I am about to jump the fence and get a Mac, and was just curious as to who really needs dual processers and who does not. I doubt that I personally would need them, but I would like to know. I have read here that some people say "...if you want real fast speed, you need dual p's" while others say that a single G5 is as fast as a dual G4. I am confused and as simply as I can ask is "Who REALLY needs duals?"
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Who REALLY needs a dual processer Mac?
- Thread starter steve88
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Only the Pro's really need 2 Cpu's . The problem is Apple refuses to sell a single fast CPU to the consumer. More marketshare 3% madness from Apple. They dont want consumers?
If you're going to be working in audio, video or design, then DP machines are a godsend, if you are going to be doing WP, net-stuff, email etc. then SP is fine, as Dont Hurt Me says, pro's love them, but a lot of my students are buying iMacs or Mini's and loving them, I use a PowerBook as my main machine, but will transfer files to a DP G5 at work for heavy editing/rendering or mixing.
NEED? NEED? Some would say people who do heavy graphic rendering and movie making would NEED a dual processor.
Of course, people in the windows community would say all Mac users NEED a dual processor because Apple can't keep up with the technology to produce faster gHz's so they just stick 2 in there.
But then of course, there are the rich nerdy kids who say you NEED a dual processor so you can watch AND burn porn DVDs at the same time.
(No biggie, but it was uneccessary-moderator).
Of course, people in the windows community would say all Mac users NEED a dual processor because Apple can't keep up with the technology to produce faster gHz's so they just stick 2 in there.
But then of course, there are the rich nerdy kids who say you NEED a dual processor so you can watch AND burn porn DVDs at the same time.
(No biggie, but it was uneccessary-moderator).
After hearing about Africa, I feel about about having 2 CPUs. Windows users comfort me in saying that I do need 2 CPUs to keep up with their single CPU.
Personally, I'm looking forward to the quad G5 or what ever form it takes (most likely dual dual core cpus).
With the 3D animation and video editing it is something you need. Your requirements are dependent on what you plan on using your machine for - so what will you be doing with it?
D
With the 3D animation and video editing it is something you need. Your requirements are dependent on what you plan on using your machine for - so what will you be doing with it?
D
When I switched from PC to Mac, I went with the DP1.8 for a few reasons. I wanted a machine to do some video editing and photo manipulation, but I really wanted to try and future-proof myself for a few years. The couple hundred dollars extra I spent jumping from a SP1.8 to a DP was worth it, if only for my peace of mind. I don't regret the purchase at all, even if I'm not a "pro" user. I've always thought one should set a budget for what they can afford, then maximize the computer they can get for that budget.
Go DP
Hi,
Just for the 'piece of mind', alone I'd go dual! Hell, I have a G5 1,6, SP
for the light PScs I do, it's been fine. But, I'm always hoping I have adequate capabilities.
Hi,
Just for the 'piece of mind', alone I'd go dual! Hell, I have a G5 1,6, SP
for the light PScs I do, it's been fine. But, I'm always hoping I have adequate capabilities.
Anyone who wants to do a moderate amount of video editing, should get a dual (Assuming they can afford it), because the compression speed will be a lot faster.
In the long run, for a non-pro user, it's a question of throughput vs. latency. My take on it is that a DP machine "future-proofs" your purchase due to the fact that, when the individual processors really aren't that fast (relatively) anymore, you know that you've still more than one processor to handle jobs in parallel. This'll likely reduce the perceived time spent waiting when multitasking (which is what computer users are getting more and more accustomed to doing -- especially on OS X). If multithreaded apps are able to run background threads on another processor, perceived response time will also be reduced within a single application.
Case in point: I have an ancient Dual Pentium Pro 200MHz machine running (I know, ack!) Windows XP, which is still very capable of running some heavy duty hardware design and synthesis tools --- though it takes substantially more time during builds than a newer machine, the fact that it's got an extra processor allows me to do other things while waiting for a build to complete, with minimal perceived lag time. Compare this with other single processor machines (at approx. 2 times the clock rate) that are totally frustrating to work on with the same software.
The conclusion? If you can afford a DP machine, and expect to be hanging on to it for a long time to come, get it! If, however, you have the funds and the inclination to upgrade to the next bestest fastest beast when it arrives, and you won't likely tax the current iteration, then the speed of a single G5 will do you just fine.
