Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Archive > Archives of Old Posts > Macintosh Computers

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jun 29, 2003, 07:27 PM   #1
sonicbaz
macrumors member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Brisbane
Question Dual 1.25 VS 1.6 G5

G'day,
I am a Logic user thinking of switching from PC to MAC and seeking opinions in relation to a G5 1.6 vs the Dual 1.25. They are the similar prices but I am sort of leaning towards the dual because it sounds faster Any Logic users able to tell me the track count they are getting on a Dual G4 1.25 or any other relevent information would be appreciated.

Cheers

Baz
sonicbaz is offline   0
Old Jun 29, 2003, 07:32 PM   #2
sparkleytone
macrumors 68020
 
sparkleytone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Send a message via AIM to sparkleytone
if you are dependent on the absolute best in audio capability, you'll buy the G5 and not think twice. Just take a look at the architecture, watch the keynote if you didnt, and take a look at the tech specs that showyou how much audio capability is built in. g5 all the way.
sparkleytone is offline   0
Old Jun 29, 2003, 07:42 PM   #3
iJon
macrumors 604
 
iJon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
a logic user thinking about switching. you have no choice unless you are gonna use outdated software. anyways, go with te g5, it will last more in the long fun. but as for a answer to you specific question, im not sure.

iJon
iJon is offline   0
Old Jun 29, 2003, 08:15 PM   #4
Kwyjibo
macrumors 68040
 
Kwyjibo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
it even has all those optical ports
Kwyjibo is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 01:44 AM   #5
daveg5
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
g4 still standing after all these years

apple was using a enhanced version of logic and failed to list a dual g4 number, the track count should be the same, more or less on both, remember a dual 1GHZ gets over 100 tracks with eq according to motu.
the g5 advantage is memory bandwith which should allow for more plugins, better 3d video incoding decoding rendering, basically anything you have to wait a while for the cpu to do. also everything in the g5 has sort of dedicated bandwith so you should be able to do many things at once. like burn a dvd a firewire cd disc while playing itunes with the visalizer and surfing the web although 2 g4's does this already..
although its pci slot and memory type is the same.
the g5,s weak part is its 23 stage pipeline, as apple pointed out in the past, eats up a lot of that bandwith when it has to redo a command, and also its cache system, allthough larger is said to be not as advanced as the g4 8 scalaer type cache. in other words apple is pushing it to its limit and the smaller 7 stage pipe helps alot.
i expect for most things will be close in 32 bit, unless apple optimizes it, it will see the g5 as simply a g4 more or less at a faster speed.
now when apps are 64bit and the os is 64 bit then you will see some major gains, but duals at similar speed even g4's will always have some advantages in 32 bit apps.
as the p4 pointed out, bandwidth and memory speed can help, but only to a certain point.
we have 2 months left to see in a non apple test how a Dual g4 compares to a singel/dual g5 in jag apps and benchmarks, and everyday computing,
should be interesting
dont send the dual g4 out to pasture yet apple is still making os9 and osx versions and making money on them, i suspect they will sell well at these prices for the mature but bandwidth limited design,
daveg5 is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 01:50 AM   #6
Frohickey
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: PRK
Bandwidth, bandwidth, bandwidth.

Doesn't matter if you have 2.5GHz worth of processing power if its starving behind a 167MHz data pipe.

The 1.6GHz is being fed by a 0.8GHz data pipe, so its only hungry half the time instead of being hungry for 93% of the time.

Gotta keep those processors fed.
Frohickey is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 01:56 AM   #7
tjwett
macrumors 68000
 
tjwett's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brooklyn, NYC
this is a tuff one. i'm a long time Logic user as well and i don't know if i'd fully recommend going for the G5 just yet, not totally. while i'm not knocking the G5, it's awesome, i think there might still be more to gain from a dual proc system when using Logic. BUT, i'm all for moving forward and the specs on the new machines are amazing. perhaps what the single proc G5 lacks can be made up for (and then some?) with it's massive data pipeline and huge 8Gig RAM capacity. if the prices are so similar i'd be really tempted to pick up a new G5, but that might be based on gear-lust. i record very few real instruments so i try to keep my external hardware at a bare minimum, and those optical in/out ports are really looking good to me. like i said though, Logic is highly optimized for a dual setup and that could mean it all. i guess i can't offer much more than my indecisive opinion, but i will say that i envy whatever purchase you decide on.
__________________
"The spice must flow..."
tjwett is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 01:58 AM   #8
daveg5
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Re: Dual 1.25 VS 1.6 G5

Quote:
Originally posted by sonicbaz
G'day,
I am a Logic user thinking of switching from PC to MAC and seeking opinions in relation to a G5 1.6 vs the Dual 1.25. They are the similar prices but I am sort of leaning towards the dual because it sounds faster Any Logic users able to tell me the track count they are getting on a Dual G4 1.25 or any other relevent information would be appreciated.

