE buses of 66MBps and 100MBps. Unless your G4 only has IDE 33MBps, you're much better of going with IDE instead of Firewire.

G5Quad45
Dec 9, 2007, 11:11 PM
I had to chime in and show my love for G4 Power Mac's

It was my first mac too, a 400mhz Gigabit model, by the time I sold it and got my G5 (kind of wish I didnt) nearly every part had been upgraded....great computers

and I just love those Quicksilver & MDD models, wish I had one even if I do have a Quad G5 ;)

G5Quad45
Dec 10, 2007, 07:56 PM
In case any one still wants an MDD new in box, you can still get them!

http://cgi.ebay.com/PowerMac-G4-1Ghz-Desktop-Computer-NIB_W0QQitemZ230199115061QQihZ013QQcategoryZ51035QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Interesting, second one ive seen like this. Around 2005 I saw a 1.25GHZ model that was unopened like the one above, and still had applecare!

Mac Upgrade
Nov 5, 2008, 09:06 PM
This one's for you TyleRomeo.

Here is the link to my review of the upgrade: Enter Apple G4 Mirror Drive Doors in Step 1 and select Sonnet as the Card Manufacturer. There you will find 3 hands on reviews of people who purchased this card for their MDD Mac G4 and what their experiences were. Mine is in there too, listed as Glenn D.
http://forums.xlr8yourmac.com/cpureview.lasso

Basically, it was worth it. Hell yes it is faster and smoother in MacOS X. Is it expensive? Hell yes. Do I regret doing it? Hell no. Even if I buy a new Mac in a year or 2, an Intel Mac, this UBER fast G4 will be a back up media server or something else....like just plain cool. Since mine boots in 9 I get ALL MAC old school and PPC MacOS school. HUGE backwards compatibility.

Will there be a faster card for the MDD ever? NO. NO. and NO! This is it people. Read my conversation with a Sonnet person (tech support) and find out why. And NO there will not be an upgrade from OWC or Powerlogix for the MDD so you may as well buy the 1.6 or 1.8 dualie from Sonnet now if you want one while they are still available. Personally I went with the 1.8 Ghz, cause if you are gonna do it at this point, you may as well get the best. Perfection. I dropped in a genuine Mac 9800 128 MB 4X AGP (not some crap flashed PC card) and 2 GB ram and MAN this G4 is F*$#king fast ! And as the G4 MDD is my main Mac that I use 3-5 hours a day 7 days a week, I know the upgrade is getting very good use for the $$$.

Here ya go.

Customer

I purchased the Encore/MDX G4 Duet upgrade and it is working fine and I am very happy with my purchase. However, I had a problem where I wanted to boot from a clean install of MacOS X Panther 10.3 and the Sonnet upgrade could not load to 10.3.0 which was the version of retail disk I bought early on. In fact the computer fan spun up super fast, crashed hard, and I shut down and had to remove the hard drive with 10.3 on it so the computer would default back to the older 10.3.9 partition I had the upgrade working under. Then I read in the requirements online at the website that 103.5+ is required. It will run in 10.4.x and 10.5.x, which is all fine, but not 10.3.0 or anything less than 10.3.5. I don’t understand that. How can I have 10.3.5 installed as a minimum without first installing 10.3.0 and updating? I don’t have a Panther install disk that installs 10.3.5 first natively. Apple retail only sold 10.3.0 installs and updates were free that I recall. For me to install 10.3.5, I first have to boot from a real Apple Panther disk and install 10.3.0, then update to 10.3.9. However the upgrade will not accept any partition or install disk with 10.3.0 on it. It is a little like a chicken and egg comparison.

Why advertise that 10.3.5+ is ok when you can never install that without going to 10.3.0 first which is not compatible with the upgrade? Please tell me how I can do this? I may go to 10.4 or 10.5 eventually, but for now I need 10.3 and I want to do a fresh install of Panther. Please help me figure this out.

