Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

PowerMac Specs?

Funny!

what a load of crap! anything for some site hits hu? lol
any way face the facts, the G4 is old and is no longer "Pro" material! no more g4 towers the iMac has G4 "pros" want better! A.K.A G5

(my guess is in tokyo!)
 
Crap

Parts of these specs can be right, but it's just speculative talk I see here. This is not the kind of stuff I want to see on this site (it's way too speculative). Or is MacRumours also publishing the photo's and video's of the iWalk II next week?

[Ger Nijkamp]
 
Re: Crap

Originally posted by Unregistered
Parts of these specs can be right, but it's just speculative talk I see here. This is not the kind of stuff I want to see on this site (it's way too speculative). Or is MacRumours also publishing the photo's and video's of the iWalk II next week?
Click to expand...

We didn't make it up.. we just linked to it. 🙂 Though I admit most of go2mac's user submitted material is sketchy...

arn
 
Re: Funny!

Originally posted by -=AsukA=-
what a load of crap! anything for some site hits hu? lol
any way face the facts, the G4 is old and is no longer "Pro" material! no more g4 towers the iMac has G4 "pros" want better! A.K.A G5

(my guess is in tokyo!)
Click to expand...

Well. my G4 450 Dp is still pro to me. The iMac screen is not really for Pro graphic users isn't it?
 
The GeForce 4 MX will use the NV17 Chipset, that's more like the GeForce 2 MX 's NV11. So that's very possible.
The "real" GF4 will use NV25, and GF3 is NV20.
 
what the chap above said...

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t275-s2102711,00.html


The GF4 is due to be released early feb by all accounts, so that would fit. I cant say that I'd be overly impressed by the rest of the specs mind. And why the MXversion? In fact, why a GF4 at all seeing as most of its 'features' (ie cost) are direct X based and hardly relevant to us mac users??
 
give it up

nobody knows when or what is coming out so just give it up. speculation is just that ... most of the sites are purporting facts and it's just a load of crap.
 
Re: Funny!

Originally posted by -=AsukA=-
what a load of crap! anything for some site hits hu? lol
any way face the facts, the G4 is old and is no longer "Pro" material! no more g4 towers the iMac has G4 "pros" want better! A.K.A G5

(my guess is in tokyo!)
Click to expand...

Are you a "Pro"? If so, what do you do? I'm just curious as to what your claim to knowing what a "Pro" uses is.

It's, obviously, not video work as a G4 800DP with Final Cut Pro 3 is, currently, the cat's meow as far as "Pro" video editing desktops go. Just ask a dozen or so channels like the Discovery channels or Showtime who use FCP 2 a lot.

And if you are a "Pro", what other hardware/software outperforms the current G4's for your job... and why aren't you using it if it does!?!?!

No Intel based machine has the software to do the real-time editing that FCP does on the G4. (You can thank AltiVec for that - no other single chip has the SIMD power that this thing has.)

And as much as people complain about the Photoshop Bake-offs, "Pro" Photoshop users do care. "Pro's" in these fields use Photoshop and/or Final Cut Pro ALL DAY LONG. And on a G4 Mac, these "Pro's" are more productive.

So, what "Pro" stuff do you need to do that requires more than the G4 is giving you?

And the comment about the G4 being old is plain stuipid - there are older Ultra-Sparks and P3's in the workplace. In fact, the Pentium, being an IA-32 architecture chip, is "older" than the PowerPC.

The only thing Apple had better do soon is get DDR RAM - from what I've read, that is such a bottleneck for AltiVec it's disgusting. (Which makes you wonder how fast it would crunch bits with DDR!)
 
He,s completely wrong..... come on, have you seen the low-end PM, compare to the iMac high-end.... less HD ( PM : 40 GIG, imac: 60 GIG)

Optical drive: The imac has a superdrive compare to a CD-RW....
Ati radeon dor the power Mac and the iMac, well a better one ( Nvidia) !!

Come on, Who believe this????
It's impossble.... according to these specs... who would want to buy this ****??? You could get a iMac, which is better for less..
 
