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.
Amazon Listing for Dual 2.7 Ghz PowerMac
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Cooknn said:
Yup, me too... I am still loving my dual 2.0 and so glad it is still in the line up. I put a new Pioneer Dual Layer DVD Burner in it last friday but it was to my knowledge that the iApps and regular ol' Finder burning don't support dual layer. Do you think there is some kind of upgrade coming outside of Tiger for these apps?
It's weird that they would upgrade the superdrives but then have you rely on 3rd party burning software for the dual layer support (toast titanium).
PowerPC970MP
No matter how much G5 Model are out there....The Thing is that this Apps or Games should be "Optimize for G5" remember that time when PowerPc was just getting started...and all this apps and games boxes have this Red Stamp that said "Optimize for PowerPC" or "Made for PowerPc"....i just wonder how good will be see this Stamp again, but with the G5 logo on the box..
No matter how much G5 Model are out there....The Thing is that this Apps or Games should be "Optimize for G5" remember that time when PowerPc was just getting started...and all this apps and games boxes have this Red Stamp that said "Optimize for PowerPC" or "Made for PowerPc"....i just wonder how good will be see this Stamp again, but with the G5 logo on the box..
...........
Well so I've waited 6 months for this... Pretty much disappointing if they are not dual core, anyway, if they are not dual core then i am suspecting that the rumors from 2003-04 were pretty much right on except maybe the release dates, meaning we wont see dual cores from the Power4 derived technology (aka 970 series) nor a 3Ghz processor from 970 series but rather it all will be Power5 derivative that will bring us most of the goodies we have been waiting for so long... I'll probably buy low to mid end Powermac cuz unless the 2.7 will cost $2,400 or less I dont think its worth it... Pretty much its all stretching a 3 year old technology as some may remember that 970 appeared on the horizon a couple of months before Apple adopted them in Powermacs... SO if this is what Jobs meant by proclaiming this year to be a year of HD video then his standards have sunk to an all time low...
Well so I've waited 6 months for this... Pretty much disappointing if they are not dual core, anyway, if they are not dual core then i am suspecting that the rumors from 2003-04 were pretty much right on except maybe the release dates, meaning we wont see dual cores from the Power4 derived technology (aka 970 series) nor a 3Ghz processor from 970 series but rather it all will be Power5 derivative that will bring us most of the goodies we have been waiting for so long... I'll probably buy low to mid end Powermac cuz unless the 2.7 will cost $2,400 or less I dont think its worth it... Pretty much its all stretching a 3 year old technology as some may remember that 970 appeared on the horizon a couple of months before Apple adopted them in Powermacs... SO if this is what Jobs meant by proclaiming this year to be a year of HD video then his standards have sunk to an all time low...
You can only put so much on a 250 when you're working with lots of video and audio. The drive fills very quickly.Yvan256 said:Well, you can put a LOT of.... erm... files... on that 250GB.
tromboneaholic said:
I am sorry if my tone was too agressive...this past two weeks with rumors and false information has gotten me a little verbally tense...
But on the point of secrecy, there are some things you can release and some things you want to hold back on. Everyone knows that there is a new model coming and with Apple there are sites that specify the cycle. Many manufacturers announce updates in advance and slowly build the anticipation factor to a announced release date. They are adjusting their production and pipelines to meet this coming new product and seem to have no problem.
I used the example of the new car I will be buying. This model has been in design since 2002 and periodically information is released about certain features leading to a final showroom debut in the Fall of 2005. I am sure the maker has allowed and knows to some extent the impact on other models and will adjust his production accordingly.
But with Apple to restrict any and all information and let the rumor mill fly and then sue the companies that are able to get some of the tidbits is a problem created by Apple. Don't get me wrong, I am against trade secret being released or stolen. But if Apple released items of information leading up to the final introduction of a product, then the user has some information he/she can use to make a buying decision.
I don't mean to ramble (which I am doing) so let it be said that all I want to get is the details of the new iMac and buy one
no phish
Well, it looked like a legit url to me, but a few people mentioned they thought this might be some kinda elaborate "phishing" scam, since you couldn't get theeir by navigating Amazon's menus or by using their search function.
So I figured I'd just go to the source and ask Amazon - sent their customer service an e-mail this morning, and just got this reply back:
"Thanks for writing to Amazon.com.
Yes! this page is indeed Amazon.com page, I sincerely apologize for
any misunderstanding or inconvenience this matter has caused.
I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you. We
designed our search engine to perform broad searches. I have brought
this to the attention of the appropriate department within Amazon.com
for investigation.
It is always important for us to hear how customers react to all
aspects of shopping at Amazon.com. Strong customer feedback like
yours helps us continue to improve the selection and service we
provide, and we appreciate the time you took to write to us.
Thanks for visiting Amazon.com.
Please let us know if this e-mail resolved your question:
If yes, click here:
http://www.amazon.com/rsvp-y?c=ytxwxrqe3371959076
If not, click here:
http://www.amazon.com/rsvp-n?c=ytxwxrqe3371959076
Please note: this e-mail was sent from an address that cannot accept
incoming e-mail. Please use the appropriate link above if you need
to contact us again about this matter.
Best regards,
Tanweer A.
Amazon.com Customer Service
http://www.amazon.com "
So, good, bad, or indifferent, hate 'em or love 'em, they are for real.
-erik
Well, it looked like a legit url to me, but a few people mentioned they thought this might be some kinda elaborate "phishing" scam, since you couldn't get theeir by navigating Amazon's menus or by using their search function.
So I figured I'd just go to the source and ask Amazon - sent their customer service an e-mail this morning, and just got this reply back:
"Thanks for writing to Amazon.com.
Yes! this page is indeed Amazon.com page, I sincerely apologize for
any misunderstanding or inconvenience this matter has caused.
I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you. We
designed our search engine to perform broad searches. I have brought
this to the attention of the appropriate department within Amazon.com
for investigation.
It is always important for us to hear how customers react to all
aspects of shopping at Amazon.com. Strong customer feedback like
yours helps us continue to improve the selection and service we
provide, and we appreciate the time you took to write to us.
Thanks for visiting Amazon.com.
Please let us know if this e-mail resolved your question:
If yes, click here:
http://www.amazon.com/rsvp-y?c=ytxwxrqe3371959076
If not, click here:
http://www.amazon.com/rsvp-n?c=ytxwxrqe3371959076
Please note: this e-mail was sent from an address that cannot accept
incoming e-mail. Please use the appropriate link above if you need
to contact us again about this matter.
Best regards,
Tanweer A.
Amazon.com Customer Service
http://www.amazon.com "
So, good, bad, or indifferent, hate 'em or love 'em, they are for real.
-erik
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
joshua_msu said:
It seems there's 100-150$US rebates on iBooks. And that rebate ends today (2005-04-26), which could mean updates very soon.
Come on already, I need a laptop (and no, that POS in my sig. isn't good enough, I can barely surf the web with it. It's excellent as a portable MS-DOS station though).
I need either an iBook mini or at least an updated 12" iBook. Come on already!
G5s lagging does NOT mean x86 is suddenly perfect
Using x86 and getting dual cores a few months early sounds nice on paper. It turns out, though, that the PowerPC architecture actually has HUGE benefits of its own
And Apple never claimed to make processors. Dumping IBM for AMD wouldn't change that. They do, however, help design PowerPCs, and that's a big advantage over the aging and bloated x86 architecture.
Even if PowerPC apps would run on x86 (they won't), it would be incredibly short-sighted to play the processor market like somebody gambling in the stock market: to jump to AMD because at this moment they have a buzzword and a pretty GHz number. Then what happens when AMD stagnates and it's IBM's turn with the dual-core G5s, or G6, or whatever?
These things come and go--NO one processor is always on top. x86 is "fastest" sometimes, for some purposes, and PPC is at other times. NO one chip maker is a guarantee that you won't lag in speed at times. If that's what you want, AMD is only a quick and temporary fix until one day it's get their turn to lag.
Except it wouldn't be quick--it would be nearly impossible to make happen.
So "bragging rights" of being fastest at the moment are fun, but whether the machine DOES THE JOB is the most important thing. Right now, these PowerMacs are VERY fast, and run the best OS in the world. Reality is that IBM can't deliver more than that yet--but that doesn't mean x86 is somehow free of disadvantages for all time.
I wish PowerMacs were faster still, and luckily I can avoid buying until they are
For those who need something NOW, getting less than the rumored dual-core speed-demons is frustrating, for sure. I'd be disappointed too!
Also, some info about x86 chips being security risks--even under UNIX:
http://www.cio-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=12100002EAEW
jocknerd said:
Using x86 and getting dual cores a few months early sounds nice on paper. It turns out, though, that the PowerPC architecture actually has HUGE benefits of its own
And Apple never claimed to make processors. Dumping IBM for AMD wouldn't change that. They do, however, help design PowerPCs, and that's a big advantage over the aging and bloated x86 architecture.
Even if PowerPC apps would run on x86 (they won't), it would be incredibly short-sighted to play the processor market like somebody gambling in the stock market: to jump to AMD because at this moment they have a buzzword and a pretty GHz number. Then what happens when AMD stagnates and it's IBM's turn with the dual-core G5s, or G6, or whatever?
These things come and go--NO one processor is always on top. x86 is "fastest" sometimes, for some purposes, and PPC is at other times. NO one chip maker is a guarantee that you won't lag in speed at times. If that's what you want, AMD is only a quick and temporary fix until one day it's get their turn to lag.
Except it wouldn't be quick--it would be nearly impossible to make happen.
So "bragging rights" of being fastest at the moment are fun, but whether the machine DOES THE JOB is the most important thing. Right now, these PowerMacs are VERY fast, and run the best OS in the world. Reality is that IBM can't deliver more than that yet--but that doesn't mean x86 is somehow free of disadvantages for all time.
I wish PowerMacs were faster still, and luckily I can avoid buying until they are
For those who need something NOW, getting less than the rumored dual-core speed-demons is frustrating, for sure. I'd be disappointed too!
Also, some info about x86 chips being security risks--even under UNIX:
http://www.cio-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=12100002EAEW
tromboneaholic said:
Its not like Apple is selling small convenience items here. Their entire product line could be pulled from Amazon tommorrow and it would make very little difference to them. People who are spending a couple grand on a computer are not going to change their mind just because they couldn't find it at freakin Amazon, I mean geeez. Apple makes something like 70% of its sales direct to the consumer, and Amazons portions of Apples sales are going to be in the low single digits. Apple is definitely NOT going to change a dang thing just for the sake of making a peon retailer like Amazon.com happy.
Hiroshige said:
A more friendly, adult reply wouldn't hurt, I think. I know how to read, it would be nice to see some less agressive feeling of your post.
The link you mentioned was the comparison in game performance between macs and pcs.
I don't know about you, but when I see SLI graphic cards and such, well..then I conclude that those are different videocards than those used on the mac. And those SLI cards have a huge performance increase. I agree
Sure, the pc's with 'the same' (only by name, drivers, etc are different) gfx card are a bit faster, but you can't really stack em up like that. The implementation is very different on both platforms.
That aside, Macs are not a solid platform for gaming, at least not until we get good opengl implementation AND the latest gfx technology like intel & amd have. I'm no apple zealot who says they are the greatest and the latest, so don't attack me like you did. I'm not attacking you as well, just having a discussion here.
Klaus
Did anyone notice that on the amazon website that when searching for apple computers it say you can browse for a computer that is between 2 and 3 ghz?
Here is the link:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/browse/-/712542/ref=amb_center-3_205828_1/102-3865987-9116918
Interesting
Here is the link:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/browse/-/712542/ref=amb_center-3_205828_1/102-3865987-9116918
Interesting
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Not that I'm in the market for a new Power Mac (I just bought a new iBook G4 w/Superdrive a few weeks ago) but I know some friends who are and they're quite stubborn about not buying until IBM delivers 3GHz.
I mean, by the time the Power Mac line does hit 3GHz, shouldn't it be about time to move on to the G6? It will be sad if Apple totally transitions to a new processor before IBM even hits 3GHz with the G5.
I mean, by the time the Power Mac line does hit 3GHz, shouldn't it be about time to move on to the G6? It will be sad if Apple totally transitions to a new processor before IBM even hits 3GHz with the G5.