Sonnet Customer Service Answer

It's really simple. Take the MDX out, update to 10.3.5 or higher and reinstall the MDX. Versions of OS X lower than 10.3.5 simply don't understand how to talk to the new CPU type we are using in this upgrade. Hence they can't boot from 10.3.4 or lower. Hence our warning. Of course, once I moved to 10.4, I had zero interest in booting into 10.3.x ever again. After I updated to 10.5, I had zero interest in booting to 10.4 ever again. But that's just me I guess. Everyone uses their computer differently.

Customer

Thank you for answers to my questions.

I won’t remove the MDX card since doing so requires installing the old CPU and that whole process makes me VERY nervous because I can’t see what I am doing since the CPU socket is under the processor cards. I worry about bending pins and such. I am not as experienced with this as others, so I did it once successfully and I won’t do it again unless I am selling the computer.

My only other option is actually one you mentioned which makes very good sense—update to Tiger or 10.4, which I already own the retail disks for as it turns out. Then I got to thinking….what about Leopard 10.5 which I don’t own and can buy new. Will this upgrade work in 10.5 as well as 10.4? I wonder if going to a higher MacOS will only just end up slowing down the system as the processors have to handle a more advanced operating system. Right now the upgrade is rocket fast in Panther. If I go to 10.4 or 10.5 won’t I see a slight decrease in performance because the operating system is putting a “heavier” load on the CPUs? This was part of the reason I wanted to stay in Panther…cause it works, and its fast.

Then again, maybe 10.4 or 10.5 will be faster since they might be better written for a dual CPU system? I hope 10.5 is still PowerPC enabled and not just Intel. Any light on this subject will help me close the books on this.

Sonnet Customer Service Answer

Believe it or not, 10.4 was faster than 10.3 and 10.5 is faster than 10.4. And you have a pretty fast machine. I'm typing this email on a Power Mac G4 (AGP Graphics) machine running our single 1.8GHz processor and 10.5.2 and it's pretty spiffy fast.

Your machine with the dual processors is an even better choice since 10.5 is fully multiprocessing aware and so is the Finder. In regards to the latter, it means the Finder is much faster than it used to be. No more SPODs (spinning pinwheel of death) as you manipulate files. And Spotlight (the search feature introduced in 10.4) is actually usable in 10.5. It was pokey and slow in 10.4.

10.5 is still PowerPC enabled. Apple can't really drop support just yet. I'm sure they want to but there are still too many PowerPC machines out there. I wouldn't be surprised if 10.6 is Intel only as the Apple landscape might have changed.

Customer

I think I will consider jumping to 10.5 especially since the upgrade I bought is the dual 1.8Ghz MDX and you indicate that 10.5 is more processor aware than 10.4 is and I do use spotlight a lot.

That said, if I may ask another question…remember I am not complaining….only curious. Why was this upgrade made with 7447 CPUs with 512K L2 per processor and not the 7448 CPUs with 1MB L2 per processor? Was there a large cost difference but a less than large difference in performance? I understand that my front side bus is running at 167Mhz which by today’s standards is very slow I guess, so maybe using 7448s with the bus speed as a bottleneck would not have mattered considering the cost of the 7448 chips. My guess is the upgrade would have been too expensive and the performance about the same. However, I also understand that the more cache you have the faster the system especially when you have limiting issues like a slower bus speed or slower memory. Can I assume that there are no efforts at Sonnet to refresh this product for the MDD to use 7448s and that the upgrade I have (which is fantastic by the way) is the last and final issue for the MDD G4 coming from Sonnet?

Sonnet Customer Service Answer

Back when this upgrade was designed the 7448 was just a twinkle in an engineer's eye or a schematic on his drawing board.

And you nailed it exactly. Huge cost increase, marginal performance increase. And the 7448A runs a lot hotter than the 7447A. So a dual upgrade would have been impossible. We wouldn't have been able to keep it cool. Also we could have clocked it up to 2GHz but we found it to be very unstable.

