PDA

View Full Version : Dual 1.8GHz PowerMac Released


MacRumors
Nov 18, 2003, 07:37 AM
Apple released a new Dual 1.8GHz PowerMac (http://www.apple.com/powermac/) today. The new model introduces a second dual G5 configuration to the PowerMac line.

The new PowerMac offers Dual 1.8GHz G5, 900MHz Frontside Bus, 512MB DDR400 SDRAM, Superdrive, and NVidia GeForce FX 5200 Ultra.

The new PowerMac G5 product line:

Single 1.6GHz PowerMac - $1799 (from $1999)
Dual 1.8GHz PowerMac - $2499 (new)
Dual 2.0GHz PowerMac - $2999 (Unchanged)

The Dual 1.8GHz PowerMac G5 was first rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/07/20030731035238.shtml) in July. The new dual model was rumored to shift some demand from the popular 2.0GHz processors.

gwuMACaddict
Nov 18, 2003, 07:38 AM
this is going to make it hard not to get one for christmas...

:D

Badtz Maru
Nov 18, 2003, 07:40 AM
Damn, and that 20" monster iMac too!

Sabenth
Nov 18, 2003, 07:40 AM
how the hell do you do it arn how the hell do you do it great news though

temptatino
Nov 18, 2003, 07:40 AM
sweet! the g5's are really moving into a nice price point..

Squire
Nov 18, 2003, 07:41 AM
That would be my choice of PowerMacs now. It's the best value in my opinion. (So there isn't a single 1.8 GHz anymore. Hmmm.)

Now if they only lower the prices on the LCDs, I'll be ready to make the leap to the "Pro" line.
Squire

mj_1903
Nov 18, 2003, 07:42 AM
Interesting move. Comparing the features, the Dual 2.0 comes out quite badly in the value for money department. I wonder how that will affect sales of the high end model?

Dont Hurt Me
Nov 18, 2003, 07:44 AM
anyone bother to read the link?

Belly-laughs
Nov 18, 2003, 07:45 AM
The dual 2,0 is ready for an upgrade as it no longer has clear advantages over the next in line.

Any time now. Any time!

Kamu-San
Nov 18, 2003, 07:46 AM
Erh, Apple site says just the 15" and 17" iMacs and single 1.8GHz G5...

DTphonehome
Nov 18, 2003, 07:48 AM
It's in the Store:
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?family=PowerMac

arn
Nov 18, 2003, 07:48 AM
see the press releases linked from the main articles. Apple's site is still updating.

arn

Sun Baked
Nov 18, 2003, 07:48 AM
Hmmm...

Any changes on the single 1.6 G5, or are people going actually going to have a shot back at $200 from the Apple Store this time on VERY recently shipped units?

Sol
Nov 18, 2003, 07:51 AM
This is what the Powermac line-up should have been from day one. The new configuration will likely be the most popular model. It is such good value for the performance it offers.

Kamu-San
Nov 18, 2003, 07:51 AM
Thanks Arn!

De Dual 1.8 GHz sounds really nice, too bad I just bought a 15.2" PB. Not that the dual would be a good replacement, but I can't spend my money twice...

wizard
Nov 18, 2003, 07:57 AM
Can one say 2.5GHz by January for the top end?

While some seem to think that this is to take pressure off the top end I don't believe it. First there isn't a great deal of differrence in performance for single threaded applications with the old configurations. Second I can't really believe that the 2GHz 970 is that hard to come buy that they need to take presure off the top of the line model. Nope, in my opinion they are getting ready for a faster top of the line model, which will put the 2X 1.8 GHZ SMP machine squarely in the middle.

Now clearly it is open to speculation as to how fast this new machine is to run. It does seem like apple will need to hit 2.5 GHz or better in the January time frame to keep pace with there public commitments of 3GHz in a year.

Thanks
Dave



Originally posted by Belly-laughs
The dual 2,0 is ready for an upgrade as it no longer has clear advantages over the next in line.

Any time now. Any time!

wymer100
Nov 18, 2003, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by Sol
This is what the Powermac line-up should have been from day one. The new configuration will likely be the most popular model. It is such good value for the performance it offers.

That's probably why Apple waited until now. Had Apple released these models, the dual 1.8 probably would have been the most popular model. By waiting, the dual 2.0 was the best seller. Apple was able to squeeze an extra couple of hundred dollars out of the early adopters.

I'm surprised the single 1.8 wasn't at least a BTO option on the lowend model. There's a pretty big jump in price from low to midrange products. Offer an upgrade for an extra $300 and make most of that in profit. Plus, those sales have to go through the online store, which we know Apple likes.:p

JoE950
Nov 18, 2003, 08:03 AM
they didnt support 8 Gigs of memory before did they??? good lord!!!!

arn
Nov 18, 2003, 08:04 AM
Originally posted by JoE950
they didnt support 8 Gigs of memory before did they??? good lord!!!!

they did.

arn

neeotronik
Nov 18, 2003, 08:12 AM
I don't think this was done to curb the demand for the dual 2ghz g5's. Is there a demand?!?

It was inevitable; before the mac g5 surfaced; the G4 line was exactly the same;
Lower end model was single processor (with option to build you could have added a second processor) and the mid and high end models were dual processor.

Good move on apple's part; not great!
Wizard (dave) nailed it: First there isn't a great deal of differrence in performance for single threaded applications with the old configurations.

All that apple has done is optimize their killer apps.
Don't get me wrong; The G5 is a great computer but I dont see a need right now for 64 bit pci-x computing.

I will admit that if the dual 1.8 was priced at 1999 I would get one hands down. That's 499 cheaper than what it's priced at and 299 cheaper for the educational discount.
That'll never happen though. Until then enjoy the optimized apps and raw power that can't be fully utilized just yet.

ipiloot
Nov 18, 2003, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by Sol
This is what the Powermac line-up should have been from day one. The new configuration will likely be the most popular model. It is such good value for the performance it offers.

Not quite. As I understood Apple's strategy they had 1.8DP ready for day one, but did wait with the launch as long as the top model sold as fast as the can make them.
Only after the demant started to drop they introduced a new sweet spot. Apple collected a lot of dollars with 2.0 model. I think that we'll see 2.2 or 2.5 introduced very soon and 1.6 model dropped so that entire line will stay DP.

mj_1903
Nov 18, 2003, 08:20 AM
Originally posted by neeotronik
I don't think this was done to curb the demand for the dual 2ghz g5's. Is there a demand?!