Minkintosh said:
Amazon has similar categories for the HP computers, so I wouldnt necessarily put too much into this particular factoid. Im sure its just one of their web developers saving himself from some update in the future...
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
...
Jesus Christ, just forget these friggin 3 GHz! They're like a holy grail for you, while you just won't realize the GHz-wars are OVER for quite some time now!
We'll probably never gonna see it. And personally i don't need to. What i need to see is DUALCORE, faster RAM and PCI-Express!
Since AMDs and Intels Dualcores are also lower clocked than single-core the likeliness of a 970MP with 3 GHz is close to nil! If you look at Intels Roadmap they will NEVER reach 4 GHz, they are instead planning quad-cores in Q3/2007 (Xeon MP Whitefield). With 2.6 GHz, no less!
Give me a 2.3 GHz Dual Dualcore 970MP and I'm happy. Yes, there WILL be something big in June, and a new top-of-the-line Dual Dualcore Model seems just fine for a WWDC presentation!
And this won't be a new model line, just a new model at the top end, just like they added the new single 1.8-GHz at the low end "in between"! With the next revision when they have enough of the chips they'll probably add dualcores to the whole lineup, with the entry model being single-dualcore. And looking at how nicely iApps use Dual-CPU (Garageband is actually the only Program i know that can completely max out two CPU _while you're working_ in the program! Neither 3D-Programs nor Video-Programs do that, they only use dual-CPU when they do final rendering!) i strongly suspect the iMac G5 will see Dualcores sooner than expected, too! I'd guess mid-year somewhen....
However, i swore myself when i read about Core Image that i won't be buying a G5 until they had PCI-Express. Not only is the upload twice as fast as AGPx8, what's more important is that PCIe has a real DOWNLOAD channel that's just as fast, compared to a measly 133 MB/s max with AGP - IF you're lucky! And how much a back-channel is worth when you're using the GPU to calculate your Composition, well, have a guess! ;-)
Hell, ATI will probably stop producing AGP-Cards in 2006, hello Apple???
Still, ONLY an 8% Speedup in almost a year is really disappointing in any case, especially since there are NO other real improvements. Even when you get more for your money than yesterday (this is not a great achievement, this is absolutely NORMAL in the Computer-Universe and should be and IS expected!)..
Jesus Christ, just forget these friggin 3 GHz! They're like a holy grail for you, while you just won't realize the GHz-wars are OVER for quite some time now!
We'll probably never gonna see it. And personally i don't need to. What i need to see is DUALCORE, faster RAM and PCI-Express!
Since AMDs and Intels Dualcores are also lower clocked than single-core the likeliness of a 970MP with 3 GHz is close to nil! If you look at Intels Roadmap they will NEVER reach 4 GHz, they are instead planning quad-cores in Q3/2007 (Xeon MP Whitefield). With 2.6 GHz, no less!
Give me a 2.3 GHz Dual Dualcore 970MP and I'm happy. Yes, there WILL be something big in June, and a new top-of-the-line Dual Dualcore Model seems just fine for a WWDC presentation!
And this won't be a new model line, just a new model at the top end, just like they added the new single 1.8-GHz at the low end "in between"! With the next revision when they have enough of the chips they'll probably add dualcores to the whole lineup, with the entry model being single-dualcore. And looking at how nicely iApps use Dual-CPU (Garageband is actually the only Program i know that can completely max out two CPU _while you're working_ in the program! Neither 3D-Programs nor Video-Programs do that, they only use dual-CPU when they do final rendering!) i strongly suspect the iMac G5 will see Dualcores sooner than expected, too! I'd guess mid-year somewhen....
However, i swore myself when i read about Core Image that i won't be buying a G5 until they had PCI-Express. Not only is the upload twice as fast as AGPx8, what's more important is that PCIe has a real DOWNLOAD channel that's just as fast, compared to a measly 133 MB/s max with AGP - IF you're lucky! And how much a back-channel is worth when you're using the GPU to calculate your Composition, well, have a guess! ;-)
Hell, ATI will probably stop producing AGP-Cards in 2006, hello Apple???
Still, ONLY an 8% Speedup in almost a year is really disappointing in any case, especially since there are NO other real improvements. Even when you get more for your money than yesterday (this is not a great achievement, this is absolutely NORMAL in the Computer-Universe and should be and IS expected!)..