Freescale did give us some samples and we made some prototypes and I managed to kill two of them just by abusing the chip with some gaming. Games like Unreal Tournament and World of Warcraft utterly killed the chip within 3 months. Then Intel Macs came out and we decided to just shelve any future processor upgrade projects and move into other things like storage.

Customer

Thank you for the honest replies. Talking with you has been a pleasure and a confirmation of what I thought was right. I don’t know if you were one of the engineers working on the MDD upgrade but I only have heartfelt thanks for whoever did because the Sonnet MDX Encore Duet upgrade has seriously and utterly transformed my MDD single processor 1.25Ghz into a new computer basically, especially the dual processor aspect. I thought I had a competent Mac MDD G4 before, but now the only thing this Sonnet upgraded Mac can’t do is run Intel only programs natively. All else is a breeze and multi-tasking is second nature only to running fast. And my plans were to buy a new mac in 3 years which will cost $2000+, so $650 to Sonnet for their upgrade puts me at $216 or so per year before I seriously begin to have problems with using my mac on the internet or using Apple’s latest MacOS, which by then may be Intel only. By then I suspect that Apple will have abandoned support of PowerPC so I will have to migrate to a new system. All in all then I will get about 7 years out of my PowerPC G4 MDD with 3 of those years made possible and pleasurable ONLY by Sonnet Technologies. Absolutely fantastic. Please thank your brilliant engineers. They did a bang up job on the L2 cache upgrade for my 6500/300 years ago and they did it again with my MDD. Now I need to think about storage solutions and new batteries for my iPod from Sonnet. One stop shopping!

By the way…I tried to rationalize your comment on how playing a game would kill a CPU in 3 months. I suspect you mean that clocking the hotter than fresh toast 7448 at 2 Ghz meant long periods of gaming at that speed in which over time the heat fried the electronics which it is the killer of anything electronic actually. I just never thought a game program would do that, but I know heat does. And this is why the 7447s were used…cooler and about the same performance, cheaper and more reliable. I do play games on my Mac like these for extended periods. Can I assume that I will not use my warranty in 3 months? I am hoping that the 7447s I have now will just keep working and working and working without failure for at least 3 years.

Sonnet Customer Service Answer

I'm not an engineer but I play one on TV. Just kidding. No, I'm just a grunt. I know a lot about Macs having used them since 1984.

I'm good friends with a lot of the programmers at Blizzard and they tell me folks will use WoW as a way of burning in a machine. It's brutal on all aspects of a computer system. CPU, RAM, HD and video card. On Blizzard's forums there is one dedicated to machine tweaking. Those are the folks that like to make the fastest possible systems because it's fun. You'll read a ton of reports about how brutal WoW can be to a machine. But I wouldn't worry about the 7447A. I've had the same single 1.8GHz in my machine at work and I occasionally play WoW at lunch time. It's still going strong.

Customer

Just a simple question further about the Encore/MDX G4 Duet upgrades for the MDD G4 PowerMacintosh Towers. I understand that there are 2 models: a 1.67 Ghz model (with a 10X multiplier of the 167 Mhz bus speed), and a 1.83 Ghz model (with an 11X multiplier of the 167 Mhz bus speed).

Simple question. Why not a 12X multiplier of the 167 Mhz bus speed model and call it a 2.004 Ghz (or basically 2 Ghz)? I bought the 1.8 Ghz model but I would have GLADLY paid more for a 2.0 Ghz duet model for my MDD. Was there a reason for not going to a nice round number of 2 Ghz? I can handle high tech details so please let’er rip on the technical reasons.

My guess is cost, stability, or availability of 2 Ghz 7447A chips prevented a 2Ghz upgrade with either a 7448 or a 7447 chipset. I am pretty sure if a MDD can handle 1.8 Ghz then 2.0 Ghz should be stable too. On availability, I suspect that the 7447A chips are slightly overclocked to get 1.8 Ghz already and going to 2.0 was pushing them past reasonable stability. I know 7448A chips can go to 2.0 Ghz but maybe not 7447A chips all that well, so maybe there were not 7447A chips rated at 2 Ghz in sufficient numbers to make an upgrade.