Cheers

Baz
if the g5 test much better then the dual in pro audio apps, and that includes others other then logic then by all means get it.
if it does not, which no one but apple knows at this time, aND IF IT DOES NOT OFFER ANY CPU UPGRADES IN THE FUTURE, THEN THE DUAL G4 IS WORTH AT LEAST SOME CONSIDERATION. NOT ONLY IS THERE VERY WELL WRITEN MATURE AUDIO APPS IN OS 9.2.2 LIKE LOGIC 6.1 WITH VST SUPPORT BY APPLE/EMAGIC/MOTU DP3/CUBASE VST/DECK 3.5/METRO/PROTOOLS/REASON/REBIRTH AND OTHERS WITH VST RTAS MAS AND LOGIC PLUG SUPPORT. OS9 APPS CAN BE FOUND SOMETIMES MUCH CHEAPER, BUT YOU CAN ALSO USE ALL OSX APPS AND PANTHER BOTH THE G5 AND G4 HAVE ALTIVEC AND APPLE WILL HAVE G4 MACHINES FOR YEARS AND G3 WHICH MEAN PANTHER AND ALL ITS APPS WILL BE MADE FOR THE G4 AND G5 FOR THE FORSEEABLE FURTURE.
IN OTHER WORDS DONT GET CAUGHT IN THE HYPE WAIT FOR COMPLETE ACCURATE TEST AND BENCHMARKS BY AN INDEPENDANT TESTER OF THE APPS YOU ARE INTERESTED IN.
NO ONE KNOWS WHICH IS THE BETTER BUY UNTIL WE HAVE MORE INFO. AND EVEN THEN NO ONE KNOWS YOUR NEEDS BUT YOU.
THAT SAID I WANT THE DUAL 2GHZ G5 BUT I AM NOT GONNA DOWNTALK THE DUAL G4'S JUST YET UNTIL I SEE INDEPENT ACCURATE TEST
2 MONTHS LEFT.
daveg5 is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 02:01 AM   #9
shadowfax
macrumors 601
 
shadowfax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Send a message via AIM to shadowfax
i'll have to agree, i think that you should go with the 1.6 with plenty of RAM, that will really help you out for most CPU intense applications. that 167 MHz bus is very, very. you really should invest in real DDR.
shadowfax is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 02:04 AM   #10
shadowfax
macrumors 601
 
shadowfax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Send a message via AIM to shadowfax
Re: Re: Dual 1.25 VS 1.6 G5

Quote:
Originally posted by daveg5
CAPS
dude, you should take those caps off in word or something, or just retype it, it's quite rude to post in all caps. looks like you didn't mean to
shadowfax is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 02:14 AM   #11
daveg5
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwyjibo
it even has all those optical ports
if you have optical equipment this is nice i wonder if the g5 audio is 24/96 now 5.1 if not the m-audio rev 7.1 has 24/192 out analouge and digital and 24/96 in ana/dig and is compatable with most 2-7.2 speaker systems although it needs a driver update.
i got mine for $69
daveg5 is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 02:18 AM   #12
daveg5
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Re: Re: Re: Dual 1.25 VS 1.6 G5

Quote:
Originally posted by Shadowfax
dude, you should take those caps off in word or something, or just retype it, it's quite rude to post in all caps. looks like you didn't mean to
Sorry was an accident i was typing in the dark. i need the 17"powermac.
i usually type with my apple extended keyboard (the best feel), but tried my microsoft keyboard (pretty good) for a month,
now i just changed to the oringinal g3 keyboard with the close black keys(the worst) and cant get comfortable with it and its too dark the others are white,
daveg5 is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 02:21 AM   #13
daveg5
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
with it's massive data pipeline and huge 8Gig RAM capacity. if the prices are so similar i'd be really tempted to pick up a new G5, but that might be based on gear-lust.
i thought the 1.6 only could use 4GB of the same ram in the duals.
daveg5 is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 02:44 AM   #14
shadowfax
macrumors 601
 
shadowfax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Send a message via AIM to shadowfax
Quote:
Originally posted by daveg5
that might be based on gear-lust.
i thought the 1.6 only could use 4GB of the same ram in the duals.
why? it's a 64 bit processor. it can address like half a terrabyte of RAM natively. this is not like a dual Xeon with 8 GB of RAM, 4 per proc. this is a processor that can handle more ram than you can put on the motherboard.
shadowfax is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 02:45 AM   #15
daveg5
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by Frohickey
Bandwidth, bandwidth, bandwidth.

Doesn't matter if you have 2.5GHz worth of processing power if its starving behind a 167MHz data pipe.