The Dual 2.0 is selling extraidonarily well. I heard from internal sources that they expected it to sell half the number of units in the first 3 months that it eventually did.

Dont Hurt Me
Nov 18, 2003, 08:21 AM
nice addition to the powermac line, perhaps setting the pace to all dual configs for the pro's? perhaps early next year they will have dual 1.8 2.0 and 2.5? they need this so they can do a consumer line with single g5's in em. that 1.25 g4 imac is a dog right now. how many years of moto stagnation will apple keep partaking in? a 1.25 g4 would be good for emac but not imac and what they charge. the pro tower line is shaping up and getting better all the time.

Wonder Boy
Nov 18, 2003, 08:26 AM
there should have been dual 1.8 g5s to begin with.

happo
Nov 18, 2003, 08:37 AM
My order for PowerMac single 1.8GHz was updated to DUAL 1.8GHz. The price remained the same. :D

Now, I'm actually happy they kept postponing my order. :p

-happo

jocknerd
Nov 18, 2003, 09:02 AM
Why continue to sell a crippled Power Mac? Sometimes I just can't figure Apple out at all. It seems like its always all or nothing from them. Why drop the single 1.8ghz Power Mac? It wasn't crippled like the 1.6 is. It would make a nice entry level Power Mac.

Sun Baked
Nov 18, 2003, 09:10 AM
Originally posted by jocknerd
Why continue to sell a crippled Power Mac? Sometimes I just can't figure Apple out at all. It seems like its always all or nothing from them. Why drop the single 1.8ghz Power Mac? It wasn't crippled like the 1.6 is. It would make a nice entry level Power Mac. Oh well, now the dual PowerMac G4 and the entry level PowerMac G5 are basically priced the same.

Going to be real hard to tell people they should save the money and buy the PowerMac G4 now. :D

Unless they have a real need for the 5v PCI cards and/or OS 9.

1macker1
Nov 18, 2003, 09:10 AM
Yeah they should have dropped the 1.6 single and sold the 1.8 single along side the two dual modules.

1macker1
Nov 18, 2003, 09:12 AM
In most of the bench testing, the Dual G4 runs faster than the single processor G5.
Originally posted by Sun Baked
Oh well, now the dual PowerMac G4 and the entry level PowerMac G5 are basically priced the same.

Going to be real hard to tell people they should save the money and buy the PowerMac G4 now. :D

Mr. Anderson
Nov 18, 2003, 09:13 AM
This is really a very cool move by Apple....although I have to say I'm going to still wait until the next revision (MWSF?) to buy one, its a good sign of things to come.

D :D

psycho bob
Nov 18, 2003, 09:14 AM
hate to get slightly off topic but am fed up of people saying the 1.6 G5 was a waste of space or a downgrade. If you replace the pointless nvidia GPU and add more RAM it more than happily takes on a 1.42D G4 in all but multi processor aware apps. Even the single 1.8 G5 couldn't compete with a dual G4 in such apps. Yes on paper its the weaker sibling but it's much quieter, is more future proofed, has better technology and is more user friendly than any G4 yet comes in at an attractive price point.

1macker1
Nov 18, 2003, 09:20 AM
I don't think any computer is 'future' proof, that's why we see updated machines every few months or so. Once programmers start making more applications that take advantage of the 64 bit architecture, then people will see the advantage of a G5 machine, but until then, it's just for show.

Curufinwe
Nov 18, 2003, 09:22 AM
You are always going to have some less performing chips that will run at only 80% of the top speed. (Yes kids, 1.6 IS 80% as fast as 2.0).

They keep it crippled with regard to RAM and architechture because they are trying to justify the $700 price difference between the low and middle models and push anyone interested in real performance up to a dual. For the folks who don't really need the power, there is a new lower price point - but Apple doesn't want folks who would pay more settling for this deal. Pros check specs MUCH more carefully than consumers and the crippling is just enough of a turn-off to get them to contemplate jumping to a higher price level.

Rocketman
Nov 18, 2003, 09:32 AM
I find this release instructive in other ways.

The "need" for it was learned when almost all G5 buyers selected the dual processor model over the other cheaper single processor choices. The time from that event to this release is instructive to Apple's practical response time to releasing a version of a product.

The Apple buy site for the product is instructive as it includes what seems like a lot more add-on options. Several pre-installed software options, several accesssory items (iPod, iSight, Speakers, etc).

And as a side note, thenews line on the home page has almost exclusively large media accolades instead of the typical "space filler" news items of little national note. Apple has mindshare and recognition in the real world now (as opposed to predictable zealots). This change of events matters. It is a sea change for Apple Computer, Inc.

Wouldn't it be a shock if the next wildly successful Pixar project was actually made on macs from the other company the CEO runs? Instead of PC's and workstations?

Rocketman

quasan
Nov 18, 2003, 09:38 AM
My order for PowerMac single 1.8GHz was updated to DUAL 1.8GHz. The price remained the same.

hm i just phoned with the apple store( germany)
and they said that it is not possible, so they have to give me my money back and i have to make a now order
*damn i am angry*

Sun Baked
Nov 18, 2003, 09:40 AM
Oh well at least a 50% increase in real world speed with no significant change in price, is a big event.

And a new sweet spot.

A 5-10% boost for an extra $450 should slow the sales of dual 2.0 machines quite a bit.

Should be interesting to see how many people change their current BTO orders for the dual 2.0 G5.

happo
Nov 18, 2003, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by quasan
hm i just phoned with the apple store( germany)
and they said that it is not possible, so they have to give me my money back and i have to make a now order
*damn i am angry*

Well, at least my Apple Store (Finland) order status says:
POWER MAC G5 1.8GHZ CTO Z07J 2.336,00 1 - Canceled
...
PMG5 1.8DP CTO Z09Y 2.336,00 1 2.336,00
...

I really hope it remains this way :confused:
I've had enough problems with Apple Store and have been waiting for the G5 almost 5 weeks. They have just confirmed my order, but the status has not moved from "Being Reviewed" :(

AppleMatt
Nov 18, 2003, 10:09 AM
So...does anyone know if these are a minor revision or just a processor-swap?

AppleMatt

Dippo
Nov 18, 2003, 10:13 AM
Is there really any difference between the Dual 1.8Ghz and the Dual 2.0Ghz??