I'm not sure about the development of the GeForce 4, but If I remember, didn't Apple release the GeForce 3 before any other pee-cee company had them out? NVidia seems very pro-mac (check out their website!) and it may be likely that Apple will have GeForce 4's in new powermacs, before anyone else. It just depends on whether the GeForce 4 is ready to be released.
 
Originally posted by G4scott
I'm not sure about the development of the GeForce 4, but If I remember, didn't Apple release the GeForce 3 before any other pee-cee company had them out? NVidia seems very pro-mac (check out their website!) and it may be likely that Apple will have GeForce 4's in new powermacs, before anyone else. It just depends on whether the GeForce 4 is ready to be released.
Click to expand...

Yes your right... Apple might just do it again, and if we're lucky the Peecee users might never get a GF4!
 
I wonder what the price of these machines will be. Let's have a look at the entry model:

800-MHz Power PC G4
256K L2 cache @ 800 MHz
256MB SDRAM
40GB (7200 rpm)
CD-RW

The actual price for the entry model is $1699
Now let's compare to the iMac for $1799

800MHz PowerPC G4
256K L2 cache @ 800 MHz
256MB SDRAM
60GB Ultra ATA drive
Apple Pro Speakers
Superdrive
15" LCD Monitor

Now, who the heck will buy an entry level tower mac????? This would be a bad deal!

Apple would have to sell it for about $1399 (which whould be a fair price anyway ...)
 
Originally posted by G4scott
I'm not sure about the development of the GeForce 4, but If I remember, didn't Apple release the GeForce 3 before any other pee-cee company had them out? NVidia seems very pro-mac (check out their website!) and it may be likely that Apple will have GeForce 4's in new powermacs, before anyone else. It just depends on whether the GeForce 4 is ready to be released.
Click to expand...

well, yes your right, but a lot of it was 'semantics'. It was announced at a macworld, so apples reckoning was that you got it first on a mac. As it turned out, you could buy them almost immdiatley for a pc, whilst to get the version shipping for a mac, you had to use the BTO option, and wait for teh pre-announced mac to arrive. Hence, pc users got em first, and cheaper.
My main gripe though, is why? most of the technology utilised in the gf3 is pc optimised via DX8 and soon 9. Open GL lags behind (sadly) and is definately second cousin to dx 8(9), and considering a gf2 ultra is actually faster in many respects than a gf3, why do us apple-ites pay the extra for, well, no extra?
 
Re: Re: Funny!

Are you a "Pro"? If so, what do you do? I'm just curious as to what your claim to knowing what a "Pro" uses is.

I would consider myself (network Admin) and my company Pro users. We are an Advertising Agency using hundereds of computers. Most of them Macintosh. They range from older 7300s with upgraded RAM, HD, Video and Processors to Dual Processor G4 systems. Many of the customer service professionals here use iMacs everyday. All of the creative professionals have dual monitor systems. The Avid and Final Cut Pro "Systems" are multi-computer, multi-monitor sytems yet we don't own even one DP800 G4 system.

Anyone who thinks the pros only use the "Current" top of the line don't understand the costs of doing business. I would have to say the number one request by a creative professional in my industry is multiple monitors. Even the creatives using PCs (the fastest of which is a PIII 500) want multiple monitors before faster processors.
 
"pros" vs. pros

I love it how some people claim that they need something faster than an 867 G4 because they "need speed." I think there's a huge difference between the ones who claim to be "pros" and the ones who don't say much and actually are pros. Personally, I think the professional users are the ones who don't necessarily require the fastest Mac available, but who completely know how to utilize their Mac's performance for all it's worth and are able to get the job done...

I think there's a lot of spoiled people here who feel they need "the best" in order to claim a title....

so who wants to fire upon me on that? 😉
 
Re: "pros" vs. pros

Originally posted by eyelikeart
I love it how some people claim that they need something faster than an 867 G4 because they "need speed." I think there's a huge difference between the ones who claim to be "pros" and the ones who don't say much and actually are pros. Personally, I think the professional users are the ones who don't necessarily require the fastest Mac available, but who completely know how to utilize their Mac's performance for all it's worth and are able to get the job done...