The 1.6GHz is being fed by a 0.8GHz data pipe, so its only hungry half the time instead of being hungry for 93% of the time.
this is true to a certain extent.
if all things were equal.
however this can not be overlook, the 23 stage pipe line in the G5 is 300% more then the 7 stage on the g4 for, if something has to be refed the much needed bandwidth is not going to make up for the time lost going thru 23 steps again. this is why the 533 G4 was faster at many things with its 4 stage vs 7 stage pipeline in the 733 G4 plus. also it had 1MB L2 cache the G4+ only had 1/4 and had to add L3cache to help out. this is also why apples 7 stage g4 duals can compare to petium 4 2.6 and under, and faster amd chips, even though those have 533 (133X4) and 200+ buss, faster ddr ram.
what exactly is the effective buss and ram spped on the g5 and g4? is it 3 times more or 6 times more.
again we are still in a hype cloud and dont know whether the dual 1.25 G4 can process as many tracks w/o plugs or with pluds compared to the 1.6 G5, we just dont know.
also there are more pro audio programs then logic 6.1 os9/osx as good and optimized as it is, i know apple owns it but dont forget osx's first multi track daw bias inc's deck 3.5 its the only one besides metro with a downloadable demo.
cubase sl/sx, motu dp4, protools, reason, live, rebirth, and all the vst, logic instrument format, rtas, mas, tdm, audio unit plugins.
so all the pro apps have been out for 2 mos thru a year and they all will get better with matureity.
so one optimized app that apple owns will not tell the whole story we need more unless that is the only app you use.
i use logic-cubase-rebirth-reason-deck and others. because each makes me work differently for instance starting from scratch i would make a whole diff groove depending on what i am using if i get stale i choose the enviroment of a diff app as a tool to inspire me, and it usually work well.

Gotta keep those processors fed.
daveg5 is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 02:55 AM   #16
shadowfax
macrumors 601
 
shadowfax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Send a message via AIM to shadowfax
oh, sorry, i just noticed that apple only let's you put 4 GB on the single 1.6. but that's not really an addressing issue, as it's the same damn processor as the 1.8 model, which apple will allow you to put 8 GB of RAM in. but 4 GB of RAM is more than enough for anyone who is too cheap to by the 1.8 or dual 2.0 GHz G5 Powermacs...
shadowfax is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 02:57 AM   #17
daveg5
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by Shadowfax
why? it's a 64 bit processor. it can address like half a terrabyte of RAM natively. this is not like a dual Xeon with 8 GB of RAM, 4 per proc. this is a processor that can handle more ram than you can put on the motherboard.
okay my fault you are talking about the dual 2GHZ. agreed.
my simple question is can it adrees that much when running 32 bit apps.
i agree and think it will beat the dual g4 at nost things in the 64 bit/panther/64bit app mode, this is a given as i will be much suprised and dismayed if it did not. but i am not so sure it wont be seen as a 1.6GhZ G4 with a larger cache and faster bus and memeory but rather large 23 stage pipeline

(this is a large data pipe folks no 2 ways about it, but this will help the g5 scale up in GHZ very fast just like the p4 remeber the p3 was fster then the p4 at the same speed because of this, same with the g4 7400-7410 vs 7440-7450 and now maybe history is repeating itself again with the G5 vs G4 at the same speed relative to work done per MHZ)

in the 32 bit /Jag/32bit app mode
i hope i am wrong of course and we will see in due time i say wait for actual 32 bit benchmarks in jag.
daveg5 is offline   0
Old Jun 30, 2003, 03:12 AM   #18
shadowfax
macrumors 601
 
shadowfax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Send a message via AIM to shadowfax
Quote:
Originally posted by daveg5
okay my fault you are talking about the dual 2GHZ. agreed.
my simple question is can it adrees that much when running 32 bit apps.
i was talking mostly about the single 1.8 and 1.6 GHz and saying how the 4 GB limitation is just an apple thing because it's the low end model, not an addressing issue.

as to how it will address the 32 bit apps in memory, i believe it has some kind of script of sorts that allows it to address that much, so it should work on both 32 and 64 bit apps. but it may be that it can only address up to 4 GB of RAM per 32 bit application, meaning that you could fill RAM with 2... not to worry though, if there were an application that actually needed more than that ever, it would probably be quickly updated to have 64 bit addressing.
shadowfax is offline   0


 
MacRumors Forums > Archive > Archives of Old Posts > Macintosh Computers

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Barefeats tests Dual X5690 Maxed Out Mac Pro, with Dual D700s...check it out MacVidCards Mac Pro 4 Oct 30, 2013 03:48 PM
Dual Boot Dual SSD in Raid 0? evildede MacBook Pro 2 Aug 26, 2012 09:30 PM
Dual thunderbolt ports with adapters = dual gigabit NIC? ohkuipo MacBook Pro 1 Jun 12, 2012 02:18 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:06 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC