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.
Apple Releases Dual Core PowerMac G5s
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Stylez Cz said:
That's why it's so important, with any significant purchase, to do your due diligence and research your options carefully and thoroughly. It's the only way to ensure you get the most bang for your buck and make the best purchasing decision!
re:FX 4500
Quadro FX 4500... *is*... amazing for 3d apps like Maya. For games though, the 7800 gt(x) is actually *better*. Unfortunately, Apple didn't support the whole Quadro FX line...only the top end card, big $...nor does the new PM support SLI with FX cards.... nor does it support SATA *II* hard drives like comparable pc workstations do. Don't get me wrong though, this PM update is very significant in my opinion. I am still leaning toward buying an AMD workstation from Boxxtech or Alienware. If you don't work in 3d apps...don't waste your $$$.
~Shard~ said:Yes, I'd agree with that - the Quadra is not exactly optimized for games from the looks of it, and gamers would be better off with, as you say, the 7800, I'm thinking. But man that Quadra looks amazing....
Quadro FX 4500... *is*... amazing for 3d apps like Maya. For games though, the 7800 gt(x) is actually *better*. Unfortunately, Apple didn't support the whole Quadro FX line...only the top end card, big $...nor does the new PM support SLI with FX cards.... nor does it support SATA *II* hard drives like comparable pc workstations do. Don't get me wrong though, this PM update is very significant in my opinion. I am still leaning toward buying an AMD workstation from Boxxtech or Alienware. If you don't work in 3d apps...don't waste your $$$.
~Shard~ said:
Sorry, I was revising my post when you wrote this... the 25 packs are down to ~$50US at places like CompUSA and Buy.com. Depending on when you hit the latter, you might also get one of their 10% off discount coupons, which is what I do. You'd be over the minimum for free shipping, of course, too. Not nearly as cheap as buying twice as many single layer DVDs (you should be able to get 25 of similar brands/quality for under $10US), but now finally cheaper than hard drives, for those larger things that just won't fit onto single layer discs.
Fry's recently had a Seagate 300GB drive for $90 after rebate. That's 30c/GB.
25 DLs = 212.5GB (8.5GB*25), so $50/212.5= under 24c/GB.
25 SLs = 117.5GB (4.7GB*25), so $10/117.5 is under 9c/GB.
I don't price CDs, because they're too small for me to bother with.
These are all reported sizes, not what you can actually stuff on them, (the Seagate formats down to 279GB in NTFS, for example) but at least you have an order of magnitude idea.
artifex said:Sorry, I was revising my post when you wrote this... the 25 packs are down to ~$50US at places like CompUSA and Buy.com. Depending on when you hit the latter, you might also get one of their 10% off discount coupons, which is what I do. You'd be over the minimum for free shipping, of course, too. Not nearly as cheap as buying twice as many single layer DVDs (you should be able to get 25 of similar brands/quality for under $10US), but now finally cheaper than hard drives, for those larger things that just won't fit onto single layer discs.
Fry's recently had a Seagate 300GB drive for $90 after rebate. That's 30c/GB.
25 DLs = 212.5GB (8.5GB*25), so $50/212.5= under 24c/GB.
25 SLs = 117.5GB (4.7GB*25), so $10/117.5 is under 9c/GB.
I don't price CDs, because they're too small for me to bother with.
These are all reported sizes, not what you can actually stuff on them, (the Seagate formats down to 279GB in NTFS, for example) but at least you have an order of magnitude idea.
Cool, thanks for the info. Yeah, I'm sticking with single layer for now, but it's nice to see the prices coming down. I wonder what kind of a lifespan double layer media will have though once Blu Ray comes out...
jaduffy108 said:
I wish I had a job that would let me work with Maya, and on good hardware, too
But I'm not creative enough to make it pay. As far as SATA II, someone mentioned PCI-E cards with that support. Don't know if Apple would support them, though
~Shard~ said:Cool, thanks for the info. Yeah, I'm sticking with single layer for now, but it's nice to see the prices coming down. I wonder what kind of a lifespan double layer media will have though once Blu Ray comes out...
Depends on how fast BD-R (or BD+R?) comes out, how expensive it is, and
other unmentionable things driving the price of blank DVD sales right now. By the way, DLs were around $5-6 each in quantity as recently as last month, and the retail price of the Verbatim 3 packs is still $20 or $25, depending on who you ask. I think the prices were kept artificially high by the manufacturers.
Stylez Cz said:
Why is the person going to feel bad next week? They just updated the iMac and it is perfect for the regular consumer. Not everybody needs a PowerMac. An iMac is more then enough computer for him.
BTW: Looks like at barefeet they say that the 7800 GT should be a $400 option that should show up tomorrow. Same sort of glitch that was here last week where 1GB of RAM on the new 17" iMac was the same cost as the 512MB.
I am sad though that we don't have any high end cards from ATI. Where is the X1800 XT? Unlike the 6600/7800 it has built in MPEG-4/h.264 acceleration. The NVidia cards only accelerate MPEG-2 and WMV/HD-WMV.
bodeh6 said:
The only reason I can think is if they are the old imacs and that the new imacs aren't in some stores yet. If the apple employees just let him buy it without telling him there's better ones coming soon, that would be messed up. At least let him know and let him decide whether he wants to save some money and get the old model or wait and get more bang for his buck on a new model.
~Shard~ said:Yes, I'd agree with that - the Quadra is not exactly optimized for games from the looks of it, and gamers would be better off with, as you say, the 7800, I'm thinking. But man that Quadra looks amazing....
The 4500 FX is more than adequate for gamers, it absolute overkill actually. If there was a game that supported 4 monitors, in theory, the quadra would run pretty good frame rates on all four. It's more of a workstation chip designed for multiple monitors than pumping all of its juice into one monitor. If the sky was the limit, I'd much rather have a 4500 FX than a 7800 GT, but the price is just out of control ridiculous.
So help me out,
I would LOVE a dual dual,
but should I get the 2.0 or 2.3, loaded with Ram ?
I do alot of Video and that would be faster for less $?
I am trying to justify the dual dual and my only justification is that I could put in the memory progressively
Is it my imagination or is the Ram more expensive?
I would LOVE a dual dual,
but should I get the 2.0 or 2.3, loaded with Ram ?
I do alot of Video and that would be faster for less $?
I am trying to justify the dual dual and my only justification is that I could put in the memory progressively
Is it my imagination or is the Ram more expensive?
re: SLI - Good question
>>I would say you are spot-on and that's a wise bet PPC is a dead end platform no matter how you slice it. I don't think that makes buying the new "quad" PM a bad purchase per se, but less than optimal. I'm buying an AMD workstation, Dual Opteron 275's...with SLI support, SATA II HD's....SIX HD bays, etc for the same price as the new "quad" PM without those features....then wait and see what Apple has to offer in 2008...like a revB or C(!) MacTel PM. Should be a sweet machine...though, i can't resist...
Why did Apple choose Intel vs AMD??? AMD is kickin' a$$ NOW. "Roadmaps" are vaporware!!! Intel is already having serious heating issues with the Yonah chip, which may significantly delay an Intel PB release next summer. AMD is way ahead of Intel in speed, heat, power consumption(!!!), etc. Makes me nervous...Moto, IBM... please Apple...get it right this time!
peace mon
Val-kyrie said:why the 6600 is used instead of the 6800 as the base GPU?
Even Dell's new XPS line starts with a 6800 Ultra with an upgrade to the 7800. The 6600 is still only a middle-of-the-road gpu.
>>Because Apple has a tradition and *reputation* to uphold
why I don't see anything about SLI if the PM can use two gfx cards?
The technology may be a bit premature, but still.
>>Indeed. The new PM does not support SLI, which is a bummer. Again, Apple seems determined to consistently...year after year... cripple their graphics performance...though to be fair, this update is probably the least guilty of this *tradition*. What is @#%&#@# insulting is a Rad 9700 in a $2500 Powerbook without 1920 x 1200 res. That's should be illegal! I can say that because I own one
why the PCI-express slots are 2-4x, 1-8x, and only 1-16x?
Wouldn't it have been better to have two 16x slots? Perhaps gfx cards don't require 16x--does anyone know?
>>yep. It would have made MUCH more sense to have 2 -16x slots. No PCI X support...zip, nada, zero...that's premature in my opinion.
how a user will benefit from the dual chip, dual core PM?
>>Someone using After Effects(2d) or Maya(3d), for example, will be VERY happy. Can you say.... "render times" ...multitasking while rendering, etc. Watching paint dry on the wall during a render gets old...trust me. If you don't use these types of apps..or you play a lot of games...don't waste your $$$....and it IS a waste of $$$. That's my two cents.