All you need to do is increase the FSB by 100Mhz and you have a Dual 2.0Ghz. I would think it would be possible!

neilw
Nov 18, 2003, 10:16 AM
A step in the right direction, though as others have said it leaves a huge gap between the low and middle end.

This corrects the previous anomaly where the fastest machine was the best value. Normally, you *expect* to pay a premium for that last increment of performance (which some will always be willing to pay). I'd expect the dual 1.8 to become the volume leader immediately.

I really don't like that gap in the line, though. They should add back the single 1.8 (and put the 1.6 in a reduced form factor tower, but that's another matter.)

It almost seems to be part of Apple's strategy (baffling though it be) to leave holes in their product line. When they fill one, they open another. I wish I could understand it sometimes...

magi.sys
Nov 18, 2003, 10:44 AM
looks like it's time to figure out how to overclock these G5s :D

I wonder it the 1.8DP is just 2.0DP with a different CPU card put into it, or is it a revision?

RealityMonster
Nov 18, 2003, 10:54 AM
It looks like this time I'm the guy that you always hear about that JUST bought a machine, and it was upgraded underneath him. I got my SP 1.8G5 2 or 3 weeks ago, and now this. For the same price.

Ah well. I'm sure at some point, I'll be able to buy a second processor. Is there any technical reason why I wouldn't be able to just socket it in? Are the 1.8 motherboards DP with an empty slot?

psycho bob
Nov 18, 2003, 10:58 AM
Only certain professions need raw power those being mostly video, maths and science. A number of grapic artists I know who work in London use graphite G4s or even B&W G3s.
From memory clocking any PPC to date has been something of a tricky process in the case of the G4 one which required extensive and careful work with the chip first. I assume like most processors now the G5 is locked so will require unlocking.

Sun Baked
Nov 18, 2003, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by RealityMonster
Ah well. I'm sure at some point, I'll be able to buy a second processor. Is there any technical reason why I wouldn't be able to just socket it in? Are the 1.8 motherboards DP with an empty slot? Yes, there is no socket.

Nope, no empty socket.

And the machine requires a thermal calibration, using the Apple Service Tech's "Apple Service
Diagnostic for Power Mac G5," every time a processor is moved to a new socket.

Rocketman
Nov 18, 2003, 11:04 AM
Originally posted by wizard
Can one say 2.5GHz by January for the top end?

While some seem to think that this is to take pressure off the top end I don't believe it. First there isn't a great deal of differrence in performance for single threaded applications with the old configurations. Second I can't really believe that the 2GHz 970 is that hard to come buy that they need to take presure off the top of the line model.

When setting pricing and features the theory is the low end will sell alot of units and the middle unit will sell fewer and the top line will sell fewer still at a high enough price to make the vendor vewwy, vewwy happy. This release caused most sales to happen in the vewwy, vewwy happy range. Wacky. An upside down pyramid formed with the G5 release.

That orphaned LOTS of chips only good enough for 1.6 and 1.8 Ghz ratings. In fact the IBM server uses the big pile of spare 1.6 Ghz 970's that Apple did not buy.

So a dual 1.8 is a way to dent the huge oversupply of those chips and when 2.6 Ghz chips are released to the public in January for march delivery, those will be in the high end.

I suspect the Powerbook G5 is entirely dependent on die shrink AND cooling tricks for release. Wind tunnel Powerbooks? :)

machinehien
Nov 18, 2003, 11:28 AM
Apple has to move out it's supply of chips the best way it can. I'm guessing they had a surplus of 1.8 Ghz and decided to double them up to move them out. Obviously they couldn't drop the 1.6 cause they still need to sell those and making the single 1.8 the new low end would cannibalize the same supply bin for the new dual. We should be lucky Apple is having this type of supply issue with IBM rather than the supply situation they had with Motorola in winter 99/00.

iPC
Nov 18, 2003, 11:28 AM
I think the 1.8 single should replace the 1.6, and offer it for $1,699 ($100 less than the current 1.6 machine).

I was under the impression that the move to the G5 was due to the fact that the G4 could not compete as a single proc machine. Dual proc adds more heat, noise, and money to every machine. Apple is not very intent on expanding their market share with this type of marketing. Unless there really is some truth to the cube rumors of late.

--

OT

The 20" iMac should be a 1.33 not a 1.25 G4....

--

*sigh*

:confused: What is Apple doing :confused:

Counterfit
Nov 18, 2003, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by neeotronik
blahblah but I dont see a need right now for 64 bit pci-x computing. blahblahblah That's the thing, it's not "What do I need now?" it's "What will I need 2 or 3 years from now?"

ZildjianKX
Nov 18, 2003, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by Sun Baked
Oh well at least a 50% increase in real world speed with no change in price, is a big event.

And a new sweet spot.

A 5-10% boost for an extra $450 should slow the sales of dual 2.0 machines quite a bit.

Should be interesting to see how many people change their current BTO orders for the dual 2.0 G5.

Well, isn't it $100 more? And despite what Apple wants you to think, you're not going to see a bit of a difference unless you do some sort of processor intensive encoding... you won't even see a difference in 99% of games.

I'm surprised they axed the SP 1.8 GHz model though...

Don't forget the DP models are slighly noisier, and have a 600 Watt powersupply vs a 450 watt powersupply :)

pgwalsh
Nov 18, 2003, 12:06 PM
Good to see another dual processor pro machine...

It would be great if all the "Pro" machines had dual processors.

It would be even better if they hadn't put that crappy video card in the machine. Typical Apple, to almost give you everything you want, but then come just short so they could rape ya with a few add on components. All these machines should come equiped with the top of the line video card, 1GB RAM, and two hdd. After all it is a "Pro" machine... So why not put all the pro features in it to start. So I'll call these the semi-pro Macs.

daveL
Nov 18, 2003, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by 1macker1
I don't think any computer is 'future' proof, that's why we see updated machines every few months or so. Once programmers start making more applications that take advantage of the 64 bit architecture, then people will see the advantage of a G5 machine, but until then, it's just for show.
Like the Pro Apps Apple just updated for the G5?