I think there's a lot of spoiled people here who feel they need "the best" in order to claim a title....

so who wants to fire upon me on that? 😉
Click to expand...

You might be right about a few users who just want the newest fastest box to say they have it. But there are many of use who spend 10 hrs a day creating huge Photoshop (500MB), Illustrator(350MB), Strata and Quark files. Every transform, motion blur and render we twiddle our thumbs waiting to finish is extra time added on to the end of the day.

It's been said a number of times in these forums, and I'll say it again: many of us need every bit of speed we can out of our Mac. Since we can't all afford DP Macs (and the 2nd processor is useless in most instances anyway), we'd love to see Apple implement a faster all-around architecture, including the CPU, system bus and RAM. We don't give a damn about claiming to have the fastest box -- we just want to be able to get our work done and go home on time!

BTW: I can't image anyone who actually makes their living using a Macintosh (pretty much my definition of a "pro") who doesn't feel they "require the fastest Mac available" within their budget.
 
Hmmmmmm...............

This is basically the "Apple Employee" rumor from another thread but without the "optical port".

Oddly enough, by chance or not the fonts, font sizes and grouping ARE consistant with Apple's vendor-distributed pre-release sheets. When I was working for a major Silicon Valley Mac retailer (Mac was all we did 😀 ) we got a few of these screw ups about the same time corporate got their copies. Occasionally we would get minor bumps "officially" about three days ahead. For the Purchasing copy of the new lineup to be posted the release would have to be 7-10 days out.

The numbers DO make sense: The low end tower has traditionally been too close in stats to the higher end two. Customers would be easily swayed into a mid or high end Tower. Those who didn't need or couldn't afford the mid or high end woud get an iMac SE. Having a PCI capable machine that sells (with monitor) for approx. $200.00-$500.00 more than the iMac would sell more towers. The low end towers NEVER sold. Re configuring into the high-end Gamer/Poweruser market is a good strategy, particularly since you can BTO up from the base model.Even most pro users will NEVER have a need for any form of DVD.

Given the choice, would you spend:

G4:$1699.95+17"LCD:$999.99+software:$150.00= $2489.94+local tax.

OR

iMac:$1799.95+tax

iMac at that point has the same RAM, a 20 Gb larger HD and a superdrive.

But it also lacks a 133 bus, 3 accessable PC133DIMM slots, 4 open drive bays, an exchangeable AGP graphics card, 3 open PCI slots, Gigabit Ethernet and choice of monitors.

This does not include the larger monitor size on the G4 tower either.

The real increase in cost is only:$689.99

or:$746.91 after local 8.25% sales tax. which is $53.09 less than the difference in base cost to the next Tower up.
 
"New" G4 Towers

If Apple thinks they can speed bump G4's on the same old motherboard @133 MHz and see any kind of bump in sales, I say boycott them until they ship G5 above 1 GHz, all with dual processor options, minimum 266 MHz bus, DDR ram, superdrives, 1394b, and USB2. I am sick of Apple's poor planning and miserly desire to sell every over produced obsolete motherboard they have left before moving on to today's mainstream technologies.

And what's up with them promising 1GB maximum RAM in the new iMac that is "not attainable" today? Man, this is one strange company to love/hate.
 
Re: "New" G4 Towers

Originally posted by Multimedia
If Apple thinks they can speed bump G4's on the same old motherboard @133 MHz and see any kind of bump in sales, I say boycott them until they ship G5 above 1 GHz, all with dual processor options, minimum 266 MHz bus, DDR ram, superdrives, 1394b, and USB2. I am sick of Apple's poor planning and miserly desire to sell every over produced obsolete motherboard they have left before moving on to today's mainstream technologies.
Click to expand...
indeed. without wishing to troll, Ive just been reading this at http://cr.yp.to/hardware/ and I'd say the author is, well, authorative.

"Like the Pavilion 7935, this Mac has only 128MB of memory, and is unable to correct memory errors. The Mac is considerably more expensive than the Pavilion; this is partly explained by the Mac's $80 Gigabit Ethernet card.

But the big difference is that the Mac is much, much, much slower. Hint to Apple: You'd sell a lot more of your software if you stopped trying to use it as a tool to sell your overpriced hardware.