Case in point: I have an ancient Dual Pentium Pro 200MHz machine running (I know, ack!) Windows XP, which is still very capable of running some heavy duty hardware design and synthesis tools --- though it takes substantially more time during builds than a newer machine, the fact that it's got an extra processor allows me to do other things while waiting for a build to complete, with minimal perceived lag time. Compare this with other single processor machines (at approx. 2 times the clock rate) that are totally frustrating to work on with the same software.
The conclusion? If you can afford a DP machine, and expect to be hanging on to it for a long time to come, get it! If, however, you have the funds and the inclination to upgrade to the next bestest fastest beast when it arrives, and you won't likely tax the current iteration, then the speed of a single G5 will do you just fine.
Okay, if you had a budget that could swing a G5 imac or single PM, or a dual G4 {used}, which one would you go with? I am asking this because I have a limited budget of about $2500. I currently have an aging and obsolete PC {AMD Athlon1.2G} with a 6 year old 17" CRT. There really isn't much I could use from my current system, so I would have to get pretty much everything.
steve88 said:
dual 1.8 g5 ($2000)
a few hundred $ in RAM (bump it up from 3rd party vendor. dealram.com is a great resource)
$150-$200 for CRT monitor
or you could get a bit less RAM and get an LCD
Refurb dual 1.8s are available here and there for $1599 . . . used 1.6GHz single-processor G5s are available on eBay for around $900. Either way there's plenty of room for hard drive and RAM upgrades (and maybe a video card too), plus a modern monitor. I'd go for a single 1.6GHz Power Mac over a 1.8GHz iMac because of expandability plus the FSB speed (800MHz in the PM G5 and 600MHz in the iMac G5) makes each machine's performance equal. Barefeats.com did a comparison between the two.steve88 said:
I'd say you really only need dual-processors if you're doing long-term CPU-intensive work, or, I suppose, for playing the latest games. I have a dual 2.0 G5 and a 4-year-old 800 MHz G4 PowerBook and to be honest I use the PowerBook about 90% of the time because it's just more convenient. The only times I use the G5 are for 2D or 3D rendering, or playing WoW. Other than that, I honestly don't notice much of a speed difference for all the other stuff I do (Safari, Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Xcode, etc.). Yeah the G5 is technically probably 3x-6x as fast as the PowerBook (depending on multithreading), but it doesn't feel that much faster most of the time. I do have a 7200 rpm drive in the PowerBook, that probably helps close the gap a bit.
add annother vote to the dulie's pwn opinion
my dual 450 cube will just take twice as many things going before it starts to slow down, it's the true multitaksing thats great, with my ibook if i start encoding in imovie or somthing the whole thing slows to a standstill on my dual cube i continue doing whatever i like
my dual 450 cube will just take twice as many things going before it starts to slow down, it's the true multitaksing thats great, with my ibook if i start encoding in imovie or somthing the whole thing slows to a standstill on my dual cube i continue doing whatever i like
Dont Hurt Me said:
What on earth are you talking about? Apple does not have a single CPU > 3 Ghz to sell to an end user. Believe me, if they could shoehorn a 4Ghz processor into a G5 they certainly would. Dual processors have always been a resonse to the fact the PPC architecture hasn't been able to scale the clock speed as fast as Intel has. The naive customer thinks 2 * 2.7 Ghz = 5.4 Ghz > Intel's fastest.
Or were you being sarcastic?
I second the refurb dual G5 idea --- pick up some more RAM and a cheap but decent 17" LCD from Dell and you're good to go. Or you could bet on the imminent PM updates actually happening, and perhaps get a new DP 2GHz for around the same cost. 
Rod Rod said:
Since you can swing $2500 on a system.
I would suggest getting the dual 1.8 G5 like Rod Rod said for $1700. Go to newegg.com and get memory two 512mb PC 3200s of Viking RAM for $80, a 250 GB SATA Hard Drive for $131, a Dual Layer DVD Burner for around $55 and a nice mouse $25. All fo this for $1991. That would leave $500 for a 17" LCD, cheapo Epson printer and a 9600XT off ebay.
I would suggest getting the dual 1.8 G5 like Rod Rod said for $1700. Go to newegg.com and get memory two 512mb PC 3200s of Viking RAM for $80, a 250 GB SATA Hard Drive for $131, a Dual Layer DVD Burner for around $55 and a nice mouse $25. All fo this for $1991. That would leave $500 for a 17" LCD, cheapo Epson printer and a 9600XT off ebay.