Dreadnought
Nov 18, 2003, 12:21 PM
The new dual 1.8 isn't the same price. It's about 100 Euro's more expensive. I wanted a single 1.8, can't afford more. Now the same setup, only with duals is about 100 Euro's more expensive :-(

And to make things worse, the 1.6 looks even worse now! If I confgure it to the same specs as for the dual 1.8 (only the proc is different), there is only a 300 Euro gap between the two! I think that's much to small a gap between the two. The 1.6 must come cheaper!

I think I'll wait till the new upgraded processors comes out and then buy a dual 1.8 or 2.0 with the price drop!

van2van2
Nov 18, 2003, 12:23 PM
This is great,

I am a PC user and have been itching to get into a Mac.. Was going to get the Dual 2.0 but the Dual 1.8 works better for me. I was able to get the final cut express, warcraft III, and the applecare for the same price as the dual 2.0.

Macmall has them in stock (surprised since just announced). Made sure it was a dual 1.8 and not a single 1.8 and ordered.

Guess I will be visting this site more often

:cool:

tortoise
Nov 18, 2003, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by 1macker1
Once programmers start making more applications that take advantage of the 64 bit architecture, then people will see the advantage of a G5 machine, but until then, it's just for show.

Unfortunately, OS X v10.3 does not take advantage of the 64-bit architecture, so the dependency has little to do with developers outside of Apple's OS group. Panther is essentially a 32-bit OS with PAE running on a 64-bit processor, which is unfortunate, and that is what it looks like from a developer's perspective.

I've made multiple complaints and requests to Apple about the lack of a 64-bit OS option for the G5 that hopefully will get turned into action sooner than later. Without a 64-bit version of OS X that we can target for our software applications, all of our big software systems have to run Linux on Opterons. Apple is selling hardware for which they provide no means for developers to actually use it in its native mode. Even if it breaks some amount of backward compatibility, this option should at least be available for developers and companies that need it. It is a simple recompile of the operating system (the internals are 64-bit clean), so it is little more than a marketing decision.

pgwalsh
Nov 18, 2003, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by tortoise
I've made multiple complaints and requests to Apple about the lack of a 64-bit OS option for the G5 that hopefully will get turned into action sooner than later. Without a 64-bit version of OS X that we can target for our software applications, all of our big software systems have to run Linux on Opterons. Apple is selling hardware for which they provide no means for developers to actually use it in its native mode. Even if it breaks some amount of backward compatibility, this option should at least be available for developers and companies that need it. It is a simple recompile of the operating system (the internals are 64-bit clean), so it is little more than a marketing decision. I may be wrong, but wouldn't OS X server be the first rendition of 64bit? That would make sense to me.

DWKlink
Nov 18, 2003, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Well, isn't it $100 more? And despite what Apple wants you to think, you're not going to see a bit of a difference unless you do some sort of processor intensive encoding... you won't even see a difference in 99% of games.

Every single set of benchmarks i have seen show a dramatic increase in speeds, across the board, between the single 1.8 and DP 2.0 machines, and very little difference between the 1.6 and the 1.8. From ripping a song in iTunes, to compressing an MPEG movie to playing Unreal Tournament, the 2.0 DP seems to do everything much quicker. I have to believe that this has a lot more to do with the 2 processors running together, and a lot less to do with the 200mhz difference between their clocks.

I would have to assume no matter what you're doing, you'd see a fairly decent increase in speed between the DP 1.8 and the single 1.8. I guess we'll have to wait till someone gets their hands on one to put up some scores.

foniks2020
Nov 18, 2003, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by tortoise
Without a 64-bit version of OS X that we can target for our software applications, all of our big software systems have to run Linux on Opterons. Apple is selling hardware for which they provide no means for developers to actually use it in its native mode. Even if it breaks some amount of backward compatibility, this option should at least be available for developers and companies that need it. It is a simple recompile of the operating system (the internals are 64-bit clean), so it is little more than a marketing decision.

You can run Linux on Apple Hardware BTW... I'm not certain which distribution of Yellowdog, Gentoo, PPCLinux, etc has the best support for 64bit PPC as yet but considering how IBM is preparing to release their Blades with PPC970 chips running Linux it must be one of them.

wheet
Nov 18, 2003, 12:39 PM
Does anybody know if this is an actual "rev. b" in any way? I assume it's too soon to really tell, but perhaps somebody "on the inside" would know? I'm not really sure how many major hardware bugs the G5s have had, so far, but I've been waiting for a genuine rev. b before leaping in. I do know, for example, that there's an issue in the dual 2 gigs regarding a humming sound coming from the power supply (which, I'm sure, will eventually be replaced by Apple, since it's probably a capacitor that's not up to spec). Anyway, just wondering if anybody has low-level details on the new machines?

wheet
Nov 18, 2003, 12:47 PM
sorry, I should be clear... "some" G5 dual 2.0s have had the power supply issue -- not all of them. And, naturally, i've no idea whether apple will acknowledge it. I'm just guessing that they will. Either way, I know there was extensive rev. a B&W G3 craziness, as well as rev. a G4 350 issues... not so much fun for the "proud parents" of those machines.

greenstork
Nov 18, 2003, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by machinehien
Apple has to move out it's supply of chips the best way it can. I'm guessing they had a surplus of 1.8 Ghz and decided to double them up to move them out. Obviously they couldn't drop the 1.6 cause they still need to sell those and making the single 1.8 the new low end would cannibalize the same supply bin for the new dual. We should be lucky Apple is having this type of supply issue with IBM rather than the supply situation they had with Motorola in winter 99/00.

This is probably exactly what happened. They want to clear out supply or meet some quota that they set with IBM to make way for new procs come MWSF. The best way to do that was to make the 1.8 a dualie and cash in on the holiday buyers. A dual G5 starting at $2499, now that's a great deal.

greenstork
Nov 18, 2003, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by wheet
Does anybody know if this is an actual "rev. b" in any way? I assume it's too soon to really tell, but perhaps somebody "on the inside" would know? I'm not really sure how many major hardware bugs the G5s have had, so far, but I've been waiting for a genuine rev. b before leaping in. I do know, for example, that there's an issue in the dual 2 gigs regarding a humming sound coming from the power supply (which, I'm sure, will eventually be replaced by Apple, since it's probably a capacitor that's not up to spec). Anyway, just wondering if anybody has low-level details on the new machines?

Although I am sure there are minor issues, I think it's obvious that the amount of time that Apple spent engineering this Rev A machine was greater than Rev A's of the past. It's a monument of industrial design, inside and out (although I concede that the outside is a matter of opinion).