Sonnet Customer Service Answer

We experimented with 2GHz upgrades using both 7447A and 7448 G4 chips but after extensive testing, we gave up on the project due to various problems. Mainly instability and eventual death of the product due to it being pushed too hard. 2GHz represents a massive overclocking of the CPU.

I actually got to test a 2GHz single processor upgrade based on the 7448 chip in my work machine and I killed two of them just by running some high power games on the machine. Since we couldn't guarantee that the upgrade would work for even the 1 year warranty, it was decided to kill the project.

We couldn't have done a dual 2GHz upgrade as that would have taxed the machine's ability to properly cool the machine. We mocked up a prototype and we couldn't get the machine to run without the fans running at full speed all the time and even then the machine would eventually shut down because it went over the safety limit.

And now with the switch to Intel, the Mac upgrade market is pretty much declining to zero. I suspect we'll stop selling processor upgrades once we run out of them. We won't make any more

Customer

That answered my question. But it created a new one. If 2.0 GHz is a massive overclock of the CPU as you say, then is 1.8 Ghz a modest overclock and 1.6 Ghz not at all? Just curious.

One Warranty Question:

If Sonnet is not making upgrades anymore (not manufacturing or designing them) then how will it handle in-warranty replacements if there is no inventory left? Would refunds be offered? Not that I expect my 7447A 1.8 GHz duet to fail anytime soon as I added a huge extra quiet fan to the PCI area (no PCI cards installed) to remove heat from the top of the Mac where it seemed to accumulate. I hope to get at least 3 more years of life out of my 2003 G4 tower (total of 8) before I would be okay with a CPU giving up and then having to buy new hardware. Let’s just hope my power supply holds up. I use the duet 1.8 daily and only tax it 100% on rare occasions for a render but typically 60-85% drive most of the time.

Sonnet Customer Service Answer

It's a modest overclock that utilizes some physics. We buy a high temperature version of the CPU and then run it at a lower temperature. This allows the upgrade to go faster. We actually explain that in the FAQs because someone raised a huge snit over it alleging that we were doing something wrong.

I'm sure we'll be keeping upgrades around for RMA purposes. I'm not sure if you noticed that we switched to a 1-year warranty on the CPU upgrades in Jan 2007. This makes the transition to not selling upgrades easier since the 3 year warranty product is fast approaching the out of warranty state. So when did you buy your upgrade?

If your upgrade is still cranking along, it'll last for a long time. Generally failures of the CPU occur within the first few months. The single 1.8GHz upgrade I have in my work machine has been cranking along for 3+ years now. And I even play some of those CPU bashing games on it and haven't burned it out.

And planning 3 years in advance might not be the greatest idea. It's hard to predict 6 months in advance in the computing business. It's quite possible that sometime in the next 3 years, something will come out from Apple or a program you want will be released and you'll be saying "Man, I gotta have that", and then need to get completely new hardware to run that new thing. Remember that it's very likely 10.6 will be Intel only so there will be no more OS X upgrades for older machines.

My Dad uses my old beige G3 with our 1GHz ZIF in it and it's been running solidly (except for one HD failure) for over 10 years. And recently, he just asked me to get him a discount on an Intel iMac as my old beige is "too slow" for him. He wants to watch streaming video on the 'Net etc and it just doesn't have the oomph anymore.

