well...on the same lines as that "not looking good for powerbook updates" thread, I'm getting that feeling that once again the ipod has hijacked the focus of apple. where the hell are new g5's? This is getting quite ridiculous. Am I the only one who remembers the dual 3ghz by LAST summer promise?
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.
not looking good for powermac updates at MWSF
- Thread starter Bhennies
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Capt Underpants
macrumors 68030
I had certainly forgotten about the 3 GHz promise, until you reminded me. It sucks that IBM is having fab problems, but it really isn't Apple's fault (atleast I don't think it is). As soon as IBM can make a 3 GHz 970, Apple will have it in their powermacs.
Sun Baked
macrumors G5
It's doubtful that we'll ever see a 3GHz PowerPC970FX...
It has some process problems that probably won't be corrected until the next generation chip arrives.
So it'll most likely be a 3GHz PPC 970GX...
And hopefully it'll also bring PCI Express Video, DDR2, and maybe PCI X 2.0 (200 and 266MHz PCI)...
It has some process problems that probably won't be corrected until the next generation chip arrives.
So it'll most likely be a 3GHz PPC 970GX...
And hopefully it'll also bring PCI Express Video, DDR2, and maybe PCI X 2.0 (200 and 266MHz PCI)...
The 970 also need a Integrated Memory controller and perhaps having the L2 upped to 1 MB before it really shines. Despite its high MHz bus and other stuff it really do not spank the G4 that much MHz for MHz. 🙄
Falleron
macrumors 68000
Well, I know the usual remarks about MacOSRumors. Take a look at:
http://www.macosrumors.com/20050102.php
Especially: "Quote"
Whatever it is, we're tracking strong confidence spreading through the grapevine that at least one significant Pro-related announcement will come before Macworld -- in fact it could come by the end of this week.
At least this could be taken as a bit of optimism. Even if they queeze another couple hundred of mhz out of it.
http://www.macosrumors.com/20050102.php
Especially: "Quote"
Whatever it is, we're tracking strong confidence spreading through the grapevine that at least one significant Pro-related announcement will come before Macworld -- in fact it could come by the end of this week.
At least this could be taken as a bit of optimism. Even if they queeze another couple hundred of mhz out of it.
Why do you want a 3Ghz PM?
Would you buy one? (really?)
Do you need such a powerfull system?
You know that sorfware optimisation give better wield than Mhz increasement?
What so you do with your system that make it top priority to get a faster CPU compared to simply getting new powerfull software?
One the other hand, if they spend another 30mins talking about the iPod I think I will go on a killing sprea. iPod are just an entertainement gadget, they need to focus on production tools!
Would you buy one? (really?)
Do you need such a powerfull system?
You know that sorfware optimisation give better wield than Mhz increasement?
What so you do with your system that make it top priority to get a faster CPU compared to simply getting new powerfull software?
One the other hand, if they spend another 30mins talking about the iPod I think I will go on a killing sprea. iPod are just an entertainement gadget, they need to focus on production tools!
Falleron
macrumors 68000
Personally, I would buy a 3Ghz machine. If the top of the line becomes a 2.8Ghz machine then I would have to have a think about it.Mantat said:
I will be honest, I dont need a top of the range computer now. However, I do keep them a long time + have always gone for the top range machine.
A computer is never to fast /fast enogh in some apps 😱
Take the original Unreal minmum hardware is something like 132 MHz 604 CPU and software rendering, a 300 MHz G3 is "awesome". So my G4/400 and ATI 128 was more than that and it still feels like a new game with G4/1200 MHz and ATI 8500. And it still look amazingly well compared with current games like COD.
With DOOM III I am sure that a 8 GHz G5 would be notisable faster than a "mere" 3 GHz and especially a 1.8 GHz for video coding and such speed is also a good thing.
For more mundane apps a 1.x GHz CPU will last for years 😀
Take the original Unreal minmum hardware is something like 132 MHz 604 CPU and software rendering, a 300 MHz G3 is "awesome". So my G4/400 and ATI 128 was more than that and it still feels like a new game with G4/1200 MHz and ATI 8500. And it still look amazingly well compared with current games like COD.
With DOOM III I am sure that a 8 GHz G5 would be notisable faster than a "mere" 3 GHz and especially a 1.8 GHz for video coding and such speed is also a good thing.
For more mundane apps a 1.x GHz CPU will last for years 😀
HiRez
macrumors 603
MWSF is turning more and more into a consumer-oriented show each year, as WWDC both takes over for MWNY as the summer filler and provides a place for Apple to focus more on pro gear (PowerMacs and Cinema Displays). NAB in Las Vegas appears to be the stage where Apple is now showing off their pro software (FCP, Shake, Logic, Motion) the most.
I'm just hoping that they have any good computer announcements. (I'm sure they will.) All this about iPods is really getting on my nerves. isn't it apple computer company? I really think that they may be losing focus in cupertino, but hopefully apples latest showing will be more than an ipod/itunes numberfest.