ZildjianKX
Nov 18, 2003, 01:07 PM
Originally posted by DWKlink
Every single set of benchmarks i have seen show a dramatic increase in speeds, across the board, between the single 1.8 and DP 2.0 machines, and very little difference between the 1.6 and the 1.8. From ripping a song in iTunes, to compressing an MPEG movie to playing Unreal Tournament, the 2.0 DP seems to do everything much quicker. I have to believe that this has a lot more to do with the 2 processors running together, and a lot less to do with the 200mhz difference between their clocks.

I would have to assume no matter what you're doing, you'd see a fairly decent increase in speed between the DP 1.8 and the single 1.8. I guess we'll have to wait till someone gets their hands on one to put up some scores.

The former are encoding, which I included in my post, and which aren't really day to day use. The unreal tournament 2003 scores were due to horrible optimization. The latest patch just came out that increased single processor speeds by up to 25%... so UT wasn't the best test.

Now for real world use, you honestly won't see a difference, since most applications ignore the 2nd processor.

happo
Nov 18, 2003, 01:17 PM
Just got a confirmation from Apple Store:
As a valued customer who recently ordered an PowerMac, we have used our
best judgement to revise your existing order to incorporate the new configurations with
no increase in price. We will endeavour to match the original configuration of your order
but in instances where that particular option is unavailable, we will upgrade you to the next
appropriate level at no extra cost.

We expect to begin shipping the new Power Mac G5 within the next week.

Sounds nice, I must admit :D :D :D
Shame about the another week delay.

1macker1
Nov 18, 2003, 01:22 PM
Are you talkin about the THREE apps they updated. Not nearly enough.

Originally posted by daveL
Like the Pro Apps Apple just updated for the G5?

Sun Baked
Nov 18, 2003, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Well, isn't it $100 more? And despite what Apple wants you to think, you're not going to see a bit of a difference unless you do some sort of processor intensive encoding... you won't even see a difference in 99% of games. Well Boo Hoo I was off by $100, I'm sure people can find a single 1.8 G5 still sitting on the shelf and save themselves $100.

Now it's too expensive and you won't be able to afford Apple Care. :p

$100 for about a 50+% boost in app speed is nothing to sneeze at (shaving a bit off barefeats across the board G5 comparison test).

Not when it'll cost another $450 to get another 5-10% boost.

e-coli
Nov 18, 2003, 01:47 PM
This new machine will likely become the bottom of the line in January. They're pbbly just trying to offload a bunch of these units at a decent price point before they become the low-end model.

January's lineup:

dual 1.8
dual 2.25
dual 2.5

just a guess. ;)

Lancetx
Nov 18, 2003, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by Dreadnought
The new dual 1.8 isn't the same price. It's about 100 Euro's more expensive. I wanted a single 1.8, can't afford more. Now the same setup, only with duals is about 100 Euro's more expensive :-(

And to make things worse, the 1.6 looks even worse now! If I confgure it to the same specs as for the dual 1.8 (only the proc is different), there is only a 300 Euro gap between the two! I think that's much to small a gap between the two. The 1.6 must come cheaper!

Retailers in the U.S. anyway have already reduced the price by $300 on the remaining SP 1.8 PowerMacs down to $2,099. Why not pick up one of those? I know that Fry's for example almost always has some of the old closeout models laying around on clearance for a month or two after a system is revised. I would think it would be a similar situation in Europe too.

pgwalsh
Nov 18, 2003, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by e-coli
This new machine will likely become the bottom of the line in January. They're pbbly just trying to offload a bunch of these units at a decent price point before they become the low-end model.

January's lineup:

dual 1.8
dual 2.25
dual 2.5

just a guess. ;) I'm thinking the 1.6 and 1.8 processors will make it into the consumer line and all the Powermacs will go from 2.0 up... Seems like what they've done in the past.

3.1416
Nov 18, 2003, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Now for real world use, you honestly won't see a difference, since most applications ignore the 2nd processor.

You will as soon as you have two apps running at once...

true777
Nov 18, 2003, 02:31 PM
Wow, with the educational discount, and sans the superdrive, the 1.6 G5 now comes in at just $1400. This is going to open possibilities of G5 ownership for a new range of folks. With a 17" studio display, it would be an even $ 2000, pretty reasonable for a lot of college students.

AmigoMac
Nov 18, 2003, 02:33 PM
Someone took my credit card from my wallet... I'll be back, have to ask my wife if she know something....:D


fghsdkjfghjksdfhgjklhfdkjg!:cool:

pgwalsh
Nov 18, 2003, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by true777
Wow, with the educational discount, and sans the superdrive, the 1.6 G5 now comes in at just $1400. This is going to open possibilities of G5 ownership for a new range of folks. With a 17" studio display, it would be an even $ 2000, pretty reasonable for a lot of college students. Scap the 17" from Apple and get a really good 19" for almost the same money?

You can get a 19" Sceptre with 300nit 700:1 Contrast Ratio for $550- Best value for you money..

DWKlink
Nov 18, 2003, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by 3.1416
You will as soon as you have two apps running at once...

and you also will once more and more apps are optimzed to take advantage of both g5s and dual processors. and to many of us rendering and compressing are parts of daily life.

i just can't see how a dual 1.8 machine for $100 more won't give you marked performance that you will see on a daily basis. i think it's a great move on apple's part. and i think it will push a lot of people who were holding out on the 1.8s to buy one now.

daveL
Nov 18, 2003, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by 1macker1
Are you talkin about the THREE apps they updated. Not nearly enough.
Whatever.

jcook793
Nov 18, 2003, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Now for real world use, you honestly won't see a difference, since most applications ignore the 2nd processor.Originally posted by 3.1416
You will as soon as you have two apps running at once... I know, seriously dude. Open up a Terminal window and type in "ps -a". If you only see 1 process then you have no need for a dual processor. Otherwise you can take advantage of it.

Rincewind42
Nov 18, 2003, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by tortoise
Unfortunately, OS X v10.3 does not take advantage of the 64-bit architecture, so the dependency has little to do with developers outside of Apple's OS group. Panther is essentially a 32-bit OS with PAE running on a 64-bit processor, which is unfortunate, and that is what it looks like from a developer's perspective.