Customer Thoughts

PowerPC G4 chips were easily available and in smallish quantities as well so making upgrades for PowerPC G4 macs was financially doable. G4s started at 350 Mhz and ended at 2 Ghz so there was also a large 1.65 Ghz range potential market of speeds to make available in an upgrade. Motorola/Freescale would always be refreshing their chips so we could get new spec models quickly out the door in an upgrade. Upgrades typically have a speed advantage over existing Apple hardware so there was a price point that worked as a business model. The G5 was a very different engineering effort and speeds started at 1.6 Ghz and ended at 2.7 Ghz, only a 1.1 Ghz range. The G5 chips cost much more and were not as conveniently available from IBM in the same way as G4s were available from Freescale. Much larger quantities were required to be bought and that meant too many of a version of a chip to sell to a much smaller market. As it was the G4 market lasted a very long time and had more Apple models utilize them. The G4 was at one point in every new Apple Mac produced from laptops to minis to towers and iMacs and eMacs. By comparison the G5 market, and the only Mac to ever have a G5 chip were the towers, seemed like a niche market and was arguably smaller. There was no reasonable financial reason to make any upgrade that used G5 chips for G5 towers because the boost would have been small but the price high. And technically speaking it was impossible to fit a G5 chip into a G4 architecture because the G5 was so closely linked in performance to its much higher front side bus, that the G4 167 Mhz bus was by all measures ridiculously too slow to feed a G5. By comparison the G3 had to deal with a 50 Mhz bus in legacy Macs which was not as bad as what the G5 would be in a G4 system. There were other technical issues as well having to do with timing of the slower memory and power requirements. The G5 required a power supply that was substantially more powerful than what most G4 systems shipped with so the "G5 upgrade" had to work with those less powerful power supplies to be fully compatible. The expense of upgrading a G4 with a G5 chip and/or also a custom power supply was insanely expensive for a crippled G5 upgraded (the slowest G5 used at 800 Mhz bus--compare that to 167Mhz on the fastest G4 bus and you get the picture). And finally and most importantly, the G5 chips produced substantially more heat due to their higher frequency and higher performance than any G4 so there was no feasible way to put a G5 into a G4 system and keep it cool without a complete redesign of the air flow. To do this in every G4 system would be a custom design per model (since all the G4 towers have slightly different air flow paths and efficiencies) and that engineering effort was just beyond ugly. It would be cheaper and smarter to buy a G5 outright than to upgrade a G4 to work with a G5 chip. A good comparison would be why we don’t put diesel in our gas tanks. It just is not compatible with the engines in our cars and there is nothing we can do to bridge that incompatibility without changing out the diesel for gas or the engine completely to a diesel motor. So G4s stayed G4s, and faster with an upgrade (from Sonnet or Powerlogix, etc.), and G5s stayed G5s and faster if you bought a new Mac from Apple.

Nuff said.:apple:

IroquoisPliskin
Nov 6, 2008, 04:54 AM
Why waste money on a G4 buying a high speed dual CPU? The same money could buy a dual 1.8 or 2.0 G5 which would have a FAR faster system bus, FAR faster memory, better CPU architecture and is not limited to only 1.5/2gb of ram.

and the only Mac to ever have a G5 chip were the towers
And the iMac line.

Trdinput
Jul 16, 2011, 12:34 AM
Ok I've looked around the net and the fastest dual G4 I see is a 1.8 GHZ upgrade to the 7447 chip that has 512KB of L2. I've seen a single 2.0GHZ g4 updrade but will we ever see a dual 2 GHZ g4? More importantly is freescale or whoever owns the chips now are going to make faster G4s for those still not willing to let go of their g4s (myself included going strong after 4 years) I would like to hold on to my dual 1.25GHZ longer but a 2HZ+ dual G4 seems promising for Final Cut Pro and Photoshop. If anyone has any info on this please respond.

Tyler

Try yourmacstore.com. Harry will have the answer to your question regarding upgrades. I just found out that I can put an sata in lieu of the ata by replacing a pci card. The g4 is fast for home use, upgradable, and extremely dependable. I bought mine in 2001 and have had zero problems, I just wanted a faster machine that ran Leopard.

