mac audio comparisons..QS vs DDR

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by 3rdpath, Aug 26, 2002.

  1. macrumors 68000

    3rdpath

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Location:
    2nd star on the right and straight till morning
    #1
    don't know if any of the resident audio peeps caught this review at xlr8yourmac last week...its an informal test between the dual QS 1ghz and the new dual DDR867, both running logic under 9.2.2.

    i do like that he uses virtual instruments, audio tracks and altiverb plug-ins in the comparison...thats "real-world" enough for me.

    the main point i find interesting is that the new architecture seems to make no difference in the system performance...the 867 is still 15-20% slower than the QS dual 1ghz--right where you'd think it's be judging by processor speed alone.

    http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/archives/aug02/082202.html#S14303

    anyone, bueller,bueller..........
     
  2. macrumors 603

    nuckinfutz

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2002
    Location:
    Middle Earth
    #2
    I didn't expect the bus

    to make much of a difference. The only benefits you'll see from the new DDR Powermacs is areas where devices like PCI use DMA to access something from Main Memory without travelling the FSB. Audio Apps are not going to apply.

    I'm buying a Mac next year and running nothing but OSX apps for Audio...no OSX native...no buy is my message to Software companies.
     
  3. macrumors 68020

    barkmonster

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #3
    It looks like the entry level is a good performer, I mean in realworld terms 15-20% extra speed is barely noticable no matter what you're doing.

    I could easily hit a brickwall with any mac if I pushed it hard enough, loads of different software synths, loads of midi tracks with lots of controller data and dozens of aux tracks and audio tracks with loads of effects could easily mean printing a few tracks to audio to free up the cpu even if it was 15-20% faster than the entry level G4.

    For £1,349 or even cheaper if I shop around, the entry level G4 has got to be best performing mac for the price ever. If money wasn't an issue I could easily spend the difference between the entry level G4 and the new dual Ghz model on a superdrive as CTO option, a bit more ram and a decent rack mount synth like a virus rack and be a lot happier with the overall system I was using than if I got either the new mid range GHz or the old QS dual GHz.
     
  4. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    #4
    CTO option...

    It's funny how when money isn't any issue, you get the CTO option. :)
     
  5. macrumors 68020

    barkmonster

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #5
    I knew that didn't quite sound right to me when I wrote it :D

    I'm just thinking that I'd be hard pushed to spend over £1500 on my next mac but I don't even have £150 right now so it's out of the question either way.

    The mid range powermac has had a serious price hike since the last range were out so stripping the mid range down to the bare minimum is still way more expensive than simply boosting up the entry level, plus I just have to have a superdrive on my next mac even if I have to have a rotten social life for the next 6 months to get a new mac with one built in.
     
  6. macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #6
    One thing to note is that the Dual/867 has the old BUS running at 133Mhz. It will be interesting to see the new Dual/Gig compete against the old with the new 167Mhz BUS.
     

Share This Page