Won't this require a better compiler to effectively utilize all four cores? Obviously, I am not a PM user, but I am curious if this top-of-the-line PM will really yield performance that is worth the price, especially with the Intel transition coming. Hey, if Apple is already dismantling their hardware teams to focus on the coming Intel shift, it only makes sense to me that they are also shifting their software resources. Sure they will support PPC through Leopard, but where will the real optimization be seen? I'm betting Intel. I'm also betting there will be no OS support beyond Leopard.
>>I would say you are spot-on and that's a wise bet
PPC is a dead end platform no matter how you slice it. I don't think that makes buying the new "quad" PM a bad purchase per se, but less than optimal. I'm buying an AMD workstation, Dual Opteron 275's...with SLI support, SATA II HD's....SIX HD bays, etc for the same price as the new "quad" PM without those features....then wait and see what Apple has to offer in 2008...like a revB or C(!) MacTel PM. Should be a sweet machine...though, i can't resist...Why did Apple choose Intel vs AMD??? AMD is kickin' a$$ NOW. "Roadmaps" are vaporware!!! Intel is already having serious heating issues with the Yonah chip, which may significantly delay an Intel PB release next summer. AMD is way ahead of Intel in speed, heat, power consumption(!!!), etc. Makes me nervous...Moto, IBM... please Apple...get it right this time!
peace mon
andiwm2003 said:
You nailed it on the head. No argument from me that the dual-dual (quad) box is a monster.
But i have no intention of spending $3300 on a computer.
I was hoping for something clearly more powerful than the old dual processor 2.0 and 2.3 Ghz systems. Apple didn't deliver it. Now the conundrum of what to do, buy an older dual 2.0 - 2.7 with its older AGP and PCI-X slots. Or maybe just wait for the intel boxes.
I am kinda pissed off about it, because I wanted to see something like a dual 2.3 at the bottom, a dual-dual 2.0 in the middle and a dual-dual 2.5 or 2.7 at the top. The two lower end models are major letdowns imo.
I was looking forward to a new powerbook, but I'm more tempted to get a new Quad G5! A few questions:
1) Are there any better graphic cards than the 7800 (BESIDES THE QUADRO), I was particularly interested in ATI's H.264 acceleration, but it sounds like it's not as good as I'd hope.
2) Will we have to wait for an update to applications like Final Cut Pro, Motion Ect. to fully take advantage of the Quad as opposed to Dual Processors? Any word from Apple on how this effects video apps?
Thanks!
1) Are there any better graphic cards than the 7800 (BESIDES THE QUADRO), I was particularly interested in ATI's H.264 acceleration, but it sounds like it's not as good as I'd hope.
2) Will we have to wait for an update to applications like Final Cut Pro, Motion Ect. to fully take advantage of the Quad as opposed to Dual Processors? Any word from Apple on how this effects video apps?
Thanks!
zoran said:
I guess the dual cores might be pretty expensive stuff and they always try to maintain their margins
Ordered my Quad
I for one, am absolutely stoked about the G5 quad announcment. I'm about to become a first-time Mac owner, after waiting months for this update. I'm ready to join you all in the mac fraternity
I ordered my G5 Quad as soon as apple store came on line after the annoucment (Ordered with 2x1 gb of ram, wireless/bluetooth, 500gb hd, apple care, and 30" cinema). Can't wait until it ships (on or before 11/17)...I plan to get Aperture, iSight, and add extra ram after market.
Booyah, and boodigity yo!
I for one, am absolutely stoked about the G5 quad announcment. I'm about to become a first-time Mac owner, after waiting months for this update. I'm ready to join you all in the mac fraternity
I ordered my G5 Quad as soon as apple store came on line after the annoucment (Ordered with 2x1 gb of ram, wireless/bluetooth, 500gb hd, apple care, and 30" cinema). Can't wait until it ships (on or before 11/17)...I plan to get Aperture, iSight, and add extra ram after market.
Booyah, and boodigity yo!
AMD is great in processor performance but as a company they are still far away from making consistent money-positive quarters. Intel has huge cash and can therfore afford to play with Apple even if the base is not so big.AMD would be bad off at this point to invest money into Apple versus focussing on the bigger PC market.jaduffy108 said:>>I would say you are spot-on and that's a wise bet
Why did Apple choose Intel vs AMD??? AMD is kickin' a$$ NOW. "Roadmaps" are vaporware!!! Intel is already having serious heating issues with the Yonah chip, which may significantly delay an Intel PB release next summer. AMD is way ahead of Intel in speed, heat, power consumption(!!!), etc. Makes me nervous...Moto, IBM... please Apple...get it right this time!
peace mon
Welcome to the club! You won't regret it - you get great computers plus all the excitement!zugzuglani said:I for one, am absolutely stoked about the G5 quad announcment. I'm about to become a first-time Mac owner, after waiting months for this update. I'm ready to join you all in the mac fraternity
I ordered my G5 Quad as soon as apple store came on line after the annoucment (Ordered with 2x1 gb of ram, wireless/bluetooth, 500gb hd, apple care, and 30" cinema). Can't wait until it ships (on or before 11/17)...I plan to get Aperture, iSight, and add extra ram after market.
Booyah, and boodigity yo!
fpnc said:
This is where the test this guy is doing breaks down. Multithreading is about 11% faster on the dual processor rig vs the dual core rig. Disk I/O is faster on the dual processor rig vs the dual core rig.
The area where the performance gain is being seen is in graphics. However, the 6800U is known to have driver issues. Not sure if those translate over to the 6600s in the new powermacs. I'd like to see the test run with the fastest available video cards like the X800XT on the AGP box. I'd also like to see application benchmarks (like office, photoshop, mysql, cinebench, some games), DVD burns, file copies, etc. What this benchmark so far really tells is what we already knew - the memory and graphics IO are faster.
The multitasking results are the most disturbing thing. I usually don't see any slowdown on my emac unless im multitasking several things in the background. I use a mysql database and sometimes run one or two queries against it (large ones) while listening to itunes and browsing the web, often running a java app or two. This is why I was looking for the new powermacs to justfiy an upgrade, but they appear inferior (for what I do) to the old powermacs.
Excitement is right!
Man - the excitement is great. I was disappointed last week since I was monitoring the rumor sites for a long time - and thought for sure we'd see the dual dual updates last week. But was happy to see what I had been waiting for come out today.
I can't wait until I experience the "I wish my 30 inch monitor was bigger" syndrome that my friend is going through after buying a G5 w/ ACD 30" a few months back
Renegate said:
Man - the excitement is great. I was disappointed last week since I was monitoring the rumor sites for a long time - and thought for sure we'd see the dual dual updates last week. But was happy to see what I had been waiting for come out today.
I can't wait until I experience the "I wish my 30 inch monitor was bigger" syndrome that my friend is going through after buying a G5 w/ ACD 30" a few months back
zugzuglani said:I for one, am absolutely stoked about the G5 quad announcment. I'm about to become a first-time Mac owner, after waiting months for this update. I'm ready to join you all in the mac fraternity
I ordered my G5 Quad as soon as apple store came on line after the annoucment (Ordered with 2x1 gb of ram, wireless/bluetooth, 500gb hd, apple care, and 30" cinema). Can't wait until it ships (on or before 11/17)...I plan to get Aperture, iSight, and add extra ram after market.
Booyah, and boodigity yo!
WOOOOW. First of all, congratulations. Second of all, I'm sooo jealous. Geez, you have a monster of a system....
Dont Hurt Me said:
Let's see....
Twice as much L2-cache
PCI-Express
Faster vid-cards
Faster RAM
These are fine updates.
...interesting...
uhh...hmmm. I get your point, particularly considering the past. Also, if $$ is your primary criterion versus performance. ahem. On the otherhand, AMD just posted greater earnings than Intel. AMD's performance is creating converts from the Intel camp in significant numbers right now...server market too... so doesn't performance in the end matter most? I would be careful about betting against AMD...very careful. I guess your point is... AMD might not even want Apple's business? Maybe.
peace
Renegate said:
uhh...hmmm. I get your point, particularly considering the past. Also, if $$ is your primary criterion versus performance. ahem. On the otherhand, AMD just posted greater earnings than Intel. AMD's performance is creating converts from the Intel camp in significant numbers right now...server market too... so doesn't performance in the end matter most? I would be careful about betting against AMD...very careful. I guess your point is... AMD might not even want Apple's business? Maybe.
peace