I am writing this from an eBay machine that still needs work, but here it is

Model Name: Power Mac G4 (AGP graphics)
Model Identifier: PowerMac3,1
Processor Name: PowerPC G4 (0.0)
Processor Speed: 1.6 GHz
Number Of CPUs: 1
L2 Cache (per CPU): 512 KB
Memory: 704 MB *Next Upgrade*
Bus Speed: 100 MHz
Boot ROM Version: 4.2.8f1
Serial Number (system): *Purposely Deleted
Sales Order Number: M7641LL/A
Hardware UUID: 00000000-0000-1000-8000-003065544DD2


I started out with a 400mhz machine and now run at 1.6 ghz that never reaches 100ºf. My G5 2.7 dual LCS is broke and has got up to 189º.

DesmoPilot
Jul 16, 2011, 01:21 AM
the dual 1.8 G4 can be used as a media server of some sort.
Tyler

That would be one hot, power hungry media server!

mrkramer
Jul 16, 2011, 01:34 AM
Try yourmacstore.com. Harry will have the answer to your question regarding upgrades. I just found out that I can put an sata in lieu of the ata by replacing a pci card. The g4 is fast for home use, upgradable, and extremely dependable. I bought mine in 2001 and have had zero problems, I just wanted a faster machine that ran Leopard.



Considering the post you replied to was from 2006 and it's now 2011 he probably already found an upgrade, and got rid of the computer.

zen.state
Jul 16, 2011, 11:26 AM
That would be one hot, power hungry media server!

You never seem to actually ever offer the assistance people ask for. You just add petty observations and move on.

The G4 he has only has a 200 or 237 watt PSU. That is far from high considering any modern PSU is 400+ and most are 550+ now.

DesmoPilot
Jul 16, 2011, 12:15 PM
You never seem to actually ever offer the assistance people ask for. You just add petty observations and move on.



It's how i use this subforum.

zen.state
Jul 16, 2011, 12:21 PM
It's how i use this subforum.

It's borderline trolling. Is that a good thing to you somehow?

DesmoPilot
Jul 16, 2011, 12:46 PM
It's borderline trolling. Is that a good thing to you somehow?

I post opinions and suggestions based off of my personal experience, can't help if people don't find them useful.

You can easily find a lower wattage PSU for a small home server/htpc type setup. Also, just because a PSU is rated for 400W or what have you, doesn't mean it's constantly pulling that amount of power. For example, my home server/htpc (with 4TB storage) is based around a 300W PSU. From the wall at idle, only pulls 25-30W, at load it doesn't go over 140W!

zen.state
Jul 16, 2011, 01:21 PM
I post opinions and suggestions based off of my personal experience, can't help if people don't find them useful.

You can easily find a lower wattage PSU for a small home server/htpc type setup. Also, just because a PSU is rated for 400W or what have you, doesn't mean it's constantly pulling that amount of power. For example, my home server/htpc (with 4TB storage) is based around a 300W PSU. From the wall at idle, only pulls 25-30W, at load it doesn't go over 140W!

Same goes for those ~200 watt PSU's in the earlier G4's. They won't always use all the current it capable of and would only go near the max if it was filled with hard drives. I have never seen any modern PSU below 350 and after just doing a google search for "home theatre psu" it found all 400+ watt.

The number you are hinting at would only come from a laptop or mac mini or shuttle type system. These all require external storage which adds to the overall wattage used in a building.

You need to understand that your thinking is a bit off the reality we all live in and it only offers your skewed view to the question at hand rather than offer assistance for what they are actually asking.

DesmoPilot
Jul 16, 2011, 05:55 PM
The number you are hinting at would only come from a laptop or mac mini or shuttle type system. These all require external storage which adds to the overall wattage used in a building.


Well I didn't just pull that number out of a hat, I used a meter plugged into my power bar to measure the power, at idle it pulled ~25-30W. Anyways, off topic.


You need to understand that your thinking is a bit off the reality we all live in and it only offers your skewed view to the question at hand rather than offer assistance for what they are actually asking.

I appreciate your opinion!