Perhaps the forthcoming G5 processor will be competitive. I'll believe it when I see it.

Similar comments apply to the UltraSPARC. Sun's university price list shows a $795 Sun Blade 100 workstation with a 500MHz UltraSPARC IIe processor, 128MB ECC SDRAM, a 15GB hard drive, a video card, a CD-ROM drive, a 10/100 Ethernet card, a keyboard, and a mouse. Sure, it's a nice computer, but it's not nearly as fast as a new Athlon.

I sometimes buy overpriced processors so that I can see exactly how fast they are. This does not mean that you should buy them."
 
is the keyboard the key?

Regarding a new case for the Towers...

I wonder. Apple has recently, liked to have one set of keyboards and mice, to save on production and supply costs.

So whatever the new Towers are they'll have to "match" the new kit. So are we looking at white enclosurers and if so are these enclosures actually coming out sooner rather than later, contrary to what we've been previously thinking...

thoughts?
 
Re: "pros" vs. pros

Originally posted by eyelikeart

I think there's a lot of spoiled people here who feel they need "the best" in order to claim a title....
Click to expand...

I agree entirely. MOST people WANT. But that is the American way of life.

I fight that want everyday because my computer is only a DP 533 G4 with a GeForce 3. I would love it if Apple could again run those burning Intel guys and the snail with the pentium on its back commercials.

Here at work, when we replace someones Mac, the one they used the day before is suddenly junk in their eyes. They then proceed to let everyone around them know how much faster the system they have is compaired to their coworkers. That way everyone WANTs one. Its odd that the person with the new computer doesn't get any more 'pay for work' done. They simply have more time to surf the web.
 
Pros & the New towers..

I personally dislike the current enclosure. The big fat depressed circle on the smooth clean curves doesn't do it for me. But this isn't why I DON"T buy the machine.

Firewire 2, USB 2, DDR Ram, faster mobo, and of course the 2xG5... the technology is what I have been waiting for and it seems that it's going to be worth the wait too. (I've been waiting for about 2 years for this machine). In the mean time, upgrading bit by bit an 8500.

The currect machine is no where NEAR the speed I need for my "pro" work. Even a 733mhz Current G4 isn't enough. When running 3 virtual synths, a sequencer/mixer, virtual sampler, and 20 sound effects (changing in real time), there is no where close to the power needed to run all this in real time. While the real time can be faked by dubbing down/sampling and putting the samples in to the sampler, it take a lot of work then if anything changes. (like changing the bpm or changing around actual sample if it isn't good)

2x G5 @ 1.8ghz please! Maybe then i won't need a new machine for another 5 years... until the 4x G8 @ 20ghz

brad
javalizard@mac.com
 
Speed Demons

I know I am a newbie, but I just had to speak my mind on this subject. I have a G4 400 mhz Tower. Bought it in September of 2000 for $1,199 Brand New. I pumped up the ram to 832mb, b/c it is so cheap. My machine smokes, runs OS X and any application just fine. I know everyone wants the best of the best in terms of whats new, but sometimes it is just a waste of money. The only people other than pros that may need more speed is Gamers. If that is the case go buy the ATI Radeon 7000 PCI card. This card is 10 times faster than my Rage 128 16mb that came in my G4, and can now run Quake 3 at full FPS with the graphics maxed out at 1024x768. Plus the radeon 7000 only costs $108 at Provantage.com!! When have we ever seen a bad ass Mac video card this cheap, never. It comes loaded with 32mb DDR ram, Radeon processor, DVI, VGA & TV out. Allows for dual displays both Mirroring and Extended desktop, comes with DVI to VGA adaptor, RCA & S-video Cable, and other stuff as well. So forget buying a new G4 or even a G5 (whenever it comes out) for now. Spend $200 and juice up your current machine. I am waiting until G5's will really be worth it, until the software really requires me to have a G5. For now I'll stick to my 400mhz speed demon. BTW- eyelikeart....you make the most sense of anyone on this forum, from what i have read so far. --Personally I am waiting for the 1ghz Titanium G4 Powerbook......I here it will be available by April or May.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back