I have read through this entire thread of messages about the possible G5 announcements. Some of them are enough to turn away a person who might be on the fence when it comes to deciding to go with a Mac or not. Luckily, I am one of those on the fence who already has both legs over. Since I am currently using a P4 2.4 GHz laptop running Windows and an AMD 1.67 GHz desktop at home, I will be happy to get any one of the three systems.
I do software development. I intend to use the Mac for music composition and video editing as a hobby at home. What I am doing does not require me to have the bleeding edge in speed.
Now, for my $0.02... I hope they drop the price of the 20" Cinema display.
I do software development. I intend to use the Mac for music composition and video editing as a hobby at home. What I am doing does not require me to have the bleeding edge in speed.
Now, for my $0.02... I hope they drop the price of the 20" Cinema display.
The thing everyone has to realize is that so many people (including myself) would not be disapointed about this update if Jobs hadn't claimed 3ghz back in the day and someone had a fantasy of Apple's Power Mac speedbumps being dual-core. Should those 2 things not happened, nearly everyone would be "YAY APPLE YOU HAVE THE BEST TECHNOLOGY EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!! "
Now that we realize because of some BS someone posted and Job's failure to deliver, we all say this speedbump is no longer good. As I always say, Apple has a few hundred tricks up its sleeve, so just be patient...
"Now that we realize because of some BS someone posted and Job's failure to deliver, we all say this speedbump is no longer good. As I always say, Apple has a few hundred tricks up its sleeve, so just be patient...
Why is everyone obsessed with dual core?
People are so obsessed with dual core G5's, it makes no sense!
A G5 with one 970MP would perform very similarly to a dual processor 970FX at the same clock speed. The only advantages to using a single 970MP would be somewhat lower cost, less heat, and a very slight performance gain.
Sure, sure, a dual processor 970MP, with four cores, would be wicked fast, but it would also be wicked expensive and wicked hot. Furthermore, I'm betting that a lot of multithreaded OS X apps out there that are compute intensive probably don't have more than two compute-heavy threads running at once, which means no performance gain from having four cores unless you run more than one compute-heavy app at a time; but even then, your hot beastly quad-core 970 won't be four times faster than a single CPU 970FX machine with the same clock speed.
We will see four core machines from Apple at some point, but I'm betting 90% that it will be in Xserves only, and very expensive.
People are so obsessed with dual core G5's, it makes no sense!
A G5 with one 970MP would perform very similarly to a dual processor 970FX at the same clock speed. The only advantages to using a single 970MP would be somewhat lower cost, less heat, and a very slight performance gain.
Sure, sure, a dual processor 970MP, with four cores, would be wicked fast, but it would also be wicked expensive and wicked hot. Furthermore, I'm betting that a lot of multithreaded OS X apps out there that are compute intensive probably don't have more than two compute-heavy threads running at once, which means no performance gain from having four cores unless you run more than one compute-heavy app at a time; but even then, your hot beastly quad-core 970 won't be four times faster than a single CPU 970FX machine with the same clock speed.
We will see four core machines from Apple at some point, but I'm betting 90% that it will be in Xserves only, and very expensive.
Hi
Can any one tell me if the MoBo on this pic is new or just generic from earlier G5 models? I have 2.5 and this looks different.
Also any one care to commment on the absence of the removable fan modual in front of the CPU enclosure? The seating is there for it so may be just removed for picture. supposed to be pic of new 2.7
Can any one tell me if the MoBo on this pic is new or just generic from earlier G5 models? I have 2.5 and this looks different.
Also any one care to commment on the absence of the removable fan modual in front of the CPU enclosure? The seating is there for it so may be just removed for picture. supposed to be pic of new 2.7
Attachments
I remember a long time ago, the PM line-up was something like:
733
867
dual 800's
So, that means we could see:
dual CPU 2.0
dual CPU 2.7
dual-core, dual CPU 2.3
Ok, done dreaming now.
733
867
dual 800's
So, that means we could see:
dual CPU 2.0
dual CPU 2.7
dual-core, dual CPU 2.3
Ok, done dreaming now.