Capt Underpants
macrumors 68030
switchedanhappy said:
I'm pretty sure that the iPod and computer divisions of Apple are seperated. Apple is still working on great computers, and the iPod isn't in their way. If anything, the iPod helps get Apple $, which can help them make better hardware (and software).
Chaszmyr
macrumors 601
Mantat said:
A computer can never be fast enough.
Absolutely.
Virtually no one really NEEDS such a powerful system, but virtually everyone can make use of one and enjoy one nonetheless. Really, the argument of "what do you need such a powerful system for anyway?" is getting old... People said it back when 1ghz Pentium 3s came out too, but now people have wisened up, and no one wants to use a lowsy 1ghz Pentium 3 anymore if they can avoid it.
Sir_Giggles
macrumors 6502a
Capt Underpants said:
Its funny how Steve Jobs was able to turn the bad news into a positive spin at last years WWDC.
Mantat said:
I think I am as tired of the constant iPod talk as the next guy, but you Apple zealots can't have it both ways. You want Apple to be a market dominating company but get upset when they put the full force of their R&D behind the product that is spear heading their run on the stock market and allowing them to cross the gaps between market segments?
Which is it? The 3% Apple, dominating the niche market, or a company that is going up against the industry leaders?
Try running 50 tracks in digital performer with trilogy bass synth and battery with about 15-20 waves plug ins. Or 32 tracks in Pro Tools with a waves L2, a C4 and a couple altiverbs. Even a dual 3.0 ghz would start to huff a little with that. Or try working with a couple hundred MB file in photoshop (4x5 negative scanned in at 4800 dpi). Both of these I do on a somewhat regular basis, my powerbook will not handle the audio sessions at all, and the photoshop file causes the spinning beach ball for 2 minutes. I NEED a good powermac and a dual 1.8 may not be fast enough...the dual 2.0 is only marginally faster, and the 2.5 may be updated very soon and is quite expensive. I could get a dual 2.2 or above for what I'm doing, so hopefully they'll update and bump the 2.5 at least to the middle if not the bottom.Mantat said:
Until I can run whatever I want and it will work instantly, I'll never have a fast enough computer.
Bhennies, I hope you're not recording those performer and pro tools projects on your internal hard drive, are you? When I had a 500 mhz pb G4 with 1 GB RAM, I used to work with 64 tracks in digital performer, all stacked with a LOt of plug-ins..sure it would be a bit slow but nevertheless, it would work great. The data was all on a 10 k rpm SCSI drive using a magma pci expansion chassis. The internal drive will crap out at probably 6 tracks!
Music_Producer said:
come on! every one knows that it is all about how many mhz you have, disk IO is a non-issue. We all need to get more mhz on our computerz yo! then we'll roxor with fast mhz.
Actually understanding computer hardware would be a lot of work, it's so much easier to cry about a single variable for performance.
HiRez
macrumors 603
I can't believe you're whining about how lame the G5s are when Photoshopping 4x5 scans when you're basing everything you say on performance on a PowerBook. Please. Get a dual G5 with 4+GB RAM and a proper RAID array and then come back and complain if it's not cutting it. When I was rendering 3D animation on my PowerBook, I wasn't complaining about how lame a dual G5 would be...I desired one and now I have it! Of course it's never as fast as you want it to be but it's one hell of a lot faster than the PowerBook was.Bhennies said:
well, I use g5's often and I never said they are lame. If I'm going to spend my cash I would like to get the best bang for the buck and not buy outdated tech (I'd be looking at the 1.8, the 2.5 is overpriced). I just finished working on a 3x5 foot digital composite with 60 layers at 300 dpi on a dual 2.0 g5. It worked ok, but wasn't the lightning quick workhorse you seem to suggest. The powerbook on that file...forget it..it took forever to do anything.HiRez said:
If the g5's are powerful enough to handle anything, why did apple design logic with distributive processing? So people could off load CPU onto another computer. The moral of this story- one computer (yes...even a dual 2.5 with 8 gigs of ram if you want) is not even enough for some people. I am not one of those people- and in fact could probably work for now on a dual 1.8, but that's the same thing I thought when I bought my powerbook as I wasn't working with MIDI at the time....workflows change and CPU usage changes. NOw I'm using virtual instruments and I've sold a lot of my outboard gear so my CPU usage is 5 fold over what it used to be 1 year ago. I like to make an investment when I buy a computer 'cause I keep em for a long time- and the dual 1.8 and 2.0 are right on the border of being just enough CPU (not a good investment).
nah. I have two 120 gig seagate 8 MB cahce FW800 drives. It's a CPU thing. I use lots of real time plugs- reverbs, delays, ring modulators etc. and they eat CPU. PLus I use a good bit of MIDI which on a native system needs low buffer which in turn needs more CPU. Thank god at least the spectrasonics stuff is more ram-based than CPU.