This is not entirely true. The kernel (and hence any kernel extension you are running) operates in a 64-bit memory space. This isn't extended to applications for various reasons

I've made multiple complaints and requests to Apple about the lack of a 64-bit OS option for the G5 that hopefully will get turned into action sooner than later. Without a 64-bit version of OS X that we can target for our software applications, all of our big software systems have to run Linux on Opterons. Apple is selling hardware for which they provide no means for developers to actually use it in its native mode. Even if it breaks some amount of backward compatibility, this option should at least be available for developers and companies that need it. It is a simple recompile of the operating system (the internals are 64-bit clean), so it is little more than a marketing decision.

The internals are 64-bit clean, and running in a 64-bit memory space. However, the internals don't extend far beyond the kernel yet. You still need to revise all of the system APIs to be 64-bit clean, which is neither instant nor overnight. It essentially doubles the amount of code running at any one time, and causes nightmares for the people that have to test all that code. If Apple could have given you a true 64-bit OS for Panther, they would have. But it was simply not technically possible to do that. Apple knows that they will eventually need a 64-bit OS, and they will want one sooner. But that doesn't mean that it will happen before it is technically feasible. It was NOT simply a marketing decision.

ITR 81
Nov 18, 2003, 04:06 PM
I happen to hear on Tech Tv that apparently Apple is currently working on 64 bit OS and maybe released next yr. I only can hope so but I think they will wait until almost all the topend models are using the G5 before doing this. So that means until the PB's go G5.

pgwalsh
Nov 18, 2003, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by ITR 81
I happen to hear on Tech Tv that apparently Apple is currently working on 64 bit OS and maybe released next yr. I only can hope so but I think they will wait until almost all the topend models are using the G5 before doing this. So that means until the PB's go G5. Pure speculation, but i think it's going to be OS X server... I don't see any immediate need for 64bit OS on the desktop.. Of course math and the medical industry would argue this, but they can use Xserve 64 bit clusters when available.

t500
Nov 18, 2003, 05:22 PM
I almost bought the 1.8 last week. I'm glad I waited. I picked up my dual 1.8 today at Comp USA. I cant wait to get it home and out of the box (I'm stuck at work).:D

pgwalsh
Nov 18, 2003, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by t500
I almost bought the 1.8 last week. I'm glad I waited. I picked up my dual 1.8 today at Comp USA. I cant wait to get it home and out of the box (I'm stuck at work).:D lucky bastard :D

lucarelli
Nov 18, 2003, 05:45 PM
I bought G5 1.6 two weeks ago. Today the price had dropped $200. So I called Apple Canada, they told me the policy had changed and now it's 7 days to claim for the difference. I also called the reseller that sold it to me"BMac" Montreal, they
never called me back. Not all that impressed with Apple for not posting something for people that have just purchased their products and they decided to cut the prices.

Sun Baked
Nov 18, 2003, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by lucarelli
I bought G5 1.6 two weeks ago. Today the price had dropped $200. So I called Apple Canada, they told me the policy had changed and now it's 7 days to claim for the difference. I also called the reseller that sold it to me"BMac" Montreal, they
never called me back. Not all that impressed with Apple for not posting something for people that have just purchased their products and they decided to cut the prices. In Canada and the US it used to be the following at the Apple Store...Should Apple reduce its price on any shipped product within 10 days of shipment, you may contact Apple Sales Support at 1-800-MY-APPLE to request a credit of the difference between the price you were charged and the current selling price. To receive the credit you must notify Apple within 14 days of shipment. In the event a credit is given to you, the same credit card that you used to make your purchase will be credited. So if you did order a couple weeks ago you'd probably be out-of-luck anyhow. If Apple changed the policy.

Though if they can, they'd better hop on the phone by the end of the week. Just-in-case.

tortoise
Nov 18, 2003, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by Rincewind42

This is not entirely true. The kernel (and hence any kernel extension you are running) operates in a 64-bit memory space. This isn't extended to applications for various reasons


The generally accepted definition of a 64-bit OS is that you can compile LP64 code for it, something which is not yet supported. Many 32-bit processors (or 64-bit processors running in 32-bit mode) support >4Gb of kernel RAM; it has been available on Intel for years. In this sense, it offers nothing in the memory department versus other 32-bit OSen on 32-bit machines. The only 64-bit property you can really exploit on the G5 currently is an L64 compiler mode which is among the least useful benefits of a 64-bit machine.

The real power of 64-bit computing is that your VM can map a single contiguous address space across multiple types of memory/physical storage up to a very large size. It allows for some lovely optimizations and simplifications that simply aren't possible on 32-bit machines.

I love OSX, but this one thing really limits the applications I can reasonably use it for.

manitoubalck
Nov 18, 2003, 05:58 PM
Originally posted by lucarelli
I bought G5 1.6 two weeks ago. Today the price had dropped $200. So I called Apple Canada, they told me the policy had changed and now it's 7 days to claim for the difference. I also called the reseller that sold it to me"BMac" Montreal, they
never called me back. Not all that impressed with Apple for not posting something for people that have just purchased their products and they decided to cut the prices.

Bad luck but get used to it. The Price of RAM and PC CPU's, and other hadeware is always fluctuating, It's just something your going to have to wear like the rest of us.

3.1416
Nov 18, 2003, 06:43 PM
Originally posted by pgwalsh
I don't see any immediate need for 64bit OS on the desktop..
Digital video. 4 GB of RAM fills up fast.

manitoubalck
Nov 18, 2003, 06:50 PM
Originally posted by 3.1416
Digital video. 4 GB of RAM fills up fast.

Yes, Yes it does,

sethypoo
Nov 18, 2003, 07:40 PM
Originally posted by happo
My order for PowerMac single 1.8GHz was updated to DUAL 1.8GHz. The price remained the same. :D

Now, I'm actually happy they kept postponing my order. :p

-happo

That's so cool!
Congratulations!

sethypoo
Nov 18, 2003, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by manitoubalck
Yes, Yes it does,

Amen to that.

RealityMonster
Nov 18, 2003, 08:29 PM
Originally posted by Sun Baked
Yes, there is no socket.

Nope, no empty socket.

And the machine requires a thermal calibration, using the Apple Service Tech's "Apple Service
Diagnostic for Power Mac G5," every time a processor is moved to a new socket.
Hrm. I just opened up my G5 for the first time, and it looks like there's a spot where another processor could be mounted. I would assume for the sake of economics that all of the motherboards are exactly the same.

The thermal calibration bit makes sense, though.

(BTW, even with the case off, the G5 is basically entirely silent! Holy crap!)

thogs_cave
Nov 18, 2003, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by 3.1416
You will as soon as you have two apps running at once...

Very true. I dinged MacAddict on that one, as they always focus on one application (usually Photoshop), when part of the joy lies in being able to run multiple apps really quickly.

I have around 10 or so MP systems (from Macs to Alphas to SPARCs to even a BeBox) at home, and I prefer 'em. OS X is quite well-threaded, and allows multiple applications to crank along at a good clip on my G5 DP (2.0).

It also works well for the MacRumors folding team. :-)

ZildjianKX
Nov 18, 2003, 09:23 PM
Call me a PC user for too long before switching, but I still feel that dual processors in most of the powermacs is Apple hype.

I came to this conclusion the other day at my job when one of my boss was shopping for powerbooks, and he asked "do they come with two processors yet?" This is a man who knows very little about computers, and like most consumers he feels that two is better than one.

Windows XP Pro has native support for multi-processors... but how many Abit or Asus boards do you see supporting them? Very few and far between.

I gurantee you that if the G4 line didn't stutter so bad a few years back and they had to release duals for marketing reasons, none of the G5s today would even have dual processors.

You don't know how many times I've read in the forums that a dual processor system has twice the bang for the buck as a single processor system at the same price...

manitoubalck
Nov 18, 2003, 09:45 PM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Windows XP Pro has native support for multi-processors... but how many Abit or Asus boards do you see supporting them? Very few and far between.

I dont mean to steal your thunder, I currently use an AMD PC so This is not from a mac zeolite.

Many Abit, Asus, MSI, Giga-byte and especially Tyan Motherboards support dual processors just look under 'work station/server' motherboards. However you can't run a P4 or Athlon XP in dual configuration, you need an intel Xeon, or Athlon MP. The xeon uses a different socket while the Athlon MP has mods to make it work better in Dual configuration. The same goes with the New Athlon 64 FX and Opteron. The opteron can be run in single config, but the FX can't be run in dual. There are even different Opterons for upto 8-way processing.

ZildjianKX
Nov 18, 2003, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by manitoubalck
I dont mean to steal your thunder, I currently use an AMD PC so This is not from a mac zeolite.

Many Abit, Asus, MSI, Giga-byte and especially Tyan Motherboards support dual processors just look under 'work station/server' motherboards. However you can't run a P4 or Athlon XP in dual configuration, you need an intel Xeon, or Athlon MP. The xeon uses a different socket while the Athlon MP has mods to make it work better in Dual configuration. The same goes with the New Athlon 64 FX and Opteron. The opteron can be run in single config, but the FX can't be run in dual. There are even different Opterons for upto 8-way processing.

Granted, but you're gliding over my point. Extreme PC builders don't even use multiprocessors, and I believe you used a key word "WORKSTATION."

daveL
Nov 18, 2003, 09:57 PM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Call me a PC user for too long before switching, but I still feel that dual processors in most of the powermacs is Apple hype.

I came to this conclusion the other day at my job when one of my boss was shopping for powerbooks, and he asked "do they come with two processors yet?" This is a man who knows very little about computers, and like most consumers he feels that two is better than one.

Windows XP Pro has native support for multi-processors... but how many Abit or Asus boards do you see supporting them? Very few and far between.

I gurantee you that if the G4 line didn't stutter so bad a few years back and they had to release duals for marketing reasons, none of the G5s today would even have dual processors.

You don't know how many times I've read in the forums that a dual processor system has twice the bang for the buck as a single processor system at the same price...
Actually, OS X, which is based on the Mach kernel and freeBSD, is very well threaded and very efficient on DP configurations, much more so than XP BTW. All you have to do is look around at some of the public benchmark postings to bear this out. Oh, and then there's the VT Supercomputer DP G5 cluster, ranked #3 in the world. Yea, I guess it's just marketing hype.

ZildjianKX
Nov 18, 2003, 10:07 PM
Originally posted by daveL
Actually, OS X, which is based on the Mach kernel and freeBSD, is very well threaded and very efficient on DP configurations, much more so than XP BTW. All you have to do is look around at some of the public benchmark postings to bear this out. Oh, and then there's the VT Supercomputer DP G5 cluster, ranked #3 in the world. Yea, I guess it's just marketing hype.

No reason to be patronizing... I am quite aware that OS X as well as *nix systems are well threaded...

so you would say a DP 1.8 to DP 2.0 GHz is worth $500?

MOM
Nov 18, 2003, 10:08 PM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Call me a PC user for too long before switching, but I still feel that dual processors in most of the powermacs is Apple hype.

It all depends on your uses. Obviously, web browsing, iTunes, word procesing don't require dual processors. However, many graphics and video applications really get a boost out of dual processors. If your really working on multiple things at once you also noti ce the benefis of dual processors. Much depends on how well the software is written to take advantage of both processors. Despite the hype, Adobe Photoshop doesn't always benefit, but I've noticed that Studio Artist benefits a lot. When rotoscoping video, your computer can never be fast enough.

ZildjianKX
Nov 18, 2003, 10:20 PM
Originally posted by MOM
It all depends on your uses. Obviously, web browsing, iTunes, word procesing don't require dual processors. However, many graphics and video applications really get a boost out of dual processors. If your really working on multiple things at once you also noti ce the benefis of dual processors. Much depends on how well the software is written to take advantage of both processors. Despite the hype, Adobe Photoshop doesn't always benefit, but I've noticed that Studio Artist benefits a lot. When rotoscoping video, your computer can never be fast enough.

Yeah, I definately agree with you.

Its funny that most of the programs that due truly benefit from it are written by Apple.

manitoubalck
Nov 18, 2003, 10:52 PM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Granted, but you're gliding over my point. Extreme PC builders don't even use multiprocessors, and I believe you used a key word "WORKSTATION."

If you by some stretch of the imaganiation think for one second the the DP G5's are 'desktop' computers you are sorely mistaken. They are a highend WORKSTATION.

note: I can price together a DP Opteron 2.0GHz with R9800XT and a gig of ram for the price of a G5.

daveL
Nov 18, 2003, 11:05 PM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
No reason to be patronizing... I am quite aware that OS X as well as *nix systems are well threaded...

so you would say a DP 1.8 to DP 2.0 GHz is worth $500?
We were talking SP vs DP, not GHz. No, I wouldn't pay that premium (1.8 vs 2.0); the DP 1.8 is the best deal (upgrade to the Radeon 9600 for US$50).

tortoise
Nov 18, 2003, 11:10 PM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Call me a PC user for too long before switching, but I still feel that dual processors in most of the powermacs is Apple hype.

My first dual processor system was a Pentium-100 running NT. I've generally bought dual processor systems for my desktop systems and workstations ever since.

Dual processors isn't a gimmick in any decent OS (e.g. OS X or Linux), and is a cheap way to extend the useful life of a system in my opinion. One of the really important differences is that SMP systems handle hardware interrupts differently than single processor systems and perform better and more usably under many conditons (it is one of the reasons SMP is essentially mandatory for high load network servers independent of any nominal CPU load requirements). For many types of uses, it is better to have the extra "width" of 2+ processors that the OS can schedule for than to have one processor that is twice as fast because of differences in hardware behavior under those two conditions.

The best reason to buy SMP systems is that they age more gracefully. When running an application that is a bit too much for whatever processor you have, it doesn't adversely impact the user interface or other applications in the way it does if you have only one processor that also has all the interrupts being shoveled on it. Even with a preemptive multitasking OS, you'll still feel the pain if you have an overloaded processor with a decent interrupt load -- it will stop multitasking effectively -- but it rarely makes an SMP system behave in any way other than normal.

Since I routinely stress my systems, SMP is mandatory to have a system that handles severe abuse gracefully. For people that just do routine light usage, I agree that SMP isn't particularly necessary. That said, dual processor systems almost always feel smoother and better behaved than single processor systems, especially if you make it work a little bit. For the marginal cost over single processor systems (usually a few hundred bucks) I find it to be well worth it as it makes the system last longer before I need to replace it and makes the general user experience subtly yet noticeably better.

ZildjianKX
Nov 18, 2003, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by daveL
We were talking SP vs DP, not GHz. No, I wouldn't pay that premium (1.8 vs 2.0); the DP 1.8 is the best deal (upgrade to the Radeon 9600 for US$50).

I'm a bit sleepy after work, apologies for my incoherence...



Well, maybe my next computer system after this one will be a DP... no rush though.

crainial77
Nov 18, 2003, 11:23 PM
hmm, and after the PowerMac G5 got personal computer of the YEAR from PC Magazine! A start of things to come? Anyone got bechmarks of a G5 vs AMD Opteron or Athlon 64?

pgwalsh
Nov 19, 2003, 12:19 AM
Originally posted by ZildjianKX


Windows XP Pro has native support for multi-processors... but how many Abit or Asus boards do you see supporting them? Very few and far between.
Yes... I have XP Pro as well, but the multi tasking sucks bad... I would hardly see any benfit with a dual on XP except for video rendering and audio programs like Cubase. But running multiple intensive apps on windows sucks big time.

manitoubalck
Nov 19, 2003, 01:31 AM
Originally posted by crainial77
hmm, and after the PowerMac G5 got personal computer of the YEAR from PC Magazine! A start of things to come? Anyone got bechmarks of a G5 vs AMD Opteron or Athlon 64?

If anyone does please let me know.

leet1
Nov 19, 2003, 01:38 AM
Originally posted by manitoubalck
If anyone does please let me know.

http://barefeats.com/g5c.html

opteron won that one :D

leet1
Nov 19, 2003, 01:45 AM
Heres one from PCWorld.com

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,112749,pg,8,00.asp

Athlon 64 vs. Apple G5 Systems: Not Even Close

arn
Nov 19, 2003, 01:49 AM
Originally posted by leet1
Heres one from PCWorld.com

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,112749,pg,8,00.asp

well, usual caveats...

the G5 did quite well in the only g5-enhanced app (photoshop). Beating every Athlon machine at photoshop.

Meanwhile... the G5 the Opteron at Quake.

Doesn't beat them all at everything or lose to all at everything - but it's certainly in the same ballpark. To the naysayers... it was worse before the G5...

arn

taran
Nov 19, 2003, 07:44 AM
I bought a single processor 1.8 just 28 days ago... It's a bit gutting that a far superior machine for effectively the same price (after an educational discount) is now available.

Ah well, that's life...

T

tortoise
Nov 19, 2003, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by manitoubalck
If anyone does please let me know.

The Opteron and G5 are pretty close at a given clock speed, close enough that there isn't a compelling reason to buy either. That said, for our supercomputing codes, the Opteron marginally outperforms the G5.

If you can use Altivec, the G5 has a clear advantage for floating point work. For more general computing, the Opteron is somewhat faster, particularly for "large memory" applications. Databases scream on the Opteron.

The Opterons are damn fast, and on a much broader range of material than for most processors. I give a slight nod to the Opteron, but the G5 is very fast as well and faster for a narrow range of applications because of its excellent DSP capabilities.

Rocketman
Nov 19, 2003, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by crainial77
hmm, and after the PowerMac G5 got personal computer of the YEAR from PC Magazine! A start of things to come? Anyone got bechmarks of a G5 vs AMD Opteron or Athlon 64?

There is a breakdown by processor I posted in the Virginia supercomputer thread. Since these are optimized systems it is instructive.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=47658

Rocketman

1.8DualVegas
Nov 19, 2003, 05:03 PM
Originally posted by taran
I bought a single processor 1.8 just 28 days ago... It's a bit gutting that a far superior machine for effectively the same price (after an educational discount) is now available.

Ah well, that's life...

T

I took mine back to the apple store. No restocking fee and paid the 100 bucks. I walked out with a dual and I was 33 days into my purchase.

RealityMonster
Nov 19, 2003, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by 1.8DualVegas
I took mine back to the apple store. No restocking fee and paid the 100 bucks. I walked out with a dual and I was 33 days into my purchase.
Really? That's very interesting. I bought mine online through a developer program. I wonder if there's any recourse for me.

g5man
Nov 19, 2003, 06:53 PM
I ordered my Dual 1.8 yesterday and will have it on Tuesday. I can hardly wait.

Now I hope a dual 2.5 will come out in January because I will be buying on of those as well.

Dahl
Dec 5, 2003, 02:03 AM
I just wanted to tell that it looks like Fry's is selling the dual 1.8 for $2099. ( saw ad in the paper )

That's pretty cheap, isn't it ?